nancy pelosi will probably be over 100 by the time she finishes her last time as speaker if nothing changes. the challenge is that all of leadership has no term limits. chairman have term limits. all the way back to newt gingrich, what happened was we took a strong chairman system and turned it into a strong speaker and minority leader system. >> watch conversations with retiring members of congress, saturday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span and c-span.org, and listen with the free c-span radio app. back want to welcome markings become a served as u.s. ambassador tomorrow, former senior adviser to president carter, and senior diplomatic advisor, went to the counterterrorism project. >> counter extremism some advocating the

removal of extremist content from social media and provides a pretty sophisticated software to intelligence agencies and other agencies around the world to help identify and expedite the removal of terrorist and extremist content. >> but skip to the headline, mattis resigned after the president announces a syria withdrawal. i want to show you part of the letter he wrote to the president after the oval office meeting. "dear mr. president, while the u.s. remains the indispensable nation in the free world, we cannot protect our interests are served the role effectively without maintaining strong alliances and showing respect to those allies. like you, i have set from the beginning that the armed forces of the u.s. should not be the policeman of the world. instead, we must use all tools of american power to provide to common defense, including providing effective leadership to our alliances, nato's 20 democracies demonstrated that strength and fighting alongside us following the 9/11 attacks on america." what is he saying? seems to me that he

is deeply disappointed at the breakdown of the transatlantic alliance and the inability of the u.s. to show adequate leadership against the challengers that the pentagon in its national defense assessment determined is both china and russia, not necessarily in that order. more importantly, i think what secretary mattis is saying is that these alliances, because of the lack of respect the president is demonstrating they areur allies, unwilling to join the u.s. in what essentially are these major challenges in an effective way, even though -- i'm sure secretary mattis agrees with the president that having our allies provide a sufficient mandatory contribution to nato is essential. money is never the deal here. it's always about what they are doing for us to combat al qaeda

in the middle east, what they're doing in afghanistan, what we are doing to join forces against china, to help stem the tide of putin's content imperialism in ukraine and other places around the world. >> there's this headline from the washington post, a morning of alarm, the departure sent shockwaves abroad. here's part of the preboarding from the washington post. european leaders did not mince words. europe isof alarm in how carville, the cochair of the european council on foreign relations, the former prime minister of sweden, described on the news of the exit. he wrote mattis is the remaining strong bond in the trump administration. all the others are fragile, at best, or broken at worst. saidrench defense minister isis has been reduced, but not eliminated. the french government doesn't share the american that the fights in syria are over.

a for the kremlin's response, spokesperson asked about mattis as a restraining influence on trump. he had this dry rejoinder. in our time to guessing who restrained president trump from doing what is the work of political scientists and a thankless task. amazing to listen to the breach of diplomatic by our allies about this president. the american people, whether republican, democratic, independent, have to make a decision whether or not in the end of u.s. stands for global leadership, and whether or not we can have our cake and eat it. to galvanize our allies without necessarily engaging as policeman around the world. it takes a really dexterity is dance on the part of a very well respected president to balance off the desires of american people, but maintaining america's interest abroad. this president seems to be failing on both counts.

>> we have been talking about syria. there has been talk, first by cnn and u.s. troops from afghanistan. reuters reporting it could be more than 5000 u.s. troops being pulled out of afghanistan. >> this is precisely what the american people have to make a decision on, whether the president is conducting national security policy adequately, or just waking up in the middle line deciding he will do this despite the advice and counsel of his military advisers. the situation in afghanistan has been our longest war, 15 years going on since 9/11. the taliban have been researching. they provide what is it essentially protection for some of the most important lethal terrorist organizations that are directing their efforts against the u.s.. we cannot seem to be able to win a conflict with just u.s. military troops alone. the afghani military is under duress.

our allies have certainly contributed. there are important peace negotiations the trump administration had launched. when the taliban wake up as they did this morning and saw that the president has decided to withdraw troops before he's even able to prove that the peace negotiations could bear fruit, how do you imagine their military commanders are going to react to that? host: the president was very critical of president obama when he telegraphed military operations but didn't the president just do the same thing? host: this president always says his predecessors have done everything wrong that he is now repeating. guest: this president always says his predecessors have done everything wrong that he is now repeating. host: russian president vladimir, in his year and news conference, you will hear his answer for a translator. -- his answer through a translator. >> yesterday president donald trump announced the withdrawal

of american troops from syria. he also announced that, in his opinion, the united states defeated isis in syria. he made that very clear. what is your position with respect to his statement of the withdrawal of american troops from syria and his statement regarding the defeat of isis by the united states? secondly, do you have concerns that the american troops will remain in some form? there's been much discussion, for example, around the president essentially using contractors where the united states has either acted -- is either active militarily or might want to be acting militarily, but in a more discreet way. thank you very much. pres. putin: as for defeating isis, i do generally agree with the president of the united states. we've achieved some major

advances when it comes to defeating the terrorists, and we have struck major blows on terrorists in syria. there is a danger that those terrorist groups might now infiltrate the neighboring regions, for example, afghanistan and other countries. and also to other countries, for example, the countries of origin. this poses a great risk for all of us, including russia and the u.s., asian countries and central asian countries. we are aware of that, and we know about that. yes, donald trump is right about that. as for the withdrawal of american forces, i'm not sure about what that is. the american forces have been present in afghanistan for some 17 years, and every year they talk about withdrawing their forces from afghanistan. but they are still present there. that is my second point. my third point, we do not see

any signs of the american withdrawal from syria, but we see that it is possible, and we are now on the track of political settlement. now we want to form a constitutional committee in syria. host: that news conference and those comments by russian president vladimir putin. marc ginsberg, this is the headline from "the washington post." "the syrian position leaves putin with a winning hand." guest: trump is making assad great again. maga. syria has always been a russian puppet regime. the russians have an absolute desire to keep him in power. the issue has always been what exactly is the role of the american military in syria? i've always advocated we should not have boots on the ground unless it is for one reason and one reason only, and that is to combat and complete the job

against isis. the president's declaration to withdraw troops from syria, in my judgment, is totally premature. that's why i'm sure that my views are shared by most of the people on the ground in syria, as well as in the pentagon. the fact of the matter is it is funny to watch putin to discuss this role against isis and terrorism. it was his cronies that launched a military offensive against u.s. troops in syria instead of fighting terrorism. they have been supporting the number one terrorist in syria, bashar al-assad. host: let's get your phone calls. fred is first up from st. paul, minnesota. go ahead. [inaudible] host: are you with us? we will go on to joe in eastpointe, michigan. caller: good morning. got right to the chase. excuse me. i think the least of trump's worries about august of next year will be pulling troops.

i think he will be out of office, having cut a deal, a plea to keep his kids out of jail, to keep himself out of jail. this man is rotten to the core. i'm 83 years old. i remember a lot of bad things, and many good things in this country. trump is the worst thing that could've ever happened. he's ignorant. he knows nothing of history. he cares nothing of history. he is going to be gone when the democrats get in and begin to open investigations into his mafioso regime. and i will be very happy when they do. it's too bad the founding fathers didn't make it a little easier to rid ourselves of a cancer in the white house. thank you. host: thank you. guest: i don't want to get into the domestic politics here. as you know, my area is foreign policy. i want to say southern that -- i want to say something that perhaps would surprise people. the president, when he came into office, was essentially

unshackled the military to do what was necessary against isis in syria, which i commanded him on. as soon as the battle begun to be won, in fighting terrorism, you are not just fighting the battlefield fight. you also have to make sure you can hold the territory and prevent insurgents and terrorists from returning. the president then did the worst possible thing. he prevented the pentagon's request for additional funding for stabilization. that is coming to provide -- that is to provide civilian protection against the terrorists that remain to help them rebuild their lives and prevent isis from returning. so in effect, the price that the u.s. military is paying in syria is being undermined by the very policies that the president himself declared over general mattis's objections, and that has eradicated a $200 million stabilization fund in syria. host: michael lynwood said what

you said earlier. -- insurgent is safe from any proponent. with us now leaving syria, that creates what? guest: it gives iran free reign, more or less, to build what is its land bridge to provide weaponry and missile technology without having to fly it in from tehran to beirut to provide the offensive weapons to hezbollah and iran against israel. number two, it gives bashar al-assad a lease on life. number three, and most importantly -- and i think this is what bothered general mattis the most -- the battle on the ground in syria has been fought largely by syrian and kurdish forces that are our most important ally in the battle against isis. when we withdraw our troops, the turkish military is going to move in and try to vanquish those troops because they consider them to be supporters of the outlaw terrorist

organization the pkk. president erdogan of turkey is desperate to prevent the syrian kurds from creating an enclave that would appear to be an independent enclave in syria. host: our guest is marc ginsberg. our phones are open for u.s. troop withdrawal from syria, and now reports are as many as 5000 troops from afghanistan. if you support it, (202) 748-8000, and if you oppose it, (202) 748-8001. from rochester, new york, ruth. caller: thank you. in a way i do, and in a way i don't. the united states is the only country that fought in world war ii that has been at war consecutively. first it was 1945. we ended the war. 1950, the korean war. trying to stop north korea from invading south korea.

then the vietnam war, and we didn't succeed. keeping the north vietnamese from invading south. we lost that war. then iraq. then afghanistan. then libya. now syria. where the only country, we are losing all of our good men in the wars. fathers, husbands, sons. we are spending all this money. and look at congress, all the women. how many women have won in the congress because we've lost the men? not all men want to be in politics, they want to do other things. we are losing all our good men. that is what i support. we can't be in all these wars. iraq was a complete fiasco. vietnam a complete fiasco. and here we are getting involved in syria, and we are losing our good men. we've got to stop going to war for other people. that is what america first -- i support -- i understand why people don't like it. we can't continue to lose our

men. host: thank you for the call. guest: ruth, you are absolutely right. there are plenty of people, and i disagree with my former friend who passed away senator mccain, who wanted tens of thousands of troops in syria. i believe our most important goal is to protect the american people. unfortunately, in this age of terrorism, we cannot let isis and al qaeda regrouped in yemen or syria. they are plotting and planning. continue to instigate and insight attacks against the united states. fortunately, those attacks have been far and few between. to the credit of president obama and president trump, there hasn't been a 9/11 style attack in the united states. but in order to prevent these terrorist organizations from being able to regroup and plot these attacks, unfortunately we

have got to have special forces operations tracking down their operations and trying to prevent them from regrouping. that is the price, unfortunately, we have to pay as americans to keep our country safe. host: clearly there is a division within the republican party. i want to share with you in a moment what lindsey graham said to reporters yesterday, but first, the president am a response that criticism, saying, "so hard to believe lindsey graham would be against saving soldiers' lives and billions of dollars. why are we fighting for our enemy syria by staying in killing isis for them, russia, iran and others? time to focus on our country and bring our youth back home where they belong!" here's lindsey graham. sen. graham: i don't know where it came from, but it needs to be reconsidered. our ambassador to syria two days ago announced a commitment to

stay until we got it right. i don't know how this decision was made. it literally came out of left field. it has rattled the world. you see north korea flexing their muscles now. they will want us to leave south korea before we do a deal. i promise you that every thing that happened in iraq is going to happen in syria unless we change course. i can promise the president if you reevaluate this decision, you will have a lot of support across both sides of the aisle. host: ambassador ginsberg. guest: isn't it horrible that the president appoints a special envoy in syria, jim jefferies, appointed by secretary pompeo, and three days ago he said we are going to stay in syria until we finish the job against isis, and it may be several more months, but he didn't put a timetable on it, and the next

morning he wakes up and reads the paper to see the president determine unilaterally that we are going to withdraw troops. can you imagine how top diplomat -- how top diplomats feel when they are undercut by the commander-in-chief? host: so there was no comedic asian between the 2 -- so there was no communication between the two? guest: absolutely none at all. >> what role do you think general mattis had? we know the president had mattis in there, as well as pompeo, but not the chairman of the joint chiefs. can you imagine that? the president would not have the chairman of the joint chiefs in the meeting that determined the fate of american troops in syria. host: what is the president's foreign policy? how would you define it? guest: he calls it america first. bring america's troops home, stop engaging abroad. it is an isolationist foreign policy. it is something that goes back to the 1930's.

the american people, he's playing off of a very small base of american people who believe that america's role in the world has been detrimental to american interests at home. there are many of us who would argue to the contrary. we wouldn't have the economy we have if america didn't stand up for the values and trade systems to stand up to countries like china and russia that are determined to undermine our allies abroad. without our canadian and european allies in the middle east talking about israel, how are we supposed to be able to benefit from a great economy if all we are doing in the end is essentially going inward instead of protecting our interests abroad? host: based on who you talk to, among our closest allies, justin trudeau, angela merkel, president macron, how do they view this moment? guest: they keep hoping that in

the end, they can humor him, keep him under control. president macron of france tried to invite him to a bastille day military parade that seems to impress the president. he's had very poor relations with our closest ally, canada. how can the american people accept the fact that we have a president that insults our canadian allies? i was in canada just several weeks ago. the canadians were beside themselves about how trump is treating them. that's unacceptable. americans should resent the fact. it is one thing the american people could say the president is just being the president. look. the canadians are our number one trading ally in the world, and he is insulting the role they play in our security and trade relations. host: next, deb in houston, texas. you oppose this move by the president. good morning. caller: yes, good morning.

could you please ask your guest, i would like to know, we've been building up to this since trump took in this unilateralism where he tweets out whatever and it is chaotic. i'm concerned that this paves the way for him to privatize the war and bring in eric prince the way the american people rejected, and take away any transparency we have. this is just one aspect of the unilateralism that we are getting, from the maga and the wall and isolation. it is like if you grew up playing battleship or risk, it is little pieces and you don't just walk over and shove the board away and throw it in the closet. you have to build it up and take it down. i'm concerned the american people that say to shut the government down or do this or that, there are people's lives here. our place in the world.

i really want to know about this private station because trump -- this privatization because trump seems to want to merge the republican party into trump party. he seems to be just privatizing everything. he's a privateer. thank you for the opportunity. host: thank you. guest: there's plenty of people in washington, what has become the swamp of washington marching into the white house and saying for a couple billion dollars i can put 10,000 former seals and navy troops and military on the ground in afghanistan. this is this guy prince you are talking about. i can tell you this at least five or six stories that i've heard of people who have been major donors to the trump campaign, who have marched into the white house and said, you know what? i think we can help you put together a private army. it will only cost the united states and our allies a couple billion dollars. of course, the person putting this together is probably looking for a nice payday.

putting american troops on the ground in a private army who are not under the control of the u.s. military, much less even doing that in the first place, opens up a whole can of worms. host: let's go to nancy in austin, texas. you support this move. why? caller: first of all, lindsey graham never saw a war he didn't want to wage, so everyone should have known he would be against this. second, this gentleman, what we are hearing from him is the globalist viewpoint, which is fine. but he should announce that from the beginning. you should have somebody like rand paul on for the counter side who very much supports trump pulling our troops out of there. our troops are in 130 countries around the world. we have been building this empire for a long time. we are broke. let's look and see what this has gotten us. we don't talk about it much in

the media anymore, but libya. how did that work out? we basically helped facilitate the killing of a leader there, and now who owns it? isis and al qaeda. that was quite a little thing we pulled off there. so we want to do the same thing in syria? overthrow assad? let's keep in mind the christians from iraq moved to syria so they could live under assad. assad let them live peacefully. host: by the way, we have an open invitation for senator rand paul to join us on the program. we always welcome members of the house and senate to be with us. this is a tweet from senator paul yesterday, who did support what the president was doing in syria. "i'm happy to see a president who can declare victory and bring our troops out of a war. it's been a long time since that happened." guest: mission economist, right? -- mission accomplished right?

, let me push back on this. for all the politics, here's the situation on the ground. there are 20,000 to 30,000 isis fighters still lurking around iraq and syria. the area that the united states and our allies have still been unable to conquer in the former caliphate, there are 3000 diehard isis fighters, many of whom are the command and control operatives of isis. we have been unable so far to get them out of this pocket in the euphrates river valley. many of those folks who are still part of isis that we have not been able to beat are plotting and planning attacks against u.s. forces in europe, inciting and inspiring. when you look at the sheer situation on the ground, we have made enormous progress, but the job is not done. and for the president to declare

mission accomplished, well, it is an alternative universe with alternative facts. the facts on the ground, putting aside assad, there's no way to thousand troops on the ground are going to get rid of assad, which is why i disagree with lindsey graham about our role in syria. we have one job, and that is to make sure the caliphate is completely destroyed. the american people need to know that the president is prematurely withdrawing from syria before the job is done. host: the bbc publishing this official response from the british government, available on the bbc website. "the global coalition has made huge progress, but much remains to be done, and we must not lose sight of the threat they pose. the british government remains committed to the global coalition and campaign to deny daesh territory and ensure its enduring defeat, working alongside our regional partners in syria and beyond." what about the kurds? guest: this is one of the

reasons general mattis resigned. the american people need to understand that 2000 troops in syria were special forces, as well as air force advisors to help call in airstrikes largely as a result of the ground offensives being waged by our allies, the syrian kurds. the american people need to understand the kurds have been a people without a country for decades. the majority of them live in turkey. the turks want to prevent them from ever organizing and creating their own state. they live in syria. they live in iraq. they live in iran. the syrian kurds have become an a in effect, and listed by the u.s. military to be the ground troops against isis. once we pull back and withdraw our troops, the turks have threatened to launch an offensive to kill the very people on the ground that protected american troops and fought the fight against isis.

so i ask the american people, how do they feel about betraying our allies who did most of the fighting for us against isis? host: the headline from "the washington post," "the syria pullout alarms allies in iraq and hardens foes." joe is in oklahoma. good morning. caller: one, thank god for president trump preventing us from heading down the path of venezuela. the guest on your program praising the socialists like macron and trudeau, i that he did not have the same objection whatever obama pulled the troops out of iraq. basically, trump is saving us as a nation from the deep state that is now being uncovered, rather than what we had is hillary and people like your guest were in control.

host: thank you. guest: listen, i'm very proud of the position i take as an american who has spent my career fighting for our country and involved abroad as a diplomat, and in the intelligence area. the fact of the matter is i understand the weariness of people like yourself who feel the president is doing what is essential. whether you want to put labels on our allies, that is your prerogative. i think president macron and prime minister trudeau represent two of the greatest allies the american people could ever have. the situation in venezuela is totally out of control, and the president said maybe we will militarily intervene in venezuela. well, why don't you smoke on that one? it was the president who suggested to militarily intervene in venezuela. host: this editorial from "the new york times," "jim mattis was right. who now will protect america? no one wants american troops deployed in a war zone longer

than necessary, but there is no indication that mr. trump has thought through the consequences of a precipitous withdrawal, including allowing isis forces to regroup and create another crisis that would draw the united states back and the region. american withdrawal would also be a gift to vladimir putin on the russian leader who has been working hard to supplant american influence in the region and who, on thursday, enthusiastically welcomed the decision by saying donald is right." guest: here's my reaction to all of that. the president has had more than ample opportunity to leverage the art of the deal, for example, with the saudi's, particularly after the khashoggi murder. why did he not say it is not our fight against isis? you need to put troops on the ground as we withdraw. it is the responsibility of our arab allies to fight the fight against isis, not primarily american forces.

we will support you, but you need to put boots on the ground. i've always argued, for decades, on this issue, that the most important thing we've failed to do is to get the arabs to fight the fight we shouldn't be fighting. the saudis will always fight till the last american. where are the troops? where are they fighting the fight they should fight? i believe the president lost a major opportunity in this saudi crisis to have said to the king of saudi arabia, you want to get out of jail for the mohammad bin salman, the prince? then you need to put troops on the ground to fight the fight against isis. he has no idea when it comes to foreign policy. host: also the withdrawal of as many as 5000 troops from afghanistan. jay is joining us from michigan. good morning. caller: good morning. first off, i want to say my son

is a green beret right now, and i think he is probably in afghanistan. i'm not sure. he don't really tell me. after listening to lindsey graham say what he set about he -- said about he doesn't understand what trump is doing these type of things, i've got a kind of cynical idea about it. trump is doing all of this to distract from his legal problems and his treason. that's what he's become. he's a treasonous president to the people of this country. it drives me nuts. ignorance is not a virtue. trump is incompetent and he thinks he's an emperor. i think he's demented. i think there's something wrong with him. if it isn't just due to his criminal ideas about how to run an organization, it has to be dementia. so he's other a criminal, or he's crazy. have a good day. host: thank you for the call. i want to go back to another issue because there have been reports on another front that the president had been in touch with turkish president erdogan

before announcing his decision on syria. explain the significance of that. guest: here's the back story on that. president erdogan has instructed turkish troops to launch an offensive in northeast syria to take on the syrian kurdish forces that have been supporting american troops and stabilizing that area against isis. he is determined on behalf of his country to, in effect, eradicate these syrian kurdish forces that have been supported and trained by the united states. he's threatened over the last several years to launch these offensives. we almost got to the point where u.s. military was going to have to fight turkish forces, our nato ally, to defend these syrian kurds fighting the battle against isis. probably what happened on the phone call is erdogan said to the president, i'm going to move no matter what against the

syrian kurds, and american troops get harmed, so be it. and the president said maybe this is the time to fulfill my commitment to get american troops out of syria, so the president blinked. that's exactly what i think happened. host: let's go to terry from minnesota. good morning. caller: good morning. marc, you're a funny guy. two years trump has had, and is plenty of time to solve the problem. people in your thought process have had 20 years, lost trillions of dollars in money, lost u.s. soldiers' lives, and where does it end? what are you concerned about? diplomats and the french, and how they feel. if they feel like that, they can increase their debt. step all the way and. -- step on the way in. i feel there's no reason after 20 years for people with your thought process who are supposed to be so smart, but yet have failed to end any of the wars or solve any of the problems, so i think maybe you should step back

and look and say maybe my way of thinking has been a complete failure, and i should move on. thank you. guest: well, that's your opinion. i don't necessarily agree with it. you tend to think the united states is the only country that has ever been engaged in an effort to fight isis and al qaeda. do you think the canadians have not fought on our behalf? the french? do you think they would have joined forces with us if we had a president that was determined to insult them and denigrate the contribution? the you think in the end, nato what have played the role that it played had it not been for the leadership of good presidents, whether it be obama or bush or even president clinton? you can't have it both ways. you can't have the united states safe and protected and not have allies supporting us. but if you think in the end, the united states can just willy-nilly return home and turn

its back and pretend that world war i, world war ii didn't happen, well, the fact of the matter is say the same thing about north korea. based on your reasoning, we should just pull troops out of south korea and let kim jong-un have his way. the president declared victory in north korea. he said north korea is going to denuclearize. there isn't one intelligence agency in the united states, not one person who is familiar with north korea, that would agree the president was correct, and once again, and anti-ghost on -- empty boast on the part of donald trump when it comes to a conflict he's been unable to resolve. the mainstream media hasn't had a word on what he just put out. >> part of the concern i had about the syrian withdrawal is the president makes the announcement, but the american people don't really understand what exactly the u.s. military

is still facing on the ground in syria when it comes to isis. the president woke up in the middle of the night. it was one of his nocturnal foreign-policy decisions. no consultation, announces he's going to withdraw. the american military are still trying to finish the job against isis. it's like saying i want to build this building, but i don't want to put the roof on it. that's what donald trump just did. he wants to slap his name and declare victory, but the roof is going to start leaking as soon as he pulls the troops out. host: let's go to anna from texas. good morning to you. caller: thank you mr. ginsberg. in 2005 i lost my nephew in iraq. his fiancee, they have a son. he is hysterical now. hysterica. she is army intelligence out of the pentagon. i have another niece who is a reservist. she served in afghanistan.

when i hear these people call, they don't know what it feels like to lose relatives. by 25-year-old nephew is a gold star recipient. he fought in iraq. he saved a lot of lives. he said all they did was protect these blackwater people who would come in, rape, start crimes, tell them they are not making enough money, and i hear these people calling in talking about something they don't even know. there are lives out here that are being lost. do you think putin is just going to lie down? when general patton was fired for saying we have kicked germany's butt, we need to go ahead and kick russia's butt because they will rise up again, and then i hear these people call-in. it is not a good day for

america. thank you so much, and the giver common on the air today because we have a lot of nuts in this country that don't know what's going on. host: they keep or your call, and of course we are very sorry about your loss in the service of your family members. to, if i may, it just brings back the thought. one of the things see her do in in myd -- things seared mind, i went to iraq on behalf of fox news to find out how bad the war was into a house and eight -- in 2008. there were body bags of young kids who had lost their lives in iraq. no one cared whether they were democrat or republican. we've made some terrible mistakes and foreign-policy. the invasion of iraq was a terrible error. the battle against isis and al qaeda will never be won.it is

the score just the 20th and 21st century . the attack in france just a few days ago in the market incited and inspired by isis. if the american people knew how many attacks could have occurred in the united states this year by isis inspired lone wolves, they would be shocked. our job is to continue to protect them. host: >> government funding ran out at midnight as we entered a one of a government shutdown. negotiates continue on a bill that can pass both chambers of congress and get a pass from the president. watch live coverage of the house on c-span and the senate on c-span two. and senate are both scheduled to come in saturday to work on a government funding bill. senate leadership announced they would not take a vote until there's an agreement between them, the president, and house

of representatives. watch the house live on c-span, and the senate on c-span two. >> saturday at 8:00 p.m. eastern, conversations with three retiring members of congress. democratic senator heidi heitkamp and republican representative dave brat, both defeated in the midterms, and darrell issa, retiring after serving 18 years in the house. >> we could have gotten the tax bill passed. there was no interest in a bipartisan tax bill. we could have done some reforms of the health care bill. and there was no interest in doing reforms of health care, because it was about winning and not governing in a sustainable way. those are regret i have. >> ideas matter to me. you try to get ideas in the press and they don't care. it's worse than they don't care, they are against your ideas and

they put them down. they cannot name a substitute that is better. they don't have an alternative hypothesis. that is an intellectual fraud. that's what the press is engaged in, unfortunately. >> most people think term limits sound like a good idea. leadership has no term limits. will probably be over 100 by the time she finishes her last time as speaker if nothing changes. that oldenge is leadership has no term limits. chairman have term limits. all the way back with newt wegrich, what happened was took a straw of chairman system, and turned it into a strong speaker and minority leader system. >> watch conversations with retiring members of congress saturday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span and c-span.org, and listen with the free c-span radio app. the house financial services

committee is considering legislation to protect mortgage borrowers and reduce risk in the housing market. they heard from witnesses ,epresenting mortgage lenders borrowers, builders, and real estate agents. this is 2.5 hours. >>ller