special prosecutors. as always, we will take your calls and you can join the conversation on the look and twitter as well. "washington journal" is next. a new deadline, but will it be the same politics for democrats in public in? -- democrats and republicans? if they cannot come up with another plan to agree on, the prospect of another shutdown or executive action. it is sunday morning, january 27. your comments on what you think more security should look like. our phone lines are open. (202) 748-8000 is the line for democrats, (202) 748-8001 the line for republicans. if you are an independent, (202)

748-8002. send us a tweet and we will read it, or join us on facebook at facebook.com/cspan. weekly" lookscq like, "the real border crisis" as we take a look at what will happen over the next few weeks before the deadline. joining us live on the phone is eric watson, who covers congress for bloomberg note -- bloomberg news. begin with the players on capitol hill. who are you looking at to lead the debate in congress? guest: first i want to look at the appropriations committee. the people sitting on this conference committee over the next three weeks. dealmakers andn they will come up with a deal on border security, representative leaders for which there are new fencing and barriers. it is up to the republicans to decide they can swallow that and

say that this is the wall that i talked about, it's just as good as the wall. they may get some flack from commentators and others may go along with that. in other hands they may reject that. , deal involving the dreamers the undocumented immigrants who came here as miners. again, trying to get some kind of grand bargain along those lines. once you do that, it's a new can whoorms with conservatives will reject that kind of deal in the senate. first, the appropriators. ultimately it's in the hands of the leaders and nancy pelosi in the donald trump to decide how this goes. the presidentwith tweeting over the weekend that 21 days goes right quickly and withote that negotiations democrats should be -- will not be easy to make a deal and the case for national security has been enhanced by what's happening at the border and

through dialogue. the president saying that there is another caravan on its way to the border come the same charge that he used before the election. is there a caravan, is the threat the -- real at the moment? thing about this caravan, if there is a 2000 mile take years to build. the wall is not really the solution to that threat in any way. soon, it'sppening immediate. the caravan is people trying to present themselves of the u.s. border to seek asylum, not a group of people trying to raid or illegally immigrate. i think the democrats will call his bluff on that. trump is going to again try to shut in the -- threaten to shut down in three weeks, but most of the republican senators i have talked to, there is no appetite for that. mike pence went up to the hill on thursday and really got shelved by republicans and republicans.

trump is going to continue to say that, basically continue to like that. the chances of a shutdown are pretty small. more likely he will declare some national emergency. his advisers seem to be urging him to do that. then that will get tied up in court. eric we are talking to watson, who covers congress for bloomberg news. on that point, how frustrated are guest: republicans over this shutdown? guest:there is -- are republicans over this shutdown? guest: there is a lot of frustration. it put them in a bind. looking at someone like shelley , there's a lot of federal workers in west virginia. she's put into a bind, for a load and unpaid, workers and the department located in her state, but the wall is are a popular there. it put people into a difficult position. they don't want to see that

again. they want this issue to go away for sure. host: front page this morning in "the washington post," the president's golf club using illegal labor. thet one dozen employees at trump national golf club in westchester county new york were summoned one by one to talk with an hr executive from trump headquarters in during the meeting they were fired because they were undocumented immigrants. many had worked there for two years, three years, for years, something the president railed against during the campaign. did briefly glance at that story. this came out over the last couple of months. allowing golf course undocumented immigrants to work there is a bit of an eye. ,ut for a lot of conservatives especially the low immigration pressure groups, they want to see the e-verify pressure.

they understand the popularity dothe wall, but that they want to reduce undocumented workers in this country and e-verify needs to be lamented. from the agricultural lobby there is not a lot of popularity for that. this would be a system where you would have to check status before hiring. host: eric watson covers capitol hill. thank you for being with us this morning. guest: thanks so much. host: to your calls and tweets, this is from hans -- host: you can send us a tweet at c-span wj. host: again, your tweets, [video

clip] .-@cspanwj claude, riverview, florida. caller: good morning. i have a great idea as to what border security should look like. but let's be honest. donald trump said that mexico is going to pay for the wall. he and his supporters were chanting it over and over endlessly. in addition to the fact that -- let's step back for just one minute. donald trump is the unindicted co-conspirator, according to this southern district of new york, in the commission of two felons. tried or been indicted, but in the minds of many, he's a crook. withve potentially a crook the mueller investigation going on, the southern district of new , running the country. he took all the power from the republicans in for 35 days he would let them vote. i think that's pretty tragic for the country of the united states of america.

run amok forhas two years. for two years he had the house and the senate. he did not petition for a wall like they wanted. they offered him $20 billion. he turned it down. he's a crook, let's be honest. all the people around him. host: thank you for the message. this is from a republican congressman in arizona. "here's what a fully funded border security system would look like.

host: that full essay is available on the fox news website. back to your phone calls. mary is next. good morning from atomic, maryland. independent line. the objective is to secure our country. the wall is not the way to do it. because people can go under. it has been done before.

the only reason the trump really wants the wall is because if he doesn't, then his base doesn't chant about ino the next election. he loses that edge. that's the only reason. i really think that michael bloomberg was right and he called trump the best con man and america. and i think if we can get something done for a lot less pelosi and nancy chuck schumer say, then i think it's a better idea to just monitor the ports of entry. and have more security there. and that's the way to do it. for the call.u

republican line from texas. daniel, good morning. good morning. i live here in texas. not too far from where i live there is a town called summerfield. the people that run these plant farms get rick's. american citizens, black, hispanic, if you are an american citizen you can't get a job out there. they bring them in and 18 wheelers. i live almost close to louisiana. this is not south texas here. they have been doing this since 90. this came out of the bush new world order. the whole thing. it's a mess. host: thank you for the call. the cover story is "state of the union." "dysfunction junction, chaos in washington has left america

wheeling." -- reeling." about nancy pelosi, "she does not mess around.

host: back to your phone calls. patrick, pittsburgh, pennsylvania. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: we're fine, how are you? caller: i'm fine. intellectual properties go, integrating technologies into platforms that are viable and make sense, i was always a proponent of the border wall until the past five years, when i began to study not only its value from a technological perspective, but also an environmental perspective. and with advanced robotics that are literally right around the , telemetry, drones, and the utilization of our troops, which we as americans should immediately allowed to be on the border of mexico.

mexico uses their troops on their border. so do all the latin american countries. especially with the chaos of latin america. from an environmental perspective its disastrous. insect populations, bird populations, all types of animals traversed through these various corridors. is a very important discussion that c-span needs to have. you need to bring on some studys in the sciences to the real impact. you are talking about thousands of miles. the impact on this just from a biological perspective could be quite profound. patrick, thanks for the call. tony is joining us next from pleasantville, new jersey. what should border security look like? good morning, steve. good morning, c-span. host: good morning. caller: it shouldn't look like a

wall, the kind that trump is talking about. fencing, drones, electronic technology would be better. i was watching a show next week that showed where they had dug like three or four tunnels somewhere. i caught the end of it, i didn't see the kind of heart of the border it was that, but these people digging tunnels all the way from mexico and coming up to california. what good is a wall going to do? host: thanks for the call. this from "the new york times," morestandoff makes trump vulnerable in 2020, even from the gop. of those candidates is larry hogan, from maryland." john joins us from bridgewater, republican line, good morning. caller: good morning. trump is winning, no matter what they say. all we are talking about is his issue. we may have lost the skirmish, but he's winning the battle because it's going to be the

main issue again in 2020, which will carry it.e as far as border security, i would say something funny, but i won't. it's simple, do it it takes to heap people from coming or -- coming over the border. you must discourage people from coming by making the risks too much to bear. have the wherewithal or the courage anymore to protect the border like it should be protected. by any means necessary. but i guess that's just a failing of america. john, thank you for the call from new jersey. after the president announced the agreement to reopen the government, the same one that he had on the 22nd that would extend the funding through in this case february the 15th, the new deadline means that lawmakers need to work on a compromise that they would look .t here's what chuck schumer said last friday.

[video clip] thee don't agree on some of suspicious -- specifics around border security. .emocrats are against the wall but we do agree on many things, like new technology on the border, and that loads well to coming to an eventual agreement. i believe there is good faith on to reach an agreement and we will work diligently reach one. because we set this up as a conference, democrat and republican leadership, house and involved, asbe will the appropriators from that committee. importantly, this agreement means the government will reopen and 800,000 federal employees will finally get paid. after over a month of increasing desperation, our dedicated public servants will get the relief and the paychecks they are entitled to. host: that from the senate

democratic leader chuck schumer. back to your calls and comments, our question, what should border security look like? welcome to our viewers -- our listeners on c-span radio. this tweet -- host: another from this viewer -- republican line, mark, you're next. good morning. caller: good morning, how come you don't correct people when he says two thousand miles of all. he's talking like 200 miles of wall. thaton't the democrats don't want the wall, why don't they pay for all of the illegals, their health care, the court systems, everything else, like the ones that want to pay

for the wall, pay for the wall? i think that would be very easy. call mark, thanks for the and adding your voice to it. betty, bedford ohio, good morning. my solution is this, simple and relatively inexpensive compared to building a wall. this may sound drastic, but i think it would work. could some landmines in the jaw -- in the ground -- put signs to warn people that if you keep trying to cross the so-called border, you will risk landmines. put the signs up along the border line. host: you don't think that's a drastic measure with the potential for injury? caller: yes, but that's their choice. because you put the signs up. and if they want to do that, that's their prerogative. that would be a lot cheaper and

it would work. nobody wants to step on landmines. you wouldn't have to have any guards. it would be cheaper in you could leave them there forever. that's my suggestion about the border wall. it would work much better, believe it or not. thank you for the call. ralph, you are next. caller: this has been going on for a while, we've got to have border security and we need a mix. we need a physical wall. i've seen some demonstrations on youtube. and we need e-verify. what brings people here, it's not going to ever stop. as long as you can come here and make 20 times more than you can in your own country, assuming you get a job in your country, these folks are coming across the border. , we saye e-verify great, first time you get caught, $10,000 fine.

100,000 dollar. third time, quarter million dollars and you go to jail for a year. ceos of like the tysons and these other big corporations who are taking these people and using them as virtual slaves. one more thing here. victor chavez, the great hero of the left, the hispanic moses, right? you mean caesar, cesar chavez? caller: you know what he wanted to do question mark you wanted to burn the people he came across the border. was advocating violence against these people. you know why? he saw that in unlimited untrained population willing to work for anything would drive the wages down. look at what he said. he was against this. but everyone looks at this -- him as a hero, but he saw the writing on the wall. the blue-collar workers in this

country have been destroyed. i did construction in d.c. and i could not find a blue-collar worker. an american blue-collar worker cannot support his family on 12 to $15 per hour. no benefits, no insurance, no vacation, nothing. ,f he gets injured on the job the hispanic worker gets kicked off and they get the next pop -- called in the wheel. the moral posturing on the left has to stop. but the problem is, if we look at three years down the road or four years down the load -- down the road, these folks, most of them are not making it. host: this is the headline from the fox news channel, one of the president's biggest defenders and a critic over the latest agreement to reopen the government. m coulter, ripping trump on the film our show after attacking president the atwitter.

here's a portion of that. [video clip] the base has -- >> the base has rebelled. stand-in. >> that's very modest. here was your tweet. "good news for herbert walker bush, as of today he's no longer the biggest wimp ever to serve as president." you were convinced that donald trump was the guy, you voted for him, donald trump. now you are fighting at that he's a lying con man. what was your first clue? [laughter] [cheers and applause] >> i mean -- >> this is the thing, ok, i'm a very stupid girl, fine. but that was a selling point with trump. you can also fall before writing in trump we trust. look, we have been lied to over and over again by politicians.

by respectable people, people like mitt romney, george bush, obama, clinton, we are going to protect your jobs. if i can say for a second to an audience that is not wild about me, i think this build the wall soundss become -- it like crooked hillary or lock her up. it isn't that. you are being played. said,s, as bernie sanders a koch brothers idea. lots of cheap labor coming into the country is good for employers, not employees. rupert murdoch wants it? why hasn't trump and able to get it through? republicans don't want it. it's all mass immigration. legal immigration. e-verify, the wall is a big part of that. you are being played to have everyone act like this is some sort of racist thing. working-class wages have gone down.

middle-class wages are stagnant. it's great for the rich, it's good for you. it's bad for people who work. , on the hboulter program "bill marr," going after the president. some tweets, this is from steve -- another from peggy, saying -- host: "the new york times sunday magazine," mitch mcconnell "getting everything he wanted. the president who helped his turnout, with the one thing he can't control. "trump brexit freak out." "the forces of global migration cannot be stopped." john is next, in arlington, virginia. caller: a few points.

one, the wall works. the israeliis egyptian border, where the israelis built a wall and really diminished in illegal immigration to the point of not being significant at all. it isoblem is that probably not going to happen. the way that trump wants to do it now, the way that other people want to do it with the struts and things like that should satisfy the nature people . and it would work ok. far as the technology goes, they could catch all the people that come across the border, but then they stay here. that's why the technology does work. e-verify is the way to go. the president should learn that another shutdown is not worth it. you don't endanger your own employees because the other business guy doesn't like you. that's just crazy.

no more shutdown. work on e-verify and maybe an intelligent border patrol situation. host: thank you for the call, john. to that point, this is from bret stephens who this month wrote a piece for "the new york times," examining what's happening on the israeli border. the headline is "what real border security looks like." he writes the following -- "how does israel defend the border? one of two ways. the good news for the u.s. is that we don't face hezbollah, hamas, or isis across the border -- full essay ishe available on the new york times

website. back your calls, james joins us from missouri. i don't think there would be talk of a wall if you hannity andike sean and coulter, if they were on the other side of it. there wouldn't even be a discussion of a wall. security, go anywhere, be anywhere, all sorts of ways with documentation and some kind of verification. forhrow people in jail trying to get a better life? it's just wrong. james, thanks for the call. nina, you are next. from galpin, florida. caller: everyone talks about, the gentleman said earlier -- they don't want to thousand miles worth of all. they want to do it like san diego. they said they have proof that

crime and all has gone down in that little bit of wall that they built on the san diego border. i don't think it will be a win-win, though, i don't think the democrats are going to do anything and we should have done something when we had full control of both houses. iq for the call. the president on friday in the rose garden, announcing the deal to we open the government, announcing what border security must look like. [video clip] >> let me be very clear. we really have no choice to build a powerful wall or steel barrier. if we don't get a fair deal from congress, the government will either shutdown on february 15 powersor i would use the afforded to me under the laws and the constitution of the address this to

emergency. the president on friday. inside of "the new york times," "confident negotiator jared immigrations the deal to be elusive in a key role traveling back and forth between house republicans and the senate to find something they can work on." joe, portland, oregon, democrats line. whole wall, this business is so simple. have you ever seen the movie "300"? host: i have not, no. caller: you can take all the mexican's bodies and use them as mortar. host: we will move on. jim, good morning. if you could speak to the phone and not on the speaker, we will hear you a lot better. caller: can you hear me now? host: we sure can, go ahead.

toler: i have been listening this discussion. i'm an independent. i have never voted before in my life, but i'm an independent. when i listen to this border stuff, i listen to your callers that call up. you know? the one thing that i don't see that they just won't focus on, that's the employer who is hiring the people that are coming across the border. don't care if it's drugs or if it's people. there is a demand in this country for them, just like there is a demand for drugs. i hear the republican party giving outut us information, spies are listening, they said that about obama. they are talking about a wall. you would think -- do you think the cartels are worried about a wall? they are sitting in there, laughing, they say they are going to go all the way around the wall. they can bring it in by plane. i'm 70, they can bring it in by plane or by boat. if you really think that the

drug war is going to end tomorrow when they build a wall? you are just joking. i have worked many construction jobs. i have seen these employers paying them off at the end of the day, laughing right in my face. i just look at them. until you get down on those employers that a hiring them, they will continue to keep coming across the border. yeah, when they get there, they will have a job. then maybe you can cut down on it. there's millions in this country and you had better believe that these employers are hiring them and they will hire them over and american any day. host: thank you for the call. let's get to elizabeth in nebraska. good morning. my idea for border wall security is military lining the borders.

weapons andr use of good signs of protecting themselves. another thing i would like to say is the reasons that democrats want them in there is so that they get more votes than the republicans. thank you, have a nice day. for: elizabeth, thank you the call. this is from james. host: our question is, what should border security look like ? our phone lines are open, (202) 748-8000 is the line for democrats, (202) 748-8001 the line for republicans. new york, good morning. caller: i would just like to say so -- being someone who -- hello?

host: you are on the air. caller: i'm not, i wouldn't say poor, but i live under the ranks of most and i'm trying my best to provide for my family. the government shutdown didn't affect me, but to watch of those affected, i'm only 27 years old, a young black man. i don't deal with the problems a lot of people deal with when it comes to reason -- racism and stuff like that. i don't live in a community like that. the whole border security thing, you know, if you really want a wall, you should find a way to go about doing it properly so as not to affect lives. i'm surprised i made it through. i want to say that for the government officials who control what goes on on this earth that we live in, just to do it right. your job. host: glad you made it through. this is from "the wall street journal," "we will build the

wall," the president saying. yesterday in a tweet saying " will they wall and crime will fall." "neither party has shown much appetite for a deadline mr. trump doesn't get the money you want to the next round of negotiations. another option for the president is to declare a national emergency and build the wall with money congress hasn't approved -- host: the full story is on "the wall street journal" website. greg is next.

good morning. republican line. caller: i'm all for the wall. goy have the technology to ground vibrations for them not to date under. they do it for the earthquakes. detections underground, they won't be able to get underground. i just wish that the democrats would seize that technology in the wall. greg, thank you. let's go to paul, joining us from tempora, florida. probably they should let border security decide where they need the fencing. they have had many experts from border and homeland security tell them that the fence helps. they had them on tv. the democrats flatly denied that they don't know what they are talking about.

this thing about drones, it doesn't do any good. they are going to come across, then they will be arrested and we have catch and release. they are in the country already. you have to stop them before they come in. that is what trump has been trying to say. the other thing is, really, the only reason, the way they wouldn't need offense is if the democrats were willing to do interior enforcement. if they were willing to pass laws -- they always say border security, the democrats, because they don't want to say stop illegal immigration, because they are not for stopping illegal immigration. they say border security, whatever that means. i have several points and i won't be long. if you stop the drugs at the ports of entry, where are they going to go? where there is no fence. if you stop them at the ports of entry totally, they will go where there is no fence.

if you have the fence up and stop them at the ports of entry, they won't be able to get in anyway. the interior enforcement, if they were willing, but they are not, the democrats, stop catch and release, stop sanctuary cities, stop anchor babies, stop tourist babies. if they mandatory e-verify and didn't let them go to school, the supreme court ruled that every child has to be educated whether they are a citizen or not. host: thanks for the call. this tweet -- host: again, our question is -- what should border security look like? we will get back to more of your calls and comments in just a moment. we have two headlines from "the washington post." "senator marco rubio is driving

the u.s. strategy into that .ountry yesterday, mike pompeo had these remarks -- [video clip] tothe time has come recognize the new democratic government in venezuela and and this nightmare. no excuses. the united states stands with the venezuelan people. so far many other states have decided to do the same and they also recognize the interim government. the united states stands proudly with you as we stand together in support of venezuela. you knew that the venezuelan people did not have a moment to spare. now it is time for every other nation to pick a side. no more delays, no more games. either you stand with the forces of freedom or you are in leave -- in league with maduro. some have taken his side. iran aressia, syria,

just four of them. just this morning we try to find a way for this counsel to speak in one voice in support of the venezuelan people and the democratic ideals through a presidential statement on this counsel. our russian and chinese colleagues refused to let this move forward. it's not a surprise that those who rule without democracy in their own countries are trying to prop him up while he is in dire straits. those comments yesterday by secretary of state mike pompeo. back here calls on the issue of border security and specifically what you think it should look like. georgia, republican line, good morning. morning, steve. you are the best host on c-span. host: thank you for listening and watching. caller: i'm all about changes. all about problems being solved. for 75rked in technology

years and found solutions to my problems so here's one to the immigration problem. the people of mexico and central e-verify willere, not stop them either. go wikipedia and actually read what e-verify is. it is the political expediency of creating the illusion that employers will have to screen the employees. but it doesn't work that way. i will tell you what the real solution is. provide a national identity caught underground. linked and iphone apps to homeland security in , where if any person wants to get a job, the employer

has to scan in the qr code on the top. it will instantly provide either a clean check mark for homeland ,ecurity and lawful employment and give a high personal risk of going to jail, be fined, or a question mark. the whole process could be done within seconds and everybody from regular employers down to people who want their loans known would be allowed to work within the united states. let me jump in, clearly you know a lot about this. with regard to the employer who is hiring these illegals, what type of penalties do you think they should be facing? caller: fines, substantial fines, moving on to jail time. the problem is that politicians

want to create the illusion. the allusion in this instance is that they are actually doing something to stop illegal immigration. the reason for that is that if we do actually stop people making very little money in this country illegally, pushing up the rate of inflation, that happens when the politicians jobs are threatened because people stop complaining about the cost of living and the people being laid off, so on and so forth, that will risk the politicians jobs. that's what matters to congresspeople, being reelected. so few people vote in the , which decide who is elected, the public thinks that the best person in the general election, the real is that with the

primaries you get with the government. to be a reason to compromise. thank you for the call. let's move onto dave, joining us on the democrats line. youngstown, ohio, good morning. caller: how you doing? host: we are fine, how are you, sir question mark caller: could be better. -- how are you, sir? caller: could be better. but i'm glad there are some stations out there where the public can speak their mind. ,ut you know, the last caller what he stated, he's a republican, i agree with that. called,pendent jim that he had good views, i agree with that. in theave to say is that history of this country, we had the black slaves, the african-americans, and they

replaced the people that came over -- for seven years they had to have servitude. they have the freedom to buy land and everything. and then you had your chinese that come over for the railroad and exploited them. and then in this country we had child labor, we exploited them. you haveover here now in our area they are shutting down a plant to build the chevy cruz. you are not going to get the very of likeo that they were saying, this is cheap labor. slaveryld love to have back. for your housing and give you food, they would rather. that would be it. host: thanks for the call. this is from "the new york

times" opinion section. maureen dowd writing about roger stone. "better infamous then not famous." also from the opinion page of "the washington post," "trump among the ruins." around what many call the capitulation after getting no money in the short term for the border wall. back to your phone calls, arkansas, carla, good morning. good morning. i was wanting to know why we are not holding mexico responsible for all of this stuff that's going on, also? got point. great. brian, south city, utah. ok, here's how mexico pays for the border, all those people out there. what you do, i'm a construction worker. i go into these three bedroom apartments, they turn into four bedrooms with eight beds in

them. so on and so forth. they pay one/16 of the rent and they ship it back to mexico. backmoney won't be shipped there anymore. that's how mexico pays for the wall. it's just ridiculous that everybody -- that's how it's done. they get no more money from america. and hey, one more thing. .ight years we tried what about barry obama? host: what do you mean that he changed his name? i know that we don't talk about that, you, we'll always kept trying, you hung up on us. he changed his name because he become muslim. barack husseinrn obama. caller: his birth certificate

says barry obama. disagree.e to this is from "the washington speakerthe democratic hailed, trump plaza new york golf club used illegal labor. many were filed just a week and a half ago." the story also in "the new york times." chuck, good morning. how are you? caller: good. one of the problems i feel we are having is we have got to come together. i hate have democrats -- if we watch fox news we get lumped into one big ball of being against everything trump does. listen, we need border security, absolutely. workers to come in with the economy doing so well, we need them to come in legally

to do that work, white people the do that work anymore. i have had a gutter company for years and the hispanic people look at me like -- what are you guys up there doing that for? to get a system together where the people can come across the border legally. but we are so divided. the problem is we are so divided and i don't know where we find the middle to start working together. we have got to work together. this is our country. i remember when trump met with kim jong-un. -- great, i can't go to canada anymore because of the tariffs, but i can go to asia? happy day? i give him credit for what he does, but until we get together we won't get this solved and we need to get it solved. listen, build the wall. if it doesn't work, that will play out in time. but it's not going to hurt to

get this stuff done. how much money did we spend on afghanistan and are we still spending around the world? 100,000 times more than it would take to build a wall? wall and work on everything else we need to do to get legal immigration into this country? let's go on to ronnie --host: let's go on to ronnie and webster city, iowa. i have got a solution that will make everybody happy. a big wall on the canadian border. that's where all the cold air is coming from. next from guinn, maryland. good morning. caller: my comment is that for 35 years we have been trying to get this job done with the wall. between the republicans and the democrats.

from texas was saying in an interview that i saw on tv that there are 170 nations that use the wall method to have protection for their own country. i just pray that god helps us to get together and get this job done somehow. that's my comment, sir. host: thanks for the call. want to share some news that broke over the weekend regarding longtime republican congressman walter jones. according to news reports in north carolina he hasn't voted in congress since last september and is now in hospice care. in a statement they said that his health has declined since he broke his hip last week. he was sworn in for his 13th turn just this month by congressman g.k. butterfield. .t his home in farmville again, the headline, congressman walter jones is now in hoskins -- hospice care. let's go back to your phone calls.

john, south williamson, kentucky. good morning. >> good morning. i do support the wall and there is plenty of material to build it out as far as concrete, metal, whatever. my main thing is -- why don't, when they shut the house down, why don't they go ahead and take the money from the house, from the working people, that's the way it should work. host: deborah, jacksonville, florida. good morning. i have voted for democrat, as a republican. i have voted across party lines. first of all, if you haven't done it, first of all, you have no right to complain. he seemed very proud of the fact that he had never voted before but had an opinion. i agree with ann marie's tweet

earlier relative to the power of using technology to enhance our security. this medieval mindset of a physical wall is, i think, the president has default it to his father's business, his own ego. which vary from frankly has massively caused this domino affect and deterioration for people's lives of the past several weeks. think that one should defer to technology and the experts and enforce the law, which very frankly is why we have so many lawyers in congress, good or bad. i'm not one. i'm in a ba, they do know the law. they have perspective and at frankly, i'm as fiscally conservative as any and i think it's a total waste of money to build something that is

trouble and frankly, why are we now forcing the bill on someone else? we were promised that mexico would pay for it up front. is insulting to our intelligence, our technology, our security, and our laws in place. host: thank you for the call. the president spending the weekend at the white house. want to share some information on a debate that took place on the senate floor in the reopening of the shutdown and a new record terms of the video reach we did on our twitter page. setting two c-span twitter records, the most use any for any c-span twitter video, 12.3 million, with the most read -- retweets ever in less than two days. this is of course the exchange that took place, in response to senator cruz referring to

crocodile tears for first responders and an angry response from senator bennett. you can watch the website -- watch the video on her website, c-span.org. ron is joining us in georgia. democratic line. good morning. good morning, ron. caller: i agree with president trump about the wall. i am from central america. i agree with president trump, build the wall, stop all the people to come here. thank you very much. host: thank you.

doug is next, from tuskegee, oklahoma. democratic line, what should border security look like? first of all, let me , it doesn't look like a wall like a concrete wall or fencing. host: what about a steel barrier? well, you ever hear of a wrecking ball? that one wall with hack saws. , taking those things down real quick. border security should look more like a century we are in, the technology that we have, the , some move down there and

they just deck something, detect something. they had security like that. plus in certain areas you should probably have new the border patrol that would work better. like where you put those walls. but anyway. , i mean that you build it's like putting a peanut butter, almost. not just peter butter, but butter. be --an host: i think we get your point. we want to get to michelle in idaho. good morning. caller: good morning.

i was calling because i wanted e-verify, that would be a good thing. on the wall number one, it does need to be built. if they come over here, they need to talk english. you know, they are all over, they have tons of families living in one house. i have family that actually came from mexico that are totally legal. i just think that, you know, if they want to come over here and work, they need to be legal and stuff. i believe that trump is doing a wonderful job. host: ok. we will go to steve in fargo,

north dakota. good morning. morning.ood calling about the border and the wall, if they are effective why do we have walls around the crib ? seems as though they have to function. and they are very effective. ok, that's all i wanted to say. ok.: our last call is eric. this from politico, "all for nothing, trump's wall retweet ."wilders allies eric, you get the last word. call this as just wall of technology. we have enough knowledge to told a wall of technology keep everyone out and keep everyone safe. be not afraid, america. and take people work care of their families.

it doesn't hurt nobody. be not afraid. host: they will be here for the next hour, taking your phone calls. from thelaw professor university of arizona will talk about his new book, prosecuting the president. how prosecutors hold presidents accountable and protect the rule of law. newsmakers follows washington journal. among the questions, what if the president uses executive authority to build a wall. consideringdent is forg emergency authority military construction funds to

build the border barrier. i can imagine conference legislating anything in time to stop him immediately. in the longer term, there might be some bipartisan support for limiting residential authority to move money like this without the consent of congress? legislation and empowered the president to declare a state of emergency and gave him options to take money from different pots. there is a lot of different areas. constructiontary budget he could tap. i don't think there is an emergency, even under the 1976 law. there would immediately be a lawsuit, taking money out of the military construction budget would be a big problem. there is bipartisan opposition to it. the only place where there is

enough money would be the army corps of engineers. this is not dod money. it's not out of dod. it's money for flood control projects. taking billions of dollars away from that would be very problematic. i think there will be a the law andook at see if it grants the executive too much power. >> the pentagon has been tasked with developing plans for this barrier. planning isg in the in process? >> i'm not. i've heard the same rumors and the same stories. we don't have anything confirmed. that is a question we would like answered. we hope you tune into newsmakers after the washington journal at 10:00 eastern time.

it's also on the free c-span radio out. app. we want to welcome our strategists this morning. the house about where republicans and senate republicans are now the president has given in for a short-term reopen of the federal government. is there an appetite for another shutdown? guest: it doesn't seem like it among house and senate republicans. this is an opportunity for the house and the senate to begin honest negotiations and reach a conclusion that will provide some level of order security but keep the government open and the nextperating for year until we go into a different cycle. host: this only gets us through the end of september.

we are doing this all over in the summer and fall. guest: it's a never ending story. time is a flat circle here in washington. hashis point, the president realized that the pressures he are not going to relent. he still needs to have some victory. down in has gone up and terms of its intensity of support. that is one thing they have to keep a close eye on. for him, it's about the base intensity and fighting on this issue is something they are looking for. you are looking at this first capitulation some warning signs from his base about him backing down. he needs to reach some sort of

conclusion. there needs to be a compromise on border security. i think he realizes another shutdown is not to his benefit. host: the washington post has a story. the speaker emerges triumphant. let me share what he is writing. began withhowdown him questioning her viability, it ended with her winning a major victory. guest: she has been around a long time and knows how the game is played. she knew her hand and she knew the strength of her base and the agreement she made in order to become speaker in the first police -- place. there is a wing of her caucus that were not going to allow her to reach any sort of

capitulation on the wall. time, there is going to be some push to reach an honest compromise going into the next three weeks. we will see. she is one of the great legislators of our time, in terms of her ability to reinvent yourself and come back and demonstrate a cohesiveness in the majority. host: was this capitulation by the president? guest: i think common sense prevailed. that's not what he was reposing. in some sense, it was capitulation. there's an opportunity for some sort of deal that includes money for border security. -- voters are clearly there should not be a border wall.

whether three weeks is enough time or not to reach that agreement, we will see. development a good for government. host: agree or disagree? guest: it's an unfortunate amount of time with the government shutdown. this development now allows the opportunity for honest debate. host: this is the headline from the atlantic. the x starbuck ceo could get trump reelected. howard schultz is considering a run for the white house as an independent. guest: i'm not worried yet. he has declared yet. i'm not convinced he will gain much traction or play a real role. we are a long way from 2020. there aren't any signs he can ramp up to real operation and draw support.

there is the possibility that he could pull from republicans and donald trump as much from democrats. he is a more physically research -- conservative. he does not pull from the democratic base. whether or not he makes a difference, i don't tickets clear yet. i'm not considering him a major factor. host: yahoo! news is reporting that bernie sanders is set to announce his presidential did. it,t: if i had to bet on no. he makes an impact in the field. it's very early in the cycle. 2015, donald trump did not announce until june 2015. we are a long ways out. there are a number of big candidates who could declare. the top-tierng

contenders due to his run-in 2016. he certainly has a base of democrats. there are a number of candidates out there. ishink the shape of the race going to change a lot over time in a way. host: there is talk that larry considering a bid to challenge the president. what impact would that have if the president faces a challenge them somebody else? guest: i think it has very little outcome. there is a pro trump vote and an anti-trumped vote in the american electorate. time, there is still a large pro trump vote. larry hogan and get into the race and change the discussion and the dialogue coming out of the republican primary.

what would have to be concerning for democrats is the prospect of a real independent getting into the race. holds, anyamic independent is going to be splitting the anti-trumped vote. it will open the door wider for his reelection in 2020. host: front page of the washington post, his new york and club used illegal labor has done so for a number of years. it's their hypocrisy when you have candidate trump talking about illegal immigrants and the club he owns and operates hired illegal immigrants? isst: the president personally involved in the hiring decisions at his robberies is a bit of a stretch to think he is personally responsible.

i do think it's problematic for him going forward in this discussion as the stories come out about hiring at his properties. standpoint,ging it's going to be a problem for him on this issue. guest: the more these stories are in the news, these are not things he likes to wake up to and see in the washington post, not that he reads it most likely. host: it's in the new york times and the says he reads that. guest: the failing new york times. it does show hypocrisy on his part and his team's part. it is helpful for democrats politically. host: our phone lines are open. (202) 748-8000 is our line for democrats. (202) 784-8001 is our line for republicans. facebook, join us on

we have aligned for independents , (202) 748-8002. guest: you're going to have a lot of posturing, a lot of brinksmanship. if the deal is going to happen, it will be at the last minute. i won't be surprised if you start to see a great deal of behind the scenes work done between the house and the senate leadership to construct the ultimate compromise here. public perspective, it's going to be more of the same. host: let's get to your phone calls. raymond is in south carolina. good sunday morning. caller: good morning. i have a question. all is the possibility that of this stuff about opening up the government is just because they realized if they don't open

the government, the super bowl cannot come off safely? i think it's making sure the super bowl comes off without a security problem. you have all of these people from the same people. host: is it about the super bowl? guest: i do think the color has a point in that the shutdown it doubled the length of the shutdown in 2013. , americans felt the impact of this. polling showed that one quarter of the american people were affected by the shutdown. there were people who were not getting paid, many people that

get back pay. onn laguardia was closed friday, people really felt that and saw that. orther it's the super bowl not, people were feeling the impact more and more which pressured lawmakers into a short-term deal. host: how about doing things that make sense? electronic surveillance, more security at ports of entry including airports. problems in the countries that people are fleeing from. guest: the idea of a comprehensive border security strategy has been something that voters have been supportive of, even before we begin to address the larger situation of what to do about those in this country illegally and how we reform the process. that theye told us

want to understand how we are going to approach comprehensive border security. whether it be security at ports border,orts, along the along our coastlines, that's what they want. you still have the majority today that says we need to address this. that is part of the problem. part of the solution is going to be doing it in a comprehensive way. other countries, we were just our nationvenezuela, and others have an interest in making sure there are stable regimes in central and south america. host: deborah is in ohio. good morning. you are on the republican line. go ahead. caller: i just had a comment in the question. changedars ago, they

the law that you have to get a passport to go to different countries. they do background checks. now -- you can come over here, but you don't have to have a passport to come here anymore. why can't everybody do it legally? do a background check. then let them come over here. i don't have a problem that. host: what do you mean? passportto present a or document. caller: correct. they are sneaking over the wall. four years ago, i lost my son to drugs. they came here to ohio. dayton is like a ghost sitting out. a lot of people left here.

they left because of the drugs, the immigrants, they are bringing the drugs. we have one of the biggest drug problems right here. my son was one of those. we are sorry about your loss. that has been part of the debate. guest: again, we are sorry for your loss. the drug epidemic has hit america very hard. it is something that legislators are working tirelessly to address. when it comes to some of the the responsention, some people might give is a lot of the people that are trying to come to the united states may not have the passports or popular documentation because they are coming from lower income places where they are

fleeing gang violence or drug violence. they may not have the ability to get a passport and come here legally. we will go to michael in california. good morning. caller: good morning, steve. good morning. i was wondering as holsters if you could speak to the media.ization of social there was a documentary on hbo about what happened in england with brexit. it appears that robert mercer and steve bannon capitalized on this function of social media. they brought it to the united states. couldwondering if you speak to what is going to happen in the 2020 election? is this going to continue,

especially with russia and china getting involved. could this be a problem for the election? thank you. review, thatl deadline for brexit is also looming. the brexithave deadline, our shutdown, a lot of things are going on nationally and internationally. the suspicion of social media, i think our nation and others have taken steps to begin to figure in what happened in 2016 and 2018. the brexit vote affected the social media discussion. they were driving misinformation online. it's not going to get rid of social media in 2020. for many of us in the political profession and those who are

interested in the national discourse, we've got to figure out how we can elevate the discussion and continue to have a civil discussion. they lend themselves to argumentation and bring it down to the lowest common denominator. i think there will be a live discussion about making a more civil space online and how we can have honest discussions. host: our sunday roundtable with two strategists. you are next, joining us from denver, colorado. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. andthat you have a democrat republican strategist, as we approach the 2020 residential election, people start to declare.

let's suppose that something party, something that happened to what happened with the republicans when you have 15 people vying for the nomination. thest can't see differentiation between 15 different democrats who might be standing on a debate stage because we all have the same basic ideas about our political future in the country. that's just going to be the tree all against trump as they come out against them. could they speak a little bit too how the democratic candidates will be able to differentiate themselves going forward? thank you for taking my call. host: if there are 14 or 15? guest: i think you may see more

than 15. four orll ready at five. how do you will the field from ?5 down to one as much as we hate this long nomination process, voters don't like having to pay to politics for full two years. slowly helps narrow the field of candidates from the 2015 from a wide field down to one candidate. the debates are going to be a major part of that. the democrats are doing something a little bit different in how they set up the debates. stage, weee 15 on one will have different candidates and then narrow it down. there is a long way to go. it's too early to become handicap in the field.

there is a lot that voters need to learn about these candidates. some of the major candidates, kamala harris, better work is thinking about it. 40% of americans have never heard his name. that is something we tend to forget. primary voters know him very well or no senator harris very well. there is a long way to go in terms of these candidates, even some of the major candidates introducing themselves. int: senator harris is oakland this morning. she will deliver her announcement speech. we will have it for you live on c-span. you can listen to it on c-span radio. the shutdown has dropped a team.e on the presidents

how are they scrambling? guest: there has to be a sense that if you are on the campaign exercise in every day fire drills. it's a rolling crisis. constantcampaign, a dealing with what is in front of you. they have the benefit of knowing there is a great deal of time. things that change only weakly, but daily. there will be something else that attracts attention. there will be opportunities to back intoapprovals the 40's. been he has never really a two wayarea in race, how does he get the majority of the popular vote and the electoral college vote? guest: it comes down to being a

case between two candidates. who the two candidates majority of voters have favorable opinions of. the swing votes are favorable towards both. 2016, they had an unfavorable opinion of both trump and hillary clinton. they made up their minds based on who they liked least and voted against that person. campaignays, the trump isn't having a moment were a grenade has been dropped. they still have to wait and see who their opponent is going to be. there is no better example than 2008 when hillary clinton was far and away seen as the presumptive nominee in the process. she showed about 40% of support. that looked unbeatable. voters votedd and

and candidates got out of the aroundhe vote coalesced barack obama. we have a long way to go. i think it's understanding who do they want, who they end up with as an opponent going into 2020. host: jeff flake? does he run? does john kasich get into the race western mark -- race? people arember of looking into a potential republican primary challenge of the president. it's a big them, uphill battle to not only engage a president who has the support of the majority of primary voters, but has the party infrastructure behind him. anyone who gets into the race

has to be doing it for a reason other than thinking they are going to win. host: we welcome our audience on the bbc parliament channel. good afternoon to you in the u.k. good morning in jacksonville, florida. caller: i was wanting to say trump is doing pretty good. border, i think they should build a wall. so they don't let the mexicans tear it down. i think trump is doing good overall. people in there republican base who feel that way. overall nationally, it's not the same place. his approval rating overall is 30's.e mid- they felt her manically during the shutdown.

in the base have fallen a bit, but are still pretty high. the concerning thing would be among the independent voters. in a recent poll, his approval rating has fallen to 28% among independent voters. that is historically low. that includes the border wall. i think it's 55 or 56 percent of the american public opposes building the wall. have seen the numbers change a little bit over the past few weeks. research, is from pew what are the priorities among the electorate in the next national election? the economy, health care, education, security. i think it gives republicans an opportunity going into the election, particularly

the strength with the economy. address us a chance to health care. we have seen in a lot of states where republicans controlled legislatures, they have begun to address health care, the costs. , ouryou ask voters discussion has been about access to health care. focused.ntinue to be for many people who have health insurance, our focus is on how much health care it's costing them. there is an opportunity there, there are issues that voters of not given republicans the advantage on in terms of health care and education. on the issue of security and the economy, i think it's a benefit for republicans. it,: a survey you did

division in the country is leading the list on the biggest problem. i think the political divisions in this country have risen in the past few years. you can see the divisive nests and the polarization. 2016 was different than past elections. besides were so far apart and angry. andher this is a trend things are going to get worse, things could turn back to where they were. i think that is something we will keep an eye on and hope things get tamer in the future. host: when you look at these numbers from your group, does this surprise you? guest: to some extent it does. i think the president was a more that incitesgure stronger reactions from people on both sides.

, some other candidates that have run recently. it doesn't surprise me to that degree. host: 77% say they believe the country can heal its divisions. guest: i think you see a lot of optimism. are, peopleings have the hope that things will get better. that is something a lot of the democratic house candidates were promising, a new approach to politics. something that works toward compromise and a more adult way of governing than what we've seen. i think voters responded very well to that. host: do you see any scenario in which donald trump says i will leave after one term? guest: i think there is the possibility of that.

if he feels like he's accomplished what he can accomplish and wanted to accomplish, i don't see that as being the most likely scenario. right now, there is quite a bit of momentum. the infrastructure is in place. it seems like there is going to be a reelection campaign in the cycle. host: we will go to jason in georgia. caller: good morning. why doesn'tould be the politicians look into opec cutting production and asking other countries to cut production? i couldn't quite make out everything. i heard oil prices and opec. are on the list of concerns that voters have.

right now, they are not among the top concerns. you mentioned some the top concerns are about education and health care and the economy. five or sixting how years ago, energy was much higher on the list. gas prices have dropped down. host: we are much more energy independent. guest: i think the increasing trend toward renewable energy is offsetting the concerns. guest: things can change on a dime in terms of issues. 2008, any campaigns had ads and spent a great deal of time talking about energy prices. everyone thought that was going that the falle election hinged on. took thoseame and we

ads and threw them in the garbage and start again because what was going on with wall street and housing. right now, energy is not in terms of being the top issue. host: let's go to buffalo. can is next. caller: good morning. regarding the problem of border knowing, this argument back and forth about the wall or not the wall, it seems to me misdirected. it's a technical question. what kind ofis devices solve the problem. it's going me that to be a huge military construction project and throw all that money at it.

that, theo do government has to have a planning document. has to be defined. second, solutions have to be proposed. costs have to be estimated. environmental statements have to be made. firmit is submitted to a which will solve the technical problems. host: thank you for the call. guest: he describes a traditional public holocene model. -- policy model. what happens a lot of times in our public discourse is our politicians who are much more informed get ahead of the public

in terms of identifying a solution while the electorate is still sorting through solutions and identifying the problem. if you go back to the bush see ourcy and you discussion about social security. eventually, the electorate came to identify the long-term reliability of the program. private accounts did not align with it. when you look at the passing of obamacare legislation, voters were looking at the cost. the solution had to do with access. they suffered some losses in the elections following that. i think we are going to this issue of immigration and border security, trying to sort through solution. the president has a solution of just a wall. want borderrs

security, but it's just not about a physical wall. it's about comprehensive solutions that protects the border, it also addresses airports. we have to be careful about getting too far ahead of where voters are in terms of their decision-making and thought process. we to make sure that we align the solution with the problems. conversation this sunday morning, i want to turn to this piece in the washington examiner. what nbc is reporting, that's a real possibility. >> i don't think the hopes for 2020 are predicated on robert

anotheruncovering smoking gun. i think the democrats are hoping issuesent an agenda of that appeals to voters. it will be less about focusing on misdeeds. that is certainly part of it. may become aece larger part of the election. i don't think he has to uncover something for the democrats to do well. host: what about the issue of impeachment? guest: i don't think it's something the party is focused on. you will notice most of the bills they have brought up, hr one is something that focuses on ethics reform and getting rid of gerrymandering. it increases transparency in

government and elections and protects the voting rights act. it's not targeted at the president. democrats were elected in part to investigate trump, but to focus on issues that help the american people. a poll said 63% of voters want them to focus on issues like the economy, jobs, health care. fewer one of them to focus on impeachment or investigating the president. articles of impeachment have been back and forth. approvee that said 46% and 44% oppose. i don't think they will be introducing that beyond a certain wing of the party. there are more focused on these legislative accomplishments. host: thank you for waiting. good morning. caller: thank you so much for

c-span, which provides opportunity to hear from our history. , it was very illuminating as it relates to the immigration and the western expansion. to get to this polling i think the country is very much a reflection. woman, my husband is a doctor. republicans in the family. what has happened with the policy, that'se what we have here. we have an alignment that did not create the uplift to policy. , inbackground for c-span southwest georgia, it is giving class as no or

longer the issue. i live both of those. 6, that wasistrict alignedgrich seat, they with those women. that you are going to online women such as myself? i have two kids. one is at duke in a radiology fellowship, another at harvard. everyone is not here. we have to uplift all people. the reason why we have speaker pelosi is because women like myself who went down to alabama because i have black family. we went there and elected doug

jones. we are not going to have this kind of d gratian of value and education. we have not invested in public education. privateollars going to schools is outrageous. the republican party has no alignment to its base. the donor classes supporting a lobbyist. we want a government based on laws that are written by people with a brain in their head. we are not going to be able to have people give us laws that have no context of the interdependency. we also have to have morals. the lucy mcbeth, that is canary in the coal mine. host: i want to give both of the respond.f a chance to

thank you for the call and thanks for watching. of our programming schedules are on her website www.c-span.org. very engaged and she's not wrong about many things. if you look at the 2016 election , the turn realignment is thrown around way too much. there are some indications that there were some realignments along class lines. when you look at the geographic regions in which trevor -- president trump over performed, they were rural places where the economy was not doing well. socioeconomic levels were lower. those zip codes that were the most distressed in the country were aligned very closely where

trump over performed. what we saw in 2018 was the backlash. places like the suburbs where the economy was better moved in the other direction. issues,oint about the that is exactly why the president got elected in the first place. i talked to those people in rural parts of midwestern america. from them is the status quo wasn't working for them. statusd voted with the quo. things had not changed. they still had problems in their hometowns. the of we went epidemic is part of it. they were desperate for anything. result, we had that backlash going on.

republicans have to do a better with suburban voters, particularly suburban women. host: to those listening on c-span radio, we are talking about the shutdown. what is next for democrats and republicans. our two guests are here at the table. alex is on the flown -- phone in flint, michigan. caller: could i interject a couple of things that are really dear to my heart? it's about people being patriotic. if everybody is patriotic who owns businesses, they wouldn't hire people that didn't have

legal residency. that would take care of the wall situation. friends whoublican run out and vote republican, minimum wage jobs, i dad used to say -- he was born in 19 over four. he said anyone who would vote republican and are not writing checks for someone, they are not republican. guest: i think you have a point about how republicans can address economic opportunity. that is one thing that they have always done very well and should be focusing on. years,e last couple of we have seen an economy that has gotten its feet back under

itself and has created jobs. what we need to be able to do is not just talk about the jobs we are creating, but in terms of their quality. odors are looking not just for minimum wage jobs, they are looking for high-paying jobs. part of the way we can talk about education, we can talk net just about k-12 schools or four-year colleges, but talk about technical schools that are out there. that gives people skills that align with good paying jobs that are out there. there are opportunities for republicans to talk about jobs and the economy. that meets the needs that voters have. host: good morning. comment. have a

this president is doing and will do is he is making sure the democrats have all three branches of government. a raging economy. he wasted $6 billion on the shutdown. he is wasting money on the farmers because of the trade war. they have been covering for him. he is going to get nailed on taxes and a lot of things. i just hope he makes it to 2020. guest: i agree that the president hasn't been talking about issues that are targeting his base.

saidee with everything bj about the opportunities to talk about the economy. the president hasn't been talking about that much. he's focusing more on immigration, which the majority of the country is against him on the border wall. now,nk as it stands right he is not putting himself in a great position to be the favorite in 2020. there is a lot of time to go until we get to november next year. tois restricting himself this basic strategy, which is risky. field as you look at the and the potential field now, who is the strongest democrat? choosei'm not going to one. it is so early. there are so many candidates.

think if bernie is going to run and joe biden may into the race, they will begin at the top of any poll you would conduct, i wouldn't say those two are the favorites to emerge with the nomination. i would think it would be one of the other candidates. to give you one name. i think it will be someone different than those two. host: who would the president worry about the most? the president would want older, someone who is someone who has a long that hasn track record been part of the swamp for many years. potentialangerous opponent for him as someone who

is coming more from the center. it is someone who is more of a fresh face. that is to i think he would be more likely to be concerned with. i think it's a player to be named later. host: george will this morning in the washington post focused on elizabeth warren, calling her the democrats margaret thatcher. robert is in maryland. good morning. caller: the truth is president is the biggest problem republicans. mitch mcconnell could have money the border security if he would have just run it through budget reconciliation. billuld have passed that and everybody knows it. he's the reason the shutdown went on. they chose to undermine him.

the republican party deliberately sacrificed the sose of representatives nancy pelosi would come in their and start impeachment proceedings. they deliberately did let. 40 seats when up for retirement. problemidents biggest is he is trying to get along with congress. he will get nothing through that congress ever. party, they are not his friend. everybody in that party is trying to undermine him. you can't sit there and say that mitch mcconnell could not have passed that bill if he sent through budget reconciliation. want to blame the shutdown on somebody, blame it

on mitch mcconnell. host: he is the subject of the new york times and using. the present has turned that to be the one thing he can't control. guest: i think the power of the bully public exist. when you look at the first after this his term, he focused on tax reform. congress got it done. amount of put the effort until late in the election cycle. he made it front and center again. that is still intact in the country. he made it an issue. he is carried over into this year. i don't think there is that sort of blame to be laid it senator mcconnell's feet. he is done more for the party.

he has gotten judicial nominees through and getting things done. guest: i think they call it makes a good point. there is a tension between the republicans in congress and the president. you saw a lot of talk during the shutdown that many senators were upset with them about the length of the shutdown and they did not come back to the table. episodes like that will continue to happen. if trump's numbers stay where they are, he might be a drag on the ticket in 2020. if you start to see some cracks or some separation where senators are increasingly stepping away from the president and mitch mcconnell to establish a more independent brand and protect themselves. host: i saw this headline on fox and friends in my office.

there were 58,000 illegals who voted in texas. guest: when you talk about the unity of the republican base back together, the issue of voter id is one thing that republicans and some independent voters agree, showing some form of identification. the president is not wrong when he says the issue is something. said the cost of illegal immigrants so far this year is in excess of $18 billion.

facts i don't think the back up his numbers in terms of the amount of election fraud in voting fraud. there is a lot of support across party lines for more election security and more voter security , something that was in the legislative proposal from the democrats. a lot of democrats of been republicans in the special election in north carolina where a republican campaign was accused of what seems to be very blatant election fraud trying to get some votes. response has not been calling that out is voter fraud. the charlottem news observer, walter jones is

now in hospice care. guest: thoughts and prayers with him and his family. it sounds like he is been ill for a little while. he was sworn in from his home. there is nothing more to offer at this point. 13th he just began his term in the house of representatives. back to your phone call. tenet is in florida. caller: good morning. i want to bring up the federal government is on track to have a $1 trillion deficit. that is a concern for younger americans like myself. moreovernment is spending than what it brings in. is the deficit

getting reallys ugly because we've never had this type of deficit. if we keep spending more money than we bring in, that's going to bring a problem. we are going to have let's flexibility with the economy. we have a true crisis. we need to be careful with the people we are bringing into the office. we need to stop bringing in the same old same old. we need to bring in new people, new ideas. we need to stop bringing in people that do not want to better our country. host: thank you for the call. guest: i agree with many of those things. voters are concerned about

responsibility and the deficits. this is something they've been talking about. be ahing that is going to backdrop in the 2020 race as well. when you talk about the shutdown and the news reports coming out, voters will be very skeptical of proposals like the border wall are estimated to cost $6 billion. i think voters will look closely at what both parties propose. host: this is the cover story to that point. it's time magazine. why the forces of migration cannot be stopped. charles is our last caller. caller: good morning. this border issue has been going on since the 70's. people in california, texas, and california have been calling for

the border to be secured. secured, the wall to be built, more border control, and congress and state legislatures have dropped the ball completely. everyone wants to blame the president. they ignore congress completely and the state legislators on this issue. nothing changes if nothing changes. there has been money allocated for this wall in the state legislatures and congress. it has been passed by the president, and we see no action. this is a congressional shutdown. trump said he would take the ball if they camera on it. when he handed the ball -- if they can run it. when he handed the ball back to chuck schumer and nancy pelosi, they took possession of this issue. they dropped it and fumbled it. president trump takes it up

again and hands the ball back to them. they keep fumbling it. this is a congressional shutdown. i don't know how anyone can blame president trump for this. this is a congressional failure. behave allowed congress to in their seats too long. host: let's conclude on that point. cant: i think the debate down far too quickly to this concept of the wall. the wall became a four letter word. when it are brought in this discussion out to places where both sides have a lot of common , the desire for increased border security across the board, whatever that means. we reduce this discussion simply to all wall, which we knew was unpalatable for speaker pelosi and the democratic base, but became a rallying cry for the president and his base.

at that point, we knew there was no compromise. can we step back from the wall and get back to talking about border security in a broad sense? their israel opportunity. host: winston, you get the last word. guest: i am hopeful the two parties can come together and keep the government open and increased border security as voters want. is ben winston and b.j. martino. thank you both for being with us. please come back again. guest: thank you. host: the book is called prosecuting the president. our guest is joining us from arizona to explain what is at stake, the law and applications for president trump, democrats, and republicans. andrew coan is our next guest. to our listeners on c-span

radio, we are back in a moment. live, february 3, super bowl sunday, author and sports writer guest.ren is our game over, how politics has turned the sports world upside down, and jim brown, last man standing. >> we need to fight for sports. we need to reclaim them. if we're going to do so, we need to know our history. that is our greatest ammunition in this fight. we need to know the history of the athletes, sportswriters, and the fans who have stood up to the machine, if for no other reason that it allows us to look at the world and see that struggle impacts every aspect of

this system. live three-hour irin onation with dave z february 3. >> the legend grew up that he was this bad kid on the waterfront of baltimore. he never lived on the waterfront of baltimore. i think he internalized. you don't want to do too much psychobabble. i think he internalized the idea that he must be bad because why else would neither of his parents have wanted him? >> tonight on q&a, author and journalist jane levy on her book on babe ruth. 1932 world series. babe ruth gets into this back and forth with the picture for

the chicago cubs. it becomes a legend that he is standing at home plate, and the cubs are yelling at him. the yankees are going back at the cubs. raising one finger for one thene, two strikes, and allegedly he points out to the bleachers, the grandstands, allegedly saying that is where i am going to hit the next one. levy, on c-span's q&a. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us from arizona is andrew coan, the book is prosecuting the president. thank you for being with us on this sunday. i want to begin not with a book, but with a piece you wrote in the wall street journal. historically the outcome of the

teapot dome scandal is closer than watergate. special prosecutors are david, not a life. taking downable of a president, but their aim must be perfect, and presidents have powerful tools for defending themselves. usually, the president prevails. " let's begin on that. guest: i think watergate receives a lot of the attention when pundits and commentators are looking for historical analogies. famous special prosecutor investigation in u.s. history and the only one in which a special prosecutor has forced a sitting u.s. president from office. in fact, there is a 140 year history of these investigations, and as the passage you just read

is thewatergate aseption and not the rule the fact that it is the only special prosecutor investigation to force a president from office. that is the big point of the piece. the broader implication is that special prosecutor robert mueller, like his predecessors, faces a formidable challenge. presidents have a lot of tools, resources, financial and .olitical, to defend themselves with a special prosecutor has is the ability to raise awareness, raise visibility of allegations against the president and hopefully to enable the american people to hold the president accountable for whatever the result of the investigation might turn out. ken: let me go to what starr said in washington with

regards to the duties and responsibilities of the special prosecutor and what robert mueller has been tasked. [video clip] >> that system of appointment by the attorney general, which is the current system, was structurally sound. bad things happened. ulysses s. grant fired the special prosecutor. that is unfortunate, but life goes on. yes, harry truman, after the attorney general fired the special counsel, fired the attorney general. it just goes with the territory that if an individual is going to be investigating the president of the united states, probably half the nation is going to think the person is a skunk. why are you doing this? you are exceeding your mandate. you are on a witchhunt. these kinds of things are said from time to time. , the angers we heard

and the angst with respect to the saturday night massacre. the whole system did work. it is working again with bob mueller, and hopefully we will understand that. host: ken starr in washington at an event we covered. do you want to respond? guest: i think there is a lot of truth to what mr. starr says. the real mystery to special prosecutors is twofold. first, there is a real question, real puzzle as to how they position that looks so week on hope tould possibly hold the most powerful man in the world accountable? how the american people have come to trust such a subordinate official with this kind of awesome responsibility? it is these puzzles that can

start is getting at -- ken starr is getting at. the answer to both puzzles is that special prosecutors serve as catalysts for democracy by raising awareness, raising the visibility of allegations against a president or his close associates and making it easier for the american people to follow the investigation of those allegations and make it toder for the president interfere with the impartial investigation of those allegations. prosecutors can also abuse their power. it is for this reason, for good or for ill, that presidents continue to retain the power to fire a special prosecutor. the idea is to prevent a special prosecutor from becoming a kind of unaccountable fourth head of

government. president works to act against a special prosecutor as president nixon did when he fired the first watergate prosecutor, the president has to answer to the american people for that decision. host: let me take that one step further with your book. special prosecutors raise the visibility of presidential misconduct they allow the american people to hold the president accountable for his actions. special prosecutors can abuse their power. to guard against this, the president retains the power to hire a special prosecutor at any time. if he exercises that power preciously, special prosecutors have no legal remedy. they are not protected. tected.o

the president has to ultimately answer to the american people. guest: this is an especially powerful deterrent since watergate and the episode that has come known as the saturday night massacre, which i expect will be familiar to many of your viewers. firstober 1973, when the watergate special prosecutor sought the judicial order only president nixon to turn over his white house tapes, president nixon fired archibald cox for what he saw as insubordination. the public reaction was so swift and ferocious that nixon was forced to appoint a genuine prosecutor to replace cox.

that special prosecutor ultimately forced nixon from office. this has served as a kind of warning for what happens in modern american politics when a president tries to squash an independent investigation of himself or his administration. evers deterred presidents since 1973 from firing special prosecutors. i think this is a big part of why robert mueller still has a years whenwo president trump clearly have liked to get rid of him, ofsibly as early as june 2017. host: our guest is andrew coan, a professor at the university of arizona college of law, joining us from tucson. and hasprofessor

written a number of books, including prosecuting the president. first caller, bob illinois. go ahead. caller: love c-span. thank you very much. aith ina lot of f robert mueller if he indicts a democrat. there are plenty of them out there that are lying. willder if you think he eventually indict a democrat. host: thank you. guest: i don't think we are likely to see special counsel robert mueller indict any of the figure you just mentioned since his charge from the attorney general, acting attorney general rob rosenstein who appointed him, is to investigate potential coordination between the trump

and the russian government. what distinguishes a special prosecutor is they are limited in their jurisdiction to investigating a particular issue or set of issues or set of theons and investigating persons that the caller just mentioned would clearly fall outside of special counsel robert mueller's authority. host: paul, your next good morning. .- you are next good morning. caller: i have a question about the arrest of roger stone. president trump said who alerted id, which ira thought was a good

question. who could have alerted them? with that the legal? i think it is interesting the cnn.news agency there was thank you. host: thank you. guest: unfortunately, i don't have any information about how that permission could have reached cnn. with regard to the indictment of roger stone, where do you think that puts the mueller investigation? ofst: the indictment rajasthan, not the charges -- roger stone, not the charges clearestlly, is the evidence we have seen robert mueller present publicly of the possibility of coordination

between the 2016 trump campaign and the russian government, albeit coordination through a long chain of intermediaries. the charges against roger stone themselves involved mostly false statements to congress and obstruction of a congressional investigation and witness tampering, including threats and intimidation of a witness who was scheduled to testify, or congress was trying to obtain testimony from this witness. the things roger stone was lying about according to the indictment and evidence presented by the special counsel stoneo do with attempts by himself and members of the trump campaign to obtain access to

materials that russian government hackers had obtained from dnc servers and passed on to wikileaks. host: we want to share a tweet from abc's this week, george stephanopoulos asking what he hopes to gain by doing interviews with special counsel bob mueller? roger stone says i think the way i was treated was extraordinary, and the american people need to hear about it. abc this week is one of the five sunday shows we re-air every week. to that point, your thoughts? guest: i don't think that we we need the information to evaluate those claims. is,cally, my understanding and this is a little outside my expertise because it involves

fbi law enforcement practices, but my understanding is that ids of the sort that was conducted in roger stone's case, in which armed agents show up at the crack of dawn to arrest someone that has been indicted are typically used in circumstances when there is some fear of flight or that the witness might destroy evidence. this possibility is bolstered by the fact that the fbi agents who arrested mr. stone conducted extensive searches of multiple properties owned by mr. stone, presumably in search of evidence, which it seems possible they were worried he might destroy if given the opportunity or advanced notice of his arrest. that seems consistent with the

charges brought against him, which involve deception in the course of a congressional investigation. host: this from president trump, tweeting last night. reports the roger stone indictment, data released during the 2016 election to damage hillary clinton. really? what about the fake and phony con job that was paid for by crooked hillary to damage me? know, isteve, as you think donald trump is the best leader in world history. i am a stock market man. i think, we all think this mueller investigation, everyone i am talking to, it all ends.

this has been going on for two years. it seems everybody is against donald trump, and all they do is give him a hard time. i think he is the best leader in history. man, why ask this good does this continue, this unbelievable attack on donald j. trump, who i think is the best leader in world history? host: thank you. guest: thank you for your question, joe. by historical standards, the mueller investigation remains one of the shorter independent counsel investigations of a president. walsh'sest was lawrence investigation of the reagan administration which continued into the presidency of george h.w. bush. investigation of the whitewater matter and monica

lewinsky was not much shorter than the walsh investigation of iran-contra. the charges that mr. mueller has been charged with investigating, the allegations are extremely complicated. these types of investigations take time. i think there is every reason for the american people to have confidence based on everything that has been reported in the press on this investigation and based on mr. mueller's long-standing reputation for inflexible integrity to believe that this investigation is being conducted in a responsible fashion. trump, joe might be interested in the testimony that mr. trump's own attorney general nominee william barr offered about mr. mueller's reputation and about his personal integrity. s suggestion gets it

exactly right, that the american people vitally need a credible resolution to these allegations. it might seem like investigation has been going on a long time, but it is a complex matter. by historical standards, this is on the shorter side. host: joe is one of our most loyal viewers and listeners. he phones in every 30 days. , many that so many people voices can be heard. whatever the precise nature of the problem, the independent counsel statute fell into nearly universal disfavor in the aftermath of starr's investigation. era ofades later, the the independent counsel is widely seen as an important lesson.

neither can be safely allowed to operate with impunity. that is right. some background is in order to help your listeners understand the significance of that passage. 1978,watergate in congress passed the ethics in government act, which established a more powerful special prosecutor that had previously existed in u.s. history. one that could not be easily fired by the president. the fear was that the and had almost escaped accountability for the crimes he committed in connection with the watergate and thatand burglary the responsibility of investigating the president could not be allowed or entrusted to a person who could be so easily removed by the president. unfortunately, during the course of the 20 years in which the

ethics in government act remained in force, conventional wisdom developed that the special prosecutors appointed under that act were themselves to powerful and lacked any meaningful accountability to elected officials who could rein them in. as a result, they lost their sense of proportion. the two independent counsel's most people had in mind when they came to this conclusion were lawrence walsh, whose investigation of iran-contra most republicans thought represented an abuse of power, or a kind of runaway investigation which went on way too long and took up too many resources, and the can start investigation into bill clinton, bill clinton, the same which produced the same reaction among most democrats and many independents. after the experience of two

decades under the ethics in government act, both sides of the political spectrum came to the conclusion that we needed special prosecutors, but we could not allow them to become as powerful as they had been under the independent counsel statute. se andt was allowed to lap replaced by justice department regulations, under which robert mueller was appointed, which commit the presidents to appoint a special prosecutor anytime it.ible allegations warrant ultimately, that authority rests with the attorney general, who serves at the pleasure of the president, and under the new regulations, the attorney general's decision to fire a special prosecutor is not subject to judicial review, which means both the presidents

and the special prosecutor are principally accountable to the american people. the president can get rid of the special prosecutor if he wants to buy ordering his attorney general to fire the special prosecutor, but at the end of the day he will have to stand in andt of the american people defend that decision. if they believe he is firing the special prosecutor because he wants to squash the investigation itself and wants to hide evidence, the president will have to face the consequences. presstodd on meet the writes that the democratic congressman says impeachment is not on the table right now. back to your phone calls. charles in rhode island. caller: good morning.

thank you for c-span. mr. coan, i have to take issue with this mueller being such a great person. let's talk about the people he put in prison in boston. four of them were not guilty. two died in prison. the government had to pay the families $20 million. they spent 20 years in prison when they were not guilty. let's talk about the bomber in georgia, who they prosecuted for three years when he was not guilty, and it had to pay him $10 million. let's talk about mueller applying to the the fbi director with president trump monday. president trump says i am not interested. the next day, rob rosenstein hires him to be special counsel. recused forve been that for trying to apply for the

job, and he doesn't get it. rob rosenstein should have been recused because he filed papers that were false for the russian government. mueller and rod rosenstein whiplashed him. mueller and rosenstein were put there to cover up what happened in the obama administration and hillary clinton. that was the whole purpose to make chump look terrible. trump look terrible. host: we will get a response. thank you. guest: robert mueller is a lifelong republican. he has held responsible positions in both democratic and republican administrations over the span of decades and has held

senior-level posts in the fbi and justice department prior to his current appointment as special counsel. wasidea that robert mueller appointed as a hatchet man to serve a liberal democratic agenda or the reall -- virulently antitrust agenda does not seem credible to me given the available information. there is a little more scrutiny, but my understanding is that rosenstein like jeff sessions consulted with internal government ethics lawyers, who are politically independent, who advised that sessions was under the circumstances obligated to recuse himself based on his

involvement in the campaign, which was under investigation, but rosenstein was not. i think robert mueller interviewed for the fbi director position at a time when the agency was clearly in a state of crisis, and the best and most natural assumption is that he did so out of a sense of patriotism and dedication to mission and that president trump's decision to go in another direction does not begin to rise to the level of the kind of conflict of interest that would require recusal. titledhe book is prosecuting the president. our conversation from tucson, arizona, with lot professor andrew coan. tennessee,next, democrats line.

caller: good morning. this involves a caller from your previous guest regarding how democratic candidates can separate themselves. i feel quite simply the candidate can have a history of screwing people financially, spring people other than their illegals work for accuse theirll, amily ofs' f assassination and have a bevy of corrupt people surround you and keep their taxes hidden. that would be a few tips for the democratic candidates. host: thank you. guest: i'm not sure that i see the connection to the special so iel investigation,

think i will just allow the caller's, to stand. host: -- caller's comment to stand. host: you wrote that for two generations of richard nixon's downfall served as a warning for any president attempted to fire a special prosecutor. fromobal stork standards american democratic norms remain strong today, but the rise of populism and authorization is a worrisome trend for american democracy and special prosecutor investigations. guest: that is right. this is the biggest challenge facing robert mueller, and maybe to a greater extent the biggest challenge facing the american political system and our constitution today. the political polarization that has engulfed american politics

over the past two decades or s o, which political scientists refer to as hyper polarization, makes it challenging for special prosecutors to hold presidents accountable because that wires the american people -- requires the american people to have widely shared standards for presidential misconduct, judging presidential misconduct, that transcend party lines. in the polarized political climate that we operate in today, it can be difficult for people to set aside their partisan allegiances and judge the president according to any sort of neutral standard. this applies to democrats. suffice to republicans.

-- this applies to republicans. that is what the rule of law requires. aecial prosecutors are not partisan institution. in any given investigation, there will be partisan implications. people of one political party will be suspicious people of the other political party will be supported. special prosecutors are not a partisan petition. they have been -- institution. they have been appointed for 140 years. asy serve a critical role a check on presidential power and a way for the american people to enforce the principal that no one is above the law. if some substantial fraction of us are not capable today or in the future of putting aside our

partisan allegiances and enforcing that principle, upholding that will come even for a president of our own party, the rule of law will be in serious jeopardy. host: our guest is an expert on the topic. he wrote a book, joining us from tucson, arizona. we welcome our listeners on xm, andadio and sirius to our viewers in the u.k. if roger stone was indicted for lying to congress, what about the lying done by so many others? what about hillary to the f the her and her -- fbi and 33,000 diluted emails? much more.

any validity to these points? guest: that is a lot of allegations for one tweet. i don't think i can do them individual justice in the time we have without taking up the rest of the program. classic m is a aneuver by persons under investigation to try to distract attention from their own misdeeds or the misdeeds of their friends in this case as president trump is talking about roger stone's indictment here, and to throw the attention on to others. robert mueller has not been charged with us to getting any withe other per --

investigating any of the other persons named in this tweet. through things like false statements, perjury, witness tampering, and the like. the allegations against roger stone fall squarely in that jurisdiction. the other matters president trump has mentioned do not fall in that jurisdiction. host: what motivated you to write the book? guest: i started thinking about writing this book in february 2018 because everyone i knew at peopleme, especially outside the legal profession, were desperate to understand is, a special prosecutor

what a special prosecutor does, how a special prosecutor functions and to understand how weak onial who looks so paper can hope to hold the most powerful man in the country accountable. those puzzles are at the core of the book. they were my original motivation for writing. when i looked into it, it turned out nobody had written a book on the subject for a general audience. next,sydney, you are minnesota, republican line. caller: thank you. we don't really need a book. what we do need is to start listening to the words in the constitution. the powers are given very clearly. when we go outside of that, we end up opening the door for a lot of bear.

right now there is a very strong press on reliance of these special counsel's and the fbi. they were not in the constitution. we have the beat state. the founding fathers were battling the beat state one at the time of the writing of the constitution. the british were trying to get this country. it is still happening today. listening to russia and the united nations and the different nations speak yesterday on venezuela. if you listen to the people of the world, they want to have their sovereign power, and they are fighting the one world government, which is trying, if you listen to the complaints of the illegitimacy of this new person that is claiming to have the power in venezuela, it is

all clearly -- you listen to the people speak, and you hear the truth come out. when we have both persons come out and say this is the truth, you are only getting their version of what they want to infect on you. host: i think we will get a response. guest: let me pick up on what the caller said at the beginning of her remarks. do not appearls in the constitution. there is some constitutional debate about whether congress has the power to create a special counsel or special tosecutor by statute and insulate that person against presidential removal. there is not any serious constitutional controversy about the president's own ability or the president's own appointee, a pointrney general, to

a special prosecutor as a way to signal seriousness about getting to the bottom of allegations that have made made against the president or his administration. this dates back 140 years to the presidency of ulysses s. grant appointed the first special prosecutor in u.s. history. he gave the specific order, let no guilty man escape. kind ofxactly attitude we should want. ultimately ulysses s. grant did initial up to that statement. the idea is sound. the american people cannot have in the impartiality

or independence of an investigation undertaken by a political appointee like the attorney general. under those circumstances, the appointment of an outside prosecutor by the attorney valuable way of increasing public confidence that the investigation of serious allegations will be undertaken figure sleep and -- rously and impartially. if president trump wanted to fire the special counsel, he could give that order to his attorney general. his attorney general might not follow that order. as president nixon proved, the president has the tools to follow through. the president will have to stand and take responsibly in front of the

american people. president trump has not taken that step despite his obvious displeasure with the mueller investigation. host: henry, line for democrats. caller: good morning. still true democrat and supporter of the last true legitimate president of the u.s., barack obama, who gave tens of millions of people health care, saved our economy from disaster, and killed osama bin laden. donald trump is a traitor. all the evidence is pointing that way. there are so many indictments still to come. the white nationalists group supporters are afraid of what is coming down the pike. i would like for you to draw a nexus between tom barrett, paul

manafort, and roger stone and how paul manafort became the campaign manager for the trump campaign, especially given his ties to the russians and the -- nexust is between between wilbur ross, deutsche bank, and the bank of cyprus. that is a lot of ground to cover. let me make a couple of brief points about the relationship between roger stone and paul manafort, which is addressed a little in the book. businessformer partners. they cofounded an influential lobbying firm in the 1980's, which really launched the ,usiness of foreign lobbying

lobbying on behalf of foreign governments, as a lucrative business in american politics. paul manafort has a long history of working on behalf of foreign governments. that history is clearly at the center of the russia investigation in many ways. prior to joining the trump campaign in 2016, manafort worked for a long time on behalf of the pro-russia president of ukraine and had a number of ties to various oligarchs within the orbit of vladimir putin. exactly how that escaped the attention of the trump campaign, or whether it escaped the attention of the trump campaign, something on which i don't think there is good public information, but certainly roger stone and paul manafort go back a long way. cnn and caseym

hunt of nbc tweeting out that based on reports from inside politics, hillary clinton is telling associates she has not closed the door on a potential 2020 bid. back to your phone calls. tim in arkansas, good morning. guest: it is lakeview. good morning. thank you for taking my call. another sad day for c-span as you put your guest on as an expert. he is either a liar or a fool. what is mueller's mandate? it was to investigate russian hacking. we know that was evident in the steele dossier. unregistered foreign aid. becausein was a witness he signed off on it. mueller is completely legitimate.

he is not a superior officer. he does not have the right to investigate the president. he is an inferior officer. he was never confirmed by the senate. you cannot just have rogue prosecutors taking down an elected president. 63 million people elected this person. i'm tired of people trying to negate my vote with these false allegations great host: let me jump in. i will let you respond. we don't know what the report potentially says. it could exonerate the present. this all results to the responsibility of congress. the house needs to impeach and two thirds of the senate need to convict. caller: you don't set up a prosecutor to impeach. impeachment is political, not criminal. you set up a prosecutor to investigate crimes. this press set up to investigate any crimes. this is a foreign surveillance operation.

all of this is illegitimate. if he was legitimate, then all the people donald trump listed would be indicted right now. host: how do we know that? we have not seen anything from the mueller report. aren't you jumping to conclusions? guest: if he is busting down roger stone's door for these petty things, they have been watching his email for two years. where are the rest of the indictments? host: we will get a response. professor coan. guest: i think the first important point is that none of the charges that the caller mentioned fall within robert mueller's jurisdiction, which extends not to alleged collusion between any person involved in the 2016 election and any

foreign power, i certainly have not seen evidence in the public record is for allegations the caller mentioned. robert mueller's investigation only extends to potential links between donald trump's campaign and the russian government, not to foreign involvement in the u.s. residential election more generally. the caller is right that robert mueller is an inferior officer in a constitutional sense. he did not have to be appointed by the president or confirmed by the senate. he could be removed by the principal officer, the attorney general, appointed by the president. originally that was jeff sessions, and soon it looks like it will be william barr, hand-picked by president trump. president trump's own nominee, the nominee of the man that your collar says he voted for,

testified before the united states senate that he believes mueller should be allowed to complete his work, that it is vitally necessary to have a credible resolution to these issues. donald trump's own nominee for position of attorney general declared his belief that robert mueller is capable of providing that resolution. if the president does not share that belief, he has the option of withdrawing william barr's nomination of attorney general. he has the option of directing william barr of firing robert mueller and firing william barr if he refuses to carry out that order. the ball is in president trump's court on this issue. if he takes that step, if he shares the view of your collar, he will have to stand accountable before the american people for that decision. he has not proven willing to take a step, perhaps because he is convinced, and perhaps with

good basis, that the ultimate report will exonerate him in the aller seems to believe he should be exonerated. this is the decision of the president, and it is up to the american people to evaluate that decision. it is a very serious matter for any official within the u.s. government to contemplate overturning the results of a presidential election, but there is a very involved process for that. it involves both houses of congress and a two thirds majority of the u.s. senate. we are a long way from that point. the first special prosecutor, 1875, investigating ulysses s. grant for what? grant investigating the

administration for potential involvement in a kickback scheme known as the st. louis whiskey scheme. the origins of this scheme lay in the whiskey tax, which was a principal source of federal revenue in the 19th century. hundreds of federal revenue agent appointed by the grant frustration throughout the midwest -- administration throughout the midwest were involved in a partnership distillers to underreport production and spread the tax savings among themselves. this is piercing reached into circle and toal orville babcock. advocatedcame weekly in this scandal, public pressure forced the success grant to do something to get to the bottom of these allegations.

the step he chose to take was to appoint the first special prosecutor in u.s. history. caller: good morning. i am probably going to shake up this show a little bit. host: we have had a few. welcome to the conversation. ex-democrat.an i went independent 2016. i have two points concerning robert mueller. something all the media shies away from, and don't cut me off. don't cut me off. let me make my two points if you are a neutrophil. directoreller was fbi during 9/11. democrats,olled republicans, and independents, hardly anybody believes the official story of 9/11. host: i am going to cut you off

as we have focused on this in the past. it is muller. we're going to move on. we're going to ned in alabama. caller: good morning to you. happens to the emails.ivanka' t trump's she used a private enough server. nothing came out of it. host: is that part of this investigation? guest: that is not part of the mueller investigation. host: what happens next when the report is issued? guest: the special counsel regulations require robert mueller, the vision of this investigation -- at the conclusion of this investigation, to draw up a comprehensive report explaining

his decisions to bring charges and declining to bring charges. that report will be forwarded to the attorney general, and it will be up to the attorney general to decide what sections of the work if any -- that to open to the american public or congress. we don't know whether the special counsel my issue some interim report to the attorney general prior to the conclusion of his investigation and what steps he might take between now and the drafting of that report. we don't know whether there might be further indictments. at the end of his investigation, he will send a report to the attorney general.

the attorney general will make the decision of how much of that report to publish. host: how did the grant investigation conclude in 1875? guest: grant fired the first prosecutor. he then appointed another independent prosecutor, but at the urging of orville babcock, grant appeared as a character behalf,on babcock's which scuttled the prosecution. that was not a good look. it was years before the anticorruption norms to cold enabling -- took hold, enabling the american people to hold the president accountable.

coan joining us from arizona, thank you for being with us. guest: thank you. it was a great pleasure. c-span2, dr.ow on carlson is appearing -- tucker carlson is appearing. [video clip] >> our final story this week is the dramatic, ludicrous arrest of roger stone. barely is 66, frail, able to post shirtless photos of his jacked body. clearly no threat to anybody. this is how the fbi raided his home. [laughter] it is horrifying. thinkyou look at stanley i trust this guy. here's roger stone.

[cheers and applause] fun couple of days. i am loving the ride. go nixon! 36you have had a harrowing hours. your home was raided. you have been charged with seven felony counts. counts.s four >> the indictment says seven. >> who cares, i am lying. i can't even count that high. >> i think what you are really trying to say is that you are a feeble old man. >> writes, the petty thing. asm almost 66, almost as old sting. >> that is why it was so awful the way the police raided your home. >> the whole experience was

harrowing. afterwards i could only manage one radio interview, a speech from the courthouse, and to television appearances. it was horrible. host: you can listen to the sunday programs later on tape delay on c-span radio. day, our guests, jason andty editor of rollcall later peter coy, who was supposed to be with us last sunday until our show was abbreviated because of a fire. thank you for joining us for a full three-hour show this sunday morning. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]