administration winding down the daca program. the court will release audio of this week's oral arguments friday, which we will bring you on the c-span networks after they are released. and a look at today's life events here on c-span. coming up in 30 minutes, the discussion on using the national vote on popular elections hosted by the hill. at noon eastern, a look at the d.c. circuit court of appeals decision to uphold the repeal of the obama administration's net neutrality rule. later today, former cia director david petraeus will talk about cyber threats and the role of nato. this evening, canadian party leaders, including prime minister justin trudeau, will take part in a two hour debate live at 7:00 eastern on c-span. host: back at our desk is matt

schlapp of the american conservative union, as we begin another week with the impeachment story front and center. i wonder what you think of the historical comparisons. what are the lessons that democrats and republicans should take from the clinton impeachment and the nixon impeachment inquiry? guest: i was a young staffer for the clinton impeachment fracas. i would say two things. it is a political exercise. it is all politics. argumentslegal wrapped around it, but in the end, one thing we do not talk about is that the previous impeachments -- and nixon was not impeached but would have been, and probably would have been convicted. the republicans could not get the super majority vote in the senate. both clinton and nixon had just gotten reelected. so the voters did not have another chance to render an opinion on their legal

wrongdoing that came to light after the elections. with donald trump, we have an election a year away, and what makes what the democrats are doing so repulsive is, just beat him. the campaign has already started. we are watching democrats run around the country, even a few republicans, raising money, asking for votes. we are going to be voting in iowa and new hampshire soon. just beat him if you do not like him. but just because -- but the reason they are going to impeachment, they cannot beat him. democrats have said that. that is a disgusting use of the constitution. go win an election. donald trump won fair and square. i know they wanted to upend the election results for three years, and it is all about a coup, anything, something to drag the man down just when fair and square. host: just a minute ago you called impeachment a political exercise. do you think that for democrats it is part of the 2020 campaign? guest: totally.

it is all a part of it, and it is all part of what is happening in the democratic party, which it is becoming increasingly radicalized. go to gallup polling or any other polling, and see the leftward shift of the democrats. they are embracing this term of socialism and the policies underneath it. in the house, the squad rules. aoc, ilhan omar, rashida tlaib, these people lead that caucus. in nancy pelosi eventually had to bow to them. they have wanted to impeach -- as rashida tlaib uses colorful language in terms of her wanting to impeach the president. the first that they were sworn in, it was all about impeachment. why? because they believe it plays to their politics to impeach the man. there is no wrongdoing here there is no criminal statute that has been violated. this is all about taking trump down.

host: matt schlapp will be with us until 8:30 eastern. guest: 8:30? host: it might even be more than that. guest: i need to renegotiate my contract. host: republicans, 202-748-8001, democrats, 202-748-8000 independents, 202-748-8002. is donald trump talking about impeachment too much? host: donald trump is doing the job the way donald trump wants to do it, and all these mark people, including newt gingrich, who was essentially impeached himself, i think sometimes newt gingrich is

communicating to the president through the press. donald trump is he does listen, number one, and number two, he is going to do but what i have learned about donald trump is he does listen, number one, and number two, he is going to do this job the way he wants to do it. he has thrown away the playbook we were all taught to use, that my view is, you insult mother, i will insult your mother better. it is a little bit of schoolyard tactics, and it is jarring to a lot of republicans and a lot of people who have seen the president have this sort of regal manor, but do you know what president -- this regal what theo you know president does behind when the cameras are off?

i think it is a very fine opinion journal. these are one of the headlines. room,impeachment war "trump does it all by himself." i wonder your view at the strategy, the messaging strategy inside the white house. do they need a war room to respond to this? guest: i have always hated that concept of a war room. what i think they need is the ability to make sure that people around the country, including their allies, know what is true and what is false with these charges. there is already rumor of a second whistleblower. i think we will have whistleblowers for 14 months. we will have people from -- conspiracy theorists used to call it the deep state. now all of us who work in government admit that there is a deep state because all of these people will come forward because they have an animus against donald trump. we will read story after story of outlandish things he supposedly did. in theson i have learned

era of trump, what they accused trump of, they already did. we will see this with ukraine. shouldts whose hands have been caught in the cookie jar, now they are accusing trump of having his hands in the cookie jar. it is insane to it i always say, a democrat was the one who actually did it. let's try to figure this out the other thing that out -- about "the new york times," moderates, independents, people who are not that partisan, they are going to c-span and other news. they will not interact with them. they have lost their voice with 50% of the american people are that is actually a bad thing for democracy. we should have places like c-span where liberals and democrats and conservatives and republicans and independents can go and just get news. i see you have "the new york times," "the washington times."

let's get an idea of what multiple voices are saying, and with these major news outlets, they have lost the ability to have any credibility on any issue, which is why this fake news concept is a real and troublesome concept. host: and the best way to do that is to let you get out of the way and let you chat with viewers. from bolingbrook, illinois, good morning. you are on with matt schlapp. caller: good morning. my big thing here is that people will believe what they want to believe, not what the facts are. here is a perfectly good example. we have a beautiful church here in my neighborhood, and it drips myrrh. some people will go in and see it and their heart is changed. people have actually been healed from it. other people go in, they looked, h,ey turn around, they go "hu

maybe it is a hoax." i have been listening to all this news, and i think people will believe what is in their hearts, no matter how big, how strong the facts are. catherine, what happened in the church? i think you cut out there. she is gone. i am a believer, so i believe in miracles, i believe in that. so let's get that out of the way. i do think people -- it is responsible for an individual to put a filter on their views. what is wrong, what is right? does it pass the smell test? i am healthy with skepticism and cynicism. the problem with these main media outlets, they are left-leaning. if you watch the sunday shows,

almost all the shows have four people that just destroy the president. but how is anybody who likes the president watching that show going to consider that fair? host: you mentioned the sunday shows. this exchange on "meet the press" is getting a lot of attention this morning. guest: only because he is in the hot seat. host: he was just about a minute of it. >> chuck, i just want the truth. >> you don't trust the american people, the fbi, the cia? >> no, i don't. absolutely not. after james comey -- >> you don't believe the fbi, the cia? >> i don't trust anybody. >> do you trust them now? dr. no, i don't trust them back then. problem, which is people have not only lost confidence in news sources they used to go to come and i have lost confidence in shows i used

to go to. people have lost consonants in organizations like -- have lost confidence in the fbi let's face it, they did everything they could do to help hillary clinton. only because he said now, because he knew she was going to win and he did not want her to be impaired. these intelligence communities, have been politicized. run off thed to be ship. and they should go back to doing their core emissions. in ukraine, why are they going after ron johnson when the obama administration successfully got an investigation of paul manafort opened up again. why? because paul manafort had been talking to the trump campaign, and joe biden was able to call off the investigation of this ukrainian gas company, that his son conveniently sat on the board of eared anybody involved in politics at that level -- any lawyer, some lawyer had to

improve -- had to approve all of those manifests. who would have thought that it made sense to have the president's son travel with him to countries, while joe biden was doing his official duties. wasred -- hunter biden collecting millions and billions of dollars. so what the american people see is obama and biden tried to influence the ukrainian government, and now they see trump trying to in -- trying to influence the ukrainian government he puts up the transcript. what trump did is somehow criminally impeachable, and what obiden did isn or not. what is good for the goose is good for the gander. host: caroline, texas, republican. good morning. i thought you all were talking about the impeachment of

different presidents. host: that is how we started. guest: i would love to talk about that. caller: i'm kind of old and i was alive during a lot of them. with nixon, prior to him being was --ed, you know, he me tried tom assassinate him. of course there were tapes and this and that peer to into -- who knows where they came from or who really cares? clinton, herer as you have a president that they wanted to impeach because he was having sexual whatever with everybody. kennedy, didn't he do the same thing? guest: you were aptly describing the situation. caller: he was doing whatever, whatever he was doing. but then again you had kennedy

who was also doing the same thing, but it was never publicized because at the time there was only three channels. and abc. nbc, cbs, so, i mean, you were only getting three different, you know, commentaries from three different channels. squeaky wiki from -- kille actually tried to gerald ford. is, gettingpoint impeach because of your private sexual conduct over time became less popular with the american people. i think the republicans were put into a tough position because phil clinton was so flagrant with his lying under oath as the president of the united states. it was not so much of a question of what he did in the oval office, it was his me too treatment of women that got him into hot water with these depositions. today, my guess is that the past

treatment of women he had power over would have been much more politically damaging to him then even what he did with an intern in the white house, although now i am the father of five girls, and my older girls are starting to have internships and such. i hope they go to a workplace where they are treated with respect. host: more from the sunday shows. this is congresswoman val demings, meeting this week to take more investigations and inquiries this week on the impeachment. this is her from fox news sunday yesterday. >> why is how speaker pelosi refusing to hold a formal impeachment inquiry vote? >> chris, let me say this. i would hope -- this has been a painful time, this past couple of weeks now. i would hope that the white house would cooperate with congress.

and actually acknowledge the oversight that we have a responsibility to do. requirementre is no under the because to touche and that we have a full house vote. there is no requirement under house rules that we have a full house vote. there is no precedent that we have a full house vote that really drives -- >> wait, you say there is no precedent. there have only been two times in the history, under the rules we now have -- andrew johnson in the 1860's was different -- in both the bill clinton case and the richard nixon clays, there was a clear precedent. the full house voted and authorized a full impeachment inquiry, so there is a precedent. requirement,o again, under the constitution, and no requirement under house rules that that is the procedure we follow. chris, let me say this. this past 10 days has been

painful for members of the house on both sides of the committee. obviously it has been quite painful for the senate, even though too many senators are quiet on this issue. we need to conduct a very methodical, very thorough investigation. we need to talk with all witnesses, identify or review all documents. as we begin the process of making a very, very important historical decision. so based on the information that we have, i believe that every american should be painfully concerned about what they have witnessed over the last couple weeks. matt schlapp is chair of the american conservative union peer they were talking about a full house vote on impeachment. does that matter at this point? guest: yes, because what she is saying is that she wants to deny the president of the united states to defend himself in

front of the house of representatives, and to have his allies in the republican party, any conservative, right minded democrats come if there are any left, to subpoena their own documents and their own witnesses. my guess is if they took the full house vote, and the judiciary committee, although nancy pelosi does not really trust jerry nadler. now she has to go to three committees per can you imagine going to three different courtrooms, just what she is doing to the president? she wants to deny him the ability to push back on what will be a kangaroo court. we did not do that with bill clinton because i think the republicans at the time realized that if it was perceived that the process was unfair, there would be consequences at the ballot box. i think nancy pelosi continues down this road, a road she did not want to be on at the beginning, the consequences will be devastating. i think if impeachment proceeds the way it is proceeding, the republicans are going to do very well in 2020i think the president will be reelected.

and i think the american people will look at the democratic and say you told us if you -- if we gave you the majority that you would tinker with obamacare and make sure the republicans cannot do anything with pre-existing conditions and that you would help with income inequality. they are transfixed on bringing down donald trump. it is an unhealthy focus for them. it is almost like there is a mental problem here. some people call it trump derangement syndrome. problems fixing the from your liberal perspective. ralph, independent. good morning. yes, mr. howard stern had said earlier that he talked to trump and asked him, was he mentally up for the challenge of the job. is racially trump

dividing -- mr. trump is racially dividing this nation you used a term, mr. schlapp, repulsive and unhealthy. well, to me, mr. trump's behavior is repulsive and unhealthy. last year andane said to a woman, if there -- i would be right there on the front row. that was an impeachable offense there. guest: i don't know what the senator meant by that comment, but i think that she believed that that woman would be a victim of capital punishment. everyone has a viewpoint in a democracy. you brought up howard stern's interpretation of the president's mental. that is a really interesting way

to approach it. he is doing just fine. i've met very few people in my life that are on top of things as he is. he tracks everything, he reads everything. that is a misconception, he doesn't read, he stays around in the white house and he is not engaged. he has read every article. if you ever have a chance to have a private conversation, you will go through everything he is reading, what his interpretation is. he always asks you what your interpretation is. most of the political people that staff him on the foreign trips say they cannot keep up with him, his level of energy. that is because he never touches alcohol, doesn't take drugs. he is kind of in a natural state as far as that is concerned. i marvel at his energy level and mental capacity, and i think the democrats and people in the media try to act like he is not really up to the job. it is more of the fake news. my wife worked for him for two years at his right side in the white house come of the west wing. to marveled at his ability

juggle a lot of issues and to remember things from meeting to meeting to meeting. i had president -- i have had conversations with the president or he remembers things that i cannot remember that we talked about. you don't have to like him if you don't want to like him. you have every right to do what you want to do, but nobody should be under the illusion that he is not up the job. host: and now he is on the campaign side of this. your advisory role -- is it formal or informal discussions? with presidents, it is one of the things that i think there is a sacredness of talking to the president. he is the commander in chief, the leader of the country. he reaches out for counsel and advice, and i think some people who talk to him should be careful about talking too much. and i worked with president george w. bush. they are also just people. they are vulnerable. they have times when they are mad, when they are sad, where they are more vain and they let

their weaknesses come out. when you see that, you realize it is a totality of the person, positive and negative. i have friends who worked for obama and clinton who said the same thing. there were things that they did not like, and they were other times where they were so proud to work for them. mike, democrat, good morning. youngstown, ohio. caller: how is everybody doing this mauling? guest: how are you? this gentleman that you have on, he is obviously right wing. guest: i prefer conservative. caller:, you prefer conservative. good for you. you sound like trump. thank you. caller: mike, do you have a question? this could be howard stern. is howardah, this

stern, right. you are a wise guy, too. guest: mike needs some coffee. host: indiana, a republican, good morning. this is janice. ok, i just wanted to say that i fully support president trump, and i really, really am so glad that matt is on here trying to explain what president trump is deplorables, of us i guess you would say. guest: deplorables. i am a proud deplorable. proud one,, i am a too, and i know a lot of proud deplorables. to knowresident trump that everyone in our neck of the woods supports him and we pray for the democrats, too, because

they are obviously in a lot of trouble because they just keep wanting to go down this impeachment road, and it is said. it is really sad for our country , and if you love our country, our country did you well. you would want our country to do you well. guest: thank you, janice, for your comments. what i notice as i travel the country come and really the world, and we just had a cpac in korea and we have had three in tokyo and japan. standing with the protesters in the streets in hong kong. i am going to the first cpac in brazil. this whole cpac that i oversee as a chairman is taking off around the world. the reason is because of the struggle against the green new deal, the struggle about the rabbit as well as him -- the radicalism being jammed for our schools. the whole world is watching america.

freedom loving people, people who believe in limited government and democracy are an americaeath of that reaches out to socialism. janice is saying, everyone in her woods reach out to the president. i will have everyone coming up to me and telling me how sad they are that the country is going through this. many people think it is all about donald trump. i don't mean to be disrespectful to the president. but it is not all about donald trump here there is an underlying question -- what does it mean to me american -- to be american? what are our founding principles? those of us who believe in those principles, look at what the doing as not -- these socialist values cannot be consistent with these american values. that is a real troubling thing. if you fought in a war, if you are a doing as cop, if you are e

professions that the democrats always had your back, and you see them attacking cops constantly. you see them not wanting to fund the military. it makes these people trouble. that is why you have a whole bunch of people who normally vote democrat turning to trump. you see a huge change in the country. people and not doing it with smiles on their face. people are worried. host: you said you stood in the streets of hong kong with the protesters. i wonder what you thought of last week's president trump's tweet, congratulating the people in beijing. guest: i don't like that tweet because i think they are butchers. nobody in america should be in love with the bridging -- with leadership in beijing. i understand what the president is doing, and i give him grace with the tweets he