your calls on the senate impeachment trial of president trump which resumes this washington journal is next. i implore you -- [video clip] >> i employ you, give america a fair trial. give america a fair trial. she's worth it. ♪ host: that was part of adam schiff's closing argument, part of three days of presenting evidence, which according to the team calls for the removal of president trump from office. the white house legal team starts making their case today. you can start watching that on this is washington journal, for three hours today your calls on either what you heard from the impeachment

managers or what you expect from the white house team. here's how you can reach out to us. for democrats (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for independents (202) 748-8002. if you want to text us this morning you can do so at (202) 748-8003. tweet us or post on our facebook page. the democrats from the house took every bit of time yesterday in making their final points in their closing arguments in the case for impeachment, talking about that and what to expect for today is greta. [video clip] >> the president's defense team gets their term -- their turn, we could hear from ken starr, along with harvard law professor alan dershowitz.

lawyersident's personal is there, and also is the fort -- former florida attorney general, along with robert ray who succeeded ken starr as the independent counsel in the whitewater investigation of bill , and others are all part of the president's team. they are expected to go two to three hours today. to beesident's advice is honest. what to hear from the president's team? privately political reports that some republicans out that illegal defenders mount a substantive defense on the merits of the case instead of generalities about democrats trying to overturn the 2016 election, or broad claims that trump did actually -- did absolutely nothing wrong.

and there are plans to target hunter and joe biden. the white house counsel, and trump's personal attorney plan to use their time to target the former vice president and his son, hunter, according to multiple gop officials, if they can argue that the president had a plausible reason for investigating the bidens in ukraine they can defend him against impeachment charges and gain the bonus of undercutting a political adversary. and we showed you at the top, adam schiff be the closing argument -- adam schiff had the closing arguments, some of this through the iron of republican senators. >> -- [video clip] >> it was reported that gop senators were warned to vote against your president, and your head will be on a pike.

true.t know if that's vote against the president in your head will be on a pike. that, and again, i don't know if that's true, but i was struck by the irony. i hope it's not true. i hope it's not true. that the president who would make himself a monarch, who would use the terminology of the penalty imposed by a monarch, head on a pike. >> craig kaplan was in the inside senate trial, all

were at their desk, jerry moran who washed from the front row of a public gallery above the floor said that many senate republicans, including ernst shook their heads in disapproval over the comments about head on a pike. enoughebody said no loud for the gallery to hear. and fox news and others report that some senators, including lisa murkowski said it was unnecessary. and someone once i know republican senator had been told that. lisa murkowski said he was doing fine with moral courage until he got to the head on the pike part. host: this is from some of the reactions off of twitter, saying the white house attorneys will be more than sufficient to counter all of that the 24 hours , this would be an added

attraction. joe saying looking forward to hearing actual facts and truth, not opinions and assumptions over again. also from our we were in river falls, saying republican senators are between a rock and a hard place, they lose if they have witnesses and documents and if not they lose in november. watch the polls, 70% want a fair trial. when it comes to actual polling there's a new poll out from the washington post, just to give you some of the highlights. when asked of all adults on of the president should be removed from office, 47% saying he should be removed from office compared to 49% say he should not, that's amongst all adults. third of those american saying should beitnesses called, 66% of those polled -- two thirds of american saying there should be new witnesses, the approval rating rose to 44% but still a disapproval rating

at 51%. that's in the washington post. in light of what you have seen play out. charles, he starts us off on the republican line. go ahead. calling because i'm not in favor of impeachment, the democrats want to take our alls away, and make it one-sided, just like california. favorwhy are you not in of impeachment specifically? caller: why? host: yes. point. let me get to my , this has been nothing but a media storm about impeachment. impeach, impeach, impeach. they've been trying to stop president trump from doing what he set out to do since day one.

take the country back. i agree. drain the swamp, get rid of the bureaucrats. and another thing, the media lies like no tomorrow. they had their heads up their -- host: we're going to stop right there. bob on the democrats line. hello. caller: thank you for taking my call, i don't understand where these republicans were schooled at, but some of them are just illiterate. they have no idea what's going on. if this impeachment trial does not take trump out of office, there will not be any more impeachments. there's going to be a crooked democratic president in that office and these jokers running around and running their mouth -- they don't understand the whole idea of impeachment is to

take out a crooked president that we have which has been in office for the past three years, that spent 120 $6 million to go --fing, that he paraded abraded barack obama. host: they -- republican say that they see this as cheapening the process making it harder for future impeachments. caller: oh it will be harder but there won't be any more impeachments if they don't love this guy out of office, the impeachment process will be dead , there won't be anymore at all. host: another caller on the independent line in lynchburg, virginia. caller: good morning. i would like to pose a question. bidenestion is, if joe the primaryome person for the democratic party , then all of this

would have been worth no one's time. meaning that donald trump did all of this for nothing. he dug his own grave. and i don't understand why he felt that nobody else could have possibly been the front runner for the democratic party. host: patch, in dallas, texas, on the republican line. i'm against impeachment and i will tell you why. in the house,n -- no republicans voted for impeachment. -- and ther thing other thing, i truly believe when president trump was on that call, he was talking about the ,orruption that was in ukraine and this new president of ukraine had just taken over, and there was still corruption, and

he was trying to let them know that they needed to stop it if they want to the aid from us, and that included the bidens. biden, underent obama, he was the one that -- i'm trying to think of who represented. host: to the point that you have made, are these things at the white house -- are these things that the white house should bring up? caller: yes. and i want to make a comment about the previous caller, with they said about impeachment. it's getting more prevalent. in 1999 there was an impeachment , now we are going to the present. it seems like it's just going to mind.e frequent in my

anytime they don't like us, the opposite party doesn't like a president, they are going to impeach him. what they're trying to do. host: we will leave it there. the third time for a president as far as an impeachment process has played out, others have taken place over the years, we continue on with your calls on the events of this week. first we go back to greta. guest: let's take a look at what's next in the senate impeachment trial. the house managers have concluded their 24 hours to present their case. now it's the president's turn, begins at 10:00 eastern and they are expected to talk for two to three hours and pick up again on monday. the third time has not been determined for monday. after the defense team presents their argument, then the toators have 16 hours question the two legal teams, after that there will be emotions to subpoena documents

and witnesses and then four hours of debate. of course there will be that final vote on whether to acquit or convict the president. politico reports this morning that trump finds nearly unwavering loyalty from republicans after the democrats have concluded their case. they are talking about the final votes there. the two thirds needed, 67 senators to convict the president. witnesses andn of documents, when they get to that part of the trial, the debate and the vote expected on tuesday of next week. says set a gop and white house sources say that they are near confident they will defeat a motion next week calling for subpoena of witnesses and documents, saying they are believe their conferences in line after the democrats opening arguments. lisa murkowski has not yet said how she will vote

on witnesses, but she has criticized democrats on three separate occasions this week. she said she was critical of jerry nadler's cover up comments, the house not going to court for subpoenas, and adam schiff's comments last night about heads on pikes. you can follow that story if you go to cnn. they are likely, referring to republicans, to lose two votes initially. but it's less certain they lose mccaskey given her comments critical of democrats three lamar alexander continues to play coy as to whether he would be open to calling witnesses as do others like shelley more capital but gop leaders are confident they won't lose more than three. tweets, how can republicans claim that trump's impeachment follow-up was fair and legitimate there are no witnesses or documents?

this is a joke. murray tweets saying it's not like the managers really blew it during the dnc marathon infomercial. this is how you can reach us on twitter, you can post on facebook, and if you want to text us, (202) 748-8003. the indiana, indianola, on democrats line, james, hello. caller: hello, how's it going? host: i'm fine, thank you. theer: i really enjoy democratic presentation. adam schiff was profound. but i think this whole thing boils down to truth and lies. god's honest truth, and the devil lies. side are you on? host: you called adam schiff profound, why is that? caller: there's no other word to describe him. host: as far as presentation or

the way he presented information? caller: exactly. and watch with these republicans, everyone should have a clicker and count lies, how often they lie under oath. this is the liars, the devil's people. pat, in royal to oak, michigan, on the republican line. caller: i know the press follows everything and i know that the andtors follow everything, the american people follow everything that has transpired cincohe last four horse -- four or five years, they were ready to elect hillary clinton hid evidence. and when anybody ever gave any materials over to the senate, they were completely rejected. memorydy has a short that wold remember.

betweenes somewhere lying and laughable. host: how does not apply to the last week. caller: they take us all for fools as they say we have always complied, we've always given our information. you can give information but if it's already adapted what good --redacted, what good does it do? host: what did you think of the information from the house managers in light of everything you said? caller: i think they are hypocritical. they are totally saying things that -- and i will grant you that both parties do it, but time for the press to hold them accountable. as a republican, i want my senators to be honest. you can say we were wrong when we did that, it's time to be honest. host: do you want the republican senators to call witnesses and documents? caller: i do not, because they did not allow the process to be honest with shift not allowing

it to be an open process and not allowing witnesses getting us to this point. if they had and they had come to the conclusions now with an honest debate with the republicans allowing to defend the president, then yes. i certainly would. but not now because it has not been a good process. proceedings were in the house that were closed except for the house republicans and democrats on the relevant committees, and the open impeachment hearings. you did here witnesses questioned not only by democrats but by republicans as well and the republicans and democrats question each other in the process. if you want to go back in time and revisit those hearings, everything that led up to what you heard on this week, you can do so on our website and watch the proceedings as they have played out this week by the house team. the white house team steps up for their part starting at 10:00, you can see that on c-span.org and are c-span radio

app. joe, in maine, good morning. caller: i would like to mention about two days in the hearing, trump was overseas, he turned around and said he has all the information, all the paperwork, and all the witnesses. what do democrats have? evidence in all the the witnesses. i call that impeachment and that's not right. i think the democrats of done a good job. host: republicans say that the democrats should have called that during the inquiry process, calling for documents and witnesses. caller: but they're knocking to it it -- not going to get because the republicans don't want it. host: walter on the independent line in arizona. hello. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my calls. host: you are on, go ahead. caller: one thing i like to look at is the big picture.

week or the month, but last several years. when trump was one -- running for president, the plan was obvious from back then. they said if he does win, we own washington and we can show them who's boss. they had planned on an impeachment before he was even elected. they were playing out their game, they are trying to prove there is no one person that can influence us. we control the show. and i have seen every step take was designed from before he was elected coming to fruition. they are doing their best job to pick out one item, the aspect of him saying he was going to enforce the aspect of holding

accountable corruption in the country from the new president of the ukraine, and when he saw that biden was involved, there was a smile on his face. he did not hold back the money. he used it as a pressure point, saying please follow through with your promise to fight corruption in your country. host: with that in mind you are saying the bidens should be a part of this process? caller: the bottom line is the big picture, this is the wealthiest country in the world, there are many players controlling the politics. trump was an independent, a billionaire. everybody is familiar with the trump ego. it cannot be quelled. host: let's hear from another arizonan on the republican line. cheyenne. caller: good morning. i want to wish you a healthy and prosperous new year.

host: thank you. amazed at the way these people act. if they had a real job, you could never act that way against your coworker. i just wish that they would be more transparent? far, before we go that specifically, how do you apply that to what you heard this week as far as democrats making their case on impeachment? we keepi just feel that hearing these falsehoods. they are not telling the truth. and they don't talk about the truth. they don't talk about the phone call, it's about how they feel. and we know how they feel. what you mean by falsehoods.

we know that adam schiff lied and apparently the democrats can lie and nobody else can. bill clinton lies to the american people for seven months. but now people are going to jail for 50 years for lying. it's ridiculous. it's a double standard. host: let's hear from provincetown, massachusetts, peter, on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to take a different look at the big picture that the gentleman discussed a few moments ago. i think it would behoove c-span to bring in somebody from the dutch embassy to talk about the extent to which the dutch played iso this to the reason for that a long time ago a dutch airline was shot down, a huge

number of dutch citizens died in a malaysian aircraft which was shot down over ukraine. that commenced, on the part of the dutch, one of the most extensive investigations ongoing. host: how does that connect the impeachment inquiry directly? caller: it connect because they were laser focused on all traffic between the ukraine, russia, anything they could scoop up off the internet, and in it -- any intercepts they could make. they have copious amounts of electronic information. host: how does that relate to what we heard this week as far as the main centerpiece of the impeachment inquiry and the phone call between the president and the president of ukraine? caller: i believe they would've picked up not only the phone call, but they would have picked up all the other extraneous phone calls. somebody has said that the dutch

are sitting on a stash of somewhere around 300,000 intercepts. host: that's peter, in massachusetts, let's hear from one of the impeachment managers from yesterday, hakeem jeffries during part of the closing arguments. he elaborated on the president's what jefferies characterizes as a national character. [video clip] a tough spot during the civil war, america was at risk of tearing itself apart but we made it to the other side. a tough spot in october of 1929 when the stock market collapsed, plunging us into the great depression. but we made it to the other side. spot inin a tough december of 1941, when a foreign power struck, plunging us into a great conflict with the evil empire of nazi germany, but america made it.

to the other side. we were in a tough spot in the 1960's dealing with the inherent contradictions of jim crow. but we made it to the other side. spot onin a tough september 11, when the towers were struck, and young men and were sent jason crow to afghanistan to trite -- to fight the terrorists there so we did not have to fight the terrorists here. and we made it to the other side. country, we great can handle adversity better than any other nation in the world. but what are we going to do about our character? cheat,nt trump tried to

and solicit foreign interference in an american election. that's an attack on our character. powerent trump abused his and corrupted the highest office in the land. that's an attack on our character. trump tried to cover it all up and hide it from the american people, and obstruct congress, that's an extraordinary attack on our character. nation, we canat handle adversity better than any other country in the world. do what are we going to about our character.

again onem jeffries c-span.org. let's go back to greta. guest: americans do favor calling witnesses and evidence, the washington post, abc out with this number, 66% call for witnesses in trump's impeachment trial. now many people have been looking at four senators, market watch has the story today on those four senators. and what they have been saying about calling witnesses. susan collins said on tuesday, as i said last week, while i need to hear the case argued and questions answered, i anticipate that i would conclude that having additional information is helpful. it's likely i would support a motion to subpoena witnesses at that point in the trial just as i did in 1999. mitt romney, who has criticized trump in the past had this to say on january 13. i have said i would like to hear from john bolton, i expect that

barring some kind of surprise i would vote in favor of hearing witnesses. and lisa murkowski who has been cagey on the issue, according to alaska public media reports she told reporters and anchors that at the trial start she would be voting with her party against amendments demanding witnesses, but no one should assume she would oppose calling witnesses later. and senator lamar alexander who is retiring, they say he has been coy in recent interviews and said maybe he will vote for witnesses but maybe not, according to a politico report on thursday. he is likely to be the 51st vote for witnesses, but if he's feeling the need for witnesses, other republicans could join him and scramble plans on how to handle new testimony in the trial. schumers, led by chuck are keeping close count on which republicans have said what on calling witnesses. take a listen. [video clip] >> the message has gotten across

strongly, the american people are overwhelmingly with us and the house managers are making the case. we are going to continue to make it. this is a heavy moment and you don't know how this sense of constitution and historical constitution weighs on the shoulders. we know we will never get trump, we will never get mcconnell, we know they will pressure republican senators. the four republican senators can step forward and say that we need witnesses and documents, and there are 12 or 13 who have never said a bad word about witnesses or documents. host: jeff, in michigan, on the republican line. caller: good morning. it's been a given fact that the democratic party has been against the outcome of the 2016 election from day one. they have been screaming impeachment. the people of america are backing our president, he has done nothing wrong. he is for the people.

they can twist and turn and lie all they want, the evidence is right there, when it comes to a democrat like hillary, she can smash and destroy any kind of evidence. the bidens are underwater with the corruption, five different family members have been accused of sweetheart deals through joe biden's position in the white house for the tenure here was there as vice president. host: so what do you think of the white house team as they start their part today? caller: i think off the get go they are going to sit there and destroy everything the democrats have said. the articles of impeachment that the democrats have brought up are not even in the constitutional guidelines. this is a farce. this is ridiculous. host: then reported at the white house team will focus on the bidens, is that a good strategy? caller: that's a great strategy. you want to see where the corruption lies, there are five

different fighting family members -- biden family members that have gotten millions of taxpayer dollars that's our money that has been sweetheart deals of contracts overseas, rebuilding iraq. host: how does that apply specifically to this impeachment? caller: there won't be an impeachment. they don't have a legal status. they change the deals around in the words around and they started out with a you don't have to be an eyewitness to be a whistleblower. ,ost: we will hear from kathy also in michigan, on the democrats line. caller: good morning. andn't have television, when i'm working i can't really follow, that i do have a stream and read a lot of newspapers. presented a shift has --

representative adam schiff has done an impressive john. a pike is a spear used in infantry and to me, --resentative shi represented adam schiff is -- it works on a public in senators. and president trump is gollum or smeagol in this. i can barely think about how far the country has degraded. you have to read a lot to find out that everything is being taken and put into jeopardy. shi --epresentative adam schiff said he could not

confirm that, was it appropriate to add that? .aller: why not sometimes people are so afraid to speak the truth of something they have heard or witnessed, and they hold back. and things become worse. it does not help any of us when we live in fear. host: yet some republican senator say that did not happen. i've experienced people in the face of pressure being put on them backing down and betraying the truth. that's not uncommon. carl,let's hear from lancaster, pennsylvania, on the democrats line. caller: hello, how are you doing today? it's a fantastic day. --resented adam schiff is 1 adam schiff is one heck of a great house representative and he has been an incredible person to present the arguments before

us on television. but i have to tell you, i want the guy who tells 20,000 lies since he was elected and now on tv he is actually saying that he wants to eliminate or reduce a huge portion of social security and the entitlements that we americans have, that includes people with disabilities receiving money from social security. because he feels it's unfortunate. but let me get back to impeachment. , right now we you have a vice president that's even in trouble, they have information put away in a top-secret vault for very high level classification of secret information and top-secret , and chief justice roberts is saying he doesn't see anything secret at all about this. host: where did you hear that?

caller: that was on msnbc and also on cnn. host: and specific statements to the vice president? caller: the vice president was doing an interview -- i swear to god it was on pbs that he was doing an interview with, and he kept saying things like we take it under consideration and we are going to eventually do it in the future. and the reporter would ask more questions and the president would say things like i didn't say that. but he said it like 45 seconds ago when the president kept forgetting what he was saying and then he would say it over again and he had said it twice. next, in kevin is maryland, on the independent line. caller: good morning, thank you for c-span. just a little context for my

comment, i'm an independent moderate voter. i think i'm the type of voter that the democrats would have to win over if they want to win the electoral college. i'm not in the relevant states but the relevant mindset. i think trump has been a good president from a policy perspective. he has done a very bad thing with respect to ukraine. i think it's unfortunate, because he would be coasting to victory in this election if he had not created this mess. that said i think the democrats have really dropped the ball on the impeachment issue. i think first of all, in the hearings they definitely made the case that he did some bad stuff. but they failed to do, i think, is establish that it's impeachable, or that he can be removed from office. so the question is then what's the impact on the election?

the democrats have aired a lot of that stuff about trump but i think a lot of voters don't see the democrats as being much better. kevin, if i could ask a question, we've had several democrats over the last several days say that everything the democrats have brought forth as far as evidence regarding as impeachment, that it lends to the case they are making about the removal. you are saying that's not the case from things you have heard? caller: i think so, it is certainly bad. the question is whether it rises to a level of impeachable and removable. and one of the central issues as the constitution says it's for high crimes and misdemeanors. they have not really established that there is a crime or made a strong argument, even if there isn't a crime that it is still a high crime or the constitution does not require an actual crime and this meets the standard of a

high crime or misdemeanor. that's the argument alan dershowitz is going to make and david brooks said this on pbs last night. they have not made a strong argument for removal, even assuming the facts are true. so what is the impact on the election? think the democrats have handed trump a real victory here , because a lot of republicans and moderates don't see the democrats as being much better in terms of corruption or a threat to the integrity of the constitution. and what's going to end up happening is a lot of dirty laundry about the bidens will be that, so it's ironic congress is going to end up doing exactly what trump wanted ukraine to do to drag biden through the mud. host: we got the point.

that's kevin on the independent line, calling from maryland. the washington post says when it comes to the proceedings that have taken place back and forth during the course of the week, a new york republican advising the president's defense team told reporters that trump's lawyers needed to relitigate what is considered a debunked conspiracy theory that ukraine interfered in the 2016 election to help hillary clinton and therefore justify the president pushing ukraine to investigate the matter. he appeared before cameras yesterday during the day as it played out talking about the house impeachment manager, the lead one, adam schiff, his method and intent. [video clip] 2017,ember march 22 of adam schiff was on msnbc and he said that he had more than circumstantial evidence that president trump colluded with the russians in order to win the 2015 election. he has not produced a, mueller couldn't find it. this guy is the arbiter of so

many righteous things right now in the senate, and is the same guy that said he would love for him and his team to have contact with the whistleblower. and it turns out that they did. they had contact with the whistleblower before the whistleblower was the whistleblower. before they had hired an attorney. and then you get in front of the director of national intelligence, and he gives a version of the call transcripts that was completely different than the call transcript. so it's a point about who we are dealing with it was not just in the past made himself prosecutor, judge, jury, and witness coach, but the arbiter of all things good. so anything that takes down donald trump. we will call it out, this man has been caught time and again and there's a reason why he's up there speaking for so long, on end, repeatedly, too long, and without any credibility.

among the independent-minded people still out there. on therom michigan republican line, peter, go ahead. the focus is always on liking donald trump as a person rather than his policy or whatnot. the founders of this country set the bar so high for impeachment so that whether they are republican or democrat, nobody would just be able to create a false narrative to impeach someone for something that is not really an impeachable offense. and whether the democrats or republicans on either side, you should wanted -- it was not fair in the house, and calling witnesses in the senate like they want to do that, but i agree with some of the callers who have called in. it would have been fair in the house and they would have called witnesses or whatnot, or been open to calling both sides of

witnesses, it would have been fair in the senate, they agree on that concept, but if it's not fair to begin with, i don't false donald trump for not sending any information and agreeing with any sort of house committee, because in 40 days they will go ahead and impeach president, the house of representatives, and granted it's been done two other times in the country's history. andto go ahead and do it he's making change in that changes because a lot of the senators from both sides of the table are not necessarily happy, or house presented us, because once you have served, if your cousin or brother or sister and they had these cushy government jobs that are paying $200,000 a year, and they get pensions and everything forever, and he's getting rid of those jobs where you are a supervisor for one person or two people are five

people. you're not doing much. host: that's peter, in michigan, we will continue with calls until 10:00 today. but first, we go to greta. guest: c-span put together a breakdown of the house impeachment managers 24 hour presentation. leada look at how long the manager spoke, adam schiff, nearly three hours of those 24, followed by two hours for hakeem jeffries, one hour from jason , 30 minutes for zoloft brennan sylvia garcia, 30 minutes for jerry nadler and val demings coming in at 25 minutes. that's how they spent the third day, yesterday, the breakdown of the third day. from dayok at overall, one, day two, day three, how the house managers broke down there 24 hours straight on the first day they spoke a little over seven hours, followed by date

two, eight hours, on day three they spoke for about five hours and 45 minutes. the senators are listening to the trial, they are obviously in the chamber, some have gone to the cloakroom as you have seen. when there are breaks, the senators, you have seen them along with house lawmakers making their way to the cameras that are stationed around capitol hill on the senate side. howard portman caught one senator spying on other senators, that's patrick lahey, an avid photographer, taking snapshots right off the senate floor yesterday. here he is again, taking pictures. and then you have him behind jay set flow, talking to reporters at one of the stakeout positions, senator patrick lahey with his camera.

here's another shot of the senator getting a picture of the president's personal attorney. kevin, from indiana. hello. hello? hello. say?can you you support the president, you're against it, i guess you can call it foreign aid. i don't understand how it's a joee when your average cannot just go look into dealings overseas? it's redundant, we had a

president come in it's not your .ypical politician he donated a lot to them. i think it's -- host: do you think the president did anything wrong? caller: which president? host: this current one with the impeachment charges laid against him? caller: you want to ask that question about this president but not the prior administration question mark host: --? host: it's the current president we are talking about. caller: but that's double jeopardy, isn't it? host: what to think about the impeachment proceedings this week? caller: i want to past presidents to do the same thing. what i think about this week is the same thing i thought when bill clinton was getting impeached. host: let's go to georgia, on the democrats line. hello. caller: hello.

this is a sad time for our country. it's almost like we are in a civil separation. republicans versus democrats. and my opinion is that the republicans do not appear to care about the country. they are putting their party and their president before the country. the democrats, i'm not saying that we the democrats are perfect party, but democrats appear to care more about the norms for the country and for its citizens. president has not shown to knowledge.ent of he doesn't read, he doesn't want to know about what's going on. host: let me take you back to the impeachment proceedings, what did you think of them and the white house as they make their case? i believe the democrats

have done a wonderful job. they stuck to the facts. i hear a lot of republicans say they did not allow witnesses in the house, but president trump would not allow people to come and give testimony. for some reason people tend to forget that. the door was open for citizens to come in and for witnesses to come in and he refused to let them come in from the white house along with the documents. he's been holding back on everything because that's where you find the truth. he has not been an honest person from the beginning. host: let's go to ruth, internal creek,-- in the turtle pennsylvania come on the republican line. caller: i listened to all of this, from the mueller report to house, democrats have cried

impeachment from day one, i used to be a democrat. i changed because i did not like .ow they treated people he got equipment ukraine on time, they should let him guide this country. appreciate the democrats trying to tell me who to vote for. i like the man, i think he's a good leader for this country, he's finally getting this country back on track. kevin, ins go to denver, colorado, on the democrats line. good morning. the redi really hate versus blue nonsense. you're not helping, c-span. but this isn,

misleading us. aboutnversation should be impeachment and only about impeachment. what did you think about the evidence? host: so you answer the question that you just post quest -- posed. caller: the evidence presented by the house managers was like watching perry mason. , the intent, the motives, the timeline, it was like watching perry nation or sherlock holmes. aside.to put my blue hat we are the jury, not the senators. the senators get to make a choice. host: well ultimately they choose impeachment or not. caller: but the choice will have an impact on the governance of

this country for hundreds of years to come. so that is what's at stake. you can change his name with any other president, democrat, independent, whoever, but keep i was 16 years old when i started watching with brian lamb. it was objective, but not neutral, because neutrality is not objective. americans support witnesses and a fair trial because they know we are not having one. host: kevin, you made a lot of points so we will let you end with that. if you look at the washington post polling it talks about the idea witnesses and everything else. say thats of adults

witnesses should testify. surprisingly, 45 percent of those republican, 65% independent saying that and 87% of democrats saying that. let's go back to greta. the third dayore of opening arguments adam schiff came to the reporters with these , and whether or not the president could use executive privilege. house where the president could play rope a dope in the courts, that's not an option here. and it gives no refuge to people who are hiding behind executive privilege to avoid the truth coming out. we have a very capable justice sitting in that senate chamber, empowered by the senate rules to

decide issues of evidence and privilege. and if any of these witnesses have a claim that they wish to make, we have a justice who is able to make those determinations, and we trust that the chief justice can do so. the senate will always have the opportunity to overrule the andice, but what they fear what their team fears is that the justice will in fact apply executive privilege to that very narrow category where it may apply. and here that category where it may be nowhere at all, because you cannot use executive privilege to hide wrongdoing or criminality or impeachable misconduct. that's exactly the purpose for which they seek to use it. and finally, they have withheld hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of documents for which there is no claim of lynch. -- of privilege.

we seekof the witnesses to call have no claim to privilege. this is merely the latest camouflage and effort to obstruct the congress in its investigation and now to obstruct the senate in the trial. that was adam schiff before the third day of opening arguments. he said that he wanted to deliver that message in front of the cameras. at the same time, lindsey graham , republican of south carolina, shared with the judiciary committee and he also came to the cameras and said that joe biden and hunter biden need to be investigated. they don't need to be called as witnesses he said, but they need to be investigated. here's how the reporters on capitol hill framed those remarks. politico saying lindsey graham pushes outside biden probe in bid to sink the witness push.

and you have a reporter on capitol hill saying what's lindsey graham up to? he is signaling to trump that they can and should kill the witness vote and not bring in for anens and still push investigation. a public announced biden, sound familiar? not wantor graham does to use his committee to probe the bidens, but says someone showed. -- should. host: on the republican line, and washington state, william, hello. points andave three i want to make them quickly. is that thething house managers are taking things out of context. they do it again and again and again. taking something out of context, ,ike the very next sentence

that's leaving out exculpatory information. when a prosecutor put the leads out, it carries the information in the court of law and they get disbarred. they get fined. host: can you recall something taken out of context? caller: let me go to this next thing, ambassador sondland seems to be their star witness. committeeck to the after he was able to review some no, he imagined the quid pro quo. he came back and testified to that. lawyers left that out which left out exculpatory information. one last thing. motivation is the core of every criminal prosecution, whether

this is criminal or not it doesn't matter. the motivation, the whole key to their case is that president trump started the investigation the day that biden declared his presidency. host: you made three points we are moving onto jeff this come jeff, hello., lewis in north carolina come on the independent line. caller: yes, my statement is this, i was a lifelong democrat who voted twice for the last two .epublicans i will not do that again. i became an independent. but i was born and raised in clarksville, tennessee.

and this week our representative from clarksville, tennessee, marsha blackburn, attacked colonel vindman. that upset me terribly. i went to southeast asia in 1971 believe in i do not attacking any credible person while they are in uniform testifying before congress. she pretty much accused him of lying. i do not know him, i do not know marsha blackburn, but i know she's from my hometown and it makes me very sad when you start attacking people that are -- that have been shot and wounded and got purple hearts representing you and me. carolina,s, in north

finishing off our first hour. two more to go, taking your calls on the weeks impeachment case. the white houseyou can see theis starting at 10:00. you can go to c-span2 or c-span.org, or you can listen to our radio app. 202-748-8000, for democrats. 202-748-8001 for republicans. independents for if you want to call us. judy off of twitter saying that after watching every day, how can anyone not believe the president should be impeached. watching clips of the brave patriots should be enough for everyone. man/woman up senators. iay from virginia texting us, " did not hear evidence, just opinion and speculation.

the senate trial by rule cannot introduce any new information. this is a bus for democrats. .ou can text us at 202-748-8003 starting off on our second hour. jenny, in the virgin islands. my name is ken. host: i am sorry, go ahead. caller: i am trying to get this conversation outside of the guilt mongering that is being thrown in constantly. i have sat through as much of the impeachment trial as my work allows me, and i keep hearing things like, threats to our national security, this is a threat to our national security, and i have yet to see any evidence at all. it is a talking point that seems inbe hitting a lot of homes

america, because it is a talking point in every conversation that comes up. i find myself in a lot of conversations revolving around disdain and hate for this man. and, usually i can turn that conversation around in about five minutes if they take the time to listen. as far as this impeachment, and i am trying to keep it centralized. witnesses,ng to see i am not necessarily concerned with what this is the democrats want to offer, they will spew the same rhetoric. i am more concerned with the ones that the democrats do not want the republicans to call on. i believe if people were more forecast -- focused on why those people, one hunter biden's name is mentioned, they say he has no bearing, and they should feel that he would offer no damage to

their case. host: why do you think he has bearing? caller: excuse me? host: why do you think he has bearing? caller: because the initial start of this entire deal, i believe, and this is from my watching, is that our presidents with joed of an issue biden years ago, and the video released with joe biden making admissions, and then when it came around to giving foreign aid to this country, that is when he took pause, and if that was the reason that he took pause, i believe that hunter biden and his father are very relevant witnesses who should be called. , in theat is kenny virgin islands, giving us a call this morning. you can call from the lines, post on twitter or other social

media feeds. also, joining to help us with information with this week and what to expect next is greta. guest: today, 10:00 a.m. eastern time, the president's defense team will begin their 24 hours following the three davies the house managers -- three days that the house managers talk. team the president's concludes their opening arguments, the senators get 16 hours to question. after that there will be a motion to subpoena witnesses, and documents and debate. we are hearing that that could be on tuesday. then there will be deliberation and votes on those witnesses, and finally, if they hear from evidence and witnesses, and they get evidence, the trial could go longer than next week, but finally, the conclusion of this will be the vote to convict or acquit. last night, in the senate

chamber as the house managers wrapped up their opening arguments. craig kaplan had observations. democrats jell-o brand, browned brown, and casey spoke with house managers, and he also noticed that the democrat of delaware was poking to the president's legal team before he left the senate for the night. klobuchar spent time speaking with republicans, including senators collins, portman, cruz, and kotten. post" is running a headline trump impeachment past empty spec -- spectator gallery has puzzled the senators. "rules for ticket distribution are on written -- unwritten,

most are distributed through offices and people q for up to three hours -- queue for three hours. it move slower do to have our seating blocks. senate offices get three to five tickets each, which allow entry to the gallery and can be used by multiple people who take shifts, including staff and constituents. some offices say there have been robust interest and offered turns of one hour each. again, this is going to be the scene being set throughout the day. capitol hill, the outside and capitol hill, the inside, as the white house team starts making its case. 10:00 on c-span two. -- c-span2. one of the president's lawyers giving a hint at what the strategy might be. [video clip] >> first of all, let me bring up a couple of things.

we are only going for a couple of hours. i am going to tell you something. look for things. look for things like the foreign intelligence surveillance score. see what they had to say about that in the last couple of weeks. cooperating -- yes. of there is no obstruction that is an interesting thing. this is worse than this one or that one. there was an allegation of obstruction of justice, there is no obstruction of justice. abuse of power, obstruction of getice -- of congress, not in trouble for excising constitution rights. >> are you going to argue if there is no trouble for in pressuring campaign or that he did not do it? >> i will not tell you. >> what is your reaction to this news? >> i talked about that earlier,

there is an ambassador that serves at the pleasure of the president. do you know who said that? the ambassador herself. >> senator graham should -- said someone should do it investigation of biden. >> i have not had any discussions, that is up to the senate. for whatever reason, the house managers decided to not just open the door, but kick the door down on the burisma and biden matter. i am trying to figure out what their strategy is, but they have done it. >> will you be talking about that? >> i am not going to be telling you what i will be or would not be talking about. they certainly open the door. look at our brief. i do not mention it, but they spent hours on it. rudy giuliani -- look. i will say it clearly. rudy giuliani was representing a president of the united states who was under attack by special

councils, and to look over every possible defenses is what a lawyer does. [end video clip] host: if you go online you can find the trial document that will serve as the basis for the lawyers on the white house team. to give you some of the table of contents saying that the articles fail to state unimpeachable offenses, the novel theory of "abuse of power would do lasting damage to the separation of powers." charges of obstruction fail because invoking constitutionally based privileges to protect the separation of powers is not an impeachable offense. the trial document is available online. bruce, in michigan, democrats line, starting us off in the second hour. hello. caller: how are you doing? host: fine. caller: my take is this, the deep state has been trying to impeach trump since the beginning, and to me it is all kabuki theater, it is just

distraction. today, there are 200 protests around the world going to stop the 5g implementation that trump wants. the media has not covered this at all. host: you called this week on this very topic. we will go to michael, maryland, independent line. thank youod morning, for taking my call. i called in to give my perspective. i'm going to try as be as educated, i do not like speaking on things i am not fully educated on, and i am not there in the senate hearing is going on. here's what i will say. thatnally, i think witnesses and documents should be presented for both sides. i feel that if we had evidence and witnesses from the democratic and republican sides, you can truly be impartial. although i may not agree with

one side or the other, at least it comes off as fair. -- only having the house managers' evidence and documents and not showing the white house counsel what they want to show, people have mentioned hunter biden and john bolton, i think it is important to show both, that way the american people can say i do not agree with what they are doing, but i can be impartial. aen you do that, it creates way for people, the american people to say at least i can say it truly is fair. i'm going to end with this, i want people to remember that we are americans first. we may not agree with the president or you may hate him, or have a review -- or however you feel about the guy, do not forget we are countrymen or women.

what scares me, the thing i see online, and when people call in and on these other news channels, we have become so divided. we are not each other's enemy. host: if i may ask a question? for everything you've have heard so far, have you made up your mind as far as if it is an impeachable offense or not? caller: that is hard to say. here is why i said that. i may vote a certain way, that i know he was voted in, and i feel like because he was voted in, taking him out would make all the people who voted for him feel completely invalidated. i think there should be something done, i am not for sure removed, because if you remove him, that invalidates the democratic process. i do something -- i do think -- what he did was wrong, i feel that way. taking him out when so many people voted for him would wipe the vote away.

we should take it to the polls, or show all the evidence, so that when we go to the polls we can say i do not do support him because of this. i just want people to remember that. host: i am assuming it is your windshield wipers making that noise because it is raining in the d.c. area. let us go to melvin, texas. democrats line. melvin, and ie is am calling in because i think they should have witnesses. host: why is that? caller: because i think we should have witnesses because we have courts that go on around the united states every day, and a jury trial. just think about the murderers, robbers, and rapists if we did not have witnesses and -- on the street if we did not have witnesses and documents.

it is only fair that we should know what is going on, so i think we should have witnesses and documents. host: do you believe both sides should be calling the witnesses they want? because that is a fair trial. i want to see a fair trial, not a government trial where there are no witnesses and documents. this thing about the president, we would be on the street if we do not have -- just thanks about the criminals on the street without witnesses and documents? host: what do you think that witnesses and documents would add? caller: it would give us some perspective what is going on and what is really happening. it doesn't make it any different who is the president. know what iso really going on, so i think there should be witnesses and documents. host: this topic playing out in the papers. in their editorial section of " the wall street journal," the

proper path would be to seek documents by challenging mr. trump's privilege claims in course -- in court. also that is what ken starr did in the clinton case. the other hand the house would've lost an attempt to call john bolton or mike pompeo. that may be why the house never formally salt -- sought to their tempered -- their testimony. those names appear on the list in the second impeachment article, instead it asserted what alone is -- it can determine what is privilege. the democrats are demanding that the senate call mr. bolton. the privilege claim does not vanish because the house has impeached him. "the washington post" makes their case saying "mr. schiff may clear the extent to which those gaps exist because of stonewalling and reminded senator that they have -- senators that they have a pot -- the power to remedy them.

would they not like to have a letter from the secretary -- from the former advisor. would it not be useful for john bolton to explain what he meant when he said mulvaney and the ambassador were cooking up a drug deal with ukrainians. mr. schiff pointed that out, and whether gop senators demand relevant testimony, more facts will come out." you can read both of those online. from north carolina, republican line, lee, go ahead. caller: hello, i enjoy your station. one of the things that i wanted to mention was that i watched adam schiff's closing argument, and he said his father was 92. he went through a medical exam, failed, went to another service, and failed, but the guy let him serve, he did not get to and my father is 91. in japan when they

were signing the surrender papers, and then he went to holland where the japanese did not believe that they were -- they had surrendered. i am just questioning was adam schiff livening -- lying about his father? did his father exaggerate? i had many other points. host: something that specifically applies to what you heard, what do you think? something on that. caller: i do not know if adam schiff's father lied to him. host: we will go to philip in texas. democrats line. caller: good morning, and thank you. i enjoy watching your show. i have a couple of comments, and i was raised where they were told that a man was only as good

as his word, or a woman, only as good as their word. i believe that we need witnesses. if you have gotten anybody out there that can call in and say that they would go to court, and their lawyer telling them, i am sorry, we cannot use witnesses and we cannot use documents to prove your innocence, i would like to hear from them what they would think about that. we are all americans, and yes, i am registered democrat, but i have voted republican. i have voted independent, but we need to protect our country, and our constitution, -- when it comes to the witnesses, what do you think they offer? what would the documents offered to sway republicans? them ifonce again, ask

they would go to court without any witnesses, knowing that they had witnesses and documents, and that the fairness of it. i know they push back to the house of representatives and say why did they not do that. that has been explained, because that would take two or three years to go to court and subpoena somebody that is a witness, and there are people who have volunteered, and bless those who have come forward and given what they feel like is the truth. like the again, i feel truth will set you free. i believe in the good lord, and i think he has a plan, and i hope everybody opens their mind. host: that is philip, in texas. we will hear from david, republican line. good morning, you are on. severalpedro, you and

of the moderators on c-span are models of what folks that do your job in the news and in reporting should be. i have no idea what your political affections are, and same for most of the other folks and i would like to congratulate you on the job. as far as the witnesses, it is a last-ditch, the democrats ploy. all of this discussion about witnesses of the clinton trial. the three witnesses they had had already been given depositions and testimony in the house. they did not call new witnesses in the clinton trial. this whole thing, this is a last gasp of the democrats after three years of one hoax after .nother to try and get trump they have moved it to the senate, going for another hail mary. i did not realize that until this week, because they have not

litigated executive privilege during an impeachment thoroughly, so there is a possible legal chance that they could do away with it. the idea would be that they did not do the job they were supposed to have done in the house where everybody acknowledges or should acknowledge that the job of the house is to conduct the trial,ment, to the developed the testimony, and the case that will be delivered to the senate. why did they not do it? because they also would not get a lot of it because of executive privilege. so, they back off of all of that and everybody saying why did you do that? hoped with a hail mary to put all this junk so that people are calling for witnesses. i would like to see witnesses myself, but because i want to see the bidens. host: that is david, in texas. trial, threeon

witnesses were presented. rick jordan, cindy blumenthal, and monica lewinsky. if you want to see what passed for the clinician -- the clinton impeachment, you can go to our video library where you can watch what happened then, and what is happening now. guest: many of the lawmakers yesterday, house managers and the senators were asked about the tape released by abc where you can allegedly hear president trump talking about getting rid of the former u.s. ambassador to the ukraine. take a listen. problem where we need to start is we need to get rid of the ambassador. she is from the last administration. she is walking around telling everybody that he will be impeached. just wait. it is incredible. >> the president appears to say to the group, including a top

aide. pres. trump:, get rid of her. get her out. take her out. do it. guest: many of the lawmakers asked about the tape did not have a response saying they had not listens to it all. aboutke pompeo was asked her in the interview that he did with reporters. here is marie with the morning edition of npr and her questioning of the secretary of state. [video clip] >> people who work for you and your department and have resigned under your leadership saying that you should stand up. >> i do not know who these unnamed sources are. i can tell you this. >> these are not unnamed sources, this is michael mckinley, a career servant -- foreign service officer testified under oath that he resigned in part due to the failure of the state department to offer support to foreign service employees. >> i will not comment on things

that mr. mckinley may have said. i will say only this, i have defended every state department official. you have built a great team. >> respectfully, you have not defended marie jovanovich -- yovonvithc? >> that was mike pompeo in an interview with npr. npr'sweeted out, wow kelly just now says that secretary pompeo was furious about being questioned about ukraine. we will go back to that. furious about being questioned, took her into the office and cursed at her, made her point to ukraine on an unmarked map and she did, it is shocking. from the reporter herself, saying that i was taken into the secretary's private ebbing room

where he was waiting and he shouted at me for about the same amount of time as the interview. she has reported by saying the secretary of state used f bombs at her in a sentence and told her that no one cares about ukraine. here is, independent line. hello. address three important points because i think the impeachment trial exposes a number of significant conflicts that we are having in our country. number one, the impeachment trial is about the right of the people to choose their leader to establish policy. i think it was appropriate that you would put on that recent exchange between mike pompeo and a press member talking about the glorified bureaucrats in our

centralized federal government. these people think that they are the ones that determine policy. in reality, it is the people and their elected leader who should be the one that determines policy. what we have here is a --nificant conflict in what the thinking of our government should be. i think, of course i come down on the right of the people to choose their leader to establish policy and then through normal elections they continue the policy or do a direction change. i think it was interesting that adam schiff, during his presentation in the senate that he would say that we cannot leave this to the ballot box, we could not be this to the ballot box, he said that a number of times, and that is an indication that what we have is a democratic elite that believes that the people should not be capable of selecting their leaders. host: that is john, in texas.

dennis is in fort myers, florida. democrat line. caller: thank you, and thank you to all of the subscribers for c-span. i have been watching all of the hearings, i have read as much as i possibly can on the transcripts, i have listened to the arguments put forth by the democratic members on the senate floor. the senatorsed to and legal people that have come day,fter the end of the and even listened to fox news to get information on what they are talking about. young mr.bringing up biden. and that he made money working

on a board for a company that they keep saying, he had no information, or no knowledge about the gas and oil business. i would ask the american public, why do you not do a little research, and see how many former congresspeople and former senators that are on boards of directors in this country. host: because the bidens were at least featured so much in the democratic argument, do you think that opens the door for them to be called as witnesses? caller: you can call hunter, as far as the vice president, there is a public record of what he did, and who was involved. european union, the banking community, and things like that. host: he was a key player in ukraine policy during the obama administration. caller: of course he was, he was

the vice president of the united states. host: should he be called as a witness? caller: if they want to do that, guess what, there are 53 republican senators on the floor of the senate. will they? they?estion is won't host: let us go to alvin, in delaware, republican line. caller: good morning. i think one of the strategies that we may hear from the republican side is a list of all comments of politicians who have said that the president should have been impeached from day one, people like maxine waters, all of the media all of thempundits, saying that we will in each this on the date -- impeach this on the day that he was put into

congress. i am sure that the team are going to come out swinging, and just like the democrats for the last three days have put out there list of thing --their list of things they think he should be remove on. ashink the argument will be just as strong, deep, and meaningful, and all these people who have already made up their minds, wait until you hear the other side. caller: if you cast what you set aside to begin with, what do you think about the case made by the house democrats -- or the house team on impeachment? caller: honestly, all you have to do is go back to the convention -- congressional hearings. they said the same thing there. they are not saying anything new. host: but not a convincing case? caller: absolutely not. they have been trying to remove the president since he got out

of high school. host:host: as far as the case, why is it not convincing? caller: i think they have an agenda to remove him, he is not one of them, he never has been and never will be, they are trying to do everything in their power to get them out of office, matter what it takes. host: mike johnson, yesterday going before cameras, one of the things that he talked about was a case that was brought forward by democrats, specifically on the obstruction of congress. here is some of what he had to say. [video clip] >> we had this out with them in the house judiciary meetings. if obstruction of congress was an impeachable offense, we would have lost a number of previous presidents. look at the fast and furious investigation, he did not turn over everything that congress wanted. they had to go to the judiciary sorted out. it is no stronger than article

one, which has been beaten to death. i like what senator blunt said, it is about -- it is like the hourers only have a one presentation, it goes on and on. there is no smoking gun or evidence that supports this, and i think the president's defense team when they present the case are going to hammer that point home, and we will dispense with this easily. host: we are halfway through our program of taking your calls and comments on this week's events in the house and senate when it comes to impeachment. the white house team starting their case. 10:00 is when you can see it on c-span2, c-span.org and radio app. guest: in other news, longtime viewers will remember pete stark , longtime california congressman who served for 40 years. he died yesterday at the age of 88. the "mercury news" noting that

he served for 40 years, most recently as a representative for the east bay district including oakland and put -- and berkeley. a democraticeat to upstart following a campaign marked by a series of gaffes. if you go to [no audio] -- c-span.org, you can find many appearances by the late congressman, we hundred 93. if you are interested in looking at the video. nancy pelosi, a california colleague, put out a statement saying "today america has lost a champion of the people, a leader of great integrity. master legislator who used his gavel to give a voice to the voiceless and he will be deeply missed by congress, californians, and all-americans." caller: -- host: from delaware, ohio, republican line. caller: thank you for the call.

i will say the same thing -- i am so disappointed in our commander-in-chief. i would like to say the same thing. you made your bed, that is what you have to say -- that is all i have to say. host: mike, in maryland, independent line. you are up. caller: good morning. iwould like to say this, and would like to say that the democrats, specifically the house impeachment managers in their presentation to the senate, they have managed to bore the entire nation to the point of tears. they have, up with 1000 different ways to belabor the same point. that they are absolutely crazy. instance,ng about for the lead impeachment house

manager, mr. schiff, i think the man is insane, i think he is completely obsessed about russia and everything, but i am saying, i think i am the average american. i think that all average americans do not give three hadesand hades -- in about ukraine. host: did you listen to the testimony and learn anything from it? caller: yes, but i did not learn anything other than the fact that i think democrats are crazy. host: why do you characterize it as boring? caller: it is boring because they keep saying the same thing 3000 or 4000, 5000 different ways. i hope that when president trump's defense team takes the floor in the senate, i hope that they will do some -- do so very

-- so -- insistently essentially -- they will not retread the major point. the democrats sounded like a bunch of lunatics. host: that is mike, in maryland. you heard congressman johnson talk about the obstruction of congress charge. that was brought forth by the democratic leadership. up thatngs taking portion from yesterday specifically, looking at obstruction of congress. [video clip] obstruction trump's of the impeachment inquiry was categorical, indiscriminate, and historically unprecedented. to impedee was clear, congress' ability to carry out its duties. to holde constitution, the president accountable for high crimes and misdemeanors.

as part of his effort to cover up evidence as -- of part of his scheme to solicit interference in the upcoming election, president trump did something no president has ever dared to do in the history of our republic. president trump directed the branch, not toe cooperate with the house's impeachment inquiry. president trump blocked every person who worked in the white house, and every person who works in every department, agency, and office of the executive branch. from providing information as part of the impeachment inquiry. specific,ot about narrowly defined security or privacy issues, nor was it based on potential privileges

available to the executive branch. indeed, president trump has not once asserted executive privilege during this process. totalas a declaration of defiance of the house's authority to investigate credible allegations of the president's misconduct and a wholesale rejection of congres'' ability to hold the president accountable. executeddent's order by his top aides, substantially interfered with the house's constitutionally authorized power to conduct an impeachment inquiry. direction,t trump's the white house itself released -- refused to produce a single document or record in response to a house subpoena that remains

in full force and effect, and it continues to withhold -- and he continues to withhold those documents from congress and the american people. [end video clip] host: we will hear from daniel, in california, independent line. caller: good morning. how are you. host: fine, go ahead. caller: this is political theater. what is happening is the democrats are trying to retake the senate. -- i do not think it will be successful, and the impeachment is -- he will not get thrown out of office. why do you draw directly to the democratic attempt to take over the senate? caller: they are trying to chip away at various senators that may or may not agree with them at this point in time, it is just not going to happen.

anyway, have a good day, thank you. mccrighten, from ohio, -- democrat's line. hello. caller: i have not been able to follow it in its entirety, but i do watch it when i come home in the evening, and i am just really baffled by the republicans who do not see that the man, if his lips are moving, he is lying. host: what is it about the democrat's case that conventions you that he is in the wrong on this? root --well, he had what he had really giuliani -- rudy giuliani doing. giuliani is not in government. he has no business doing our business. that is for the secretary of state, and the president. that is not for the thugs. host: bill, in florida.

republican line. you are next up. caller: yes. i would like to know why, when we had joe biden on videotape saying that he will withhold money from ukraine if they do not stop investigating his son, and they are blaming trump for all of this. also, trump was not afforded due process in the house each man. they would not let him call witnesses. it is a travesty of justice. at one point the house judiciary committee invited president trump to testify, and he refused to that. caller: because they would not let him have his lawyers were call witnesses. that is not due process of law. each side should be able to call witnesses. host: go ahead. biden, and why does joe nancy pelosi, and john kerry all have sons working in ukraine

since 2008? the obama administration. this was going on since the obama administration. all three of those people have sons working in ukraine, that is against the law. this will come out. dwayne ine, -- mississippi, republican line. caller: i have a couple of questions. one thing that stood out to me is this question, when they were given testimony, it was said that they knew that burisma was a corrupt entity, they knew that burisma was corrupt, and yet joe them,s son worked for this was before trump got in there. they knew long ago that ukraine was a corrupt nation, but yet they are sending their kids to go work for ukraine. i just have to ask this right

here, i know you guys are going into detail in finding out facts. find out how much money have we given in the last 10 years, and to all in our government sent kids over there to work for ukraine, a known, corrupt state. and, to work for a corrupt entity like burisma and get paid and obscene amount of money. that does not throw a red flag up for you? inler: that is dwayne mississippi. we will continue on calls about the impeachment process as it plays out. we will first go to greta. guest: the house managers concluded there three days of opening arguments last night and "politico" has the headline that the republicans are loyal to the president. nearlydline, trump finds unwavering loyalty from

republicans after the democratic case. mcclatchy d.c. has a profile piece on mitch mcconnell and the role that he has been playing to keep that party unity. they say he has been educating senators, coordinating with the white house and preaching the importance of party unity. from that story they also note that he has become the villain for democrats after responding to the democrats to respond, republicans close to respond, republicans closed the majority leader laughed. "for one thing, he does not care what the people think about him. the roles are covered -- the walls are covered in unflattering lyrical cartoons of him. at one point he started answering his own phone as cocaine mitch to an infamous campaign add from a failed republican senator -- senate candidate in west virginia. politico" also reports about what is happening inside the

senate chamber during this impeachment trial. the reporters have put the senators into groups, we will start with the fidget caucus, and they note that topping the list is bernie sanders. he has a hard time staying still , they report. sanders was eager to find distractions, rummaging through old papers, emptying the contents of his jacket pocket, and at one point studying the label on the back of a 10. his legal bag was largely left untouched. it says the most studious goes to kiersten gillibrand whose pen was almost constantly moving during the many hours of opening arguments. not to be out done, susan collins of maine, and lisa murkowski of alaska, two swing votes worse frequently seen flipping through their packets and following along with the democrats.

richard blumenthal constantly taking notes. the least caffeinated handful of senators have been caught dozing off including senator jim rich of idaho. "the new york times" sketch artist caught him doing that. jeanne shaheen of new hampshire and patrick leahy were briefly spotted resting their eyes. they also note that there are the chummiest of senators. barely an hour went by without whispering and chatting in the role of senators of tim scott, and kathy and david perdue of georgia. at the start, they were quietly exchanging notes. by thursday afternoon, all four were caught chatting and chuckling out loud during the presentation. the chill used goes to dianne feinstein -- the chilliest goes to dianne feinstein and who wore a jacket and kept asking if it

was warm in the caucus room. rumors have spread of senators with an ipad on their desk or speaking on their phone, a violation of rules that bans all electronics. an appleornyn, who had watch was spotted glimpsing at the device. the decorum for the senate trial, no unrelated reading materials are allowed, no phones or electronic devices. messages, relay access to the well of the senate is restricted. senators should rise when the chief justice arrives and departs. senators are to refer to the chief justice as mr. chief justice, and entry and exits are restricted to the cloakroom. the senators should remain in their seats, refrain from speaking when the case is presented. they should stand and vote from their seats, and the interns that you see will relay messages to the chief justice through the staff of the parliamentarian. that is exactly what senator

susan collins dead. she wrote a note on the first day of opening arguments to the chief justice about jerry nadler accusing the senators of a cover-up, in that language. he saw the admonishment in the early hours of that first day. i also want to note that on monday, the senate trial again picks up at 10:00 a.m. eastern time and defense team takes over for their 24 hours. then, they resume on monday, and howard markman notes that monday is the chief justice's birth date, and we know what he will be doing. host: in missouri, claudia, thank you for waiting. caller: hello. thank you. that thented to say two previous collars are correct. the democrats are saying they are not allowed this is or

because, ifd it is they call a witness, the republicans can also call a that theynd they know are going to call the bidens. that is the heart of this whole thing, why cant our ourident -- can't president, who suspects that the bidens are involved discuss with president zelinski, who was elected on his stance on corruption, why can they not have a discussion about forming a joint investigation that involves both of their countries? i expect this from our leaders. toh that said, he was leery give the money and only points this,at prior to all of

there was a conflict over whether it was russia or ukraine that was meddling in the investigation. host: back to the bidens, do you think it is worth calling them? caller: yes. host: why is that? caller: it is the heart of this whole thing. that is the cover-up. host: what is the value in having the bidens testify? there is aause, question as to whether ukraine is corrupt. son ise fact that his over there, making millions of dollars just makes absolutely no sense. 'sst: james in ohio, democrat line. good morning. caller: yes.

i want to say one thing before i get into it. the last lady, i do not think she understands that the democrats cannot have a witness in the senate unless it is approved. it has to be voted on. they cannot call the witnesses, they are not concerned that if they call a witness that the bidens have to testify, it is not possible unless the republican senate votes, and they have to have a majority, to get a witness and, and it is not happening. that is not what i am calling about. -- what the congressmen and senators are doing is not for the next election, it had to do for the right thing. as the senators and congressmen voted them the way their people wanted them to vote, they got reelect. . partisanship,ch

especially on the republican side and has been for at least 20 or 30 years, as you go back and look at all of our impeachments, it was always people from both sides that voted, and they put themselves on the line. and also, with important documents where you had people who crossed over and voted the right thing. looking at this whole impeachment thing, i would be ory surprised if we get four -- four republicans to allow us to get witnesses, i hope so, but i do not believe it. host: the washington wire section of the "wall street journal" talks about fundraising, adding that the drum campaign "has seen a 20 to 30% jump in fundraising." and adds "at least one politician is taking a different approach."

michael bennet says "he will not conduct any campaign fundraising when the trial is in session." mark from florida, democrat's line. you are next up. caller: thank you for taking my call. i was just interested in some of the closing arguments from the democrat side. jeffries bothnd focused in on a point near the end of the day. character of the president. a subtle wayind of of reminding us all of some of the things that the president has said and done over the three years that he has been in office. i will give you an example, the first one was kind of a mindset and a quid pro quo kind of

mindset that the president seems to have. when he said of jeff sessions that if sessions -- if he knew sessions was going to recuse himself, never would've nominated him for attorney , and it kind of goes back to the service above self issue that adam schiff is trying to make. , at ar example real quick michigan,rand rapids, when president trump made a congress -- the congresswoman debbie jingle and her late huntsman -- late husband, the idea that that he rolled out the red carpet and treatment ine a the rotunda, i think the press missed the point when trump said

something about maybe he's looking up, maybe he's looking down from heaven or looking up from somewhere else. the point that i think the president was trying to make was that how could debbie dingell raise her hand for impeachment after all that president trump had done for her. host: that is marked in melbourne, florida. we will continue on with our calls, a lot of things going on in connection for impeachment and the world of politics. guest: we will talk about campaign 2020 and some of the senators running for the democratic nomination. some of them have had to stay in washington, d.c. instead of campaigning in iowa with only a few days, a week to go before the caucuses. showing whicholl of these democrats would be your first choice in the iowa caucuses.

talking to democrats who plan to caucus. 25% said bernie sanders. 18% said mayor pete buttigieg. joe biden. elizabeth warren comes in fourth at 14% followed by amy klobuchar, tom steyer with 3%, and mr. yang with re-percent as well. theher pickup in endorsement game for the former vice president. here's a tweet from cindy asked -- she isdy axne e the latest in the string of endorsements including congressman abby finkenauer and iowa attend the -- attorney general. cindy is a freshman congresswoman from iowa. we will have coverage of the

iowa campaigning. today, jim mcgovern will be speaking to supporters of elizabeth warren. congressman mcgovern endorsed warren in 2019 and speaks at a kickoff event in concorde, new hampshire. we have live coverage at noon. we will also cover jonathan joining 2020 presidential candidate elizabeth warren at a town hall in cedar rapids, iowa. live coverage begins at 5:15 p.m. eastern time. we have covered other candidates as well as they have been stumping in iowa and around the country. you can watch our coverage if you go to c-span.org. host: a couple of comments from the twitter feed. nos is jody saying "there is question that ukraine is corrupt. in 2017 and 18, the funding went one -- uninterrupted. president wasl

caught and had to release the fund." sonyry in indiana saying " democrats have to say we have to protect our country -- our country and constitution. do not blindly follow partisan politics, think for yourself and make up your own mind." we are just before 9:00 and a little bit over an hour to go. the white house team beginning to make their case today. watch that on c-span2 or c-span.org, and listen to it on our radio app. for this final hour we will continue taking your corals -- recalls on what we have seen from the house impeachment team and what you expect from them. 202-748-8000 free democrats. republicans, 202-748-8001. .ndependents, 202-748-8002 nathaniel from st. petersburg, florida.

republican line. caller: good morning. you guys doing excellent job and there are a lot of great comments. i will tell you something. if the president does not have anything at all to worry about, and he did say often that he would like to be able to be totally exonerated from any charges, so that he can be able to prove himself. he says that he is holding onto the proof and that he is able to share it, and mitch mcconnell says, i am going to do whatever the white house says they want us to do. so if that is the case, and we do not have anything to worry about because i want to prove us republicans are in good standing with the american public, and this country and the laws. i would like to hear all of the evidence from the president's -- what's going on in the situation. i don't want to hear it secondhand.

for myself,nd out i'm a pretty logical person. host: so you will be watching the white house presentations today? i have no choice. this is a matter of me being it. to show i'm a vietnam veteran, i was willing to die for america. the least i can do is listen to both sides. me into war simply because you say it's happening, and i'm a republican, i won't lie to you, they will send me into war if they are whoever. host: we have that idea of finding out for yourself and you can watch the presentations on c-span uninterrupted and without commentary.

you can see that live and go to our website. the presidential impeachment site on the website gives you access to everything we have taken in, the testimony, everything leading up to it, all of that is available. digest what's being said, and like the caller said before, make up your own mind about the process. all that's available as c-span.org. john, in dearborn, michigan. hello. caller: thank you for accepting my call. i'm calling on the independent line, representing veterans in general and i had the opportunity to see mr. trump down in toledo, ohio, on february the ninth and got to speak to many of the veterans in ohio, i was drafted out of ohio back in 1967 out of bowling green strait university. host: so what do you think so far? people feelt of

that the country is divided, i don't feel that we are divided so much as we are much disgusted . like anything else, we have our feelings about the whole situation, but we are much united and the result is that our biggest question is the whistleblower situation brought about in the telephone conversation should have been disposed of at the beginning of the hearings related to the democrats and now the republicans now have the seat to make a judgment on the whole case. host: what do you think of their case? caller: i think we need to know who the whistleblower is and we need to hear about the cia connection to the situation. but what about the case made

by democrats? veterans in general are sitting on the sidelines, we have to support the president of we took anstates oath to serve our country. i specifically can say this, i did read and hear all of the presentation of the case of the arguments. if i was the republicans, i would ask for a cease-and-desist until we hear and find out who the whistleblower is and all of the ramifications related to the whistleblower. host: you mentioned that a couple of different times, the white house team is assembling today, 10:00 is when you can see them in action as they make their case on c-span. we now go to greta. guest: the defense team is

making their way to capitol hill already this morning for that 10:00 start time. the president's defense team includes, and we may hear from some of these folks today, ken starr, harvard law professor secularat cipollone, j -- and others, including jane who served on the mueller defense team, as well as white house deputy defense. all sitting in front of republicans in the senate chamber. they will begin their case at 10:00 eastern. they are expected to go two to three hours. kyle cheney said in a tweet, trump lawyers will begin an impeachment defense that is meant to make it feel like joe biden is on trial.

it is what adam schiff says is the backdoor attempt to have the team do what ukraine would not. and also a story this morning from national security reporter and capitol hill reporter olivia onver's who writes working impeachment trial saying house anagers will file a 28,550 -- 28,570 eight page trial record with the senate secretary which will serve as the evidentiary area foundation informing the senate impeachment trial and provide an accounting of the evidence gathered against president trump. biden,o the idea of joe one of the democrats going before cameras yesterday, senator mark warner asking about republican calls. [video clip] hehe made very clear that wants republicans to put joe biden on trial in the president's defense, can you react to that? i have seen no evidence, i

have seen no case that would in bidens tonnect the the accusations that are made about mr. trump's abuse of power. if there's new evidence that no one has heard, i would be surprised. i know we have constantly been hearing for mr. giuliani every few weeks that he will come back and lay out the goods. i think that has been promised for months on end. giuliani inhat mr. particular is straight out of the russian playbook. that concerns me, as someone involved with trying to be supportive of our intelligence. >> [indiscernible] >> from the intelligence standpoint, even from the truck -- the press standpoint, i see no confection, in fact, jim, ,hen you see the press reports

russian entities were hacking into burisma, that seems like one more step in the russian game plan. host: joe biden expected to be a feature of the white house case being made today. with that and more, here's greta. guest: you just showed senator mark warner being asked about lindsey graham's push to have joe and hunter biden testify. he wants them to testify in an investigation. not testify in the senate trial and for the past three days he's been talking to reporters about that. reporters on capitol hill like john bresnahan of politico saying lindsey graham pushing outside biden probe in bid to sink witness push. and you also have burgess everett saying what's grandma too? he is signaling to trump that they can and should kill the witness boat and not bringing the bidens and still push for an investigation. a public announced probe of

biden. sound familiar? also lindsey graham does not want to use his committee to probe the bidens, but says that someone should. host: we will give you more of that information as the morning goes on. to senator lindsey graham, he also appeared before cameras yesterday, talking about amongst many things, the bias you sensing against the republican party. [video clip] >> i supported mueller looking into all things tom -- trump. i bleated -- i believe the country needed someone to resolve this. but here's what a stunning, that the impeachment managers are telling the united states senate and potentially the whole, that the biden allegations have been investigated, that's a flat untruths. has done an investigation anywhere near like the mall or investigation of the bidens. and i think they should. and when this is over, congress

will do it, but i think it's important to find out what happened, why the prosecutor was let thisw the systems go unchallenged. how the secretary of state's stepson could be on the payroll of this company. the bottom line is that we cannot have in america were only one side is looked at. to my democratic friends, i stood with you when you called for an outside entity to look at president trump. to allowng you somebody outside of politics to look at what happened with the bidens and with john kerry's stepson and others when it comes to the ukraine. because we are not going to live in a country where only republicans get looked at. so here's what i'm saying. put yourself in the shoes and see what would happen to you if you did this. and if you are a republican,

please understand mr. adam schiff would not be so kind towards you. host: kevin, from minnesota, on the democrats line. hello. yes sir. thank you for letting me talk. i love your show. to make a couple of sensible points about this impeachment deal. sensible trade would be -- and un-sensible trade would be something that would be unacceptable when you are trading millions of dollars to a country like, say they were those weapons, and selling them off to russia. yes, take the aid back and that

would make sense. all of these republicans, are they ignorant? they don't seem like they have college educations. it's only sensible. and another thing, mitch he hasll, you know how that alumina company, the aluminum king from when they had the aluminum wars in kentucky they stuck a 250 william dollar aluminum country -- company there. host: regina, on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i want to say that i'm so upset that house democrats did a fantastic job as far as putting forth all of the information that they do have. i think they laid out a very strong and excellent case to

show that this was not just about one phone call. it was about a series of things and about a way of behavior. host: what was the stronger point of their case? caller: the strongest point in their case, and this is because i was reading a lot of the mueller report, is that they kept saying that no one is above the law. thathen i kept remembering was something i had read in the mueller report. it's in the footnotes. i think if people pay closer attention to what robert mueller said, this is exactly what he laid out. host: sharon, in alabama, on the republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. theve a couple of things on impeachment inquiry. i have watched it all. i watched the inquiry in the

prosecution and i found the prosecution case to be full of hypocrisy. are you there? host: how so? caller: i can tell you how so. i watched the prosecution get up and over and over and over say how critically important this aid was for ukraine. to keep had to have it us safe. to prevent russian aggression. i watched them over and over, almost in tears. and then i started looking, and this is what your station should be doing. house manager nadler, lofgren, jesse voted against this critically important aid for ukraine. byt: that point was made

senator joni ernst earlier and we showed a tape of her saying it. caller: that's what you should be putting out. you cannot argue that something is critically important and vital if you didn't vote for it. my second point, if congress wants any aid delivered to any country. host: i will also add that this was part of a larger package deal, the national defense authorization act, that was a subset that they were voting on, but go ahead. if congress wants money delivered by july 1, but the date there. they wanted it delivered by september 30. was delivered on september 11, before the september 30 date. if they want a different date, they should put it there. my third thing is on adam schiff closing, and i thought this was

terrible, he encouraged senators to vote against the wishes of their constituents. when you start telling congress to vote against the witches -- the wishes of their constituents, we no longer have a representative democracy. sharon, inis alabama, bill, on the independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. that they keep going over the same thing over and over again, i saw something on tv this morning, that the ratings which started out at 11 million went to 8 million, 7 million, i haven't heard the ratings from yesterday. it goes to show that people don't care. i'mas far as the bidens, going to give you some fair and truthful information. hunter biden should go and give

the family of the person that ran over the car that his mother got in front of, the money for them going around when joe biden was running for vice president. int: we will go to dixie, nashville, tennessee, on the republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. concerned that the democrats are attempting to amend the constitution. our wonderful constitution. without going through congress and the states. treason,itution says bribery, high crimes, and misdemeanors. high crimes and misdemeanors are supposed to rise to the level of treason and bribery. congress --er of

and obstruction of congress are not constitutional. this is exactly with the founders warned against. the senate should vote to orserve the constitution, these or similar articles will be used every time there is a difference between the president and the house, and it will destroy our country. i'm so concerned that we preserve our constitution. and i appreciate you taking my call. bob, in south carolina, on the democrats line. go ahead. caller: we go to war and all of our men die and they come back with limbs missing, this end that, and they are in war for years. and our congress is worried about a month or two to go to court and have a real trial with witnesses and documents.

we might as well open up the prisons and let everybody out if documents and witnesses are not allowed. host: with the relation between those things and what happened this week? caller: well, what's happening right now is that there's no documents and witnesses that they will let come to court. that's like saying it doesn't matter what happened. we have more coming out saying that donald trump was sitting on in our 20 minute tape. host: but we just had a week of information being presented by democrats, which they gained from their investigation on the house side. caller: that's right, everything on the house side, why can we have the documents like you do in a normal court and the witnesses? why are they holding back information that's coming out?

fromremind me of the movie 1979 called caligula, where he was the ruler, the monarchy, whatever he did or said to people, they had to do. you can get it on amazon for 2999. host: republicans have said that if that's the case than they should have been collecting it all of that stuff before they made their case before the senate, would you buy into that argument question mark caller: -- argument? caller: i've listened to every minute of it, there is a major reason to get him out. that's my opinion because when you listen to what they did, i've seen no court case on tv that has as much information without having any information from the state that's holding it . donald trump went on tv and said i have all the papers and you have none. is that not crazy? maryland, onn, in

the independent line. caller: i have two questions for the american people, i served in the military for 30 years and we could save each other a lot of money. i want to know is it right or wrong what he did? if the republicans can say -- host: go ahead. caller: all i want to know if what he did was right or wrong? if it was right, it's good? what if it's wrong, call him out, because it will happen again. we could not have to spend this money trying to save its right or wrong? host: how would you answer your own question? caller: if i do something and hide it, and i go around the system, we have a system in place if i go around the system to have someone do something when i had the smartest and the

best -- where america --we are america. host: how would you answer your question as to whether it was right or wrong? caller: for me, i would say it's wrong. ask, what do you base that on? somebody asking a foreign country to investigate an american. we don't do that. line,on the republican gary, in arizona, go ahead. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. i think this impeachment should have never been brought forth in the first place, it's called -- because more division in the country and i think at the time when we should be more united. should haveation taken a longer course, maybe

there would have been more prudent action, and if they had found more evidence, something more substantial to support impeachment and bring it forth, even then, i feel like it would've been the same result. host: so you are saying as far as the case democrats made, it was not substantial enough? caller: i don't think the case was evidentiary, and supports the evidence. it's more of a hearsay and conjecture and what i heard and what the other guy told me. , theched the shows proceedings quite a lot and i did not see anything that was very tangible. it was all more conjecture and speculation. i heard this, i heard that. host: to the phone call itself between the president and the president of ukraine, did you find that questionable? caller: i did not.

the way the wording was, i looked at this in the transcript and read other articles the wording in the context in which it was placed, i don't think it was questionable. when he said i want you to do us a favor he was talking about the country going through a hard time right now and i think he was really referring to the country, i don't think he was taking that empirical or monarch form of wording. scary, in yuma, arizona, talking about what he learned listening and what he thinks about what's been presented so far. 37 minutes until the white house begins its case this afternoon -- this morning. this continues into next week. here's greta. , the lawyers, the lawmakers, the reporters are starting to arrive on capitol hill ahead of the 10:00 start. says a democratic

staffer reported that house managers will rebut white house lawyers to the media, even if they cannot on the senate floor when they begin at 10:00. we have not been idle here and you can expect that there will be real time activity as needed. take a look at the president's defense team arriving on capitol hill. , as wellat cipollone as president trump's personal lawyer arriving together. and also people tweeted this picture of senator susan collins, republican of maine of --with the republic the republican of wyoming coming in, getting ready to sit in the senate chamber. this is expected to be two to three hours of the defense team beginning their oral arguments, their opening arguments i should say. they have 24 hours just like the

house managers did over the past three days. they will begin today and pick up on monday and go through the week next week. one of the caller says that she does not think that americans are watching. take a look at this story from fox news, there's a report that broadcast networks in teacher -- impeachment viewership falls short of soap operas. news duke it fox out over ratings supremacy in impeachment trial coverage. c-span, as you know, has been covering the impeachment trial as well, and our coverage continues today at 10:00 eastern on c-span two. we bring you gavel-to-gavel unfiltered, uninterrupted coverage. in for the fourth consecutive day, our youtube livestream of the senate impeachment trial is currently trending number three on youtube. and representative adam schiff's closing argument is trending

number six. you can follow along with c-span's coverage on c-span two, youtuberg, twitter, and . you can see along with the free c-span radio app. host: in texas, on the democrats line, hattie. caller: good morning. i am so glad that you finally took my call. i'm not an attorney, but i have been hearing the democrats have case, and they are trying to bring in witnesses. saying thatlking, he did not say that, but why are the republicans saying he did not do this and why is there a witchhunt? and why would he want to investigate biden and the

republicans want to do that? he's not on trial there. it's trump on trial. a lot of people have said that on different shows, and this gentleman, what's been going on. host: if the democrats made their case, do you think more witnesses and documents are needed? caller: oh yes, those others coming in that trump said no, they all need to come in. they are still saying if the witchhunts but they will provide witnesses. billy, on the republican line, in houston, texas. caller: i did not get any new information from the democrats on why they are impeaching our president. our president had the right to investigate corruption. ukraine,corruption in

but the united states with the democratic party. they are the ones who are corrupted. more so than ukraine is. anytime you have the vice president son sitting on a board , and you already know that this company is corrupted, if the , butdent did give the aid it still does not stop him from investigating the corruption in ukraine from the democratic party. and all of the witnesses that the democratics -- the democrats have called, even though the president had selected them, they are not for him. they are wolves in sheep's clothing. host: you brought up hunter biden come are you convinced he did something wrong? why? caller: why? i could not go and sit on a board with no qualifications. with no qualifications whatsoever. from susan, in

massachusetts, on the democrats line. caller: i want to applaud your ability to keep a straight face during a lot of these calls. i'm very worried about our democracy. i have watched things happen since 2015, and slowly we are slipping away to this executive privilege that he has and defying subpoenas and whatnot that democrats would have never dreamed of doing. i truly wish some of these callers would pay attention to the details and listen. but everyone has their minds made up, even republican senators have their minds made up when they are playing with fidget spinners and reading books and getting up and walking away. they are not invested in this, they are not giving at their full attention. and i think they are being paid to pay attention. host: de think democratic senators will give the full attention to the white house team or will they do the same?

caller: that's a good question. i would like to think they have more integrity and that they truly do care about this issue. i would like to say yes, they will, but no one knows for certain. but i think more highly of their integrity than i do of the republicans at this point. host: let's go back to greta. guest: we caught up with jay se he said the house managers decided not to open the burismathe biden and issue, but instead they are kicking down the door. i am trying to figure out the strategy is for the life of me, but they've done it. and this picture, a pallet of documents that the house managers are getting ready to wheel over to the senate chamber.

senators elizabeth warren and bernie sanders are contemplating chartering private jets so they could get to iowa right after today's proceedings. this is at 10:00 eastern time when it's expected to get underway, and the president's defense team laying out a beginning their opening arguments for two to three hours today and they will pick up next week. host: we are in the final half-hour of taking calls on the senate impeachment trial. you can call and let us know your thoughts. for democrats (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for independents (202) 748-8002. start watching at 10:00 today and you will see that on c-span two. the senate will convene at 10:00 to start those proceedings. you can watch along at c-span.org. take a chance to check out the .nformation

you can download this on your phone with our free c-span radio app and listen along to the proceedings as well. in ohio, joe, on the independent line. >> -- caller: the most compelling piece i saw yesterday was adam schiff showing putin and trump standing together and trump actually uttering propaganda from the kremlin. it is so sickening to see our country being aligned and following a person that would align themselves with propaganda from russia. host: on the republican line, lonnie, red springs, north carolina. caller: i'm glad that you taken my call. i've been watching this ever since it began, and all the way democrats have been trying to impeach our president. and i have been watching this

over and over. host: what did you think of what was presented this week? i watch a lot of it until they got to the getting up and going over the same thing over and over again. all, they to it needed to bring -- they wanted witnesses to come forward they should've gotten it done before they started this. think they should leave the president alone, let him do his job. i don't think he's done anything wrong. ,olding aid from that country doesn't mean they were all going to die. while i can understand that they are in a bad war -- they are just in a conflict and he got them the weapons and the things that they needed. host: and let's hear from adam schiff yesterday, he was specifically speaking to

senators who ultimately have to make the decision on impeachment on how the president's tactics as adam schiff describes them could affect them personally and reforming it and referring to the former u.s. ambassador to the ukraine. [video clip] >> let's stop for a minute into ambassador jovanovich's shoes, the subject of a vicious smear campaign, and the secretary of state does not think that there is a shred of credibility. step into her shoes. we spent her whole life devoted to public service, serving in dangerous places around the world. and we are hounded out of our day, someone releases a transcript of a call between the president of the united states and a foreign leader, and the president says there's going to be some things happening to you. or to you, or to you, or to you,

or to you. how would you feel about the president of the united states? would you think he was abusing the power of his office? , it should not matter that it wasn't you, or marie jovanovich or joe biden. as i will tell you something, the next time it just might be you. it just might be you. do you think for a moment that any of you, no matter what your relationship with this president, no matter how close you are, do you think for a wasnt that if he felt it in his interest the, that he would not ask you to be investigated? do you think you wouldn't? and if somewhere, deep down below, you realize that he would , you cannot leave a man like that in office when he has violated the constitution.

it should not matter that was joe biden, it could have be any us, itit may be any of should not matter that it was marie jovanovich, it will be some other tipple at tomorrow for some other pernicious -- other diplomat tomorrow because it goes to character. don't realize how important characters to the highest office until you don't have it, until you have a president willing to abuse his power, to coerce an ally to help him cheat. to investigate one of our fellow citizens, one of our fellow citizens. yes, he's running for president but he is still u.s. citizen. and he deserves better than that. host: that's a portion from yesterday's proceedings which finished out, the house impeachment teams part anyway in this process. they will still be heard from

one questions are asked by senators as the process plays out, you see various senators arriving on capitol hill as they prepare to go another day, looking at testimony. this time from the white house team, that is pat lahey of vermont. earlier,pointed out they were showing up as well for the start of the proceedings. in new york, on the independent line. dee. caller: hello. how are you. host: i'm fine, go ahead. caller: i want to make a comment about what you said a little while ago about the defense opening up the whole biden issue as part of their defense. that president trump and his men are all about distractions. they do everything with smoke and mirrors, that's been my

observation from the time he started running for office. host: why is mr. biden a distraction in your mind? caller: because he has nothing to do with this particular case. that, to me, sounds like a crafted defense. when there is no defense, you craft one out of old cloth. felt that the corruption in the ukraine came down to the hands of the bidens, he could have announced that is the reason for holding up the aid. he could have announced that he wanted to open an investigation through the legal process set up by the united states congress. he could have done that, he did not do that. he took it upon himself to stop

that aid and only came up with the reasons that he was concerned about the bidens being corrupt after the fact, not before. like the sounds , that he was simply trying to get more dirt on his opponent, like he did in the first place. sarah,n south carolina, hello. caller: good morning. 18, why didn't trump investigate joe biden? ivanka trump, $83 million in the president,he became will they be investigated? host: what's the connection? caller: the children are profiting off of the presidency and if you're going to investigate one you should investigate the other.

host: you're talking about children in this case, but here we are talking about the a to ukraine. -- the aid to ukraine. caller: right, but they keep on hunter biden, he's a lawyer and as i understand it he was being asked to be the director of burisma to keep corruption out. but this doesn't have anything to do with hunter biden. host: so when republicans say that his skills do not fit the position, what do you think of that argument? caller: that's their talking point. they have their talking point to keep hunter biden in the conversation. he has nothing to do with the situation. host: and republican say that joe biden was the key architect of ukraine policy for the obama administration, does that factor into the thinking? actually, joed

biden didn't visit ukraine while hunter biden was there. host: let's go to lewis, in illinois. hello. caller: hello. , i'm curious as to why don't you ask the scholars -- these callers what radio they listen to? havenk that those places great influence and prejudice. host: did you call before? caller: yes, we have a 30 day call policy in place, --host: did you call before. caller: yes. host: were going to ask you not to do that because we have a 30 day call policy in place. let's go back to greta. collinsenator susan said that she was offended by representative adam schiff's

reference to the heads on pikes comments that he made during his concluding remarks of the oral arguments last night. but she said, let me make clear that it's not going to have an influence, one way or another. hissing it is not going to have an influence when way or the decision-making -- his saying it will not have an influence one way or the other on my decision-making. and another reporter notes that this is the sign that senators are seeing, a man outside with a poster reading, senators, history will remember. turley, tweet, jonathan who has become a household name, that law professor who testified in the house and query that the -- inquiry that the president should not be impeached and what he does not -- -- did does not rise to impeachable offense, says that the trump team should strike a careful tone, trump is

a famous counterpunch are but this case shows that you can counterpunch yourself into an impeachment. tom, int's hear from dayton, ohio, on the independent line, go ahead. caller: good morning. disgusted, i saw adam schiff come in and make a parody of what was said, a lot of people don't have cable and they ashley took off the prices right and put on adam schiff making a seedy so millions could what he was saying. that's a pure live. and i want to make one more point. what about when president obama said to vladimir putin, i'm going to have -- after the election. russias all trump and and there was not a thing wrong,

let me make a point clear, this is -- tom, in ohio, let's go to florida, on the democrats line, christine. caller: hello. host: go ahead. various senators come in and getting prepared for the hearings and we will show you some of that, but go ahead. disgustedm thoroughly . i've been watching cnn through the trials, through all of the other stuff that was brought in, evidence and all of that, and i am disgusted at the senators. how could they put their head in the sand? they admitted outside of their office that trump is wrong. but they are going to defend him anyway. and the fact that trump has over and over again done what no

other president would do is thoroughly disgraceful. that's disgraceful. three, i just don't get it. even my family is part republican and i cannot for the that he has done anything right since he has been in. over and over again i see him putting down the press, people, he's a disgusting man. florida,istine, in sandra, in north carolina, on the republican line. caller: i was calling because i'm really concerned about the country, the course. the impeachment hearings are just a small portion of it. we keep hearing about the president is so concerned about corruption, yet we look at saudi arabia and the corruption there.

if for no other reason, jamal khashoggi. look at the israeli prime minister, he's been indicted. doesis indictment corruption, if he so concerned thesecorruption, why things not being discussed? the reality is that truth is truth. republicanly, the has become lapdogs. host: what do you think about this case being made by democrats this week? caller: the faxes support themselves. the president himself stated -- the facts support himself -- themselves, the president himself stated he wanted another country to investigate an american citizen, and that unfortunately was joe biden, his rival as a presidential candidate. he has no interest in anything other than what would make him and help him be reelected. host: that is sandra, in north

carolina. there has been a team of republican representatives tasked to help the president's team on the white house team. let's listen to a little bit. [video clip] >> i would actually say a club sandwich filled with unbelievable falsehoods, sandwiched between hyperbole and conjecture. it's time that we allow american people to see the facts. starting today, you will see a number of statements that adam schiff and my democrat colleagues on the house manager's team, have made are simply not true. we saw that last night, adam 53iff was able to offend republican senators by suggesting that the president of the united states said something to him and to them that all of

them knew was not true. so for the first time, they got to experience what we have experienced for the last three months, that adam schiff is willing to make false statements . that will be called out today, and in the days to come. and ultimately the president of the united states will not only .e vindicated, but exonerated host: that was mark meadows, it's a sampling of what year are expected to hear. this on c-span two, c-span.org, and our radio app. in maryland, wayne, on the democrats line. he has obstructed justice and his abuse of power, and his ability to want to rig

the election, all of the facts that the democrats have already presented prove his guilt. if he could exonerate himself through witnesses, or through releasing all of the documents, more than any other president, why wouldn't he. host: so what is the strongest point of the case? caller: i think obstruction of justice. if they wanted to exonerate, they would ask for several documents, hundreds? continuesrtment that to push for exoneration, he has obstructed them from either testifying or releasing the documents. it's a no-brainer.

i can't understand veterans or republicans that look at the withdent and how he deals kowtowing to putin, giving vladimir putin everything he has asked for. host: so as far as the case so far, are you saying it's not strong enough or does not satisfy those things? caller: i think it's a strong case and i think it's a no-brainer. i think that witnesses would satisfy the republicans, but they won't allow witnesses. they want to talk about hunter biden. it's just a diversion. maryland,'s wayne, in you heard greta talk about numerous pages of documents that the house impeachment team, the democrats in the house were to deliver to the senate, to be admitted as we see playing out. i suspect that cart will have some of those documents as part of this process.

the house impeachment managers are finishing up their case yesterday, the white house starts making its case today and you can see that in about 10 minutes time. a reporter from the washington post tweeting on this issue, saying vagaries of impeachment coverage, capitol media haskdown, the been moved from the outside of the speaker's office. this is some of what's playing out. let's hear from bill, in california, on the independent line. caller: i would like to state that president trump is the one needs to have a deposition to give out the information that he knows. he's the one who started this. so i think you should finish it. that's all i need to say. host: you just on marsha

blackburn, the senator from tennessee, who has been in the news over her comments over colonel vindman. some of this documents being wheeled through as you watch this from indiana on the republican line. caller: good morning. host: i'm sorry jane, go ahead. caller: what i was calling to say is that, as an american voter, and a citizen, after the stopion, the impeachment -- the impeachment talk started then. and it has continued until today. and i see that they bring one thing after another. and trying to impeach this president. and yet i feel in my heart that it's not really the president they are trying to impeach, but that they are trying to impeach the voters who put her room --

put him in office. and as we have watched this play out, it has been one thing after , bob mueller, the russians, the kavanaugh hearing, everything they have fought for. yet they come away being rebutted in those cases. and now here we are again, with the impeachment, watching this play out. and congress did not do their trialn playing out a fair , and a fair hearing. yet they get into the senate, and they want to take over in the senate and have it play out just the way they expected to be played out. there has not been any fair and balanced checks and balance in this process. host: so what do you want to hear from the white house team? caller: what i'm wanting to hear from the team today, now that

it's in the senate, i want to hear an opportunity for president trump to put forth what he has to share. what he has to say. because they basically shut him out of the whole process of what took place in congress. host: you just saw the majority leader walking towards the senate, as they are set to convene at 10:00 this morning. in --e and trent, charlie, in trenton, florida, on the democrats line. caller: they're talking about all ofnd burisma, but that was already investigated by our intelligence, fbi, and everything, well before this to took place and everything was shown to be on the up and up with those issues. trump has come in and hired rudy to go over there and talk to russian influenced leaders who

got the brunt of the anticorruption activity that we put on ukraine. it's just been manipulated. there is already information out there by our own intelligence agencies that show that biden and burisma was on the up and up. host: where did you hear that? caller: i thought i saw that joe biden even saying in an interview as he was walking along, saying that they looked oko that and it was all previously. i think it was when he was on the campaign trail one day. host: presidential candidate amy heading towards florida. also in florida, on the independent line, john. caller: my belief is that the president wanted this

investigation only so that he could say, during his rallies, lock him up. lock him up, like he did with hillary clinton. this president is a joke. host: why do you believe that? caller: because i believe that , that's what his thinking was, to have president zelinski just announce an investigation so he can, during his rallies, start his chance, lock him up. ville,rom carnes georgia, chuck, on the republican line. showr: could you sometimes, where the military was having to take spare parts from aircraft's and all that while obama was in office? he should've been impeached for letting our national security

--, to borrow spare parts from an aircraft? it was crazy. host: how does that relate to this week's effort and the current impeachment process? caller: they are saying that the president threatened national security by withholding, and he did not because they got the money. if that is so bad, then obama was 10 times worse. host: and that's pat lahey of vermont, and ted cruz coming out of an automobile as senator start gathering in. in knoxville, tennessee, on the democrats line. diane, you are on. caller: good morning, i've watched impeachment all the way up to this morning. i think the democrats laid out their argument well. the reason they kept going over and over and over the same thing

was to let the public know how it interfered with the constitution. and the deal about joe biden and hunter biden? what about the trump kids? they are all in office doing something off of the government. me, it's clear. happened in the 2016 election but i didn't know what until they started talking about it. .rump tells on himself what more do we need? wake up. georgia, from florida, on the republican mine --georges from florida on the republican line. caller: this is about critical thinking skills, facts and non-facts. the professor was asked at a university one time, what is the one thing that is lacking in new

freshmen coming in? and he said the lack of critical thinking skills. that's what we have right now. we have individuals that don't want to look at the facts, individuals that are stating false truths. host: how so? well, you have to think, there's an electoral college. i was against the -- host: but to the point of the impeachment matters, where's the lack of critical thinking when it comes to the impeachment case being made by democrats? caller: the democrats -- i'm a republican and i will never be a republican again until all of these republicans are voted out of office, including this president. this is an embarrassment, the whole world is looking at our country and saying what an embarrassment this president is. that's a shocking statement and is a shocking statement and we all know that that is true.

host: we will go to lisa, last call for this show. frederick, maryland, democrat line. caller: i have been a democrat for 28 years and am very disappointed in the democratic party. i believe it has been hijacked by communists and socialists, and i voted for trump in 2016 and i will vote for him in 2020, because i am sick and tired of the same old politics of and noton and greed really representing the people but the party. we need to end this two-party system. post: with the impeachment process, the impressions of what you saw this week? caller: i mean, shift getting up and lying to the american people by giving a parity of what was actually done, zelenskiy is the president. he said there has been no corruption, there has been no bribe, no quid pro quo, but here

is where the democrats lose that ability, when they don't investigate joe biden, when he did on videotape a quid pro quo. they fired prosecutor -- there is a pro-quote. host: lisa finishing up this program. three hours of listening to your calls on the senate impeachment trial, the house managers, the impeachment managers finishing their efforts yesterday. we will hear from the white house team starting today and into next week. you can follow along all the way through on c-span, c-span.org, and our radio app specifically on c-span2, which should start showing the proceedings any minute now. they give are watching today, and another edition of this program comes your way tomorrow morning. we will see you then.