the 40th anniversary of the three mile island nuclear power harrisburg,nt near pennsylvania, consider the most serious nuclear power accident in the u.s. , historian and author samuel walker and acting director of the nuclear safety project for the union of concerned scientists, edward lehman. at 4:00 p.m. on railamerica, watch the 1979 cbs report, fallout from the three-mile island. please stay indoors with your windows closed. month,almost a week last the people in middletown, pennsylvania lived in fear of an enemy they could not see, hear or feel. >> this weekend on c-span3. >> congressman jerry conley is our guest. in thees a six term

virginia 11, which is fairfax county and the washington metro area. he is a member of the foreign affairs committee in the house of representatives and government and oversight returned chairing government operations. thank you for being our guest. rep. connolly: great to be with you. we have the new york times and politico. >> congressman, thank you. rep. connolly: my pleasure. >> you are on the oversight committee. no longer government oversight and reform. the committee has just asked president trump for 10 years for his financial records. to see in those records and what are you looking for? rep. connolly: this is a follow-up to the public hearing we had with michael cohen in which he testified under oath the president falsified financial records in order to qualify for loans and financing

that he inflated the value of ,he property that we just saw yesterday a story in the washington post corroborates that undocumented. he also underestimated properties for tax purposes in the state of new york and elsewhere. follow-up to that testimony. just how bad was that and were laws violated? >> why do you think this is relevant? this is conduct that occurred before he became president. rep. connolly: this is a president who has not put his assets in a blind trust, as was recommended. continues with his family to run the trump organization. he continues to run profits from various elements of the trump organization, golf courses, hotel properties, apartment buildings, with his name on it.

it is relevant. he continues to benefit from that enterprise. >> given the report you mentioned in the washington post, documents appear to corroborate the fact the president inflated his net worth. what is the next step? i think itly: depends what we find. as a washington post story documents, we have to separate promotions in which he exaggerated his net worth and the value of properties, even to the point he added stories to the -- added 10 stories to the trump tower. presumably you can look up and count. it is not 68 stories, it is 58. nonetheless, he presented 68. that is a distasteful and dishonest and the marketing practice that is false. it may not violate a law. on the other hand, if you

provided formal documents to a -- acial and duchenne financial enterprise, that crosses over into bank fraud. we want to know what happened, what did you do? given the fact we do not have his tax returns, i do not think we have any alternative. if we think a law may have been violated, hopefully we will refer that to officials in new york state. >> either other parts of michael ohen's testimony you are pursuing other leads from? a rather obscure figure who has been with the trump organization, the chief financial officer. has, i think, the key to the lockbox. his testimony will be sought.

>> we have had a lot of talk about impeachment and the mueller report. speaker pelosi said now is not the time. i am wondering if you think this inquiry might possibly lead to articles of impeachment? rep. connolly: we can only speculate. i think we need to put that discussion aside. that is not what is driving this. and haveeply concerned been since before the president was a nadya riddick, with issues --conflict of interest before the president was inaugurated, with issues of conflict of interest. in tangling relationships overseas. he has properties, for example, in the philippines. of theocratic residence philippines, named right after donald trump was elected, donald

-- what could go wrong with that? pursue thed to possibility of building a trump tower in moscow during the campaign. he did not put it on ice, as he said he did. could that have influenced how he views vladimir putin and the statements he made about russia and the rejection he engaged in in terms of his own intelligence community. those are relevant topics. this is not a gotcha investigation. it is a broader look at this picture and trying to fill in lots of blanks. sheryl: a yes or no question. if you find that he violates a clause, it is -- is it an impeachable offense? rep. connolly: yes.

how and when and will congress pursue impeachment if that is the full issue in front of us? it is concerning because it is a matter of the constitution, not new york statute -- it was written by our founders to deal with situations such as the one we face with donald trump. investigationsre on the other five committees that have some role in investigating the president. public opinion is hearing from president trump saying he was exonerated, declared completely free by the mueller report. i you concerned if democrats continue to pursue these investigations, there will be some in the public is the democrats as grasping for straws and how do you prevent that? i do not want to be pursuing these issues and have the public think it is a

fishing expedition. on the other hand, i took an toh when i got elected defend the view -- the constitution, not the president or my party. i have a constitutional obligation to pursue these matters on the gravity they represent. take where we are right now. i think the media is guilty of breathlessly deciding this is over, why are you doing it, this is overreach. sed on a four page of a 300 plus page report. the idea there is no collusion -- what apparently he concluded there was no criminal conspiracy with the trump campaign to collude actively with the russians. nots not saying there are

some. and lots of receptivity to russian overtures to provide intelligence. we knew there was issues with wikileaks. and that meeting at the trump tower with russian operatives who claim to have dirt on hillary clinton. there were at least 17 or administrative officials that had over 100 contacts with russia and they lied about it. let's not forget, the reason robert mueller was appointed was because the attorney general, jeff sessions, did not tell the truth in his confirmation .earing about his own therefore, he was required by doj procedures to recuse himself from the entire russia investigation. there is more to learn. if you look at polling data, people this is a four-page

summary written not by robert mueller, written by the attorney general, an appointee of donald someone who wrote a memo questioning the underpinnings of the mueller investigation, not a disinterested party. >> some in your party, house majority whips, implied is time to move on after seeing that summary. they want to get on with the agenda, there are many people loyal to him in that district. they want to get going on the agenda. how do you balance that? we have been: working on the agenda since we took over january 3. a silver there is lining in this four-page summary in that it moves that agenda to the front burner and moves some of these investigations from a public perspective point of view

to the back burner, but still very much simmering. we can do both. we will. >> that is a great lead-in to the agenda. want to turn your attention to health care. we just came off a week in which health care made a lot of news. you introduced your plan to , but premium costs democrats are divided over health care. you have 100 members plus presidential candidate to have signed on to medicare for all of come -- all. how likely is it we will see medicare for all pass the house? rep. connolly: we have to distinguish between pragmatic programs that can be implemented and aspirational goals toward which we move. i think medicare for all is in a lot of categories.

it has not been fleshed out or cost assessed. clarity toave provide the 180 million americans who receive their health coverage through private insurance. largely, their employers. remains and all aspirational goal for a lot of my colleagues. my time defending and improving the affordable care act. i voted for that when i was a freshman in congress. i spend buckets of political blood defending it. i have not given up on that at all. view, despiteof attempts to derail it by the trump administration and by my friends on the other side of the aisle, it is working. it has expanded coverage for tens of millions of people through medicaid and the exchanges. overall, the health care cost

curb is coming down. we have protected consumers in terms of lots of reforms, chief making it illegal for insurance companies to deny you coverage based on a pre-existing condition. we saw how relevant that issue alone was in the midterms. that is a very important issue for us and frankly, we are grateful for donald trump this week deciding to challenge the entire affordable care act in court yet again. that is a winning argument for us. aboutas going to ask you that. can congress intervene in the lawsuit? and is there any plan for you to do so? rep. connolly: i do not know that we have discussed yet following an amicus brief, but hopefully will be heard. brief shouldnk a be filed? rep. connolly: i do.

especially since trump directed his department of justice to enter into that litigation on the side of repealing the entire act. >> the halfway point. >> with republicans redirecting their attack on obamacare, [indiscernible] an issue you feel confidently talking about. also a lot of pressure to come up with legislation to strengthen existing laws, to address the gaps. how do you do that with a republican-controlled senate, the white house intent on dismantling it? you have to come up with bipartisan legislation. what would that look like, how do you find common ground? rep. connolly: given we have a republican senate, it is hard to make improvements and additions to the underlying legal framework of the affordable care act. but i think there are things that can be done nonetheless,

where we can strive for bipartisan support. there is nothing like the results of an election to clarify your thinking. thumping my friends took in november are largely credited to economic issues and the health care issues. them pause.give we know a lot of them are very accountable with the decision made by the administration this week to challenge the law in court, to resurrect that issue was not a welcome development on the republican side of the eye out. senators and members of the house up for election next year, they may look for some opportunities to separate themselves from that activity. that is to say, the legal challenge to the bill, and show health caree about consumer issues. i will add, but here we are nine

years after enactment of the affordable care act. republicans have yet to put on the table and alternative. i think that speaks volumes about how completely vapid their rhetoric is about the subject. onus is onhink the democrats to come up with something republicans can support? do you need to work across the aisle so there is something they agree to? there has been some compromise in the senate that never went all the way. the alexander murray deal, for example. do democrats need to find a way to get there? rep. connolly: i do not think the burden is on democrats. good ideas can come from both sides of the aisle, so long as people put aside preconceived conceptions and work together. not related to legislation, increasingly across the country, as republican legislatures have seen the benefits of the medicaid expansion in other states, including state led by

republican governors and republican legislatures such as my own in virginia, i think they have come to accept that that is a good thing for their consumers, their voters and their state and their budgets. i think there are things we can do to further expand the affordable care act. maybe not always legislatively, but possibly programmatically. congressman, we came off a week in which the aipac met in washington. it is clear republicans are trying to paint democrats as the party that harbors anti-semites. you yourselves have called out the president for making what you called hateful remarks. i am wondering, do democratic leaders need to do more to push back, and what should they do? this is really --

as somebody who has been involved in middle east issues for 40 years, as a young staffer for the first 10 years of my career and no member of the house of an terminal affairs committee here in the house, it disgusting and vituperative dab the president say what he said, especially coming out of the mouth of a man who, even after hearing white inremacists a "get the jews" charlotte bill, nonetheless said there were good people on both sides. i do not know who the good people were on that side. he did not condemn anti-semitism when we actually saw it in action in charlottesville two years ago. is someone to he turn to as a moral arbiter. the democrat party has always been a strong home for american jews because we share liberal

values. i do not think that will change because a stray individual makes inarks that are anti-semitic nature or just downright stupid. i do not think that somehow changes history. democraticr all a president, harry truman, who against the advice of john marshall and other advisors at the time, recognize the state of israel. we have had a solid, important relationship ever since. i do not think that will change. are there different points of view about israel and the netanyahu government? of course, but there are within the jewish community as well. an americancterize as to theirewish patriotism -- i can tell you as a young catholic boy in 1960 when that happened to us because john kennedy was a catholic and our loyalty and patriotism was

questioned, and maybe we had to do [indiscernible] in a defensivet posture about those comments. i do not think that is going to stick at all. i think it is a very cynical move about a very important topic. >> you spoke about being in a defensive posture. that is where democrats have been. rep. connolly: i did not mean it that way. i meant emotionally. i look back to my memories of 1960, when the headlines in time magazine and news world report were, can a catholic be president? meaning, if by implication, they could not. >> should democrats go more on offense? rep. connolly: yes. >> what should they do? rep. connolly: steny hoyer gave an impassioned speech that was wildly received positively at the aipac conference, stating

what i just said, but more eloquently, in terms of who we are as democrats and what our relationship is to the state of israel, and the embrace of american jews as partners in the enterprise. was message of inclusivity an important statement strategically for steny hoyer to make and i applaud him. >> i want to pivot to budget and appropriations, one of the most crucial aspects congress has to do this year. you were hit hard by the shutdown. looking ahead, there is the looming sequestration battle, a debt ceiling battle, next year's funding. how anxious to you feel looking ahead to all of these tasks that need to be done, given the dysfunction we saw over the five-week shutdown, where the president could not seem to agree with congressional leaders of either party what to do, and

ended up having a stalemate? none of that was resolved. the border funding fight is still out there, as well as new battles on sequestration and debt ceilings. rep. connolly: it is important to remember a little bit of recent history. sometimes we cover the 35 day shutdown as the longest in american history as sui generis, but it is not. for democrats it was there -- remember they wanted to shut down the government over the funding of planned parenthood, over president obama's it executive orders protecting dreamers and other executive orders they objected to. ironically, no problem with executive orders from the republican party. work out fornot them. at 35 day shutdown for nothing, the damage to the economy,

damage to people's lives who could not pay bills, and profound embarrassment worldwide in terms of the image of the united states not being able to fund its own government. if they want to go there again, that is their choice, but it is not something we are going to welcome or deliver to this president or our friends on the other side of the aisle. trump did not take seriously the risks to employees, did not seem to have an issue. what happens when the markets are at risk, when there could be financial implications for the country? rep. connolly: we have a republican administration and the burden is on them to decide how they want to handle that. congresswoman dispose of their proposal. congress will then dispose of their proposal. there are many who understand l ofperiol of -- peri

playing with national debt. you have to pay your bills. this is a serious matter. republicans have to step up to the plate, both in the u.s. senate and the white house and treasury department, which they control. sheryl: you mentioned the you meppingsed wall and the decision to try to block the emergency ressluge. is the president going to get the money and build that wall? mr. connolly: and in both the use and the senate clearly disapproving of his actions. we took actions at the crisis of the border.

and you can't weigh the treasury. that is a concxds con trutional role. now the action moves to the courts and there will be active litigation and states and others to object yect to his actions. host: will congress . mr. connolly: i hope so. we have not had that conversation. host: and ask you about congressman adam schiff and called for him to step down. that is appear important committee, do you think it can function? come connell prior to his chair manship, devin nunes was controversial and had to step

aside if you recall for the entight of the investigation because of his controversial actions. i think a a.m. schiff is moipting us to misdeeds and i don't believe the four-page from that.s away and the mueller report is released. think he is eab an honorable man. and who chairs our committee. host: thank you for your time. >> i wanted to start with the

germ tone in congress and ashington post-mueller report, how do you see the pricks playing out? dem contribution, lawmakers and have been won by president trump. and investigating the president has been uncomfortable and with the decision to release the summary and for the attorney germ to say he was clear, this i ery fleeting for those dim cats. they say they don't receive questions. and because the department of justice had and filing that and wanted the entire haw, there are they of opportunity a

need democrats. ost: that is a good sip nope cyst. democrats. president trump came to the capitol depens his advisers and toog a lunch with senate republicans. republic companies are clearly feeling relieved and agrieved ks i would say and they are going on offense and which you referenced with the congressmen. republican leaders are now attacking adam schiff likening to senator joe mccarthy. they are using these four pages as a way to say we are vin difficult indicated, there was

no collusion and you democrats are have lied. and larger cuke cuss. >> the tactic they are taking is pursue regular order and green

aredeal and med kay for all not interested for symbolic votes. they will send it to committee and have a budget hearing in the next few weeks. he green new deal, the speaker did agree to have a new panel d she has weighed and stenyu hoyer have weighs of diffusing tension. and very interested in seeing something some h on this. they want to see the republicans put on defense and they are going go in committee rooms ap trying to move on to this conversation without completing.

are so hour are members approaching with the trump administration? >> they have said those memberships have to be careful that the young progressives don't harm the harm party. hep has to maintain that balance of a allowing their voice except the heir voice crosses linebacker and sprer pelosi drew it.ne and they are handling and so saw this week the speaker unveil health care legislation. the green new deal is not going

anywhere in the house. speaker pelosi are aware the centrists delivered them the majority ap they have to win districts or trump zrits and not let them go to the left. >> mr. concxds con ol cry pursued government in the oversight committee even if it leads to an impeachable offense. >> he was so pointed. e didn't dance around it ault. he said with's impeach him and t is surprising and dem cats when michael cowhep came in and said the president committed cam

paper finance there were many democrats who said that was eab mpeach nl a offense. that is a political decision. and they need to have bipartisan support and there are bipartisan supporters. so there are democrats who are set ig the path that the resident has committed impeachable offense. and it was the two of them. host: thank you very much. i appreciate it. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019] captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org networks called

pbs. 1979 a small network rolled out a big idea. let viewers decide. c-span opened their doors for ault to see big you and in the age of power to the people. in the 40 years, the landscape has changed. is and youtube stars are thing. crmp span's big idea is more real vapt. no government money. he it's is a public service by your cable or satellite provider. view is your unfillered so you