wilder. nearly mary fell ill and died and became blind, laura was really forced into this role that she had never contemplated for herself, which was to become a teacher. >> and at 8:00 on the presidency we look at the work of pat olyphant with cartoons of president bush to obama, from the university of virginia which just acquired its cartoon -- his cartoon collection. explore our past every weekend on c-span3. nears the headline, front page of the washington post. the story is also available at washington post.com. rank-and-file democrats puzzled about the next step. after two weeks of impeachment

hearings, democratic leaders are poised to draft articles of impeachment, but their rank-and-file members were stumped about what they should do next. lawmakers heading home for thanksgiving break unsure as to whether there would be more cast as or they would vote with just eight days or meaning. congressman will hurt, and outspoken anti-trump republican on the intelligence committee said he was not convinced, and impeachable conventions be compelling, it's not something to be rushed or taken lightly. thate not seen evidence bribery or extortion was committed. heard was one concerning possible crossover vote. congress members in the dark about what would happen next. the full story at washington times.com. we will get to your calls. john mcardle also looking at the impeachment story and what is

next. according -- if you watched it -- >> if you watched it all you minutes andours 43 43 seconds of testimony. speaker pelosi was asked what she needed to know or moving to the next stage of the impeachment process. youhe days not over and never know what testimony they need. tayloraw with ambassador at the beginning of last week. of bringing forth mr. holmes today. so that will be a judgment made ofthe committees jurisdiction, particularly under the jurisdiction of the intelligence committee. we had not made any decisions. and as i said to the president if you have any exculpatory information, please bring it forward. host: speaker nancy pelosi on capitol hill, whenever the house intelligence committee has decided that it has completed

his process it will submit its report to the house judiciary committee. a congressional reporter with bloomberg is looking at the road democrats andthat those familiar with the intelligence committees activity say the drafting of the report will begin in earnest next week with the aim of getting into the panel.ry jerrold nadler will then have the option of holding his own hearings were representatives would have the ability to participate under the impeachment inquiry rules approved by the house. the story goes on to note that nadler will have to decide what to do with potential impeachment recommendations transferred from other committees conducting investigations on other topics other than ukraine. his story notes pelosi has said she wants any impeachment effort to be tightly focused, but she noted the rules approved do not set limits on the potential articles of impeachment. on the timing of a floor vote, this is what billy house rights.

the democrats' goal of any house year-end isvote by coming challenging, the house scheduled to be in session until late december after passing a stopgap spending bill to fund the government through december 20, but they may not allow enough time for the house to debate and vote on impeachment articles. if it flips until next year, it would delay the senate trial, which could take several weeks and push the process into the democratic presidential primary season, a complication for the candidates. several of whom are u.s. senators. that is a look at what could be the road ahead when it comes to impeachment. host: the senate trial will be live on c-span 2. a few tweets, this from the libertarian saying republicans will not accept any level of evidence, they will degrade every witness. our democracy is dead. another viewer saying they proved rudy giuliani went to ukraine on russia-funded cash to

get fake trash on biden to win 2020. from this viewer, they have to keep the fire smoldering until october 2020 and after that, democrats will find something else. send us a tweet, we will read it, the front page of the new york times has dr. fiona hill with this quote, in the course of this investigation, i would ask you that you please not promote politically driven falsehoods that so clearly advance russian interests. and there was this exchange with dan goldman representing democrats and dr. fiona hill. [video clip] >> you also testified ambassador bolton had expressed some views to you about mr. giuliani's interests in ukraine. do you recall what he said to you? >> it was part of a conversation about the things mr. giuliani was saying frequently in public. we saw him often on television

making these statements and i had brought to ambassador bolton's attention the attacks, the smear campaign against ambassador yovanovitch and expressed regrets about how this was unfolding and the shameful way in which ambassador yovanovitch was being smeared and attacked then i asked if there was anything we could do about it and ambassador bolton looked pained, indicated with body language there was nothing he could do about it and in the course of that discussion said rudy giuliani was a hand grenade that was going to blow everyone up. >> did you understand what he meant by that? >> i did. >> what did he mean? >> he meant what mr. giuliani was saying was explosive, he was on television making incendiary remarks about everyone involved and he was clearly pushing forward issues and ideas that would probably come back to haunt us and i think that is where we are today.

host: the testimony of dr. fiona hill. a live look at the u.s. capitol and this headline from usa today as ukraine saw the meeting with president trump as critical. more of your tweets, democrats have three things necessary to impeach, stop trying to justify your actions with additional stuff. unless you come up with a big smoking gun, glowed quietly for gloatat -- bloat -- quietly for the next week and then it is our turn. another tweet, republicans are convinced this is a witch hunt and they all used to be democrats until democrats started treating donald so poorly. got it. you are fired, donald. after two weeks of hearings and about a dozen witnesses, what is your take away? steve, good morning. caller: good morning. am i on? host: you sure are, go ahead, please. caller: my take away is nothing has really changed my mind. i did not vote for donald trump

in 2016, but what the democrats did during the whole russia collusion investigation, when that first started, i thought this could be really bad and the longer it went on, it was a nothing burger. when the mueller report came out, i said we need to get to the bottom of who started that mess, that is a national imperative because if what i think is true is high-ranking people in the obama administration and cia and other places conspired to overturn the democracy of this country, that is huge and if i am wrong, prove it to me because where we stand right now, that is the only russian collusion we know of, the dossier. i thought this was an attempt to hide that and every witness -- i have asked about -- watched about 5 or 6 hours -- it comes

down to the same thing, trump was obsessed with 2016 and corruption in ukraine and if i were donald trump, i would be obsessed, too, because a huge segment of this country spent three years calling you a traitor for no reason. anyone in this country not concerned of getting to the bottom of what happened in 2016 says it is okay if the intelligence agencies act the way they did under hoover. i thought we were out of that. i thought we wanted to be better. if the election for 2020 were held today, i would vote for donald trump. as loose cannon donald trump is, the overturning of democracy and the constitution that the democratic party represents is an existential threat. thank you. host: thanks for the call and this is alfred on our twitter page saying congress needs to hear from pompeo, barr, minutia

-- mnuchen before moving the matter to the senate. craig and washington, d.c., calling on the phone line the hearing changed your mind. how so? caller: i wanted to look at the overall situation and i am appalled at some of these callers that call in and say they would vote for trump. trump is the biggest liar ever, i think, of any president we ever had. what i am trying to say is all those dignified people that came on this show, they are not partisan. these people are just american people and they did their duty to come out and take chances to tell the truth and the overall picture, what i am trying to say

is even the mueller report, look at all the people that he locked up and the people indicted. everything is a lie around trump, even his special lawyer, he is in jail. host: this tweet at the end of the day, these impeachment inquiries are nothing more than a sham campaign to publicly humiliate agent orange, referring to president trump, before the election. it will not be enough to swing pennsylvania and wisconsin. sylvia next from virginia and you remain unsure, why? caller: i am a little confused. i liked fiona hill and i liked ambassador yovanovitch. for what they say is i did vote for president trump, but i don't like the way he treats women at all.

i am confused about burisma and it sounds like to me sondler is trying to say something, but feels he can't. i think there needs to be more investigation, but i think he dances around the subject because he doesn't want to hurt president trump. i believe we need more information to bring the truth out. host: the senate passing a bill to avoid a government shutdown and john mcardle is looking into that story. host 2: with all the focus yesterday on the impeachment inquiry, c-span viewers might be forgiven to not realize a government shutdown was averted with about 6 hours to share. -- to spare. this was scott wong with his tweet, shutdown averted, thanksgiving is saved. president trump signed a continuing resolution funding the government through december 20. he signed that after it passed

the senate on a vote from 73-20. that continuing resolution passed the house earlier this week. as the hill newspaper notes, congressional negotiators have four weeks to hammer out how to spend the agreed-upon $1.37 trillion for the 2020 fiscal year. we are in continuing resolutions until december 20. roll call reporting on the cr and how this negotiation will take place. they quoted chuck schumer during his floor remarks saying the year end negotiations could go down one of two paths. the first does not include trump's involvement in the second where trump would stomp -- and the second where trump would stomp his feet and make impossible demands would likely end in another government shutdown. chuck schumer on the floor of the senate yesterday. the vice president tweeting

yesterday about the government funding measure. president trump will be forced to sign a continuing resolution because congress failed to do its job once again. they are spending more time trying to impeach the president then working for the american people. not only have they failed to pass a budget that includes critical funding for national defense and a pay raise for men and women in uniform, the usmca has been sitting on speaker pelosi's desk for over a year. the american people deserve better. host: this tweet from steve saying career bipartisan officials lawfully and morally testified that trump abused the office of the u.s. president. anyone refusing to come forward under lawful subpoenas is obstructing justice for a reason. trump is guilty as hell. impeach. in the front page of usa today has dr. fiona hill and david holmes testified yesterday and

-- they testified yesterday and there was this exchange between jim jordan and david holmes on the phone call that david holmes overheard with ambassador gordon sondland in kiev, ukraine. let's watch. [video clip] >> why didn't your boss talk about it? why didn't your boss bring up the call you overheard? the reason you are here today? you are the closing witness and yet their first witness, ambassador taylor, did not even bring it up. when we deposed you, you said this was one of the most remarkable events of my life. you said after the call happened, i immediately told deputy chief of mission and others about the call and you said you went on vacation and told several friends and family and you come back on august 6th and tell ambassador taylor about the call and in your deposition you said i repeatedly referred to the call in meetings and conversations where the issue of the president's interest in ukraine was relevant.

that sounds like government speak for you told everybody and yet their star witness, their first witness, ambassador taylor related 13 different conversations he had between july 18 and september 11, 13 different conversations, never once mentioning this call. 19, they talked about the upcoming hall. tell taylor what zelensky told. july 20, morrison told taylor what happened on the trump-zelinski call. august 21, they talked to taylor morrison talks to taylor, , morrison tells taylor what s ondland -- morrison tells taylor what sondland told trump and nowhere is there a homes tells taylor what the president of the united

states told sondland. a homes tellsre taylor what the president of the united states told sondland. >> may i answer the question? >> i will let you in a second. 13 conversations from their star witness and he can't remember a call from a guy he works with every single day? why? >> immediately when i went back to the embassy after this lunch on the 26th, i told the deputy chief of mission. i would have told ambassador taylor immediately except he was on the front lines that afternoon. as i testified, i went on my vacation on saturday and came back the following monday and tuesday, i was in the ambassador's office where i referred to the call.

in that week plus i was away, it was my assumption the deputy chief of mission would have informed other people about the call as well. my recollection is when i referred to the call, ambassador taylor nodded knowingly as though he had been briefed. i referred to the call and mentioned some of my takeaways from the call. at the time, the main take away was the president does not care about ukraine, so we will have a tough road to convince him it is important enough for him to schedule an oval office meeting and release this hold on security assistance, that was the take away and what i referred to repeatedly in the coming weeks when it became relevant and -- one more important point, throughout this time, we were trying to find a formula, things we could do that would convince the president they were worth talking to.

>> may be the take away was he thought it was no big deal because he already knew. he did not remember because we already had the transcript. host: that was congressman jim jordan and david holmes. the hearings available on our website. you can listen to them on the free c-span radio app. back to the phone calls, floyd in jonesville, virginia, did the hearings in any way change your mind? caller: not at all. thank you for taking my call. that first steve took what i had to say, but i want to thank president donald trump for being a truthful man, being the truth in helping this country. i am 66 years old and he has been the best president since i have been living. he has done more for this country, got us jobs and stuff to work at paris to the hospital was closed during obama administration.

he has done a whole lot, but all of this is lies. they said this good man said this and this woman said this and they did not have evidence on him. i kind of doubt there is even a whistleblower. democrats -- the only reason they started this investigation is because on december 9 and 11th -- it is coming out where the investigation was done on them where they tried to lie on trump. i hope democrats turned the tv on and watch that on the 11th and ninth when this is coming

out because there is a lot more going to come out and that is the only reason they started this other thing and the candidates running for president on the democrat side are trying to force churches to believe in homosexuality and believe it is all right to kill babies because they are going to take their tax exempt away from churches. host: thanks for the call and when our best president ever wins again, this embarrassment of liberals will begin for a different reason. inside the washington post, here is the headline, senators and the white house mapping the trial plans. "a group of republican senators and senior white house officials met privately to map out a strategy for a potential impeachment trial of president trump including rapid proceedings in the senate that could be limited to two weeks according to multiple officials familiar with the talks. the prospects of an abbreviated trial viewed by senate republicans as a favorable middle, substantial enough to give the proceeding screens without risking damage to trump dragging on too long. even a two week trial could run counter to what the president expressed.

spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the president possible use. the president use. siden'tt's views. administration officials are readying all options to present them to trump. republicans remain overwhelmingly aligned behind the president, insisting he has done nothing worthy of impeachment or removal from office. some have acknowledged the potential toll a continuing inquiry and trial could take earring an election year, particularly when a republican is aiming to protect its senate majority. that story from washington post.com, the impeachment trial of president bill clinton lasting 36 days in the u.s. senate. kathleen joining us next from massachusetts. you are still unsure after two weeks of hearings, is that correct?

caller: i would not say unsure, i would say it reaffirmed what i was thinking. i try to keep an open mind. what was alarming to me was dr. hill's warning of these conspiracy theories and talking points from putin, what that meant to our democracy. the second thing i have been very concerned about regarding the holding up of the money is how many people died? they are in a war. how many children? how many men? they keep focusing on like it was a big inconvenience. they are at war, they needed the money to protect themselves. i think a lot of this is what is the big deal? the big deal is saving lives. if somebody is at war and they need your money, that is the end of it.

the second point is, it was about cheating. donald trump had rudy go out there and get the dirt. it was about cheating, knee capping his opponent and the cheating is similar to me like the college admission thing. we had the wealthy and powerful use their wealth and power to get ahead of everybody else in line. that is it, thank you. i have one question about c-span for years i have been listening to that classical music you guys play all the time and i think it is mozart. at the end of the program either today or sunday, i would love to know why c-span for all these years has played that same classical music in between all the segments, just a little trivia to break up the ice.

host: do you like classical music? do you like it or not? caller: i love it. i cannot tell you how much time i spent trying to figure out if it was mozart. it was so mind-boggling. i would love to know. host: i am going to put john mcardle on the task to find out more on the classical music. caller: maybe by sunday. i hear the trumpets and i love it. host: you don't have to wait until sunday. john mcardle is on it. caller: i love your smile, it makes me so happy with that beautiful background. host: thank you, kathleen . john mcardle, from kathleen, you need to find out the answer to that. john has other news on the story shaping impeachment. he host 2: i am taking notes on the homework you are assigning me.

so i will get back to you on that last question, one of the early callers mentioned she had questions about burisma and you heard members of the house intelligence committee asking about burisma. republican members bringing that up yesterday, here is one of the tweets from congressman scott perry, certainly a face of the republican response to the impeachment in korea amid the hearings at about 10:45 yesterday saying chairman adam schiff is discussing hypocrisy and investigations into corruption, but does not mention hunter biden and devon archer's involvement in burisma during the obama administration while they were meeting regularly with white house officials while ukraine was investigating burisma. it looks like republicans are going to possibly get some more answers on that front because senate judiciary chairman lindsey graham yesterday sent a letter to mike pompeo requesting

documents related to joe biden and his communications with ukrainian officials, a step seen as part of the republican effort to counter the house impeachment investigation. the inquiry is focused on calls biden may have had with the then ukrainian president regarding the firing of the top prosecutor as well as any that referenced an investigation of burisma, the ukrainian natural gas company that employed biden's son. the story from the washington post going on to note graham said in october he was under intense pressure to launch an investigation into biden by president trump and his allies and said he would turn the senate into a circus and would

focus on his committee's work on the investigation of the justice department's launch of the russia investigation. a spokesperson said the senator is now seeking the documents because adam schiff in the house intel committee made it clear they will not look into these issues about hunter biden and burisma. host: this is the headline from thehill.com. dr.fiona hill saying trump officials were involved in a "domestic political errand in ukraine." also from foxnews.com. one of the republicans getting a lot of attention is elise from foxnews.com, one of the republicans getting a lot of attention is elise stefanik. she represents upstate new york. she says house democrats' case is crumbling according to the representive, making the claim last night on her appearance on fox news's hannity program, the facts claimed make clear the narrative drum tried to pressure

ukraine's president into conducting a political investigation into joe biden by withholding military aid does not pan out. on capitol hill, stefanik called out democrats accusing them of making untruthful statements and saying their impeachment inquiry reeks of political desperation. and this regarding the claim republicans were not interested in learning more about russia in 2016, here is what happened. [video clip] >> not a single republican member of this committee has said russia did not meddle in the election. we published a report in 2016 with policy recommendations as to how we strengthen cyber resiliency to counter russia. i have worked with members of this very committee on this issue, but also on the house armed services committee. to have our democratic colleagues say these untruthful

statements just reeks of political desperation. the good news is the american people understand this has been a partisan process from the start, the democratic coordination with the whistleblower, the astounding leaks, the unprecedented closed-door process closed to the majority of members, closed to the people, starting this inquiry without taking a vote and when finally forced to take a vote, the vote was with bipartisan opposition. host: that from representative elise stefanik, republican on the house intelligence committee. 7:30 in washington, and we welcome our listeners on c-span radio where you might be listening on the radio app. we are getting your calls, comments, and reaction, two weeks of the house intelligence committee hearings. congress now in recess. billy from brooklyn, did the hearings change your mind in any way? caller: yes, they changed my mind.

the case ofbolster trump's quid pro quo withholding aid from ukraine. if obama were engaged in this behavior, he would have been impeached in one second. the republican case is nonsensical. republicans call democrats socialists, but republicans are the ones who are socialist and buddy-buddy with russia. pushing this debunked conspiracy theory that ukraine was meddling in the 2016 election. i want to rebut one of the last callers who said democrats are baby killers, trump put kids in cages in private prisons for profit. we treat dogs better than we treat undocumented migrants. to say trump created all these jobs, trump inherited a great economy from obama.

his tax cut and jobs act gave 85% to the top 1%. if you want to have medicaid, don't vote for trump. trump wants to cut billions from medicaid and social security. i just want to rebut the last caller talking about how beto o'rourke wants to remove tax exemptions from church that discriminate and do not represent the law. host: from texas, what is your view this morning? did anything change your mind on the impeachment inquiry of president trump? caller: no, actually, nothing really changed my mind. everything is still the same when it comes down to the general issues. my main concern is the competency of president trump.

that is my main concern, and it always has been. that will never change. if that is the main issue, then it doesn't matter about party lines or about anything that has to do with anything with any matters on either side. his competency makes it without any matter. host: thanks for the call. from axios.com, dr. fiona hill said giuliani pushing views on said giuliani pushing views on ukraine that in her words would probably come back to haunt us. michael in maryland, good morning. you are still not sure, is that correct? caller: let me clarify. i am sure that what occurred -- they are looking into a political rival in joe biden. i don't think the republicans can really -- i don't think they have a good defense so the question for me is whether or not -- i don't think we will ever be able to prove whether or not trump was directly involved in giving the orders because it doesn't sounds like he gives clear and concise orders.

building on the competency thing. best case scenario, he did not do it, he did not mean for any of this to happen. it shows at best case scenario he is running a completely slipshod overseas foreign policy involving millions and millions and millions of dollars. and that is the thing -- the witnesses i find credible, but there is nothing tying it directly to trump. host: let me jump in and ask this question. if for example former national security advisor john bolton or secretary perry or rudy giuliani former new york city mayor and now the president's lawyer, if those individuals and others testified, do you think that would sway your opinion one way or the other? caller: it would depend on what they have to say. giuliani is clearly trump's guy. nobody wants to be the fall guy.

sondland, i think they are angling for him to be the fall guy on this. you know what i mean? i don't like bolton, but he was clear what he felt was going on and it was the same thing everyone else thought was going on. he said i am out. he might be a more reliable witness. host: thanks for the call. the president up early tweeting. he will be appearing on fox and friends during the 8:00 hour, so we will monitor that. at 7:05, the president with this tweet, former fbi employee accused of altering fisa documents, hello, here we go. host 2: this comes back to the investigation the inspector general michael horowitz is conducting into the origins of

the russia investigation. as we found out earlier this week, michael horowitz will be testifying before the senate judiciary committee on december 11. lindsey graham, the chairman of that committee, tweeting yesterday that michael horowitz accepted that invitation that came earlier this week and noted the inspector general's report will be released on monday, december 9. we have been waiting for that report. some redactions have been the hold up, but we know when it will be released. lindsey graham going on to say, i look forward to reviewing the report and hearing the testimony where he will deliver a detailed account regarding what he found in his investigation and recommendations as to how to make our judicial and investigative systems better. when it comes to the president's tweets, he is referring to some reporting as to the content of

that report. cnn with some reporting on the yesterday. the inspector general has found evidence an fbi employee may have altered a document connected to the court approved surveillance of a former trump campaign advisor. concluded the conduct did not affect the validity of the surveillance application according to officials familiar with the matter. they say the person under scrutiny is a low-level lawyer who has been forced out of the agency. according to those officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity. they declined to identify the lawyer, the allegation is contained in the inspector general's report. fox news following up on that washington post reporting, noting the post hours after originally publishing that story yesterday conspicuously removed the portion of the reporting that the fbi employee involved was underneath peter strzok.

the post did not offer an explanation for the change, which occurred shortly after midnight, fox reports. justicertment of highlighted a slew of anti-trump text messages sent by him when he was leading the hillary clinton investigation and the probe into the trump campaign. the department of justice highlighting those earlier this week. more to look towards as we head towards that december 9 release of that report and eventually more hearings on december 11. host: robert simpson with this tweet, after this mess, was george washington correct in saying stay out of foreign entanglements? this editorial, no good news for the president. after two weeks of public testimony, americans have a better sense of why an impeachment inquiry was needed.

you can read it online at nytimes.com. richard in tennessee, your view after two weeks of hearings, did anything change your mind? caller: not really, sir. not really. i have been watching this from the get-go. i have probably paid more attention to this past election -- and i never cared for donald trump in the beginning, i never watched one or two shows from apprentice. i think i saw trace adkins on it one day. i never liked that deal, you are fired. i want to be a compassionate person, someone says you are a republican, no i am not. i am more of a democrat, but i am a yellow dog democrat. the union of which i am involved in today supports socialism. do i think capitalism is perfect when you have everybody getting rich and everybody staying poor, maybe it is not working properly. if you look around the world, it is working better than any system that is out there. you have the freedom to get up

every day and go do something for yourself. when we let government get too involved, our government has got to be a boxing match. who is going to win? donald trump said he is the counter puncher. we have to have a leader in the white house, and all of this is a bunch of shenanigans. is donald trump perfect? maybe he is guilty of something, but i hesitate to use the word guilt because if i go into the kennedy administration, nixon, carter, all these administrations, you could find something they could possibly be impeached on government wise. it is odd we have the first businessman in many years that has become a president, and i think the politicians don't like him because he has upset the house. it is like mom remarrying and getting a stepdad. all of a sudden you have his rules. all these people testifying, it

is their opinion. are they professional, yes? do they have their own agenda, possibly. they need to understand, you get a new boss today, c-span, we have to adhere to their changes. host: what was your view of yesterday with david holmes, dr. fiona hill? caller: i think ms. hill was more competent than anyone i have seen. it is hard for me to look at adam schiff because i caught him in a lie. he lied no matter what. i googled adam schiff the other day to see who he really was. he is from massachusetts. he represents the l.a. hollywood district, and his net worth is $1.74 million. that is neither here nor there. i have a hard problem with politicians going to washington,

getting rich, and the deep state is not necessarily you or me running for president and going to washington. the deep state is the people who have been appointed positions, secretaries, directors, all these people in washington or anywhere in washington, that is the deep state. your opinion is worth something, but only to you and your close associates. if you are not in the business of being empowered by being a president or maybe a cia director, your opinion is just an opinion and to nationally put done, heas schiff has is trying to sway the population, and i think democrats, when you look at the debates on what has been raised moneywise compared to what trump has done -- i don't trust all the republicans. host: let me share with you. the trump campaign is raising money off of this, including selling a t-shirt that has a picture of adam schiff with bul

l next to it. that represents bull schiff. what do you think about that? caller: i would say you are right. is it right or wrong? who is to say. there is so much mud out there by both parties. host: this is from the opinion page of the wall street journal, diplomats play partisans on tv, more on the testimony of dr. fiona hill yesterday and marie yovanovitch last week. most of the foreign service officers i know are proud of their colleagues who testified and some are sharing stories of the sacrifice they have made. fsing hashtags like #ss proud, meaning foreign service proud. perhaps the hearings will help americans understand their valuable service to our country,

but most republicans and independents will boil them -- view them as willing accomplices to oust a president they don't like. this is not a good look for american diplomacy. that this morning from dave. his piece available from the wall street journal. he is a columnist and a former career foreign service officer. nick from illinois, good morning, thank you for waiting. go ahead with your comment. caller: good morning. it doesn't change my mind at all why set the example of regarding a president for what? the excitement of the hour shall be regarded as insufficient causes as several of those against the president was decided by the house of representatives only a few months since and no future president will be safe on any measure they deem important, particularly if of political character.

blinded by their own partisan zeal with such an example like this before then, they will not scruple to remove any obstacle to the accomplishment of their purposes and what becomes of the checks and balances of the constitution, so carefully devised and vital to its perpetuity, they are all gone, folks. democrats don't care about checks and balances. they call the people who wrote the constitution racist and reprehensible, and when it is convenient, they hold the documents up and claim to love it. how is that the case? they say they are racist. i guess they support racism. they are the party of segregation. host: nick, thanks for the call from illinois. james joining us, akron, ohio. you are still unsure, is that correct? caller: i am sure of quite a few things. i listen, and i hear people say trump is not a politician.

trump has been in politics since the 1980's. throw that out the window. i see people say you cannot justify what is happening, but he is a good guy. i look at the emoluments clause, i look at that. i look at his kids. what they are stealing. everybody is stealing from the government. this government is for sale now, and somewhere the people, we have to make a decision what is good and what is wrong. to decide on this matter here to impeach him, i think they are going after him the wrong way, but i don't think -- if they went after him for the emoluments clause and the government being for sale and the deals with russia and china and all this stuff, they would not go after him that way. we would not impeach him, that is where i think they should go.

to say you made up your mind, i have listened to every one of the people speak. i have listened to all that stuff, and it is confusing to me to understand why they have not went in the direction i think he should be impeached for. that is where i am right now. host: from your mind, he should be impeached for what? caller: he should have been impeached -- the emoluments clause for one. his kids are signing deals all over the world for him, and he spent like $340 million playing golf. nobody has said anything about that. host: i don't think that number is correct. $340 million is high. caller: they said he spent $102 million at his golf courses paid for by the government. host: what is your source for

that, james? caller: it is in the newspaper. you have people in your staff right there, have them check it out. host: we will. we will look into it. thanks for the call. front page of the financial times, is fiona hill's testimony laying bare the trump fiction? one of the exchanges with steve castor, the republican council asking many of the questions to the witnesses over two weeks. here is his line of questioning. [video clip] >> indicated you are upset -- you were upset with investor bolton, and i believe your counsel said that was an outright fabrication. >> you might recall i said unfortunately i had a blowup with ambassador sondland or a couple testy encounters. one of them was june 18, when i said who put you in charge of ukraine?

and i will admit i was rude, and then he told me the president, which shut me up. this other meeting, i was actually to be honest angry with him, and i hate to say it, but often when women show anger, it is not fully appreciated, it is often pushed onto emotional issues or deflected to other people, and what i was angry about was he was not coordinating with us. i realized having listen to his deposition, he was right, but he -- that he was not coordinating with us because we were not doing the same thing he was doing. i was upset he was not fully telling us about the meetings he was having, and he said to me, but i am briefing the president, i am briefing chief of staff mulvaney, secretary pompeo and i spoke to ambassador bolton, who else do i have to deal with? the point is we have a robust

interagency process that deals with ukraine that includes mr. holmes, ambassador taylor, a load of other people, but it struck me yesterday when you put up on the screen ambassador sondland's emails, and he said these are the people who need to know and he was right because he was being involved in a domestic political errand, and we were being involved in national security foreign policy and those things had diverged. host: dr. fiona hill in her testimony yesterday before the house intelligence committee. a live view of the u.s. capitol on this friday morning, the anniversary of the assassination of president john f. kennedy and this inside the washington post, records detailed the payouts to trump's firm. a photograph of the trump property in jupiter, florida, pointing out the secret service has billed the trump properties a quarter of a million dollars.

$250,000 in the first five months, on average about $2000 a day, wanted to put those figures out there. matthew joining us from rosendale, new york. did the hearings in any way change your mind? caller: good morning. in a way it did. i thought it was pretty incredible watching the witnesses. i thought they were all compelling. i think one of the most interesting parts is by the end of it, i think the republicans, frankly, came off sounding a little nuts with their defenses. i think everything they tried to use got shut down pretty effectively, and the people i hear cali in saying this is a slamdunk for republicans, i don't necessarily get that, but i wish it wasn't under the impeachment umbrella. it seems like if there was

another level like right under there, where we could bring up this crime and say this is criminal. the throwing him out aspect of it i think complicates it. you can hear it in your callers. your callers are so angry on both sides. host: we have been getting a lot of reaction over the past couple of weeks. this has certainly been a partisan issue, and we continue to want to hear from you. barb next. did the hearings change your mind? how so? caller: during the hearings, i was keeping a very open mind, really hoping to get more rebuttal, clear rebuttal from republicans. i really did not find that. i was looking to see if anybody would address the fact rudy giuliani, the personal attorney of the president, was very

involved. that is concerning to me, and republicans could not answer why that was the case. nor was it addressed. i also have some concerns that people in the trump administration are refusing to testify. those kind of things leave me wondering what really happened and lend more credibility to the democrats in terms of their arguments. host: barb, thank you for the call. let's go to james in philadelphia. did the hearings in any way change your mind? caller: no, not at all. i am so grateful to go after this young lady because she was 100% right. rudy giuliani to be involved did not make any sense. also, rudy giuliani is his

attorney, and his attorney is giving falsehoods to his client, i also agree with the gentleman from new york that it is sad this is under the impeachment clause. if you ask me, quite honestly, it is on record rudy giuliani was giving out these falsehoods to the president. rudy giuliani put together a dossier, sent it to the state department so he could fulfill these goals. at the end of the day, what really needs to happen is rudy giuliani, this should be conducted. iesse impeachment inquir should not be conducted in congress, he should be charged. rudy giuliani should not be allowed to give the president that information. the president is his client, he has a duty to his president. he should not be flying overseas, having people lose their jobs. one thing i took from the entire

hearings were these were true professionals who had a clean, clear job to do, and rudy giuliani felt as though he could step on their toes because he was trying to prove a point to the president. i am sorry to see the president is going through this, but i also believe that he should -- because all of this has been done, he should still be impeached. it should be placed on record that the president got himself involved with a lawyer who ultimately got him impeached. host: thanks for the call. a lot of attention on what happens after the house and senate return, and now the focus will turn to the house judiciary committee. this is a text message. you can send us a text at (202) 748-8003. we ask you tell us your first name and where you are texting from. a viewer saying that hearings did not change my mind, still no evidence of an impeachable offense, but it is obvious the

dems have made false representations and cannot be trusted. they are corrupt. there was a moment you might have missed on c-span on the house floor on tuesday. congressman john lewis, the dean of the congressional delegation in georgia, a civil rights icon, paying tribute to former angressman johnny isakson, republican who is stepping down due to health reasons. our apologies to those listening because you will hear congressman lewis walk from one side of the aisle to embrace senator isaacson and those watching on television, let's watch. [video clip] >> you have been very good to the people in the state of georgia, and i am lucky enough and blessed to call you a friend and a brother. thank you so much. madame speaker, it is almost

difficult to yield back the time difficult to yield back the time when i speak of this good and great leader from the state of georgia. thank you, brother, for your service. i will come over and meet you, brother. host: that embrace from senator johnny isakson, a republican and congressman john lewis, a democrat. we do not control the cameras, but we were able to capture that moment.

that took place on tuesday in a week in which the decibel level here in washington was at an all-time high, a moment of civility between a republican and democrat, two members of the house and senate. john mcardle with more on how that story is playing out. host 2: that moment getting the attention of georgia papers, this is the headline from the atlanta georgia constitution, two icons embrace during morning -- moving tribute to senator isaacson and this from the daily news, congressional party pays tribute to johnny isakson. the stories noting that almost all of the members of the house delegation were on the floor of georgia house delegation were on the floor for that tribute tuesday and the members of the united states senate, many of them -- maybe all of them will be on the floor in december when senator isakson will give his

farewell address as all departing senators do at the end of their term. look for that in december. one more story from capitol hill's hometown newspaper, roll call noting it was no surprise members and staff from both parties showed up on the floor of the house on tuesday, but at an event tuesday night at the georgia state society honoring senator isaacson and the ceremony featured video tributes and speeches about their time serving with the senator. former georgia governor sonny perdue, senator david purdue, sanford bishop, doug collins, all showed their faces, as did lucy mcbath, the democrat from georgia who holds the seat once occupied by senator isaacson and newt gingrich, who spoke about the plea for bipartisanship. straight out of rollcall. some of the reporting from that event on tuesday night, if you

want to read more about it. let me follow up on the homework you gave me earlier on music we play here on the "washington journal." i am now much more educated on that. it is the concerto for trumpet number two by johann mulzer, an arranged version of that. a viewer thought it was johan sebastian bach, but it is johan molser. here is a good story from roll call about the chamber music from a few years ago. c-span's music all in the public domain, keeps the costs low. in that interview, they interview rob kennedy who maintains the twitter handle @cspanmusic. he tweets about the music we use here on c-span, c-span2, and c-span3.

the tagline, by the way, of @cspanmusic, if it ain't baroque, don't fix it. host: [laughs] announcer: we are going to leave this portion of "washington journal." we go live now for a conversation on the upcoming u.s. supreme court midterm. we will hear from paul clement, who served as solicitor general in the george w. bush administration. neil, who is the former acting solicitor general. he acted for a long time. >> still do. >> of the united states. jan crawford is the chief legal correspondent for cbs news. she does politics as well. paul clement, who was the solicitor general of the united states for four years. before