ght talks about diffs information campaigns, -- disinformation campaigns. you can join the conversations on facebook and twitter. ♪ host: good morning, it is friday, i'll tober 25th. a3 hour -- october 25. a three hour "washington journal" is for you this morning. we will spend the first hour of our program getting your thoughts on how house democrats have conducted the impeachment process. from what you have seen so far do you think the inquiry has been fair? if you think it has been, 202-748-8000 is the number two car -- to call. if you think it has not been fair, 202-748-8001. you can send us a text with your thoughts, 202-748-8003.

on social media on twitter is at c-spanwj. on facebook, and facebook.com/c-span. a very good friday morning, you can start calling you now. whoas lindsey graham introduced a resolution yesterday looking to condemn the house impeachment inquiry. this is lindsey graham talking to reporters. [video clip] >> what is going on is a runaround of the impeachment process creating a secret proceeding behind closed doors that fundamentally, denies due process, and when you are talking about removing the president of the united states it seems to me that you want to have a process that is consistent with who we are as americans inconsistent -- and is consistent with what bill clinton, and richard nixon was allowed to do. the process i think is the

danger to the future of the presidency. if you can drive down a numbers by poll having proceedings where you selectively leak information when the president is pretty much shut out, god help future presidents. [end video clip] that resolution was introduced yesterday. chuck schumer took to the floor of the senate to defend the impingement -- the impeachment inquiry and dismiss the republican members of the house who occupied the intelligence room one's deposition wednesday in protest of the impeachment inquiry. this is chuck schumer. [video clip] theore than one third of members who secured the secure facility our members already allowed in the closed hearing. they are allowed to ask questions of witnesses,

participate in the fact-finding. they know as well as i do that they will be -- that there will be public hearings once the evidence is gathered. process,is not about that is a diversion. this is because house republicans do not like the fact and want to suppress them. that is the reason they are storming and trying to create this childish, infantile fuss. they do not want to open the process, they want to shut it down. if the white house and its congressional allies wanted an open and transparent process, the white house would provide the documents congress requested, it would not defy subpoenas, forbid employees from testifying. switch,ot just flip a one day suppress evidence, and

the next argue for transparency. the hypocrisy in the self-interested dealing is self-evident. rather than stomp their feet in a fit of staged political theater, all republicans should go -- adjoining getting all of the facts. we are not preacher -- that we are not pre-judging, we want the facts to come out, not some, but all. [end video clip] host: a question about process for you this morning, but a very high profile process, the impeachment inquiry. do you think it has been fair? 202-748-8000 if you think it has. 202-748-8001 is the number if you think that the impingement inquiry has not been -- impeachment inquiry has not been fair. a democrat out of north carolina. good morning. caller: i think it is very fair,

and i find everything that senator vitter schumer said capitalizing what i would want to say. i can only pray each day and night that we can be successful with the impeachment process and to impeach and remove president trump from office. the fear -- i fear that we are headed to a civil war, it is real. the fact that he is trying to take over every single department of our government does not bother anybody, the fact that you want your children to become like him, a bully, all of the things that he encompasses that are very negative, and very evil. the fact that we have the stain of the kurds, that were being murdered on our hands as a country does not bother anybody. this deeply concerns me. host: that is clara in north

carolina. carlos who thinks the process has not been fair. why is that? caller: thank you very much. clinton wasen bill impeached a bunch of years ago, i remember the democrats came out and defended him like he did nothing. also, i believe that the haverats of which i am one continued to overlook the good things this man has done, they think the good things he has done for the country, and they are focusing on getting him out of office. what happened to the russian hoax, how did that suddenly get out of the news? it is like flipping a page. finally, the

impeachment is meant for real crimes. hislieve that may be judgment -- maybe his judgment in ukraine can be talked about, what we do not impeach presidents for things like think thosend so, i pushing for impeachment now should worry about what happens when a democrat is president. host: what should impeachment be reserved for? forer: it should be used when you see something that is impeachable, you should know it. is -- presidents do a lot of bad things all of the time. reagan with ronald the arms sale, no one talked

about impeaching them. ladyclinton with the young . the democrats came to his defense. biden, he sold uranium to the iranians, and nobody talks about that. the democrats do not want to. the double standard approach of possiblyrats is considered reasonable. host: carlos rings up the russian investigation. it is back in the news today. here is a story that came out yesterday from politico. the inquiry that william barr ordered into the origins of the probe and the ties between the trump campaign and russia has become a criminal at -- criminal

investigation. this story was first reported by but new york times" politico is confirming that the investigation being conducted by john durham was launched by barr to answer unspecified questions that he had about why the fbi began their investigation. that led the appoint -- to the appointment of robert mueller. however escalating the inquiry from a management review to a criminal matter means current fbi or cia officials could face charges. the designation as a criminal inquiry increases his power to gather information and opens up the possibility of grand jury subpoenas for records and testimony. in othersat story this morning, it is on the front page of several papers.

andre, an independent. he believes it has been run fairly, why is that? caller: you have got the democrats and you have the in the senate, and both of them are in the hearings. so, to me that said it. the ones complaining are the ones not in the hearings. they will be able to view all of the files and documents. my thing is, if we talk about trump has always been lying since he has been office. the impeachment, i really believe that he did all of those

things, the evidence shows that he did those things. attorney barr is just as crooked because he is working for donald trump. marylandt is andre in talking about those who are allowed in the impeachment depositions. takes ityork times" up. several questions asked about the impeachment inquiry process. house rules allow only lawmakers and designated staff members of the committees involved in the investigation, in this case intelligence, foreign affairs, and oversight and reform panels to attend sessions with witnesses, amounting to more than 100 house lawmakers and a quarter of house republicans. among those are some of mr. trump's most loyal allies including jim jordan and mark meadows who have come out and talked about the impeachment inquiry and approximate -- in

the process. "greg pence who sits on the foreign affairs committee can attend depositions, and so can representative kevin mccarthy the house republican leader generally speaking the questioning is conducted by republican and democratic staff members but lawmakers may occasionally ask questions as well." alaska.hooper bay, believes the inquiry has been run fairly. go ahead. caller: hello. welcome to the united states of america. we are up north, close to russia. thei do think that impeachment inquiry is very fair, because we know that president trump has done that

things, but the worst thing that he has done is he is betraying our nation. i was bored on the fourth -- born on the fourth of july, and it is a very bad insult what he is doing. host: how has he betrayed the nation? how specifically do you think he has betrayed the nation? putin, he has sided with the president of russia. school, we went to had to hide under our desks in case there was a bomb or anything that might be shot at us, because we were so close to russia. i remember that. has noe president empathy for people, i believe that he fakes it.

the only god that he knows is his god of money. that is my personal opinion. morning, james in florida, he thinks the process has not been fair. go ahead. caller: i want to set the record straight. -- so, he is impeaching his own self. he is doing things there. host: you do think the process is fair? is impeaching his own self, sir. host: we will go to robert in

maryland who thinks the process has not been fair. go ahead. caller: good morning. we process is not fair, but do not have impeachment here. there has been no vote, they do not have the nerve to take the vote. this is about giving them an argument to counteract john durham's investigation. now that we know a grand jury has been impaneled to look into barack obama authorizing surveillance of an american citizen. we do not know that it has been impaneled yet, but we do know that it has been changed to a criminal investigation, that could happen down the road. caller: the cia investigating people, the cia is not legally authorized to operate inside the united states. the democrat party and barack obama were involved in this, they authorized this. this is what they are designed to cover up to give them a

narrative to go against the upcoming indictments that we know that will come down. you do know that there has been a grand jury impaneled, because if you have common sense and logic you do know that. today, we have elijah cummings, he is being buried. that is the perfect example. int: we will move on to sam crystal springs mississippi, a republican who thinks the inquiry has not been fair. good morning. caller: how are you? host: doing well. caller: it has not been fair, i think everything has been done behind closed doors. i love what with this guy just said, except not the latter part. oros' son is married to adam schiff's daughter.

soros is involved with that. host: where do you get your information from because i have not seen that? caller: i have seen it through several publications, it is definitely true. george soros is behind this. i am glad that this criminal trial is going to come up with the doj and the people behind this. is guys behind the curtain barack hussein obama, he is authorized this whole thing. alls fixing to come down on of these folks. i am tired of all of this date in and out of msnbc and cnn ever since and even before trump took the office, they have been hammering him, and all of this stuff will come down on top of

him. i cannot wait to see what happens. i am ready for that report to come out and i want to see these reports come out. host: that is sam this morning. a few comments over text and twitter. james and kansas asking the question is it fair that a president of abuses their position? this from one of those who follow us on twitter, "dems are dammed if they do, damned if they do not. public,make the inquiry the guilty parties will coordinate and collude. if they continue to do it privately, half the country will see it is suspect. melinda saying "it is unfair this is the people's business." ifd then from larry " republicans were allowed to participate it might be

considered fair." just a few of the text and tweets this morning. getting your thoughts as -- is the impeachment inquiry fair. good morning. caller: good morning. because,nk it is fair unfortunately, too many of these people are listening to fox news instead of everything. and, reading more than just the back of the cereal box, i guess. republicans are allowed to participate, they are right there, as you said. one third of the republicans are supposed to be there. if they go in for more than just a look-see and just walk out. if they take the time to ask questions, but as you see when they get stopped by the camera crew and are asked what did you learn today or did you sit in, i

did not want to, i did not want to listen. they do not take the time to do it because i do not to have to answer to the president. they are afraid of saying something to anger him. the problem is that they do not want to be responsible for what is going on. , what iscary thing going on in our government right now. no one wants to take responsibility for the president, or their party. the democrats are doing what they are supposed to -- supposed to do and following the rules that the republicans set during benghazi. the exact rules. host: looses the editorial board of the washington post -- this is the editorial board of "the washington post" today. process,ing "wrong on republicans have no defense of

mr. trump but their claims of unfairness lack merit. there is an old washington saying that you are arguing about process you are losing." and they bring up the benghazi hearing that the caller brought up, "lawmakers lack an investigative record like the 1998 report, so they must do their own basic investigating why it makes sense to hold hearings behind closed doors. investigators do not want witnesses to play for the cameras or align their testimony with earlier witnesses. classified mcteer aerial may -- ossified material may be discussed. held manys closed-door hearings and insisted that they were most useful." if you want to read more, you can do so on the op-ed pages. one more from "the wall street

journal" taking a look at adam schiff who has been at the center of all of this as the head of one of the three committees investigating and conducting the impeachment inquiry. in the potomac watch column, kimberly called "hymn the lord high-end teacher, conservative impeacher, lord high this helps the caucus' vulnerable members to gain accountability. there is an important reason for the democrats to skip the formalities. an observation will be held before they proceed. jeff, phoenix arizona, republican, thinks it has not been fair. why is that? caller: i think this is the

continuation of what the democrats have been hoping and working towards since trump was elected. they have known this impeachment warpath for almost three years. twist iniry is another the same game that they have been playing for three years. you asked a previous caller what should the inquiry be used for? i can tell you what it should not be used for, to overturn an election of -- by the people, and that is what the democrats are doing. they are unhappy because they did not win, and they will do everything in their power to disrupt and interrupt, and obstruct whatever this president has on his agenda, and quite frankly it has been -- trump has

been good for the united states. unemployment in the economy is good. they do not like that either. they are making noise. i do not think this has been fair at all. in thee will go to gene louisiana on that line for democrats who thinks it has been fair. caller: i think it has been fair, the process has been fair. the republican leadership set the rules during the benghazi hearing in 2015. the democrats are following that rule. the republican leadership is lying, they know that there are many republicans in this committee meeting. and the republicans that are not on the committee wants to know what is happening in the committee meetings. they can ask their republican committee member. an evil man who

would have his hate filled supporters start a civil war. thank you. this we are taking up question throughout this week in the past several weeks as the impeachment inquiry has gone andg, the fairness of it, the process. we talked about it yesterday, most recently with two members of congress including congressman michael waltz, a republican of florida. here's what he had to say. [video clip] >> i think it was out of frustration. i was reviewing last night the rules that were adopted for the nixon impeachment hearing, which prior to that we had not had this in over 100 years, and i would encourage your viewers to look up house resolution 83 in 1974 in which the house voted on , number one and adopted the

rules. the thing that is frustrating to me, which is what i talked about before we walked into the secure facility down there is that, in any country in the world, i am a green beret and i fought from afghanistan to west africa and everywhere in between. most of those countries, the defense is allowed to call their own witnesses, and in this case they are not. the minority is not allowed to call our own witnesses, we are allowed to cross-examine but not call. 1998, thegain in president was allowed to have counsel in the room. at least have some type of representation. i wonder why you, the media, and others are not asking a lot more strongly why the same rules have not been adopted, and furthermore why the house has not been afforded the

opportunity to vote on the rules. what was so interesting and what happened in 1920 -- 1974 is that the chairman of the judiciary knowledge that subpoenaing witnesses exceeded his authority of chairman of that committee and required a special resolution and a vote, and required special rules. another interesting tidbit, one of the lawyers establishing those rules and effort towards fairness was hillary clinton. -- hillary clinton. the same rules were adopted for hillary -- for clinton and were not adopted today. that i aminfuriating not allowed to even -- fine if you will not allow me in the room, to even see the transcripts. everyone has been reporting on ambassador taylor's transcript from a few days ago, but no one transcript.

why not? [end video clip] host: that was congressman z talking about the issue. -- theninquiry be fair, fair? 202-748-8000 if you think it has. 202-748-8001 if you think it has not. robert, out of massachusetts thinks it has been fair. caller: when this inquiry going on now, the republicans and the democrats, they both need to answer questions, everybody is fair. you republicans say that close doors, it is close doors because it is like a grand jury, nobody goes to the grand jury and asks them to tell them everything that needs to be done. and another thing.

end up beingcould the president in one year. ,f donald trump gets impeached mike pence has to go too. is third president in line nancy pelosi. here another thing, nobody talks trump -- this man wrote his own doctor's report and had his doctor sign it. several months later he signed another report and had the naval dr. fine -- sign that report. host: we are focused on the impeachment inquiry and a process question. it is one we have been covering for the past cap -- past several weeks. we have been talking to members of congress as well, whether they think it is fair. you heard from michael waltz's, , one of the members

who occupied the room. we talked to anthony brown about this as well. we got his thoughts on the fairness of the process. [video clip] >> why not just hold a formal impeachment vote to start the impeachment probe? is laid out,ment not even laid out, it is in the constitution and there is not a lot of detail to process how it can be conducted. the house has a set of rules and the senate has rules for an impeachment trial there is nothing that requires a formal vote. what is important is that we get to the truth, and that we have a fair, open, and transparent process. if you look at the process we 24%, one out of every four republicans have access to the hearing that is taking place behind closed doors in the house

intelligence committee. it is behind closed doors because a lot of the information is classified and sensitive and we do not have the benefit of a special prosecutor like in the clinton and nixon impeachment. we are doing the work in that committee that a special prosecutor would have done. and that committee, one out of every four republicans -- that is unprecedented. i'll on the largest standing committee, it may have 10% of the full body or membership on that committee. these hearings have 25% of the membership. >> we are talking the house intelligence committee, and oversight. >> there are no restrictions placed on republican members or their staff that do not apply to democrats. there is equal access to the witnesses, documents and the process. and adam schiff has stated that once he has organized, and i am

not saying in a manipulative way, once he has organize the information after reviewing ,ocuments and can present it there will be open hearings to make the case and demonstrate the evidence to go to the truth on these matters. the idea that you have to take a formal vote is found nowhere in law, statute, or rule, and let me state that even if we took the vote, we wouldst -- we would see the grandstanding and delays that we saw yesterday from the republicans. [end video clip] host: congressman andy brown yesterday. the one with michael waltz in that interview you can watch them any on our website at c-span.org. meanwhile taking your phone calls. for those who think it has and has not been fair. dennis thinks it has not been fair out of rhode island. good morning. caller: first of all i think

people should look at the big state doingthe deep this investigation. you cannot connect all of these dots until this is final and they see what has happened in the background because this is the reason for the phone call into ukraine, which is to investigate this stuff that has not been investigated. i think people are passing judgment too quickly before they have evidence of the whole picture. you have to put the puzzle together before it comes together. host: when you talk about the whole puzzle, are you talking about the probe into the 2016 election that the attorney general is conducting right now? caller: the deep state. a lot of people do not even understand what the deep state is about, and they are talking and passing judgment without seeing the whole picture come together. in rhodet is dennis

island this morning. as we noted, reporting yesterday that the attorney general's u.s. attorney out of connecticut, john durham has become a criminal investigation as that moves forward. by the way, c-span viewers know that we are waiting for the justice department inspector general report, the inspector general report is focused on their investigation into the contents of the foreign intelligence surveillance act applications that the fbi and justice department's admitted person whopage, that served as a trump 2016 campaign advisor. durham's investigation is broader than the oig inquiry. that report has not been released yet and is expected at

the time. said tohorwich lawmakers in a letter yesterday that a draft of his report is undergoing classification review process involving department officials and the fbi. he has not promised any specific timing for the release of that report, but appears to be in the final stages. that story we are showing on your screen from politico for our radio listeners who are not able to see the screen. curtis in maryland, and independent. you think it has been fair. caller: it is very fair. the process is fair. we have republicans and the democrats in this committee. so, why do you say it is not fair? i do not know, it is unbelievable. the republicans they do not love this country or themselves, that is all. they think they will make

american -- make america great. it is because of their constitution, it is because of the country's justice. this justice and constitution and no corruption makes america great. when you remove these things, america cannot be great. even though we have technological advancement, if you are corrupt you cannot be great. if you do not uphold the constitution you cannot be great. the same goes for democrats. it is unbelievable, i am praying for this country that these men -- that this man will leave the seene i have never behavior like this. i feel like i am living in the third world with the way that donald trump is behaving, making fun of everybody. it is on presidential.

for this country that this guy does not come to more trouble. in the third world country, you never see stuff like that, there is going to be war. host: a few more comments from twitter and text messages as well. dosty out of ohio asking " these republicans crying foul know that republican congressmen are present in these hearings and get equal time to question the witnesses. bill in new jersey, "it is as fair as the benghazi hearing when the republicans want to play games. let us play games." rob out of west palm beach, " this is a witchhunt, democrats should be working on health care and pharmaceutical greed." jill is saying "why would i want our president not allowed to ask or make statements to another nation's leader.

that is what the president does. who is it who thinks he knows better than the president with the president should say or ask? we are taking your calls and thoughts for another 20 minutes before we turn to a roundtable discussion on criminal justice reform. that topic being taken up over the weekend at a forum in columbia, south carolina and being attended by many of the democratic presidential candidates and president trump is expected to speak as well. that will be the topic in our 8:00 a.m. eastern hour. until then, more of your thoughts on the fairness of the impeachment inquiry. frank, a republican, you think it is not fair, why is that? caller: i think it is not fair that the procedures -- i think it is fair, the procedures, but it is unfair to the american public. everyone is so partisan that they made up their minds already.

i have been hearing for months that there is no way that the senate will vote to remove him. down toy the facts come who is ever in majority, that is the rules they will follow. i think it is unfair to the american public. it should not be like that. side, ashe democratic far as in the house, they will not take a vote for full impeachment because it is -- they are worried about how it will inflect -- reflect on the next election. basically, they are following the procedure but they have no intention of following any kind of laws or really looking unless they come up something -- with something like nixon's tapes when you have people on tape stating certain things concrete. unless they have their backs to the wall, why bother, why do

this? i have been hearing for months, even before the mueller report was released, he would never be removed in the senate, so why bother? the only recourse we have is to vote people -- toss people out of office. host: this is ruben, a democrat who thinks it is fair, why is that? caller: i think it is fair and he is one of the most corrupt president who have ever been. he takes his orders from putin. host: specifically what do you think is fair? you've heard a lot of other callers and the caller before you that had complaints about the process, why would you defend it as fair? way that gaudihe does it -- did it. it was fair then, i am wondering why it is not fair now. host: teresa out of michigan who thinks it is fair.

as a republican who thinks it is fair, why do you think that? caller: because they are going by the rules. i think it is amazing how the republicans are ignoring all of the evidence, making it go all the way back to russia and hacking emails, because if you think donald trump did not know what you were -- what he was doing then, you are crazy. he is the most corrupt president we have ever had, and his kids are just as bad, and he is hiding his taxes because he does not want everybody to know the place he has been getting his money from the last decade plus is from russia. host: i take it you are not a republican who voted for president trump in 2016? caller: i did vote and i have been playing -- paying close attention, and that is why i am amazed. they went through the gang of eight, the republicans know what donald trump is and what he has

been doing. now he is sending troops back into syria to take care of the oil wells, not the kurds, the oil wells. we know what this man's priorities are, and he has interest in over 100 businesses in turkey, and the president of turkey threatened to take his name off the buildings in 2016. he probably did the same thing this time to get the courage to move. host: that is to in michigan. peaking of the president, here is one of his tweets from just about 10 hours or so ago. this is about the process that is happening that is playing out in the impeachment inquiry the president asking around 10:00 p.m. eastern, "where is the whistleblower and why did he or she write such a fictitious and incorrect account to my phone call with the ukrainian president? why did the ig allow this to happen?

who is the so-called informant was so inaccurate? a giant scam!" speaking of the whistleblower, here is a story in the " washington post," in the headline, the democrat having other witnesses deem at the whistleblower's testimony unneeded. it said that they were prepared to take steps to serve -- to preserve the whistleblower's identity concerning him a central figure and they have grown cold the idea after several witnesses described how trump leveraged access and military aid to secure a promise from ukraine to launch an investigation. a person familiar with the discussions between the whistleblower in houston fatty investigators said yesterday -- house investigators say that there are no active efforts to arrange for that individual's testimony. we know that it is a he and has

been identified as a male cia officer but not much more than that. democratm georgia, a who believes the process has been fair. why is that. caller: good morning. i have been up since 4:00 and i want you to know that i am a -- i am retired and i have been listening to c-span for a long time. they are really giving him a fair hearing, but the point is, i worked in the medical field about 40 years, and this man, there is something wrong is him -- with him, and i do not know why no one has picked up on it. he is going to really end up doing something drastically more than he did last sunday when he

called for the soldiers to come out and turn the place over to russia and turkey. he knew what he was doing, but i tell you why he did it, he did it because he wanted people to stop talking about the impeachment, so he did something to try and get their mind away from it. he did not realize what he was doing, so he had the soldiers come out from there, and then people in the white house got mad at him and he started backtracking. that is the way he does things to get even with someone doing something to him. he is going to really do something dangerous to the united states. every night i pray that when -- that they will get him out of there because he is a time bomb. the closer you get to these

trial -- this trial, you watch, he will do something dangerous. i am just saying, just watch because it is so obvious that there is something wrong with the man. working with him -- when i see this it just hurts me to see this. you can see this man walking around knowing something that there -- knowing that there is something wrong with him mentally. host: some news on syria, the white house considering sending tanks and other equipment back into syria. the white house considering options for leaving now, the number 500 troops, and sending dozens of battle tanks and other equipment. officials saying it is the latest in an array of scenarios following president trump's decision to remove troops from there. the options would represent a

reversal from the withdrawal. mr. trump has stated that he has wanted the withdrawal. "the wall street journal noting would safeguard oil fields with additional troops and new capacity. oil fieldssees the as a potential leverage. in future negotiations over syria" michael from pennsylvania, my credit thinks the process has been fair so far. caller: yes. the process has been fair, the only problem i have is that it is overdue. donald trump should have been impeached ages ago. i will go one step further. donald trump should have been in jail a long time ago. this man has been a criminal all of his life. his money keeps getting him out of it.

he defrauded children out of an education. everything else he has done, even his airline, everything that he has totally failed at. he conned the country into believing something. people wanted something more and different, so they voted for him, any people not knowing of who he is. they do not have the benefit of being from new york where we were close and personal to this man. he has done things in this white house that are a disgrace. it is a disgrace. if he does try to clean up syria now it does not matter, the damages done. he did it. he does not know anything. host: this is from taylor michigan, -- this is from taylor, michigan who thinks the process has not been fair. yourr: i appreciate viewers to write down this information that i'm about to give you. number one, there is a phone call that everybody wants to

interpret what was said. that a matter of fact every phone call that is placed, even if -- even if it is the president is recorded and stored, i'm going to verify that by giving you names. programne is the prison , fairview program, magic lantern program. host: what are these things? caller: these are massive spy programs. everything, at&t built the largest utah -- bear with me a minute, the utah datacenter was billed by at&t, and what that is is a center where every form of communication that we make the text, email, whatever is, that particular phone call made by president trump and the

president of the ukraine is recorded word for word. tot: we should be able listen to that phone call? caller: why are we storing it? it is stored. that actual phone call word for word has been stored. host: art, you might be interested in the 9:00 a.m. hour hour of our program today from weut 9:00 to about 9:30, will be talking about cyber, about the dark net and issues of cyber hacking. we will be joined by charity wright, a former nsa espionage expert in that segment. stick around and it might touch on topics that you are interested in. linda out of texas who thinks the process has not been fair when it comes to impeachment. why do you think that? caller: i think they should go back and look at precedents, and

i think that republican representatives and the president should have the same rights as they have had past impeachment hearings. backi think until they go and do this right, to me it is a sham. host: this is congressman adam schiff, the chairman of the house intelligence committee in a dear colleague member to the other members of the house from earlier this week talking about the proceedings and how the process will work. he talked about the comparisons being made between what is happening now and past impeachment proceedings. the reasons for conducting interviews and private are sound and based on the best interest and thorough and fair investigation. unlike in past proceedings where

congress had the effect of an investigation conducted in secret by an independent prosecutor, we must conduct the initial investigations ourselves because the department of justice the client to investigate this matter after a criminal referral had been made." he is talking about one of the reasons for the differences compared to past proceedings. suzanne, california, independent, police the proceedings have been fair. though ahead. caller: hello. i did not know you were going to call me that quickly. way --ry sorry with the can you hear me? host: yes ma'am. wayer: i am sorry with the you frame questions at time -- times that you frame them in a way that promotes hatred, you may not covet that way. of depthere is a lack of understanding of history, the way other kinds of countries

have formed governments that are dictatorial. early on when trump came into office some of us saw parallels in the appeasement of neville chamberlain to hitler's early on. -- hitler early on. we do not talk about trump in the way we talk about other people. we do not talk about trump in the way that we talk about people of color who are assumed to be guilty. there is a pass being given. unfortunately it is not simply racial, because there are a lot of people who are white and progressive and even not progressive on the right side of history in the right side of the issues. in fact, they are standing up for people whether it is there group or not. when you stay on this kind of thing, no one is looking at this act that 49% is kind of a border on the civil war. trumps going to happen if

changes the fourth of july to celebrate himself. he is now running the military. what is going to happen if people protest them and he orders our military to attack our own people? host: we will stay away from what if's. we are asking the question whether you think the impeachment inquiry and what we have seen so far is fair. sarah and alabama, a republican who thinks it has not been fair. go ahead. caller: i do not think it is fair. why are these people not seeing socialism and other countries? come on. these people are trying to take down america, these socialist people. why can you not see that? they do not like him, they call him racist. what about black people that ?all us racist when i am not

host: come back to the impeachment inquiry, what has been unfair about it? caller: behind closed doors, why did they decide to go behind closed doors? i do not understand that. host: one of the explanations they have given is that this is the grand jerry side, the j -- side.ry -- grand jury caller: i do not believe that. why do they not have it in the open? let everyone hear it. they did it to start with. they got a little embarrassed. how long has this been going on, three years? they have not proved a thing. look at the jobs, look at the economy. old, i started working when i was 17. how many people do you see starting to work at 17 now?

any kid that drops out of school needs to automatically go into service. host: we will stay on the impeachment inquiry. several comments from twitter and facebook, and via text message. "the impeachment hearings are not fair, it is wrong that adam schiff is leaking partial information that supports his narrative and it is hoped to them -- to convince the citizens." "if the house holds a vote and the impeachment inquiry, the white house and republicans will come up with another excuse, so why bother." robert, "it is just another witchhunt by the democrats, the goal is to drag this into next year and distract from president trump's achievements." and kent saying "these testimonies are not part of the grand jury."

of virginia, independent. good morning. you think it has been fair. caller: good morning, i believe it has been fair, and i think i have been really open-minded about the entire process, and i happen to not be going along with some of the supporters of trump are saying that this is influencing people to go against the president. i have been watching this thing for all of the time, donald has never answered any of the accusations about him, he has up by a lot thrown of smoke for anything or anyone who challenges him. i think that the man believes that he does not have to be accountable to anyone, and i am glad that someone is finally holding his feet to the fire.

they will have plenty of time to have open door hearings when it goes to the senate. thank you. ohio, at of cleveland, democrat who thinks they have been hit fair. good morning. caller: good morning. wouldn twitter, and i like to say good morning to some of my friends. i have been talking to you. we have a lot of folks waiting. caller: let me tell you why i think this is fair. this is fair because this is the -- that they did in gaza benghazi. i kind of blame you guys at c-span for not explaining the process to your i do not call them ignorant, but low educated republican voters and your

callers, because they are calling in saying that this is not fair when this is the same procedure that was followed during the benghazi hearings. they want to call in saying it was not fair then, here's what the point is. tomp got caught cheating elections, that extorted foreign countries. the sitting president got caught cheating. this is a reason for removal, not only removal from office, but he should be facing criminal prosecution. and, people better wake up, because 15 years from now you will be turning around talking about how did we get this way. here is a place where viewers

can go. most everything that has happened on the inquiry so far, everything in front of cameras impeachment.g/ that is the special webpage we have set up. there are briefings you can watch, the hearings in front of the cameras that you can watch. the administration responses you can also watch. the washington journal segments we have done talking about impeachment. as well as the documents released so far. all in one place where you can go if you want to educate yourself on everything that has happened. texas, at of stanford, republican, he thinks the process has not been fair. toler: they have been trying

impeach him ever since he got elected. ok. the thing is there was a muslim president for eight years, born in kenya -- host: you are referring to barack obama. he was not muslim. he is a christian. caller: ok. but this impeachment is ridiculous because he has done more for our country and three years than the past 45 presidents. it took 45 years to get our embassy moved to jerusalem. i think it is just ridiculous what they are trying to do to president just because they lost the election. $70 million trying to win the election. they could have put $70 million towards the border wall. host: this is karen out of

warren, michigan, a democrat who thinks it has been fair. caller: good morning. good and bad, depending on where you are. i used to be a republican 10 years ago and now i am a democrat. i am listening and looking to see what i see. what i have seen so far with this president who is obviously noti am good and should not be a president should have been impeached and never been president. the problem is we have republicans who are helping him by going along with this narrative that he is innocent, it's a witchhunt, but they don't want to ask the questions. they know he is bad. there you have it. it depends on who you ask what kind of answer you are going to get. he is not fit for our country.

he has disgraced us and he needs to be out of office. host: kathy out of saint martinsville, louisiana, an independent two things it has not been fair -- whohost: thinke process has not been fair. caller: i definitely would not like to be treated like he is being treated. i know a phone call cannot be considered high crimes and misdemeanors. i know since he has been elected they have been trying to call high crimes and misdemeanors, and he has done almost -- they have not found anything. host: how would you define high crimes and misdemeanors? caller: probably the seven like rape that they convicted president clinton on. we were real compassionate to him.

we allowed america to stay together as a whole when that happened to him. everybody wants to take this guy down. he is not even taking a salary. if anybody could take what he has taken from the republicans and from the democrats, nobody could stand what he has been through. of mobile,a at alabama. she think the process is fair. think -- i think this is very fair. turn downhave got to your tv and finish your thought. why do you think it is very fair? caller: this man is mentally unstable to be in office. he should not be in office. he is so uneducated. i don't understand how he got elected. this is not right.

he is a danger to our country. he has to go. he has to go. host: our last caller in this first segment of washington journal -- plenty more to talk about today. we will talk about the criminal justice reform forum set for this weekend in south carolina. we will speak with deray mckesson, black lives matter activist, and robert ehrlich, the former republican governor of maryland. in later charity wright will talk about the disinformation campaign already underway by foreign countries targeting the 2020 election. that is later on today. after our program today at about 10:00 a.m. eastern we will take you to the funeral services for former maryland congressman elijah cummings who died last week. the 13-term congressman's life

will be celebrated in baltimore, maryland. you can watch live at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span, c-span.org, or listen on the free c-span radio app. yesterday in statuary hall, congressman cummins laid in state. he was paid tribute by several of his colleagues and friends, including mark meadows. here is some of what mark meadows had to say. [video] >> he is called a number of things, father, husband, friend, chairman. for me, i was privileged enough to be able to call him a dear friend. it asave classified unexpected friendship. elijahse of us that no notnow elijah, it is

unexpected or surprising. we were able to share a number of personal stories and intimate secrets that allies are never shared with anyone because -- elijah never shared with anyone because he was a man of his word and never would. through the tears of the past new days i am reminded of o conversation. he had a smile that would consume his whole face. you know that. conversation. he also had eyes that would pierce through anybody that was standing in his way. reminded me not to long ago of a quip he made. he said darrell issa would make him famous.

i reminded him that he is not defined by other people. he is defined by the character honesty of hishe -- the mannd the man that we will miss. the scripture talks about let not your heart be troubled. believe also in me. house are many mansions. if it were not so, i would have told you. you.to prepare a place for his tent tos left go to a mansion, a better place. place and this

country would be better served with a few more unexpected friendships. i know i have been blessed by one. god bless you. >> washington journal continues. the candidates had to columbia, south carolina this weekend to talk about criminal justice reform, we will take up that issue in this segment. you can join us on the phone lines that we put on the screen for you. we are joined by former maryland governor bob ehrlich. he is a member of right on crime. we may be joined by deray mckesson, a community organizer and cofounder of the group campaign zero. we are respecting him to join us at some point. until then --

-- you were dealing with this as governor of maryland. the group is right on crime. explain with that is. it is a conservative take on criminal justice reform. guest: it is counterintuitive to some. not to me, not to many in fact. groups,e of numerous probably the leading group of philosophically inclined conservatives who believe criminal justice is an issue in our country. man-made can is and is broken and we should achieve one central goal, justice. this has been running around conservative electoral circles for decades. it has really taken off. this may be the only purple issue of our time. there is a little bit of a nixon

goes to china element. i found that out in maryland more than 10 years ago before it was the purple issue. my staff would say, say again why were doing this. i would say we are focusing on consequences of pardons and commutations. my democratic friends and the legislature -- i came from the maryland legislature. i went to washington as a member of congress and then came back as governor. i have a lot of friends on the democratic side in the legislature. doinge love what you are but i can't give you a lot of credit for this. is -- this ise still willie horton. the specter of willie horton was around the issue. for younger viewers who don't --w who he is, the infamous

vice president gore against mike dukakis. i think i am correct on that. willie horton was not necessarily a consequence. he got out of prison early in massachusetts and committed at least one murder. he became the symbol of soft on crime. want to talk about the nixon goes to china analogy, republican governors, not necessarily coming together but on our own saying, you know what? the time is due. we can do sentencing reform. we can do reentry reform. we can do job training and drug treatment. we can do consequences, pardons, connie tatian's as a lot of commutations as a lot

of times as governor. republican governors felt more comfortable doing this then more liberal governors who were fearful of the political repercussions because of willie horton and because philosophically. host: we saw democrats and republicans come together in december. to remind our viewers what the act does. it reduces mandatory sentencing guidelines for certain drug felonies. it allows judges greater latitude in sentencing nonviolent drug offenders. reduces mandatory minimum sentences in some cases. it makes retroactive the fair sentencing act of 2010. it expands present employment programs. that first step act now 11 months old and coming up on his first birthday. it was just a few much ago the deputy attorney general gave an update on the implementation of that act. i want to show the viewers a bit

of what he said at that press conference. [video] >> first is the reduction of sentences and releases of inmates at -- back into their communities. since the passage of the act in december of 2018, approximately 1691 inmates convicted of crack cocaine offenses have received sentence reductions as a result of resurrected free sentencing under the first sentencing act of 2010. additionally, nearly 250 inmates have been placed in the expanded compassionate release and home confinement programs. starting today at prisons around the country nearly 3100 inmates are being released from dot increase into the goodtime credit applied to reduce their sentences under the first step act. that is the first item i wanted to cover. second, i am pleased to announce

the department of justice has redirected $75 million in existing resources to fully fund the first step act in fiscal year 2019. we will work with congress and the administration to ensure additional first step funding is appropriated for fiscal year 2020 and future years. in this regard i want to underscore the attorney general and i both toward federal prisons and we saw the value and quality programs for inmates. the attorney general has directed additional funding for programs for fy 19, including resources to expand vocational training and job programs, to increase the availability of medication assisted treatment, to support programs tailored to the needs of female inmate populations, and to increase education opportunities for inmates.

for by thealled first step act, we are announcing a new risk and needs assessment system designed to assess inmates risks of recidivism and to identify individualized needs to reduce risks of reoffending -- the reoffending whether terms are up. inmates will have the opportunity to receive earned time credit in addition to goodtime credit and to participate in evidence-based recidivism reduction programs. host: governor ehrlich, the deputy attorney general quantifying the first step program. guest: it does not do enough, by the way. host: could it be more successful? what is the second step? guest: let's get to the first at first because in this town, is thatometimes it counterintuitive measure. people have an idea.

there was a coalition. there are press conferences. there is a vote. bill signings. you say i am great, vote for me. this is my addition if -- initiative. nobody measures if it will be effective or not. just a few much later, with regards to this major achievement, and we have numbers. we talked off-camera about the dichotomy. that was an issue when i was in the house. many years ago now actually. i got out of the house in 2002. i remember the debate on the floor. it was a racial issue quite frankly. -- there is soch much to this act to this issue generally. it is prison reform. it is consequences. it is reentry. nobody talks about reentry. it may be the most important issue of all. at some point, 90% of

incarcerated felons are going to reenter our society. in what condition are they going to be and when they walk those sidewalks in your neighborhood? that's an important question for policymakers. host: bob ehrlich of maryland. we are taking your calls. the phone lines are (202) 748-8000 if you live in the eastern or central time zone. (202) 748-8001 and the mountain or pacific time zones. the special phone line in the segment, if you have experience in the criminal justice system, it's (202) 748-8002. governor ehrlich with a group signatory of the principles of the right on crime. come back to that group and talk about what conservative criminal justice reform means. -- forthe motivations some the motivations here are

socioeconomic. for some it is racial. it is fair to say for those of us in right on crime the motivation is justice. blind justice in fact. we know criminal justice systems can be broken. they can give us unfair results. injustice being the enemy of what government should be. particularly at the governors level, extraordinary power. constitutions give governors extraordinary power to correct wrong. we took that seriously. other governors have as well. on the most part we focused consequences, pardons and commutations. there are people in jail for longer than they should be quite frankly. it's a multifaceted issue here. i will ask your listeners to

categorize the issues into these general categories of sentencing reform and prison reform and consequences and reentry. host: the argument that advocates take is that longer sentences are leading to more crime. how does less incarceration translate into more public safety? guest: you become a professional criminal and at some point you will get out. that's the argument. particularly in nonviolent crimes. this bill increased the predicate offenses that would qualify you for some of the more egregious sentencing. what i liked about the bill was the revisitation of mandatory minimums. you of judges -- i'm sure have interviewed judges that hate mandatory minimums. the general public does not thesearily love it in

cases. we debated in the house legislature. the predicate was a three-time loser. that qualifies with a crime of violence. that led to a 25-your parole. -- that led to a 25-year parole. giving 25 years with no parole. host: let's look at the original arguments on mandatory minimums. it would make sentencing more fair because regardless of your -- you would be sentenced to the same thing for breaking the same crime. guest: true, except you're creating a professional class of criminal. it is the same issue we had in juvenile justice reform in the 1990's. there are many savables in the

juvenile system. that's my term. you want to increase the predicate offenses into adult court? ok. the byproduct is more professional criminals because they will or how to be criminals. in the juvenile system you have a better chance of correcting them and saving them early on. host: bob ehrlich, our guest this morning. former governor of maryland. work in that building behind me for several years. the topic is criminal justice weekendheading into the where the democratic candidates and president trump will speak about this issue in south carolina. gracie from virginia, good morning. gracie, you have got to turn your television down and listen through your phone if you have a question. are you with us? caller: yes. president trump, when he first got into office he would

manipulate the system. before obama left, obama had the first step act. trump changed a few words and tried to act like he made the first step act. he did not. i know it in half united states knows it. host: who should get credit for the first step act? guest: lots of people in both parties. the bottom line is -- this president is a businessman. he is not a lawyer. he has no great history with criminal justice reform. educating nonlawyer executives to the merits and demerits of easy, but is not so he had members of his family interested in this issue. -- jared kushner.

he was probably the leading light, not just within the family but also generally. educated the president. some hollywood stars. very well-publicized. they gave their opinions with regards to this. liberal, conservative, right, left, republican, democrat came together and achieved something in this town on an important issue that impacts real life. you can quantify whether this is working or not. that is important. host: we have a special line for those who have experience in the criminal justice system. (202) 748-8003. gainesville, virginia. paul, good morning. caller: i was a chicago police officer in 1990 for a year. your guest can complete divorced from reality. the truth is not enough criminals are being locked up.

they are not being held long enough. it was the black -- law-abiding african-americans that wanted african americans locked up for a long time. they were doing damage to the community. there is so much crime on the south side of chicago. police officers don't even arrest people for dui. they don't stop people for dui because if they did, they would be missing out on dozens of calls i would have to make and the other police officers would have to pick up their load. idea --le have no host: that is paul. guest: if you're going to impeach my credentials, i would ask the listener to do some research first. nobody ever called me soft on crime. i support capital punishment. participated in many gun cases in theny

1990's. i will not apologize for my record. i am pretty educated on this issue. by the way, the officer was right in essence in minority neighborhoods a lot of great folks were saying help us, protect us. the disparity between crack -- between powder and crack made no sense. host: take us back to those debates in congress. guest: i didn't even know the issue. members of the black caucus would go to the floor and talk about disparity. powder is a white drug, crack associated as a black drug. the disparity in the criminal sentencing. i educated myself. it made no sense to me after i talked to many professionals, police professionals. the bottom line here is these issues have evolved over the years.

balanced approach -- approach is the right thing. the bottom lines is a result of the function of justice. not race, not income, not anything. with regards to those neighborhoods -- on a totally separate issue that the listener brought up with regard to police now being scared to enforce the law, police not making arrests in urban areas, i get that but that is a separate issue. host: with the caller being a police officer, on this program we were joined by former new york city police officer eugene o'donnell. he talked about policing in the united states, the front end of criminal justice. [video] >> policing is in a terrible place that has been irreparably damaged.

no institution could sustain the onslaught of negative attention it has received. you have had a collapse of recruitment all over the country. people you most want to be in the police business will not go near it. police departments in the big cities are paralyzed. new york, philadelphia, baltimore, st. louis, minneapolis, los angeles, the pacific northwest. there is a redefinition of policing. if officers use force that is brutality. the california legislature saying healing time they can be in a shooting is if they are fired upon. if they fire in defense of their lives, if that person is unarmed, it will probably be you that will be criminally prosecuted. it's time to talk about what we will do post-policing in this country. host: you are the first person i have her talk about post policing. do you see it changing that much where policing as it is today

might not exist in the future? guest: there was no appetite among young people to do this job. it is becoming an impossible job to do. i've had the police union say this week the job is dead. you had a total lack of leadership from mayors. you have mayors grandstanding and attacking their own police forces. police chiefs are just political animals now. legislators should be responsibly selling legitimate policing, they instead are trying to win points by attacking the police. these are major issues. cities like chicago where the police are basically in chapter 11. baltimore, they are not operating. the judges are unaccountable. not responsible for safety at all. they spend their time trying to keep the police under their thumb. the result is you have young

people being shot. gigantic violence problems. host: your thoughts? guest: post policing, i have never heard that phrase. i'm not sure how you would define it. hopefully we will never get to that point because post policing is no police i expect. the points are real and serious and concerning. i'm a baltimore kid. i grew up outside of west baltimore in baltimore county. i count myself as a city kid. i have seen baltimore degrade over the years. i have seen what happened since freddie gray. i've seen the new spirit with regard to policing in baltimore arrests.ch is less why get involved? we are not supported. we do not receive the political support we deserve. the prosecutor's support we

deserve. that is real. it is not just an urban but other police departments around the country. it is something we all need to take seriously. to the extent young people are not attracted to that profession, that is a societal issue and we are in trouble. host: criminal justice reform is our topic. our guest is former maryland governor bob ehrlich. this is stephen. governor-elect. post policing. i live in anne arundel county. we can make the connection. police'she county consomme watching my block. they are here all the time. that. we appreciate caller: i do, but i'm also

concerned. police to have that authority in that reputation. i also want to say you did something previously when you were governor. you were commuting sentences. it was something that democrats would not do after the presidential election where george bush was bringing up willie horton. democrats were shying away from giving commie patients and pardons -- commutations and pardons. you were the only governor that did not. the way baltimore is being maligned by conservative radio constantly all the time gives the impression the police department did not deserve the andtation they have gained

the entire brutality that has been portrayed upon the citizens . it is like they deserve that reputation and hopefully thinking start to build from -- they can start to build from the poor reputations and is something that is better. the way they advocated their policing, places like park heights for business owners say i have been robbed and the police are just looking. host: he brings up a lot of issues. guest: we can spend an entire show on those issues. very multilayered. there is an old adage. it takes a few bad or rotten apples to wreck everyone. it can certainly racket image. whether it is baltimore or other please departments, a few bad apples can do that. i'm -- i believe

in politics and i believe in the issues. strong leadership can lead, whether it is a city, county, state, or country. ofhink there has been a lack leadership in places like baltimore as well. there is a middle ground here. good people and most folks are good people want strong policing. they want to be protected. they want a drug dealer taken care of. they want to go to the local mall and shop safely. they want their kids to come home from school. not a function of race, class or anything. that is just a function of being a human being. one police officers lose that trust and department get bad apples, we have a crisis of credibility. political leadership needs to show itself. leadership has not been present in my view. host: speaking with former

maryland governor bob ehrlich. we expect be joined by activist deray mckesson. we got a text message he is stuck on a plane. plenty of time for calls. talk about criminal justice reform in a weekend in which the presidential candidates on the democratic side and president trump are heading to columbia, south carolina to talk about the issue. perhaps that is one issue coming up heading into the weekend, plan toanders's new legalize marijuana across the expungeand criminal convictions. your thoughts? guest: i have been a longtime supporter of medical marijuana. i have been a longtime supporter of terminal situations, end-of-life issues.going

i receiveddays and, plenty of grief in the bush administration for my views. i took that to the governorship of maryland and we got some stuff done in maryland. wife is a deputy in the drugs zar's opt -- c operations. she is a public defender. she has prosecuted marijuana offenders over many years. the issue of marijuana legalization is very difficult, particularly given the marijuana we are dealing with today. this is what the scientists tell us. of 20s not the marijuana or 40 years ago. it is much stronger. addictions are much more frequent.

what results come from those addictions is a legitimate public health issue. you are seeing this play out in colorado today. i get the argument. you are a maryland guy. in the 1980's they talked about the equalization. oh my god, soft on crime. i think i was in the state legislature at the time. someone said we need to talk about this. not necessarily it is a good idea but we will talk about it. we understand the criminal repercussions, what occurs as a result of prohibition from alcohol. we have seen that with illegal drugs over many decades. we know there is a lot of profit motive and violence. we could have a safer society and we could tax it -- states that have have made a lot of money. on the other hand people tend to downplay the mental health aspects of long-term addiction,

which are very real. particularly given this generation of marijuana. host: the washington post talking about the marijuana plants put up by the other top contenders for the democratic primary. elizabeth warren supports legalizing marijuana and erasing past convictions. biden's plan would expunge prior convictions. his plan advocates legalizing marijuana for medical purposes, but leaves decisions for recreational purposes largely to the states. guest: that is probably the majority position. talking about expunging records, and i was all for consequences. we talked about my record in maryland with pardons and commutations in second chances. where do you draw the line? distribution? is that where the line is drawn?

these are policy calls made by policymakers with legitimate ones of you at work. i think fewer people would support drawing that line with regards to distributing as opposed to simple possession. host: five or 10 minutes left for the former governor. gerald in pontiac, michigan. caller: what's going on? host: what is your question or comment? haver: what i see is we instead of more prison reform is that the system and of itself needs to be reformed. we need to look at the history as far as african-americans in this country. you look at how we work in the ghetto, forced to be in the ghetto. the system gave us crack. this has been proven. we are being killed by cops. the system does not hold these people accountable. as far as i'm concerned it's about the system that is continually perpetuating these

negative stereotypes by causing african americans to even be a part of the system. host: do you think the first act has had an impact? have you seen anything over the past 11 months to show it changed anything? caller: i don't see much of a change at all. nothing has really changed as far as people going to prison. i don't see a change. the system and in of itself needs to be changed. until that changes, nothing is going to change. guest: there is change for the assistant attorney general. that is incorrect. host: the clip from the deputy attorney general on the update of the numbers of the first step act. guest: that is measurable and that is fact. i get sometimes frustrated with regards to how this issue

becomes a race issue. there are more white people in prison. i understand what has happened in poor neighborhoods. i understand the history of termination. --- discrimination. we lose the debate when we look at principally a racial lens. it needs to be looked at the right justice lens. that is a much more balanced approach that gets everybody involved in the issue. it is not just a purple issue. it's a justice issue. it is a bottom-line issue for those who care about the government and fairness. host: viewers are likely to hear more about the first step act over the next couple of days with that form on criminal justice and south carolina -- forum on criminal justice in south carolina. about we talked earlier -- the last caller talked about discrimination. one earlier caller talked about

a lot of folks in the minority neighborhoods calling the police to protect me. we will pay you for a service. i want to be protected. i want the police making arrests. i don't want you scared of coming to my neighborhood and making arrests. be fearful that everyone is taking your picture as you make an arrest. social media has impacted this a great deal as well. host: time for maybe one more call. margaret is waiting in somerville, massachusetts. go ahead. caller: i would like to talk about the criminal justice system. my daughter went into a store a few years back and bought a little plant. the cashier went in the back to get the right price. three ladies tired of waiting in line beat her to a pulp. outthree ladies then ran

and got the policeman, took them back into the store and the policeman through my daughter on the floor, handcuffed her and took her to the police station. took her shoes off and one of the gentleman that was there called me up and said she did not throw a punch. she said that three times to me. i rushed over there. the policeman were still out there. i said, where is my daughter? they said she is at the police station. i went down there and there she was. she was a wreck. they had beat her to a pulp. how found her guilty -- could she beat of three women to begin with? she had no chance at all. host: thank for sharing your story. -- thanks for sharing your story. i suspected as a police training issue. this is a very difficult profession.

part of your job description within this profession's physical altercations with the public. whenever that is part of your job description you will have potential negative repercussions. potential reputational problems. person -- i want to be the first person to applaud the police. sometimes they need to be taken care of and prosecuted, but we need good people to enter the profession of law enforcement. there is no such thing as post-policing. we need a central authority to protect us in a free country. host: governor bob ehrlich, former governor of maryland. the group is right on crime. rightoncrime.com. thank you for your time. up next on washington journal, time for some phone calls. opening the phone calls for your top public policy issues.

the lines our on your screen. start calling now. we will be right back. ♪ politicon is live from music city center in nashville saturday at 2:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. speakers include political pundit ann coulter and columnist and sheom, james comey, political analyst for msnbc and nbc news nicole wallace. political commentators james carville and sean hannity. former minnesota senator al franken. watch live on c-span, anytime on c-span.org, and listen wherever you are using the free c-span radio app. >> if i'm a socialist, i'm not

caring too much about popular opinion or pleasing a consumer. when we socialize things like health care they just say everybody will get it. you don't have to worry about your bills, but you will have to have rationing. >> sunday on "afterwards," in his latest book kentucky republican senator rand paul talks about the history of socialism and argues there was any threat of socialist thinking on the rise in america. he is interviewed by republican congressman matt gaetz of florida. >> it seems you're making the argument that a country that is more socialist becomes more selfish. >> i think that is true. it's an irony anyway because they profess to be everything for someone else. in the end it is driven by selfishness. >> sunday night at 9:00 eastern on c-span2.

>> washington journal continues. host: asking you for your top public policy issue in the time we have to open of the phones to you for your thoughts. republicans is (202) 748-8001, democrats is (202) 748-8000, independents is (202) 748-8002. just a few of the headlines for you this morning, including the latest on the democratic presidential primary. congressman tim ryan becoming the latest candidate to drop out of that race, making the announcement yesterday. housean has served in the since 2003. aprilounced his bid in and is now leaving the presidential race. his departure from the race getting the attention of the president today. this was about half an hour ago on twitter. "another big drop out of the presidential race -- the

president referring to the congressman who has left the race. from bothand bravado and nothing to show. they said for nothing and the voters cannot stand by them. obnoxious and greedy politicians never make it to the end. that is what president trump tweeted this morning. he also focused a bit on syria today about 15 or 20 mitts ago. turkey fully understands not to fire on the kurds in what is known as the safe zone. i don't have to repeat large-scale sanctions will be imposed for violations. it is going well, the president said. ice is secured by kurds with -- isis secured by the kurds with turkey as backup. a much better alternative. our soldiers are leaving syria

for other places than coming home. they are supposed -- we were supposed to be there for 30 days 10 years ago. asked but we are getting out of the deal. i simply say the oil and we are bringing our soldiers back home. isis secured. all of that in a series of tweets about 15 to 20 minutes ago. now your phone calls for the next 10 or 15 minutes. elaine from olympia, washington. caller: yes. this is not a real significant policy but i would like to see it brought up. that is a safe house for islamic to honor are subject beatings and killings. who went to become more are foughtd and they against and in forced marriages.

it would be a good idea if they had some place to go and they could talk to people who are familiar with the situation. host: this is something you want in the united states? guest: -- caller: yes. we have battered women's shelters, but this is more than battered women's shelters. it is a whole gamut of incidents that happen to these young women who are in islamic households, whose brothers or take islamic law to far as far as i'm concerned -- take islamic law too far. their daughters are subjected to some terrible things. out ofhis is howie philadelphia. caller: thank you for the time. i know there is a lot going on in the government.

they try not to inform us of the things that are going on. i do support president trump but i am not one of these people that will be cheerleading for him while walking barefoot at airports. there are a lot of things are party -- as far as the masses and the people. corporate welfare. you have banks and airlines, boilermakers, all these people all these people getting money for the government. there is so much going on. i have to call back. i am so pissed at this country. host: alice from las vegas, democrat. caller: good morning. i think the impeachment is fair because i see that the president -- down the drain.

that is not good. why would he give russia, turkey, ukrainian anything? i am upset. democrat democrat from the first time i voted for kennedy. i don't like seeing what i see going down these days. host: what would you say to the callers who called during the first segment who said they think it is unfair, the impeachment inquiry? they would like to see the process take place in front of the stores that have enclosed, these hearings and depositions conducted behind closed doors. what would you say to them? caller: they said there is a room where they have a closed door. they can't take cameras,

microphones in. when clinton was impeached. why change the rules now? york this is tom from new -- kathy in washington, an independent. good morning. caller: i am calling about the issue that we are being governed by tweet. i can see how a tweet from a president talking about people dropping out of the democratic race. then you go on to a war. can't hear you. host: i am listening. caller: we are talking about war in syria. our main interest is oil evidently. he is lying that he is sending

the soldiers home. they are just being moved around in the least. i would love to have official government channels used to announce policy. thank you. host: now tom from saint albans, new york. caller: thanks for taking my call. i was listening to your show when you were talking about if impeachment was fair or unfair, and criminal justice. i'm a retired corrections officer. 29 plus years on the job. there was a linkage between your impeachment, fair and unfair, and criminal justice reform. what it comes down to is what we are willing to pay for the progressive -- i am a democrat. i consider myself -- i was a liberal democrat. they would not consider me as liberal today but progressive nowadays. if we are willing to pay the kind of tax required to modify

the pipeline of our prisoners coming into the criminal justice system, the pipeline is our education system which is not funded adequately. our foster care system which is not funded adequately. our substance abuse treatment programs that are not funded adequately. our jails and detention centers become dumping grounds for all the inadequacies in funding that exist in our american society right now. do you see anybody looking to give the resources to change that? someone out there with a plan? caller: i am not progressive enough to say i agree with elizabeth warren or bernie sanders, although i admire them greatly. i am kind of an old guy. i just retired. i would go with biden. i admire the approach to health care for all. what do you want to do?

can you improve education? can you improve the justice system? if you look at the scandinavian countries, they have an income tax rate of 50%. we are crying because our tax rate was around 30% or 36%. it has been cut to 22%. as a culture we don't want to pay taxes unfortunately, yet we want to be progressives. we want to give away all the services. the funding is so inadequate that you have a crappy education and foster system, an almost nonexistent substance abuse system. we need inpatient services for our people suffering from substance abuse disorder. we cannot find it with the current tax rate. -- fund it with the current tax rate. host: coming up at 10:00 a.m. eastern you can watch the

funeral services for the late elijah cummings, democrat from maryland. his body lying in state yesterday at the united states capital. you can see this shot therefrom outside of the front of the psalmist baptist church were that is taking place. our coverage begins at 10:00 a.m. eastern. you can watch on c-span.org and listen on the free c-span radio app. derek and randall town, maryland, a democrat -- randallstown, maryland. caller: i would like to give my condolences to elijah cummings. he was a great man. we always knew it here. i was born in the seventh district. the problem we really have is we have a president who just clearly does not care about other than what is best

for him. we have to get this situation straight about this impeachment situation. other than what is best for him. nobody is impeaching the guy but he gets mad and he starts calling people names and that is when you know he is really guilty. then he goes out there and bum rushes. we are better than this. we have got a guy here i'm sure that by the time we get to november he will be in big trouble. he can't win. every time he goes to those little rallies -- i call them trailer park rallies -- he brings washes -- he brainwashers them into thinking he has the numbers. the midterm was the worst loss for any president in the history of the united states. he lost by 9 million votes. and can inan't win the democratic field? caller: i am not too sure.

the main thing we should do is that no matter who it is stick together because we have the numbers. we have the numbers. just stick together. the problem is we have a president that has disrespected the world over. he calls people names. he is not a role model. as long as we have got this guy we will have a hard time. there is no possible way i see him winning in november. in toledo,is nick ohio. what is on your mind? caller: trump is always saying were going tofs china when everybody knows the tariffs are taxes on the american people. socialism --that was in his tax cuts for the billionaire socialism?

i am trying to figure this out --ause it is like everything he is blaming democrats for it, but he is doing it. i notice that fox news won't play none of the other stories, none of the news going on around the world. it is like fox news edited. i am trying to figure out how that works. host: nick, are you a republican who voted for the president in 2016? caller: yeah. but the lies he was telling -- he was telling all these things. what i don't understand is, they are finding out all these things out about him, but he is saying on tv one thing, and it is totally different. i don't understand that. , and that is nick in ohio in st. louis, missouri, charlotte, democrats. caller: i want to comment on

impeachment. i want to remind everyone that we are in the investigation stage right now. there is no difference in the way nixon was treated and the way clinton was treated. so everything is aboveboard. however, i do want to say also that republicans that are on the committee cannot attend the in care he investigation -- cannot attend the inquiry investigation. but they should not be ramrod in the process by going down there and standing outside with cameras and their cell phones. that is crazy. that president trump should be impeached, and i am and democrat, and i stand by that. host: that is charlotte in st. louis, missouri. speaking of president trump,

news out of the white house about the news that comes to the white house. the sub story in "the wall street journal two today, trump targets two newspapers. instructing federal agencies to not renew subscriptions to "the new york times" and "the washington post." the decision comes days after president trump said to cancel the white house subscription to "the washington post co. trump said to sean hannity, we do not even wanted in the white house anymore. president trump said we are probably going to terminate that. that is what is it an trump said publications. barbara, panama city beach, florida, a democrat. good morning. morning, good morning, america. i want to say, i know trump is

washing this show. i have two points of interest to tell him. one, you said that the military was coming back home. now do what you say if you want to be voted for. do what you say and send these people back home. the second issue is, to watch this documentary of all that is watching this show, it is called the great hack, a documentary about how this all happened. please, everyone on tv watching this, watch this. thank you for your time. host: our last caller in this segment of "the washington journal," but more to come this money. up next, we are joined by former nsa espionage expert charity wright about cyber threats to the united states. charity wright joining us as part of her work as a threat analyst with insight cyber intelligence. stick around for that discussion. we will be right back.

announcer: live tonight, two candidates challenging president trump for the republican nomination. she's been hosts a conversation with bill weld and former south carolina governor and congressman mark sanford. to talk about their plans, strategies, and why they are running against the president. they will also be taking your calls, tweets, and facebook comments. live tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span. watch any time on c-span.org and listen were of you are using the free c-span radio app. using ther you are free c-span radio app app. >> the house will be in order. announcer: for 40 years, c-span has provided 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 wrought to you by your local cable or satellite provider. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. washington journal continues. host: charity wright joins us now for a discussion about social media disinformation and cyber threats to campaign 2020. she previously served as a cyber threat intelligence analyst for the national. having this conversation during a week when mark zuckerberg was on capitol hill getting questions on this topic, what is your biggest worry over the next 12 months as you look ahead to campaign 2020 and the cyber threats to the election see echo caller: one of my main concerns going forward in the next year is that the american general public does not really understand the gravity of the situation and how great the

impact is of social media disinformation campaigns. host: what recommendation would you give to mark zuckerberg or the head of other social media companies as they try to take on this issue? forward, ang important aspect is letting the public know what is going on, continuing to investigate these types of things, which it is my -- it is my understanding that facebook is putting in a significant amount of work hiring people to analyze these types of social media threats. i recently had a recruiter from facebook reach out to me about working with them, and i started looking into their program, and it looked like they were trying to make advances when it comes

to identifying these types of threats when they are happening, and eliminating the threat immediately. host: what would for transparency of the threat show? perspective is, we have entire governments with huge military organizations, hundreds of soldiers dedicated to disinformation campaigns. they are setting up huge operations. they are setting up -- it recent study showed there are over 70 countries in the world conducting social media disinformation. this is a huge thing going on globally, and when it comes to these huge military operations, full-time, 40job, hours a week or more, 20 47, trying to -- 24/seven, trying to manipulate americans and disrupt democracy. we have to be aware of, the

threat is ongoing. they are persistent. we have to be persistent with our defenses. one of my pieces of advice to social media platforms like facebook and instagram is to share the intelligence you are gathering. intelligence sharing is going to enable everybody around the world to defend against these threats live and in real time. host: share with who, the u.s. government and each other? caller: absolutely. we have an entire industry of cybersecurity professionals trying to protect not only their customers and employees, but government as well. so nonprofit, government organizations, political parties, anybody that is being influenced or is a victim of this type of disinformation campaign. they can be better protected with intelligence sharing. host: where have they been most successful?

?hat specific areas he the studies reveal there are two aspects of it. there are domestic campaigns, the majority of what is being observed. a lot of these governments and military operations are doing this are trying to influence the people within their own countries, which is something i think is important for americans to understand as well, especially in light of research done on investigations like o,mbridge analytic investigations done on a mass scale. we are talking about possibly political parties hiring organizations like that to influence their constituency and influence americans. who think americans need to be aware of what they are hearing and saying on social media and , the intelligence sharing

is going to be a major help in the situation. host: charity wright is our guest on this segment of "the washington journal." charity wright, as folks are calling in with their questions, can you ask plane your background, how long you have been in this issue? caller: absolutely. i started out in the u.s. army in 2005 to be a linguist. i was assigned to learn mandarin chinese, and i started translating for the national security agency in analyzing intelligence there. to2015i decided to pivot cybersecurity because it is the future. it has been an exciting four or five years now. analyzing cyber threats not only from a tactical point of view, meaning network security, but going out to strategic intelligence. we are looking out at what is

going on around the world and how is it influencing not only us as americans but as global citizens. and also, as employees of companies and organizations. host: who do you do that work for these days? caller: right now i work for insight. in dark and deep web intel. this is something i have been wanting to do for a long time. the company specializes -- we have an amazing team of nearly unitalysts, from israel's eight 200 m of my self from nsa, whate work to analyze happens. we go to the dark web to hear what hackers are talking about, who they are going to target, and we provide intelligence to our customers, which are mostly enterprises and some government ministries. upt: lawrence, kansas, is

first. this is jeremy, an independent. good morning. caller: thank you for taking the call. i would like for your guest to respond to two aspects of cybersecurity. software, idea of psychology, consciousness ops, byns, con addressing a book called "truth of conspiracy," by seth abramson, that describes the middle east component of the war on american democracy in 2016, including joel's ml from that but also "seeds of fire," by gordon thomas, china and the story behind the attack on america that describes the conjunction of chinese intelligence and is rarely intelligence -- and israel

intelligence, and compromising the most secret aspects of u.s. national nuclear security. charity wright, have youe read either of those books? caller: no, i haven't, but i think jeremy brings up a really good question, and a two-part question. to address the first one, i have not read the book, but we know cyber threats are happening all over the world, not just in the middle east. and it is not just one area of the world attacking another. the majority of cyber attacks that happened today are not -- most of them are financially motivated, and so when we are talking about missed -- middle eastern cyber attacks, we have to first look at who would they be targeting and what are their objectives. so as far as the book goes, i cannot speak to that. the second part, i can speak more to. when it comes to china and who they are working with or allied

with, we can look straight at policies which are very open and publicly available. you can go to the websites of the government and see spelled out line by line, what their objectives are. their main objective is to be the superpower of the world. the word china in chinese means literally center country. they believed to be -- they believe themselves to be the center of the world, and most important, the government of the world. their objective is to take their rightful place as that superpower. so being that that is their objective, they are slowly working toward that, using economic means and cyber means. so they have a huge cyber operation working directly toward the goals of stealing secrets, espionage, is a big part of their program, and by

stealing economic secrets and technology, they are able to advance their economy even further and grow their economy, which then just gives them more financial power. so i think it is important to know, when you are talking about a threat, especially to the united states, to identify what is their main objective? the united states is not china's only target. china is very focused on targets within their own region there in there areasia, and reasons behind each of those. host: out of ohio, this is steve on our line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to guest to may be spent a little bit on what friends -- what france did in area elections and how they were able to shut down basically the dark web. host: charity wright? guest: ok.

well, i can tell you that they have not shut down the dark web. perhaps -- each country has their own rules and policies about how their users use the internet. some countries have more control and censorship over how people use it. the dark web is an openface, open to the public. if you know how to access it. as far as elections go, not familiar with what france is doing in terms of their elections and disinformation. but we know that democracies around the world are shutting down these types of campaigns. most of them do not start in the dark web. most of them start from state-sponsored efforts and operations. host: let's talk more about the dark web, about how big it is, how many people use it on a daily basis, and how one accesses the dark web. caller: ok -- guest: ok.

the dark web is what is commonly referred to, it is really a criminal underground. but not everything in the dark web is that. most people know it for drug sales and trafficking and activities like that. web we know of the surface is 3% of the entire internet. but the surface web is what we use on a daily basis. it is the index part. we are talking about websites for businesses. the rest of the internet is an -- it is a sprawling space. there is the deep web, which is indexed part that stores databases. you have to login to get into it. but the dark web is a space where there are forums and marketplaces that are very difficult for the general public to access because they do not

know where it is. they do not know the url to go to. to access the dark web is pretty simple. you can access it using the special browser that anonymize s who you are and where you are at. there are statistics this morning, over 2 million users on tour right now. so it is growing in popularity throughout the world. and going through tour to access the dark web -- there are underground market places. a lot of it is drugs. number -- a lot of it is drugs. drugs is number one in sales on the dark web. but we look at cyber threats, and this is what hackers are talking about, techniques and tactics and procedures on how to be hacking. they are writing code and selling things to each other. it is full of valuable information, especially for enterprises around the world that are being targeted. the federal

government is responsible for doing what you do in the private sector for monitoring the dark web? and do you think there is enough attention being paid there? note --i guest: i know several government agencies are keeping an eye on it. the national security agency does foreign surveillance. there is quite a bit of intelligence to be collected in the deep and dark web, and i think it is very valuable and it is important to keep an eye on it. but what we do know, the majority of state-sponsored operations -- we are talking about governments around the world like china, russia, and adversarial nations -- they are not using the dark web as a foundation for their programs. they may go there to do some buying, selling, trading, and espionage, but the majority of their activities are behind

closed doors. so we are talking about mostly criminal underground activity. wright, if you want to check out their work. it is insights.com. republicans, democrats, and independents. this is dave from armstrong creek, wisconsin. caller: thank you for taking my call. these companies have got people ,ddicted by using their data and, you know, i think there should be at least some sort of a standard on fact checking. if there isn't, maybe they should take political ads out of the whole picture, especially in the last six months before an election because you have got people believing everything that they hear, and they are scaring -- they are steering people in a certain direction by using their data. this goes for facebook, google, instagram. host: charity wright, your

thoughts? guest: good point. one thing i am most concerned about on this topic is that facebook just announced they are countering disinformation campaigns are countering disinformation campaigns however, they are not stopping disinformation in political ads or in advertisements. that is another thing that i think is a problem. they do need to stop this information. there does need to be fact checking, basically. the american people, the people of the world that you think deserve to know the truth and deserve to know fact from fiction. host: another topic brought up at that hearing with mark zuckerberg on capitol hill, the financial services committee, was the future of cryptocurrency. and the question from diana strong this morning from twitter -- "how will cryptocurrency informed law-enforcement on where cybercrime can take many forms over many years. cryptocurrency has become the

favored detergent for criminals to launder their money. what do you think? guest: absolutely, she is correct. cryptocurrency has become the primary form of money in the dark web. that is because it is anonymous. but law-enforcement enforcement is finding ways to track down certain wallets, cryptocurrency wallets, and be able to use intelligence to track down exactly who it belongs to. so i think advancing that area of intelligence is going to be really important going forward, especially for law enforcement. but she is absolutely right, this is a huge problem. we are working every day to protect hundreds of customers from threats like this, and we are seeing this every day we are learning them on the dark web, related to cryptocurrency, fraud, malware, things like that. host: gale out of cincinnati, ohio, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning.

wow, we have covered so much ground on this. it is incredible, the number of areas. i am going to restrict my states --o the united civil liberties. theiggest fear is that biggest threat in our cybersecurity is that the government is spying on us. means and power that they have to do it. your comment. guest: yes, a valid concern. i agree. and, you know, i have been focusing my studies on countries basically that are setting the standard to be a surveillance state.

china has it down, and they have written a playbook on how to survey the population of citizens in your country. i think a lot of smaller communist governments like vietnam are following in their path and watching what they are doing, and it is becoming extremely dangerous because the technology is available for mass surveillance of a population. are weust a matter of, the people of the united states going to hold our government accountable for transparency? like we talked about with facebook, it is the same with our government. i completely agree that it is a concern, and people are paying attention to the subject. they are discussing it with representatives and congressmen. the firsthat topic, segment of "the washington journal" today, brought up the intelligence community national cybersecurity initiative data center -- can you explain what

it is and what happens there? history withon my the u.s. government and my security clearance, i think it is probably best that i don't, general, speak to, in data collection that is happening from our government. from an unclassified standpoint, our objective is to monitor foreign adversaries for threats. that being said, domestic surveillance does sometimes fall under the jurisdiction of the fbi or a particular state and their government. i think that is important to pay attention to what is going on. it is important to have transparency from the government agencies, but it is important for you to understand that national security is the priority, and so we have come to

this debate like we always do between privacy and security. yes, we want to secure our nation. but at what cost? and i think it is important to have that distinction. host: after all your years working in the nsa, where do you think the line is between privacy and security? where should it be drawn? guest: it really is up to the people within that constituency. just like i advise organizations like enterprises every on this topic, and they grapple with this problem. it is a big challenge. it comes down to what is most valuable to this organization. the functionality and the freedom that you get your users on the network, or the security of the data of those users. so each organization, including government, has to decide for themselves. but i will say that when i was working for national, i was

dumbfounded by some of the claims that have been made during that time by certain people that call themselves whistleblowers. it isg inside the agency, vitally important for us to protect privacy of americans, and i worked with hundreds of individuals very seriously. there were laws, there were rules and regulations about what we can and cannot listen to and collect. and we were very strict about not collecting on u.s. persons. and there are laws set up to do that. it is just a matter of, is leadership holding people accountable for that? in my experience, they were. information was not being collected in other parts of government, but transparency is definitely the first step. we have been talking about going in front of congress, having these interviews with stakeholders and asking them

what they are doing to be transparent. left witht 10 minutes charity wright, a cyber threat intelligence analyst with insight intelligence. taking your phone calls this morning, on a variety of topics when it comes to cybersecurity and social media disinformation. chris, jacksonville, north carolina, a democrat. go ahead. caller: good morning. a couple issues i would like to talk about. zuckerberg, they want to hold zuckerberg responsible for something that the federal government should be responsible for. i don't think they should be doing that. i think congress needs to get off their backside and they need to make laws, be bold and make .aws, and work this thing out they also need to establish course. zuckerberg should be doing and should not be doing.

not zuckerberg deciding on his own. in america we have the cyber the government taken into cyber court? it is wrong for the people not to be taken to cyber court. host: thanks for the topic. charity wright? caller: thank you for that very valid point. it is an interesting that you made, that, you know, i am going to go out on a limb and say we need to have cybersecurity , likes in the government you suggested, a cyber court. not a bad idea. we have to keep enterprises and companies accountable for what they are doing with user data. and with their employees' data as well. just like companies are required to disclose a breach when it happens. i think that the important part is that we cannot just have senators and representatives

congressmen in these positions, they have to be experts in their field. they have to understand cybersecurity and privacy to the core. host: do you agree with the caller when he said that he believes congress was trying to offload their responsibility for setting the rules in this area to mark zuckerberg in that hearing this week? that congressve is trying to grapple with a lot of changes right now. we live in a very complicated world right now where the internet and basically most valuable our asset. that being said, we are trying to figure out altogether how do we protect information? and what regulate it, is the responsibility of the government as opposed to an organization like a company like facebook. i definitely agree that there needs to be some type of regulation and accountability,

but i cannot go out on a limb and say -- i am not going to attack the leadership because it is a complicated world, and i am watching enterprise leadership grapple with these challenges every day as well. in alexandria, virginia, a democrat. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i will make this as quick as i can. theink we are witnessing coordinated destabilization of the united states with these companies, with mark zuckerberg being on the hill and discussing. i believe the politicians are ill-equipped to answer these questions because they do not understand the technology, nor do they understand the impact it has. as far as facebook, the cat is out of the bag. they have already monetized our information and weaponized it against us with the use of coordinated ads to make people ultimately clash against one another in the streets. we have seen this with the

result of the 2016 election being the -- facebook took the money because they knew this was happening, yet they did not act. i do not believe that any i.t. corporation does not know what transactions are happening. myquestion for you, since information is already out there, even though i have removed myself from facebook, my information is out there, from a cybersecurity standpoint, what can i do or what can citizens do to remove or purge their information from these areas that are being weaponized against us, whether it is in taking my data, my data and my metadata, to be driven in certain directions financially, socially, or economically? that is my question for you. what can we do to get ourselves out of that realm. host: excellent question. charity wright? guest: that is an excellent question. thank you.

there are several steps that we can take as people who have data floating out there or stolen. or mishandled by corporations. i know that from my standpoint of a cyber threat intelligence analyst, we work every day to eliminate that data from the dark web. the way that we do that is we actually go into the dark web using anonymous avatars and profiles, and we represent people and companies and take their data off the dark web by spying it off the dark web. a lot of people, there is a debate about do we pay hackers for what they have stolen? in some cases, yes. in some cases, no. it depends on what does that take? one of the ways we do that is to identify where is that data and how is it being used, can it be taken down for free? can we utilize the laws within

our country to have that information removed from the source. if it is in the hands of a foreign adversary, there is not much you can do about that. but going forward, proactively, as a citizen of the internet, i would recommend that you follow basic security practices. not reusing the same password over multiple accounts. two-factor authentication to verify your identity. the cybersecurity industry is making great strides when it comes to helping people understand how to implement these best practices. so i advise everybody to stick with the basics of security, and then also explore, what are the options out there? what kind of intelligence vendors and providers are out there that can help you monitor your identity theft, or monitor your credit account, and monitor

for your information on the dark web so that it can be then remediated and taken off. host: time for a couple more phone calls with charity wright. this is paul from chicago, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning, c-span and charity. i just wonder about this disinformation and all. why is nobody, looking into the disinformation by the media? and --ke john klapper they are like movie stars. they are running in and out of these media giants, discussing all the intelligence of the country with these guys. there is a problem. that is disinformation. it is not only against the president, but against the people of this country. somebody should be checking it out. host: that is paul in chicago. your thoughts on the media? guest: i definitely understand your frustration. control, ory little

it feels like for americans there is very little control over the media that is coming at us. to fact checking and accountability and transparency. those are the really underlying issues that we have to -- and that we have to keep people accountable for that. i definitely understand the concern for sure, that what we are getting through social media can be false, fake news, but also as a people we are in this place where we are not trusting anybody anymore. can we trust the media, can we trust the government? i feel like the only way forward is to demand transparency and become more involved in these processes and in these new laws that are happening. host: last call. jean is in fremont, ohio, a democrat. morning. caller: good morning.

i am more not into the cybersecurity with mark zuckerberg, but our government, and our president, he is constantly contacting other countries to manipulate our elections. i'm sorry, but until this president is out of here, we are going to have this problem. thank you. host: charity wright, when does the problem go away? know, that know, that is definitely a complicated question. we live in a very complex world where the internet allows people to hide behind a screen and let them be who they want to be and say what they want to say. i understand her concern about forticians using mass media abusive purposes, and i think that that is not just a part of the issue.

i think anybody in a place or position of power is using the internet and social media and whatever they can. it has been this way since media went mass in size and what were two. -- in world war ii. going forward, looking at the future, i am encouraged that people are engaged in this conversation. i am encouraged that they are concerned and that they are expressing their concerns, because to me that means they want to be involved and they want to speak out and they want to hold people accountable. because essentially it affects all of our ways of life. it is going to be a fine balance. we are watching right now entire countries and governments kind of doing a land grab for internet space within their borders. so they are regulating it and censoring it. and i think it is going to be a matter of, if we share values

with another country, we are going to be sharing the same cyber laws and rules and standards with those allies. going forward, i expect those allies to be forming, and for some kind of policy to be put in place about how do we behave on the internet. what can governments do to regulate it, and what is the responsibility of companies and institutions going forward with handling people's data? host: charity wright is a cyber threat intelligence analyst in insight intelligence. join us again down the road. guest: thank you so much. host: up next, for the last 20 minutes, we will end where we began, with this question. if you think the impeachment inquiry process has been fair, 202-748-8000 is the number.

if you think it has not, 202-748-8001. start calling in. we will be right back. announcer: thinking about participating in c-span's studentcam 2020 competition, but you have never made a documentary film before? no problem. we have resources on our website to help you get started. check it out on our getting started and download pages on c-span.org, and video link to footage in the c-span library. to help you introduce studentcam to your students. >> for anyone to wants to compete this year, find a topic that you are truly passionate about and pursue it as much as you can. announcer: we are asking high school students to create a short documentary on items that

you want candidates to address in the 2020 campaign. there will be a $5,000 grand prize. >> get a camera, get a microphone, and start producing the best video that you can possibly produce. announcer: visit studentcam.org for more information today. "washington journal" continues. host: after a week that saw two high-profile impeachment positions take place behind closed doors, we are asking you your thoughts on how the impeachment angry -- the impeachment inquiry has gone. do you think it has been fair? if you think it has, 202-748-8000 is the number. if you think it has not, 202-748-8001. the deposition is expected to continue next week with more current and former members of the trump administration asked

to testify. this from "the hill," looking at the week ahead in impeachment inquiry testimony. philip rieger, the acting secretary of state for eurasian affairs is expected to appear in a closed session tomorrow, and charles cumberland is expected to appear in a closed session on monday, according to -- charles cup roman is expected to appear in a closed session on monday. timothyial said morrison, a special assistant to the president and national security council senior director for russia, is expected to be in a closed session on thursday. morrison mentioned during william taylor's testimony as someone who may be able to corroborate some of what he testified about, william taylor, that high-profile testimony that we heard about at the beginning of this week. taking your phone calls. d is up from memphis,

tennessee. do you think the impeachment inquiry has been fair? we lost him this morning. one of the stories in today's papers looks into democrats defending the fairest of their hearing, taking place behind closed doors. yesterday on capitol hill, senator lindsey graham, republican from south carolina, introducing a resolution aimed at condemning the house impeachment inquiry era that resolution calls for the house to take a formal vote on the impeachment inquiry, and for lawmakers to allow president trump's accusers, lindsey graham in the picture there, alongside that story from "the wall street journal," taking your calls all morning long. on "the washington journal" as usual. we focused on this topic in the first hour of our program today, and we are focusing on it again in the last 20 minutes.

charles out of winston-salem, north carolina, you are up. an independent. go ahead. caller: i definitely think it is a sham there the whole purpose -- i definitely think it is a sham. he whole purpose since president trump has been impeached, impeach. that is the whole democratic party. all it is is a sham. he is not the perfect man, and he certainly was not a perfect republicang the elected, but he was and immediately they started screaming impeach. the first word was impeach. the second word was change the system so it is no longer an electoral system but go to the popular vote. two things -- losers always do that. first they want to break the rules and then they want to change it.

this is a lousy group and i am really disappointed. any of my democrat friends, how sorry they have become great all they want to do is tear down this president with all they can do. they have another election coming up here, and then if people do not want him, they can get him out. but in the meantime, they are trying to make him look bad all they can with everything they can do, and all it is is an absolute crooked sham. host: that is charles in north carolina. this is charles in georgia, who believes it has been fair. why do you say that, charles? caller: i feel the program and the process has been fair because as long as congress follows the guidelines, and the guidelines call for no vote, so right now, we also have something that looks like a republican communist party that is arriving. thank you. host: why not hold a vote? that is something that republicans have been calling for, a formal vote to again the

impeachment inquiry. why not do that? we lost charles p this is tom in leesburg, virginia, a democrat. who think it has been fair. why is that? caller: i had dinner with a friend last night. i am in the d.c. area, and he is one of the people i know with top-secret security clearance, and he told me that for what trump has been doing, if he has done that, he would lose his clearance immediately. i have also had people tell me that they would have lost their they did what hillary clinton did with her server. so i think we need to say what is the least amount -- in other words, like, even if you just look at the ukraine thing by itself, it seems like there is enough there to, whatever seizure they have to do to drill down and make a determination. that is absolutely fair. i don't like the leak, and i

bringing cell phones into a -- i work around this world, and i'm telling you, it is amazing to meet members of congress who have no idea about walking into a secure facility with their cell phones. it is just mind-boggling. this has to be done sooner, not later. host: when do you think it needs to come out from behind closed doors, tom? caller: it is not a simple thing. think about it this way. if people went in and robbed a bank and you arrested five of them, you don't put them all in one room, one story. you question each of them, find out the facts, see if their story corroborates. you work on each of those points , if it doesn't, and until you have some kind of clarity. they need to quit doing the finger-pointing and the name game and the same thing they do,

and get some answers, have a vote. once they move beyond the inquiry phase, release the transcripts of these interviews, and let the chips fall where they may. the republicans, if they say trump never did anything, they should say, bring it on, he is an innocent man, if him a trial. host: tom in leesburg, virginia. tom mentioned republican members occupying the secure room where the depositions have been taking place. their complaints that they have not been allowed to participate in the hearings. this from "the new york times" today, looking at who is actually allowed to participate in these depositions, the inquiry hearings. "in this case, the intelligence foreign affairs and oversight and reform committees, to attend sessions with witnesses.

that amounts to more than 100 house lawmakers and includes roughly a quarter of house republicans. among them are some of mr. trump's loyal allies, including representative jim jordan of ohio, meadows of north carolina, greg pence, the brother of vice president mike pence, who sits on the foreign affairs committee, can attend, and so can representative kevin mccarthy of california, the house republican leader. the questioning is conducted by republican and democratic staff members for the committees, but lawmakers may occasionally ask questions as well." a few more of your calls today before we take you up to baltimore for the funeral of elijah cummings, the late elijah cummings, who passed away last week. lied in state yesterday, and our coverage begins here. until then, our phone calls.

joe, buffalo, new york, believes the inquiry impeachment hearings have been conducted fairly. go ahead. caller: i would like to say that if you look at the track record going back decades, who has been following the laws? i mean, this whole business of the republicans being patriotic -- it is absolutely a joke. they are dangerous, and it is like they even go after the laws that they themselves created years ago. so it is like they have no credibility whatsoever. it is just disgusting. so let it go. i mean, it is like let the process work. joe in new york. this is tim and california peer he believes the impeachment inquiry has not been conducted fairly. go ahead. caller: president trump just got out of a 2.5 year investigation

where they tried to overturn every rock to see exactly what this president has done, and they came out with nothing. now they are just continuing with this thing. trump's phone call, nobody seems to mention that his phone call neutralizes this whole show that we are seeing right now. it neutralizes everything. now they are on a fishing expedition behind closed doors. if they have nothing to hide, this is the people's house. this is not the democrats' house. this is the people's house per that means republicans and democrats. they did a rules change. believe this is just a kangaroo court. get it out into the open. the ironic thing about this is if it was the other way around and it was the democrats that sorry,ing this, -- i'm the republicans doing this, my

god, you would have heard a huge cry from the mainstream media like you have never heard before. so get it out into the open. what are they afraid of? host: this is the president's current tweet from his twitter page, and his complaint about the process, asking where is the whistleblower? why did he or she right a fictitious and incorrect account of my phone call with the ukrainian president? why did the inspector general allow this to happen? who is the so-called informant? adam schiff? who was so inaccurate? a giant scam! thesing on the status and whistleblower and whether they might testify in the impeachment inquiry. the story notes that democrats were once prepared to take extraordinary steps to preserve the whistleblower's identity, considering him central to their investigation. but over the last month, they

have grown cold to that idea, exposing him to additional scrutiny. launching investigations -- a person familiar with the discussions between the whistleblower and house investigators, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said there are no current active -- deborahefforts to out of eugene, oregon, is a democrat, believing the impeachment inquiry has been conducted fairly. go ahead. caller: thank you for c-span. i would like to say that the people who are supporting the realize the not extent of the criminal activities that are going on from his office and that have been going on in his business for so many years. as a real estate appraiser, i was in 2008 that trump

money laundering for the russians. when he sold the palm beach property that he got for 41 million, that he did nothing to for two years, and resold it for $94 million to a russian fertilizer magnate. mueller was not allowed by barr to investigate his financial miss dealings, and so most of the public does not know that. and the people that are repeating these republican talking points that are so ridiculous have been brainwashed for so many years by right wing wek radio and fox news, that -- it is critical that we do something about fox news, and people like rush limbaugh, who spread the disease.

your point, deborah. speaking of attorney general barr and the russia investigation, that is back in the news today on several front pages. this from politico, an inquiry that the attorney general ,rdered origins into the probe now becoming a criminal investigation, according to a source familiar with the matter per the investigation being conducted by the u.s. eternity -- the u.s. attorney, john durham, launched as an effort to answer unspecified questions that he had about why the fbi began the counterintelligence investigation that eventually led to the appointment of the special counsel. barr's -- the current and former fbi justice department thomas cia officials could face the possibility of criminal charges arising from some aspect of their work on the russia and, noting that the

investigation has become a criminal investigation, increasing the attorney's power, probe,s power in the opening up the possibility of a grand jury subpoena for records and testimony, that again reporting from politico website, it also other papers as well. the story broken yesterday by "the new york times." maryland, sykesville, an independent, who believes the impeachment inquiry has not been conducted fairly. the morning. caller: good morning. these thoughts are not necessarily connected in the same paragraph. i think what we are getting lost on as a country is, is this fair, is that fair, is everybody squeaky clean, is everybody down to the wire? what are they thinking? how are they behaving every moment? i think we have gotten lost in the details. since politics have begun, they have been, you know, nefarious

and questionable acts and deals done behind doors and all of that. it does not make it right, it does not make it ok. we should certainly work to improve things, but i think we are getting lost on that. one of the interesting things, is trump squeaky clean? probably not. is adam schiff squeaky clean? probably not. is hillary clinton? probably not. but i think if we get stuck there, we are getting lost and missing the big picture, the big picture being, is the country financially in a better place? are we working to get things better together with our politicians, not just trying to rip them all down and separate and divide. i used to be a democrat, i am now more trump leaning, but i just feel like if we could all try to come together and get out of this messy detail, like they are right and -- nobody is squeaky clean. look in the mirror and be clean and try to rise to a better level in this country. host: before you go, was there

one incident or a certain moment when you realized you were no longer wanting to be a democrat and became an independent, leaning toward president trump? caller: you know, it was a culmination of things, but primarily i felt like i wanted america to stand stronger as a keep outnot to bar and people, but to solidify more and not lose ourselves on the playing field of the world. and trump represented that. did he do it in a little bit of a gangster aspect? absolutely. do i love that? no. but he is getting a lot accomplished, and in time there will be a more diplomatic, gentler soul, male or female, in the oval office. i just felt he was going to tighten things up and get us

straightened out because it takes a personality like his to do it, and then he will go about his way and somebody else can come in and ride that path in a nicer way. i know my time is up, but another point i wanted to make is, with all this political stuff on the left and right, what it is doing is thinking all of us from thinking clearly. what is the message that each party has to offer us, so that we can make intelligence -- intelligent choices. one of the message -- what is the message that the left has? host: a couple minutes before we are expected to take you to baltimore for the funeral of the late elijah cummings. there is a shot there from outside the church where that funeral will be held this morning. we will take you there in a couple of minutes. i also want to give you an update on the latest. as we have been talking about the impeachment inquiry, this from cnbc this morning. lawyers for former national

security advisor john bolton have been in touch with officials working on the house committee conducting the impeachment probe, according to a person close to bolton, that spoke to nbc news on friday. the news coming amid the impeachment probe the story talking about the possibility of john bolton perhaps testifying as part of the impeachment probe. no confirmation yet, the only john bolton's lawyers in contact with the panel. jonathan is in fayetteville, north carolina, democrat. caller: good morning, sir. good morning, sir. peopleit interesting why get on here and what we are textingat our president negative stuff and saying negative stuff about people.

for the highest office in this land, it should be opposite. really should be. host: what do you mean by that? you should not badmouth or talk about because otherou do that, you have fingers pointing back at you. it is a terrible state that we are in. host: that is jonathan, north carolina. philip, indiana, independent. caller: good morning. thank you. i agree with everything deborah said. i think deborah pretty much rationalizing president trump. i wish people would check on trump's past history as far as his money-laundering, business dealings, corrupt.

he is as bad as the swamp. host: the question we are asking about the impeachment in where you, is it fair -- inquiry, is it fair? the rules were put in place by a republican majority. host: what are you referring to? majorityhe republican passed the rules to have secret hearings to interview, to interview, to interview individuals. they said they were going to come out with all the information. this is an investigation. you don't just diebold everything in the public -- divulge everything in the public right away. host: congresswoman michael waltz was on the program yesterday. he pointed out that benghazi and others were committee investigations taking place. this is an impeachment inquiry.

he pointed to past impeachment inquiries with president next and and president clinton. caller: he is saying there are different rules, is that what he is saying? i have read these are the rules passed by the republican majority. maybe it has all been twisted. it seems to me the republican leadership believes they do not have to follow the constitution or the laws. it does not apply to them. that is my opinion. host: that is fellow in minnesota. in washington, d.c. caller: good morning. i think it is beyond fair. i think the republican spin on this has been unbelievable and the fact that democrats are following the rules. republicans are trying to out the whistleblower. we have laws in place that prevent that.

whether you like it or not, those are the laws. democrats are following the rules. the president is not on trial. the trial takes place in the senate. as a private citizen, i cannot barge in on law enforcement or the prosecutor that is on a fact-finding mission to eventually charge me with a crime. you cannot do that. your time comes when you go to trial. until the fact-finding mission is overcome then they won't initiate impeachment. that is the rules. that is what they are able to do. republicans are trying to pressure democrats and spin this narrative that they should do it now. they don't have to. keith wholast call is

believes the impeachment inquiry has not been conducted fairly. go ahead. are you with us this morning? caller: yes. guest: -- host: go ahead. caller: the democrats are doing some foul stuff. they know they are in trouble. they are trying to do other stuff to hire what they done did. going to jail pretty soon, and they are mad about that, and they know that, and they don't have anything to cover that up because they finna find it, and somebody is going to jail. host: that is keith, our last color today -- caller today. we will be taking you to baltimore, maryland, for the funeral services for the late congressman elijah cummings, served 13 terms in the house. his service beginning shortly

here on c-span. we will be back with you tomorrow morning for "washington journal" at 7:00 a.m. eastern, 4:00 a.m. pacific. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

♪