policies at top tech firms. president trump holds a news conference at 578 eastern in new york city. tim kaine debates cory stuart in the virginia senate race. >> thursday morning, we're live in indianapolis, indiana for the 42 pped stop on the c-span bus 50 capitals tour. curtis hill will be our guest on the "washington journal ," your --announcer: next on "washington journal," your calls and comments. congressman gerald connolly of virginia weighs in on the spending bill vote and the future of robert mueller's investigation into russian election interference. representative connelly is a member of -- reform and foreign

relations committee. later, steven clemons on president trump's speech yesterday and chairing a security council meeting on iran. ♪ host: it is the "washington journal" for september 26th. the house plans to vote on a spending package today. you can see that process play out when you tune into c-span. president trump chairs the un security council. see that at c-span.org. we are a day away from the scheduled hearing between brett kavanaugh and christine ford. that interest you and tell us why it is your top

story. you can let us know by calling the lines. if you say it is the president at the united nations, it is 202-748-8000. if you say it is the upcoming hearing with judge kavanaugh and professor ford, 202-748-8001. if it is the spending bill set to be passed by the house, is the number to call. you can also tweet your thoughts @cspanwj and post on our facebook page at facebook.com/cspan. a little bit from this spending bill. story saying the package is not a continuing resolution, it is also a defense bill -- attaching these things together, at 855 funding bill package which was unintentional by negotiators and makes it difficult to vote

against -- for both parties and the president wants to veto -- if the president wants to veto, he would be vetoing funding for the pentagon. that is on that spending bill. when it comes to the hearing with christine ford, the professor and judge kavanaugh, usa today has a story saying the attorneys for christine blasey ford have sworn and signed declarations from four people of corroborate her claims sexual assault by the supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh and documents sent to the judiciary committee obtained by usa today where the attorneys present declarations from her husband and three friends who support the college professor's accusation -- were high school students in 1982. that was the story posted this at usa today.

when it comes to the president at the u.n., it was the website, second nexus and others highlighting the fact that when fox news sent out tweets of the president's speech, particularly when he received laughter from the u.n. audience, those were edited out. that. he is available on c-span. the president talking about united states and his a congressman's and the reaction from the un's general assembly. [video clip] >> in less than two years, my administration has accomplished more than almost any other administration in history of our country. -- so true. [laughter] >> did not expect that reaction, but that is ok. host: that. is available at c-span. those three topics, asking you storyl us what is the top

and why. if you say it is the president at the united nations, 202-748-8000. if you say it is the hearing with judge kavanaugh and professor christine florida, it is 202-748-8001. eightpending package, hundred $55 billion price tag for that to be voted on the house today, 202-748-8002. murray starts us off -- marie starts us off in south carolina talking about the president's visit to the u.n. caller: good morning. donald trump should be ashamed of himself to bring god into this. he should be glad god is a good god and generous god. host: how exactly does that mean -- since my election, i did that. he doesn't realize he is only one person. he takes up too much time trying to make himself look good. host: that is marie in south

carolina. at the united nations, the topic of her choice. that is the interest of water very, connecticut, where floyd is. go ahead. caller: good morning. host: you are on, go ahead. caller: i thought the president did a great job. we need to lead from a position of strength. he laid the issues out. he has a position on them and he position.with that that is something we have lacked in this nation for maybe 25, 30 years. we have to stop with the family politic. government by the people. the people come in and they leave. no more bush's, no more clinton's. host: when you say the issues he laid out, what was the chief issue of interest to you? geopolitical

situation in the world. the geopolitical situation in the middle east that had been the same situation for 30 years, sending money to our enemies. that type of situation. it is finally being corrected and the people who have been entrenched and profited over the last 30 or 40 years, they are squealing because they're easy meal ticket is being taken away. host: let's go to stan and maryland saying the president's visit at the u.n. is a top story for him. hello. caller: yes, yes sir. i like the fact that president trump addressed the fact against globalism as opposed to patriotism. i love that. i love that about him.

he has a lot of support with me and my neighbors, my friends. he is going to win again in 2020. host: what did he say specifically that stuck out to you and why is that important to you? caller: i love you guys and i appreciate c-span. let me say this. i 55 years old and i worked for a steel plant in maryland for almost 23 years and under obama in 2009 at the end of 2010, they shut my plant down and i lost that job and i was looking forward to retirement. i finally got a good job after waiting to get a position i wanted and that was also part of george w. bush. that was george w. bush, that globalism and the guys that had the meeting said it is because the steel industry is going to china. host: how does that relate to

the united nations speech yesterday, then? caller: because of globalism. because of this whole thing of let's equalize everybody, let's help china and all the billions of people in china. you pick up anything in walmart and look at the bottom side of it, it is made in china. host: ok. usa today highlights parts of the president's speech. "we reject the ideology of globalism and we adopt the doctrine of patriotism. " the president called the u.n. human rights council "a grave embarrassment to the institution and said the court has "no jurisdiction and no legitimacy and no authority when it comes to those issues."

the president is set to head the un security council as the general assembly continues meeting today. watch for that play out at c-span. you can go to our website for more information. top stories of the week, several mentioning the u.n.. this is roy in bethesda talking about the hearing with judge kavanaugh and christine ford. caller: good morning. i was wondering if you could have a call in of two lines for c-span. 1 -- to be able to separate the abortion rights issue with sexual harassment and the me too movement. it would be great if you could have a line of pro-life women who are against brett and pro-chess women who -- pro-choice women who are in favor of brett just to be able to discuss sexual harassment and take out the issue of abortion. host: how do they relate to each other? --ler: i think two people

maybe one of the two maybe falsely and terribly treated because of being used as pawns by the pro-life and the pro-choice movements and not really necessarily taking into account what may have happened 37 years ago. host: when it comes to the hearing tomorrow, what are your expectations? caller: i would just love for a fair and honest approach without the politics, but i don't think that is possible. my expectations are that it will follow political lines and it is an interesting dichotomy. host: we will go to beverly in ohio, revisiting the president's visit to the united nations. hi, beverly. caller: hi. i have a comment about the speech he made. if i got it right, he said it was a joke.

if it is a joke to the u.n. members, why isn't it a joke to his base? i wonder why they didn't think about that. host: why do you think that is important to highlight? caller: it makes sense to me. making such a full it statement like that -- foolish statement like that and he expects them to accept that statement and they laughed at it and then he is saying it's a joke. if it did -- if it is a joke to the u.n. members, it is a joke to his base. i hope they think about that. host: that is beverly in ohio talking about the president's visit to the unit -- united nations. profiling rachel mitchell will be doing questioning for the republicans, saying she is a maricopa --

the women accusing him of sexually assaulting her decades ago. maricopa county attorney bill montgomery says -- praised mitchell's experience, calling her a fair, objective prosecutor. he was conducted -- contacted by staffers about her availability and qualifications. chairman, judiciary chuck grassley, confirming late tuesday mitchell would question the witness scheduled to testify as republican nominee's investigative counsel. it goes on from there, a profile of her in the arizona republic. bob, dallas, texas, the president's speech at the u.n. caller: before i address the address theme caller who said separating kavanaugh and the abortion issue. we cannot really because brett

kavanaugh is accused of sexually assaulting a 15-year-old girl. had he, at the time, impregnated is trying kavanaugh to take away the reproductive rights of a girl who may -- host: trump at the u.n.. caller: trump at the u.n., i found it a poor and -- abho rrent. it is a representative body of the nation's of the world. he is a president who received nearly 3 million last votes then another candidate sitting there talking about democratic process, unelected bodies. it is a bit hypocritical. when it comes to people laughing at him, i thought the germans whened at him the loudest he made that claim on them becoming dependent on russia for suffering america

from outside influences when russians meddled with our election. he has not taken any of the steps necessary to protect us from that kind of outside influence from a hostel adversary. -- hostile adversary. david in's hear from north bend, oregon, also discussing the president's visit at the united nations. caller: i listened to the speech and one thing that astounded me -- it did not astound me. it's not so much what you say, it is how you say it. it was so generous and reconciliation and inclusive, i got the feeling it is fact and theow the interpretation of a fact are two entirely different things. it was an amazing speech because he seen to appeal to every position and people just pick up the one they like. host: when you say it was very inclusive, give us an example.

caller: he was cheering for the patriotism of all people on earth, every country having their important traditions, their belief system. he thought that was extremely turn,ant and in another he kind of talks up globalism a bit, but not that much. i think the speech was basically to assure everyone he is not going to rock the boat. i wished he had been a little less militant, though, because there is a contradiction. can i say something -- david, for you, calling. i appreciate it. that is david talking about the president at the united nations. that is one of three things you can discuss. you can see that on c-span.

a couple people mentioning the hearing was judge kavanaugh and christine ford. there is also the topic of the $855 billion spending bill to be considered by the house. those three things, up until our jet -- guest joins us. if you say the president's speech at the united nations, 202-748-8000. if you say it is the hearing with judge kavanaugh and professor ford, 202-748-8001. if you think it is the $855 billion bill of interest to you, of the three, 202-748-8002 is the number to call. let's go to samuel in houston, texas. good morning, go ahead. caller: good morning, sir, and thank you. i really want to say judge kavanaugh is the most important subject because it is directly in front of us in november with this midterms coming up.

and whole u.n. thing is new is something important, i don't want to downplay that. the bill is something that will be shot down. president trump did mention the last bill got passed in congress was the absolute last one and he would veto everything the one after that. judge kavanaugh is the most important story because the to stays' last hope alive as a party will be november 2018. they are packing up all of their either hitting the mountains or hitting the road, jack. host: that is samuel. the new york times did an interview with lisa murkowski. republican senator from alaska and one of several on the republican side people are

watching ultimately if this proceeds to a vote in the senate and she was asked about the hearing and her thoughts on it. the new york times highlighting in the interview miss murkowski and for sized how invested -- emphasized how invested she was in investigating blasey ford's story. she canceled a meeting of the senate committee and leaves on thursday to make sure her -- she will be watching -- all you can do is be as fair as possible to and sure at that year and the of the day, justice is delivered. she also said she was not so dismissive of the accusations. "we are at a difficult place because the conversation is not rational on either side. just look at some of the hateful things being said. how do you dial that back? we need to be able to listen." she goes on to say "we have to listen to what she says on the record, under oath and what

judge kavanaugh will say on the record, under oath." matthew is next in new york. that is where president trump was yesterday addressing the united nations. you say that is your top story, tell us why. forer: i think -- thank you taking my call. president -- i think the u.s. and allies should attack russia following the sanctions. in the near future, that means our economy. to replace our currency. they want to replace our dollar. they want to not use the dollar.

host: that is matthew in new york. the president directly addressing iran's leadership in the middle east. [video clip] sow chaos,eaders death, and distraction. they do not -- destruction. they do not respect to their neighbors or the sovereign rights of nations. instead, iran's leaders plunder the nation's resources to enrich themselves and spread mayhem across the middle east and far beyond. are rightlypeople outraged that their leaders have

embezzled billions of dollars from iran's treasury, see is valuable portions of the economy, and looted the people's religious endowments all to line their own pockets and send their proxies to wage war. not good. ohio here is janine from discussing that hearing tomorrow. hello. caller: yes, good morning. i feel just like to say the kavanaugh story is the most important thing right now to focus on. i don't understand the rush in terms of pushing him through. it deserves a full investigation with all witnesses. this is a lifetime appointment to our highest court in the land and it deserves the greatest wetting -- greatest vetting can possibly do to make sure the

person put in that position is honorable and moral and has the type of values deserved in that position and i think it is important for us to take the time that is necessary to make sure this man is the appropriate person for that position. i don't understand. i cannot see it any other way and i have to make one comment about the u.n. speech yesterday and that is that i, personally, was embarrassed. i cannot believe, watching him stand up there and say the things he said in front of the world leaders. i felt very embarrassed buried host: ok. let's go to jenny in hawaii talking about the hearing with judge kavanaugh. caller: hello. thank you for taking my call. i got a number watching c-span a couple days ago for the senate

and i think it would be great to repeat it for everybody. 202-204-3121. callinge best time senators, the ones i respect who are against kavanaugh and the ones who i do not respect, people like corwin, people like mitchell. people like corker lately. that is something that upset me and i have my -- had my chance to make my responses directly. host: what is the response when you call? caller: you don't get any. they don't talk to you. you just leave your comment. corwin, you cannot get through. most of the other ones, you can leave a message. even the president of the senate, pence. -3121.mber is 202-224

host: what exactly is the comment you are leaving for these senators? caller: one of them is they need education. they don't understand this because they never -- these women because they have never experienced anything like it. they should experience it. what do you think about the approach the hearing will take yesterday, especially with the addition of this outside prosecutor asking questions? caller: that stinks. those men are so corrupt. such rotten individuals. what they did to anita, they want to do it again. judiciary the senate committee, one of the stories that came out is the calling for the business meeting on friday in which judge kavanaugh and other nominations will be considered by the whole committee.

this is just some of the back theforth on twitter, saying senate judiciary notice the potential executive business meeting for friday. a meeting is being noticed tonight in case the majority of the members are prepared to hold one on friday. it can be delayed if necessary by the chairman. chuck grassley sending out a follow-up tweet about the reason for posting this hearing saying the judiciary committee noticed potential executive meeting on friday, taking this one step at a time. if we are ready to vote, we will vote. if we are not, we will not. the committee normally requires three-day day notice. we are following regular order. this prompted a response from senator dianne feinstein who schedulerepublicans to a vote two days before dr. blasey ford had a chance to tell her story is outrageous. republicans demanded dr. blasey ford testify immediately and now

they don't even need her before they move ahead with a vote. if you follow the senate judiciary members and especially the twitter feed, that is some of what is playing out. we will go next to maryland. -- speechent's sweet at the united nations. go ahead. caller: good morning, c-span. president'sur speech at the u.n. was disgusting and insult will and not the venue -- i don't know if he understands the difference a state of the union address any united nations speech. the nations standing for piece, freedom -- he did not present that and it is insulting to the nation. we should have a better leader

than the one we have in office. host: just a few more minutes until we got our first guest. if you want to give your take on the top story. the president at the united nations, the hearing with judge kavanaugh and christine ford, and thus spending bill the house will consider today, an $855 theion price tag to keep government-funded. about the hearing yesterday, it was senator patty murray on capitol hill talking about concerns of allegations and how they are being handled by republicans on the committee. here is some of her thinking. [video clip] >> what i have been focused on since i was out in the country watching when anita hill's she was occurred was not treated fairly. she was attacked and she was not given the ability to be believed inside the senate.

i have been very focused on making sure this time around in 2018, 27 years later, this senate acts appropriately. not just for this nominee, but any future nominee. what message will be sent right now in 2018 in the me too movement if the senate rushes through this, doesn't believe her before she has a chance to say anything? we have a president that says people are drunk. when we send that message and don't give women credibility, we will be sending the wrong message to young women today to speak up and they will be believed and there will be an investigation and we will respect them and to young men, don't worry, you are going to get away with this. let's get the message right and i fear that is not happening right now in this congress. in north carolina. another one talking about the president's speech at the united nations. go ahead. caller: good morning.

i think the speech he gave was great. it was right on the money. i am going to comment on the kavanaugh stuff. host: before you go any further -- since you called on this topic, tell me why you think the speech was great. caller: i think he said what needs to be said, like usual. i don't understand all these people being embarrassed. i am proud of him. he needed tou said say exactly -- which topic of true interest for you? caller: i think he needs to have -- he has a place dealing with foreign countries and i think we need to respect that. i think he is standing there for us and fighting for america and all the other countries. right. to do things

it is the american way. -- i that is crystal and apologize because we have to end it to get to our next segment. that hearing with judge kavanaugh and christine ford, the professor, that will on c-span 3. you can view that tomorrow at 10:00. our first guest of the morning is robert bixby of the concord coalition. he will walk us through the government funding deadline daca take place this weekend. -- that will be taking place this weekend. he will join us next in the program. representative gerald connolly will talk about rod rosenstein, the future of the russia investigation, and other matters. those things coming up on "washington journal." ♪ >> what does it mean to be

american? studentcams year's competition question and we are asking middle and high school students to answer it by producing a short documentary about a constitutional right, national characteristic, or historic event and explain how it defines the american experience. we are awarding $100,000 in total cash prizes, including a grand prize of $5,000. the deadline is january 20, 2019. for more information, go to our website, studentcam.org. on americanend history tv on c-span 3 saturday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on lectures in history, abigail cooper talks about african-americans during the reconstruction period. sunday at 4:00 p.m. eastern on reel america, "the lost

battalion," about the lead up to the end of world war i and an men from new-- york you ran out of water and food after they were surrounded by german voices -- forces for seven days. on american artifacts, women's history with a visit to civil war related sites in alexandria, virginia, where women were as nurses and aided communities of newly freed slaves. 8:00 p.m. on "the presidency," a look at how first lady's influence times through fashion. c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's table -- cable television stations.

-- public policy events in washington, d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you by are c-span or satellite -- cable or satellite provider. "washington journal" continues. host: we are joined by bob bixby with the concord coalition, --ves as their direct executive director. a little bit about the concord coalition. what you do and the approach you take. 1992. we were started in the idea was to be a bipartisan public education organization focused exclusively on the federal budget and the rising debt and things we could do to prevent that. this point,g up to there were concerns about a government shutdown and if that would take place.

could you walk our viewers through the concerns and why we are coming to the point of potential shutdown? guest: every year, congress needs to pass 12 appropriation bills to keep the agencies funded. that's about 30% of the federal budget. there are other parts. this is 30% that goes through the in will appropriation process that congress gets to control on an annual basis. if they don't pass all those bills by the end of the fiscal year. those agencies are not funded. they cannot function because there is no authority for them to spend. to stayoyees would have home and whatever services the employees would be providing would not happen. every year, we seem to have this cliffhanger where congress waits until the last minute like kids and --heir homework and

and so, we don't have the funding for the full government approved yet. three bills have passed, so those agencies would not shut down. the rest of the government, including a very big bill up for vote today still has yet to be passed and that big hill, assuming it passes, the defense and labor, health and human services combined two big bills. if that passes, it has what is called a continuing resolution, --ch would fund the other the idea being they would come back after the midterms and finished up -- finish up the bills they haven't finished. 51-57 is the bill you were talking about. what is the price tag for that? billion.55

there is a little bit of political symmetry in that republicans want to spend more and defense and democrats would like to spend more on domestic agencies like labor and health and human services, so they package them together and they actually greased the skids a little bit by raising the spending caps that allowed them to spend more and these are the bills they primarily wanted to spend more on. for those of us that worry about the federal deficit, that is not a great barter when you say let's decide to spend more and you get what we want and we get what we want -- you get what you want and we get what we want. it tothey are attaching two bills that both sides for their particular reasons, like. guest: that is right. it becomes almost impossible to say no.

of a't like the idea government shutdown, it is dysfunctional, so i am all for it. host: as far as the likelihood of the government shutting down, what do you think. ? seem likely.sn't the wildcard is president trump because he hasn't explicitly said whether he would sign or veto this spending bill. the issue is funding for the border wall. than theto have more senate has provided and that is not in this bill, but it is not in any of the bills about to be considered. when he is thinking about leverage for the border wall, one option would be to veto this bill. to talkob bixby with us about the spending bill. the government shutdown potentially and other matters. if you want to ask questions, democrats, 202-748-8000.

republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. you talked about that $855 billion price tag. if this is passed, what does it do to the nation's debt? the government is running a budget deficit somewhere year. $800 billion this probably over $900 billion next year, closing in on $1 trillion. congress doesn't have a plan to reduce the deficit anytime soon. programs that run on autopilot like medicare and social go upty -- they

automatically by a couple hundred billion dollars a year. federal spending is going up. congress is looking at another tax cut. they are looking to extend the tax cut from last year. i look at all the functions of government and spending is going up and revenue is not keeping pace. the budget deficit is projected to keep going up over a trillion dollars. in a growing economy, that is an unusual thing and a bad thing. host: have republicans taken a different approach to these spending matters and what it does to debt and deficit? guest: i think so. even though these are big spending bills, it is important billion in $900 total discretionary spending is trillion.bout $1.3 that is an awful lot of money, federal 30% of the budget and between mandatory

spending and interest on the debt, that is the rest of the budget and that is the part growing the fastest. republicans have been focused on keeping the lid on as much as they can on these discretionary programs, but nobody is attacking -- attacking is the wrong word, trying to control the growth of mandatory spending programs. i should also say, these bills, the discretionary spending bills for defense and nondefense as i said before, they did reach a compromise by agreeing to spend more than a budget cap put in place several years ago to try to help control spending. host: robert bixby, bob bixby hear from the concord coalition. our first call comes from houston, texas. republican line, this is gene. caller: that was quick.

i wasn't expecting that. good morning, guys. my thought about when they start talking about the spending bill and not ok and this because of this -- the main thing we have to get done is get the bill okayed so all the bills are paid and we do not have a government shutdown. -- i known would be it is only a third of our total --get, but i am thinking they are talking about the wall. the wall is not going to solve the problem. if these people coming over here -- idifferent countries know it is a different issue. pay taxesre made to through these companies they are working for, we would not have to worry about money. we would have plenty of money. if thetion would be --

spending bill does not pass because of the wall, why wouldn't we have an option to raise our budget? guest: that is an interesting question. -- immigrants that come into the country and work here illegally obviously do pay taxes. one idea is whether you are talking about the dreamers, the people already here legally or otherwise or bringing in new immigrants, one of the advantages of that is they would be here, legally they would be working and paying taxes and that would bring in more revenue. frankly, we need that. we have a declining growth in our workforce because people like me, baby boomers are getting older and retiring. one of the problems with the federal budget is there are not enough workers.

budgetary issue. legalincreased immigration and still be tough on the border, you could build a wall if you wanted to. increased legal immigration would help the budget situation. there is nothing that is a magic bullet. you would still have to look at big spending programs and probably adjust revenues we have now. i think we are onto something with increased legal immigration and people paying more taxes. massachusetts, independent line, we hear next from derek. caller: good morning, gentlemen. thank you for having me on the phone. how much of the budget goes into defense? how much of that budget is going to things like secondary education, federal loans for students who cannot pay off student loans?

i think those things are very important for the future of this country. force, people job are getting paid more for having skills and degrees and something like that. how much is the federal government going to invest in that, which i think is important for our infrastructure and how much are they spending on defense? guest: defense is somewhere -- $650 billion. i don't know exactly what we spend on some of the investment programs you talk about, but it is a whole lot less. if you look at the appropriations bills, total defense spending and nondefense spending are split about 50-50. portion, adefense fairly small amount of it goes to worker training and things

that would be constituted as investments and i think that is a problem with the federal budget. if you are going to reprioritize spending, this actually follows on the last call because we have a declining workforce. what is going to have to happen is workers are going to have to be more productive. the federal government can help in that regard by stimulating investment, for its part in workforce training and making workers more productive and helping the private sector invest. i think, to look at a part of the federal budget and say it should be increased, is the part that would go -- it is the part that would go for human and physical infrastructure investment spending. host: 202-748-8000 for democrats. republicans, 202-748-8001. independents, 202-748-8002. if you have questions about the

budget as a potential funding shutdown could happen, bob bixby. there was a story in the new york times yesterday. interest on debt could be more of a cause factor for the budget than other things. is that what you are seeing as well? guest: sure. that is an important thing to bring out. , as we borrowre more, the federal government has to pay interest on the debt. interest on the bet -- debt is about $300 billion now and it will be $400 billion next year and $900 billion in 10 years. interest on the debt would be more than we spend on national defense. that is a pretty alarming statistic for me and it shows the budgetary cost of all this is theed borrowing interest rate on the debt, which can have the effect of squeezing out the money we might spend on

investments, like we just talked about in the last call. interest rates have been very low. they are beginning to creep up again now. since the great recession, interest rates have been low. the federal government has been able to take on a great deal of debt and pay very low interest rates. as we have to roll that that at higher interest rates, that is one of the reasons, along with increased borrowing, that the interest cost to the federal government is probably going to skyrocket over the coming 10 years. that will goh of upward because the federal reserve decides to in greece -- increase interest rates? guest: i will have a big effect. it depends on how quickly the federal reserve raises rates and so what. -- and to what.

it will still be fairly low, by historic standards. as they raise rates, the federal government will have to pay more on its borrowing cost and that will have a direct affect on the budget. host: from arkansas, democrats line, john, good morning. you are on. caller: mr. bixby, i am a taxpaying american. i, for one, think we pay way too much on our military. we spend more than the next 8 countries combined and we have 800 military bases around the world in 130 countries and yesterday, trump stood in front of the u.n. and said we spent $700 billion this year and another $700 billion next year. people wonder why we can't get a decent health care program in this country and that is the reason why right there. we spend it all on missiles and bombs and we have enough bombs to blow up the world 100 times over. tokeep asking north vietnam

get rid of their weapons. israel doesn't get rid of there's. russia doesn't. host: thanks for calling. guest: you have got the numbers right on the military budget. we spent -- eight certainly is a lot of money, it is -- it certainly is a lot of money. there is no doubt there is money that could become from defense spending. that is altimately, political judgment as to how much of the budget goes for defense and how much goes for nondefense. out the really big isey in the federal budget the health care programs, medicare, medicaid, and, of course, social security. if we are looking at getting the budget under control, you have

to put everything on the table. just cutting back military spending, even if you were to cut it back dramatically by $100 billion a year or something like that, it would not stall our ouret situation -- solve budget situation. i would say we have to put everything on the table. host: from our republican line in new jersey. ted, hello. caller: i wanted to ask two questions. how much on a daily basis or weekly or monthly do we borrow from china to run our government? do any other countries successful in the world run deficits that we do daily and monthly? guest: that is a good question. i don't know daily or monthly how much china purchases of our government debt. they are one of the two largest amongs of u.s. debt

foreign countries. china and japan tends to be the biggest buyers of u.s. debt. -- whether other countries run -- i am not sure about annual budget deficits. it is unusual for a developed nation to run budget deficits as large as ours. we have a fairly high debt relative to the size of our economy. if you look at other countries, we are fairly high up. in this case, it is not necessarily a good thing to be high up in our debt to gdp ratio. we are fortunate, unlike some of the other countries, we have a stronger economy so we are better able to afford that debt. i think you are getting into something that is important, which is we are into unprecedented territory when we talk about a debt to gdp ratio

that is about 78% right and scheduled to go up to over 100% under undercurrent law -- current law. that gets back to world war ii levels when there was a much more obvious reason why we should have a debt that high and even the deficits are back around 4% of gdp and going to 5% gdp. that is not a sustainable level because the debt is growing faster than the economy. job one really is to try to bring the budget deficit down to a sustainable level and that will bring the debt, hopefully, stabilize the debt to gdp ratio because we are getting in the problematic territory. host: $21 trillion according to the u.s. debt clock, working out to $65,000 per citizen. do people make those connections? guest: i don't think so.

the numbers are awfully big and it is hard to translate into what does it mean for me today? i think what it means for me today is if you worry about the future of your country, and i think all of us are, you think of the numbers and say this is a problem now and it will be more of a problem in the future. it will be a problem for the workforce of the cuter. .ook -- future look at kids today, getting out of college. look at newborns today. this is something the economy will have to deal with. it is a wet blanket hanging over our head. there are uses for debt and deficits. crisis,had economic military crisis. the problem now is we have a debt that is growing with a strong economy. people are boasting about how great the economy is. that is exactly the time you

should be taking down your debt, it is simple common sense and a matter of good economics. we are taking -- going in the opposite direction. it seems like there is no attention to fiscal discipline on either side and i do believe the public's growing concerned about that because everybody understands. this is not really a good thing to be doing this. it might feel good at the moment, but it is not a good thing for the long-term health of the country. host: bob bixby of the concord coalition joining us. vicki in iowa joining us. hi. 1951 and was born in the first time i ever heard of the baby boomer generation, sometime in the 1960's, i was the tail end. my birth year was the tail end of the baby boom generation. they have expanded the baby-boom generation to include my

children's age. thing, what moving is part of the baby-boom generation and they act as if the baby-boom generation did not have any children. that is simply not true. between my brother and my cousins and i, we no longer -- not only replaced ourselves, but we expanded the population. honestly, i do not trust the government statistics. they always want to point to medicare and medicaid. the things that they are spending money on, like tax credits for corporations for social spending. host: thanks, caller. guest: i think you can trust the government statistics in these regards in terms of number of

people and money spent because that is something you can actually count. it is not a matter of speculation. the baby boom generation is 1964 and i am part of that, too. -- if you think about it, as we age, we become eligible for medicare and social security, which is a big reason why those programs are increasingly more expensive. it is really a matter of math and plugging in the demographics. what we do about that and how that plays into the budget and economy is things congress ought to be debating and we are not having a debate on that. those numbers are pretty sound and in terms of the financing -- let me address the other point that baby boomers have children. obviously, we do. it is the proportion of workers

to beneficiaries for programs like medicare and social security. generations that have come after the baby boomers have not grown by as much. the population continues to grow, but not as fast as it did when we were kids and the baby boomers were being born. that ratio of people paying into the system versus people taking out of it is shrinking. so, there were five workers for every beneficiary for social security and now it is about 3 to 1 and going down to about 2 to 1 as the baby boomers fully retire. i think it is important to take those demographics seriously and look at the impacts that has on the budget. host: from edward in virginia,

democrats line. caller: good morning. i would like to know -- no one seems to address the campaign pledge that was made that the president would have mexico pay for this wall. i would like to have that question addressed. guest: i think that is a very relevant question. there is some pushback the white house is getting are holding up nothreatening to hold up or fund appropriations bills because the president wants more money for the border wall. that was a campaign promise that the u.s. taxpayers would not be on the hook for it, that it would be paid for by mexico and canu.s. government -- we

appropriate our own funds, but we cannot appropriate money from mexico. on president has had to call congress to fund the border wall and some are not as enthusiastic as he is about building it in the first place or spending quite as much money as he wants. host: in light of the spending bills being considered, have you seen any result in this administration when it comes to lowering government spending? guest: no. i really think there have been a lot of proposals to slash some parts of the budget. yes, in that sense, but when you look at realistic proposals to try to get the budget -- the deficit under control, i think the answer is no. one of the other problems -- promises the president made is he would not touch the major

programs, which is maybe a smart thing to do conservatively. spendingnt to increase on defense and cut taxes, these things don't add up. add up negatively to a big budget deficit, which is exactly what we have. , on ourom maryland, ken independent line. whyer: i do not understand -- i live in this country for 22 years. every year, i have this conversation. citizen, ime a became not a republican, a democrat, and independent. . have no problem the question i have is, why do we have this thing every year? whoever is in charge, whether a

democrat or republican, when is it going to become an american thing? -- ress caller.anks, -- i'm trying to figure out what the best devotional was that they need. it would be something like a marriage counselor. , this is a matter of political dysfunction. the inability to compromise is , the unwillingness to compromise. the reason we have these shutdown episodes every year is because there is a certain portion of the budget that congress loses every year here in it would be better if more of the budget was on a discretionary basis that congress would have to approve every year because that helps

them keep control of federal spending. but the problem is that you do pass, andotes to increasingly what is happening is that people are refusing to compromise. this year there has been some progress in that regard because three of the 12 bills have already passed and we will probably get another two of them today. there probably will not be a shutdown. there is representing some progress in that regard, in the appropriations bill. i share your frustration that every year we get down to this deadline and people lay games with the deadline and try to keep leverage, -- people play games with the deadline and try to keep leverage. there is frustration that congress does not do its business. host: mike in virginia, republican line. caller: i do not know where to

start because i have so much to say about this. are instart by saying we a situation that nobody wants to face the reality of the public does not want to face the reality of it, and because of that, the politicians do not want to face the reality. the fact of the matter is you cannot have what you cannot pay for. and we long ago past the point -- passed the point where we could rely on a safety net. security,ng social but you cannot continue to overspend, to lay out more than you are taking in, and now there is no way, no way at all -- it does not exist -- to fix this problem without hurting millions and millions of people. host: let me leave you there because we are running short on time. guest: that is a pretty good

summary. i would not say there is no way. if you start now, what you described is perfectly accurate. we have a structural deficit that will get bigger, but that is why i think it is important if you start sooner rather than in,r, you can phase changes whether it be on the spending or revenue side that would minimize any sort of budgetary pain. but the longer that we wait -- the time to a dress this problem -- to address this problem was 20 years ago. the longer we wait, the more difficult it is going to be and the more unfair and rec conan the changes will be for future generations. that bothers me a lot. -- unfair and track county and -- republicans and democrats alike should be worried about it.

robert bixby from the concord coalition, thanks for your time. guest: thank you. host: this may be a top story for you. if you want to talk about that or the upcoming hearing with judge kavanaugh, you can do that for the next half hour or so. if the president at the u.n. is your top story, 202-700 48-8000. kavanaugh/ford, 202-748-8001. 202-748-8002.ill, announcer: the c-span bus was in holland lulu -- in honolulu, hawaii. join us as we feature our visit to hawaii on c-span, booktv, and american history tv. exploring hawaii pass history --

culture,history and neck saturday on c-span at 7:00 a.m. eastern. the director of the office of planning will talk about homelessness and the lack of a fort up a housing. booktv, on the life of a legendary hawaiian surfer. the extensive book collection of late u.s. senator daniel in a way -- daniel inouy e. ." "washington journal the executive director of the blue planet foundation on renewable energy efforts in hawaii. on american history tv on c-span3 at 2:00 p.m. eastern, we visit the valley of the priest along the north shore of oahu. and the polynesian voyaging

society in honolulu. three short documentaries about hawaii. the 1956 film "soldier in hawaii." the silent film "the hawaiian island." watch hawaii weekend's weekend on c-span, booktv, and american history tv. listen to hawaiian weekend on the c-span free radio app. featuring the honolulu mayor, kirk caldwell. "washington journal" continues. host: the editorial of "the new york times" this morning poses questions that mr. cavanaugh needs to answer as part of the editors' questions.

another question, that dr. blazsey alleges -- from there, but that is just some of the questions from the editors. judge kavanaugh and professor ford said to be questioned by the senate judiciary committee, and outside questions are brought in, should republicans choose. that is one thing you can talk about as your top story. if you think that hearing is 8001.tant, it is 202-748- if it is trump at the united nations, it is 202-748-8000. and the bill in the house that

we keep the federal government open, that is 202-7 48-8002. ray starts us off in north carolina. good morning, ray. caller: how are you doing this morning? host: fine, thank you. caller: i think that we should spend the money on the wall. all of the drugs, all the people coming in from all around the world, crossing the border. americans -- you have all these people that we have to pay for them and their children. ?ow much is it costing us it should be a big worry for everyone, because it comes to the black community first. why do democrats want people coming into the borders when americans are paying for it? are senior citizens, our veterans, and our children should come first. thank you. is in maryland, in

oxon hill. caller: yes, i would like to talk about the kavanaugh situation with the doctor. i am a survivor of rape. i was raped at 21 years old by a person i trusted. . was not underdressed i was not drunk. and this person, this was 38 years ago. and i remember everything that was going on. i do not think it is fair to not have the witnesses there because the witnesses need to be subpoenaed. this is not about kavanaugh, it is about what young men have done to young women, and we were told at the time what happened in the house stays in the house. people have been molested, people have been raped. it is time for it to change.

congress, step up. host: what do you think about the outside attorney that has been brought in to be part of the questioning? caller: i do not think the outside attorney is doing any good if you are not going to subpoena the witnesses. if the witnesses are not being subpoenaed to testify -- host: sorry about that. that is jane's top story, political reporting this morning that tuesday they hired rachel mitchell, on leave from the maricopa county attorney's office in phoenix, arizona. an attorney to use in questioning at this hearing. earlier today, the gop declined to release her identity, with the judge telling politico, "we are not announcing her name for her safety."

that is part of the political reporting. , highlighting the president's visit to the u.n. yesterday. caller: good morning, pedro are it nice tie. joke at thet make a united nations. he is a joke. he was talking to intelligent a full ofd he makes himself and he makes a fool of this country. , and iad and it is sick am hoping soon he will be out of office, one way or the other. host: aside from the laughter, did you take away anything else from the speech? caller: i did not listen, pedro. i heard the laugh line and a little bit about -- i cannot take him for more than a few minutes at a time. host: from pearl river, new york

, this is jim, talking about judge kavanaugh. caller: on the issue of brett kavanaugh and this woman, rachel mitchell, who is coming from arizona, her approach is that of a prosecutor, and i believe the questioning by a legislative is anin this case accusation. i think everybody has to be status i do not believe is appropriate, which is the silent cross examination, where a witness gives testimony and the defense attorney refuses to question area and i do not believe it is extremely effective -- it is extremely effective, but i do believe it would be appropriate in this case. dr. blasey-ford has to be very careful. it has to be a humiliating strategy addressed to the witness. talking aboutso

that hearing tomorrow, from west virginia. caller: my top story was on the way that senator cruz and his wife were treated in the restaurant. that they were railed upon and had to leave the restaurant. and i heard a cnn reporter last night actually in support of people doing that. i think it is terrible when people have a difference of opinion, and i do not care -- you should be able to discuss it or talk about it without violent protest. that andly supported said so on cnn. to say that people have a right and -- to go in and loudly protest when you and your wife are in a restaurant eating, and had to basically fight their way out of their -- i just think

, it is a country disgrace. you have a right to protest, but do it peacefully without violence. host: that is june talking about thursday's hearing, the senate --el, and he was also on the talking about these issues. let's show it to you now. [video clip] we have two people here who have a different version of what has happened. toneed to at least listen them both respectfully, and then make a decision. that is what we are here to do, to vote on this confirmation. have 50 votes for judge kavanaugh? >> i believe he will be convert -- he will be confirmed, yes. >> with all men? women making the

decision? >> i do not think because you happen to be a male you are disqualified. from listening to the evidence and making a decision based on the evidence. as i said earlier -- and i think you already know -- we have assistant to go on staff and to ask these questions in a respectful and respectful way. not like the political side show you saw put on by the democrats when they were questioning judge kavanaugh. [question inaudible] evidence gives us a way to evaluate the two people, could be the only people who know anything about this.

listen to the evidence, evaluate the situation, and then vote. host: in the op-ed section of "the wall street journal," talking about the events leading up to tomorrow -- "senator feinstein, clean up your mess" is the headline. host: gary in new york, about the kavanaugh hearings tomorrow.

hello. gary in new york, hello. caller: i am calling from north babylon. hello? host: you are on, go ahead. caller: i went to school with somebody who was -- who has molested a female. and he wanted to become a schoolteacher. it really bothered me that he did. host: how does that relate to the judge kavanaugh hearing? caller: pretty much. host: how does it, specifically? caller: it's like somebody is getting away with something that they should not be getting away with. host: one of the topics of discussion is the spending bill we spent our last segment talking about. that is christine's topic. she is in west virginia. hi, christine.

caller: i was calling about spending. i believe what happened with the spending is republicans just gave us a tax break. like me,res, middle-class, i think it is going to hurt me because they are going after social security, medicare, and then my generation, by the time i am retired, there is nothing going to be for me. that is because they passed the tax breaks. that is my opinion about it. host: this is how we have parsed out this half hour. we are asking you to consider one of three top stories. if it is the spending bill, it is 202-748-8002. tomorrow,he hearing judge kavanaugh and christine ford, it is 202-748-8001. if it is president trump at the

united nations, it is to show you how the kavanaugh hearing is affecting the political world, particularly as the november elections come up, marsha blackburn, currently the republican in the house. and the former governor of tennessee. they are part of this debate. the kavanaugh nomination did come up. here is part of that exchange. going on now with the kavanaugh nomination in washington, on the part of both parties, it just disgusts me. they have taken an important and serious obligation under the constitution in the senate and turned it into a circus. we have now -- we now have 90 or 91 senators who have given testimony as to who they are for. the congressman -- the congresswoman announced that she was for kavanaugh minutes after

he was appointed. reviews,earings, no let's just go ahead and confirm him. we need to listen to everybody including dr. ford, and when that is over, make a decision based on their ethics. and their competence. >> i think everyone who makes an accusation should be heard. we know that that hearing is set for thursday. we now know that the vote to move judge kavanaugh out of committee is going to take place on friday. if i were in the senate, i would vote yes to move judge kavanaugh forward. and to send that vote to the floor. i would vote to confirm him. qualifiedminently jurist. he has served well on the federal court. place righttaking now is a pr stunt by the democrats.

it is character assassination, and this is something that is dirty politics at its worst. as representative blackburn said, the senate judiciary committee is scheduled to hold a meeting on friday to consider judge kavanaugh's nomination. senator grassley, in a separate tweet early yesterday, saying that it may not take place depend on what happens tomorrow. c-span3 is where you can watch it. go to our website at c-span.org for more information, and also our radio app. connie is in south carolina you are next up. go ahead. caller: hi. i am 77 years old. ,nd when i was a teenager something happened to me like what happened to the lady, only it was much worse.

i did not tell anybody, and this , but ifirst time remember as if it was yesterday. so i know how the woman feels. used toow my father talk to us, and he was a pretty open man. this was not discussed in our house. and he told me then, told all of his girls, god made all men just alike. he just made them look different so you could tell them apart. and their brain was not in their head nor their heel. host: that is connie in south carolina. let's go to carlos in st. petersburg, florida, addressing the president's visit to the united nations. caller: good morning.

news intrigued by the report this morning about the speech yesterday, and i had not seen it. this morning i saw part of the speech on c-span. i thought it was quite on point. the tone and the flow was excellent. i am not sure why people are so offended by a lot of the things he said because he is right. where information, they have been playing their own political views around there are not quite settled, as you might call it. the rule of law is what makes enterprise go. how could people object to that? host: it was at the united nations yesterday that president trump, while meeting with the talkedan president, about judge kavanaugh's nomination, and the allegations

against the judge. here is the president. pres. trump: for the democrats to be trying to make him into something -- let's be nice about it -- that he is not -- you are also not seeing him on his footing. he has never been here before. he has never had any charges like this. from 36 yearsp ago that are totally unsubstantiated? watching this, as the president of a great country, colombia, how is this possible? nobody ever heard about it, and now a new charge comes up? she says she was totally in the brigade is and was all messed up , she does not know if it was him but it might have been him. let's not make him a supreme court judge because of that?

this is a con game being played by the democrats. host: the president speaking at the un's general assembly. find oute to c-span to what is going on with those events taking place in new york. from new hampshire, this is jill. hello. caller: yes, hi. i believe that the way the republicans are hiring a lawyer ford is totally cowardly. they should have enough nerve to question her themselves. i actually believe her. i do not believe him. that everyrely hope republican will suffer pain in the next election. a move on thes is

part of top democrats. i think it is a move on a woman who finally felt that she should come forward. i do not believe it is a political plot. host: john in massachusetts, hello. caller: at least give me the time that you gave everybody else. this is a continuation. this has been going on for over 100 years. this is a continuation of international government corporate white supremacy. -- is the same people who host: john, the spending bill, what do you think about that? caller: we are going into $22 trillion into debt. minorities, people are starving. the education system is crumbling. giving money to internationalists to continue these wars is ridiculous.

we need to spend the money here. this is a continuation from the people who have been in government since the 1700s. host: that is john in massachusetts. "the washington post" reports that a spokesman for bill cosby said that what is going on with judge kavanaugh -- he made that comparison. sentenced to 3 to 10 years in state prison. thisis the last call from segment. from columbia, maryland. the president at the united nations. go ahead. caller: i was totally embarrassed by our president. the whole world laughed at him in front of the united nations,

at it is just really sad this point in our history that we have a president who is a joke to the rest of the world. host: that is merry in maryland, the last call for this segment maryland, they in last call for the segment. we will be joined by gerald theolly on the future of russia investigation. plus, steve clemons of "the atlantic," to talk about the president's visit to the united nations, and the themes of that speech. also the chairmanship of the security council. those topics coming up on "washington journal." announcer: pulitzer prize

winning offer geraldine -- author geraldine brooks on our live call-in program on sunday, with her most recent book. her other novels include "march," "caleb's crossing," and "the year of wonder." live today from noon to 3:00 p.m. eastern on booktv. be sure to watch next month with author jodi piko and brad meltzer. on booktv on c-span2. every president i think would confirm that experienced. i am going to tell this guy off, and then they go in there and there is something about the office itself and the respect that all americans and foreigners have for the office where you just do not feel like

going out the president or taking him on the way you told your colleagues you would do. >> when he was in china, he was called back to run the cia, something he did not want to do, which he thought running the cia was a political career killer to higher office. father remembers his saying, if the president of the united states asks you to do something for your country, the answer is yes. that sentiment embodies his , note sense of obligation to necessarily be a president in his own right, but to hold the presidency up as a charge to hand off to the next person. engel discusses his new:"when the world seemed president george h. w. bush and the end of the cold war," sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "q&a."

"washington journal" continues. host: this is gerald connolly, representing virginia, also a governmenthe oversight and reform committee. guest: good to see you. what do you think about the proposal for rob rosenstein testifying? guest: i think that should happen after mark judge, who was after room with kavanaugh he attempted a sexual assault on dr. ford, testifies. you cannot have it both ways. ignoring subpoenas are relevant -- if that is the road you want to go down, let's be consistent. host: outside from that, there will be allegations made against

mr. rosenstein in this story? guest: i don't know if they are allegations. there are reports in "the new york times" that rosenstein was saying maybe in a kidding fashion -- we do not know -- talking about being wired to protect himself from the president. we know from the james comey episode that there is a substantial reason to be concerned about that. the request,far as it should not take place? guest: let's be honest. mark meadows is a friend of mine, but i certainly agree with what he is up to here with his colleagues, with jordan and bob goodlatte. ans is about undermining ongoing criminal investigation, and i consider that a congressional attempt at obstruction of justice. it is nothing less than that. it is a criminal investigation. stay out of it. host: as far as the meeting between the president and the deputy general thursday, what

good layout -- what could be laid out and that? president trump has made no secret that he is unhappy with jeff sessions, the attorney general, for recusing himself. of course, we all get why he had to do that because he did not tell the full truth at his nomination hearing before the senate judiciary committee that he in fact met with multiple contacts -- met, had multiple contacts, with the russian ambassador. that he had to recuse himself and had no choice. trump has never forgiven himself -- trump has never forgiven him for that. trump has no influence in that criminal investigation, which could involve members of his family and has involved members of his senior administration. we have had five people in his

administration who have pled guilty in this criminal investigation. of course he wants to stop it. and his allies in the house want to help him. that is wrong. it is a perversion of the will of law, and it has to stop. rod rosenstein appointed mueller when he took over the investigation. they need to be allowed to complete their work. if the president means what he ,ays -- there was no collusion i have nothing to worry about -- then you have nothing to worry about. why are you trying to interfere in a criminal investigation that does not implicate you? under the republican leadership, unfortunately, it is crickets. , and talk nor evil. to treyre 16 requests gowdy, which have not been honored.

we have no illusions about what republicans are willing to do with trump. be a course correction in november, democrats are going to be -- theng legitimate legitimate constitutional role of our committee, which is executive branch oversight, and we will be vigorous in enforcing that role, as previous democratic and republican chairman have been. host: our guest is with us for a half hour. 202-748-8000 for democrats. let's remember that the only objection to that legislation from the majority leader in the senate, mitch mcconnell, is that we do not really need it. there is no threat. i do not think that argument has

any standing anymore, clearly. and depending on the outcome of the meeting between the deputy attorney general rosenstein and the president on thursday, we will know a lot more about whether we need it or not. host: quickly, before we take calls -- the federal government possibly could be shut down as of this week. what is the likelihood of that happening? guest: initially republican leadership was confident that was not going to happen, and they had an understanding with trump that he was not going to do that. there would not be a republican -- a government shutdown 40 days before an election. shut down the government and you may create an election that moves from a solid democratic victory to a collapse of the republican cause. they were pretty confident that they had a deal, and the bill sailed through the senate with a huge bipartisan vote.

it will have a bumpier road through the house. all of a sudden trump is indicating, "without my wall, i may veto that bill." he has always kind of said that. last year he talked about what we need is a good government shutdown. there is no such thing. is a a derelict -- it derelict in our duty. for trump to make that kind of reckless threat is very dangerous. what we are hearing is that there is growing anxiety on the republican side that he might mean it. and we have got to get behind his argument. his argument makes no sense at all when you look at it. when donald trump was a candidate and he ran and had rallies, what did he do about the wall? he made the mansur, what are we going -- he made them answer,

what are we going to build? they would all scream the wall. he said, who is going to pay for it? they all said mexico. he never said the american taxpayer is the fallback from mexico. pay forno obligation to a dime of this wall. the mexicans, he said, would pay for the wall. bill itself,as the it hundred $55 billion, will you vote for it echo -- as far as billion,itself, $855 will you vote for it? guest: i will. all of the negative policy riders have been removed. there was a good bipartisan leahy effort with patrick -- they worked well together on a bipartisan basis. this is what people said they want, bipartisan legislation. stop the fighting.

biggerof the appropriations bills in recent memory, that is just what they did. the house is prepared to pass it with a bipartisan vote as well. the freedom caucus does not like it because they do not like anything that spends money domestically by the federal government. but for democrats this is a good bill that represents real investments in our country in .he future that is very important for americans and the future. to rail the bill over a wall that was supposed to be funded by the mexicans, not the u.s. taxpayer, i think is very reckless. i think politically it could be catastrophic for this president and for his republican team in congress. host: representative gerry connolly joining us, democrat from virginia. first call from the democrats line, rachel. caller: i just wanted to comment and express concern over really

the bipartisan military posture of congress. in sevenging wars countries. we are building up forces on the russian border. our water fountains are being shut off in school because of lead. people cannot even have clean water in flint, michigan, and we are going to put $700 billion into the military, where we are committing genocide in yemen? we are running proxy wars in syria and ukraine? host: what would you like our guest to address specifically? caller: specifically, we need to put money in education. we need to put money into infrastructure, in a jobs program. host: thanks.

i certainly agree with the caller with respect to the need for long-term domestic investment. somebody once said that the republicans know the cost of everything but the value of nothing. a great country has to invest in research and development, in education, and in infrastructure, as the caller indicated. you do not make those investments with big payoffs -- they have huge returns on them. ,hink about the highway system under eisenhower. it is still paying off, still with a return. it transforms the availability of goods all over america, and it helped make us the leading economy in the world. who is making those kinds of investments today? china are you go to china, everything is new. they have new high-speed trains,

new transit systems, new airports, new ports, new roads and bridges. infrastructure is crumbling, and we are standing by, letting it happen. this is about the future of america. we have to get out of this right-wing narrative that all federal spending is bad. no, it is not. federal investments can make in norman's -- can make enormous differences. huge returns on them. looking at it that way, and i think the caller is right. to bemoan the fact that those investments are falling behind -- when john kennedy was president, we were spending 2.2%, 2.3% of our gross to mastic product on infrastructure. today it is around 1.6%.

our population has doubled in that time period, and our needs have only grown. brian on's hear from the republican line. mostr: on president trump, of these problems have all been self inflicted. donald trump, the way he lives his life and conducts business that created these problems. for himself and the republican party. the republican party is riding a tiger with a time bomb in its belly. it, it couldff kill them. if they stay on, it could kill them. either way, they will lose. i think they are just paying that somehow they will -- they are just praying that somehow they will get through this phase and survive. i am in construction and i want to comment on your infrastructure comments.

i am a member of the labor union . the big fight no one talks about is the project labor agreements and how federal spending -- it is a big boost to organize labor, which is something the republicans are fighting. that is why they always dragged their feet on infrastructure, because they do not want to fund labor unions, because a lot of the money, they spend more on labor and federal projects than a private company would. up in labornds unions' coffers. guest: let me do with the second part of your comments first. the first part takes more time. agreements were a measured during the franklin delano roosevelt administration so that production would not be interrupted. we need to produce lots of things -- ships, airplanes -- and to do that, you have to have

an uninterrupted stream of production. they got together with management and labor and worked out these profit labor agreements, and they worked very today, project labor agreements totinue to work and continue serve a valuable purpose. for ideological reasons, not economic reasons, not even based on our record of success, some ideological counterparts on the republican side of the aisle simply do not like it because it promotes unions, and they kind of overlook that the benefits they produce in managing projects and getting them done in a timely fashion. we just built here in the nation's capital a new transit line to dulles airport from washington, d.c. the first phase was with a project labor agreement, and it works well by all accounts. there are mechanisms that can be very useful.

your first comment about president trump, i could not agree with you more. i do not know about a ticking time bomb in the belly of the tiger, but i think the republican party has the tiger by the tail with president trump, and i think they are about to pay a price for that in the midterm elections, and i think they should. they are afraid to take on this president, even when he makes outrageous and even un-american statements or engages in policies that are clearly antithetical to democratic norms, whether it be the rule of law, whether it be immigrants, whether it be racial bigotry, calling white supremacists good people. in charlottesville after three people died because of white supremacist radicalism, in what

is otherwise a peaceful and progressive university town, we look for more than that in our leader. we are getting a lot less than that in this leader, and it is worse than that. it is destructive, harmful. many of my republican friends in congress know that, but they are enablers, rationalize or's -- , and that does not serve america well. the point you make is well taken. you called on the republican line, and you are a republican, and i am glad to have that republican perspective. fairfax, virginia, the republican line. brian, hello. caller: you mentioned the democrats are looking to subpoena if the democrats take control of the house. i was wondering what one or two

individuals you are looking most.d to subpoenaing guest: let's look at scott pruitt. if scott pruitt had been in the republicanet, my friends would still be looking to subpoena him. he had a list of violations in questionable practices. some possible violations of law. in the use of security detail, the kinds of travel, where he went, and the security details .e had having confidential phone conversations that he has only used once. and he treated the epa like his own personal fiefdom and piggy bank, and i think he needs to be held accountable because we do not want that repeated.

this is probably the most ethically challenged cabinet , almostrren g. harding a century ago. i think he has to be investigated and held accountable. that is what congress is expected to do, irrespective of which party holds power. in this case, my republican friends do not even make a pretense of holding president trump and his cabinet and subcabinet accountable for anything. that has got to change. i am hopeful with the results in november that it will. host: talk about the 10th districts, your neighbor, a closely watch race between -- a closely watched race between barbara comstock and jennifer waxed and. what are the dynamics industry stick -- in this district?

"the washington post" is out differences. but it endorsed her for reelection. but while she was winning by six points, hillary clinton was carrying her district i 10. you have to ask yourself, two years later, are things better or worse under the republican incumbent? there has been a serious deterioration in the fortunes of republicans in that district, along with other districts across america. we tested that last november because virginia is one of only two states that has its gubernatorial election, along with house delegates elections, in the off year. new jersey and virginia were both bellwethers last election.

what happened? won thecratic governor years. landslide in 30 seven of the 10 incumbents, delegates, went down. combine that with the performance in loudoun county, with almost 400,000 people in it isistrict -- increasingly turning democratic. the first poll after jennifer wexton, the first poll that came showed a demo -- showed a 10 point lead by the democrat. i would say that all those numbers, the deterioration of the republican brand, and be republican incumbent votes with president trump 70% of the time. that would suggest a democrat is likely to win that seat. coleman in maryland,

democrats line. caller: good morning. guest: good morning. caller: first of all, i want to let you know that i have voted democratic all the time i had been in the united states of america. but there is something that is troubling me. i want to ask you this question. when are the democrats going to stand up against trump, against a campaign, and run that i personally would like to see? why i am saying this -- i will take you back to george w. bush when he ran against vice president al gore. all we had was, clean up the white house. when he ran against a strong military man, john kerry, he did not have nothing to run.

when donald trump ran against the two more -- most important, well-qualified candidates last time -- senator kaine and hillary clinton -- dust talking about him mail. -- just talking about email. we have evidence of collusion. with respect to all of that, president trump -- can't you see democratic candidates all over, to run against him -- host: thanks, caller. guest: well, what i think i hear in what you are saying is you wish it would be bumped up a couple of notches. you would like to hear it louder and clearer and maybe more stridently. i understand that desire, but i would tell you that the

opposition to this administration is not only from democrats. it is from lots of folks who previously were not particularly politically active, and they are engaged in a lot of substantive issues -- about guns, about sexual assault, about the democratic norms we want from the president, about the rule of law, and holding donald trump and this administration accountable. i think it is a huge grassroots movement welling up, and we are going to see some of the results of that movement in the november midterms. but i think the democrats in -- i think it sometimes gets washed out a little bit because of the complete silence on these matters by my

republican friends across the aisle, sadly, and i will point watergate, there were heroic republican figures. there were republicans in congress and in the national -- spoke outke up against what richard nixon had done, and called him out correctly and should political courage in doing it. there were republicans, when it finally came to impeachment, who voted for impeachment and jeopardize their careers, who put country first. where are those heroic republican voices today you go are those heroic republican voices today yo? host: from the washington post today --

comment on that. guest: the context of a pay freeze falls on federal employees. the paper these -- the pay freeze donald trump recommended, it was on assault on federal retirees, i'm assault on federal unions, and assault on hiring and retaining new federal employees. they wanted to go from calculating retention from the high three to the high five years. they wanted one point sent -- 1% for three years, adding $5,000 to the cost of an average federal employee. they want to extend the from one to period two years for a federal employee. -- it isknow of any almost designed to make sure millennials do not apply for federal employment.

the list goes on and on. on the an assault federal employee. it is a disgrace. it is a far cry from done -- from john kennedy saying, "ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." it is not serving the country well. host: from maryland, independent line. hello. caller: good morning. spending 10 times more than all the countries combined on the military budget. this is ridiculous, all this money going to the material are very -- to the military. all this money could be spent on health care and education,

healthdying from lack of care, people on the streets. this is stupid. thank you. well, if we mean could we be more careful about the investments we make and make it more accountable and more efficient and effective, yes, i agree with that. we had a report before our committee a couple of years ago of moneyillion unaccounted for in defense spending. can you imagine if that headline had been any other cabinet office? the hearings, the investigations, the outrage would be never-ending. on it, andhearing that was the end of it. i agree with that point. but i also have to say that, you know, we need a robust and

modernized u.s. military. it is a dangerous world out there. the russians are on the move or they have troops in the ukraine, in georgia. they testing and threatening the baltics. ,hey are interfering as we know not only with our elections, but lots of other elections. there is a referendum pending in macedonia. if that render sm -- referendum passes, macedonia will become a member of both the eu and nato. the russians don't want that. they are interfering in any way they can. through fake news, lots. social media. payoffs. intimidation. to try to steer the election toward a no vote. we need to be able to account for that. there is a threat from iran. there is missile development in north korea. we can't be static.

we can't pretend the threats don't exist. but can we be more efficient? can we have more accountability? can we do a better job of that? yes. we can and we should. , theould also proliferation of u.s. military involvement overseas, and i agree with that too. i think my senator tim kaine has made a point of the need for congressional authorization for military deployments in combat or combat like missions overseas. we are still operating on a 17-year-old optimization for the use of military force. senator kaine has pointed out that that is kind of a long time. of afghanistanm and al qaeda was not about yemen or niger. it was finding u.s. troops.

think it came as news to most americans, we have to have that debate. i agree with that too. we don't want to be far-flung in our deployment. areant to make sure we strategic and targeted. we also want to make sure we are ready for any threat we may face. host: cecil from florida. caller: hello. so, you are a democrat. all, i am 84 years old. i cannot read or write. you want to spend more money on college and stuff. we need less colleges and more -- the tech.

you can go to a vo-tech school and be a plumber. now, you go to college and you have to go to college to hold a stop sign out there on the road construction. you have to have a college education. 100 thousand dollars, 200 thousand dollars in debt of the time you get out of college and you don't how to use your hands. all you can do is look in a book. good: i think you make a point. i don't know we need less college, i think the demand of education are ongoing and to be competitive, certainly, higher education, high skill sets are going to be in demand. parter, there is another that you are talking about, where we need hands-on skills. we need apprenticeships. there are countries like germany and switzerland that have really rigorous, very effective apprenticeship programs. in that produce high skilled mechanics and welders and electricians. and carpenters.

our economy needs that. donald trump's assault on the immigration across the board is really hurting america right now because we can't get the labor we need. in the agricultural sector, construction center. in the service sector. havef we are not going to immigrants helping us fill those slots, where will we get those there ought to be an alternative path for people who don't wish, or art and client or don't have the aptitude -- aptitude for pursuing university education. to be able to have an apprenticeship and get a good paying, middle-class job with that apply to skill set. germany shows how it can work. they do it in a partnership between labor and management. with help and assistance, it is very detailed and very structured. it is also very effective. i think we should be looking at

that. not everybody wants or his designed to necessarily have to go to college or university. they should not feel that that is their only alternative and feeling that they are a failure. that is not true. we can do a lot more in investing in the kind of programs you are talking about. representative gerry connolly. thanks for your time. guest: thanks. by theoming up, joined atlantic's steve clemons. the president's visit to the u.n. yesterday. the security council. those discussions coming up on washington journal. ♪ announcer: the c-span bus was recently in holland -- honolulu, hawaii. for our 50th capitals tour. join us next weekend october 6 and seventh as we feature our

visit to hawaii on c-span. book tv. and american history tv. exploring hawaii's history and culture as well as public policy issues facing the state. next saturday on c-span. at 7:00 eastern on washington journal. leo. director of hawaii's office of planning will talk about homelessness. and lack of affordable housing. on c-span2 at noon. on theeman on his book life of legendary native hawaiian surfer. then, a visit to the university of hawaii at west a wahoo for the extensive book collection of late u.s. senator daniel inouye. hawaii week and continues on c-span at 9:30 a.m. eastern on washington journal. jeff. executive director of the blue planet foundation. on renewable energy efforts in hawaii. on american history tv on c-span3 at 2:00 eastern.

we visit the valley of the priest. along the north shore of oahu. the polynesian voyaging society in holland -- honolulu. at 4:00 eastern, three short documentaries about hawaii. the 1956 film soldier in hawaii. the 1924 silent film, the hawaiian islands. and the 1952 film long jeans comes scope. watch hawaii weekend next weekend on c-span. book tv, american history tv. listen to hawaii weekend on the free c-span radio app. we are featuring honolulu mayor. saturday at 10:00 eastern. washington journal continues. host: clemens with the atlantic editor. enlarged in washington. thanks for coming in. the president's speech in the united nations, what do you think was the theme? guest: i think the theme is as

far as the administration is concerned, america's international project is over. our commitment to big projects on migration or human rights come or the international criminal court, these cons of things are going to go in the trump dustbin of history. and this is a time where he is not advocating just for the u.s. sovereignty, u.s. nationalism, reasserted in a case in arctic -- chaotic world. he is telling entry -- other countries they should do the same thing. i know many people would disagree with me that despite it being pugnacious, it was more measured than last year's. very much a part of a worldview. we saw the trump doctrine in clearer form today than we have in the past. guest: -- host: for those systems he has criticized, was the correct about the criticism that he was making? i think at the end of the day i tend to have the view that there will be a dark day for the united states and we are going

to need an international partners to solve whatever global problem there is. there are not many problems out in the world that one can solve alone. almost none of them are solvable without the united states. we see president trump putting the united states in a position where we will have ad hoc allies dealing with ad hoc problems and you have to ask yourself is that an efficient way to do that. the reason we create partnerships and the structures we have is that they create efficiencies in the ability to build trust and to actually move the needle on some of our big problems. or not a global compact on migration or the climate change, or the international criminal court are flawed in various ways, abandoning them does not makee, much sense to many of us. host: we will see the security council walk our viewers for your what that means. guest: i think he will do more of what you did yesterday, saying we are redefining what success looks like in the nuclear area. he will take a lot of pride and

put a gold star on his a competence as he sees them with north korea. many of others of us don't 2000 combatants in real terms. he is in talks of federal the arrangement that relationship. he has normalized relationship to some degree in terms of the leaders of the country's talking to each other. he will use and a way to further bash iran into some position. i disagree with a lot of critics of the president on a run. i think he is trying to get to a point where he actually does want to talk to iran. i think he wants to do a north korea with the run. and eventually talk. some point. right now, part of that, you may remember, the rocket man rhetoric, he is subjecting iran to the kind of tempo. host: do you think that was from last year, that is what shake the tone of speech this year? wanted tohink he demonstrate or tell the world that he had solved the problem. the problem is north korea continues to build its nuclear infrastructure and hide it. moved not been anything, anything on the table other than

making big commitments. you have to go back in presidential history and look at whether obama had done this or george w. bush or president clinton or others who, fight very hard to negotiate with korea and ended up with this curve of seeming success and then having it taken away. you hade that happened, her book and for democrats, essentially, attacking each other over what might happen. now, donald trump has said we have checked off that box, almost like a mission accomplished. we have pompeo trying to negotiate thing's that president trump has had is already achieved. it is an awkward position for people in the white house. host: if you want to ask questions, (202) 748-8000. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. for independent (202) 748-8002. tweet comments and questions. let's hear from the president from yesterday. his talk about efforts in the denuclearization in north korea. >> i would like to thank

chairman kim for his courage and for the steps he has taken. much work remains to be done. the sanctions will stay in place until denuclearization occurs. i also want to thank the many members states who helped us reach this moment, a moment that is actually far greater than people would understand. far greater. support, and their a critical support that we will all need going forward. host: he talked about the germans step and courage. what do you think about that? guest: i think we all watched this and we have all seen a lot of the noise that is come around about the president and north korea and what his advisers. we also know the administration, some members think very differently than the president.

is in a verytis different place. mike pompeo, the secretary of state is trying to negotiate. trying to put the best face on this. unusual for a lot of folks to see the president of the united states essentially praising one of the worst bugs in the world who has done very little under the -- other than smile and a photo op and call that a success. i think we are at an awkward time where the president is going to have to deliver, at some point, substantive deliverables. he has john bolton as his national security adviser who has made a career out of looking at a run in north korea and saying these are dire existential threats to the united states. at some point, it has to come back. to say that he is praising kim jong-un for his attitude or personal behavior, while not praising lots of other world leaders, we have seen donald trump behavior toward justin trudeau or other leaders around the world. britain and france were not even mentioned in his speech, which

cut people off guard. as allies and strong supporters of america's mission and capabilities. that, iwhen you look at think many people are dismayed. that he is doing this. this could be a negotiating tactic. part of the scenery donald trump is trying to sculpt to keep kim jong-un moving forward, let me remove my skepticism and say he is trying to do that. think, if at is the case, i hear people that used to be around him, they had orchestrated donald trump's tweets in such a way as to get kim jong-un's attention. and to try it. if they are doing the same thing in the general assembly speech to try to hold us together, i think at some point you have to see what are they delivering. what is a reasonable time expectation? you can say the adoration made a lot of sense. do something. if it does not come forward, it makes the united states and president trump look like fools. host: there's -- is there a

connection between north korea and what is going along -- going on between north korea and south korea? guest: south korea is in a pickle because it is simultaneously looking at a new leader, a leadership transition. and a leader that wanted to try to find new inroads to north korea. partner in theic united states. a frustrated japan that also wants to be part of this process. time, president moon in south korea is reading about donald trump continually saying why are we defending south korea. why are we there. why are they paying us more. it is a mercantile strategy. many people have pointed out in that speech yesterday, it sounds blunt a word,oo almost like donald trump is shaking down allies. what can you give us to protect you, how can we run the pentagon at a profit. defense, iis missile remember being up in the middle of the night when time with

donald trump went to korea. i was doing a late-night tv hit because it was daytime. he made a line at the end of his comments saying this campaign was visiting, a u.s. camp, further from the dmz, i could have built it faster and cheaper and more on-time than we did it. it is really for south korea security. not for our security. he undid theine rationale of why his advisers wanted him to go to korea. your security is joined at the hip with our security. undone andt has come why south korea is in a real fights and once continue to make everything look like it is ok. it is deeply rotten right now inside. host: first call comes from georgia. democrats line. hello. caller: good morning. i saw this speech, parts of it. the thing that caught my attention was the laughter. my questions are these, were you present? did you hear the speech? have you spoken with any of the people that witnessed the speech? to find out why they left and,

from that point on, i sort of think that these ambassadors are going to get together and pat each other on the back for their reaction. can you comment? were you there? in new york yesterday. not at the speech and of the -- viewing stadium. i talked to lots of people who were in the hall. i talked to people in the white house that were part of the president's team about that. are making too much of the laughter. i would be surprised if there had not been a reaction. this is a time where the president, this is giving the benefit of the doubt to the moment. he believes he is moving the new on north korea. he believes he has changed and disrupted what he saw. he sees and hears adoration of a lot of these things from a lot of quarters. i think the world is a little dismayed with shocks to nato. the way -- the behavior at the

g7 meeting. other kinds of disruption that look like they are having negative consequences, not only for the world, but for the united states itself. also, a lot of mistrust. and fear of the united states. the united states looks to many other countries like a rogue state. when donald trump says this, compared to this, it does create a genuine shock. whether they should have left, whether that was the demeanor they should have had, i am one who believes incivility. i believe in a room like that, keep your mouth shut or your humor down. don't clap, don't applaud. in this case, i would be surprised if they did not do that. i don't think most of the people saw it as blip. i think they look at it as a function that donald trump is looking at political gravity in the rest -- in a different way than the rest of the world. he is saying the end of globalism is over. and patriotism is here. a lot of other countries are saying that does not mean anything to what it means is you are walking away from partnerships with us on key

challenges in the world and that should not be celebrated. that should be something that should be noted and punctuated as a cost to the united states, as well as the rest of the world. i don't think they are glad. i think it is getting a lot of reaction because it is not something u.s. presidents really get. host: independent line. taking myanks for call paradigm i wanted to -- in light of what transpired at the united nations meeting, what do you feel like we are in terms of our standing in the world and do you think that it is recoverable? really the 900 pound question. . feel as if we are at a moment i look at myself as a realist. i am not a global crusader. place asin the same many democrats who have wanted to go solve every cause out

there. they are not all solvable. when the president used the words physical realism in his speech it caught my attention. i think that frankly, the world and our core allies, germany, france, the united states, japan. thanld even go further that. we have glossed over relationships like israel and saudi arabia. there are people inside israel that are just as worried about the solvency of the relationship of the united states. i think the same is true in saudi arabia and others. right now, they are not sure they can trust us to be with them in a crisis. that is what we are at. we are paying a cost for that. we have had a relatively reasonable relationship with china. even though it is a global competitor. we had understandings. we could park our aircraft carriers and hong kong. they blocked us over the trade sanctions issue. that is on the forefront. when your mystique as a superpower collapses and my people don't think you are going to be there with them on their dark days, they don't trust you

as my. they change their scenarios. rini yesterday say they were setting up a way to circumvent american sanctions on iran. so the payment can still be made to keeplike it attempts the jcpoa on iran on the case. they are directly moving in a different direction on a train wreck with john. anyone who continues to do business with iran is going to pay a huge and heavy price. i think america's place in the world is diminished. a sense of power, it has diminished in the sense that our ability to get other countries to do things with us, even if they are not sure they should is gone. for now. i don't know if it is recoverable. it will take a long time, even if you were to see the trump ofinistration and, and

republican or democratic president come in and try to work really hard in restoring the trust. i think there will be significant doubt. i think many countries don't look at the mantra of as an anomaly. they look at this as something that reflects a big part of attitudes in the united states of americans you no longer trust america's robust engagement in international affairs. for: (202) 748-8000 democrats. .or republicans (202) 748-8001 gary, go ahead. disagree wholeheartedly with your position. it sounds like the usual appeasement. get along to go along attitude that has been going on for years. thatnk, my view is president trump is a true leader. his vision of national

sovereignty is profound. , not wanting to, his , histence on fairness , you know, that, everybody should pull their own weight, appreciate their own national history, culture, and they should let it blossom and we should all do that together. i think that um his insistence on fairness is of paramount importance. this idea that he is trashing jettisoning all the norms, international norms, and institutions, is ridiculous. host: host: thanks. guest: i think the caller would

be praising if john bolton were gary woulde, i think be very much in line with john bolton. an might look at it as important and authentic part of the spectrum of use on american foreign policy. i strongly disagree. i think most people who know my work in the past and my efforts to try to restore realism in foreign affairs, when i was working in a think tank the new american foundation will know that appeasement is not part of that. i think we would disagree. i think the one thing where i would agree with gary on is what the president has brought back, i don't yes been effective yet in developing a strategy, is asking some fundamental core questions about the national dimensions of global economic interest. and how this is distributed in the country, who wins, who loses. and i worked for jeff weiner him. a democrat in new mexico in the 1990's. we were concerned about this,

the wto, about trade relations with china because we saw a very large structural trade imbalance with japan and china. it was much smaller than come but growing rapidly. and thought this was not behaving in the way most said it would behave. there was something deeper and more structural that we had to address. we advocated doing that with some republicans at that time. it is like those issues that have come back 20 years ago. i do give the administration credit for finally beginning to tackle some of this. i don't think steele is the way to do it. we need to look at things like ai and nanotechnology and how wealth will be created in the future. where is china and russia and other contenders in that. what is the united states doing to keep us in the lead in those areas. that is not happening as much as it should. those of the issues about the national dimensions of economic interest that have been opened by trump. and that we ought to take a step further. that was mr. bolton surely after the speech when it comes to iran. , would faces regime

he goesant consequences on to say if you cause us or allies, if you harm our citizens, there will be hell to pay. we aree basically said coming after you if you cross certain lines. there is no doubt that right now, the stalking horse, punching bag that this administration wants is not north korea. we heard that very clearly. that is over for the time being. it is very much iran. way itery much in a falls into the line come of the narrative, a political narrative that has little to do the substance of the issue, on whether, as pressure test -- ask people who are critical, when the jcpoa, our agreement with the predictions across many of the critics was that iran would never live up to it. iran would cheat. problem is no one in the intelligence community, no one in the pentagon can show where iran has cheated in the deal that we did.

is the leaving the deal united states and changing the tenor. that was supposed to be a starting place for our allies. alsoust our allies come russia and china negotiated a deal with a run. trying to move that out of a crash collision course into a direction. that thatappened is was an obama deal. and donald trump wants a trump deal. he may very well be able to do this. he may be at some point, because andhe effect of sanctions u.s. sanctions where iran's currency has cratered and there is a lot of economic pressure, it could happen that somebody opens the door to a new negotiation that might add some of these other pieces to it. the band -- the bottom line is the u.s. walked away from that, not iran. when you look at the rhetoric that has developed, it is as much about being against obama and his legacy as it is about doing anything on the iran front. host: republican line. hello. caller: hello. i wanted to say that our

president did a wonderful job at the united nations yesterday. and i think he is doing a wonderful job for our country. gets -- the country is not a politician. he gets a lot of flak because of how he runs things. he runs our country very similar, to a business, probably, bringing people in, talking to them about different things, making his own decisions. what do you think you cheap achieved at the united nations yesterday? are a: saying that we global power, number one, but we are not going to sit there and kowtow to everything that these other nations say to us. and try to get us to do. china wasabout how involved in these other things. iran. you can't trust anything the chinese say. i don't care who they are. i lived over there for three

years. i lived in indonesia where we work with chinese for a long time. you can't trust one thing out of their mouth. they will lie. mostly we see going on with the kavanaugh hearings. host: thanks. i am glad patrick is watching. i'm glad he is supportive of the president. sees opportunity there. i guess i see a different way. i look at the world as a family -- fairly anarchic place. there is a lot of deceit. there are big problems out there appeared china works with us on an enormous number of fronts word that china and the united states go truly at odds we could see this economic rupture turn into something that became truly globally destabilizing. what happened with a smoot-hawley tariffs in the 1930's. we could see something like that happen. until necessarily say it will happen, you have to look at the fact that at the end of the day, you have to ask yourself, as americans, whether you support donald trump whether you are

supposed to donald trump what will you do to solve many of the terrorism challenges of their? assistance wes would not have shut down much of the global terrorists network that are out there. china was a very active piece of that. china has a lot of domestic vulnerability. when you held those relationships with more distrust and you don't have the ties to bind you together, and you have views that nobody out there can ever be worked with or there is no international institution you're worth its name, in a situation where america has become very small, isolated. and much less able to accomplish things it sets out to do. that is my only point. we don't have to be naive about these partnerships, we don't have to be kumbaya about the u.n. and its strengths. there are flaws. there are nations that try and deceive us and there are nations that do horrible things and what to begin rewards for that. that is all true. the fact of the matter is at the end of the day, the united states is one that moves most of the needles in global affairs

and it does so in partnership with other countries. right now, we are not in line with most of those countries, we have to figure that out. host: democrats line. caller: good morning. thanks god for c-span. i am basically against the kidnapper in chief. i don't expect him to do anything worthwhile. at the united nations. yesterday, was typical of what the people in the world feel about the jump. he was a load of manure when he went in. be annot expect him to problem solver. he is a destabilize her. the sooner somebody gets rid of him, the better america will be. when it comes to the security council, what is the long-term influence? guest: i don't think any major

decisions will be made there at a think it is symbolically important. isn't -- it is important to --ember that obama shared chaired this care to council hearing. also nuclear proliferation. it will be a comparison point. that is what i was in the room. when they did that. , of,nk that it is not of of some of trying to make decisions. it is a function of trying to seduce the permanent five members and the other members of the security council to understand and feel what trump means. i once wrote up his on donald trump to the atlantic after his speech endeavors. and, he gave a polite speech. it was not disruptive. it was a gary cohen like speech. his former economic adviser. devon else was so disappointed that they had been in the room and trump did not happen. he was not the pugnacious self. he did not talk about trade in a way he was doing there. i think to some degree, trump

has to carve a line between advice. he will not fool anyone that all of a sudden he will solve all these issues. i think at some point he has to can lessdoor to how we put nation's league work with other parties in getting into a better place with iran. i would be open to that. to beth korea, he has open to the fact that kim jong-un has not moved any of the needles that were promised he would move at how can we basically continue to put that there. there is nothing wrong with the president basically saying we can have a new drift with north korea appeared we can try to extract more from iran. in a way that that has consequences. his realism, reflect that in a way. i think that would build amongst security council members, they don't have in him right up your right now, they look at him as erratic, disruptive, unpredictable. all of those things don't make for a good partnership with the united states. host: this is kerry in pennsylvania. republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call.

good morning. i would like to say, first of all, it is like a breath of fresh air with having president trump. honestly. i am a young voter. i have never been involved in politics as i have been these past couple years. because of donald trump finally coming onto the scene, it gave me a chance to feel like changes could be made. i feel a great need to stop being scared of change. why are weys said always policing the world. why are we always the ones that have to involved to stop other countries problems. we have our own problems. we have our own sick and hungry people that need help. havel like other countries been taking advantage of us for way too long. i am glad that mr. trump, president trump scares them. and he is going to make some change. for all of us.

it will be for the better. and he has never given proper credit for what he has done. personally, increases in our paycheck. we have actually seen things that we have not seen all these years prior. host: thanks. guest: i'm glad you are more involved politically. everybody ought to get involved. i hear what you're saying. quibble withto your views. those of us who try to critique or praise the president on what he may do in the national security area, scaring other countries, generating fear is not a strategy for success. in the united states. it is not something that helps the united states either eat its foes or secure its allies to it more. i think that is the broad line that many of us are waiting for. a coherent strategy to achieve things that our society needs or wants and have a broader discussion about it.

we can debate this, president trump himself is highly inconsistent. he can say things on different days. is nuclear proliferation, dealing with terrorism, dealing with poverty in the world. i cover a wide range of issues, i go around the country. i was in iowa. minneapolis. oklahoma city. i see a lot of people on the opposite side. they see the tax bill and have not felt the impact of the tax reform and tax cuts that the president has done. a lot of people are looking at diminished health care opportunities. i want to be very realistic. i'm not saying you are wrong, i think when you open our aperture a bit and understanding that a in of what is hitting people his being felt differently. i like to keep my aperture open so i can hear folks like you, i also think we need to look at people who have not enjoyed that same experience you have. host: this is steve of the atlantic washington editor.

atlantic.com. website. thanks for your time. open phones until the end of the program. .or democrats (202) 748-8000 for republicans (202) 748-8001. for independent (202) 748-8002. we will be right back. geraldine brooks of gaston in-depth fiction edition. on sunday. program with her most recent brooke -- book. other works include march, caleb's crossing, people of the book, and the year of wonders. watch in-depth fiction edition with geraldine brooks live today from noon to 3:00 eastern on book tv. bichon sure to watch in-depth fiction edition next month with author jodi picot and brad meltzer in december. on book tv on c-span2. >> every president would confirm

that experience. i will tell this guy off. they go in there. there is something about the office itself and the respect that all americans, have for the office. were you just don't feel like blowing out of the president or taking him on the way you told your colleagues you would do. was he was in china he called back to run the cia. something he did not want to do. to be honest, running the cia was curricular. i think we should take him at his word that he remembered his father saying if the president of the united states asks you to do something the answer is yes. that sentiment embodies his entire sense of obligation. be ournecessarily president and his own right, but to hold the presidency up as a

charge to hands off of person. >> the center for presidential history discusses his book when the world seemed new. president george h w bush and the end of the cold war. sunday night at 8:00 eastern. announcer: washington journal continues. host: open phones. you can tweet thoughts. facebook.com. the phone lines will be open for you for 20 minutes or so before the house comes in. shares the un security council. you can see that starting at 10:00 c-span.org. also on c-span radio. then, the president will hold a press conference. that will be at 5:00 this afternoon. watch for that at c-span3. c-span.org. and our c-span radio app. on this open for -- open phones from lexington, kentucky. i want to say something,

i completely disagree with steve clemons. ai ise says things like the answer, not steel and materials, that is ridiculous. that sounds like what obama with say. these jobs are going away and never coming back. it needs computers to function. what do you think goes into computers to be able to run ai? software? and materials. that is ridiculous. it is like this guy does not .nderstand economics instead of sitting around he needs to get with the program instead of being a progressive and his circle jerk. host: christine in new hampshire. independent line. guest: thank you for taking my call. -- caller: thank you for taking my call. i enjoyed the conversation you had. he is a little jaded. less optimistic than i am a i believe that the president is

very optimistic. and pulling their own weight. i think is a very good point. we should not feel like we have to do everything. i want everyone to get along. we do have to consider ourselves as the great america first. host: this is on politico's website. rachel bade. the tens of millions of people, watching christine blasey ford, before the judiciary committee for the shaping hearing, no parent contact with the people who could help with the ordeal. senate democrats. been in touch with the age of both parties. interviews with more than a half-dozen democratic senators on the judiciary committee indicate there has been no court nation in the run-up to the hearing. it underscores the political minefield both democrats and the 51-year-old college professor calling ahead of the hearing. the president and gop called it a school -- smear campaign.

team of well-connected attorneys with democratic ties to lean on as well as the democratic strategist. the democratic senators acknowledgment are standing behind or with little certainty about how it will fare. the rest of the story is available on political -- politico. from ohio. caller: hello. i think therethat is way too many neocons and both parties that are trying to push us into more conflicts and the average american is tired of these endless wars. you know, afghanistan and everything. trillions of dollars by the time we finally pay for them. many many years from now. the young republican lady from ,ennsylvania was saying that you know, she did not like the way other countries were treating us unfairly. send so muchd to money to them and all this. that is exactly the point.

we are trying to push ourselves until everybody around the world, like iran and syria come a what to do. again, both parties in this. i really would hope people would look at a great website called global research.org. these people point out, mostly professors, that we are being pulled into these conflicts. for example, -- is richer. this is dennis and ohio. democrats line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. speech at the united nations one -- yesterday. i was struck by the laughter brandingpresidents about what a great job he is doing. i don't believe he is doing a great job. that is for another discussion. i'm also struck by -- go ahead. host: why were you struck by the laughter? caller: i think we have lost our

standing in this world because of some of the things that mr. trump has done. i think this america going it alone does not work in 21st century. it can't work. we have too many other players out there in the world that have the ability to create great crisis, great conflict in this world. and we need partners. if we keep cutting off our nose does -- despite our face, like we are doing, it is going to serve no useful purpose for this country. the lady from pennsylvania that was talking about how her paycheck is going up, one of the things i have noticed about young people is that most of what they think about is very self-centered. they are worried about what is happening for them. they never seem to look at the what isure of how

affecting them is affecting other people in this world. host: that is dennis and ohio. the wall street journal this morning. reporting that china has barred --.s. navy ship chinese officials this week were refusing to grant permission with the at -- amphibious assault. make a port call to hong kong. facing also abruptly -- abruptly recalled. the story also adding that chinese officials did not offer a next clinician for refusing to visit. a visit to hong kong, we expect that will continue. we refer you to the chinese government for further information. aging and peru -- approved visits on a ship by ship basis. the chinese government spokesman, making the go -- comment on tuesday. connie is next. independent line. i would like to say i

was ready to support our president, the president of the united states. whatever party he is. to, mostly be an independent person. it depends on the issue. it depends on where we stand. it depends on what is best for everyone. the majority. not just those bipartisan, no matter what you say, i have to be against it. if we don't come together and get over what the supreme organizer did to our country, the previous eight years, we are not going to have a country to hold together. we need to support our country, support our military, can support our children, support our policy. pack iteing american or up and go somewhere else where you think you have a better shot. guest: -- host: we will hear from bill in

missouri. caller: good morning. that i am 58o say years old. this year in the primaries is the first time i have -- i did so because of donald trump. yesterday's performance in front of the u.n., i think was deadly sickening and as serious as can be as he turned our people against us. the whole world against us. was late to why he be at the u.n.. he did the same thing. the g7. thinkse reason, this man he can just disrespect the world because our military can kick somebody's but. that is totally wrong.

i can't wait to vote against him in 2020, even though i have never voted in my life. this will be the first time because this man is tearing down our country and our standing in the world. host: that is bill in missouri. the journey -- journal also reported about the corporate refunds due to corporations just done by the irs. saying that the irs decision earlier this year would apply those corporate refunds to future installments of the one-time tax on past and foreign profits. the tax bill passed by congress last year, companies get eight interest-free years to pay back tax on accumulated profits. bill,ave time to pay the many executives argue the irs would assign this is refund to that purpose at least tens of millions of dollars are cut up in the dispute. there is no government or private data available on the stakes. the story adding that to avoid companies with a single large tax bill, congress gave them eight years pay them back loaded

so companies oh only 8% of their totals for each of the first five years. more of the story if you want to go to the wall street journal. new york, democrats line. caller: thank you for taking my call. two things. ofst, the speech reminded me going over the story animal farm. and four legs good, two legs bad. that is what trump was saying. four-legged animals are good and two-legged human beings are bad. the shocking moment everybody -- host: how did you make the connection? because of donald trump's racist comments about other nations. they proclaimed the u.s. hatred against other nations. especially around. at that moment when everybody left at donald trump, it was perhaps the most striking moment in the history of this country.

that a president of the united states was being ridiculed by world leaders. think it was like that moment because he was performing. he thinks he is still on the apprentice show. host: that is larry in new york. done in california. republican line. morning.ood good morning to usa. i think the laughter at trump is being misunderstood. those people are listening to kerry and all the other deep stators who are trying to send a signal that trump is no longer the president. is not the president we can possibly else. the whole problem with mueller's to try toion destabilize and take away the power from the president who is the commander in chief. all these guys and whether you are like, i mean, when i think of host: -- host:how do you connect that to the left? caller: these people, we need to

get them more sedition out the people like kerry and brenner. and klapper and obama. and hillary clinton. all those people are just obstructing justice and they are seditious. read the federal -- tot: i'm trying to ask you glenn hegar all that from the laughter that the president received yesterday. had you make that connection ? guy likeisten to a steve talk about atlantic. get a read what they are saying. it is total progressive bs. take a guy like kavanaugh and ruin him because of what, some stupid allegation were these people no longer follow the constitution. host: that is done from california. he -- here is the actual event he brought up from yesterday. this at the united nations. >> in less than two years, my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of

our country. america, so true. did not expect that reaction, but that is ok. that whole speech available at c-span.org. oklahoma, craig, republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i just wanted to address somewhat of a mix characterization concerning the iran nuclear deal. sometimes, it is floated that trump did it just because he wanted to undo what obama did his own deal, simply to undo obama. that is not the case. if you have to homeless people and you know they will use the money you give for family and food that is one thing. if you give a homeless person that has a track record of taking your money and using it for weapons and drugs, you don't want to give them money. the obamas deal with iran, they

basically ship pallets of money to a state sponsor for terror, iran. untraceable money. the reason trump did not want that deal to continue his because it was a bad deal. is very simple. it was not in america's interest to fund terrorism. he pulled out of the iran deal. that is not about any hubris or him wanting to make his deal, it is about truly protecting america's interest and the interest of our allies around the world. want to fund don't terrorism. it was a very good choice on his part. i'm glad he did it. america has high principles. we are the people of the table with the highest principles. we hold ourselves to our principles, and we had the largest stick. host: ok. let's go to dave, baltimore. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i guess where do i begin. the first thing i would like to talk about, two things. the kavanaugh hearing and i think that, you know, people who

, i, i, i think they have collective amnesia. what happened to obama's pick with merrick garland. mitch mcconnell would not even address that. year.t for over a now, suddenly, they want to russia's through. the second thing, i could talk about that. i don't have time. the other thing is the u.n. speech. and the laughter. i think that just speaks volumes. historically, it does not really make sense to alienate our nato allies. know, with all the trump supporters there. trump just continually pushes his convict --'s conspiracy theories that play into the hands of his political base. let's go to derek in chicago. independent mine. caller: good morning. i have two quick comments.

first, a few colors before my call, a lady said she was talking to respect the president and all of that and then she made a mark, against obama. talked about his last eight years. my last comment is american people, please wake up. us against them. we have more in common than those people up there in washington. and remembermind that we are the ones that are hurting. forget the party. if they are not doing what you would like done in your life, vote against them. i don't care what side it is. vote for what is at stake for me. thank you. minutes left five until the house comes in. the president and still in new york. at the un security council, you can see that on c-span.org. the at 5:00 this afternoon, president holding a press conference while at the united nations. c-span. -- c-span3, c-span.org,

our c-span radio app. florida is next. donald p republican line. caller: good morning. i do support the president. i think he gave a really good speech. the more he set about the laughter in the beginning was more about him, his ego and people, how he comes off, trying to break the ice to get into his speech. i do have a question, about where he said he was backing away from the igt. i did not understand that. is there something more going on with international criminal court. before he was breaking away. then his company -- comment about germany and german rule. i was a little lost. to go to me invite you our website at c-span.org. it was a couple weeks ago, maybe last week. maybe the week before, the ational security adviser made

speech in washington dc where he talked about the international criminal court and the stance that the united states is going to take to that. i remember the exact today. bolton, thatn john defense will be there appeared you can learn more about the united states stance on that aspect if you want to tune into to our website at c-span.org. tom is next. hollywood, florida. democrats mine. two comments. i already didn't like kavanaugh before the sexual allegations. he did not answer any questions or if he did, they were just pat answers. no substance to the men. he is hiding everything. number two, i think the hard-core republicans really need to look at yesterday events with mr. trump at the u.n., the whole world realizes what a buffoon we have. the worst president the country has ever had. maybe they need to wake up and smell the coffee. thank you.

host: independent line. alex is next. new jersey. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would like to make a few brief points. to -- many of his policies are exactly correct. his policies are basically to go you are, saying that protector for yourself. 300 million people or more, the economy is eight times that of russia. they should be able to take care of the united states help. france and england have nuclear weapons. that is one. second one is immigration. the united states except on million immigrants legally. there is no reason for us to expect several hundred thousand more illegally. if you can here illegally to get deported. ok. the last one as again, talking

about our trade policy. clinton. obama did not do anything contrary but jump is doing something. host: let's go to bob in michigan. independent line. caller: i just want to make a comment. reiterating what one of the guys was starting to say about the types of folks, all parties that are now inhabiting washington. whether it be economy or like we had on, it is only when we asked 20 questions do we realize how detached most of these private school bubble boys really are from the other 99.9% of the american people. how unable they are to answer any kind of question that deviates from their simple platform that they read. i'm not saying they are not the experts that you have to have on, i am saying they have been raised in such a bubble that

they really have no clue as to how the american people live. host: that is bob in michigan. he will be the last call. house of representatives coming in. part of their work today deals with the spending bill that is about 800 55 billion in cost including provisions to keep the government open. stay close to c-span for that. we take you to the house of representatives. the speerropore: uswill be in order. the chair lays before the hoe a communition fm the speaker. the clerk: thpeaker room, washington, d.c.septer 26, 2018. heby appoint honorab ral norman to act as spear pro tempore on this day. signed, paul d. an, spker othe house of rresentative