stewart take part in a second town hall debate. at c-span 2 the national comes in for more debate on brett kavanaugh's appointment to the supreme court. and the votes have been denied until a sexual assault allegations are complete. there's a c-span hearing at 10:00 on a system to prevent train accidents called positive day control. the atlantic festival continues n the afternoon at 2:00 with senator harris of california. >> coming up live on "washington journal," your calls and comments. the trump administration's lawsuit to stop the net neutrality law, with brent skorup. tucker on the

trade deal between the u.s., canada, and mexico. the latest on the fbi investigation of supreme court nomination brett kavanaugh. niels lesniewski joins us. ♪ morning.d and is wednesday, october 3, 2018. a house is a way that the senate a in an expected to hold final vote today on an faa reauthorization bill. we are with you until 10:00 a.m. we"washington journal." begin with getting your reaction from president trump yesterday, expressing insert about the public outcry over the sexual assault allegations of brett kavanaugh.

trump says it is a very scary time for men in america. what do you think? men can call in at (202) 748-8000. .omen can call (202) 748-8001 you can catch up with us on social media, on twitter and facebook. a good wednesday morning to you. you can start calling now, as we show you the president's comments from the white house lawn when he was asked if he had a message for young men and women in america amid the brett kavanaugh confirmation fight. >> it is a scary time for young men in america when you can be guilty of something you may not be guilty of. this is a very difficult time. what is happening here has much more to do than even the appointment of a supreme court justice, it really does.

you can be somebody that was perfect your entire life and somebody could accuse you of something. it doesn't necessarily have to be a woman, but somebody could accuse you of something and you are automatically guilty. for -- truly guilty until proven innocent. that is one of the bad things taking place. host: that was the president yesterday. the reaction from democrats in congress, ted deutch of florida -- presidentnever trump never ceases to amaze. he claims it is a scary time for men and america as he wraps up a month of minimizing the importance of sexual assaults and questions the intentions of survivors. raising my teenage son in the me means ditching him to

respect, believe, and support women. trump is concerned about boys and men. no concerned when he called for the execution of five black men wrongly charged with rape. hisp refused to change position about calling for their death even after they were exonerated. yesterday in washington, d.c., hillary clinton was at the atlantic festival and was asked how the confirmation fight this playing out along gender lines. , young womenonts and girls are saying, you have to hear our stories too. we have the right to be heard. tv,member, we saw it all on those two young women following senator flake into the elevator, and they were determined that he

would know there were young women like them representing many more who wanted to be heard and wanted their stories to be taken seriously. i don't see it so much as some kind of conflict as finally righ because therece has been a tremendous imbalance on women's lives, women's narratives. they have been historically dismissed, condescended to. i have a chapter in my book about being a woman in politics, and it is not just about me but about a lot of women who find themselves picked apart, second-guessed, held to a double standard, and it is time to say enough. to watch thatant entire event and the speech by hillary clinton, c-span.org is where our video library is. taking your thoughts and questions this morning, we want

to hear what you think about the president saying it is a very scary time for young men in america. edward is in washington, d.c. .aller: good morning i am a proud african-american scientist. ineported to two presidents my lifetime and i am ashamed of this president and what he has done. i agree with the mueller investigation, so please hear me out. , believe that our president our nation is in a crisis right now. was anestigation, i investigator when i got my top-secret clearance and i believe i served under this nation and protected america from foreign and domestic and armies, and this man is -- enemies, and this man is an enemy to our state.

history,irst time in hillary clinton was the most qualified to ever run for president of the united states of america. host: would you rot her to run again? caller: i was -- host: would you like her to run again? caller: i would love her to run again. the united states needs a commander in chief. ,ost: interesting poll out reported about in "usa today," who do you think is the leader for each party? for republicans, far and away president trump, but for democrats it is quite mixed, 14% saying barack obama. .4% saying there is no leader 9% saying nancy pelosi. 6% saying hillary clinton.

getting your thoughts this morning, cap is up next in baltimore, maryland -- chat -- cat is up next in baltimore, maryland. caller: i am 80 mother of a young son and daughter -- a mother of a young daughter and son. i was like, what are the actual numbers? if you go on than actual sexual youence resource center, can get the stats yourself. the rate of false accusations is between 2% and 10%. a chance a female will be raped sometime in her lifetime is like one in four. the female that she will be a victim of sexual assault or harassment in her lifetime is nearly 75%. it is hard to argue with those facts. i am terrified for my daughter

much more than for my son. host: next in grand forks, north dakota, good morning. caller: can you hear me ok? i am in the middle of nowhere. host: just fine. brave thing for trump to say, because it goes against the orthodoxy of our day . we live in a dino centric nation that is female oriented. all you hear is female health, women's rights, the gender pay gap. everything is geared towards females because we are rooted in western european chivalrous civilization. claimhough the feminists to hate chivalry, they still demand it. they want doors open for them but they want men to think of them only. let me give you an example.

working in agriculture and construction over the years, look at the death gap when it comes to workplace death. 96% of the people who died on the job are american men. talk about that money. women are worried about $.70 to a dollar and men die, about 5000 a year, doing jobs that keep women safe and secure and keep the trains running and keep boring through the mountain tunnels and all those things. hundreds of thousands of men have died since the industrial resolution, to build this infrastructure, so women can have that. point, modern-day women are so far removed from the struggle, they do not understand what their men have done for them. they do not seem to have any gratitude for us and what we have done. the other thing is, when i was

young growing up in pennsylvania, all the women calling this show on the democrat side are asking -- acting like they are a bunch of mother teresas at 18. i grew up in pennsylvania, a working class steel town. the polish girls and the german girls were more wild than the bullies. i jumped them, they jumped me. host: mary is in oakton, virginia. caller: can you hear me? host: yes, go ahead. caller: hello? host: go ahead with your comment. caller: can you hear me? host: we will go to essie in tyler, texas. caller: my comment is, i am a victim of sexual assault when i was younger, as a teenager.

what president trump was alluding to and the comment, to me it was sexist. i do not believe -- men have always been in power, not women in this country. progress, thef women are involved more. a lot of times, the reason we do not speak up -- because i never said anything -- you feel a certain way. i was told, this person told me he would kill my family. him, trump saying what he said, like he is making fun of miss ford's testimony and a lot of women who have gone through this, senators up there, especially the republican senators, and they say this man was a teenager and he is doing what was due, they have daughters and granddaughters -- what boys do, they have

daughters and granddaughters. they are saying a boy is going to grope you, stick his tongue down your throat, you will say no. i have granddaughters and great granddaughters and great-grandson's. itould not tell any of them is ok for you to put your hands on a young lady, because it is not. host: essie brings up the president's comments about christine blasey ford, made several comments last night. "president tots kavanaugh's untsser -- taug kavanaugh's accuser." >> i had one beer? do you think it was -- >> note. -- note. -- nope.

i had one beer. what neighborhood was it in? i don't know. where is the house? . don't know upstairs, downstairs? i don't know, but i have one beer, that is what i remember. a man sliced in tatters. host: that was the president last night at his rally in mississippi. a response from christine blasey ford's attorney saying, a vicious, file, and soulless vile, -- viral, and so -- and soulless attack. he is a profile in cowardice. taking your calls this morning after the president yesterday's saying it is a scary time for young men in america. getting your thoughts, on the

line for men, (202) 748-8000 and the line for women, (202) 748-8001. i want to show you this story that is getting a lot of attention, the front page story. it is the entire top half of the front page above the fold and continues for eight more pages inside "the new york times," a look back into the trump organization and his schemes, they write, to evade tax bills. a proclaimed himself self-made billionaire and has long insisted that his father provided almost no financial help, but the investigation based on a trove of controversial tax returns and records proves that he received the equivalent of 413 million dollars from his father's real estate empire, starting when he was a toddler. most of this game because he helped his parents dodge taxes.

corporationa sham to disguise income and records , that trump helped his father take improper texted actions worth millions more. he also helped formulate a strategy to undervalue his parents' real estate buildings by hundreds of millions of dollars on tax returns. it is a pretty exhaustive story, eight pages long. here is what it looks like if you were to open "the new york times" itself. pages with pictures of president trump and his father's various tax returns, both from new york city and various tax bills. through, some of the copies you can see their --

there. some response from the white house yesterday from sarah decadessaying -- many ago, the irs reviewed and signed off on these transactions. "the new york times" credibility with america is at an all-time low because they are consumed with attacking the president 24/7 instead of reporting the news. another apology is in order. in the wake of that story, tax officials with the state of new york say they will look into some of the allegations in that story. from "the newiece york times," the lead editorial -- donald trump is a self-made sham. today's new york times, back to your calls, ralph is in kalamazoo, michigan. commenti just wanted to

on the article you were citing. it is clear now that donald trump is a crook and a tax cheat. that is why he did not release his tax returns, but that is just an editorial comment. let me get back to the subject. i was recalling my college years and my sister, we are about the same age and she was at the same college as i was. she was attacked, not by a student, but by a person in the town that the college was. she was grabbed from behind as she was going into her dorm. she got away -- it was at night -- she got away -- and i was at that college at the same period. they were wanting volunteers to escort women from dorms at night to the dorms in other classroom

buildings. i, inc. kind of young and naive, i thought -- being kind of young and naive, i thought this is not necessary. i sister was attacked. -- my sister was attacked. when i was in college, we had a weekend drinking party. mate waste or suite involved in a rape or an alleged rape. asked did i -- they witness anything, and i was not even at the party and i cannot offer anything. i think he was expelled, but i have to say, this to me, i don't know why donald trump says this kind of thing, that men have to be worried. i was never worried in college. i think the women have to worry.

on top of this, with the me too larrynt, larry nassar, nassar was abusing women for what, 20 years? concerned than i was as a young person. i did not think it was a major issue, but when i reflect on this, on these attacks, the attack on my sister and this rape incident in my dorm, it is a problem. host: thank you for sharing your stories. a few tweets -- trump is afraid young man will be held accountable for unacceptable behavior. it is part of the white entitlement mentality. repeating kavanaugh's lies do not help. mike says -- there should be no fear of being persecuted if you do not behave in the way that kavanaugh has alleged to have behaved.

it is a scary time for men and women in america. repeating the same mistakes that gave america the last great recession. thomas is waiting in fredericksburg, or genia. -- virginia. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i just want to say, whatever happened to the diplomatic gentleman? we live in an era where we have a president that was accused more than 13 women. we have a gentleman running in alabama to be a senator accused of allegedly attacking or going after young females who were allegedly not allowed to come at all because of his behavior. now we have a guy on the supreme court being accused of that same behavior. we have individuals that are that placed in high places

have put themselves in compromising positions, and where is the accountability? ifa diplomatic gentleman, you put yourself in a compromising position, your character is already assumed in question for the simple fact that you as a professional, and is a mature gentleman, you would not be seen in that light. you of judges and doctors and -- you and a high regard think of judges and doctors and lawyers in a high regard. you do not think of them doing the low level, if areas things. -- nefarious things. comments president's yesterday, and the rally in mississippi, his comments coming just a couple days after his son , donald trump jr. made similar comments, saying he fears more for his sons than his daughters in the me to climate come forward.n

"i got boys and i got girls and when i see what is going on, i now,ared." he said right "i would say my sons." oregon . caller: thank you for letting me speak. i feel so sad listening to the last comment that you just made and the focus about how afraid, he is more worried about his boys. theyou imagine how african-american citizens of this country feel when their boys, when they kiss them goodbye in the morning they don't know if they will be returning that day because of the slaughter -- i consider it a

slaughter, a little bit of a strong word -- that are going on, and these killings. president trump, i watched the whole rally that he did in mississippi. ache just, i got a stomach and i and 70 years old. i have protested the vietnam war, protested for us women to be able to have birth control and not have to be married, which is how it used to be when birth control first came out. basically, fight for our rights. fight to bring our boys home. i feel like the angst of this country is coming to a head. inclusion bringing and including everybody,

president trump goes out of his way to divide this country. always, get over it, i won the election. do you know how many times i have talked with other democrats or left-leaning people who have tried, every time there is a little bit of a hope that you think, he is going to settle in, he is going to include all of us , he is going to speak in a positive way, than he does something else that is so stupid or questionable or manipulating. he is a master of minute the relation. i got a little emotional, i apologize. i appreciate the topic this morning. host: harvey is in germantown, maryland, good morning. caller: good morning, sir. i just wanted to react on what the president said about dr. ford.

actually, first, i followed closely the hearing about dr. ford. she barely remembers anything. condoning the act of violence on women. really? she did not even remember where she went before getting to the house. she did not remember anything. i really think this is all, this was just a charade to destroy the life of a man who has worked all his life and is about to get a big promotion in his life. you think will, this fbi investigation? caller: i don't think nothing is going to come out. --t: if nothing comes out caller: set a long time ago that

the fbi investigation will not go anywhere. host: where does that leave the vote on brett kavanaugh? mitch mcconnell promising that will take place this week. caller: he will be confirmed. i am not condoning the actions of violence on women. he will have the job. host: harvey in germantown, maryland. when that vote takes place, "the new york times," with a story about the five senators to watch , including the sofar undecideds -- lisa murkowski, susan collins, jeff flake, joe heitkamp.eidi one story on what is happening at home and members' offices

amid this ongoing discussion of brett kavanaugh, the ongoing fbi investigation, nine protesters were arrested in the charleston, west virginia office of joe manchin, urging him to vote against brett kavanaugh. those arrested were part of a larger group of 18 women who arrived at 2:00 p.m., part of democratic socialists of america , whose members helped organize that demonstration. lynn is waiting in maine, bar harbor. caller: good morning and thank you. discusso say and disparagementp's of women. i am more concerned about mitch mcconnell's disregard for regular order, because that perpetuates all sorts of abuses in both men and women, and every gender in between are negatively affected.

1960's, i wasthe sexually assaulted by a professor and i did report it. i was given a choice to continue in the class with that professor or drop out and take an f. president trump bragged about not paying taxes, and he is women. i think most likely that brett kavanaugh will be confirmed and i'm really using this to call in my senator, susan collins, to show her independence and recognize that the senate is a deliberative body and takes time. it doesn't go to political false , that the fbi is investigative and the executive branch gives its marching orders, but those should take the time to uncover the facts. that is what i'm going to say.

order hereis regular with this fbi report? republican leaders saying they only want senators to have access to this information. democrats wanting to report to be public. what do you think regular order is? what i meant by "regular order" is the fbi, unlike prosecutors, the fbi actually adept ate who are listening to a lot of testimonies and following the trails. so i think they should interview dr. ford. i think that debbie ramirez's list of people who she says can corroborate her experience should be spoken to. the fbi should present the senate with a very thorough investigation, not one with an artificial deadline.

yes, of course, i would like to butwhat the reports are, since they might include very sensitive material about people who have come forward, that maybe they don't need to be made entirely public because we see what the president, he makes fun of people with disabilities. a makes fun of people who have been assaulted in various ways. he assaults people. i am not quite sure about whether all the investigation should be released. vares is in athens, georgia. caller: good morning. love that tie. three points. .irst, i love c-span i want to thank brian lamb so much for the wonderful job he has done with creating "washington journal." are doingthe callers

the work of watching the watchers in this nation. if more people were paying attention, c-span getting politically active and politically aware, then the country were not -- would not be going to the turmoil it is going through. third, in regards to sexual abuse and the me too movement come at no abuse of a woman is ever justifiable, ever, no time. abuse, when you take advantage of someone or abuse someone. as far as president trump and the statement a very scary time for young men in america, i have got to agree with president trump. i have got to agree with him and thethe hysteria me andion directed at only on the accusation, mr.

cavanaugh has not been charged with anything. i have not proven anything. he has been convicted in the , where the burden of proof is very low, and it is ruining his career. i understand professor ford has been traumatized, but that was 36 years ago. the pain can't be that bad in 2018. thank you so much, john. it is just after 7:30 on the east coast, taking your calls this morning, the president saying yesterday it is a very scary time for young men in america. --ne lines for men, caller: phone lines for men, (202) 748-8000 and the phone lines for .omen, (202) 748-8001 the secret service intercepting an envelope containing ricin.

a letter was intercepted on monday, the same day a ricin-laced piece of mail was sent to the pentagon. another letter with a suspicious white tower caused a stir -- powder cause a stir at ted cruz's campaign. the news did not reach the white house. secret service says it was investigating the incident along with other law enforcement agencies. we will keep you updated. we have talked about campaign 2018 this morning a little bit. another story, there will be plenty from here on out. less than 35 days until election day. michael bloomberg, the billionaire former mayor of new campaignidering a 2020 , will give $20 million to the main democratic super pac this week. post" noting the

effort will bolster the senate majority pack, a group that has $29 million on hand and has been purchasing advertising. the former republican who declared political independents said the emotion and national debate over sexual assault allegations has energized democratic voters and has opened the party to be more competitive in rallying women and swing voters, saying that he sees the hearing is a tipping point heading into 2018. if you want to read more, that story in "the washington post." anita is in conway, south carolina. caller: thank you for taking my call. i was dismayed at the apparent laws a dismissal of our senate -- blase dismissal of our senator to dr. ford.

south carolina leads the nation in deaths due to domestic violence. another statistics of which we are not proud as we have the lowest sat scores in the nation. this is the background of people who elected lindsey graham. from.s where he is coming if i make -- may make an additional comment, i saw an even ifst on tv say people believe that dr. cavanaugh -- i am sorry, judge kavanaugh is guilty of sexual molestation, he should still be put on the supreme court. i would urge people to take a look at what your church leaders are saying. especially seem to have become a one commandment group.

it is wrong to murder babies, i agree with that. adultery is acceptable. fraud is acceptable. sexual molestation is acceptable. lying is acceptable. hating your neighbor is acceptable. if this is how the religious leaders of this nation truly think, i think we might be better off to cast our lot with the muslims. thank you for taking my call. host: margaret in kennett, missouri, good morning. caller: good morning. i have not called in, in about 20 years but i had to call in this morning. i wanted to say that the reason dr. ford does not remember leaving the house are coming back to her house is because she never left her house. at 15, she probably smoked a joint placed in pcp or something and she dreamed all that stuff

up. host: you don't believe any of her statements? caller: if she was drinking at 15, she was trying drugs at 50. it is not know he say, she say. it is he say, they say. if the democrats think black people are going to come out and vote for this, i want all the , so many and women black men have been killed simply because the whitelaw -- white woman said she was raped. host: eugene, clinton, maryland. caller: i am so pleased to have the opportunity to share my for -- as he was described on msnbc last night,

but my heart goes out to his parents, his mother and his father. my heart goes out to his wife. those twooes out to young daughters. cavanaughhether mr. not,vanaugh is guilty or the only entity who knows whether he is guilty or not, it is god. and ie, and i listen called the vice president and i shared this with him, i said, mr. vice president, you are and otherhristian considered to be great christians. questions -- christians, we have the 10 commandments.

one of the commandments is i believe, thou shalt not lie. from all ito me could see as a 76-year-old black lie -- lack man, that testimony -- black man, that testimony revealed that he lied and was disrespectful to the senators. that is unheard of. he is not going to be sworn in. if he is sworn in, i pray that he will be impeached. then i will sing as i always sing, lift every voice and sing. i will use that negro league national anthem because it means so much to me and so many black people. anybody there who wants to know who this old man is, just google me. dr. eugene williams senior. i am determined to get this word

out all over the nation, that we have what appears to be an lie.idual who has told a now people are saying they want him sworn in. that is not right. host: before you go, you said you called the vice president and spoke to him. did you speak to him directly? caller: i called the vice president line and left a message. i called also lindsey graham, orrin hatch, mitch mcconnell, but you know what? i can't get it. host: dr. eugene talking about brett kavanaugh's mother and his thoughts about her feelings in this situation. president trump yesterday in his rally in mississippi talked about the mothers of those who are accused of sexual assault.

this is an important time for our country. this is the time when your father, when your husband, when your brother, when your son could do great. mom, i did great in school, i've worked so hard. i am so pleased to tell you i just got a fantastic job with ibm, general motors. i am so proud. on, a terrible thing -- mom, a terrible thing just happened. a person i never met said i did things that are horrible and they are firing me for my job. i don't know what to do. what do i do, mom? what do i do, mom? sad situation. host: we are taking your calls this morning on the washington

journal, talking about the president's comments yesterday saying it is a scary time for young men in america. mary lou in new jersey, go ahead. caller: good morning and thank you for c-span. i want to say that i agree totally with president trump's comment, but i want to go one step further. not only do young men in america have to be scared, we all have to be scared. i want to say that anybody who is listening to your program this morning and is thinking of voting democratic, you need to think long and hard. i am 70 years old and i have never seen anything like this. all youvanaugh, it's women out there thinking of voting democratic, judge kavanaugh could be your husband, your brother, your son. history whenime in we need to make a major decision.

when the time comes that you are accused of a crime and automatically considered to be guilty, we are definitely headed on the wrong path. i watched all these hearings. i watched the discourse between judge kavanaugh and dr. ford, and one thing i think people are not thinking about, when dr. ford gave her testimony, which is normal, most people were listening to what she said, but very few people were watching her in her body movements. i am hoping the fbi does the thorough job, but i am also hoping the fbi did investigate dr. ford, because i think there are a lot of things in that woman's past, very sadly, that brought her to that point but i do not think any of them had to do with judge kavanaugh. host: one of our other callers brought up statistics from the national sexual violence resource center that the prevalence of false reporting

for rape and sexual assault is very low, somewhere between 2% and 10%. she cited some of the numbers that are available. what would you say to that caller? john, is thatr, there are many crimes that people report that never really happened. didn'tt saying something happen to dr. ford or any other women. i myself had some encounters in my younger days and handled them on my own. it has reached a point, especially with these democrats, and i am so disgusted with cory booker i wish he would leave the senate. he is such an embarrassment to our state. i think we have reached a point with the democrats where they are just going around accusing everybody of everything, and

they are not investigating the right people. they need to start investigating how this whole thing happened because there are so many victims in this scenario, dr. ford is a victim. judge kavanaugh is a definite victim along with his family. this needs to stop. it needs to stop. it is for a fake. -- horrific. i just hope that when people go to vote, think long and hard because the way you vote will decide our system of justice in this country, and you don't want to go where the democrats are leading right now. host: anita -- jeffrey is up next in beltsville, maryland. caller: how are you doing? host: i am doing well. caller: i do not know why people keep getting on cory booker, because he speaks the truth. kavanaugh,on judge

when i was a 15-year-old i can't remember where the hell i was at. trump at his rally was being a male chauvinist. i believe dr. ford and i believe judge kavanaugh probably did blackout. about, the senator, do you bring -- blackout? do you like beer? he said it five or six times. .his man probably did it i don't have nothing against him . i see a lot of stuff going on. democrats, democrats, it is no democrat-republican thing. -- this is a persons about a person's reputation. like trump the saying, they know it is the truth because any man can lose his job and this will hunt him the rest of his life.

i think people need to stop she is lying because she was scared to get on a plane . when i bought my first truck i was scared to go to on the highway -- go on the highway. that is all i have to say. you do a good job and i am proud you are taking calls. host: anita is next in chapel hill, north carolina. caller: good morning. host: go ahead. caller: i think a lot of the rape -- the country started with a lot of rape with the caucasian male and african-american female. african-americans have pretty much forgiven that and want to move forward and we do not want to see other people in that bad condition because it becomes oppressive. no one should oprah's another ess another person

by telling a false story about them. we should really check to make that peopleare true are saying, because people work really hard to get their children in positions to have good jobs and things like this. i think more illiterate families need to be taught to teach their daughters to rely on education and not trying to have experiences with men. host: do you think the false accusations are happening more today than in the past? muslim when ime a was a teenager because i saw a lot of teenage girls becoming pregnant or having abortions. i went along with the muslims because they protect women where they don't have to be in bad situations where something could happen to them with no one seeing what happened. rape is asick -- seriously extreme topic, for the

reason that a family would have to pay for this if another family were not want to pay for it. i think women should stay out of situations that will cause problems for them, instead of accusing people later or saying the story happened and no one believed them. muslims also, we do not really believe in alcohol consumption because it usually takes away from your ability to pray and rely on god. america uses alcohol and these are the things that happen when you mix alcohol and young people together, whereas islam tries to prevent that. host: do you think the false accusations are happening more today, that there is something happening in society that it is happening more? trying to get are along materially and a lot of women do not have education. they may falsely accuse men to get money, and that is sad.

they should get educated and take care of themselves. host: randy is in millington, michigan, good morning. caller: good morning. to start by thanking you and all the men and women who bring us this great program. host: i appreciate that. caller: on the topic of the statement president trump made, a very scary time, on that part i look at you can't just play the statement off. i do not believe it is political blabber. we had a senator, al franken, run out of the senate on the rail by an accusation. my senator was one of them that jumped on that bandwagon. it has are made it to the most elaborate romney in the nation -- deliver it body in the name -- deliberate body in the nation and they did not deliberate.

it is a scary time in this country, in my opinion. that is scary when you have a senator lose a job over a neck is a show in. -- senator lose a job over an accusation. host: angela is in south carolina, good morning. caller: good morning. you are my favorite host and the only one i will call. i want to say to the gentleman from michigan who just called, he hit the nail right on the head. that is wisdom. i wanted to share with you, i called in february when all of this was going on, and i called you and told you what happened to me, i was a rape victim, ended up pregnant, carried the him out. adopted i always know when a woman is

lying and this woman is lying. this has gotten out of hand. this is ridiculous. i have, as a woman who is a rape sonivor, i have raised my for 23 years and still to this day tell him, a woman does not have to prove it, she only has to say it. it is a very dangerous situation . i had my husband and my son the other day and told them, do not be alone with them, do not be alone with a woman. do not do it. we might even need to go back to the days of courting because this is ruining people's lives. there are real victims and people who make false accusations. i told you when the roy moore situation went down, as soon as the election was over she would be gone and you would never hear another word. i cannot even remember her name,

can you? what makes you suspicious of dr. ford's testimony? i assume you watched the hearing. caller: absolutely i watched. the fact -- and i know everyone is saying this -- that she can't remember. to the can take you location from the state i am originally from, which is arizona, i can take you to arizona to the spotted happened. i can tell you the time of day, the person's name, everything. am -- if youyou, i want to call it a survivor, i am a survivor. i have dna evidence. there is a child as a result of that. it is not repressed memories. that is a copout so you do not have to say, i plead the fifth. you know a woman knows.

you never forget something like that. years,y go by, ok, 36 which is almost the same amount of time for me, time may go by that i am able to put that in the back of my mind and go day to day and not think about it. i can go days and months and not think about it, but the incidents mentioned is immediately in the front of my mind and every detail that goes along with it. all men and young men and boys in college, i am telling you, a woman only has to say it. she doesn't have to prove it. host: angela in south carolina this morning. just a few minutes left in this segment. a couple of other stories we are tracking, this out of st. louis post-dispatch, kansas city mayoral candidate, an army veteran, former secretary of

state and democratic candidate for u.s. senate is shopping out treatmente to seek for symptoms of depression and posttraumatic stress disorder. he said he has tried since leaving the military to ignore his symptoms but decided it is time to step away from politics and concentrate on being healthy , saying, i thought if i could come home and work for the city i love so much as mayor, i thought i could overcome my problems. i thought i could fill the hole inside me, but it is just getting worse. that is what jason kander wrote. one other story, we have talked about the minimum wage efforts in this country. this story getting a lot of attention. amazon is boosting its minimum wage for all u.s. workers to $15 an hour and says it will push for an increase in the federally mandated minimum wage which stands at $7.25 an hour.

the company, whose value trip triples whose value was -- we listen hard to the critics and we decided we wanted to lead. hiketory noting the wage coming at a time that amazon needs to hire holiday workers in the tightest job in a car -- job market and in decade -- in a decade. rachel waiting in maine this morning. caller: i would like to second everything that that last woman said. cornered bye 15 was an uncle, until you that i could tell you that time, the day. you don't forget.

do anything, he was just trying to kiss me, but i felt threatened. you don't forget those things. i do believe that the democrats have used this woman to destroy this good man. i watched all the hearings. i am 86 years old. i watched all the hearings and all the testimony of people came forward to say about this good man. , theired the testimony testament, both of them, i watched every day. , she isan, i believe -- the somehow, but she judge never did this to her. i always go back to the fact that dianne feinstein had this

information, had her letter for two months and didn't do a thing about it. it could have all been investigated. her name would not have been outed. it is the democrat that leaked her name out. they were the only ones that new. host: as far as we know, susan collins is on the fence right now. senatori have called my and i have urged her, if a man is convicted without any proof at all, when her own witnesses are saying they were not there, , they do notard refuted. they say they were not there and those who know him say they never saw him act in any way like this. her own best friend says she

doesn't, she wasn't there. she doesn't even know brett kavanaugh. host: time for one more call. they said has been waiting, kansas city, missouri. caller: i would just like to say that if this keeps going the way it is going, i have nephews, i have two brothers, i have cousins. if this happens then this could happen to them. they could be accused of something in their reputations could be relevant. .heir families could be ruined everything worked for could be ruined. is this the way we are going? what about representative ellison in the house? he was accused of brutality to his girlfriend and i didn't see the democrats any kind of hearings or anything about

senator -- representative allison and congress about holding here is about his girlfriend. -- hearings about his girlfriend. she wasthing. what happened to representative ellison? why isn't he being held to the same standard that brett kavanaugh is being held to? host: that was our last caller in this segment. we will talk more about brett kavanaugh and the investigation ongoing with the fbi, what's happening on the senate. neil with -- niels lesniewski will be joining us. california put new net neutrality rules in place and the trump administration responded by filing a lawsuit. george mason university's brent skorup will be with us. thewe're also joined by roosevelt institute's todd the tradetalk about deal with the united states and mexico.

we will be. -- right back. >> the c-span bus was recently in honolulu, hawaii for the 39th top of our 50 capitals tour. we feature our visit to hawaii on booktv, american history tv, explore hawaii's history and culture as well as public policy issues facing the state. eastern on 7:00 washington journal, the director of hawaii's office of planning will talk about homelessness and lack of affordable housing. booktv at noon, stuart coleman on his book, on the life of the legendary hawaiian surfer. and then a visit to the university of hawaii for the extensive book collection of

late senator daniel inouye. jeff, the 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 a walk. and the polynesian voyaging society in honolulu. 4:00 eastern, three short documentaries about hawaii. the 1956 film "soldier in and others. this weekend on c-span, booktv, and american history tv. listen to hawaii weekend on the free c-span radio app.

we are featuring the honolulu mayor. brent skorup is a senior research fellow at george mason university's mercatus center, joining us to discuss the lawsuit that is the trump administration against california over net neutrality rules. remind us what that term means, net neutrality. having me.k you for that neutrality is a set of principles among norms about how internet service providers like verizon and comcast should treat internet traffic and websites. generally in a nondiscriminatory fashion, --a fair there are a few controversies. does the government have the authority to regulate the internet in this way, and what does the substance of those rules look like? host: explain a lot of california passed this week. guest: california and a few

states have passed that neutrality laws in the past few months. fcc created obama .et neutrality rules the title to communications act, the phone that work, telegraph communications network of the past. the u.s. had never regulated internet in this way. and the the trump fcc which now has republican majority, repeal those rules from the obama administration. in response, states have been passing their own net neutrality bills regulating run services. california is the biggest, the fourth state to have that neutrality rules. theuse it is the center of tech industry, has attracted attention. governor brown signed this into law and within hours the trump

doj filed a lawsuit to stop the enactment of the law. host: what will that mean, what are they trying to do with this lawsuit? will this set precedent for all the other states trying to pass their own laws? californiapurpose of is to set standards, bring back regulations, something like what was in place in 2015. the trump doj, as a policy to see there delever tory framework prevail. they have also said in litigation of this would frustrate federal policy. the federal government has a dominant role in regulating the internet. been a nonregulatory policy since the clinton administration. they want to protect that nonrecognition policy and also restore the fcc's current rule. session's is jeff

comments about this. once again, the california legislator has it that could an extreme law attentive to frustrate federal policy. we have a duty to defend the prerogatives of the federal government. we swallowed do so with vigor. we are confident that we will prevail in the case because the facts are on our side. -- is hes are he asked expected to present in this lawsuit? guest: there is a long president of federal law dominating communications. telegraph, for example. but the internet is clearly an interstate network. if you were to pull out your phone and send me an email, that would bounce across state lines to a server in maryland, virginia, then to my phone. if you were to watch a youtube video, that would probably

retrieve data and video from a server in another state. the internet is inherently interstate. it is impossible to determine what is within the state. havehis reason, you cannot states, according to the doj, and in my own view, create their own, custom internet regulations. it is not just states, there are over 100 cities that have created their own regulations. that is what the doj sees at stake, if california prevails, which is unlikely. but if they do, then you have thousands of minas of holidays and counties and states trying to regulate the internet with different interpretations possibly. host: if you have questions or comments, brent skorup is with us until the top of the hour. republicans can call in on (202) 748-8000. democrats, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002.

this is from the california attorney general. his statement on this case. innovation and choice should drive this internet economy, not constrained and selected terminations of who should be the winner and who should be the loser. all of us should have unrestricted access to information and we should not have that information throttled one way or another simply because there are a few robert barron to get to control the flow of that information. everyone who reads that sentiment, open internet, internet service providers should not act anti-competitively against traffic -- the controversy has always been what does the substance of law look like, and the major question is do they have authority? since the clinton administration, has had a hands-off policy toward the internet. the 1996 telecom act, the republican congress took that

policy of not regulating the internet and said it is u.s. policy. since 1996, the internet should be unfettered by state and federal regulation. any state, any fcc trying to regulate the internet has a high hurdle to show how their regulations apply to the internet, comply with the national policy of non-regulation. host: taking your calls until the bottom of the hour. will is in oxford, mississippi. independent. caller: good morning. i wanted to call about net neutrality because i think it's important to support that idea. the internet, if you look at it, is the new library of the world. if one group has a certain amount of books and then another group is told they can check out more books, i think that would

be unfair. it needs to be kept fair and equal. that is the idea of america, equal treatment. host: whose job is it in your mind to keep it fair and equal, something the states can do on their own, something the federal government needs to set rules for the entire country? caller: i think the federal government oversight is necessary but the states should have a hand in their own decisions. guest: thank you for the call. i think your sentiment is shared by everyone. it should be said there is no case unaware of of an american isp blocking content because they dislike the website or what is written. other nations have different policies but there is no case of that in the u.s. i am not all that worried about internet service providers doing that sort of thing. besides, we have competition

laws. internet service providers cannot act anticompetitively against netflix, youtube, and also cannot deceive consumers. we have a federal trade act which prevents unfair practices against consumers and competitors. host: we mention your work at the mercatus center. viewers are also seeing that you served as a member of the fcc broadband advisement appointed committee. what is that? guest: that was a committee created by ajit pai, nominated by president obama a few years ago, and then when president trump into office, he was nominated to the chairmanship. one of the first things that he did was deploy this committee, which you mentioned i remember. the purpose is to provide recommendations to the fcc about how to improve broadband deployment, particularly to rural and underserved areas.

about 30 people, industry academics, consumer groups, city and state representatives. we have met for the past year and a half to figure out policies that might improve deployment, looking at things and fees that cities charge internet service provider to come into a city, string of fiber lines along utility poles, that sort of thing, and also to improve competition. an incumbent operator may own the poles. you can imagine they are not very helpful when a new server wants to come into the city. i have been pleased to be a part of that. the fcc has taken some of our recommendations over the past year and put them into place. host: is this a volunteer position or something that you are paid to do? guest: pro bono, volunteer. everybody does it because they care about the issue.

a lot of the neutrality movement comes from the fact that people don't always feel like they have , thatroadband choice providers may have poor customer service for them. the chairman -- a lot of us who favor a light regulatory approach, believe a lot of the concerns would go away if they feel they had competition, if prices are competitive, and if they feel well treated by providers. getting more competitors out there is part of that. of the internet is our topic this morning with brent skorup. coleman is into also, oklahoma. republican. it interesting that only democrats who are basically led by socialists want government to be in control of seennternet, and we have from the obama administration, we should be very suspicious whenever a proposition comes out to give government more power

over methods of communication. they have the news media in the palm of their hand. we have enough evidence now to know from the lowest learner hearings, in action, the irs was weaponize by obama. the fbi was weaponize by the obama administration. so it was not surprising they wanted to get control of the internet. i think that is why we should be very concerned whenever these democrat-led states get control of the internet. that is why i support the department of justice lawsuit. guest: i think the u.s. made a wise policy in the 1996 telecom act to have a hands-off policy. thee was controversy at time. the internet has been a government network. in the early 1990's it was commercialized and then finally commercial companies could use it, and then you saw the

development of the web, a version of the internet that we recognize today. when congress was updating the telecom act, they had this question, do we regulate microphone system, cable system, system?another they came to the conclusion with the clinton administration to take this nonregulatory policy. technology, fast evolving, competitive. it was wise policy because it cap this young technology developing. the economic results speak for themselves. the u.s. is the global leader in tech companies. it is quite hard to name a company not based in the u.s.. it has also given broadband providers the incentive to invest in a network. i think it was the right policy, and i agree with the caller. keep a good policy to regulators far from media distribution.

host: again, phone lines, republicans, (202) 748-8000. democrat, (202) 748-8001. independent, (202) 748-8002. palm springs, california. caller: good morning. you can always tell the people that watch fox. i think it is interesting with this lawsuit alone, how many dozens and dozens of lawsuits there are against what is going on in this country. i think we need to freedom. we need to fight all that we can to keep everything open, free, and fair. big business is not the little guys business. thank you. again, i think everyone agrees with the sentiment that the internet should be open. that has been the case, that was the case for the internet before 2015. hopefully, will be the case

going forward. the state-by-state regulatory regime could to severe damage to the internet, in that it would balk line the network, you would have different regulations throughout. but i think the sentiment is commonly shared. host: you mention california being one of the first to pass their own net neutrality regulations but many states are working on their laws. how many? callerguest: at last count, abo0 had a bill. that could be anything. four half past some sort of version of the neutrality. vermont, california, are the only ones currently in effect. there will be litigation. this has been much argued, litigated over the past 10 years. it will continue. host: the ones that are passing, mostly in states with democratically controlled

legislatures? guest: generally the case. robert is next in aurora, illinois. good morning. caller: good morning. i am 81 years old. day, i your c-span every am an avid fan. , we aree don't wake up doomed. it will wipe us out. right now -- i worked in restaurants where you relied on the boards for your food. he could not charge people because we did not know what they got. our country is going to hell. these people are supposed to be experts, they don't know everything. i bet you anything this ford woman comes up with a book.

when it comes to net neutrality, what would you like to see done? caller: get the democrats out of office. they are nothing but a bunch of idiots. host: robert in indiana. this frustration with the other party is pretty common. from 1996 until 2015, regulators, partisan appointees at the fcc generally had a hands-off approach. it served us well and i hope it will continue in the years going forward. host: stan is in west palm beach, florida. caller: good morning. just wanted to add a few things. i listen to c-span. things happeng with me in the last week.

obviously -- i'm an independent, i generally vote republican but i also vote democrat. these two situations happened with me on the internet that i found very curious. i generally don't get involved in running things on the internet, and if i do it's not in bad taste. but i was getting fed up with all of the self-righteousness i was seeing, in this case, from some of the democrats. it so happens i have a brother who went to james madison high school in brooklyn, new york where the democratic senator chuck schumer went. he told me a few things about chuck schumer in high school. , on posted it on the aol the internet, i didn't say anything nasty, just something to the effect that chuck schumer, you are acting self-righteous on this. people who went to james madison know about some of the hijacks you pulled. another situation -- and immediately after i wrote this,

it was taken off. the other thing i wrote was about joe biden, which i think is common knowledge, when he went to syracuse, i believe, he was tried -- he plagiarized a paper. he did this again when he went to graduate school. i wrote this down. host: your concern about the regulation of message boards? yes, i'm concerned that two things that i posted were immediately taken off. i have posted in the past, nothing ever in bad taste, let's say. just agreeing with someone. when i came up with these two factual incidents, that i know for a fact, they were taken off. i found that curious. host: thoughts on management of these types of forums? you see this issue pop

up, this idea of large companies censoring different views. it's a very tricky issue. are first amended speakers, they can decide who can be on their plant warms. people don't always like those decisions. i and many others think we should have a nonregulatory solution where we have a multistate stakeholder where people could have things out, large companies could have best practices on how to handle certain types of content. we had a conference last year with a former danish regulator talking about how they handle the neutrality disputes in denmark. they have a multi-stakeholder group to hashtags out. seems like a healthy nonregulatory solution. host: is there any movement toward that coming together, or the tech company starting to do that? guest: i'm familiar with at

least one effort to i don't know if it is public or not but there are groups talking about what to do next with this and the regulatory policy of the trumpet fcc. is, this is a very issue rightlitical now and the litigation is ongoing, several lawsuits and it's not clear how it will shake out. stepsare there regulatory or legislation to do that on that side? guest: there have been bills introduced over the years. right now i don't see much chance of that happening. anythinggh getting through congress, especially on a divisive issue like this. would bey, congress going back on a long-held policy of non-regulation. i don't see anything imminently happening but it could. the elections will change the

dynamic, of course. host: donald in illinois. democrat. caller: good morning, c-span, to the american people. neutrality, i think it is time for the government to step in and have some type of hand in protecting people's information. like facebook having 50 million -- it seems something needs to be done. host: do you trust the government to do that? caller: i trust the government to do it but with reservation. think they would need to have the other companies involved, facebook, twitter, to protect our information.

guest: thank you, donald. a wild westking for for the internet. even though the fcc doesn't have much authority to regulate the you have generally applicable competition laws, consumer protection laws privacy laws, criminal laws about fraud slander.n, even though the fcc does not have much authority, even though states like california may not have much authority, regulators are doing a lot. particularly you see it with scammers online, they are quite active. host: summerdale, new jersey. john is a democrat. caller: i am not a techie so i hope you'll bear with me. i remember the age of mike deregulation and

putting it into the hands of a solid a few. when the cable bills were supposed to be coming down because we were spreading things out, making it more accessible, giving areas more competition. now we are to the point where this is about speed of access also, am i right? not only speed of access but who can access what planes within a certain amount of speed. you can get there faster if you pay more cash to get there. corporations will be able to get, literally, access areas that other folks will. students will not be able to get on these areas. also the issue -- what was that wall street scandal where somebody was being super slick and using it to -- the speed of

it to manipulate stock prices? guest: thank you for there is a lot there. you referenced chairman powell, which was george bush's chairman of the fcc. chairman powell and u.s. policy has generally favored capitation overregulation. it has four for consumers. cable companies for decades were monopoly providers, by city providers, monopoly providers. satellite and internet-based competition. cable providers have lost about 15 million households in the last 20 years. phone as well was a monopoly service to most households. traditional phone companies have lost 100 million customers over the last 20 years because of cell phones, cable providers can provide phone service. this has served consumers well, you see consumers using more data all the time.

certainly not a perfect market but things are trending in the right direction. host: isaac is in michigan. democrat. caller: i would like to ask mr. how he feels about -- i'm try to think of a way to phrase the new law against escort sites, adult sites on craigslist? ask, how do like to another cable company? i live in an apartment complex that only has -- connected to one cable company. they will not let any other competition in. does your group, can you help me bring in competition, so we can get a better prices in this

complex? guest: thank you for the call. this is a common feeling, that there is not enough competition out there. apartment buildings by federal law cannot exclude competitors from entering. that is prohibited by federal law. some buildings may not be familiar with that. on the competition side there is a provision called -- basically, you can have satellite devices, youivers on your property, can receive tv that way, or you can have a fixed, wireless data line. that is one way that many apartment and condo dwellers are getting competition from broadband and other services. host: his question about craigslist and blocking other adult content? guest: there was a small tweak

to the telecom act. generally, internet content companies have free reign to remove or take down content as they see fit. was amonths ago, there law to hold companies more responsible for escort services and adult services. i think it has been a mixed bag so far. some law enforcement sees it as a positive, some as a negative. i don't follow closely enough to have a firm feeling on that. host: john is in henning, minnesota. independent. caller: thank you for c-span, thank you for taking my call. regarding, whon was george mason, what is the philosophy at the law school? they had been funded heavily by h brothers who are

pretty much libertarians. the recent conversations regarding conservatism, libertarianism, other issues. it is fascinating. thanks. host: on the mercatus center. george mason was a founding father for america. george mason has been a university in the state of virginia. mercatus center is one of several centers where i work. if you're interested, you can find our disclosure statement online. you can find things i have written about that neutrality, other things at mercatus center. back i want to bring you to a lawsuit filed against california. the path ahead, is that something that is likely to end up in front of the supreme court? for the 2015 regulations there is a pending case.

the 2015reneur thought that neutrality regulations banned his app. several state lawsuits against the trump fcc, t regulatory policy, and now this doj filing. it is hard to keep up. i'd expect the supreme court will have to weigh in at some point. host: we appreciate you helping us keep up. seniorkorup is a research fellow at george mason university's mercatus center. up next, the roosevelt institute's todd tucker will be here to discuss the trade deal with mexico and canada. and then later, niels lesniewski, talking about the fbi investigation into judge kavanaugh.

>> non-constitution day, c-span visited the national constitution center in philadelphia where we asked folks what does it mean to be american? >> i feel like i am home. you know when you are at home and you are comfortable to live here. meant, i wasat it blessed to have been born in a , one of the countries with the most freedoms for to pursuer all people joy with, life, families. >> freedom. to pursue your dreams, opportunities, friendship. getting along with everybody

here in america. i don't know. family, love. >> simply doing your responsibilities, both civic, family, everything like that. as a daughter of service members, a service member myself, former servicemember, i felt it was my responsibility under the constitution to go ahead and do my duty and service country. pursue yourom to .appiness for me, i have been able to be what i want to be, do what i love for a living. in the country where i come from, this would not be possible. >> we are asking middle and high school students to produce a five, six-minute documentary answering the question what does it mean to be american? we are awarding $100,000 in

total cash prizes. what does it mean to be american? is january 20. for more information, go to our website studentcam.org. todd tucker joins us now to talk about the new u.s. canada mexico agreement that president trump hopes will replace that stuff. esther tucker, you work as a fellow, political scientist at the roosevelt institute people is the roosevelt institute? guest: it is a think tank attached to the franklin delano rosen of presidential library. like a lot of think tanks out there, presidential libraries out there, there is a think tank attached to it that does work to promote the legacy of president roosevelt. there is a george bush think tank, a ronald reagan think tank , and we are the fdr think tank. host: is it funded through the

same streams as a library? guest: it's a project of the national archives, semi-governmental, but also funded by foundations. host: did you take a position on whether nafta, renegotiated in the first place here? guest: we were not around when nafta was originally signed and we have not taken a formal position on the trade agreement. host: what are your thoughts on the usmca, what do you like about it, don't like? chuck grassley, one of the president's major allies in congress sort of said yesterday it is about 95% the same as the north american free trade agreement, the original 1993 packed. of ank that's a bit exaggeration, certainly takes a lot of aspects, but also updates it with things that barack obama included as part of the transpacific partnership. it is a mix of those agreements. what is unusual about it is the way the deal got done.

certainly not the typical way that we see things done in congress. basically come the trump administration threatening canada and mexico with higher tariffs and perhaps a determination of the underlying nafta agreement if they did not agree to this new deal. that is part of the reason why you see so much attention paid about what the deal is actually called. is it nafta, nafta 2.0, nafta 2018? the president prefers the u.s. xcode canada agreement, usmca. a lot of folks talking on twitter about it. the branding is perhaps more important than the content. host: the deal still has to be approved by congress. , ast now, as you look at it we have been going through these documents over the past 48 hours or so since canada agree to this usmca, who are the winners and losers in your mind? guest: i think business was

eager to see the instability caused by the discussions brought to a close. they wanted to have certainty for what the deal was going to mean going forward. that was -- business was almost willing to accept almost the talks ofong as instability were tantamount. sector was one area where there has been a number of changes. the trump administration negotiated pretty interesting and historic provisions that would require certain amounts of content of autos to be made by high paid workers, $16 an hour. that is the first time in a trade agreement we have seen some thing like that. whatutomakers are saying it will actually cause them to do is source more of their products from china, forgo nafta altogether. nafta is not the only trade agreement out there.

there is also something called the wto which establishes a floor that mexico and canada can take advantage of. automakers predict importers will choose to use more of the devotee of benefits. host: this negotiated issue has a 16-your sunset clause, reviews every six years, could extend that sunset clause another 16 years. some concern that that creates the instability that you were talking about. guest: nafta always had a termination provision. the sunset provision is not anything terribly new. but what it does do is force policymakers every so often to evaluate the pros and cons of the agreement in a formalized way, say yes, we are going to her new our vows and stick with the agreement. host: we should invite their viewers in the we are talking with todd tucker from the

roosevelt institute. republicans can call in on (202) 748-8000. democrats, (202) 748-8001. .ndependent, (202) 748-8002 we will go through more aspects of the usmca. why was dairy such a major part of the deal? guest: that is one of the few things that did change of it with the agreement. it's been a long-standing demand of dairy farmers across the united states to have more access to canada's market. canada has a supply management system which is semi-governmental, concern and was keeping out certain products, dairy products from the u.s. so you have dairy farmers in every state of the union practically, even some democrats like chuck schumer and others praising aspects of the deal that would expand a little bit the market access of u.s. dairy producers to canada. that was one of the last things that was agreed to in the late hours of sunday night when the deal was announced. host: when there are disputes

among the trade partners, how will that be resolved, is it different from how it was resolved under nafta? guest: one of canada's main demands was to overhaul aspects of the dispute settlement system. they have been concerned when congress or regulatory agencies in the u.s. are concerned about unfair trade that the court review of what is called antidumping rules, they were worried that canadians were not getting a fair shake. that was a nonnegotiable demand on the part of canada and they largely kept intact. deal, thects of the government to government dispute settlements, largely the same. a little change in the way investors investing across borders will settle disputes. that's been a major demand of democrats. talk about any aspects of his complicated deal. todd tucker here to take your calls and questions. tom is up first, johnson city,

tennessee. caller: good morning, john. thank you for c-span and all the folks behind scenes. tucker, on ask mr. the bylines that we keep on hearing regarding the dairy industry, the concessions that canada had to make in order to satisfy the trump administration , my suspicions are that he knows something. another election year, campaign promise that he says he could make. i just want to hear his comments. guest: absolutely. the trump administration sort of has a rhetorical and political grasp on the electoral map of the country. we saw that in the 2016 elections clearly. while the clinton campaign was not really sending folks to

michigan and wisconsin, you have the trump administration really picking trade as a major issue to campaign on, appealing to concern on the part of manufacturing workers in particular about job losses as a result of nafta and other trade deals. the administration certainly has their finger on the pulse. the dairy aspect is clearly a part of that. there needed to be at least a little bit of market opening so the trump administration could say that it was different than the underlying nafta. wisconsin,t out, some of these key states, dairy is a big issue. will beng else, that something the administration can campaign on going into 2020. host: brett is in pennsylvania. independent. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i heard something there that was pretty disappointing about his car companies going around the

new deal and just buy all their parts from china. i don't know if that will work. america is awake now. we support our president. a lot of talk from people who don't even vote, out there protesting, they probably don't even have a voter registration card. there are plenty of us veterans, which i am one, and good working union guys all over the country, different generations, we saw our manufacturing base was given away. now we have a president that want to take it back and you are saying these companies are going around the back door and sneak stuff in from china? i don't think the american public will go for that. we won all of our stuff made here as much as possible. four years until we finally got a president. he said that over 30 years ago. this guy is where the rubber meets the road. host: on manufacturing and world

of origin. guest: you are absolutely correct, that this has been the longest standing policy position of donald trump, he has talked about this going back to the 1980's and 1990's. he switched his party affiliation from democrat to republican and then back again. his position on trade policy has been an absolute constant. really set astion an objective to have more u.s. autos and auto parts made in the u.s. come north america. the problem he ran up against is the u.s., a year after nafta was signed in 1993, we did the truth -- wto in 1994. the u.s. said we would have a 2.5% tariff on autos. that is the floor that mexico and canada can expect. importers, as they are choosing to bring autos into the country,

have a choice. are they going to use the wto rules or nafta rules? the challenge with increasing the content, the rules of origin , that came from mexico or the region, the challenge of doing that was if you raised it to high, importers what using debbie to benefits instead. a lot of automakers are saying on paper this may look like it would increase the number of auto jobs and auto parts jobs in the u.s., instead what we will see is importers choosing to use the wto rules, pay a slight tariff, and import lower-cost products from china. twitter, they write, they need us, we don't need them. we can negotiate from there. do you agree? guest: it is tough. the administration was threatening to pull out of the underlying nafta, or that they would raise -- citing national

security reasons -- raise auto tariffs to 25%. the problem is a lot of those rules are either not possible or perhaps unconstitutional. we have never had an administration testing the limits of our national security us as much as we have seen with this administration, but that is something that they have been pushing the envelope on. there are lawsuits in court right now challenging some of their trade moves on international grounds. host: the president talking about the renegotiation of that day and what it means for future trade deals. >> the big trade deal, largest deal ever made so far in trade. i expect to top it with china or eu or something. but this is the largest ever made. as you know, now we are working on china, japan, we are working on eu.

these are great deals for our nation and great deals for our workers. host: what does china, japan, the eu take from this usmca negotiation? guest: that has been the big issue. as a policy issue, political issue, it's been china. is basically balanced, has not lost a lot of jobs to nafta. it is really the china shock. china coming to the wto that is the big enchilada, things that republicans and democrats are concerned about. the two years spent on nafta has been time not spent to go shooting a deal with china. now both the eu and china are looking to, what will this mean for them? as we go into the midterm elections, the president may have a democratic congress that is less sympathetic to his goals and may be less willing partner.

the chinese government reads the newspaper's just like folks in the u.s. do, and those of that will be the likely outcome of the election. so the president may not be going into a lot of new negotiations with as much political capital he had to begin with. host: joey is in search, new york. democrat. caller: thank you for c-span. i'm in dairy farmer myself and i do business in canada. let's go to john in vancouver, washington. caller: good morning. i work for a company that brings in about a million tons of steel are year, unfinished slabs to oregon steel, which gets rolled into coil and plates. they also loan two plants in canada, combined, are the largest steel producers in canada. they are getting triple tariffs.

25% in the cvb account. when i bring it in, they roll it. another 25% going into canada. then canada sends the steel to the manufacturers in the u.s., and they get tariffs again. maybe those are unintended consequences. they are just now opening up their pipe mill. fun of a low blow with these as theyts -- tariffs try to expand all of these jobs and have to pay triple. guest: the trump administration's first big trade policy was putting tariffs on steel and aluminum. one of the major things they cited was national security reasons. the steel industry for number of years have had profitability problems, it's in the national interest to have a

steel industry, so therefore the administration needed to institute tariffs so there could be more profitability. one of the things we have seen in the last few weeks is the benefit to the trip protection have not been trickling down to the workers. you see steel workers around the country threatening to go on strike, demanding a fair share of the profits that were created as a result of the tariffs. what happens with the steel and aluminum terrace, what is the relationship like, what is the trust between the u.s. and canada in the wake of this negotiation? guest: the two issues were very interrelated the whole process. canada was hoping they would have a way out of the national security tariffs if they agree to trump's terms on nafta. a number of side letters as part of the new agreement that perhaps give canada relief on that front. but the issue going forward --

certainly for my colleagues in canada what i'm hearing -- is concern is if they were not able to trust the truck administrat -- trump administration now, what will this mean going forward? host: did canada get a good deal? guest: i think they wanted to make sure the apple cart was not upset. they view this as the price they had to pay. if they had to rebrand the nafta to do that, they did that. host: bill is in mobile, alabama. republican. caller: i feel so hard for mr. trump or because he is trying so hard not to give credit to mr. trump. he is tucker because trying so hard not to give credit to mr. trump. he is saying it is not a big deal other than what was negotiated by mr. obama. passed andve been included in a modification of nafta, which it was not.

it was only because of trump's aggressive threats that he made, which he could've backed up, and would have, that canada modified importation their of steel, aluminum, other things. it was only because of his skills with mexico that we now have improvement in those rules. i was in mobile. after nafta was passed, we had ts closing and moved to mexico. for mr. tucker to defend it was no big deal, the debbie to was the really the important one. i am sad for him. i know he is trying his best. give it up. host: let me give him a chance to respond. guest: the caller is right, there are a number of important changes in this version of nafta. chapter,bor rights unlike what bill clinton

negotiated, labor rights are brought into the core of the agreement. referencedst time, to violence against workers, paid time off, a number of important policies for the first time brought by reference into the core of trade agreement. what i think folks, labor unions, democrats will be the ones that ultimately have to support or oppose the deal. what they are looking to is enforcement provisions. it is nice to have these references, but will they be backed up with enforcement? that is where the rubber hits the road. over the next few weeks, we will see where that pans out. host: frank is in new york. independent. caller: thank you for kate my call. but to know with the new trade deal, the dairy deal, are we going to see lower dairy prices in this country? that is the bottom line. lower pricesl be

for dairy in canada more than here in the u.s. 0.3%, 1% ofe about the market will be opened up in canada. for certain products in canada they will see lower prices of the overall impact, we don't have the official projections of what the deal will do in macro economic terms right now. for nafta was about a percentage point of gdp. this largely adopt a lot of the rules of nafta, so it's unclear that we will see a lot of impact for consumers or the economy as a whole. host: what do you think was left on the cutting room floor, what opportunities were missed? like: you had democrats elizabeth warren demand thing a complete remodeling of the rights that multinational investors get as a part of the deal, investor state dispute settlement. i wrote a book about it if you're interested.

this was a major demand for an overhaul of that agreement. companies to sue governments over environmental regulations. it's been something democrats have long opposed. the trump administration initially promised they would get rid of it or refashion it substantially. they have made some modifications to the rules but largely they have carved it out so that oil and gas companies can continue to have access to that system, be allowed to sue governments. somethinge from being that benefited all investors to now something that benefits just oil and gas companies. host: you mention environmental regulations. one of the things that was touted was protections and environmental regulations. guest: one of the big things the new deal does relative to the underlying nafta is bring environmental rules into the core of the agreement. labor and environmental rules.

that is certainly a big change relative to the underlying nafta. what it is what obama -- negotiated as part of the transpacific partnership. the obama administration had already made that move. when this in ministration is doing is saying, us, too, we are going to be a part of that. host: time for a few more calls. donald in kalamazoo, michigan. republican. caller: i would just like to say when nafta -- a couple years after it was enacted. it took two or three years before anything happened. doors were being closed in michigan all over the place. everything you could name was being closed. i went to mexico a few times and everywhere you look, things were being built. highways, bridges, buildings. it was unbelievable. the united states construction workers could not even buy a job. it was a terrible deal. the other thing i want to square

up. a lot of people blame the republicans for nafta. it was not the republicans who passed nafta. you can read bill clinton's book. they had a majority in the senate and the white house. there was no way in hell the republicans could pass nafta. host: that is right. guest: 1993, 1994, the most consequential trade agreements the u.s. has ever signed was passed by no clinton, a democrat, approved by democratic votes in congress. the caller is right, would not have happened without democratic support. that is part of the reason why over the past few decades, debates within the democratic party have been what is their policy on trade and how can they reconnect with some of the manufacturing workers that have been left behind? one of the year to petition you can take away from the toy 16 election was a long-standing dismissal and failure to pay attention to those workers was

what harmed hillary clinton in the key battleground states. eastpointecall in michigan, democrat. good morning. caller: i wish they would find a way to import more from australia, canada. my local grocery store is selling choice, not prime, at $20 a pound. baloney, snouts, years, everything mixed together, eight dollars a pound. when i was a kid, $.13 a pound. fish used to be the meal that you substituted for meet on friday. that is about $13.99 a pound, and that is a kroger. we didn't have an income tax until 1913. if the united states regained control of its money through the federal reserve, which is not the federal reserve -- i didn't mean that -- i'm at the treasury department. we need to run and control our

money again and take it out of the hands of the bankers. guest: the beef issue, it's interesting you mention that. australia, new zealand are big importers -- exporters of land, meat. fill the trump administration rejoin some version of the transpacific partnership, which was the trade deal which they withdrew their participation from the first week he was in office. since mexico and canada are part of the tpp and a lot of these rules are the same, observers are looking into what is the move that would be required for the trump administration to pick up where the obama administration left off. host: we will leave it there. todd tucker, fellow with the roosevelt institute, appreciate your time. willxt, neils lesniewski discuss the latest on the fbi investigation of supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. we will be right back. ♪

bus wasr: the c-span recently in honolulu, hawaii for the 39th stop of our 50 capitals tour. this weekend we feature our , booktv, andan american history tv, exploring hawaiian culture and public policy issues facing the state. at 7:00 a.m.-span eastern on "washington journal," the director of hawaii's office of planning will talk about homelessness and lack of affordable housing. at noon, on c-span2 stuart coleman on his book ofdie would go" on the life an iconic hawaiian surfer, and then at the university of hawaii a lot of -- hawaii oahu. sunday at 9:30 a.m. eastern on "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. at 4:00 p.m. eastern, three short documentaries about hawaii. the 1956 film "soldier in hawaii," the 1924 silent film "hawaiian islands," and "long and theone scope -- jeansfilm "long chronoscope." what hawaii weekend. announcer: sunday night on "q

and a," joanne freeman on her book "the field of blood: violence in congress and the road to the civil war." >> you just end up with a mass brawl. in and of itself, it is dramatic. people are throwing punches and spittoon's. encounter.sive what is really interesting to me is people at the time looked at it, and what they saw was a group of northerners and a group of southerners, lots of them armed, running at each other in the house of representatives. several of them said this doesn't look like a normal congressional fight. this looks like north against south. this looks like a battle. and that is really striking. and indeed, it certainly did look like a battle, and it is not that long before the civil war. at 8:00r: sunday night eastern on c-span's "q&a." announcer: "washington journal"

continues. host: we are always happy to have rollcall senior reporter neils lesniewski with us, here today to discuss the latest on the fbi probe into supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. when we expect this probe to be wrapped up? guest: it is always good to be back. i think we are looking for the probe to be wrapped up really soon. there had been talk around the capital that it could have been actually finished last night. it is possible that it was finished last night or will be today. what we are going to be looking for is how exactly the fbi and other officials go about briefing senators on the contents of that report. mitch mcconnell, the majority , yesterdaycourse insisted that it will only be senators who get to see the conclusions themselves, pursuant to long-standing policy which i think they expected to thousand

nine regarding how these -- to 2009 regarding how these background investigations are handled. so there will be a and all senators closed briefing where people who are frequently whenrs will be familiar the television cameras set up in the basement of the capital adjacent to the train and hope that lindsey graham comes and talks to the television cameras. that is sort of what we are trying to figure out, whether that is going to be happening today or tomorrow. host: should mitch mcconnell have any real expectation that if that happens and every senator is briefed on it, that it won't be leaked? guest: no, particularly the way this has been going throughout this process and not just necessarily the extent to which things are coming out publicly in the media, but also the level people who have different perspectives on kavanaugh himself are trying to

tilt the coverage. i know this always happens anytime we have a big story, but in some ways it feels like there's more of that here than we normally expect. host: we invite viewers to join the conversation. i know there is lots of questions about where we are on this. republicans, (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002. even before this is released, are the senators saying that they don't expect it has gone far enough, or completely confident it will wrap up all the questions? guest: i think anyone who's been paying attention could probably write the statements the senators are giving in this regard. you have, on one hand, republican senators who are supportive of brett kavanaugh who are making the rounds, i know some are on conservative talk radio this morning, for

instance, saying it is time to move ahead with the process, saying there is nothing there was going to be released that could change their mind. we also have, on the other side, most all of democratic members of the senate judiciary committee, with the noted exception of chris coons from delaware, who was involved in the deal with our republican senator jeff flake, that actually set up this one-week delay to allow for an additional review. other than that, the rest of the democrats in the judiciary committee have a long list of witnesses they think the fbi should be talking to. they think there's no way the vote to happen this week. but as far as we can tell, right now the vote is going to be happening this week. host: can you talk about the procedural steps for that vote to take place? what happens on the floor that tells us about the timing of when the final vote happens? guest: first of all, if you've been paying really careful attention to the senate floor this week, you will have noticed

it is still the legislative day of september 28. they have not actually adjourned the senate. everyone goes home at night, but they have not adjourned the senate this week. the reason for that is that it avoids some potential procedural mischief the democrats could engage in that mcconnell is seeking to avoid. as a practical matter, what it means is that two days after mcconnell files this motion to limit debate on the kavanaugh nomination, which is still pending before the senate, that will probably be the key vote on limiting debate. we don't expect the isuation were close to jury voted and it is defeated. i've heard some possibility it could be one of those 1:00 in the morning votes, which we all love so much around here.

whether a not it is then or during the daytime, we are not sure. host: i should note that phone lines are split up by those who opposed, support, or are unsure. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] -- [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, sandra is on the line. good morning. caller: good morning. this is all just delay tactics that are being done. brett kavanaugh is a really good man, and this has to this into the land of ridiculous. the people coming up today need to realize it is not going to be a he said, she said if they ever get into this position because their entire lives are caught on video and streamed online. it is going to be other people having pictures from parties that they went to and stuff. the fact that his entire record as a judge is being cast aside

for stupid things that he did when he was in high school and stupid things he did not do when he was in high school has just made a mockery of this process. not a single democrat is going to change their vote. republicans that are in red states and democrats that are in red states need to vote for kavanaugh. i say to mitch mcconnell, nothing is going to change. host: sandra in utah, thanks. no democrats will change their vote. can you walk through what you know about the whip count right now? guest: i think the color is probably correct that no one is going to change their vote -- i think the caller is probably correct that no one is going to change their vote. there really are only two democratic votes believed to be in play at this point, heidi heitkamp from north dakota and joe manchin of west virginia. i spoke with manchin briefly outside the capital yesterday.

he was talking about how he had been asked a question by a reporter for "the washington post" about whether or not the temperament judge kavanaugh displayed in that follow-up hearing that also had the testimony from christine blasey ford, whether or not the temperament should be some sort of impediment, which is been something the democrats have been talking about. manchin have been focused on the fact that nothing had come out against kavanaugh. it was an allegation from the time he was 23 years old to the present or somewhere about. to have the door open to voting yes. i'm not sure where high cap is -- where high cap -- where heitkamp is. ,he has been more reserved

although supporters have been over after her opponent his treatment of dr. ford in the allegation. host: and for republicans, we are still working on collins, murkowski, and flake. guest: correct. manchin, ih joe don't understand how democrats like himself, even though you are in a red state, like donnelly in indiana, i think donnelly got the message. i certainly tried to get the message through to them. republicans did not vote for them. i don't know why they think a vote for kavanaugh is going to garner votes from republicans. it is just not going to happen, so i don't know why they would lean that direction. i think a lot of the republicans in this politicized process, and everybody seems -- doesn't

understand the fact that whether it is a republican, democrat president, appoint somebody that is going to put forward their political agendas for the lifetime of that appointment. this is the most politicized for thethere is democrats to play with what is going on with the woman that is accusing brett kavanaugh. is temperament through this whole process has proved he's not a very good pick at all. host: neils lesniewski on that temperament question again. guest: it is an interesting question, what would have happened in a different sort of partisan moment. that it is think going to change anybody's vote because of this temperament question in this case. i have heard from some people who wish that brett kavanaugh clintonbrought up

retaliation comments he made during that hearing, that he may have gone too far, but i still don't think it is going to change any votes. host: what jeff flake said yesterday about the investigation -- ake -- sen. flakflk e: the agreement we had that we would have an investigation for one week and limit the scope to ,urrent, credible allegations we didn't want to throw something open for allegations to come out like the rhode island boat thing that was out and then retracted, or some of the more outlandish ones out there. doj, and theyh afford us that this -- they assured us that this was within the timeframe that they could do it. we have been pushing the white house to make sure it is a full

some investigation, not unduly limited, and i hope they are doing it to find fact. we have not seen any of the reporting yet. we were told it might come back more in real time, and that we might have some decisions to make in terms of where they go. , as theis that interview these individuals, they will immediately follow up on other leads they might have. we don't know exactly where it is. , iterms of what it will take just hope that we find fact. i have an open mind, just like i had in the hearings. we will see what they come back with. i don't want to prejudge it. host: that was jeff flake yesterday at "the atlantic" festival in d.c. viewers can watch all of that if they want at www.c-span.org. he was saying he hopes they follow up on other leads.

if he feels they haven't done that and off, is there a way that jeff flake and chris coons can delay this process a little more to give it more time? ourt: to borrow from former colleague steve dennis, the rule of two is the way steve, who is with bloomberg these days, talks about it. is any two republican senators can slow this -- senators want to slow this down, they can slow it down. any mcconnell hear from an amalgam of two, whether it is flake with murkowski or collins, he suddenly doesn't have the votes needed, and that is sort of where we are. you need one senator, one republican won't stop it, but if you have two your suddenly there. host: jerry in new mexico, good

morning. caller: good morning. kavanaugh was not on the original list. he was picked by trump to protect trump. the republicans want him to end abortion. that is why they are supporting him. we need to criminalize premarital sex and fortification. adultery, make it a felony for every child that's involved. at five years for every child involved because your destroying the family. i believe this to be a simple solution. it shares the burden, and then there won't be any more abortion. host: that is jorge's proposal. neils lesniewski, the original list and why kavanaugh was picked. can you talk through that? guest: this was one of the curiosity throughout this process. of course, the federalist society and other conservative groups have been basically tasked the truck campaign, that's the trump campaign -- the

trump campaign to come up with a list of potential supreme court justices. that is where neil gorsuch was selected from. and then at some point in time, there was an update to the list, and kavanaugh was one of the names added to the list sort of after the fact. ,he suspicion has always been it is always seemed like the other names added was kind of cover for adding kavanaugh to it is donwhether mcgann or folks at the federalist society or wherever, they really wanted kavanaugh to make the cut on the list. host: to frank in hollywood, florida, on the line for those who aren't sure about kavanaugh's nomination. caller: good morning. as a republican, i just want to say i cannot vote for kavanaugh. wants stole ae

cookie out of his mother's cookie jar when he was six. i want a complete investigation by the fbi. thank you. host: that is frank in florida. we will go to george in illinois, the line for those who support brett kavanaugh's confirmation. go ahead. caller: thank you. i would like to speak from a legal standpoint. the fact that kavanaugh really has no charges against him, that anybody can hold anything to him for. rightwitnesses all color -- all corroborate his innocence. can we speak to the democrats' hypocrisy in the light of keith ellison and the charges brought against him, even know he has domestic abuse charges against him? host: neils lesniewski. guest: so obviously on the , that is in minnesota

going to be an interesting question for the voters to decide up there in the fall in the state attorney general race. point, this is something that senator flake was kind of wrestling with about a week ago, the question of what exactly is the burden of proof. even if you can reasonably assume that there is nothing that has been raised against judge kavanaugh that would meet , criminal standard necessarily what exactly is the standard for confirmation of a supreme court -- confirmation to the supreme court? senator flake said to a few of us that it was sort of maybe like the impeachment question because there is no exact standard. it is not like you are dealing with preponderance of evidence or beyond a reasonable doubt. it is not something nearly as clearly legally defined as to what the threshold is for the allegations. host: can you talk a little bit about what the kavanaugh

nomination, this investigation, and one-week delay has meant for senators on capitol hill? there's no house members in this week. senate is the only game in town this week. we read earlier in our program about protesters arrested at joe manchin's office, in his state office in west virginia. in rolland -- a story call. guest: that is absolutely true. catherine and i worked on that story together yesterday afternoon. it was a really unusual situation in the capitol yesterday. you had, and i will assume it had continue today, you senators who were basically getting protective details and ,scorts from the capitol police uniformed officers escorting

them through the office buildings where the public is generally allowed to be. there was somewhat less security around senators once they were in the capital building itself, which is obviously much more restricted. at one point in time, i was sticking out -- i was sticking out the normal meeting of the senate intelligence committee which meets every tuesday and thursday afternoon, a fairly well-known meeting that they have regularly that always attracts a few reporters, but not much else. yesterday there was a whole bank of television cameras, and enough police around for one or two police officers to escort every single senator out of that meeting. there was also a situation where at one point in time, a capitol police officer walks by with a garbage bag full of the ties,

which they are using as makeshift handcuffs for arresting protesters. guest: how many arrests have happened on capitol hill this week? i know there were a bunch last week leading up to that hearing. guest: it doesn't seem like it has been quite as much this week, partly because there's not been a hearing to disrupt. capitol police generally arrest people when they come to the conclusion that they are blocking the hallway or they are interfering with committee business. there hasn't been a whole lot of, so i don't think it has been quite as tents. host: although i guess the week is still relatively young. for in minnesota, the line those who oppose the brett kavanaugh confirmation. caller: yes, i would like to say that this contest for this nomination is supposed to be for the american people, not for the democratic party, not for the republican party. it is what's best for the people. is the republicans have any

courage of their convictions and vote with their conscience and their hearts, they'd know what is right for the american people, and they know a man who has spent his life in a totally corrupt things, and they intentionally put him on the court when they don't deserve any respect from anybody. they work for me, and i do not want kavanaugh, who has a reputation of doing things all his life time the scenes, to be -- his life behind the scenes, to be on the court. we deserve better than that. guest: certainly kavanaugh's , and hiss been more past work has been more partisan than other nominees or potential nominees who were on that

federalist society list. it is not come up by any stretch of the imagination, unusual for a supreme court justice or nominee to the supreme court to have worked in partisan politics in the past. it is always this question, usegh, in which we have to those probably worn out analogies about balls and strikes, and how the job changes when you become a federal judge. i think that is what we are still wrestling with here. host: we talked about the pressure various senators are under for this upcoming confirmation vote, less than 35 days away from election 2018. here's how mary puts it on twitter. "any democrat that votes for kavanaugh is doomed. now is the time to put the country before your own ass."cal good morning.

caller: when hillary clinton was a lawyer, she prosecuted a rape case. she was on tape saying she knew the man was guilty, absolutely without a doubt, and then she laughed because she made the 14-year-old girl that had been raped -- she turned the tables on that 14-year-old and made her the perpetrator. that's how good hillary clinton can stand up for a rape case. judge kavanaugh, he goes strictly by the constitution. that's what the supreme court is all about. it's not about reversing this decision or that decision. guest: well, the second point, the question of precedent, is

sort of, before we were -- this process moved into the realm of debate about allegations against judge we were stilln talking about his record, one of the things that was really interesting had been the extent to which senator collins, republican from maine, was seeming to agree, or at least seemed comfortable, with kavanaugh's position on the roe v. wade case being a precedent that had been set, and she seemed more comfortable a bit moreeing pro-choice the most republican senators, to say the least, with kavanaugh than other candidates that could have been picked. host: sugar land, texas.

tony, the line for those that aren't sure. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. first, i want to say my heart and prayers go out to every woman and man who has experienced sexual harassment. that this iss still the united states of don't believe a person is -- and i believe that a person is innocent before they are guilty. i have been allegedly charged with sexual harassment in the past. we went to federal court, and the judge threw the case out. -- theend, the judge accuser paid for the legal cost of the court. but that is one of the problems i have. the second is there is a report today in the new york post about the polygraph that the ex-boyfriend.

haven't heard anything today from c-span, msnbc, anybody talking about it. john, if youo you, always quote "the new york times," and "the new york times" even had an article that came out and used the person that i would say biased, and then had to come back and say they still stand by the article. please respond to that. thank you. host: tony and texas. we use a lot of different papers that we go through every morning before the show. i will let neils lesniewski talk through any of those reports the color brings up. guest: i have not -- reports the caller brings up. guest: i have not seen those. to the "new york times" story, my understanding is that the magazine writer who they involved in that story actually is based out of new haven, connecticut.

this was relating to alleged conduct of judge kavanaugh while at yale, and because she is in new haven, that is why she was involved in the story, is my understanding of what happened there. host: to ralph in new jersey on the line for those who support brett kavanaugh's confirmation. caller: i'm glad i finally got on this show. i enjoy your show very much. i am 92 and a half years old. i had an experience when i was nine years old, and i remember it. older boys were trying to rape me, and i had another friend next to me, and he allowed himself to be raped. i was carrying on. i was in front of the school behind bushes. finally they let me go, and i rushed off pulling my pants up. so i wonder why dr. ford can't , where ithis incident happened, the day it happened, etc. i think she might have been

hypnotized, or seems to be under tranquilizing. that was my impression, anyway. under hypnosis. you can get someone to say something that isn't completely true. i support judge kavanaugh because i believe him. he's done a terrific job over the last 25 years, no matter where he worked, and he's done an excellent job on the courts there in washington, d.c. i don't understand why the democrats are acting the way they are. i think the main reason is thatse they are hoping they can get power again and nancy pelosi can take over the house and chuck schumer can take over the senate, and they can pick someone they want to would be a liberal judge, and other words, on the supreme court. host: thanks for sharing your story. neils lesniewski, do you want to pick up on the end of that comment, the potential political strategy here and the timing of

if there has to be another nominee? guest: let's say that judge kavanaugh's nomination is either defeated or withdrawn, or both. , not is really, i think enough time between now and is election day to go through the process of another supreme court nomination. the one exception to that might be mike lee because he is a sitting senator from utah. but pretty much there is no real hope that there would be another confirmation before the election, which leads us to what would proceed in a lame-duck session. is chuck schumer is majority leader in waiting in the lame-duck session, the tension is only going to ratchet up a whole lot more. i think this theory that is out there that there could, in fact, deadlock on the

supreme court, could be a reality for a while. host: one question to follow up on that. lindsey graham saying president trump should renominate brett kavanaugh is the senate fails to confirm him. could you just talk through the logic of that? guest: the nomination doesn't , just -- or, excuse me because you are defeated doesn't mean you're nomination goes away. but at the end of this congress, the nomination will expire. think, senator graham is suggesting, who could be the chairman of the judiciary committee next year if chuck grassley ops to go back to the whatce committee, i think senator graham is suggesting is that in january, donald trump should just resubmit brett , and i thinkame that graham is hoping there are more republican senators who are in the chamber at that point so

that you wouldn't necessarily be worried about murkowski and collins as they are now. host: neils lesniewski is with blase cash is with roll call. -- neils lesniewski is with roll call. always appreciate you being with us. our phone lines are open as usual. you can start calling in now. we will be right back. ♪ pulitzer: prize-winning author geraldine brooks is our guest on "in-depth: fiction edition is quote sunday at noon eastern sunday at- edition" noon eastern with her book "the secret chord." watch "in-depth: fiction edition" with geraldine brooks

one sunday at noon eastern c-span's booktv. booktv, on c-span2. announcer: sunday night on "q and a," yale university historian joanne freeman on her book, "field of blood: violence in congress and the road to the civil war." >> you end up with scores of congressman in a mass brawl. in and of itself, it's dramatic. guys throwing punches and spittoons. it is a massive encounter. what was really interesting to me was people at the time look at it, and what they saw was a group of northerners and a group of southerners, lots of them armed, running at each other in the house of representatives, and several of them said this doesn't look like a normal congressional fight. this looks like north against south.

this looks like a battle. and that is really striking, and indeed, it certainly did look like a battle, and it is not that long before the civil war. announcer: sunday night at eight eastern -- at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "q&a." announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: it is open phones until our program ends at 10:00. the phone lines are yours for any public policy issue you want to talk about this morning. phone lines for republicans, democrats, an independents. here is one story a lot of people are talking about today, the story in "the new york times " that takes up the entire above the fold of today's paper. part in suspects schemes to evade tax bills." the story the results of a fairly in-depth investigation into a trove of tax returns and financial records, revealing that for he was president, mr. trump received the equivalent

today of at least $413 million from his father's real estate empire, starting when he was a toddler. it continues to this day. much of that money came to mr. trump because he helped his parents dodge taxes. yet his siblings set up a sham corporation to discuss millions of dollars in gifts from their parents. records also indicate to trump helped his father take improper tax deductions worth millions more. he also helped formulate a strategy to undervalue his parent real estate holdings by hundreds of millions of dollars, sharply reducing the tax bill when those properties were transferred to him and his siblings. the white house responded to that story yesterday. the president responded to it in a tweet today, saying "the failing new york times did something i have never seen before. they used the concept of time valuing money and doing some very old, boring, and often told hit piece on me.

this means that 97% of their stories on me are bad. never recovered from the bad election call." that story in today's "new york half of the front page and eight pages inside. schemes,gaged in tax reaping riches from his father." we can talk about that or any public policy issue you want to talk about. phone lines again, republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002. steve is up first in missouri, a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning, john. i'm going to vote today, as it developed -- absentee ballot. i am going to vote straight democrat. i feel that our democracy is at stake, the right to vote and freedom of press the first thing

on the chopping block. if we get a democratic congress, house and senate, we can impeach both trump and pence. the third one in line is the speaker of the house. i don't know if it is going to be nancy pelosi or somebody like that, but whatever it is, we can get rid of this corrupt russian paid for administration, and hopefully get an independent party on the next election, and maybe get a better government after that point. host: steve, if democrats do take the house, who would you like to see as speaker? would you be supportive of nancy pelosi as speaker again? caller: well, i don't like her a whole lot, but i was there would , somebodyy younger with a little more modern. i don't like the progressives as much. i am a christian, but i just

can't vote for republicans. i think trump is corrupt as can be. a appreciate you taking my call. host: jeff is up next in mississippi, a republican. good morning. caller: yes, i'm calling to make caller"fied of a "daily story on "good morning america" about debra katz. she's part of the resistance movement and entered a quote, "we are going to fight. we are going to resist. we will not be kept silent." dr. ford is also a part of that movement. she's a psychologist. she's a professor of psychology. she's a radical. she's also a radical actor. host: she's also had what in her life? caller: she was also part of a

radical movement. she flew all over the united states. she said she couldn't fly. don't remember. garrett, on his website, showed the whole story. dr. ford, the dress she was wearing comes from the amish. check it out. host: loretto is next, also in mississippi. go ahead. caller: yes, i was calling about the kavanaugh thing. heren on the news about having a friend that helped her to pass a lie detector test, her friend monica or something from california that was going to work for the fbi. she was going to coach her how to pass a lie detector test. she told her boyfriend, and he said a letter to the fbi. never afraid of

flying and didn't have two doors in her house. i went for a traumatic event when i was younger, and i know exactly where i was and what happened. host: the information at the beginning, you said you saw on the news. where you get your news? guest: fox news. demand sent a letter, danny something. an ex-boyfriend from california. he dated her for nine years. he sent a letter in. host: got your point, loretta. richard is up next in carlsbad, new mexico, an independent. go ahead. richard, are you with us? one more try. go ahead, richard. caller: yes. you said i'm an independent. i'm not a democrat or republican. i vote for whoever i believe will do best for america. for the first time in my 53

years on this earth, i am literally embarrassed of our government, both democrats and republicans. even the press. , he is justanaugh accused in the literally crucify him on the cross. it was back in high school, and college. as a man that doesn't drink, last time i had a drink out of a beer i was probably five years old out of my dad's. literally dols things to guys as much as guys doing the two girls. and i've seen girls literally lie because they don't get what they want. it does happen. guys do take advantage of women. i'm not disputing that whatsoever. but at the same time, you just get accused of it and everybody wants to persecute somebody for it. it is like that girl with, i believe it was rectors -- not

utgers, but the lacrosse team. they found out she lied, and not even one newsperson came out and apologize to those boys. host: when president trump said yesterday it is a very scary time for men in america, do you agree with that? caller: yes i do. i've got a son. is 20 years old. we talk about it. he kind of dates. i said, be careful. a girl might want to do something. you are young, you all do it, and all of a sudden she gets mad at you. she can say she was raped, and they are going to nail you to the wall. host: richard in new mexico this morning. more of your phone calls in just a minute in open phones. should note this afternoon, americans can expect a presidential text on their cell phones as part of a national cell phone alert test taking place today. for more on this, we turn to david mccabe, a technology

osporter with axi thanks for being on the phone with us. can you talk to us about why this test is taking place today? guest: thank you for having me this morning. i think americans are already familiar with his emergency alert test. they get them already for natural disaster type events or amber alert's if they opt into those. and they see them on tv, these emergency alert tests. this is the first nationwide test of the mobile alert system. the tests were mandated every three years by congress several years ago. this is the first of those. it will utilize this type of all or they can only be sent by the president and that consumers can't turn off. host: what will it say? when will it hit? houston americans react? -- how should americans react? guest: it will broadcast for about 30 minutes.

you should only get it wants. it will have the header presidential alert, and the text will say "this is a test of the national wireless emergency system. no action needed." host: can you talk about the politics of this? like everything else, this seems to have been caught up in some politics. i know you have reported on that axi -- on that at axios. guest: these have existed for more than a decade. they have not been used, but they have existed. since we are in a very politically heated time, many people said i don't want to be getting a text from president trump. i don't want people to use this talk about the russian investigation are one of his political projects. in fact, under the law, that would pretty difficult. fema officials saying that would not happen. but it has led to sort of a tinge of political controversy

to what otherwise would have been a basic standard, benign test. host: in the future, are there going to be more tests down the road? what would this be used for if it is not a test environment for this? guest: it is used sort of emergency situations. a presidential alert is the nationwide system -- [indiscernible] -- these alerts are for threats of imminent harm, almost always geographical. we get them for flooding here in d.c. or for amber alerts, for a missing child. we will continue to see those, and there will continue to be questions for accountability for the system. you will recover when a message was sent saying there was a missile in down to hawaii. those it incidents, while rare, have questions.

that is where you will probably hear and see the most about this system in the year to come. host: this is all happening at 2:00 p.m. -- 2:18 pm eastern. guest: at 2:20 p.m. eastern there will also be a test on radio and tv. but yes, 2:18 pm is when it will , ift to send to your phone you are an range and your provider has opted in to the system. all of the major providers, t-mobile, verizon, sprint, and at&t have. host: thanks for the time this morning. guest: thank you for having me. host: back to your phone calls,'s our program ends in about 10 minutes or so. richard is in missouri, democrat. caller: good morning. i am calling about this supreme court person. we have one party rule in this country right now, and they can do whatever they want.

he is going to go through. on the senate judicial, they don't do what the rest of them do and their states don't benefit from it. host: what you mean by that, richard? murkowski and the lady from maine, if they don't do what the other senators or what the state once of them, they will say you didn't fall in line, so we won't help you get what you want. host: so you think they are going to fall in line? caller: oh yeah. yeah. we got a dictatorship, more or less, right now in this country. they can do whatever they want. now let's be realistic about it. one thing about this second amendment business, we had a bad thing happen here in missouri the other day.

you always hear the way to take out a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. try to takeod guys out a bad guy with a gun, and they are both dead. so you've got to watch how you use that phrase, you know? host: that is richard in missouri. tim is in california, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning c-span. just a brief comment. i just want to say to the left and the independents in this country, please consider respect or ginsburg coming from -- consider ruth bader ginsburg coming from the most radical left organization, the aclu, in our country to be selected for the supreme court and she sits there to this day. number two, the fact that chuck schumer said, and it has been said before, the nominee, before the nominee was even revealed, "i will oppose any nominee with everything in my power." i mean, think about that statement. think about that statement.

that's what the left is in this country. additionally, a side note. it is knows rise "the new york times" is coming out with his hit piece during the nomination process. many believe and feel they are nothing more than a arm of the democrat party. this is ridiculous. the president has the ability to select anybody he chooses. i mean, it is a consent. that is all i pretty much have to say. host: ben in springfield, massachusetts, a democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i absolutely oppose the confirmation of the judge for a number of reasons. last of all, his testimony thursday. when he was asked direct

questions, he never answered one. he would filibuster and not answer the questions, go around the corner. he always had an excuse for not answering questions. the other thing i will bring up , shee lady, dr. ford didn't say there was a crowd in the room when that incident took place. there was two individuals. she didn't know which one pushed her into that room, but there was two gentleman in the bedroom with her. that's all she said was in there. she said there were other individuals downstairs, and what you walked out of the room she didn't stop to talk about what happened. . she was just glad to get out of the house. the other thing is for the last since thursday's session of the senate, president speaking actually

favorable about the testimony of dr. ford. then last night he went south on us again. it is hard for me to accept someone who would be so radical, so helter skelter, to relate an opinion. he used everything he could think of last night against dr. ford in an effort to alienate people against her. host: here is what the president had to say about dr. ford's testimony at that rally in mississippi last night. pres. trump: 36 years ago this happened. "i had one beer," right? "i had one beer." how did you get home? "i don't member." how did you get there? "i don't remember."

how did you --? i don't know. "i don't know." what neighborhood was it in? "i don't know." upstairs, downstairs, what room was it in? "i don't know, but i had one beer." and now a man's life is in tatters. host: if you want to watch that event in its entirety come a you can do so, www.c-span.org. until our program ends. phones untilpen our program ends. go ahead. caller: and calling because i know that this country has done so much to incarcerate and destroy black men in black communities. i just want to know, is there a law in congress or the senate where the president has to nominate the same amount of white people that he nominates

black people for supreme court justices? host: i don't think that is a law. do you think it should be a law? caller: i think it should be a lot because black mass incarceration has destroyed a lot of communities. these laws that are being i believe they are not having the same effect on families. it is such an issue with p, andugh and trum continuing to nominate all of these powerful white politicians in each community and each state throughout our country. why can't he nominates african-americans who have done just as much good work or just powerh political as people like kavanaugh? host: to florida to my eli,

democrat -- to florida, eli, democrat. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i want to quote one thing. , 76 and 77.st paper you will find that within it, advance the ideology of the president. against theharges judge kavanaugh. he is fit for the supreme court. it had been legally took to law, that probably would be expunged from his record because it was before his 18th birthday. we are americans, and we say that a person innocent until he's proven guilty. and the next thing that we must

realize, that he was under 18 years of age, and any background check because any further for federal security -- and i had a top security, and this is upsetting me that somebody people to take my forms of taxation for their jobs and didn't read the constitution. howad it in school and see they one of the constitution ratified. if you can't go any place, you need to look back at that and need to know that our president is doing a great job. he's bringing jobs back to america. we have industry coming back to the states. eli, as a democrat, did you vote for president trump in 2016? caller: -- it needs to be expressed. there's no emotions.

settle in a court of law. host: that is eli, democrat. norman is a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. just one comment. the democrats do not have a case. they happen old ford not running on all cylinders. thank you. host: ivan is in california, republican. good morning. caller: i was wondering if the democrats are worried about the fbi using the same tactics against kavanaugh that they did against hillary clinton? and another thing, i believe that obama, the only thing i agreed with that he ever did was he took the black folk in this country and took them back 100 years. another four years and he would put them back in slavery. host: britt in tennessee, a

democrat. caller: good morning. how are you doing today? host: doing well. caller: ok, good. my comment is that i just don't understand how a person comes 30 years back to today -- i mean, this man has been successful for a lot of years -- so why all of a sudden is it being opening up about him doing what she said that he did to her? but not just that. this is something that black mothers have been trying to teach their children ever since back in the day, their sons. you know, they would falsely of clues that falsely accuse the young black males back in the day, and they would get lynched. now if they coming for the white males, they act like the world is going to end.

this is something black guys have always had to deal with. that is all i have to say. just have a blessed day. host: our last caller in today's "washington journal." we now take you up to capitol hill, the senate side. the homeland security and governmental affairs committee is holding a hearing on the nominations of the next director of the census, and the commissioner of the postal regulatory commission, beginning in just a moment. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

>> you guys can talk.

[muttering]