narrowcasting, youtube stars are a thing. ideas are moreg relevant today than ever. no government money supports c-span. it is not part of the coverage of washington and is funded by your cable or satellite provider. on television and online, c-span is your unfiltered view of government. so you can make up your own mind. joining us from baltimore and c-span's newsmakers program is then carson, a member of the senate foreign relations committee and joining us in the studio, covering congress for politico and a senate reporter. senator, let's begin with some news over the weekend. a learned that the faa issued warning to u.s. commercial airlines flying over the gulf of oman and over iranian airspace. how concerning is this to you? >> first, it's good to be with you.

it's very concerning. i am really concerned about miscalculation on iran's part or the u.s. part. the temperature could not be hotter. iran is a dangerous country, no question, they support terrorist and they do a lot of things that are really bad. what they are doing in yemen is against national security interest. trump has elevated the potential for conflict by the manner in which he has handled the designation of their national terrorist groups and withdrawing from the nuclear agreement, evenly wrong was in defiance -- even the iran was in defiance of the nuclear agreement. >> what about john bolton? some sorting to have of military conflict even though the president says he hoped that was not the case? has clearly put the military option on the table despite the fact that there's been no consultation with congress in regards to the use of horse, and no authorization for the use of force.

certainly there would be a requirement for congress to act. expect mr. bolton and mr. trump may have different views on that, but that accounts kitchen. you have just hinted at this, but we heard lawmakers warn the administration against doing something without seeking congressional approval with regard to lawmaking powers. they also warned that the administration shouldn't use the 2001 authorization to justify any sort of military action or printed strike. those warnings really ring hollow these days because congress conceded much of it for making powers especially over the past three administrations to the executive branch. isn't that reversal at this point? >> i certainly hope so. you are absolutely correct, we have seen presidents take a 2001 authorization for the use of military auris what was really and that afghanistan and the

taliban and use that to go after isis and syria in northern africa. that is clearly not congressional intent. but to use military force against iran, there is no authorization for the use of military force. clearly under the constitution, congress has the power to declare war. the president must come to congress unless there is an urgent issue about defending america or some two powers. in this case, they are planning the military operations. the proper course is to come to congress. i would hope the president would respect the constitution. this is a pretty fundamental seek and i hope he would congressional approval which i'm not sure he would receive. this week, all senators will get an intelligent. what will you need to hear on this issue? >> i expect that we're going to hear about things that iran is

preparinghow they are we know that they were extremely upset, the united date pulling out of the nuclear agreement is going to cost them economic relief they thought they were going to receive by joining the agreement. we also know that they were extremely upset on the declaration as a terrorist group. is whatwe want to hear is the calculation, what is our intelligence community saying? and why are they doing this? are the fearful the states might take action? is it defensive? do we believe we might use offense of whether the united states? i think we really need to get a clear handle on ir whatan -- what iran's intentions are. >> thanks for being with us. i wanted to ask whether or not

what you hear on tuesday could have any effect on the confirmation for the secretary of defense. shanahan is going to be up for confirmation, and i wonder whether or not there's anything that could come out on tuesday that could affect the way that senators vote or think about that. i think that's a very important point. absolutely it could affect the confirmation assets. secretary mattis had a great deal of credibility with the members of congress of telling it the way he saw it. he was always straight with us, inh congress on the facts the military capacity, giving his best judgment. it will be interesting to see what happens with the nominee for secretary of defense, whether he also will give that assurance of congress.

are looking for his independent information, not necessarily just giving the line that john bolton would want to hear. >> have you given any thought on your vote of the shanahan nomination? >> i've not had a chance to meet with mr. shanahan yet. i've not made up my judgment. i like to go through the confirmation process and get all the information. clearly with so many hotspots around the world, his role in our national security team is going to be first and foremost . >> do you think he is qualified for the top job? >> i'm going to withhold judgment until after i've had a chance to how the response to hearings and the information i have to meet with them. seems to be the linchpin of the middle east policy in the sense that it drives most of the decision-making. for example, after the killing of jamal khashoggi, the

president was resistant to congressional efforts to cut off weapons sales because essentially, that is a key part of countering the rebels in the yemen civil war. so iran seems to be the centerpiece of the middle east policy. do you think that's smart? >> the middle east is complicated. thatly, iran is a player does things that are very much against our national security interest. their role in yemen is tragic, no question about it. their role in syria has cost thousands of people's lives. bad actor, but we have to recognize that these circumstances in the middle east or more complicated than that. we have serious issues with the kingdom of saudi arabia. the khashoggi tragedy is just one thing that happened. the way they conducted the yemen campaign, the loss of innocent life.

all of that has to be wrapped into our policy. we need to have strategic partners including the kingdom of saudi arabia in our campaign against iran, but it has to be to advance our basic values in this case, the kingdom of saudi arabia has suffered greatly from american values. ,ost: not sure if you saw essentially asking why congress has not done something in trying to get answers into what happened to her fiance. i had a chance to meet with her in my office and talk one-on-one with her. i think she's asking good questions but as i told her, i think congress is very sympathetic and going much further than this administration has gone and holding those responsible for this tragedy accountable. act ass doesn't always fast as people would like us to.

longer,ake a little bit but i think at the end of the day, congress will respond and take steps to advance american knows and let the saudis there has to be accountability for those responsible for this. you mentioned there are hotspots all over the world and i want to do a little globetrotting for a minute. another issue that you've been working on a lot has been this situation with russia. election interference and sanctions. do you have any reason to believe that majority leader mitch mcconnell is going to allow anything on to the senate floor, either related to the election security legislation that several senators have been working on, or on any sort of new round of russian sanctions or anything of that sort? four is that going to be part of

the so-called legislative graveyard? awaiting weather leader mcconnell is going to bring any legislation to the floor of the united states. all we've been doing is confirmation votes. you see a very active house, a lot of very important bills, and yet none of those have seen any debate on the floor of the united states senate. the mueller report is very revealing. in aows that russia systematic way interfere in our elections. it is very likely they will continue to do that. so, we have to take steps to protect ourselves. authoredst congress, i senator mccain and others, bipartisan legislation to hold russia accountable for their meddling in our elections and their interference in ukraine. now, we have to take additional steps. part of that is to protect our election process and yes, there

is bipartisan legislation we would hope senator mcconnell would bring to the floor. he's shown no indication he would do that, but we should be having congressional senate inrings on what russia did the prior elections and what they are likely to do in this one. we should be taking additional steps to protect ourselves and hold russia accountable for attacking our democratic additions. so far, we have not seen committee chairman willing to conduct those hearings or little mcconnell willing to bring these issues to the floor of the united date senate. >> on one specific point, i don't know how much you had an opportunity to review, but when , he used to scott be the governor, democrats in florida house delegation has been briefed by the the on some of what was in the robert mueller report, regarding some election meddling efforts that went beyond the purchasing of is that ads in florida,

something that you want to know more about, and is that something that you think that other states and secretaries of state should be paying attention to as well? guest: absolutely. mr. putin will use any weapon at his disposal in order to try to influence our democratic system of government. i issued a report for the democrats on the senate foreign relations committee little over a year ago about mr. putin's arsenal and clearly, what he did in florida is very much of concern to us. there was some debate during the senate campaign on that issue. i think it's important that we have complete transparency to the public recognizes what russia is attempting to do. if they find weakness, they will exploit it. we are worried they will operatives in america during the 2020 elections. it's possible. we have to take steps to protect ourselves.

social media has been used by russia, we got to protect ocean media platforms with transparent and know who is responsible for the ads coming across. there's a lot more that we have to take and it includes making sure we have a paper trail on our ballots. host: we are midway through our newsmakers program and jordan is from baltimore, a member of the senate foreign relations committee. we will turn back to andrew of politico. host: thanks. over the past few months, i've talked to a lot of your democratic colleagues who are essentially arguing that the 2020 presidential candidates should be focusing more on foreign policy throughout this campaign. theart, to expose what president borbon's on national security issues, in addition to his pensions to anger folks within his own party. some of his policies regarding national security and other issues.

do you agree with folks like chris murphy who say that the 2020 election could be won or lost on foreign policy? guest: it's a long time between now and november of next year. i'm not sure what would be on the voter's mines. i'd be surprised if foreign policy became a dominant issue in the elections in november of 2020. it's possible. think our candidates have to articulate national security issues and foreign policy. of all the problems we're having, we have not talked yet about venezuela, haven't talked about north korea, haven't talked about china. of all the foreign-policy challenges we have, it's critically important that our presidential candidates articulate that, show commitment and knowledge and policies in dealing with these political challenges. but they should not ignore the domestic issues. the domestic issues traditionally have an the most decisive factors in presidential

election. >> with six senate colleagues and a former vice president joe biden running, will you endorse anyone during this process? >> i'm certainly going to endorse the democratic winner. and i'lle need unity do everything i can to make sure that our primaries are conducted in a way that rings us together and recognizes that we have to nominee andith our it's going to be a tough general election. i plan to be extremely active in helping our nominee. host: but not in the primaries so far? guest: it's a little bit early to make that judgment. we will see how things go. at this particular moment, there are still candidates getting into the race. china on ourake up tour of challenges around the world. recently, the president and the congress department issued ordered against the chinese huawei,munications firm

there have been these trade talks that have been going in its, and we expect the president with chinese leadership in japan coming up. sense of the wisdom -- on one hand, the wisdom of these trade negotiations, and specifically, what do you make of the action against huawei? china is a growing giant, no question about it. there is their one road initiative trying to influence countries to except their system of trade and government control as a way of partnering with china. they would like china to be the standard for global trade rather than the west and the united states. it is a major concern. the telecommunications issue is

a concern because we are concerned that they could be using that in order to enhance their abilities to steal intellectual property from the united states and our allies. i think that is legitimate concern and i support what the administration did in that regard. but i think we also have to recognize that we need the support of our allies in dealing with china. when president trump started with the national security america'se divided strength. if you would have started with china, i think he could of got more international support. china does not play fair and it is right for us to stand up to china, but not the way the president has done it. host: you mentioned unifying our allies in terms of standing at the china but recently, the country of italy said that it actually wanted to join and be a partner with china's initiative. do you think the president should be doing anything in

particular to urge one standing allies like italy and other countries that might be considering joining the initiative to back off? guest: it's hard for the united states to say no to a country wishing to develop relations with other countries. the concern we have with italy joining the one road, one belt initiative is that if they adhere to the chinese standards, and they make it more difficult able to have the type of relationship with italy in the future. there is some risk factor to what italy is doing. quite frankly, i thought the president made a mistake by i think thatof -- would have been a way to try to isolate china and other countries with us. i think it's critically important that we reach out and establish more relations with other countries, not conceding so much territory to china for economics and trade. with regard to venezuela,

were there any missteps by the administration in the recent push to force out nicolas maduro? guest: i don't know all the details about that operation. thatw there was optimism it would be much more successful than it was. i agree with the president on the legitimacy of the regime. what worries me about it is we've seen a similar situation in syria where we heard that the assad regime would not be able to hold on very long and now, seven years later, the regime is in solid control right now. not solid, but they had the majority control of the country. i worry that venezuela could go down the same path. i hope we can find a way to negotiate some peaceful way to get a transition of power in that country. it's very important for the people of venezuela. guest: certainly, we saw some of this reporting with respect to

venezuela, but it has not been the only place where it has happened, where we have seen stories written that suggest advisorspresident's may have gotten out in front of president trump himself in terms of foreign-policy matters. seeingh of that are you through your work on the foreign relations committee, and how concerned are you, generally, that there may be questions about who exactly is calling the shots in some of these cases? you, speakingell as a member of the senate foreign relations committee, we had personally know briefings from the administration on the foreign-policy challenges. quite frankly, we don't know who is calling the shots and if they have a coordinated strategy or not. i had some conversations on venezuela, we are having a conversation on iran, but we have been the briefings. i know senator menendez has

asked her more briefings. some of the republicans of joined us in asking. we are not getting administration witnesses for our committee which would be the normal way. the reasons we are not, if they are not exactly sure what they should say. we don't know what the president's decisions are going to be and sometimes his advisers are necessarily speaking for the president. it's tough to get a straight message. turn to a news of the day topic. just a few minutes before we went on the air, the president lashed out at justin know much, -- the republican from michigan who came out in favor of impeachment. that puts him even further in that camp that house democratic leaders. what do you make of him coming out and saying that this is r next to their name? guest:-disappointed that we don't have more bipartisan

aspect for the separation of powers and the responsibility of congress as it relates to the powers of the president. showseller report clearly the president tried to influence the investigation. there's no question about that. it's now up to congress to look at that. where that leads, we don't have to make that decision. should beicans joining democrats to carry out the constitutional responsibility of the house of representatives to investigate the conduct of the president and whether there should be some accountability to conduct. seemssappointed that it lined up by party rather than by respect to the constitutional responsibility of the house of representatives. it took a lot of courage for him to say what he did, but i hope it will be to more republicans and democrats figuring out a way to follow-up on the mueller report in a professional way including the house of representatives. realistic,s that

especially in your chamber rep. conaway: we said his close -- where mcconnell basically said he is closed? guest: that goes really with the house. the senate should be holding hearings on russia from the report and there's a lot of things we should be doing and we haven't done that. mcconnell has prevented that. you are right, he has shut us down in regards to the responsibilities of the congressional branches of government. but initially, the investigation was the house of representatives. host: the you think robert mueller at some point will testify on capitol hill? guest: i certainly hope he will testify on capitol hill. i think it's absolutely essential that he have a chance to express himself directly to the congress so that he can tell you what he meant by his words rather than having the spin we

have gotten from parties of interest. it's very, very important that he testify before congress. host: now that the mueller -- since you are in baltimore, i would be remiss if i did not ask, what ultimately was your view of the way that the former deputy attorney general, your former ,.s. attorney in baltimore handled the oversight of the investigation? thinkod -- i think rod rosenstein is a true professional. the role that he played at the u.s. attorney, he was an incredibly strong u.s. attorney working with agencies state, local and federal. i think he came in an extremely difficult time. of thersight investigation was done in a way that mr. mueller was able to complete his investigation.

obviously, i think there will be some concerns in regards to the comey firing and his role in standing with attorney general bar during the conference before the report was released. but generally, i think rod rosenstein is a true professional and did a great service to this country during an extremely challenging time, upholding the reputation of the department of justice. host: final question. you mentioned that one of the things the senate has to do in reaction to the mullah report is to hold hearings about russia's influence and interference attempts in not just american elections, but in foreign elections abroad. under the leadership of chairman corker in the last congress, he held a lot of hearings focused on not just russia, but other foreign-policy hotspots that exposed the is disagreement that republican senators have had with the president on a lot of these issues. isyou think chairman rich doing a good enough job of addressing this in a way that is

too early tost: well, it is have judgment in regards to chairman rich, but i want to underscore what you said about chairman corker. he understood the spots ability's of the united states senate and understood that responsibility was not as a party leader but as a committee leader and a senate leader. he carry that out with great distinction. i am proud to have been his partner for a period of that time, when i ways ranking member. he was incredible in standing up requiredwhere congressional insight, even though it may present problems for president trump. he did the right thing, and our committee chairman need to do that. host: senator, we began our conversation talking about iran. what worries you most, moving ahead? guest: a miscalculation. that someone, either the

, wherence -- iranians something happens and it triggers escalation. there is not a military solution here, make no mistake about that. this is a situation where we opposed -- imposed sanctions in order to initiate negotiations. for the united states to walk away from the nuclear agreement while iran was in compliance isolates america. i am concerned there could be miscalculation, and if that happens, america's by itself. do not have our traditional allies from europe that would stand with us, and it would be extremely dangerous to our security in the middle east and globally, too speculation. member of thein, senate foreign relations committee, democrat from maryland, joining us from baltimore. thanks for joining us on c-span 's "newsmakers" program. we tightened their grip on iran's economy.

where is this heading? tuesdayll find a lot on -- or we won't. that may be the question. when the senate gets disclosed briefing tuesday on what has prompted the administration to ratchet up forsure and this planning military action that seems to be -- ifay, we will find out senators find out anything. if you start to hear people like ben cardin saying now i understand why the administration is doing what it is doing, we will have a different conversation tuesday and wednesday then if they say they walked out of the closed briefing room in the basement of the capitol insight we do not know anything. host: did we learn anything last week when senate leaders and the house speaker had that closed briefing? >> that was a gang of eight, congressional leaders and

leaders of intelligence committees on both sides. what we will hear tuesday out of that briefing is the argument the administration is going to make. the thing top of mind for me is whether they mention al qaeda specifically, because i could be a codeword for the use of the 2001 authorization for the use of military force, which many members of congress, republican and democrat, have said is totally outdated, and the administration cannot rely on that as their legal basis to launch 8:00 p.m. to strike against iran. but if we hear the president's top deputies mentioning al qaeda is a big threat, that can be the pretense for them going towards the 2001 authorization, which would spell disaster, in the minds of many democrats. >> and when secretary of state mike pompeo was in europe, he basically got a cold shoulder from european foreign ministers. >> he did. that was interesting, because he was essentially crashing a

meeting intended to salvage the iran nuclear deal. mike pompeo was arguably one of the architects of the u.s. pulling out of the iran nuclear deal. he essentially swooped in at the last minute as european foreign ministers were trying to meet and salvage this deal. he really seems as if the administration is intent on maintaining their incision on this and influencing their allies to be on board with them. up thend you brought congressman -- does that move the needle, a republican house member saying it may be time to move -- impeach the president? >> he is the most likely republican number to have said that in the house. i do not think it moves the needle immediately. what i will be looking for is what the reaction is from the republican congressional committee, the campaign not thee, whether or campaign committees medially

take the side of donald trump, if there is to be a primary challenger to amash, whether that scares off any additional republicans who may be even thinking about cooperating with any sort of investigation by jerry nadler or anywhere else. host: you brought the issue up. your thoughts? >> of all the were publicans who could have come out and said this, justin amash was the one to do it. last night, the rnc chairman came out with a statement that said this is someone parroting the democrats' talking points on russia. she also said that she noted voters in his district strongly support this president. but she did not take the necessary step of endorsing a primary challenger, if one were to come into fruition in the next few months. that will be the thing to watch. amash is one of the most conservative members of congers, but coming out against the president like this took a lot

of fortitude, political fortitude, that a lot of her publicans have not shown so far. host: you mentioned 2020. former vice president joe biden held a kickoff rally, around 20,000 in attendance. a message of unity -- how will that play out? >> the number one concern among democratic voters right now is defeating the president. and there are these one-off, occasionally, of folks who want ideological purity. in other words, the progressive wing of the party, the bernie sanders and elizabeth warren types of the party. but joe biden's staying power over the next two months will be determined the extent to which democratic voters feel like he is the guy who has the best chance to beat donald trump. you look at states like pennsylvania. it is no accident he has his campaign headquarters in philadelphia. it is no accident he will focus most of his attention on pennsylvania. that is one of the states donald

trump flip from blue to red. i think a lot of democrats feel like joe biden is the best one to defeat him. >> it will be fascinating whether or not this becomes a foreign policy campaign. positioned, better if this turns out to be a campaign in which russia or international threats to the united states are front and center in the campaign. if it is a more domestic policy focused campaign, where people who have more experience in that area are able to take the lead in the primaries, it may not go so well for the former vice president. host: what are the democratic caucuses like in the senate, with half a dozen democratic senators running for the presidency? >> we are starting to see attendance slipped a little bit. it has not gotten completely ridiculous yet, in terms of having eight or 10 people gone, -- thereainly, it is

is going to be more of that. so far, they are all playing friendly, but i do expect, at -- itoint in time, it gets more tense. host: niels lesniewski's senior staff writer for cq roll call and andrew desiderio for politico.com. thank you for your insights on c-span's "newsmakers" program. >> monday, the president will be in pennsylvania for a campaign rally. live coverage begins at 7:00 p.m. eastern on c-span 2, online at c-span.org, or listen on our free radio app. on monday, current and former lawmakers and dignitaries attend a memorial service for the late ellen tausch