elections, had different groups of states go together, would would -- which would allow focused, retail campaigning. presidentialt the nominating process sunday night on q and a. lower brown, director of the political management school at george washington university -- george washington university talks sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q and a. front page of the washington post, a world wind a whirlwind week of gripping testimony winds to a close, democrats puzzled about next step for impeachment. after two weeks of impeachment hearings, democratic leaders are poised to draw up articles of impeachment but rank-and-file members are stumped about what to do next.

lawmakers are unsure whether there would be more hearings or when they would cast a seemingly and evitable vote on impeachment with eight days remaining before -- eight legislative days remaining before the end of the year. congressman will heard said he wasn't convinced and impeachable offense -- said he wasn't convinced. and impeachable offense .houldn't be taken lightly aboutats had i'd hurd a possible crossover vote for impeachment. we will get to your calls. john mcardle is looking into the impeachment story and what is next. days of was five impeachment hearings, 12 witnesses. if you watched over the past two weeks, according to chad pergram of fox news, you watched over 31

hours of testimony. yesterday speaker nancy pelosi was asked what more she needs to know before moving to the next phase. >> we aren't finished. the day is not over. you never know what testimony from one person may need -- may lead to the need testimony from another person, as we saw with ambassador taylor last week bringing forth mr. holmes today. that will be a judgment made by the committees of jurisdiction, particularly now under the jurisdiction of the intelligence committee. we haven't made any decisions and as i said to the president, if you have information that is exculpatory, bring it forward. host: speaker nancy pelosi yesterday on capitol hill. whenever the house intelligence committee decides it has completed its process, it will submit its report to the house judiciary committee. a congressional reporter with bloomberg is looking out the road ahead from there, noting

democrats and officials of familiar with intelligence committee committee -- committee activities say drafting the impeachment report will begin next week with aim of transferring it to the senate in december. committee chairman would then have an option of holding his own hearings, president trump's representatives would have the ability to participate. nadler would also have to deal with other impeachment investigations on topics other than ukraine. wantspelosi as said she impeachment tightly focused but noted rules approved by the house don't set limits on potential articles of impeachment. on the timing of a floor vote, ,his is what wants billy house s the democrats' goal of any impeachment vote by year end is challenging, the house now scheduled to be in session until

late december after bashing dass billter passing a spending but may not leave enough time to pass articles impeachment. removing trump from office would take at least several weeks and that could push the process into the, craddock residential complicationn, a for some candidates who are u.s. senators. that is a look at the road ahead. host: when it comes to a senate trial, it would be live on c-span2. a tweet from a libertarian saying republicans will not accept any level of that evidence -- any level of evidence, they will degrade any witness, democracy is dead. rudyer says, they proved giuliani went to ukraine on russian crash to get fake dirt on biden. theynother viewer says have to keep the fire smoldering

until 2020 and after that the democrats will find something else. the front page of the new york thes has dr. fiona hill on front page with this quote, i would ask that you please not promote politically-driven falsehoods that clearly advance russian interests. there is this exchange with attorney dan goldman, representing the democrats, with dr. hill. i believethis time you also testified ambassador bolton expressed views to you about mr. giuliani's interest in ukraine. do you recall what he said to you? >> i recall, yes. it was part of a conversation about the things mr. giuliani was saying frequently in public. and we saw them, or saw him off and on television making these statements. and i had also brought to ambassador bolton's attention the attacks, the smear campaign

against ambassador jovanovich and expressed great rivette on how this is unfolding on the shift away -- expressed great regret on how this was unfolding and the shift, but i thought there was nothing we could do about this. ambassador bolton looked pained and indicated with body language that was nothing to do about this, and in the course of that discussion said that rudy giuliani was a hand grenade that was going to blow everybody up. >> did you understand what he meant? >> i did. he meant what giuliani was saying was explosive, in any case, he was frequently on television making incendiary remarks about everyone involved in this and was clearly pushing forward issues and ideas that would probably come back to haunt us. and in fact, i think that is where we are today. host: dr. fiona hill. a live look at the u.s. capitol this morning.

the headline from usa today is, ukraine so meeting with president trump as critical. more of your tweets. the dems have three things necessary to impeach. stop trying to justify your action with additional stuff. unless you come up with a big smoking gun, gloat and then it is our turn. from jody, let me guess, republicans are convinced this is a witchhunt and they'll used to be democrats until democrats started treating poor donald mainly. got it. you are fired, donald. steve, joining us from woodbridge, virginia. after two weeks of hearing and -- hearings in about a dozen witnesses, what is your take? caller: good morning. thank you. nothing has is that changed my mind. i did not vote for donald trump in 2016, i voted for evan mcmonagle -- evan mcmullen.

what the democrats did in the whole russia collusion investigation, when that started i thought to myself, this could be bad, it was just a nothing burger. when the mueller report came out i said, we need to get to the bottom of who started that whole mess. that is a national imperative because if what i think is true, if i ranking people in the obama administration, fbi, cia, other places, conspired to overturn the democracy of this country, that is huge. and if i am wrong, prove it. because where i stand right now, that is the only russian collusion we know of, the steele dossier. when this started i thought it an attempt to hijack. and every witness, i watched five or six hours and have read quite a bit but only had time to watch five or six, i have a job, it is the same thing, trump was obsessed with 2016 and obsessed with corruption in ukraine. and if i were donald trump, i would be obsessed with 2016 too,

because a huge segment of this country spent three years calling you a traitor for no reason. anybody in this country who is not concerned with getting to the bottom of what happened in 2016 says it is ok, if the intelligence agencies in this country act the way they did under hoover. i thought we were passed that. i thought we wanted to be better. so if the election were held today, i would vote for donald trump, i did not in 2016 but i would today because as loose a canon as donald trump is, the overturning of democracy on the overturning of the constitution that the democratic party represents is an existential compared toh is tromp, who is a feather in the wind. -- moving the matter to the senate.

craig in washington dc calling on the phone line that has changed her mind, how so? look at the overall situation. that by some of these callers who say that they would vote for trump. ever is the biggest liar of any president we ever had. sir, all the dignified people , they areon this show not partisan, these people are just american people and they did their duty, really, to take chances just to tell the truth. the overall picture, what i'm , even thesay mueller report. look at all the people be locked

up and indicted. everything is a lie around trump . even his special lawyer, he is in jail. host: thanks for the call. this tweet, at the end of the day impeachment inquiries are a shame campaign that humiliates agent orange, referring to president trump, before the 2020 election. michigan blue but won't be enough to swing pennsylvania and wisconsin lou. sylvia is from virginia. you remain unsure, why? >> yes. i'm a little confused. i liked fiona hill and vanovitch. yo i did vote for president trump, but i don't like the way he treats women at all. charismaonfused about -- about burisma. sondland is me like

trying to say something but feels he can't. i think there needs to be more investigation. he dances around the subject because he doesn't want to hurt president trump, but i believe we need more information to bring the truth out. host: from the new york times, this headline, the senate passing a bill to avoid a government shutdown. john mcardle looking at that story as well. john. john: with all the focus on the impeachment inquiry, viewers might be forgiven for not realizing a government shutdown was averted yesterday with about six hours to spare. this was scott wong of the hill newspaper at six: oh seven tweeting yesterday, shut down averted, thanksgiving saved, president trump signed what is known as a continuing revenue -- continuing resolution yesterday, funding the government. he signed it after it passed the senate earlier in the day on a vote of 73-20. the continuing resolution had passed to the house earlier this

week. notes,l newspaper federal congressional negotiators have four weeks to hammer out how this is spent. 20. -- we are in continuing resolutions until december 20. the quoted senate majority leader chuck schumer during for remarks, saying the year-end negotiations could go down one of two paths. there is a path which ends in bipartisan agreement and does not include trump's involvement. involvement in 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 .unding 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. dr. fiona hill and david holmes 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. [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 referredi repeatedly 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 -- 13 different conversations, never once mentioning this call. july 20, tell taylor what zelensky told. august dictate -- talks to taylor. morrison talks to taylor, morrison tells taylor what s ondland -- morrison tells taylor what nowhere told trump and

is there a homes tells taylor what the president of the united states told sondland. >> may i answer the conversation -- 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 issue. 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. 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 stuffy, got us jobs and 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. 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. 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 is holding up of the money 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. 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. by sunday.be 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. you, kathleen paraded john mcardle, from kathleen, you need to find out the answer to that. john has other news on the story shaping impeachment. on the i am taking notes homework you are assigning me. one of the early callers mentioned she had questions about burisma and you heard

embers of the house intelligence committee asking about burisma. republican members bringing that up yesterday, here is one of the scott from congressman perry, certainly a face of the republican response to the impeachment in korea amid the hearings at about 10:45 yesterday saying chairman adam hypocrisydiscussing 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 then may have had with the ukrainian president regarding the firing of the top prosecutor as well as any that referenced an investigation of burisma, the national gas company -- natural gas company that employed biden's son. the story from the washington grahamoing on to note 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 investigation.

adam schiff have made it clear they will not look into this -- 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. one of the republicans getting a lot of attention is elise stefanik. she represents upstate new york and says house democrats' case is crumbling according to the represented of, 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, rep percent of stuff on it called out democrats

accusing them of making untruthful statements and saying there impeachment inquiry wreaks -- 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 has said russia did not meddle in the election. in 2016shed a report 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 statement -- the american is people understand this has been a partisan process from the

start, the democratic coordination, 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. republican stefanik, 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 committee hearings in congress now in recess. billy from brooklyn, did the hearings change your mind in any way? caller: yes, they changed my mind. trumpolster the case of quid pro quo withholding aid from ukraine.

-- if obama were engaged in this behavior, he would have been impeached in one second. republicans call democrats socialists, but republicans are the ones who are socialist and .uddy-buddy with russia i want to rebut one of the last callers who said democrats are baby killers, trump put kids in cages for -- in private prisons for profit. we treat dogs better than we treat undocumented migrant. trump inherited a great economy cut --ama and his tax if you want to have medicaid, don't vote for trump.

i just want to rebut the last caller talking about how beto o'rourke wants to remove tax-exempt and from church and represent the law. host: from texas, what is your view this morning? did anything change your mind on the impeachment inquiry of president trump? nothingno, actually, 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. .com, dr. fionas hill said giuliani pushing views on ukraine that in her words would come back to haunt us. michael in maryland, good morning. you are still not sure, is that correct? caller: let me clarify. occurred --at what 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 giving the orders because it doesn't sounds like he gives clear and concise orders. welding on the competency thing. best case scenario, he did not do it, he did not mean for any

of this to happen. it shows best case scenario he is running a completely slipshod overseas foreign policy involving millions of dollars. -- thet is the thing witnesses i find credible, but there is nothing tying it directly to trump. host: let me jump in and ask this question. if john bolton or secretary perry or rudy giuliani 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. ondland, i think they are

angling for him to be the fall guy. he was like bolton, but clear what he felt was going on and it was the same thing everyone else thought was going on. he might be a more reliable witness. host: thanks for the call and 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 pfizer documents,-- fisa hello, here we go. host: 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 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. it lindsey graham going on to say i look forward to reviewing andrepeat -- the report hearing the testimony where he will deliver a detailed account regarding what he found and recommendations as to how to make our judicial and investigative systems better. as a president is referring to reporting about the contents of .hat report of the washington post and cnn with reporting about that yesterday. the inspector general has found evidence and fbi employee may have altered a document

connected to the court approved surveillance of a former trump campaign advisor. 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. they did not 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 .as underneath peter strzok the post did not offer an explanation for the change which occurred shortly after midnight. the to proppant of justice 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 toward that december 9 release of that report and eventually more hearings on december 11. mess, wasr this george washington correct in saying stay out of foreign entanglements? good news for, no the president. after two weeks of public testimony, americans have a better sense of why and impeachment inquiry was needed. you can read it online. richard in tennessee, your view after two weeks of hearings, did anything change your mind? caller: not really, sir. not really.

i have probably paid more attention to this past election -- 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 there one day. hear you are to fired. i want to be a compassionate person -- i am more of a democrat, but i am a yellow dog democrat. the union of which i am involved 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. you have the freedom to get up every day and do something for yourself. when we let government get too involved, our government has got to be a boxing match.

donald trump said he is the counterpunch are -- counter puncher. we have to have a leader in the white house and all of this is a bunch of shenanigans. maybe he is guilty of something, but i hesitate to use the word guilt because if i go into the kennedy administration, 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 these people testifying, it is their opinion. are they professional, yes? -- do they have their own agenda, possibly. 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? ill was i think ms. h more competent than anyone i have seen. it is hard for me to look at adam schiff because i caught him in a lie. i googled adam schiff the other who he really was. he represents the l.a. hollywood district and his net worth is $1.74 million. 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, that is the people who have been appointed

positions, secretaries, directors, all these people in washington or anywhere in washington, that is the deep state. if you are not in the business of being empowered by being a president or maybe a cia justtor, your opinion is an opinion and to nationally put sway tv -- he is trying to 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: the trump campaign is raising money off of this, including selling a t-shirt that has a picture of adam schiff bullbul next to itl -- next to it. caller: i would say you are right. is it right or wrong? who is to say.

there is so much mud out there both -- 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. t on -- fiona hill 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 sacrifice they have made. 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 accomplishes -- 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 career foreign service officer. nick from illinois, good morning, thank you for waiting. go ahead with your comment. caller: it doesn't change my the at all because why set example of regarding a president for what? several of those against the president was decided by the house of representative's only a futureths since and no president will be safe on any measure they deem important, particularly of -- if of political character. they will not scruple to remove out of the way any obstacle to the a compliment 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 folks.one -- all gone, 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. they are the party of segregation. host: 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. 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 his kids. 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. matter here tois 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, we would not impeach him, that is where i think they should go. to say you made up your mind, i have listened all of that stuff. it is confusing to understand

why they have not went in the direction 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. his kids are signing deals all over the world for him. he has spent 340 million dollars playing golf. nobody said anything about that. ist: i don't think that correct. that is pretty high. golfr: $102 million on a course paid by the government. host: what is your source for that? caller: it's in the newspaper. you've got people on staff.

have them check it out. host: we will. think you. there what she calls the trump fiction. what of the exchange with steve castor? many of the questions to the dr. fiona hill. >> you were upset with ambassador bolden and i believe your counsel said that was a fabrication. >> you might recall in my deposition i said it's fortunate we had a blowup with ambassador sondland. one encounter was in june when i said to him, who put you in charge of ukraine? i was rude. that is when he told me the president which shut me up. this other meeting was as he depicted it was. i was angry with him.

when women show anger, it is pushed onto emotional issues or deflected onto other people. i was angry he was not coordinating with us. i should realize having listened to his deposition that he was right. he was not coordinating with us because we were not doing the same thing he was doing. i was upset he was not telling us about the meetings he was having. he said i am briefing the president, chief of staff mulvaney, secretary pompeo and ambassador bolden. who else do i have to deal with? we have a robust interagency process that deals with ukraine that includes mr. holmes, ambassador taylor, a load of other people. it struck me when you put up on

the screen ambassador sondland's emails and he said these are the people who need to know. he was right. he was involved in a domestic political errand and we were involved in national security foreign policy. those things had just a verged. host: dr. fiona hill's testimony. a view of the u.s. capitol on this friday morning. 20 second. the anniversary of the assassination of john f. kennedy. records detail the payouts to trump's firm, a photograph of florida.rty in it has been billed a quarter million dollars the first five months, about $2000 a day. just to put those figures out there. matthew is joining us from new york. caller: good morning.

anyway it did. i thought it was incredible watching the witnesses. they were compelling. one of the most interesting parts is by the end of it the republicans came off sounding nuts with their defense. everything they tried to use got shut down. sayingare calling in this is a slamdunk. i don't get that. i wish it was not under the impeachment umbrella. it seems like if there was another level under their where you could accuse and bring up , throwing him out

complicates it. you can hear it in your callers. they are angry on both sides. host: we've been getting weeks.n these last st. paul calmly minnesota. did the hearings change your mind? caller: during the hearings i was keeping an open mind hoping rebuttal from republicans. i did not find that. see if anybodyo would adjust the fact rudy giuliani, the personal attorney of the president, was very involved. that is concerning to me. the republicans could not answer why that was the case. that theve concerns

people in the trump administration are refusing to testify. those things leave me wondering what really happened. and lend credibility to the democrats in terms of their argument. host: thank you. let's go to james in philadelphia. good morning. did the hearings change your mind? caller: not at all. i'm grateful to go after this lady. she was right. when it comes to rudy giuliani being so involved in these overseas business, it did not make sense. rudy giuliani is his attorney. his attorney is giving falsehoods to his client? if you ask me, i agree with the gentleman from new york. it is sad this is under the impeachment clause.

if you ask me, it is on record rudy giuliani was giving out falsehoods to the president. he put together a.ca and sent it to the state department so he could fulfill these goals. what really needs to happen is rudy giuliani, they should be conducted, these inquiries it should not be conducted in congress. .e should be charged rudy giuliani should not be allowed to give the president that information. he should not be flying overseas, having people lose their jobs. one thing i took from the entire hearings was these were professionals who had a clear job to do. rudy giuliani dealt as though he could step on their toes.

he was trying to prove a point to the president. i'm sorry to see the president is going through this. i also believe he should, because this has been done, he should be impeached. he should be placed on record, the president. involved with a lawyer who got him impeached. on whatlot of attention happens after the house and senate return. now the focus will turn to the house judiciary committee. you can send us a text. tell us your first name and where you are texting from. the hearings did not change my mind, no evidence of an impeachable offense by the president. cannot beus the dems trusted. the democrats are corrupt. here was a moment you might have missed on the house floor on tuesday. john lewis, the dean of the

congressional delegation, a civil rights icon, paying isakson, ajohnny republican who is stepping down due to health reasons. our apologies to those on c-span radio, you will hear from him walk over to embrace senator isaacson. those watching on television, let's watch. good toave been very the people of the state of georgia and i'm lucky enough and blessed to call you a friend and brother. .hank you so much is almostker, it difficult to yield back the time when i speak of this great leader from the state of georgia.

thank you, brother, forthank yor service. i'm going to come over to meet you, brother. host: that embrace from senator johnny isakson and john lewis, a democrat. we were able to capture that moment on tuesday. again during a week in which the dessa poe level in washington was that all-time high.

more on how that story is playing out. theefinitely getting attention of georgia papers. 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. almost all of the members of the house delegation were on the floor of the door to 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 isaacson 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. congressman bishop, congressman collins, all their showing their faces, as did the democrat from georgia that now holds the seat once occupied by senator isakson, and newt gingrich fored about the pleas partisanship. some of the reporting on 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, an arranged version of that. johaner thought it was sebastian bach, but it is johan molser. here is a good story from roll call about the chamber music from a few years ago. publics music all in the domain, keeping 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, if it roque, don't-- ba fix it. host: [laughs]

i knew you were going to say that. rob kennedy in charge of all things music. now to a phone call from california. good morning, leah. -- good morning, leo. caller: a couple funny things going on there. i was listening very closely to all these hours and hours, 31 hours, of hearings, and something jumped out at me. kind of reminds me of a thanksgiving dinner. you had this big table with all your family around and you have got stuffing and cranberry sauce and just about everything -- muffins, anything that anybody could bring to the table. so what happens? everybody sits down. they fill themselves up with food. and then what happens? they all fall asleep. that is kind of what this hearing was all about, in my opinion. i was not able to change my mind

, because what occurred to me is that a house divided will soon follow. that is very unfortunate. steve, by the way, you have a groupie in massachusetts. i thought that was kind of cool. when you gather for thanksgiving dinner, will you talk about impeachment, the president, and what is happening in washington or is that not discussed? caller: hell no. , andve got five grandkids they will be playing with everything and making a mess. we are going to have plenty to do. i am just wondering if we are going to make it to the football game and see the cowboys kick some butt. maybe john could -- because i was listening to misses hill -- and by the way, that john lewis, that was one of the most touching moments i have seen on tv in a long, long time. host: something that did not get a lot of attention, but i just wanted to share it with you because there is not a lot of

washington, and that is a moment that was unscripted and only aired live on c-span television. caller: goes back to my point, a house divided will soon fall. i wish that people would get together more often. seems that there is so much hatred in this congress, it is just pathetic. and the other thing that occurred to me, mrs. hill, i thought she was compelling. she is the one that almost set the house divided is going to fall. she says, we need to get past this stuff. i am not going to cast dispersions on either side, i just don't see how this whole thing can continue. apparently this is going to go to six more committees. i think i am full of it. i think i have heard probably about as much as i can take. if john could check on the

internet, i understand the bidens, i get that. that is fine. the problem i have is hunter biden is an american citizen and whatever he did over there, apparently that is ok for a lot of people, but recently i heard that the ukrainian prime minister or the judiciary guy over there has filed charges sma and breece my -- bari hunter biden for money laundering and conspiracy. if you don't care about that, fine. but the fact is, ukraine is trying to clean up their country, and whatever it takes to clean up the country, fine. hey, happy thanksgiving. host: happy thanksgiving with those five grandkids. lisa with a follow-up on john mcardle's homework.

love the c-span "washington journal" music. we hope you continue to listen in. you can check it out on our webpage. all classical music, by the way. evansville, indiana. have the hearings changed your mind? really, because they could have had the whistleblower in if they would have put him in a different to start or her, and his voice or -- and distort his voice or her voice, and they could ask questions to the whistleblower. but all of this is just hearsay. you know, it is like judge kavanaugh. you know how the democrats treated him. and when you come back in from the lunch break, how mad he was. that crossed over that

know,nd all the time, you this is just going on too long. they need the democrats and republicans and independents, all need to get together. just like that really touched me when you showed the two men from georgia hug each other. c-span.ou, i thank you, i learned more from you guys than anyone else. but i think it is a waste of our time, and ite of just hope god blesses us all. and have a happy thanksgiving. from thanks for the call evansville, indiana. ambassador gordon sondland testified in october in a closed-door session and then he said his memory was, in his words, refreshed, so he revised his testimony and testified publicly on wednesday.

here is one exchange with a democratic representative and eu ambassador gordon sondland. [video clip] you said it is wrong to investigate political opponents. that is what we know the president was asking for. let me ask you something, who would have benefited from an investigation of the president's political opponents? >> i do not want to characterize who would have and who would not have. >> i know you do not want to, but that is the question. who would benefit from an investigation of the president's political opponents? whoresumably the person asked for the investigation. >> who is that? >> at the president asked for the investigation, it would be he. >> it is not a hypothetical. the president asks about an investigation, and he is talking about the bidens. when he is asking about the biden investigation, who is he seeking to benefit?

>> he did not ask me about the biden investigation -- >> we just went through this paired when he asked you about investigations, which we all agree now means the bidens -- we just did this about 30 seconds ago. pretty simple question, isn't it? i am having trouble why you can't just say -- >> i assumed you meant -- >> i know what you assumed, but who would benefit on an investigation about the bidens? >> those are two questions. >> i am asking one. trumpm assuming president would benefit. >> there we have it. see. [applause] did not hurt a bit. i mr. maloney, excuse me, have been very fourth light, and i really resent -- >> fair enough. you have been really forthright, this is your third try. did not work so well the first

time, did it? a little declaration, remember that, and now we have a doozy of a statement from you this morning. there is a bunch of stuff you do not recall paired with all due respect, we appreciate your candor, but let's be clear on what it took to get it out of you. patrick maloney and gordon sondland. gordon sondland will stay on with his job. let's go to the caller in san diego he brought it up. this is a tweet saying, what does lindsey graham do while creating a diversion, a counter narrative. light to the american people about the bidens. and this tweet from elizabeth, lindsey graham already opened an investigation into the bidens and barisma. john mcardle also looking into that story. >> we talked about the letter to

mike pompeo on the bidens, just at and barisma, the document-gathering stage right now. the probe involves some of these issues. but you talk about a specific investigation in ukraine. perhaps it is about this reuters story. itsine has widened nnvestigation into burisma o embezzling state funds, according to the prosecutor general in ukraine on wednesday. trump wantsesident an investigation on john biden and his son hunter, who was a board member at burisma. the prosecutor who has ma whoigated buris previously met with rudy giuliani to discuss accusations

against the bidens after he took office in late august, the prosecutor general launched a --e-ranging audit incredible in criminal cases to see if they were conducted properly. 13 relate to burisma's founder. burisma not responding to a request for comment from reuters. i believe that is the story that call was referring to. host: thank you very much. a tweet from a regular follower of "washington journal. it says i think trump will keep his job, like clinton, but his legacy will be stained, no pun intended. let's go to the next call. caller: good morning, c-span. , as a minister and a veteran, i like to go across the board.

, am not upholding either side but i will say this right here, with this really means is giuliani -- what has he got to do with this? has this bigs and stuff he done rolled up on the bidens. dland is involved. another thing i don't understand, why in the world did the old guy not come and testify? why? they are part of this thing, too. don't hang president trump. i love the guy because i am a minister. i fear for president trump, and the reason why i fear for him is because he got caught up in all this mess with his hand in the

cookie jar. host: thanks for the call from nashville, georgia. next is a call from fresh meadows, new york, which is located where? caller: queens, new york, near flushing. it is like heading up to long island. host: have you watched two weeks of hearings? caller: yeah, yeah, oh, yeah. i am a political junkie and have watched election politics for 25 years. here is the point, i guess like most people i was wondering, is this impeachable, this whole ukraine situation? but i think dr. fiona hill yesterday, i think she really encapsulated all the issues around what is going on here and why. and when she said that this was sondlandc errand that and these are good -- and these guys are running, you think of american foreign policy and you

think of some of the best minds of the country and the ivy league schools, going to goinge, and here you're to put this drug deal alongside it, it traces right back to trump. presidents, if any does this to investigate one of his opponents, are we going to allow this to continue from now on, in per poet t -- importunity, as it relates to future presidents? else fore something c-span before i go? why do you allow false statements to be made by people, especially on the republican side? for example, you do not allow republicans in the room. you guys do not push back on these things. on you guys do not push back the lies about president trump. ok, every sunday morning we will tell the world whether this president lied five times, 10 times, 20 times last week.

you don't do it. why? said it. just this is an open forum, and our goal is to let people express their views. caller: no, no, you're missing the point here. there are times when things are obvious, and when their obvious, to say when you need something and clear something up, clarify, whatever appeared you can do it. you can say what he said last week, for example, that i was exonerated by mueller. not true. he was not. wherer had 10 cases on that man either obstructed justice are used abusive power. come on, c-span paired you can do better than this. i know you can. a queue for the call. host: thank you. appreciated. thank you for holding our seats to the fire. this says thank you for the wonderful moment with congressman lewis. which other members could do the same. i challenge them to do that.

we have made reference to dr. fiona hill, and this is from the "wall street journal," dr. hill pushing back on the theory of ukraine interference. a former white house official saying a theory that ukraine interfered in the 2016 election was a fictional narrative fueled by russian propaganda rejecting president's rationale for pushing pf to investigate the matter and arguing it amounted to a political area outside formal diplomatic channels. dr. fiona hill echoing testimony from other witnesses about efforts by top u.s. ambassador in the president's personal lawyer to convince ukraine's president to announce probes that would help mr. trump politically. this one says allies of the president have sought to use the article as a launchpad to support theories that it was ukraine, not russia, that hacked that theseection and opposed missing server belonging

to the democratic national bymittee was speared ukraine. special counsel robert mueller has concluded that russia ordered a campaign designed to take the 20 16 election in favor of donald trump. this morning from inside the "wall street journal." call from georgia. good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to make a couple of comments. i have only seen some of the sondland stuff so far. i have had to watch it recorded. but if anybody is watching this stuff and they do not think there is a possibility that trump has broken the rules or the laws, then they are not being honest with themselves. on the opposite side, there is also a very good possibility that what i have seen so far, he could still be on the up and up

and not doing it for political reasons, not having held back the funding for political reasons. from houseard speaker nancy pelosi in our first hour, responding to her comments is the house republican leader, kevin mccarthy of california. [video clip] >> it would be odd for the democrats to have witnesses, they would have to change their course the president gave his transcript. what more would you need? remember how this started. adam schiff was concerned that the president was going to withhold in some way, form, or shape a whistleblower from testifying, a whistleblower that was not on a phone call. now we have the transcript of exactly what happened on the phone call. we have witnesses. we have only been allowed to have witnesses that adam schiff has auditioned, only those that he picks, only in the manner

that he can direct. we found that there is no impeachable offense, that the aide was given with ukraine doing nothing. so why would you continue to put our country through this nightmare? i know adam schiff's goal is to try to impeach the president. he will give up nothing he will lie to say whatever it takes to get to this point. but i think we have had enough. i think it is time to shut it down. host: that is the republican leader of the house, kevin mccarthy. at can follow us on c-span @cspanwj. i have watched bias inquiry, and the real divide in the country is the news that one watches. hannity and guests misrepresented the witness statements. we should point out that the coverage of the house impeachment hearings, whether you watched it on this network or any other network, came from the c-span cameras. all of the coverage, despite

which platform you saw it on, came from c-span. john mcardle, what do you have? >> as you pointed out earlier, president trump doing a phone interview right now with "fox and friends" this morning, talking about the military aid that he sent to ukraine, pushing back on some of the witness testimony we heard yesterday, including some of the comments that david holmes made about overhearing the president when he was at that restaurant. we are watching that paired one interesting tweet i want to point out came before the president started his interview, right at the top of the 8:00 eastern hour, and it is from john bolton, former ambassador president's former head of the national security council. he tweeted at 8:00 a.m., glad to be back on twitter after more than two months. for the back story, stay tuned.....

he has not tweeted anything else since. he has been off twitter ever since leaving the white house, and his last tweet was pushing back on the circumstances under which he left the white house as it was described by the president. we will monitor both president trump's interview and whatever else john bolton tweets this morning. host: he is also working on a book deal. thank you. duane joining us for michigan. two weeks of hearing and testimony released during closed-door sessions. has anything changed your mind? caller: nope. thank you for taking my call. no, he is a criminal. he has been a criminal his whole life. he comes from a family of criminals. his grandfather was a draft dodger. his father was a criminal, got caught -- she was getting government subsidized money to house veterans and went around and knocked on the doors of the veterans and asked for more rent.

that will tell you what kind of people they are. he is a criminal. he always has been. he will never change. there is no line he can cross. the republicans, they are cold people. they have no clue what they are doing, destroying our democracy by supporting him. he is a criminal, always has been, always bill b. host: thanks --always will be. host: thanks for the call from michigan. a busy week. we begin today with senator amy klobuchar. the full schedule is on our website, c-span.org. a call from north carolina. the hearings changed your mind, in what way? caller: yes, they have. thank you very much for talking with me, my first time calling in. it changed my mind in that i realize that the american people do not understand civics. we do not understand now the president is a representative of

all 360 million people in this country. and that he does not have the ability or should not have the ability to just go out and speak for himself, make deals for himself. and that in itself makes -- puts him in a position where he has to be checked by the congress. so we have understanding that any time he speaks, every time he tweets, he asked to represent or of us, not just himself just a political party. that is why we're so divided, because it is our fault that we do not understand how the government should work and why the congress must be one body checking the president, instead of a divided body, meaning divided house of representatives and divided senate, that is fighting among themselves.

i know that c-span is doing its best, and as i said, this is my first time calling in. i listen to rush limbaugh and listen to sean hannity. i also get msnbc. as you can see, i also look at c-span. and i read different books that you recommend on c-span. but what i have learned is that we, as a citizenry, do not know civics. until we understand what mrs. hill really represents and what land reallyd -- sond represents and how they're supposed to be working for us -- we call them public service because they serve us -- then you will can show impeachment hearings or anything else. we are going to be going back and forth not understanding. c-span3's american history tv will be taking a look back at

the impeachment inquiry of former president bill clinton. that will be in december. and to your point about career foreign service officers, we sat on yesterday with the global affairs and state department correspondent for politico to discuss the impact this is having on career foreign service officers. there are more than 77,000 state apartment employees. you can watch that conversation on our podcast, the weekly, on the free speech -- free c-span radio app or where you download your favorite podcasts. a call from hunter, new york. did anything change your mind this week? caller: yes, thank you for taking my call. i have followed this as closely as i could, and i think that schiff,ship -- chairman the democrats presented a pretty good body of evidence in totality. but what really struck me, i think what changed my mind was when the

republicans were kind of --acking kernel vitamin olonel and then watching tim morrison's testimony, and both had the same reaction to what they heard on the call. oddit struck me as really that they both did the exact same thing. they skipped reporting to their immediate superiors and went right to the legal department. vindman's situation was different than mr. morrison. mr. morrison wanted it concealed in a protected server. that was one of the defining moments for me. and certainly yesterday, listening to fiona hill, which i admire these career foreign

diplomats. that the impression republicans must have felt like they were being rebuked by their mother. it was almost laughable. the last thing i will say is i have -- i feel really bad for the republicans, because they have been emasculated by the president, and it is a sad state of affairs for the country. host: thank you for the call. midway through three hours of "washington journal." our question, did the impeachment inquiry in any way change your mind. the number to call is (202) 748-8000. if it did not change your mind, (202) 748-8001. if you are unsure, (202) 748-8002. over the years, no person has more -- been more generous with his time than william seale.

the white house historian who has been on this network more than 40 occasions is a go to person when it comes to learning more about the presidency, the white house himself. he has been in poor health over the last couple of years and made his final appearance with c-span's susan swain in 2017. here is a portion of that interview from the north lawn of the white house. [video clip] trained as al building man and architect, the idea of an architect in those days. he could build, as well as plan. ireland andd in emigrated to the united states, to philadelphia, and then came here, and washington met him in charleston on his southern tour in 1792, and he remembered him. invited him, and hogan was er from the start

because he came up with a design washington could understand. nothing weird about it. some of the entries had storm rooms and things like that, the president was not going to do that. this was an english squire's house. washington liked the plan, approved the plan, modified the plan, and saw to it that it happened. host: the storytelling and humor of william seale, our go-to person when it comes to white house history. we shared the announcement of his passing with a heavy heart, because he was a true friend to this network over the years. john mcardle looking into his legacy. >> you mention he had been on this network 42 times over the years. his first appearance from the c-span video library back in 1993 during the inauguration of president bill clinton, was on with susan swain, as well.

you can see what he looked like back in 1993. i wanted to share the obituary from the white house historical association. this is what they said about the life and legacy of william seale. dr. william seale, whose contributions to the programs and publications of the white house historical association for more than 40 years, were instrumental in shaping the nation's study of white house history, passed away on november 21 following a long illness his unique approach to the study of history through biography, architecture, landscape, and cultural context expanded the understanding of the american past and made sure dozens of historic sites are preserved and interpreted for the future by emphasizing the human stories of public laces. accessiblehistory and enjoyable, not only to scholars but general audiences. he inspired support for historical preservation. host: his legacy lives on, william seale, as he passed away

at 80 years old. back to your phone calls. we are focusing on the impeachment inquiry of president donald trump and whether or not the hearings and public testimony and transcripts have in any way changed your mind. next, a call from amarillo, texas. how do you answer that question? caller: i answer that question like this, i believe -- i am a proud 20 year veteran. i am 70 years old. -- i really believe there is it has made me realize that -- i am not going to lie, you can be a democrat or you can be a republican. the one thing america has to understand is one thing, the constitution of the united states of america is what we need to live by. it is so divided now between black-and-white, republican and

democrat. well, nobody don't want to give up nothing. this isemember, people, the united states of america. i believe in the constitution. call.thanks for the at politico.com, this is the headline, the republican throughoutis holding the rapidly unfolding impeachment inquiry. democrats feared they would lose control of the moment so they carefully choreographed two weeks of public hearings to avoid a derailment. as the lights went out in the hearing room on thursday, it was clear that the few unplanned events, new testimony, recently discovered documents, and real-time twitter from president trump were poised to have the greatest impacts. even as it democrats felt they made an ironclad case that trump abused the power of his office by pressuring a foreign government to interfere in the 2020 election, there were no closer to persuading even a

single house republican to join them in voting to impeach the president. a reminder of the limits of political persuasion at a time in the country is deeply polarized, and any sign of disloyalty to president trump means excommunication from the gop. that story is available online at politico.com. back to phone calls. debbie and washington. good morning. caller: what is your view? did it change your mind in any way? caller: yes, it did. i think the president should be impeached for mafia-like behavior. i am appalled and shocked at what is happening in the white house. and they -- oh, my goodness -- the running around of his personal lawyer has nothing to do with our government. i am appalled at how the republican party is sticking their head in the sand and acting like children. i have voted republican, and i

have voted democrat. and somewhere in this country we have to reunite. dr. fiona hill was wonderful yesterday, and her preciseness of saying we have to pull together or russia will benefit from this. and i ask another question of the republicans. everything the president trump has done, who will benefit from this? russia will. russia will benefit from him backing off of ukraine. russia will benefit from him pulling troops out of syria. if we do not do something, we might as well teach russian as a second language. host: debbie from virginia, thanks for the call. ken starr, who led the prosecution of bill clinton's impeachment, called a bombshell statement from gordon sondland on wednesday. a portion of his opening statement. [video clip] choice,re faced with a

we could abandon the efforts and scheduled the white house phone call and white house visit between presidents trump and wasnsky, which unquestionably in our foreign policy interests, or we could u.s. president trump directed and talk with rudy. we chose the latter course, not because we liked it but because it was the only constructive path open to us. over the course of the next several months, secretary perry, ambassador voelker, and i were in communication with mr. giuliani. secretary perry volunteered to make the initial calls with mr. giuliani, given their prior relationship. ambassador voelker made several of the early calls and generally of what was

discussed. i first communicated with mr. giuliani in early august, several months later, and he emphasized that the president wanted a public statement from president zelensky committing ukraine to look into the corruption issues. mr. giuliani specifically mentioned the 2016 election, including the dnc server and burisma as two talk it's -- topics of importance to the president. we kept the leadership of the state department and the nfc informed of our activities, and that included communications with secretary of state pompeo, his counselor, auric rectal, his executive secretary lisa canada, and also communications with ambassador bolton, dr. hill, and the staff at the nsc.

they knew what we were doing and why. host: ambassador gordon sondland on wednesday from the house intelligence committee. the next phone call. good morning. did the hearings change your mind? caller: not at all. i just feel like democrat or butblican, people have lost the origination of all of this is. it is like it started illegally by spying on the president. we went through that for three years. of course he is going to be upset and want names. he wants to know who did this to me. and that is where this is coming from. but it is all collusion between democrats and the fbi, and it is very troubling. people should be more concerned about that then what donald trump is doing. host: we mentioned at the top of

the program, and this is the headline from "washington post." an indication, according to the post, that a trial, when it begins early next year, will be limited to just two weeks. more immediately, what happens in the house of representatives? congress now in recess for the thanksgiving holiday. the house intelligence committee working on a report. will there be more hearings? what about the judiciary committee? questions to speaker nancy pelosi yesterday. when morelosi: evidence unfolds, if that requires more time, that is where we will go. but if it is a question of the committee saying, i think that, as you asked your question, how much more do you need to know, it is so self-evident. ok, the other side has a counter

to it, and the president can submit his counter to that under oath. of gordon sondland's testimony yesterday, do you think the house should do everything it can to acquire testimony from people like mick mulvaney, mike pompeo, and john bolton before moving forward with the articles of impeachment? speaker pelosi: i think i answered that question just now. that is all in the court. .nd the court has to be clear in the case of richard nixon, unanimously the congress has the right to subpoena and inquire, and they should be coming before us. they keep taking it to court. no, we're not going to wait for the courts to decide. that might be information that is available to the senate in terms of how far we go. and when we go. but we cannot wait for that. again, it is a technique.

it is obstruction of justice, obstruction of congress. let the further obstruction of congress be an apparent -- an impediment. host: that was how speaker nancy pelosi. a call from michigan. did the hearings change your mind? caller: well, my feeling about the situation is i am concerned about our republic's ability to withstand the tearing of the fabric of our constitution. i think donald trump is a result of a broken system. we have descended beyond policy -- partisan politics to tribal politics, where the other guys demonize and see it as the root of all problems, preventing the other side from doing their work. i think term limits is what the american citizens need to think about for our congressional

members, because you can get so connected into the system that you lose focus of what you are sent to washington to do. i think what adam schiff should have done is read the oath that all congressmen and senators take when bid that -- when they become members of the senate and the congress. foreign service workers, the oath that they take to this nation, the oath that service members take to this nation. we have all vowed to protect the constitution against enemies, both foreign and domestic. host: thank you for the call. in the style section of "washington post," a review of a new movie getting a lot of buzz. "a beautiful day in the neighborhood."

congressman mike doyle from pennsylvania tweeting about the toie, saying, we continue celebrate the legacy of fred rogers. in 2003 i introduced a resolution in his memory. he died that year. i will continue to honor his legacy of love and wisdom. that is this morning from congressman mike doyle. the new tom hanks movie out today on the life of fred rogers. mike in houston, texas. what do you think of the impeachment inquiry? caller: you know, i was not sure of the charges that the democrats had made against the president and actually even the whistleblower. but i think the hearings have made it abundantly clear that the president had a program and mr. giuliani was most likely in charge of running this program to basically smear the likely

presidential race opponent, the opponent of the president in the next election. and he wanted to bring down joe biden, and he may have already done that. all of the confusion and all of the talk about the biting corruption, he may have already achieved his goal of politically bringing down his opponent. made itthe testimony abundantly clear that a program was going on. the other things that hearings have made it clear is that the white house is preventing the witness -- even the witnesses who testified, preventing them from having access to their own documents, emails, notes, meeting notes. why are they preventing the witnesses from having access to their own documents? the state department is preventing that. the white house is preventing the testimony of acting chief of staff mike mulvaney, preventing the testimony of the formal --

former national security advisor, mr. bolton, preventing the testimony of pompeo. there preventing the testimony of mr. perry. why are they preventing these people from speaking out, especially of the president did nothing wrong? -- if mr.e facing trump gets away with everything without any consequences, certainly even without impeachment or removal from office, if he gets away with all this, what we're looking at is a country where the president and possibly other people in the forrnment can openly call ourign intervention in elections, which they have done. they have said, get used to it, let's get used to this country where the president can call for intervention in our elections. a country where the president can appoint his relatives to

office and apparently seek money from foreign countries for their own businesses, as mr. jared kushner has sought from gulf countries for his real estate businesses. a country in which the opposition can prevent judges or nominees to positions on the court, whether it is the supreme court or other federal courts, from receiving hearings. and then stacking the court by their own party. thanks for the call from houston, texas. you can send us a text message .t (202) 748-8003 tell us your first name and where you're texting from. this is from ed in lexington, kentucky. it did not change my mind. millions watched and listened to the testimony. this is a tweet from franklin delano, saying the evidence points to the fact that trump is guilty of extortion, along with a laundry list of other crimes. the president has been on "fox

and friends" for 45 minute speed we are monitoring that. this headline from the front page of "the wall street journal" on the israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu. john mcardle has that story. headline out today on most major papers talking about this story out of israel, netanyahu indicted on bribery and fraud charges. the attorney general and israel saying yesterday that benjamin netanyahu faces charges of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust in connection with three corruption probes, marking the first time a sitting israeli leader has been indicted and his political survival now may depend on whether the national legislator grants him immunity, which would cause -- pause the indictment until after he leaves the body. netanyahu has denied the charges and continues to lead the country. he maintained support with his

own party, but his grips on the party are threatened. to benow more likely challenged in the upcoming third election. that is what we are weeding -- reading from the "wall street journal." this story is getting the attention of members of congress here in the united states, especially his critics on capitol hill, including congresswoman, democrat saying this indictment is past due and netanyahu is corrupt and disruptive, playing on hatred and division, moving us farther from safety and self-determination for israelis and palestinians. congo miss --m congressman john yarmuth, a critic of netanyahu, saying he is indicted in the middle of the , he writes inquiry of criminal heads of state. and this tweet says that

it has not changed my mind, and a trumpet impeachment will allow him to walk out of a mode with this head held high, claiming exoneration. they have made reelection easier. cincinnati, larry is next. good morning. caller: i was curious -- i watched the whole thing, watched every day. on theden of proof is state. they did not prove anything. everybody on there was a disgruntled ex-employee, and from 1978 to now, all corruptions have involved the democrat, from the crack epidemic in the 1980's to the cartels. they want him out because he will have them all hanging for treason. host: larry from cincinnati. call itfrom crazy eyes, what it is, treason against the american voters and president trump. schiff,ty is pelosi,

cnn, and state news. here is the ranking republican on the house intelligence committee. [video clip] vindman, did you watch the phone call with anyone else at the white house on july 25 or 26. if so, with him? >> yes, my core function is to coordinate u.s. interagency policy, and i spoke to two individuals with regards to some sort of read out of the call. >> two individuals that were not in the white house? >> not in the white house, cleared u.s. government officials with appropriate need to know. >> what agencies were these officials with? deputyrtment of state, assistant secretary george kent who is responsible for the portfolio of eastern europe, including ukraine.

and an individual from the -- in the intelligence community. >> as you know, the intelligence community has 17 different agencies. what agency was this individual from? weif i could interject here, don't want to use these proceedings -- we need to protect the whistleblower. >> please stop. >> i want to make sure there is no effort to out the whistleblower in these proceedings. if the witness has a good faith belief that this may reveal the identity of the whistleblower, that is not the purpose we are here for. i want to advise the witness accordingly. vindman, you testified in your deposition that you did not know the whistleblower.

lieutenant colonel than men, you testified in your deposition that you did not know who the whistleblower was. >> i do not know who the whistleblower is. >> how is it possible for you to name these people and then out the whistleblower? i per advice of my counsel, have been advised not to answer specific questions about members of the intelligence community. this isou aware that the intelligence committee that is conducting the impeachment hearing? >> of course i am. host: that exchange with congressman devin nunes, ranking republican on the house intelligence committee, and lieutenant colonel alexander vindman. all of the testimony available at c-span.org. front page of "washington times kimco --," alarm is growing on the right over the anti-trump pivot. above that, rank-and-file

democrats puzzled about the next steps for impeachment. a team of reporters, including sa miller from the washington times, after two weeks of impeachment hearings, democratic leaders reported to draft articles of impeachment against president trump, but rank-and-file members were stumped about what should be the next move. lawmakers heading home for the thanksgiving break unsure whether there would be more hearings or when they would tap a seemingly inevitable vote on impeachment with just eight legislative days remaining before the end of the year. congressman will heard, republican of texas and anti-trump republican, said he was not convinced, saying an impeachable offense should be compelling. it is not something to be rushed or taken lightly. i have not heard evidence proving the president committed bribery or extortion. he is on the intelligence committee. the story says the emma kretz had -- congress members were in

the dark about what would happen next. fromto phone calls, mark north carolina. did the hearings change your mind? caller: yes, indeed. -- i have watched all of it. i found dr. hill to be very profound in offering a perspective i had not considered, and that all of this is playing in the hands of those who would like to see us as people disassociate and not be together, and it is succeeding. it is working. but i am very low -- very optimistic that in the long haul, the work that you do in the focus you put on letting us all hear it directly, it might give us a chance to hear a lot of what has been going on, and it might be ugly before against better. but that ugliness may help us all come back together.

so i think i am more optimistic, and i will now pay more attention. but she was a very credible person offering a perspective that we really do not hear, that perhaps china and russia and others are excited to watch us have a food fight in washington. host: how much of the hearings have you watched over the past couple of weeks? caller: i have watched every bit of it because i wanted to hear for myself what folks were saying. host: thank you. it has dominated the headlines here in washington, d.c. how it is it playing out in ukraine? john mcardle? >> it has dominated headlines here in washington, d.c., and dominated television coverage. if you watched all five days of hearings, all 12 witnesses, you would have consumed 31 hours, 43 minutes, 43 seconds of television.

that is from fox news, those numbers put out late yesterday. a look at how it is playing in ukraine, specifically in the capital. .his is the story ukrainian leaders have done their best to stay out of it, saying only peril in fear that democrats or republicans could use them in their local brawl. there are uncertain prospects for peace in eastern ukraine and questions about where zielinski is taking the nation. in the capital, ordinary citizens are more focused on their own pocketbook concerns. quote from the ukrainian foreign minister, seems there is no more interesting topic other than ukraine in the united states, but said ukraine was always proud of the support from both sides of congress and we would like to preserve the support.

we need to solve the conflict in the east, and we do not need to be involved in the conflict on the other side of the break. that is reporting out of ukraine in "washington post." host: tracy in north carolina with the following text message. my mind has been changed with the possibility of guilt to not guilty with the colorful language and opinions offered. the fact that this case cleared this president, i wonder how many riots and protests will come after the report comes out. from new york, janet, you're next. you're still unsure. is that correct? actually, i am unsure whether the democrats should continue on with impeachment, just because i do not think it is politically good for them. i am a very practical person, and my solution, i really think what should happen is that joe biden should bow out of the race i personally hate nepotism.

i think he really has not answered that question yet. .y candidate is steve bullock there are other people on that stage who could bring the country together, republicans and democrats. i do think trump is guilty and the foreign service people who testified had a lot of integrity. you could see the passion, that they saw progress they were making with this new leader in ukraine. you could see the emotion. these people put years of work into that. i have no doubt he and others who testified new exactly what was happening. i think it is probably not a good thing for the country, and joe biden needs to stephost: ja. this is paul from new york that

writes "the house of representatives should center the president of the united states and defeat him at the polls. impeachment will work to trounce advantage. there are impeachable advantage, but the republicans in the senate are self-serving cowards." no good news from the president and an editorial in the new york times writes "there is already abundant evidence that president trump abused his power, holding out hundreds of millions of dollars to secure a bribe from a foreign government that he wanted to investigate his political rival and he undermined american national security and is continuing to obstruct efforts by a coequal branch of government to get to the bottom of what happened. right now the house intelligence committee has not schedule testimony from any witnesses after yesterday. that is a mistake. no matter is more urgent, but it should not be rushed for the protection of the nation's security and integrity of the

presidency. the new york times writing the future of the boat public says more witnesses must testify commit --e house committee. kelly and bloombfield, let's virginia. morning. >> good morning. i wanted to make three short points quick. first of all, i think the american people, when son lind -- sondland testified where he talked to the president, i want to be clear, what do you want, and the president said i want nothing. i don't want any quid pro quo, i just want zelensky to do the right thing. that was a slamdunk for the republicans. number two, if we would look at this in reality, if the burisma incident had just been an american businessman instead of vice president joe biden and his

son, then we wouldn't be in this how balloon -- hullabaloo at home. lindsey graham talked about the president looking at aid to lebanon, and withholding that ate until he had a clear understanding of what was going until he had a clear understanding of what was going on. withholding aid for corruption is the president's responsibility, but the testimony from sondland when he asked the president exactly what he wanted, to me, was a slamdunk for the republicans. host: thank you for the call from bluefield, west virginia. it is just past 9:00 in washington dc -- washington, d.c. if you are listening on c-span radio, we are focusing on the impeachment inquiry, two weeks of hearings that wrapped up yesterday. we covered all of it live on the c-span networks.

it is archived at c-span.org. more of your calls, comments, and reaction for the next hour. i want to share what is the next step as the washington post has a headline of the gop eliminating -- limiting the trial to two weeks. here are the details. a group of republican senators and senior white house officials said privately yesterday they would map out a strategy for a potential impeachment trial for president trump, including rapid proceedings in the senate limited to about two weeks. that's according to people familiar with negotiations. the prospect of an abbreviated trial is by several republicans as what they call a favorable middleground. substantial enough to give credence without risking greater damage to the president by dragging on too long. even a two week trial could run counter to what trump has expressed privately. miserable"ent is " about the impeachment inquiry

and has pushed to dismiss the proceedings right away. people close to the president sentiment expressed his views. republicans have remained overwhelmingly aligned find the president, insisting he has done nothing worthy of impeachment or removal from office. some have acknowledged the potential tolls a continued inquiry could take during an election year, particularly when the gop is aiming to protect their senate majority. that's available at washingtonpost.com. did the hearings change your mind and anyway? caller: the only thing these trials have done is to solidify -- host: i should clarify, it wasn't a trial. caller: it feels like a trial. my vote forified president trump, and for being a republican. i became a republican when i saw

how women going into the inaugural ball were being treated. i became a republican from independent then, and as this goes along, i do not get cable news so i don't get any other stations. you are the only people i get other than my mainstream media, which i don't tend to watch anymore. it's i really think -- i really think for myself, i try to see was going around me and try to talk to people in my area. in connecticut, in the last election, and we have a heavily democratic connecticut, more people have come out on card and truck about trump. -- car and truck about trump. i agree with the gentleman that perhaps there should be corrections. you had a young girl that spoke about democracy but she was talking about socialism.

but, back to the topic. i do not think president trump anything wrong. i'm sorry. i didn't watch all of this, the trial. i try to watch the beginning. to be honest, i have so much to do that i couldn't, so i kind of listened to snippets on your station. but, what the president did was to try to investigate the 2015 election which we all know was influenced by the dnc going after ukraine. i don't understand why they view this is going to go against biden. biden has issues. i don't think he would have made it through a debate if he wasn't nominated. i don't think there was any reason to think president trump would go after him. i listened to your gentleman the other day talking about what constitutes impeachment and the narrow base it was. i also listened to three senators that talked about when

obama was in office and they had many reasons to impeach him but chose not to because of dividing the country. about obama. if you're going to impeach this president on what you think is an impeachable offense, every democratic president coming along the line, they will be impeached for the same thing because obama had abuse of power when he went after iran, signing the dock a deal. he kept children in cages, but he had the benghazi. he lied about dividing our country by going after white people who were judge, jury, and executioner with the white police officers in black people. host: i will leave it there. see and then reporting the house judiciary committee could be drafting four articles of impeachment. we will follow that story coming after the thanks giving break. the house intelligence committee is working on a report.

it is unclear whether they will have public hearings or the exact timeline of what will happen in the house. if the vote takes place in the house, what would happen in the trial. couplesident tweeted a hours ago saying i will be interviewed on fox and friends this morning at 8:00 a.m. eastern time. i know there's not much to talk about but we will try to keep the conversation going. enjoy. we've been tracking any news from our long interview. >> the interview is just over 55 minutes this morning on fox and friends, and plenty of topics for reporters to pick up on and 20 of reporters live tweeting the president's appearance. you will likely see these stories over the course of the next apple minutes and hours. here are a few reporters tweeting their comments". one -- comments that they pulled. one is from the wall street journal, a white house reporter,

quoting the president saying i know exactly who it is, about the whistleblower, adding if adam schiff doesn't know the identity of the whistleblower, he's the only person in washington who doesn't know. this is from aaron blake in the washington post, president trump asked about nikki haley, mike pence is a great vice president, he is our man 100%. nikki will absolutely be involved and he went on to say nikki will be back in some form because she is great. this is also from aaron blake, president trump sang the first lady got worried about his health when she saw news reports raising questions about his will to revisit over the president saying she told to him, darling, darling, are you ok steve of fox and friends congratulating president trump the record stock isket and asked how he will strong for 2020. president trump responding by talking to you. these last two talking about foreign policy.

president trump on his fox appearance saying al-baghdadi was the biggest terrorist of the last hundred years and his administration doesn't get enough credit for killing him. the quote says we defeated isis, took the caliphate, and we just took out al-baghdadi. if obama did it, it would be a two year story. with me, i got a day. not that it was -- it matters, but we defeated him. host: thank you for that. front page of the new york times, the expert condemning the flow of fiction on ukraine's role. the testimony of dr. fiona hill, live yesterday. here is part of what she said. >> as republicans and democrats have agreed for decades, you are a valued partner of the united states and play an important role on our social -- social security. legitimizeeffort to

a narrative that the ukrainian government attacked us in 2016 and not russia. these fictions are harmful, even if they are purely mystic for political purposes. president putin and the russian security offices operate like a super park, the blowing millions of dollars to weaponize our political opposition resource and full narratives. bipartisan concerned they partisan talk, degrade our institution and our democracy. i respect the work this congress does in carrying out their constitutional responsibilities, and i'm here to help you to the best of my ability. elsee president or anyone impedes or subverts the national security of the u.s., in order it for domestic, political, or personal resources, that is worth attention.

preventnot let politics us from defending ourselves from foreign efforts. host: ukraine's are meeting with the president as critical. he is viewing it as leverage to pressure kiev. louisville, kentucky, did the hearings changer mind in any way -- change your mind and anyway? caller: no, they didn't 00 -- any way?ny -- caller: no, they didn't. they solidified my stand. you had a person who talked about how adam schiff and witnesses showed republicans. i would like to ask that young man, where were the president's witnesses? why didn't the president have a say in all of these hearings? the only thing the representatives -- republican representatives could do was to debate these witnesses that

shift put up, and they did a great job. schiff put -- adam up, and they did a great job. not one witness said the president of the united states broke the law. not one witness. back to giuliani, i want to say this, rudy giuliani is the president's personal lawyer. the president of the united states asked him to find out who triedto impeach him, who to during the robert mueller, all of that stuff, the dossier and that stuff, giuliani is try to find that stuff out. my last thing i want to say, robert mueller said there were 12 russians who tried to interfere or did interfere with the elections, and donald trump -- in donald trump's favor, but he would not name the russians.

robert mueller is a fraud. this whole thing is a sham. host: richard from louisville, kentucky. that is robert mueller for clarification. you brought up the point of the process, and this is from republican congressman stuart echoing your point of view. impeachapolusa tour comes to an end. two and a half years of these absurd accusations against the president and russia collusion. we have gone from quid pro quo to bribery to extortion. seven weeks of hearings, 16 secret closed-door sessions, 12 public hearings, of which you are the last, unders of hours of testimony, and i think for those who hate the president, they have not changed their minds but there are a lot of americans that look at this and say is that it? you are going to impeach and remove a president for this? like i said, if you don't like

the president, you have already come to that conclusion. many people wanted this three years ago, but a lot of americans can see this. zero evidence of any bribery. zero evidence of extortion. zero evidence of any quid pro quo. yet, impeachment is almost inevitable. why? because the leadership of this committee has been unfair and dishonest. we hear these crocodile tears from some of my colleagues heartbroken because they finally had to impeach this president, and we know that is absurd. there is no heartbroken or fairfield tears over this. they are giddy over this. everyone knows what they will do next, impeach the president and send it to the senate. that is the good news. that's good news. concert.ll been to a

you have the warm up band and then the main act. what we have seen is the warm up band. this is like the sioux city crooners. this is a band no one has heard of but the warm up band is over and we will go to the main event. in the u.s. senate, there won't be secret testimony. there won't be dishonest leadership for chairman who askses to let us appropriate questions or deny a defense. where in the country do you have a trial where the prosecution presents the case and the defense is not able to? host: that's from republican congressman stuart and impeachapolusa is the headline. your phone call, your reaction to the public testimony and wondering whether or not it changed your mind or had any impact. we go to georgia, what is your view on this? caller: my point of view, and changed -- ain't changed.

i will still vote for trump. i didn't see anything that came out of the inquiries, and you guys brought up the person getting indicted for money laundering and bribery and stuff like that. host: yep. thank you for the call. matthew, it changed your mind in what way? caller: i voted for trump and thought president trump was guilty, but after the hearings and seeing how this presidency is benefiting russia, i believe he is bad for our country. in new york, trump was known as the teflon don. for the caller on september 9 , thetrump called, sondland day they found out giuliani -- what they were doing in ukraine and said no quid pro quo, that is the same day congress found out what they were doing. that line about no quid pro quo, i don't want nothing, all of

that is not true. we need to make this country a better place and join together. we don't need to be having all of this discourse in our country. we need to work together and follow the constitution and the laws. if you sense something wrong, it needs to be censored -- >> c-span's "washington journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up saturday, marijuana policy's don murphy talks about efforts to legalize marijuana on the federal level.

>> in case you missed any of this week's impeachment inquiry hearings held by the house intelligence committee, we will bring you some of the highlights this weekend. saturday starting at 10:00 a.m. eastern, the testimony of lieutenant colonel alexander vindman and kurt volker, former special envoy to ukraine. sunday, the testimony of gordon sondland, the u.s. ambassador to by european union, followed fiona hill, former national security council director for russian affairs along with david holmes, u.s. political affairs counselor in ukraine. that's that's at 10:35 a.m. eastern. you can also stream the hearings website,online at our impeachment.rg/ c-span 2020 has live coverage of upcoming campaign events. senator elizabeth warren speaks with voters at a town hall meeting in manchester, new hampshire. on sunday at 5:00 p.m.