power over people. that is one of the reasons i am a conservative. i don't trust people with power. the left does. the left wants more and more power centralized in the state. i am against it. i want to influence people. that is my dream. i think i do. i want to do more. i have no desire to have power over anybody. steve: we thank you for joining us on this sunday morning. if people want to follow you on the web, they can do so how? dennis: dennisprager.com, prageru.com, and @dennisprager. those are the three ways, and please enjoy the work. none of it is hate. it is all predicated on my deepest belief in life. god wants us to be good. steve: we thank you for being with us this sunday. please come back again.

>> thanks for being with us on this sunday. let me begin with the results from louisiana, your reaction. -- >> well, it is just sort of another -- what has been a pretty terrible week here for the president. you know, he has had a longtime confidant convicted of all seven counts of lying on friday. he has had a series of people coming forward to the impeachment inquiry, testifying about what they consider an improper pressure campaign to get ukraine to investigate the bidens, and now you have some political defeat here in a state that trump won by 20 points. the democrats are pulling an upset here, doing better than he did in the primary. that is going to be something other republicans start paying attention to, to see if the

president's political pull is not as strong as they hoped, and, you know, they have got a bottle vulnerable senate republicans up next year, and they have a lot of house republicans who have started to look at the political landscape and have decided to retire as well, so it is not great for the president. steve: let's turn to the recording both the of you and your colleagues at bloomberg news and some testimony behind closed doors yesterday. one of the headlines is "career diplomats building a narrative of ukraine's pressure campaign by the president." what have you learned? >> so, we have even more, i guess, career, and in some cases white house officials, coming forward to the committee and saying that they -- providing sort of more confirmation of details about what was going on behind the scenes and also how they viewed this phone call with the ukraine president zelensky

on july 25. mike pence's aide, jennifer williams, said trump appeared more focused on his personal political agenda rather than some policy objective with the -- for the united states on that call. that is not great for the president. tim morrison, a former cia -- senior director at the national security council, did testify that he did not hear anything illegal on that call, but he provided more confirmation that gordon sondland, the ambassador to the eu, was talking about a pressure campaign to get ukraine's president to announce investigations. and this comes after a number of other diplomats have come forward in the recent days to say that they also heard, either overheard conversations that happened friday night with david

holmes, a ukraine -- one of our diplomats in ukraine overheard a conversation between trump and sondland. this is the kind of stuff that we will see rolling out in the next few weeks of testimony. steve: let me turn to roger stone, because of the late 1980's, he has been a close print and confidant of donald, one of his earliest and most public supporters, found guilty on friday of witness tampering, lying to congress, faces a potential of 50 years in jail. he is now in his mid-60's. there is some indication, at least based on the president's tweet, that he may be up for a pardon. >> yeah, i mean, he clearly wants a pardon, and the president has the power to give him a pardon, and the president had some tweets about roger stone, which seem sympathetic to stone.

i think that would almost certainly result in another article of impeachment, however, for abuse of power from democrats. the key here is that prosecutors in trump's department of justice said that stone had -- the reason why he was lying was to protect the president, and so you could have a situation where the president is pardoning people for lying to congress for him. that could be, you know, that would be a pretty dangerous precedent, potentially, if anybody who ever lies to congress does not have to pay a penalty. so i think that is -- the president may want to pardon him, but i think the consequences for that could be politically not so great for him and certainly would be something that would be another thing that democrats would take a hard look at. steve: we are talking to steven

dennis. he covers the capitol hill and most notably, the senate for bloomberg news. let me ask about the senate and whether or not you are sensing any division among republicans, either support or lack thereof, for the president, because ultimately, they will be the jurors if this comes to a senate trial. stephen: the president is working them hard. he is having senate republicans up to the white house, 5, 10 at a time on different subjects. impeachment has been coming up. and the way i view senate republicans, i talk to as many of them as regularly as i can almost every other day, they are in three buckets. one bucket is a bucket of five or 10 senators -- actually, less than that, usually, who are robustly defending the president all the time, and then you have got a much bigger bucket of

senate republicans who do not want to talk about it at all, and if they do, they will sort of say a vague talking point about being a juror or haven't seen anything yet, or they will wait until they see it when it gets over here, and then you have a maybe much smaller group must 2, 3, or senate republicans who have said very critical things about the president's phone call. people like mitt romney, susan collins, who are not saying much after that, but have made clear that they are not happy. and then you have got a few people, like pat toomey of pennsylvania, who, at last check, this past week, believe -- was in that the call was , inappropriate but not impeachable.

some harsh words for the president's conduct. ultimately the democrats lined up to protect him from removal. could be where things are going. tell at thisard to point. one thing that i don't think is removal an actual barring a collapse in the support among the primary voters because as a senate republican you're ssentially voting for the end of your career because somebody is going to run against you and probably beat you if you president that a they like. as the of to develop as unfolds on wednesday

morning. thank you for being with us on this sunday. appreciate it. >> thank you. >> c-span's washington journal every day with knew and policy issues that impact you. coming up monday morning, we'll two of the impeachment inquiry hearings with "wall street journal" vivian -- an senior staff writer for the hill scott. later a discussion on the george ent inquiry with washington university law professor jonathan turley. c-span's o watch washington journal live at 7:00 morning.onday join in the discussion. washington jug mugs are at c-span.org. [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] >> during the turkish's presidential visit, some an opportunity to ask the turkish leader questions on russia, weapons, and attacks syria.s in meeting. look at that president trump: we're discussing trade and lots of having aters and we're very good discussion. some of bringing over our republican senators that are well versed in what's going on turkey to meet president erdogan would be good so we're a strong discussion on things, including the safe zone, border, and oil. a very big is factor because we think we can get trade up to a hundred and it's much lower than that right now. we'll have a meeting for a while a then we're doing conference, making a statement, nd i think we've had a very successful