can learn about -- from the man who wrote the watergate article. "washington journal ♪ host: good morning. the flags on capitol hill and outside other federal offices outside the country remain at half staff following friday's shooting that left 12 people dead. in virginia, the virginia beach community holding vigils, remembering loved ones and neighbors. once again, the nation asking why and when will it end. "the washington journal," the recess is over for members of congress, they returned to capitol hill tomorrow.

and among house democrats, president trump and the issue of impeachment. after robert mueller delivered his first and presumably only his reportverance on last week. journal." "washington should congressional democrats pursue the issue of impeachment? those who support the idea of impeachment, (202) 748-8000. if you oppose, (202) 748-8001. send us a tweet, we will read it. join us also on facebook at facebook.com/c-span. good sunday morning, thank you so much for being with us here. we will get your calls and comments in a moment. this tweet from jim, if impeachment from the house alone would guarantee improvable, i could see the allure. if there is no chance, it's a full mistake.

state democrats, meeting over "nancy pelosi treated by christ to impeach at the california democratic convention to her coat this is what it sounded like yesterday in san francisco. californians are here, maxime waters -- [video clip] >> californians here, with maxine waters -- [indiscernible] [applause] nadler, waysrry and means, [indiscernible] affairsign [indiscernible] exposing the full extent of the insidents corruption challenging the administration in court. breaking through the trump administration cover-up to get the truth. we want the truth for the

american people. we had to and resounding victories last week. [indiscernible] must be obeyed. this week we heard directly from special counsel mueller and his report warned us in the starkest terms that there was an attack on our election and our democracy itself. president trump called it a hoax. why is it such a threat that he won't defend our democracy from a foreign threat? why is it something he's covering up? quote impeach" -- "impeach"] 11the report lays down incidences of obstruction of justice by the president of the united states.

i told you, this is like coming home for me. , if hesel mueller said had had confidence that the president didn't commit a crime, we would have said so. we would have said so. host: that from the losey in her home city of san francisco. california democrats and a number of candidates in attendance. next sunday we are in cedar , where 17 of the democratic candidates are scheduled to speak. this is a headline from "the washington post." "democrats in california confronting deep divisions over how to handle the calls for impeachment. deep divisions were fresh when last marks -- last night's remarks by robert mueller raised new questions about whether president trump had committed impeachable violations, playing out time and time again in the

first full day of the weekend convention. putting up a new fissure between democratic and congressional leaders and party white house hopefuls who are once again largely united in opposition to impeachment after the mueller comments, the list of presidential candidates calling for growing. more details available at their website. from sigmund --

host: let's get your phone calls. michael is joining us from winston-salem, north carolina. you support the idea of impeachment. why? caller: i think my take on all of this is i support impeachment because to me president trump is the most controversial president that we have ever had in this country. he just likes things his way. he doesn't care about the american public. he doesn't care about how many people could even vote for him. the people that believe this man, they are crazy. you for the call. let's go to bob, who opposes the idea of impeachment. good morning, bob. good morning, sir. sir, i'm a veteran. the gentleman said that president trump didn't care

about us. i think he's totally wrong. however, my main issue is not -- aspect for thel hate campaign that the democrats are doing against this president. there's nothing illegal that he done wrong. interfering chinese is the democrats are eating crow, sir. there's nothing they can do. obama should have been impeached. he's a traitor. president trump is not a traitor. no impeachment. nothing to impeach, man. thank you. host: this is from john besh -- john -- you arew york, gail, next, also opposing the idea of

impeachment. why? caller: i'm a democrat, lifelong democrat, and i think this president is a dangerous president and i think one of the reasons he is dangerous is because mueller so eloquently said in a beginning of his speech and at the end of his speech, americans remember russia. russia tried to take over our elections. the president did nothing about it. i don't want us to be the same way. i think that the most important message that he had in his reports, there's very little that said, by anybody, about the fact that we have got to take care of business in terms of our election. i wish nancy pelosi would, with mitch mcconnell -- [laughter] seriously, the two of

them. americans, get with it. start talking about what russia did. trump is also his worst enemy. i like the fact that nancy pelosi is trying to make it not get so emotional, but try to -- all the different committees that they are on, continued out work. you don't have to call theachment, just continue investigation. but everybody, all americans, we have got to be concerned about russia and what russia has done to this country. host: thank you for the call. to that point, this story is from inside of "washington post." "democrats debate how far to go to get mueller's testimony. democrats agree that he has a testify, despite his

reluctance to do so, but how far they are willing to go to force him into the witness chair remains to be seen." rochester, jane, good morning. caller: i would like to know, if they continued, what they find in his tax returns. the election should have been redone. it obviously was interfered with. that's just a fact. that means that the election should have been negated and that mitch mcconnell must have with all his position of his power, he must've known something was going on and that pressure was helping to spam the airwaves. he's just as guilty. this president, the things he's somewith border children, of those children have died in his care. nothing is being done to help those poor people on our borders. thank you for the call.

if you are joining us on c-span radio, the russian you are asking is whether you support or oppose the idea of impeachment. those that support, (202) 748-8000. we welcome our listeners on sirius xm. those that oppose, (202) 748-8001. it jersey, you support the idea of impeachment. why? caller: good morning, steve. i'm torn. even when they impeached clinton, i realized that they ability to the convict. i felt then that it was a waste of time. is that ancern now house divided cannot stand. with trump's behavior over the last three years, his unorthodox style, with the amount of support that he still has, that

everything is a hoax and fake news, i feel that the only way that maybe -- because we can't rewrite history . what is going on now, if we don't hold this type of behavior , we are doomed to let it happen again. that is my concern. but i am torn. i know that they will never convict him in the senate. but maybe through impeachment they can hold him to the fire in hearingsve him that the world -- the world is going to blame us if we don't. it's like a catch-22. part, like i said

earlier, a house divided cannot stand. has the great job, she is under -- he was under assault from the democrats earlier. they either feel she is too old or they want to replace her. she is still holding it together. thank you for the call. president is up at the white house and already tweeting, with this -- at 7:0 nine this morning from president trump who leaves this morning for england, part of a weeklong trip to commemorate the anniversary of the historic d-day invasion with a day trip to france and he will stop in ireland. this is a story that the president conducted with "the

london sun," taking aim at meghan markle, the president saying it's a great honor to meet a 93 euros monarch queen elizabeth and that he's ready to the prince ofith wales on climate change, saying that the u.s. i'm it has never been better. he was asked about meghan markle, who said that she would leave the country of donald trump was elected. the president saying -- i did not know that, what can i say? i did know that she was nasty." regarding the honor of the state visit hosted by the queen, he's bringing all four of his grown children and their spouses to share in the experience. you can get more details from " the london sun." that remark that meghan markle is nasty, getting a lot of headlines in the u.k.. the president on thursday was asked about the issue of impeachment as he was heading for theolorado springs

air force graduation ceremony. here is what the president had they. [video clip] it, to me got into it's a dirty word, the word impeachment. it's a dirty, filthy, disgusting word and it has nothing to do with me, so i don't think so. there was no crime. , or,crimes and -- not with it's high crimes and misdemeanors. there was no high crime, there was no misdemeanor. how do you impeachment for that? it came out that there was nothing to do with russia. the whole thing is a giant presidential harassment. a scam. honestly, i hope it goes down as one of my greatest achievement. i have exposed corruption. i have exposed corruption like nobody knew existed. that from the president on thursday before heading towards the air force graduation

ceremony. if you go to "the washington post," 55 members of congress, all but one are democrats, saying that they support the idea of opening up the inquiry to impeachment. the way they have broken it down is that those who support impeachment primarily and heavily in. -- democratic districts, continuing the invest -- and those supporting the continuing investigation, mapping out evenly or leaning republican. again, the list continues to grow. this is what it looks like from "the washington post" website. over 50 democrats want to open an impeachment inquiry into president trump. tell us what you think. ruth is joining us from millersburg, pennsylvania, good morning. caller: good morning. i do not believe in impeachment. president trump did a lot for this country.

it.i think most appreciate believedemocrats cannot that he beat them. the democrats can't accept the won.he just is not a politician, ok? and he won over hillary clinton, which was wonderful. thank you for the call. we will go to francis, next, tennessee. good morning. good morning. i oppose impeachment because president trump has not done anything worthy of impeachment. who was president when all of this was supposed to have happened was president obama? what did he actually do to stop this interference in our election if it did happen? and number two, america has

interfered in elections. i got president obama did not like netanyahu and interfered in that election over there. we all know that was the case. america has many worse problems. the evidence for impeachment is not there. and i have a feeling that other countries interfered in our election is in russia. why aren't we talking about them? mindlease, house, get your straight and enforce the cuts to think correctly. thank you. host: thank you for the call. taking a moment to share with you this headline and the faces of those that were killed shortly after noon 4:20 in the afternoon on friday.

no motive found as a shaken city city employees, one contractor, and a gunman that we will not name. all 13 are dead. those 12 victims something going about their work during the day, shot down. yet another mass shooting in virginia. yesterday in virginia beach, a memorial in tribute. [video clip] collects its unbelievable, what happened yesterday. we read about it in the news and it was brought to our house yesterday, brought to our families yesterday, brought to us yesterday. please remember them in your prayers. now is the time to mourn. tomorrow we will pick up and we will move on. ask we need to be strong, we and to revise, our friends our families need to work to move virginia forward from here. and we will. >> you are not standing here because this city is part of a

statistic. city that keeps going forward, keeps doing bigger and better things in the name of jesus and on the backs of the people who have health. -- health -- hope. amazing grace, how sweet the sound, that saved a wretch like me i once was lost, but now am found ♪s blind but now i see that video, courtesy of "the virginia pilot." this editorial -- ." tragedy we did not deserve pointing out that there are

"policy questions that must be asked and answered big and small in the aftermath of this mass shooting, the deadliest in the history of virginia beach and the worst in the united states this year. that distinction is unlikely to hold for long, this is only the deadliest nationwide since november. we were challenged, we resign ourselves to the fact of what happened in virginia beach of friday and in countless other communities before is part of life in america or we can commit ourselves to something different . the choice is ours to make. that editorial, following the shooting on friday that left 12 people dead. on the issue of impeachment, good morning. caller: good morning, steve. thanks for sharing that information. let me just say one thing before i talk about the impeachment. i want to give my condolences to all of the people in virginia beach.

i'm originally from sandy hook. in charleston, i lived there before i moved here when that shooting occurred. and now here. 3, 2 towns and one city, three altogether with mass shootings. horrible, horrible thing. i had to go to the hospital for a cat scan yesterday and didn't get to go to a vigil, but am going to go to one. i just got my virginia pilot, i haven't had chance to look at it yet. as far as impeachment goes, i'm i am for it, i certainly wouldn't want them to lose the election over it. nancy pelosi very much, but i think she's wrong on this. the constitution calls for the congress to impeach, in my opinion.

i think that's what robert mueller calling for when he gave his press conference. i knowif they don't -- the senate's not going to remove him, we almost that. but still i think on principle -- on principle and also it sets a bad precedent if they don't impeach this person. what's going to happen in the future? nobody gets impeached no matter what they do? bill clinton was impeached. he wasn't removed from office. certainlyng, but he -- certainly didn't do the things that this man did. we have got a criminal sitting in the white house as far as i'm concerned. host: thanks. thanks for sharing your story about sandy hook as well. how long have you lived in virginia beach? here --i only lived

moved here in 2015. i live in a beautiful place here, it's a hug willing. i only live four or five miles from the municipal federal building. it was a horrible, horrible thing. i don't know anybody who -- i don't know any of the victims, but i sure am openhearted and my prayers and my sympathy goes out to each and every one of them and i will try -- i don't have a car, my neighbor drove me to the hospital yesterday. host: going back to one other point, this is from "the virginia pilot," asking the question whether or not these mass shootings are now simply a part of american life. when you hear that sentence, what do you say? like i said, i've lived in three cities with mass shootings. host: that's why i asked it.

caller: i guess it is very unfortunately a part of american life. the politicians won't do anything about it. mean, i'm originally from connecticut and i'm eventually going to move back there. my family is all back there. i go from here to visit them. , my hero has stood up on the senate floor for 15 hours and has been on it since sandy hook. i cried my eyes out, you know, son president obama tried hard to get even a background check and couldn't get that. i have a signed letter from president obama on my living room wall. i wrote him a wonderful letter before he left office.

i was a big supporter of him, i supported him from the beginning . i wrote to him and thanked him. sandy hook, he was there two days later at a memorial service. covered it live. betty, thank you very much for sharing your story, we're going to move on. we appreciate it. caller: yeah, well, ok, thank you very much for showing everything, steve, i appreciate that very much and thanks for c-span and taking my call. host: absolutely, thank you, betty, good luck to you. another tweak saying that obstruction of justice is a crime that can be done even if no initial crime was committed, doing things because you are worried you might be found even if you are innocent is still any legal act. round rock, good morning. caller: the situation with impeachment is urgent.

course, donald the chump must be impeached. he must be impeached. -- he's nothing but a crook. when you have someone like that withs breaking every law, these situations over which our legal systems are based in this country, which we fought for, especially in world war ii, you have got this guy in office, he's got to go. nancy pelosi's position regarding that, she doesn't want to lose an election? what's going on right now is you have got to protect the constitution. he needs to be impeached. that doesn't mean ovi convicted in the senate, but when he gets to the senate, those supreme that preside over

that, the questions -- questions can be asked of each and every one of the republican senators who are also traders. they are just as much traders as donald the chump is. they can ask questions and they .an ask for it they put their names on the line saying whether or not they were impeaching or not. and if they say not, our history will judge them to be the kind of traders they are. host: thank you for the call. from the l.a. times, "impeachment 101," how they could remove the president from .ffice "the president, vice president, and all civil officers of the u.s. shall be removed on impeachment for and in conviction of treason, bribery, and other high crimes and ."sdemeanors

carroll joins us next from concord, new hampshire. you oppose the idea of impeachment. why? hope,: because i hopefully, all the evidence of august the president from has done, i would like to see resign as richard nixon did. morenk he has done criminal things than richard nixon ever did. i don't know if you will ever resign, but if it comes to peach mint, it will have to come soon. what's going to happen is his face that seems to think he's so great is more to rally behind him and the tragedy for him to be reelected, just a tragedy. hoping that he gets some morality somewhere or a moral compass and decides to resign. that would make me happy. host: matt in league and nebraska, good morning. good morning. i want to see his tax returns. i support most of you colors, i

support impeachment. these people who did no -- think he did no wrong, what about all these people who were involved in his campaign and cabinet, they are now convicted felons. was he really the only guy there that was good. watch the reception he gets in england. is that how we want to be represented worldwide on the world stage? that's all i have. to that point, there is this story from "the washington post," "britain is in crisis, trump's arrival could make it worse. the story here in the u.s. and london, brexit, the most agonizing, paralyzing political crisis suffered by an ally in decades, i guess ken. president trump may be a match. his longer live -- long-delayed state visit to britain coincides the the withdrawal from

european union. joining us from harrison, arkansas. good morning. host: good morning to you. thanks for my call, but the. caller: absolutely. -- host: absolutely. there is no crime and you can't impeach someone for what they think. if they are going to replace somebody under article one and it can be president, for their shoes, if he wants, but you have got to have a crime to do something like that. just because you don't like a president, he's a rich man and paid for his own campaign, that's the main deal right there. they can't control him. he's not been controlled or paid into his campaign by rich

people. so that's the way it is. caller: thanks for the call. june the ninth, richard nixon residing the presidency, gerald became the 38th president of the united states and in the headline from "the washington in a september 2 thousand five interview, howard baker reflected on the nixon resignation, the impeachment proceedings. he was a republican from tennessee who have long supported richard nixon and then reflecting on the resignation that this in september of 2005. [video clip] difficult, it really was. i must tell you that when the committee was constituted i really felt it was just a democratic effort to embarrass him. the election was over. that's what i thought. and indeed, i call president

nixon on the telephone and said -- mr. president, i'm the senior republican on this committee and i would like to come talk to you. he said of orson i get the next day as i remembered when he was in his office, in the executive office building across the street from the oval office. when i walked in i said something like -- mr. president, i'm a senior member of this committee and i'm going to check your right. i'm your friend and i'm a senior republican. we chatted for a few minutes. -- it was anid important point in my life as i said -- i do hope that my friend john mitchell doesn't have any problems. and nixon said well, howard, he may. a lightbulb went off in my head and i decided -- baker doesn't know as much about this situation is you think you do and you had better just put your head down and charge into this thing and but the facts fall over they will. it's not often when you find a

single defining moment, but that was such a moment. i was standing by my personal friendship with nixon. he had campaigned for me, he was a republican husband. with all of that, this was a serious matter and i was going to find out more. and i when i decided, hope it doesn't sound vain of me to say that, but i hope we get a good job of it. host: howard baker reflecting on the watergate recitation. the famous russian, what did the president know and when did he know it. reflecting, back in september 2000 five, on the watergate investigation that began as a democratic effort and then republicans supported the idea of impeachment it ultimately led to the first and only resignation of a sitting u.s. president, the resignation of richard nixon in the august of 1974. the president with this tweet --

"the truth, the witchhunt is dead to come dead."ico -- new mexico, good morning. caller: good morning, c. the democrats are passing information paradox. that is how they are known to do. impeachment, we have nothing to fear but fear itself. when the march on charles koch on friday night was illegal, trump accepted that march. supremacistswhite that destroyed the building in oklahoma. he has to be impeached. i'm a veteran. enterowed the enemy to sacred grounds, the office at the white house for us veterans.

for us veterans its sacred ground, steve. thank you very much and god bless you all. thank you. jim, pelham, north carolina. good morning. your view on all of this? theer: the reason i oppose process is, number one, mr. mueller did not find anything that would convict mr. president trump. number two, nancy pelosi i think is very good at counting votes. even though they may try to impeach him, i think nancy has got to get the votes to convict. thank you very much. call.thank you for the and it, sarasota, good morning. caller: i support it, i think it's the one way we can be assured that the republicans will retake the house. all of your callers who are against trump, who i think is

the best president we have had since teddy roosevelt, really need to ask themselves what question -- when christopher steele turned in that dossier, he had an entry in there that michael: went to eastern europe to meet the russians. there was one big problem, it wasn't president trump's former attorney, it was an entirely different michael:. how did he get that? it had to be either from the f geithner or the intelligence community to the carnivore prison program. one thing that everybody should remember that is calling in against trump, john durham. when that attorney gets done looking into how all of this started, you will see some people go to jail and get taken out of office, but it will be the likes of comey, struck, maybe even brennan and clapper. i cannot wait for that day. thank you. from florida, this tweet --

host: let's go on to donna, new york, good morning, welcome to the program. caller: good morning, how are you today? host: we are fine, how are you? caller: good. i don't think president trump should be impeached. he is one of our greatest presidents, i believe. he has done nothing wrong. i listened to all of your callers say that there are callers -- crimes out there he has done, i would like one of them to say what crimes he did, what crimes he has done. is there anybody that can name a

crime he has done? he did not obstruct justice, he of everything mueller wanted. this is terrible for our country. you are tearing the country apart. [no audio] int: we will go to kevin galveston, texas. we ask that you avoid profanities on the program. caller: about impeaching donald trump, they are going about it all wrong. the way i see it, the man who was president before him started everything. the way they see it, they need to get off that impeachment. i don't -- i'm a democrat, but that doesn't mean i'm against republicans or democrats or independents. i'm just above all. you know, respected. thank you, kevin.

among the seven key allies for speaker pelosi, jefferies, the zoe lofgren listed as a key ally , as well as elijah cummings. you can read the details at the hill.com. tomorrow the executive editor, bob you sack, of the hill.com, will be our guest. the week in congress, lawmakers returning this week. good morning, jeffrey. welcome to the program? caller: where should i start question mark good morning, steve. host: good morning. caller: i believe that these republicans are suffering from some kind of a delusion that hope donald trump is infallible. he's only human. he's kind of a greedy, self-righteous human. narcissistic and his ways. i think he thinks he's still on a reality show in some way. this is his biggest tv moment. will beachment trial

his highest rated biggest loser. think that what we really need is education in the united dates. we need education on logic and the rules of debate. donald trump has brought this ofntry to the level third-grade playground -- i don't know what you want to call it. the shenanigans i guess you would call it. hoc, ad hominem hasty generalizations. these are faults of logic and fallacies. these are his modus operandi. he deals in insult -- i don't know if he thinks he's don rickles reincarnated, but ad hoc ad hominem attacks on the

opposition. we are not traders. thatl of you republicans are parroting these accusations of treason, i want to point out the treason is a crime only in wartime. actually a crime. we are not in a declared war. for theffrey, thank you call. this from a harvard university hill.com,ls at the "two thirds of voters opposing the impeachment proceeding, 65% of those surveyed said they don't like the idea of democrats proceeding with the impeachment against president trump." on the issue of impeachment, here's what alan dershowitz said. >> impeachment, -- [video clip] >> impeachment, it's whatever congress as it is. that makes congress above the

law, they specify high crimes and his demeanors. in other words there must high crimes to impeach. if president obama had done what president trump was alleged to have done. attempt tolear violate the constitution. asking whether you support or oppose the idea of impeachment. robert is next from old forge, pennsylvania, good morning. good morning. i'm just calling to say i don't understand why these people that donaldling up think that trump is such a bad president. he has done so much for this country already. what are they going to do when they find out what the fbi has done to try and take down this president? all i can say is that i hope

that they watch the news, besides cnn and msnbc. they got to realize that whatever happens to president trump could happen to us, the american people. eventually it's all going to come out and i hope that people listen and get the fact before they make a decision. thank you. host: robin, thank you. and, powder springs, georgia, good morning. goodmorning -- caller: morning, we are having a good day, today, aren't we? the idea of impeachment is correct. i also agree with nancy pelosi, the time is right. i would think that we would need to wait until we could get a few republicans to admit that impeachment is needed. while it is just a partisan issue, it's not going to do the job. i think that unless republicans

get on board -- we have got one -- until we get enough senators who are willing to do what needs to be done to rid our country of the man who is making money from his office and abusing his power , to call for the fbi to act against his enemies, his political enemies -- he is doing much more than the things that are contained in the mother of art. call thank you for that from georgia. this headline from "the baltimore sun," "mary hogan saying he won't run against president trump, is instead forming a bipartisan advocacy .rganization hogan said that instead of running, he would start a national nonprofit organization united."merica all of thepreciate

incursion i received to run in 2020, however i will not be a candidate. i'm dedicated to serving in my second term as american governor and leading the incoming chair of the national governors association host: again, the headline is that larry hogan wilma challenge donald trump. right now, bill well, former governor of massachusetts, the only challenger to donald trump in the upcoming primary caucuses. our newsmakers program is available on our website, c-span.org.

anthony, good morning. i oppose the impeachment of the president. i think that the president has never gotten a fair shake since he was elected. you know, they have 90% of the coverage against him from all of the media. from unnamed sources. i cannot even write a letter to the editor here without getting my name, address, and phone number. another thing i would like to say, i commend attorney general barr. he looks at the objective data and just says the fact. that's what we need more of. the democrats, they have a thing where if you yell the loudest you are more right. it's not true. the thing i find very insensitive from the democrats all ofear nadler, shift, these, this is our constitutional right of oversight? that is true.

but what about your constitutional right to pass the laws. let's give some examples. the taxes. youwant to have the taxes, pass a law to have the tax forms. a lot of people in congress on 100 $80,000 a year to come back millionaires. look, we have the democrats saying -- they wanted to pass health care. obamacare is a disaster. very expensive. they call it affordable. they should change the name to unaffordable. that would be more realistic. call,thank you for the anthony. the story from politico, the headline is that the navy acknowledged the request to hide the mccain warship, confirming on saturday that the request was made to minimize the visibility of the uss john mccain during president donald trump's state visit to japan. the request was made to the u.s.

navy to minimize the visibility. however, all ships remained in normal configuration during the visit and there was no intentional efforts to explicitly excludes sailors assigned to the john mccain." that story first reported by "the wall street journal," the white house wanted to move the mccain's named after father and grandfather. he told reporters that the move was, in the president's words, well-meaning. just in a mosh is the only republican in the house of representatives who has called for an impeachment inquiry and at a town hall this last week, he was asked about it. [video clip] >> i'm concerned that we have gotten to the point where impeachment a never be used in any circumstance and i think that is a greater risk than the risk that it be used to often. [applause] impeachablee

context, there are so many layers that need to be moved through before he would remove someone from office. i think there are a lot of protections for someone like you. you have to have a two thirds majority in the senate to convict someone, which is a very high threshold to get through, especially in a very partisan environment. i think it's more dangerous for our country to allow the president to mislead people, make things up -- for example, a the mueller report, again, lot of my colleagues haven't read it. a lot of people at home haven't read it. i understand why that is, you expect your representatives to read it and understand it. as an example, in the mother -- mueller report, the white house counsel is asked to provide false records.

things like that to mislead people about a statement he made, things like that to me dishonestyredible and really harms the office of the presidency. host: that from representative justin the mosh -- justin amish. this headline from "the new york hads," "lowering the bar, i an editor who said not to give homeric epithets and that people in the culture of politics are beautiful, but i must make an exception with william barr, saying that in an interview in alaska between he and jan crawford, he asked bar who was the best cheney-esque outdoorsman under the big sky routine and if he was worried about his reputation, he came in with a good reputation and is now at use the protecting the president --

host: that is from maureen dowd this morning in "the new york times." rob is joining us from eastern north carolina. good morning. thank you for to my call. it's early and it's a nice day in washington, it looks like. mr. trump is not your regular career politician. the clintons stayed in for two terms for bill clinton. he got impeached, he stayed in. hillary's brother came up, in the last month they should more pardons than any other president.

mr. obama was in, increasing the national debt to times. when he got out he had a recession. obama was a good candidate, something the nation needed. to show that people of color were more of a role model that you could get an education for get a lot agree. and become president of the united states. that's helpful, that's helpful. debt one point about the and the deficit, it did double under president obama and it is elected to double again under president donald trump. what does that tell you? caller: it tells you that the democrats increased the deficit twice. can i ask you, did they rebuild any infrastructure? daca is the good thing that came out of the obama administration. a lot of people that were who are and low income had insurance and that was the best thing he

did. mr. trump is a businessman. the professional politician class in washington are the last 20 or 30 years has not solve the major problems like rewriting and simplifying the immigration policies. we have had massive deficits with china, which owns 51% of our treasury notes. in japan, which owns about the other half. now the thing about it is, if you look at the pros and cons in business, the clintons, they had, when hillary was secretary of state, bill clinton was trotting around the world eating six-figure and seven-figure speaking fees. bill clinton and chelsea went to morocco, they got there in the afternoon, stayed until the next day, had a dinner, gave a speech, came back with $32 million. host: we are going to move on with -- to another caller.

good morning, jim, california. caller: i find it laughable, some of the logic that some of the characters have in support of this president. from the time he hit office, excuses were made of his inability to understand the laws and the rules that apply to everybody else. we have watched this shifting of funding for the wall. it took the courts to have to control that, taking away money from our military. there is a recent thing that was summit,ing the japan that the navy is holding over sailors because they don't have enough sailors to support his efforts with the iran thing. going after our allies like they are the ones who are a problem. , the almost funny, the corporations are the ones that have the biggest issues,

creating the problem with china and how they do business. china's ability to demand that they turn over there trade secrets to do business in china. they wouldn't give up the opportunity to make money, so they went along with it. thishey are arguing about self-created tariff problem. now we are doing it in mexico. people have said -- show me the crime that this president has committed. host: thank you for the call. the trade war with china could spiral out of control as the president heads to the u.k. in concerns over brexit and threatening new tariffs against mexico." by the way, the president tweeting again this morning on the issue of border security, saying the people for years have been saying that we should talk print -- theut the

problem is mexico is an abuser of the united states, taking but never giving. it has been this way for decades. they must stop the -- talkinge president about coyotes and illegal immigrants this morning on his twitter page, at real donald trump. james, go ahead. caller: i don't support the impeachment because i want to on every factor brought up either side of the situation brought out and i believe that the endemic that's really need to stop with all of this self-righteous stuff. it's consuming them. for example, the man from new

jersey earlier today, saying donald trump is terrible, ask ,im if he voted for menendez who did what trump is accused of. ask the people from connecticut if they voted for blumenthal, who lied about his vietnam war experience record. ask people from massachusetts if they voted for elizabeth warren, who lied about her ethnicity. this is getting to the point that it's ridiculous. ,f he was guilty of a crime, no we just don't like his demeanor, so we want to see him impeached. host: thank you for the call. this from this morning, from " the washington post" sunday magazine. a letter to an army veteran, dated june 22, 19 44, to his girlfriend. my darling, i finally got a few moments off to let you know that

i am alright, i love you with all of my heart and my soul, i have missed you my darling more than you will ever know and i ."uld never put into words and then he reflects on what happened at the historic d-day invasion, so many that generation with letters to their loved ones, spouses, girlfriends, talking about the emotions that they felt, as president from travels to england and france to pay tribute to the greatest generation. we will have coverage as well. this is from inside of open of the washington post," finding that his grandfather sent to his girlfriend, future wife, and what it meant to those in the d-day invasion. you can find more information online. a reminder that american history tv is taking a look back at the events 75 years ago you take a look at the. on our website, c-span.org.

mississippi. good morning. caller: good morning. host: you get the last word. what do you think? i am glad for this opportunity for people to call in. i am from mississippi. i am a black individual. i love trump. i think he is the best president we have had. if the democrats want to try to impeach him, go right ahead -- he will win. plain to meet -- explain one law he has broken. please tell me what law this man broke. host: dwayne from mississippi.

we thank you. the conversation continues on facebook at facebook.com/cspan. and the tweets continue, a lot coming in at @cspanwj. coming up in a moment, we will talk about john walker lindh, now a free man, and talk about the potential threat he and others may pose to society as these former taliban supervisors are now free in this country. seamus hughes of george washington university joins us. later, timothy mcnulty, author of "the meanest man in congress," looking up the role that jack explained in the watergate judgment. "newsmakers," veteran affairs secretary robert wilkie. [video clip] >> if we just look at the last, tragic act, we are not doing our service to the veterans of this country. i said out the coalition to

prevent veteran homelessness, we need to take a strong look at homelessness, addiction, and mental health. the budget for mental health services at the v.a. is 9.5 billion dollars, yet we have not even reached the sputnik stage in terms of getting our arms around mental health issues. i envision the whole of government approach with a whole health approach to tackle veteran suicides. the great tragedy is that, of the 20 veterans who commit suicide, one or two are on active duty, every day. two or three are in the guard reserve. another 10 we have never seen before. we have to work work closely with the states and localities and nongovernmental organizations to find those veterans we have no contact with. i've seen it work in many cities on the homeless issue. new orleans, jacksonville, houston. where the charities go where the v.a. cannot. i think that will be one of the

keys in getting our arms around it. but again, it is much larger than veterans. we may be the most visible man in the station of this tragedy, but the entire nation needs to have a deep station about life and mental health. the v.a.ert wilkie, secretary. we hope you tune in, following the >> "washington journal" continues. -- following the "washington journal." it is also available on the free c-span radio app. we want to welcome seamus hughes, serving as a pretty director for the program on extremism, which is what? week track everybody thought about joining a terrorism organization. host: who is john walker lindh? caller: -- guest: he converted to islam when he was 16, learned arabic, and eventually ended up in

pakistan and afghanistan, and got picked up in a taliban prism, then came back to the u.s. and was sentenced to 20 years. host: he is now a free man after serving 17 years. why is he being let out? guest: because he served his time. he got out about three years early for good behavior. but good behavior in prison is different than good behavior in life. he was following all the rules in prison, but he held his extremists believes. host: what concerns do you have about his release? guest: he is the case study for the future. we have about 80 folks getting out who have been convicted for terrorism related activities. john walker lindh is the extreme case. he is still a strong believer in extremism, has supported the islamic state letters to reporters. he is a true believer, through and through. host: so he said he is the tip of the iceberg? guest: he is the tip of the ice berg and is also an outlier. most individuals tend to move on

with their lives. they move on. john walker lindh has not come it appears. host: you looked at what his family had to say when his -- when he was first taken in. this from knbc television. [video clip] >> what injuries do you have? >> i have a bullet in my leg and several shotgun wounds. ♪ you have a slight accent. englishe not spoken with native speakers in several months. i've been speaking arabic. ♪

>> walker chose to fight on the front lines with american enemies. terrorists did not compel john walker to join with them. john walker chose terrorists. >> all right, now, you are a prisoner. ♪ >> it has been three years since i last saw my son. it was wonderful to see him this morning. my love for him is unconditional and absolute. ♪ >> i am just wondering, personally -- i am just curious, is this what you thought it would be? host: so as you looked at what

he looks like, he's on his mother in 2001, first of all, at an early age, at 16, being radicalized, what led to that? guest: curiosity. it was before 9/11. al qaeda had announced its intentions to attack the west, but he is an individual who came from an upper-middle-class family in california and wanted to see the world. he got drawn into this extremist belief system. host: what is not being done in the federal prison system that needs to be done to help these so-called radicalized individuals? issue, a is a big public policy question. for the most part, we has our extremist population in three or four prisons and do something called special administered of measures. monitor their phones, do all of those type of things, but there is not a disengagement or de-radicalization issues.

there are first amendment issues. not the goaln is when it comes to the federal bureau of prisons. host: why? guest: they have a lot of other things going on. 180,000 prisoners. they focus on drug offenders and things like that. when they= -- when it comes to extremists, and used to be that spread these guys out across the population. the concern was they would then radicalize other inmates who were not drawn to extremism to begin with. together,as them all which means you have an echo chamber happening. they are feeding off each other. to ask aboutant the trader at -- ink ordination with the justice department, to share with state, local, and

regional fusion centers as well as other relevant law enforcement entities, release information from a federal correction facility, including the name, charge and date, excited place and date of release, and individuals convicted of a federal crime of terrorism. does that apply? level ofere is a coordination because he is john walker lindh. there is a cornish between the bureau of prisons, department of justice, the fbi to watch him. my concern is less about john walker lindh, although he has his she missed believes. there will be a strong eye on him. it is the other individuals who will not have the support. i interviewed other individuals who got out -- there is no systematic way to address this. host: our phone lines are open. . (202) 748-8000 the line for democrats. (202) 748-8001 for republicans.

we also have a line for independents --(202) 748-8002. we are talking only about john walker lindh but also about how many others who will be released and what is the timeframe. guest: we have about 275 homegrown terrorists in prison right now of jihadist persuasion. 85 folks are getting out in the next five years. the issue is there is not uniformity in terms of what we do with them. some individuals get lifetime supervision. some get two years to five years. some get monitoring in their phones, some do not. it is -- it is entirely dependent on what the judge decides. host: what do you want to see happen? guest: some baseline everyone agrees two. do we require some level of counseling, some mentorship of individuals who have gotten out -- how do we reintegrate them into society, so you are not dealing with this problem in

another five years. bill, joining to us from florida. good morning. caller: good morning. , is thisike to ask you new procedure going to overflow into freedom of the press? for instance, the journalists who are against our occupations iraq -- affectis this going to press coverage at all? is the press still independent, or are you going to go after people who are against our policies overseas? host: explain your thinking there. i am not quite sure i make the connection. caller: this guy obviously had his deceptionwith

of what is going on, and proceeded to take a stand. i am wondering if it is going to --ect the type of coverage is journalism going to be undermined in this country? host: thank you. we'll get a response. ofst: on the narrow question journalism, by any measure, john walker lindh was not a journalist. he went to afghanistan, met bin laden, went to a terrorist training camp. he crossed a legal threshold where he got arrested for trying to join the taliban. so i do not see this infringing on freedom of the press. host: jay in philadelphia, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i want to know what proof does your guest have that these -- these mates are any

more dangerous -- that they are a threat to the public? guest: actually, that is a larger question. the problem is a sample size is small when it comes to release. there is a study from the university of idaho that says recidivism rates for terrorism convicts tend to be lower than the general population of criminals. on the narrower question of john walker lindh, we have a decade worth of material. an nbce letters to affiliate where he talks about his support of isis. i do not want to overflow the threat, but the concern is that is not a systematic way to deal with this. we can look at the problem and say there is nothing going on, but let's at least set up tripwires, and right now, we do not have those tripwires. host: john walker lindh writing a letter to nbc 4 in los angeles. quote, "we are in prison due to our police and the practice of

religion, not for committing any crime. the islamic state is clearly very sincere and serious about fulfilling the long neglected religious obligation of establishing a caliphate through armed struggle, which is the only correct the." guest: and this speaks to a larger question. john walker lindh was housed in indiana with other extremists. ofwas tied up with a bunch individuals tied up with other islamic state activities, got a window into that, and did not change his mind on it. the concern going forward is if you are going to house all of these individuals in the same prison, this makes it easier for the federal bureau of prisons, they can monitor all of it, but it does not make it easier when they get out in terms of they are just reinforcing their beliefs. host: john, independent line. good morning. caller: hi, yes. thank you for c-span. give me 20 seconds. or give me 30 seconds.

i appreciate your time. i am very much appreciative of how you have started off this segment. however, you have not identified a crime, constituting a crime, whatsoever. and more importantly, i love c-span. i cannot think c-span enough. but at c-span, it shows a man on asking?what am i host: the reference to a man who committed suicide the other day in washington and lit himself on fire in a public venue. guest: the question of ridding a fore, he was committed committing a crime. you can restrict an individual on probation. i'm not asking for something vindictive or punitive when it comes to john walker lindh. i am just asking for a system that makes sense. host: the next call is dan zell from north carolina. good morning. caller: good morning.

i have a question. by your definition of terrorist, does it only include jihadist or religious fanatics? guest: no. uses violence to further their political beliefs. in prison, you are dealing with a larger set of domestic terrorist. everybody sides folks had joined al qaeda and isis. the bureau prison action has a good tracker third of tracking those individuals. host: you want to follow up, denzel? caller: we have already released convicted terrorists. it has been going on for decades now. for instance, down the street, i was going to the store and saw neo nazi with his shirt off. he had the empirical -- imperial convicted-- he was and got out. it is going on already. guest: and when it comes to

weiser premises, you have programs in place. you have programs like life after hate. when it comes to jihadism, we do not have those civil society or ngo's that can step up to the plate. host: our guest is seamus hughes. you worked at the national counterterrorism center, which is what? guest: the national counterterrorism center was set up after 9/11. bring 17was to different intelligence agencies under the same roof and connect the dots. what did we miss in 9/11, what if the fbi and cia have, and what is the single point of ringing together? host: and what did we miss in 9/11? guest: sharing intelligence. we had individuals not willing to share because of legal frameworks but also bureaucratic fights. host: could 9/11 have been prevented? guest: yes. if you look at the 9/11 commission report, says the

failure of imagination p this was a bureaucratic and systematic failing. host: james in north carolina, good morning. steve: good morning, and to your guest. do you all track white supremacist or radical lights or permissive groups? guest: we do. havee u.s. context, you 1000 active investigations when it comes to active terrorism, 1000 investigations when it comes to domestic white supremacist terrorism. extremism -- at the program of extremism, we do track them. host: donald's next from cincinnati. good morning. caller: hey, how you doing. you feel -- what are you asking?

us, after he has committed his crime, gone on to prison, and now you want to violate the constitution of the united states by chasing him down forever, is that what you are up to? guest: i am not up to that. in fact, i think you can set up researches on parole that can and after some amount of time. but is there any process in which there would be monitoring of his activities? that is the real question. an individual has served their time, they should be able to move back into society without the cloud of suspicion that follows it. the concern for the fbi is it has not raised to a level of full investigation. there is something called the domestic oversight intelligence died, the -- guide. the d.o.i.g. a publicestion is

policy question. if an individual commits an attack, which is highly unlikely, but if they did, there would be congressional hearings, and the public would ask, why did we not watch the sky? there is not the systems in place to allow for that. we can have debates over the civil liberties of that, whether it makes sense. it may make sense and we have not made that determination. host: how long would it last? guest: monitoring? it depends. host: what easy for john walker lindh? guest: at least a five-year monitoring of his social media accounts, no travel, no association with known or suspected terrorists. host: but he has dual citizens that. -- citizenship. guest: he does, but he cannot travel. dual citizenship with ireland from his grandmother. host: we go to wisconsin. good morning. caller: good morning. thanks for c-span.

years,t 10 years or 15 we have had our own people coming back in body bags, both mentally and physically maimed. we are at war with the taliban. the question is what to do with these people? isn't this treason? they should be executed. i have a layman's understanding of treason, but perhaps you can and let me. guest: he was not charged with treason. he was charged with aiding and abetting the taliban and 10 other charges. we have a system of government, article three, that allows for impressment of that imprisonment of up to 20 years for these cases. host: didi has this week. if he does commit another crime, who was held accountable? guest: that is the other thing. you have a soup of bureaucratic organizations, bureau of prisons, probation services, department of justice, u.s. attorney's office, fbi, the all

have to be coordinated. the short answer is nobody. host: let's go to george, -- sorry, let's go to debbie, pittsburgh, pennsylvania. caller: hi. i am not in pittsburgh, but i am in pennsylvania. i like when these are on about the cia trained the terrorists in afghanistan. they armed and funded them. now, so where is the accountability on that and, for starting all of this -- on that end, for starting all of this? my comment is mostly that needs to be incorporated in your discussion to these people getting out of jail. we have really been attacking community, or the cia -- like i said, they trained al qaeda. i think that needs to be incorporated in your coverage. i love c-span.

i watched it all the time goodbye would like to bring in more journalists from like the in these democracy now times that were present the muffling of our -- host: thank you. we have an will continue to do that. thank you for your question and,. guest: we did see some support of the u.s. government of the taliban in the 1980's, or some aspects of them. you can separate that between the act, which is john walker lindh went to an al qaeda training camp, met with bin laden, was arrested and picked up in a taliban prison. host: if you could sit down with john walker lindh, what would you ask him? guest: where are you at now? i've interviewed a lot of convicted terrorists, and like i said, most of them have moved on. it was an early phase, when they

got arrested when they were 20 and now they are 40, and they just want a family and move on. for john walker lindh, would ask do you still support the islamic state, do you get is the right belief, and what do you want to do with your life now? stay in the u.s., travel, do you want to go back to where you were before? host: you call him a terrorist? guest: he is a convicted terrorist, so yes. i believe in second chances. we have seen former extremists move on with their lives. but, yes. us frombert joining tennessee. good morning. sorry, anthony from tennessee. good morning. caller: good morning. he admitted that 9/11 could have been prevented. he also forgot pearl harbor. if you put a tracking device and the person -- i was in combat in

vietnam, and, frankly, the people that -- that terrorists that you 40, doe, you say he is you mean there's no taliban at 60? host: thank you. guest: thank you for your service. i would say you cannot hold a person indefinitely for crimes. you can be concerned about them indefinitely, and the question is how do you set up a system that respects civil rights and civil liberties, while aware of the concerns. host: from pittsburgh, david. good morning. caller: i have a question that pertains to some of the concerns once the rights of people they are released from prison. are we suggesting a program similar to what we had for child sexual offenders?

it is my understanding that they are monitored in a way even is that thee -- constitutional ground for what he is suggesting? guest: yes. there is a smattering of that in the tracer act in front of the hill. i do not know if we need a system that brought kate put it in context. we have about 300 to 500 people arrested in the last 15 years for terrorism related activities. adr getting out. i am not sure you need a nationwide system. what you do need is a system where you share information. if an individual moves from alaska to massachusetts, which u.s. attorney the for alaska did not know he moved from massachusetts, there is a problem. host: but is it a similar system ach and that system if pedophile's release from jail? guest: there is not a similar system. it is not there. host: what about local police

department's? guest: sometime they are part of it, and sometimes there is classified information. so some individuals may not have clearance, so they have to go to the joint terrorism task force to get information for the locals. you are talking about 18,000 law enforcement agencies in the u.s. say john walker lindh moved to virginia, you have arlington, you have d.c., you have metro, you have everybody playing, and have them all on the same sheet music. have should they at least the knowledge, whether or not they do anything with it? but i know that this individual is living in arlington or fairfax or spring field? guest: yes. host: jane joining us from cleveland, ohio. good morning. caller: hi. i am older now, but i spent 40 years doing unity release counseling, which got defunded

and privatized. at any rate, being between the individual and the community in that way, i looked at what kind in ourtions we have larger context, other than police. you are words, if dealing with violence, and of course you have to have police type defense against violence, but sometimes driven to are really extremes are driven to extremes also because there is too much extreme in the society and too much either surveillance and or extreme conformity. i am thinking back about how vietnam veterans against the war offered people nonviolent solutions, and community groups like that that are not opposed

to violence but have some protest, ways for people to protest, that are not strict conformity and being surveilled all the time. i just wonder if this gentleman and other people with solutions are thinking in terms of positive protest. host: thank you for the call. guest: absolutely. my colleague, brian jenkins, talks about terrorism does not attract the well-adjusted here there are other issues other than the ideology. there will be mental health issues, substance abuse issues, in some cases, so of course counseling will have to play a role. but we do not have that instituted right now. in fact, there is not actually a bunch of folks you can call. say john like can -- walker lindh gets out, and i have five people who were in the

same shoes and are trained against radicalization, because it is a relatively small phenomenon. host: how does the bureau determine whether or not someone is radicalized? guest: they use an assessment tool in prison based off the u.k. model, and they say what more his charges, where is he now in life? a lot of it is interviews, a lot of it is monitoring. letters they get in, phone calls, communication with other inmates. -- i if he were involved use this hypothetically -- if you were involved in any other type of terrorism poster -- post release, the question is why do we know? guest: in many ways, john walker forh will come to mind policymakers. we saw senators write a letter to the bureau resents two weeks ago. this is a way to start a conversation that has not

happened for a long time. in the u.s., we have been fortunate, in some ways, because you have a relatively long sentencing process. in the u.k. and france and germany, you're talking to to five years. in the u.s., 10 to 20 years. so we have basically arrested our way out of this issue. now, we are getting to a point where individuals are getting out, we will have to deal with this. letter, senator shelby and senator hassan writing our highest priority is keeping america safe, secure, and free. to that end, we must consider the security and safety of our citizens who will receive individuals like john walker lindh who continue to openly call for extremist violence. upst: and you need to set a system not punitive in nature. by that, you want to give these individuals a chance to reach a great and society. you do not want to set them up for failure. so there are researches on his

monitoring when it comes to the online space. in 2002,he went in, what it is now, you need a cell phone to be able to get a bus pass, or all of those types of things you will need, so we need to think this through a little bit so that we can set him up to move back in society. host: philadelphia next, jacqueline. go ahead. caller: good morning pete i just tuned in, and i really -- i hope americans will watch him, because i do not trust him at all i feel like this is the type of person that goes to schools and shoots them up nowadays, because he is still claiming to be a sympathizer. i would not trust him at all. publici think his pronunciations are concerning. again, john walker lindh is an outlier for the larger cases of extremist convicts.

most tend to move on. host: how do you know that, how do you know if they move on? guest: you never know what is somebody's head, but that is true in any criminal. there is a system of monitoring you set up when it comes to the online environment, and you set up some sort of counseling. we set up a system of laws and government that allows for people to serve their time and move back on. so we cannot hold them indefinitely. host: what questions do you think officials -- i say generally, whether local police department or the bureau of prison or fbi or counterterrorism experts -- what questions should they ask, with all of these individuals. you say several hundreds will be out in the next five to 10 years. guest: what programs will be helpful to get you back in. i interviewed a guy who was trying to join al-shabaab from chicago.

he was trying to move back into society, but because he was a terrorist, he couldn't. you cannot even go to the local mosque, so he is basically out in the wind with no support system. the -- amus hughes, former official of the obama the deputy, now director the george washington university center for cyber -- george washington university program on extremism. thank you. we will take a short break, but in the meantime, a lot of talk about. our phone lines are open. the president heads to england for d-day ceremonies. also the shooting in virginia beach. (202) 748-8001 is our line for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. independents, (202) 748-8002. tell us what is on your mind this sunday morning. " continues journal

in a moment. ♪ how do you -- >> i can only see it from her perspective. i've had a lot of people pray for me similarly. as a christian, i believe christianity has a long tradition of healing, so i certainly do not think it is not possible for god to heal people. "q&a," ka on c-span's te bowler talks about her memoir -- "everything happens for a reason," reflecting on being diagnosed with stage iv colon cancer at the age of 35. >> it is really gone, right? there is no pain in your stomach, right? that is real. >> you can see how quickly he moved from praying for her, he as the anointed vessel of god, then his confidence in himself

as i vehicle. and then the idea that because she did not have pain in that moment that she is evidently healed. in his very dramatic approach to faith healing is one i often found to be somewhat manipulative. tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span. ♪ >> the house will be in order. has been years, c-span providing america unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public-policy events from washington, d.c. and around the country, so you can make up your own mind. created by cable in 1979, c-span is brought to you by your local cable or satellite provider. c-span. your unfiltered you of government. >> "washington journal" continues. host: for the next 20 minutes,

we want to hear from you. tell us what is on your mind this sunday. we want to share this front-page story and this photo of those 12 victims of the shooting that took place friday afternoon in urging of each. the headline -- no moto found as a shaken city -- no motive found as a shaken city weeps. the city focusing on the victims. the shooter also part of the public works department. 11 of the 12 victims were employees, one was a contractor. also in political news, this headline from the "baltimore sun," governor larry hogan announcing he will not be a candidate or the republican nomination in 2020. in a statement released by larry hogan, he said i truly appreciate all the encouragement i received and people around the nation urging me to make a run, but i will not be a candidate. instead, i am dedicated to

saving my second term as governor of maryland and leading america's governors as the the nationalr of governors association. he is also starting a new nonprofit called in america united. let's go to nancy in elkhart, indiana. good morning. what is on your mind? , just your statement about the man released from prison, that they were deciding whether he should be controlled, i think that is very much related to the virginia beach -- get anith the guns idea into the mind of the person. that is very much like the man who were wondering whether they asuld trace him or not -- far as with the guns -- it sounds simple, and it is not true, but the restriction on

those kinds of people should not sum gonen't there the restriction on whether or not they are allowed to purchase guns? host: from politico, the white house lawyer emmett fled to leave the "post." the president tweeting that he 14. be leaving service june the president adding no collusion, no obstruction, emmet is my friend, and i think him for the job he has done. john joins us from california. caller: good morning. i was listening with interest through the previous guest. i had a couple of quick comments i would like to make. as i understand it -- by the way, i believe john walker lindh, even though he communicated with knbc in los angeles, he was not from here. he was from northern california -- i forget the name of the community, but i believe it was in the bay area.

a very liberal community. and he was a very spoiled young man. i say that because it makes me wonder how many of his reasons for radicalizing more personal. i know that, when he was a young teenager, i think maybe 14 or 15, his father left the family, left the mother and their children for another man. you can look this up right now, because under it is true. his mother seemed to be ok with it. bad agethat is a very for a young man to lose his father and for that reason, and i believe he was, perhaps, rebelling against that, which is why would he go from being too liberal kid to such a radical member of al qaeda.

the: this editorial from "virginian pilot." in virginia beach, a tragedy we did not deserve, pointing out there are policy questions that must be asked and answered, both big and small. this was the deadliest shooting in virginia beach history, the worst in the united states this year, but there have been more than 150 mass shootings in 2019, and this is only the deadliest nationwide since november. either we resign ourselves to the fact that what happened friday and in countless other canoes before it is part of american life or we commit ourselves to something different. the choice is ours to make. joe is joining us from texas. what is on your mind this morning? caller: good morning. good to get through finally. it is kind of hard, but i was lucky today. i wanted to say that basically i report.read the mueller

it was not necessary. trump tells on himself. russia, youhim say got any emails? i heard him say that. i saw him fire james comey after they started the investigation into russian collusion. on and on -- and it seems, to me, some of the callers are reading on script they support trout. he is the greatest, he is doing a wonderful job -- it seems to effort on a concerted the trump administration to try to have people call in. that is all i wanted to say. host: thank you. about 12 minutes ago, the president tweeting on this issue, quote "no collusion, no obstruction, no nothing." rivkin,ting david

presumably on fox's morning, what the democrats are trying to do is the biggest sin in the impeachment business. meanwhile, the president saying in dems getting nothing done congress -- get back to work. much to do. we welcome our listeners on fm in theio, 90.1 washington, d.c. area. bruce in maryland, good morning. caller: how is it going? one of your college just said that we have to make a decision whether or not to just accept this gun violence as being part of american culture or making a change. i accepted it as being part of the american culture a long time ago. when we had those kids killed in the elementary school in connecticut, -- host: in sandy hook. caller: no come in connecticut. host: sandy hook, connecticut.

caller: absolutely. when that happened and we made the decision not to make any major changes to policy, that was basically america accepting it. i understand how people lost their lives in virginia, but -- now tohappened, hear that happen will hundred 50 shootings throughout america in 2019, i am not surprised. i've basically become numb to it, and i no longer use it as a means to excite me, that there needs to be some major change. what we have to understand is we, in america, we were built on violence. we killed the indians in order to take over the country. we enslaved african americans in order to develop and make the country rich. one thing we do better than anybody else in the world is violence. so why would we go against the concept of actually believing the individual american should be able to carry a gun and execute violence in defense of

themselves but also run the risk of executing violence indiscriminately? for the call.u i want to share with you -- this is the headline from the "new york times co. the president is said to have overruled kushner, and other aids, when it comes to these tariffs regarding mexico. the president tweeting about that as he repairs to leave for the u.k., slapping on those tariffs when he returns from great britain. sarah joins us, or publican line. what is on your mind? caller: good morning. how is everybody at the studio? how is everybody in washington? host: we are good. go ahead. caller: first of all, gun violence -- i hate to have to even talk about it. i think it is sad. it is unfortunate for the families in the sense that these

folks who are doing this -- it is not typical. they know they will be a superstar. whether we condemn them or not. talking about gun control in such an outburst fashion -- that grows on these people, whether we believe them or not. host: we go to iowa. caller: missouri. host: missouri, good morning. caller: first of all, i spent a long time doing criminal defense work and prosecution. i am also a vietnam veteran. as far as robert mueller is concerned, i feel very sympathetic with him. he seems to know what the constitution is all about. i strongly recommend that mr. mueller and the rest of his

staff seriously consider the miranda rights before they testify in front of anybody. ther the constitution, fifth amendment, they have the right to remain silent if they invoked the privilege under the fifth amendment. if i was them, as their lawyer, i would recommend they do that, because it appears that, if it is a criminal investigation, that robert mueller and his staff may have been co-conspirators, and i strongly recommend they consider their constitutional privileges before they testify to anybody. that may be why he does not want to testify now, but he does have the right, under the fifth amendment, and i would strongly urge him to review that. thank you. host: this is the headline we talked about in the first hour, from the london sun -- donald wasp shocked meghan markle nasty about him, but it is great

to have an american princess. the president saying he is honored to have a state visit, that the 93-year-old queen elizabeth will post the president and his family. in the interview, he was told about meghan markle "barbs" about president trump, assisting she would move to canada if he was elected. nothe had to say was "i did know she was nasty." a short while ago, the present with this tweet -- i never called meghan markle "nasty," made up by the news media. times" andnew york others apologize? again, let me read the quote -- "i did not know that. i did not know tha tmeghan was nasty." you can read the interview.

our next call from london, england -- we are carried on the bbc parliament channel every sunday morning. good morning. you ready for the president? caller: good afternoon. i live a mile away from the palace. we are ready for the president. i am going out for the day. my phone call is to tell the american people they will see a massive demonstration in london against the president, but please do not see this as against america. it is a question of the fact that your president, at the moment, is interfering in our political affairs. you're going through a difficult time in britain, elections, changes, this that and the other, and we have two right-wing candidates, and your president has come out in defense and support of them prior to the election. does unknown that anyone this. how dare he interview and our affairs? that is the reason you will see a massive demonstration against him. but please, it is not against the american people. as regards meeting the queen and

royal family, he should be proud. her first time in his or is winston churchill. that is how long she has been sovereign. she is a very intelligent, intellectual lady, who deserves immense respect, and i hope he behaves better than he did last year when he went to windsor castle and walked in front of her. he has no idea of etiquette, but that is his problem. host: can you stay on the line? this is what the "washington post" is reporting -- britain in crisis. trump's arrival could make it worse. some of the details -- if brexit, the most agonizing political crisis suffered by america's closest ally in decades is a gas can, president trump may be a match. added to it is his criticism of theresa may -- scalped by her ruling conservatives but still on the job, and he is chummy

with nigel faragae an -- nigel and boris johnson, the front runner for next prime minister. caller: i would say he has a hard time getting through, because he has to get through the conservative m.p.'s in parliament, and they hate him. the thing that gets us is he is interfering just hours before he arrives. it is an embarrassment to the british government, certainly an investment to the queen -- but she has met with people. she will cope with it well. i just wish he would shut up. look after america. lookingdoing a job after america -- i will not say it is good but rather indifferent. but do not interfere in british politics. it is none of your damn business. watching usyou for on the bbc parliament channel. caller: you're welcome. host: we go to david.

all, to the guy in london, obama went over before brexit and campaigned against it, so this is not unprecedented. i know you have contact with all the news agencies and the networks. i've noticed there has been no picture of the virginia beach shooter. is this they new policy, that, from now on, they will not show the picture of the shooter? which i think, if they do, that is great. host: i do not know if it is a new policy. i know in the case of virginia beach, officials said they would mention his name only once. and you are right, i do not see a photograph of him this morning and the "washington post," but there could be a concerted effort to draw attention to the victims and not the individual or individuals involved in the crime. need to make they it a policy from now on. don't just do it for some and

not others. they just need to completely quit showing any of them. thank you. host: thank you. lou joining us from illinois. caller: how are you? thank you for c-span. these socialt all media inventions that we have ,ow, facebook and apple, google netflix, can figure out who the terrorists are, what they are doing, what they will buy, who they are talking to. i think the fbi could protect us much better. like, when i go on the computer, they know what my preferences are for cars and clothes and shoes, and i just think there is a lot more that could be done to protect us, in addition to protecting us from americans, it seems like americans are killing more americans than terrorists could ever imagine to do. host: thank you for the call.

from politicalo, the navy acknowledging that the request was made to hide the worship, the uss john mccain, named after the late senator's father and grandfather, who served in vietnam and, before that, ward two, his grandfather, that a request was made to minimize the visibility of the uss john mccain, however the navy insisting all ships name -- remained in their normal configuration did the president saying he had no knowledge of this, although he said the request was "well-meaning." jim, springfield, illinois. caller: good morning. how are you? host: we are fine this morning. you know, here we are, you just got done doing this job, this report on what trump said about merkel. if you watch the whole

interview, he does not call her "nasty" in any shape or form. he is referring to the nasty comments she said about him. the press, 93% negative coverage about this guy, president trump. you're doing the same damn thing, you are doing the same thing they are doing. misleading people. and i wish c-span actually had some conservatives who worked there, because i know you, pedro, you are all liberals. we all know this, just looking into your backgrounds. host: jim, all i simply did was read what the president said, and his quote was he was asked about meghan markle -- according to the "london sun" -- and the audio is available on the "london sun." was his quote it and then the president's tweet

about that. guest: meaning -- caller: meaning nasty about what she said, not he was referring to her -- that the i was saying markleaid that meghan threatened to leave the country, --- he said he was everything you threw on there is negative. you're just part of the whole thing. host: i couldn't disagree more. we have the same criticism when obama was in the white house. our job is not to praise or resize any president but put the facts out there and let you make your mind. we are not expressing any opinion. we are only putting the information out there. caller: you guys carried obama's

water the whole time. host: the press is not a monolithic group, but we certainly do not. caller: the american people do see it. they see it. i know you do not want to admit it kid i know the people who work there do not want to admit it. there is a lot of us who watch you guys every day, and we do see it. we do have republicans on there, and you do have democrats. you tried to make it look like it is balanced and even, but in reality, it is always jabs at president trump and what he is doing. host: we are not trying to make it look like anything. we are trying to be impartial and fair. we appreciate your opinion. we simply read what the "sun" reported and read what the president responded. thank you for the call. we go to mark. caller: thanks.

when he was talking about misleading everybody, he said merkel, talking about trump. markle. anyways, as far as england is concerned, i cannot believe the queen is wasting time again with trump. and i hear his whole family, his grandkids, will be going as well. he is going to create a firestorm over there. as you well know. maybe some of your listeners might know, the economy over there is set really spiral downward and has been. thank you. there?ou still lost him. sorry about that. let's go to kim. caller: good morning. first of all, i wanted to say everything trump does is negative. it is not that you all are negative about him, it is the

actions he takes are negative. you know, calling little rocket man, derogative statements and such. but what i was calling to say is i think it is funny how he is always coming off about fake news, isn't that what the russians did on social media, put fake news to influence people? isn't that what they did? on there toe news influence people. that is what trump was saying. news, fake news." i thought it is funny pit i feel like he is too close with put in. 90 minute ski met with him privately -- the 90 minutes he met with him privately, saying the opposite of what the intelligence agencies had found, it is very plain. i do not feel that -- anyway, that is all i had to host: this is the tweet from the

president. this was sent 15 minutes ago. we can track down the audio from the london sun. >> megan is now the duchess of sussex. she's got maternity leave. she was a very nice about you during the campaign. >> i didn't know that. i did not know that. >> she said she would move to canada if you got elected. >> a lot of people are moving here. i didn't know that she was nasty. host: that's the lines it was

getting attention. you can listen to that full interview from the london sun website. he is departing for great britain tonight. the state visit will include one day in france and then he is off to ireland to pay tribute to the d-day veterans. it was a turning point in world war ii. we will have coverage of his trip to england and france this week. the house and senate are back in session. when we come back, we will turn our attention to lessons from watergate and the author of a new book. be joiningulty will us as washington journal continues. towant to share you, a stop beaumont texas. let's watch and listen.

i am just a plain democrat. texas arerats in fairly conservative. compassion andve help people. they want to be reasonable about it. thatof them agree with me when you get right down to it that you should be interested in helping people, you should be asked in helping everybody. attended lamarr university. congressman in 1952. he served the people of beaumont for 42 years. he was a very powerful democrat. he had strong relations with the labor unions. he did many economic development projects for beaumont.

to sam rayburnse and lyndon johnson. in working with lyndon johnson, he voted for some very important and controversial new laws, especially the civil rights act in 1964. before this law, there was widespread discrimination and segregation against black people in the united states, especially in the southern united states. they were barred from going in restaurants and cafés. in those places, they were not welcome there as customers or clients. there was widespread

discrimination. many thought that should be changed. in 1963, president kennedy proposed a new civil rights law. this was based on rising tensions in the south, especially in birmingham. president kennedy, they introduced a sweeping civil rights bill. it stalled out. it wasn't being passed. there was opposition from the south and other people. is dallas.he trip in november 1963, the bill was pending in congress. a number of people went with them, including congressman brooks. they were in the motorcade in

22ntown dallas on november when president kennedy was assassinated. they went back to the air force one. he took the oath of office. jack brooks was looking on. thehe year of 1964 after johnsonation, after became president, the civil rights bill was brought forward. with president johnson's they brought that bill to fruition. on july 2, 1964. that changed everything in the south in the united states with respect to segregation.

that broke the back of segregation in the south. brooks was one of 11 southern congressman who voted for it. all the other southerners voted against it. major player in this huge change. he went with johnson on the voting i tracked -- voting rights act. he is featured here on this statue. for changejor player in the united states. he did many things for our region and lamarr university's campus. host: are there lessons from watergate as democrats debate whether to impeach donald trump.

this is the subject of a new book, the meanest man in congress. joining us is timothy mcnulty. brooks,es on jack democrat of texas. what role did he play in the investigation? guest: he was a key member of the house judiciary committee. i think he was a driving force in the notion of getting articles of impeachment. the chairman of the judiciary was rather reluctant to move forward as were a lot of other democrats and some republicans were ready for impeachment. it was a very long, slow process. some wondered if it was just going to collapse.

congressman brooks was the one who really pushed it forward. 1973 photograph of him shaking hands with richard nixon. richard nixon called him his executioner. why? understoodn everything that was building. it was leading up to impeachment. because brooks was the driving force, that's why he referred to him that way. it never got to impeachment because nixon resigned. he released the tapes. he knew about the problems in his administration and the illegal acts, the obstruction of justice.

mentioned the democrat from new jersey was reluctant to begin the impeachment proceedings. why? impeachment had happened for almost 100 years. johnson, everyone it was a major step for american democracy. it's not something that should be taken lightly or used to settle feuds. it is something that means host: there is a serious question about the president. are there lessons for today? lessons are it should be very deliberate. we shouldn't just rush into it. there should be very definite

articles that say this is worthy of impeachment. it doesn't have to be an actual crime. that's what nixon and his lawyer wanted to argue. the bar was it was an actual crime, they could defend against that in a court of law. impeachment doesn't involve actual crimes. obstruction, it could be disobeying one of the articles. the president not obeying a congress, that is something we can look to today. there are a lot of things that are similar. you have to have the political will to move ahead. host: what made congressman brooks qualify -- qualified for

the impending impeachment of richard nixon? it almost certainly would have led to impeachment in the house. guest: i think you mentioned earlier about the president going to europe and the greatest generation. jack brooks was a member of the greatest generation. he served in the south pacific during the war. he went island hopping in the marines. he had risen through the ranks of state legislator and then to congress where he was under the tutelage of sam rayburn. he was a great friend of lbj. a bosom buddy. he learned how things worked. that was extraordinarily

important, he understood where the pitfalls were. when they talked about votes, they knew what the other congressman needed, what they could do. they were very selective. i think that is something that is important. it's not just about making statements to the press. it's about knowing the process. host: your book was also featured in a recent article in politico magazine. the man richard nixon called his executioner, what democrats can learn from jack brooks. he wrote the watergate impeachment articles. how did you research the book? was the family accessible? guest: this is the book. my son was the one who was a major researcher and writer.

he understood what was important. the family was most forthcoming. libraryearched at the in austin, texas. also the library of congress. he was in congress for 42 years. there was a lot of documentation. he had a three foot pile of figures from the military records. thoughthrough that and this is too much. the military is good it detailing where people were when they went from one island to another. colleagues and staffers were

most forthcoming. him those who opposed , the washington examiner a couple of years ago if the republicans wanted to take control of the budget, they should take the example of jack brooks. i thought that was an indication of how he was respected, even 20 years after he left congress. revered republican, when the question came up about trading votes for a bill of a house and a bill in the senate, bob dole said i want it in writing from the house leadership. if jack brooks should write.

brooks's word is good. that's a great lesson for today. a tipping point for congressman brooks that said we will go down the path of articles impeachment? i don't know if there was one tipping point. as i mentioned, it became very gradual. by point, month after month, the questions about nixon, about the improvements he made at government expense at his property and key biscayne and san clemente. drip of questions about presidential behavior forget led -- don't

republican supporters of nexen stayed with him all the way up until the end. ofs was a tsunami information that was damning. it wasn't just one thing. host: i want you to listen to what howard baker said at the university of tennessee in 2005. he has since passed away. he was the ranking republican on the committee looking into watergate in the senate. he asked what the president knew and when he knew it. he is reflecting on his meeting with richard nixon early in the investigation and how one moment changed what he was thinking in regard to the 38th president. >> it was difficult.

felt it's not going to amount to much. it's just an effort to embarrass him. that's what i thought. i called president nexen on the phone. i said i am the senior republican on this committee and i would like to talk to you. i did the next day. he was then the old executive office building across the street. when i walked in, i said something like i want you to know i am going to protect your rights. we chatted for a few minutes. the most important part of my life.

nixon said he may have problems. a light bulb went off in my head. said you should put your head down and let the facts fall where they will. it's not often when you find a single moment, when you make a decision of that magnitude. notwithstanding my friendship with nation -- nixon, he was a republican president, notwithstanding all of that, this was a very serious matter and i didn't know much about it. sound -- ioes not think we did a pretty good job with it. host: howard baker reflecting on the watergate investigation in 1973 in 1974. what is your reaction? guest: i think that's a very

honest assessment. it also expresses how painful it was for a lot of the president's supporters to come to that realization, that there was more here than people had been led to believe. respect him. unlike -- brooks and his own line. he wasn't of the so ordered was of the same party. when he was head of the government operations committee, that's why they called him the meanest man in congress. they meant it as a compliment. he was so tough. you had to keep pushing and pushing.

whether it was generals or heads of corporations or federal department heads, there were questions that had to be asked. he insisted they had to be answered. we discussed calling it that esso be. sob. them saying that. meansd the staff that sweet old brooks. host: there was a clear distrust between jack brooks and richard nixon? guest: absolutely. wasn't so much watergate. his control over the committee

that talked about waste, fraud, and abuse. he looked at nixon as someone who was contributing to that abuse and the federal government. distrust before he got to the articles of impeachment. our phone lines are open. (202) 748-8000 for republicans. (202) 784-8001 four democrats. our guest is timothy mcnulty. he worked under 10 presidents. he was with lyndon johnson on the day john f. kennedy was assassinated. he was the one that said he needs to take the oath of office at love field. when was elected to the house? 1952. then in 19 94.

he was part of the group of 50 congressman that lost in the gingrich revolution of 1994. host: lyndon johnson is taking in the oath of office. it's worth mentioning that the reason he encouraged the president to take his oath of office in dallas and not wait until he returned to washington is because congressman brooks had a healthy fear of robert kennedy, he was the attorney general. he thought he might try to do something that would somehow delay or stall the overtaking.

skeptical of democrats as well as republicans. when jimmy carter was president, he wanted to reorganize the government as he took office. brooks refused to go along with it. he said that is the prerogative of congress. thatsn't just republicans he was willing to take to the woodshed. host: here is a photograph of president jimmy carter. timothy mcnulty is our guest. david, good morning. subject ofthe impeachment, which i don't see if there is any evidence or anything, people should take a spain in 1936.

i think that's where we are going. there is more rifle ownership. they are going to get something they don't like. i certainly hope it isn't going toward the spanish civil war. haveis something people talked about lightly. it is a catastrophe. it was for spain as well as it was for us in the 1860's. impeachment,rms of you need to think about it as a trial without having criminality involved. you want to see if there is evidence. that's what impeachment is, to bring forward evidence.

that is something for congress to decide. seattle withs in timothy mcnulty. good morning. caller: i would just like to make a comment. i watch the news pretty closely. amazing that the republican from michigan has, out and strongly stated in no uncertain terms what the facts are, what the motor report stated. he went to a town hall and got a standing ovation in a republican field. he had the moxie to get up and say what happening. i find it rather fascinating that the democrats haven't been his vocal and verbal instating

the same across -- in stating across the board that this is not constitutional and needs to be taken under impeachment. arest feel the democrats rolling over on this and putting their finger up in the wind to see what will be better for them. country over say party. i don't feel they are standing up for that. i'm a democrat. i'm really disappointed that they are not really drilling down on this and sticking up for the constitution. i find it is heartening. i disagree that the

democrats haven't been saying anything. i think there is a split within the party. whether that will create sympathy for the president. a tacticals disagreement. you can see with the republicans so far, that congressman is pretty much alone in calling for an impeachment. generallye democrats will come to some agreement weather with speaker pelosi or decide that is at the time yet. that will let the slow drip of outrage continue for a while. we will have to see. what was his relationship like with tip o'neill?

there parallels to what nancy pelosi is dealing with today? guest: absolutely. of theu are the speaker house, it's not just for your own party. it's the house itself. when you think about what your job is and how to perform it, you were going to be criticized no matter what you do. this a heavyweight to say is important. i am third in line for the presidency. i have to be very careful and do things by the book. with tip o'neill and the other saykers, they have had to this is something i can't take lightly. outtimes it's best to wait things. "the meanestle is

man in washington." i would be remiss if i did not mention that jack brooks was opposed to the cameras in the house of representatives. explain. guest: yes. hewas opposed and then turned for around and thought it was something the american people should see what was happening in their congress. it wasn't necessarily gestate one moment decision. things had to work late.

newt gingrich among others use having his advantage by his fiery rhetoric broadcast as if he was speaking for the entire house when there may have only been one or two members there. they had to make adjustments as they get used to the notion of cameras. c-span was born there. boom for theeat country. host: good morning. thank you for waiting. listen, i think the people are missing the big point. country -- hethe turned a lot of democrats

republican. there is a reason for that. people need to really look at it. they are trying to turn it around. trump may be a nasty president, but he is our president. think they realize that even if they put trump out, they will find a nastier president. host: thank you for the call. your take away from that? guest: i'm curious about what he thats president obama did turned him. what does he think president trump is doing that is either keeping him in the republican fold or just keeping him a

supporter. les is from gilmore, texas. caller: good morning. how is everybody doing this morning? i've been watching c-span for about two or three years. one of your callers called in and said something about c-span being democratic goal. why don't you tell us who you did vote for and all of your colleagues. this ain't c-span. we will let the comment stand. thank you for the call. let me ask you about the political tone in washington.

are there lessons with regard to watergate? i think not just watergate, but that whole era. more personaluch in the sense that congressman each other from both parties. they lived in the same neighborhoods. their children went to the same schools. when they talked to each other, it wasn't just talking to a camera and reporters. they were holding onto their own words and talking to neighbors. speaking about speaker gingrich, he introduced an era of personal destruction.

when he went after jim wright as he actually got charged with the same things as speaker right. then he lost office. watergate wasf something that was so personal. both republicans and democrats had to work their way through. what does this mean? now we have the impeachment of president clinton. there is a little bit more familiarity. in the early 1970's, this was uncharted territory. host: good morning. thank you for waiting. caller: thank you for taking my call.

i just wonder if the powers of the president are being challenged as far as democracy as a whole. he seems to be obstructing justice when he's telling people not to testify under subpoena. i wonder about the subpoena process. in regular court, you would be in violation of the law if you did not actually show up. speaker,ering with the she basically said that we can go through the house and get it done. senate,comes to the they don't have the votes. evidence, maybe they should subpoena the interpreter in the private meeting that the president had with vladimir putin. no one seems to know what happened. that seems to be shady.

host: thank you. i think that's what's going to happen. the president says he is going to refuse all subpoenas. it will end up in court. decide what the power of congress is. wheren unusual situation the president will deny the congress their constitutional right to subpoena witnesses and documents. that, theynues to do will have the courts decide. that is not necessarily a good thing. should take care of its business as well as the president taking care of its own

it. not to deny the constitutional right to information. jerry nadler is now the chairman of the judiciary committee. following the statement by robert mueller, jerry nadler had this to say. did notpecial counsel exonerate the president of the united states of obstruction of justice. obstruction of justice of which the special counsel found evidence is a serious crime. it strikes at the core of our justice system. the constitution points to congress to take action to hold the president accountable for his misconduct. counselately, special mueller did not pursue criminal charges against the president

because department of justice policy prevents it. that policy in my opinion is wrong. therefore, as he highlighted this morning, it goes to congress to respond to the crimes, lies, wrongdoing of president trump. we will do so. no one, not even the president of the united states, is above the law. host: that is jerry nadler. what do you hear in that statement? echo the ways brooks set of the articles of impeachment in 1973. he is talking about the congressional prerogative to go

after the truth and information from the white house and the administration. he says it very clearly. mueller is legalistic. people could say his words means us and others take the same words and say no, it means the opposite. that is the important part. it's up to congress now to act. host: white house file articles of impeachment against a supreme court justice? think -- this is what you have to be concerned about -- it's a political hunt for damningion or

instances. douglas was a very liberal supreme court justice. people on the very conservative side of government wanted him off the court. the question is does this impeachment come to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors? in his case, it didn't. from the process of impeachment. light, which is what people are concerned about, it does not become a political trial, but one that talks about the rule of law. point, let me read the following. impeachment resembles a regular

criminal indictment, but it is not the same thing. it refers to the right to hold civil office. uniquement is a political advice designed to dislodge from public office those who are unfit for but cannot be removed. about the only thing authorities something lessis than a criminal act or criminal dereliction of duty may be sufficient grounds for impeachment or removal from public office. that is from jack brooks. your reaction to that? it is what he was saying it doesn't have to be a crime that would be prosecuted in a court of law. ofcan be a simple matter obstruction of justice, denying

subpoenas is obstructing justice. when he is looking at these and they had many more , they first go around took it down to 37. then it came down to five. threeork out the first when president nixon released the smoking gun tape and resigned. one of the main of the three was obstruction of justice, the others were about being unfit for office. saying, what he said is you have to look at it and be

very dispassionate. does this work for impeachment? if it doesn't, let it go. does, go after the president as in the case of president nixon. host: were house republicans right to impeach bill clinton? they in the right? yes. a trial in the senate. he was not found guilty. in some ways looking at it politically, a lot of people think that it garnered more support for president clinton to be impeached on grounds that may

.eem somewhat tame it it may seem like this is hardly impeachable for many people. history goes. ago was acceptable 20 years is no longer acceptable and the reverse is true. formerur guest is a correspondent for the chicago tribune. statea graduate of wayne university. you are next. good morning. caller: good morning and thanks for 40 years. we miss brian. host: q&a is tonight.

did not president johnson talk about jack brooks as the only man biting him in congress or in washington? i seem to recall that quote by johnson. he didn't refer to them that way. tohought it was a testament congressman brooks that his sense of fairness even though he was a close friend of johnson, he was going to do what he thought was proper and right and constitutional. agree with allto of his policies or other

actions. he would decide things without fear or favor. host: mitchell is next in tennessee. thegoing to ask you to turn volume down. it will be difficult to hear what you are saying. i sit and listen to c-span my whole lifetime. see is a democracy going down. keep't understand why we going on this road. all we do is negative.

why can we not have something positive? host: your response? i agree. at times it seems like there is so much negativity, so much personal destruction of reputations. sideon the glass half full when it comes to history. there are but other times in american history, mccarthy, world war ii, the great depression, where all of these things for many years seemed to unable to bee and rectified. i am hoping this time. period shocks people.

bridgesr potholes and that are rusting. there are important things that the country should be doing. -- i think it's good for people to recognize that it's alonger period country with laws. if we follow those laws, that will save us. host: i was listening on c-span radio. our guest is timothy mcnulty. his new book is "the meanest man in washington. " caller: good morning. on the subject of impeachment, bill clinton was impeached for

something that was not a crime. trump shot someone, he would be in pitched for being unfit for office. then he would be out of office and then they would slap the handcuffs on him. guest toike for your tell me if i am correct. bill clinton was not impeached for a sex act, he was impeached for lying. that is something that anyone , ifhas followed the news you lie in a congressional hearing or fbi agents, that is a crime. that's what his impeachment was for. let me fully address it.

host: he was talking about donald trump and if he committed an impeachable offense. your reaction to that? this is a presidency by tweet. i'm not sure which ones to pay attention to or which ones are just a rant. back over the no collusion, ino don't think that's a settled issue. i think the president would like

to say it loudly so people think it is. it isn't over until it's over. host: let's go to robert in texas. caller: good morning. i would like to get your thoughts on a hypothetical. would it not be better to have the justice department under the , move thatontrol from an executive ranch position , the attorney general, actually have them controlled by the supreme court nominating people to run the judiciary and have them get the approval of the senate. judiciale them to be a

an entity under the judicial branch to enforce the law of the country and when theence is found revise impeachment process to eliminate thekind of laws or statues department has about whether or not presidents, senators, anyone indictedongress can be for crimes. now it is completely out of the political process. situation resolve the we are in? a fascinating suggestion. i don't know what the legality

of it or how it would happen. both with the attorney general and attorney general mitchell in the 70's, there was a question of who is the attorney general speaking for or working for. is it the president as a person? is it the presidency? turning it over to the supreme ideas will laws would be involved. it may be a novel way to get out of this current state. york, goodhead, new morning. independence would be

the best thing to do and have them vote in all 50 states. they can get something done. they are not doing anything. host: thank you. certainly is one way to get out of this partisan fix we are in. third-party if a group has ever had much traction, whether it was the bull moose party of theodore roosevelt or the independent candidates like ross perot. i've lost track to the other names.

thurmond,lace, strom ralph nader was who i was thinking of. has becomearty spoilers in our election system. perot get sand, he takes votes away from george w. bush. of what purpose do they serve when you only have two choices between the ,emocrats and republicans however they deviate or it here to the party line. host: you mentioned george h w bush. brooks a picture of jack with him. were they close? guest: they were friendly. i wouldn't say they were close. for george h w

bush. much more than he had for his son george w. bush. they served in congress together. they were respectful of each other. of his being able to reach out to members of the other party. he had very good republican friends. i mentioned senator dole. he gave them respect. host: good morning. you get the last word. my call is more spiritual than anything. frank, i have an amazing 30-year-old autistic child.

campaign, during the i didn't vote for trump, that's not here or there. i remember when he made fun of the journalists that had cerebral palsy. she looked at me. i didn't think she was paying attention. said, mom, that man is a bully. this might seem silly to a lot of people. and i doa child believe the meek will inherit the earth, here is a young woman who noticed a bully. , im the bottom of my heart feel sorry for this gentleman. host: we will get a quick response. children can see

through lots of things. perhaps that's what your daughter was understanding. there is honesty and truth in children. 1994 and hiseat in death in 2012. can you briefly touch on those points? had been an nra member his entire life. 1994 because of the crime bill and it added an assault weapons ban, the nra turned against them. after himroup when and elected this steve stockman, who is now in jail. he was a week short of 90 years

old. memories.ad great in his life and his study. all of the pictures of presidents and others who had been with him over the years. host: "the meanest man in congress" our discussion lessons from the watergate era. timothy mcnulty joining us from north carolina. thank you for joining us on c-span. we appreciate it. guest: thank you very much. host: we are back tomorrow morning. congress is back after the recess. friend of thea network. later, the brookings institution

will join us. we focus on the president, the u.s. and u.k. relations as president trump leads -- leaves tonight. we hope you tune in all week. content isrs of available for free on our video library at www.c-span.org. newsmakers is next. enjoy the rest of your weekend. we hope you have a great week ahead. ♪ makers isst on new

robert wilkie. he talks about the mission act. a program to expand private health care choices. after that, commencement speeches featuring president trump at the air force academy, maxine waters, rod rosenstein and archival address by then fbi director robert mueller. a hearing on facial recognition technology by the government and its impact on civil rights and liberties. officer talks's about the balance of transparency and secrecy. >> i can only see it from her perspective. i have had a lot of people pray for me similarly. as a christian, i believe

christianity has a tradition of divine healing. tonight on c-span's q&a, assistant professor and prosperity gospel scholar talks about her memoir everything happens for a reason, reflecting on being diagnosed with stage iv colon cancer at the age of 35. >> it is really gone, right? there is no pain in your stomach. >> you can see how quickly he moved from praying for her. himself.dence in pain in thatave moment, she is definitely healed. his very dramatic approach to faith healing is one i often found to be somewhat manipulative. >> q&a, tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span.

forfter a weeklong recess memorial day, congress is back in session monday. housemates at 2:00 p.m. eastern and will consider a disaster aid package. the senate comes in session at 3:00 p.m. eastern and will continue nominations with the nominees to head the social security administration up first. when congress is in session, the house is live on c-span and the senate live on c-span2. host: our guest this week is the secretary of veterans affairs, robert wilkie. he is the 10th secretary of