that the president has signed the coronavirus relief and government funding bill, congress to has work to do this week. they begin today in the house with a vote on whether to override the veto of the defense authorization bill. in his veto message, president trump said he objected to the 's -- and the removal of confederate names from military relations. if the veto override is successful in the house, it goes to the senate. the house may try to increase the stimulus checks from $600 up to $2000. the house gavels in at 2:00 p.m. the politicsk with editor of the washington examiner and he is with us today to talk about the republican

party, the incoming biden administration. jim, good morning. let's talk about what is going on in the news right now. president trump has threatened to veto both the stimulus bill and the defense authorization bill. where are we with those bills right now? the defensetoed authorization bill and he has yet to actually veto the stimulus bill but has indicated he is not happy with it. he would like the payments for individuals to be increased to $2000. this is really going to set up some votes next week in congress because the government funding expires on monday so we are up against a shutdown

deadline. for government shutdown potentially and there are definitely going to be votes on whether to override president defense authorization bill. the bill passed by margins sufficient to override a presidential veto, but you never know. the republicans who voted for mightll on final passage not want to vote to override president trump's veto. there is some suspense there. this is generally a must ask. known when hell passed it. he did not know -- he did not like the renaming of the bases. he did not like restrictions on

his ability to pull troops out of afghanistan. he wanted there to be something addressing what he considers to be discrimination against conservatives on social media before repealing section 230. so, it was fairly predictable. it.as not going to sign the covid bill was more of a last-minute intervention. congressional democrats thought they had an agreement with treasury secretary steven thehin who is spearheading negotiation for the trump administration. they thought they had a deal. president trump came in late and said he did not like how low the $600 payments to individuals -- which i think is a very popular position. president trump is probably , but he did not make that

very clear while they were negotiating the deal. seenill remains to be whether he actually does the moment, both of these pieces of legislation are up in the air. has beensident trump tweeting about these bills. i want to read what he was tweeting this morning. stand by andl not watch this travesty of a bill happen without reining in big tech. and section 230 now before it is too late. covideted about the payments as well. he said, i want to get our great people $2000 rather than the thely 600 dollars that's in

bill. so, for our audience, explain what's going on with these section 230 provision. there was a major piece of communications legislation paste in the 1990's on how to regulate -- fast in the 1990's and how to regulate the new platforms and how do you deal with the fact that a lot of websites will have commenters and were the websites going to be liable for the things their commenters were saying? a lot of people alive with president trump believed that major social media platforms , if twitter and facebook they are going to get into content moderation, if they are going to be flagging things like

presidential tweet as misleading , if they are going to be restricting the flow of things like the new york post story about hunter biden they are no longer providing an open forum, that they are acting as a publisher, like the publication and therefore they should face a different liability standard. a lot of people say if you do that it will make it more difficult for people to express themselves freely and they would become more strict does on content goes they would be potentially liable for what say, but president trump and many of his supporters take the view that this would force platforms like twitter to be more evenhanded, not discriminate, as conservatives.t

there are are others who believe that this would result in the breaking up of these companies and potentially competitors who are conservative friendly could emerge. howt now, it's hard to see something could come along and compete with facebook on even terms. host: you recently wrote an article in the "washington says republicans understand that finishing with trump is not the end of trumpism. explain what you mean by that. there's a question about whether we are finishing with trump because the president has not conceded the election, and for 2024, butrun again, if he does not get what he wants on the elect are in --

election challenge, it appears to be pretty unlikely at this point. there are redefinitions of the republican party that seem unlikely to outlast trump even if trump is no longer the republican candidate and a loss of the republicans aspiring to run for president in 2024 are either modeling themselves after this ideology which some have trumpism or they are skeptical of large scale ofigration and are skeptical .ore free treated -- free-trade

there are other republicans who are more inclined to imitate president trump's personality. his willingness to not be a good loser as maybe some republicans they should have been's -- passed nominees, they are able to get down on their own terms and a lot feel that appealing about president trump and future gop leaders want to follow that path as well. then there's the matter of the electoral map. even with the results being what presidentor 2020, trump is still competitive in pennsylvania, michigan, and

wheresin, states republican presidential candidates have not really competed since the 1980's. there has been falls hope in the not-too-distant past about pennsylvania. reagan was the last republican presidential candidate to carry wisconsin before president trump did. now he may have done that at some cost with college educated suburban white voters, which helped make arizona and georgia tufts states or republicans in this presidential race and also in the senate races, but it is certainly the case that trump expanded the map in any future nominee is going to want to try

to hold onto those gains and see if they can recover some of the voters that trump lost. do you think the efforts by president trump and his to challenge or overturn the election results is going to be helpful for the republican party or does that hurt the republican party as they move forward? -- guest: i think it would have been a nonissue if it stopped at the supreme court ruling and the electoral college vote. the supreme court did not take up the texas lawsuit, which was probably the best chance of a federal hearing of prison trump's election claims. it gets dicier if there's a big aboutfight on january 6

certifying the electoral college results. it's difficult to see what president trump's path forward is on this and ultimately time marches on. the closest thing for a the floridas really reach out situation in 2000. stated, that was a single . it was potentially more realistic to see a change in the outcome. but you still have a major party presidential candidate contesting the results, taking them to the supreme court, saying that he felt the decision was wrong, but he decided, having exhausted his legal options he was going to respect the process. president trump has taken it at

least one set beyond that. not unprecedented for there to be challenges to the electoral college results, but usually it is consigned to prospect ventures. 2017.pened with trump in it happened to george w. bush. it's usually pretty quickly overruled. it's not as clear that it will .e quickly overruled this time mitch mcconnell is certainly making sure that that happens. the big question will be -- the immediate question is, does this demoralized republican voters heading into the january effect georgia senate runoffs? mobilizeible it will people more. you have to wonder if there is a confidence.

does it make some republicans angry with down ballot candidates? risks goingrtain forward for a party that seems to otherwise be pretty well-positioned heading into the administration and 2022 midterm elections when they would not have to take up too many seats to be in the majority of both houses. we are going to open up our regular lines. republicans, your number is going to be 202-748-8001. democrats, your line will be 202-748-8000. beependents, your line will 202-748-8002.

you can always textus act 202-748-8003. before we move into what is future of thethe revolt can party, what do you see president trump doing for inauguration day for president-elect joe biden. do you see him showing up? do you see him inviting the bidens to the white house? guest: i imagine this will be the most contentious transition in recent history. that heit is unlikely a cordial face. i think it is certain that he rivalo some kind of event. maybe he announces he will run

in 2024, something designed to away from joe biden. they were probably less in need of such an invitation. but i think a lot of people would consider it a nice thing to do. i think that there's a possibility that happens. who would be most doely to urge him to do that not seem to be the people he is listening to right now. i do not think he is going to say he lost reelection

appeared. once he has no more options, he will be willing to say there are no more options. the 1960ght be like presidential election where jfk became president. felt himself, whatever he privately, did not do a whole lot to encourage that publicly. i think president trump will encourage a lot of that publicly. he already is. it's an open question whether he will do some traditional things, but i think he absolutely will not let the inauguration day be totally about joe biden he's going to make sure he is in the headlines as well. most former president stay out of the public limelight

after they leave the white house. do you expect president trump to give up the limelight? and normally the president is considered the leader of his .olitical party will ex-president trump still be the leader of the republican party once he leaves the white house? i don't think he will surrender the limelight very easily. he has a large platform on twitter, even if twitter is starting to flag many of his tweet. he still has a huge twitter following and that is really what got him to the point where he is right now. that is where he first started commenting regularly on political issues. i don't expect that to stop. i think he will be willing to criticize joe biden on january 21 if an issue comes up where

that is appropriate and especially if he either plans on running again or plans on having his next business venture with some political component to it. there's always talking about .rump tv certainly there are things he can do to monetizes large role following. is his brand it that has gone from something that 90% of the country liked, this lifestyles of the rich and famous type thing, where only -- half of the country is into it, but they like him a great deal more than anyone had. will you be the leader of the republican party? i think he definitely will be the only influential person -- the most influential person for a while. i think elected officials will

try to find their voice. maybe some will try to succeed him as leader. he will cast a very large shadow. let's start with rick from spokane, washington on the democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. guestd like to hear your comment on the republican party going into a modern-day apartheid government. approach this,em an openld trump is racist. i think that is the uniting factor that drives the trump

told. in emboldened something into a cultlike jonestown. go ahead and respond, jim. held: that is a widely liberal view. there are certainly events from charlottesville to children in cages at the border to support that account. factor the complicating ,s a purely electoral phenomena theever you think about president's rhetoric or his policies, the biggest political change is the loss of suburban white voters. , inroads maderess with hispanic voters and not really just in texas.

it was particularly in places like florida. so i do understand the critique. i understand it is a deeply held the view and there are things that the president may have to anson for -- answer for. how he has behaved on certain issues. if you look at which people in america have voted and the number of obama-trump voters , it existed in 2016 and 2020 think we're looking at a more complicated electoral form -- electoral map than that. let's go to ronald in new jersey. good morning. caller: good morning.

ourt you think our -- expanded?a little too the russians are spending a fraction of what we spend and they have a faster missile than what we do that goes seven times seempeed of sound and they to be able to break into our cyberspace. we have not won a major war since world war ii. it seems there's a lot of corruption in the defense industry. they're definitely have been calls to audit the pentagon. there's a lot of can turn about the content of the defense .udget there questions raised about the procurement process, questions whether the spending really goes

for military means as opposed to payments for things that are programmingsocial in defense of people who are may be retired, retaining benefit as personnel. that's not even talking about whether some of the overseas military interventions are very good ideas. , people to time consider defense the number one priority of the federal government, which is certainly true from a constitutional perspective. people are very reluctant to do anything that is not seen as providing adequate resources for the troops. there's a lot of high partisan support for keeping the military well-funded.

president trump, one of his toor talking points was deliver $700 billion in funding r national defense, that he was good for money for the troops. i think a lot of people cared very deeply about making sure that the minute women in the armed forces have what they need and are paid what they need. you have the entire the of that and they are holding the bill because of concerns about specific thing. appear tos objections be unrelated other than the potential restrictions on troop withdrawal. we have been talking about how the republican party will deal with president trump after he leaves. even as we are talking this morning, president trump is

tweeting and there are republicans tweeting back at him . it seems like some republicans seem more willing to criticize president trump. this is what he tweeted. the justice department has done nothing about the voter fraud. this is from president trump. republican representative adam kinzinger tweeted this out a few minutes ago. place, trying to burn the down on the way out because uganda losing. no evidence, nothing but your temper tantrum and crazy conspiracies. embarrassing. we would all be surprised if we saw that tweet three months ago. but it seems like some

republicans are saying, hey, far.is going to far -- too guest: certainly that is being be --tical as you can mitt romney is probably the only person who has gone much further. i think this opens up the republicans to speak this way and it has opened up the door for republicans who feel this way to become more aggressive in their criticism. they may not say, i wish the president would not talk like that. .hey may make fun of him .hey may criticize him the fact is you have more strength as a winner than as a loser, which i think president trump himself understands, which

is why -- one of the reasons he is so vociferously challenging -- there is going to be a lot more willingness of republicans to criticize from. for republicans who do not agree with the president on that trio of issues, there will be a lot of willingness to see if they can move the party back in their own direction. they will be trying to challenge trump and move past trump wherever possible. host: let's talk to richard, who is calling from maryland on the democratic line. caller: good morning. where theon as to republican party will go after trump, i think it will not go anywhere higher than where it has been. a party that runs for power.

jobs.0, the rent on -- they ran on jobs. it never came about. they ran on the same thing in 2014 -- jobs, jobs, infrastructure, never a bill introduced. when you go back to when obama was elected in 2008, newt leaderh, the minority republican from california, he -- against the president. after thed himself people killing our sons and daughters. it will never be anything other than gimmicks. reagan and bush started us on this downfall. i firmly believe republicans do not have the executive ability

or honesty to handle the executive branch, as exhibited by reagan, bush and the second bush. each time it was a democrat that pulled our country back onto the right path against all kinds of opposition. where republicans go, it should be identified as a group of individuals who go there only for their own benefit. they are the swamp. host: go ahead and respond. guest: it is an interesting point. there are some people who are opposition to the republican party under trump. likediked reagan, they they became but dismayed by the leadership of the party under trump. campaignsple in the for john mccain admit romney ercome involved in "nev

trump." they endorsed joe biden for president in a way that was unusual. whohave a lot of people were sort of chagrined at the direction of the party, beginning with reagan, or in some cases george w. bush. in some cases it is a continuation of the party being more conservative is a problem for them, and certainly many democratic voters might feel that way. hogan, thely, larry governor of maryland, potentially looking at running for president in 2024, he seems to be that sort of blue state republican in the mold the did not like reagan or the bushes, but he has tried to cast himself as a reaganite and move the

party from trump back toward reagan. some people who share his inclinations, and certainly maryland republicans at that time, feel differently about reagan, although at least reagan did carry maryland at least once in 1984. who iset's talk to john calling from pennsylvania on the republican line. caller: good morning and merry christmas, america. jim, i want to kind of go back over the past 20 years and get your comments on our country's situation and support for the military with 9/11 and whatnot. had,l problems we have under the obama administration,

we had embassies being bombed throughout the middle east. talk -- your comments about president trump's ofracter -- the differences what he brings to the office as a businessman as opposed to a politician, as a businessman you have deadlines, goals, consideration of a profit at the end of the day. when you're making decisions about a contract or to get something done, how would that differ with the characteristics or the personality of a possible partition? thank you. guest: that is a big part of president trump's appeal, he would look more at the bottom line. he would conduct things through more of a cost-benefit analysis,

that he would be looking for advantage,he u.s.'s and not necessarily things that would create favor with other countries or follow the bureaucratic status quo. the overall trajectory of federal spending under president trump has been upward and congressional republicans have been less inclined to resist that than they would be under president barack obama and likely under president bill clinton. whereare some areas president trump been different. i think trump is much more likely than even recent republican presidents to question whether the united states benefits from certain foreign military interventions. i think president trump has sharingdata on burden with allies, so the united

states is assuming less of the cost -- or at least sharing the cost -- of allies' defense. i think trump would argue there are rich allies of the united states who are not really fully bearing the burden of their own national defense, which is the case of a lot of western european countries. it is helped fund social where first date they have that are more generous than ours in the united states. there have been some areas were trump has certainly been different. i also think there has been a lot of continuity. when you look at the numbers in the defense authorization bills up until this when he is vetoing, it has been mostly the same path. a lot of his objections to this bill are for reasons other than the nature of the spending. host: jim, there has been some

conversation, especially online, about possibly a split in the republican party, president trump starting his own party or taking over another political party and turning it into a trump political party. do you see the republican party staying united after president trump leaves the white house or a possible third-party splitting off from the gop? guest: if you are going to have a semi-successful or successful third-party, having it led by someone like trump would be a prerequisite for doing that. i think it is hard to do and it is certainly hard to do after the main personality involved eventually passes from the political scene. president trump is 74 years old, granted a spring chicken compared to joe biden, but that is an advanced age to be

starting a new political party. we saw what happened with ross perot. the party look promising but was short-lived. with did not get along another major elected leader, jesse ventura, former professional wrestler who served a term as governor of minnesota. it is tough with ballot access laws. what trump has shown is it is better to run as a third-party candidate within a major party and take over that party. trump might not feel, based on how things are going with the election challenges, that he has taken over the republican party. if you look at what he has done, he has had more success than he would've had if he had run is a third-party candidate. perot got one out of every five votes in his first campaign in 1992, but did not win a single

electoral vote. i think the two major parties are pretty durable. if the democratic party could receive the civil war in the republican party could survive the great depression, i imagine the republican party could survive president trump. collins,rles from fort colorado on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. historicalkind of look at things. bankrupt at trump towers, then he goes over to deutsche bank, and then move into a special department. and then goes to second district of new york. he tries to put in a golfing buddy of his. oathchael: testified under

, devaluing his properties for the irs and inflating the value of his properties for banks. as you know, that is fraud. you can go to prison. sullivan is now interviewing people from deutsche bank. second district has no love for trump. host: you have to hurry up because we are running out of time. caller: after he gets out of office, will there be litigation in the second district? thank you. guest: that is the hope of a lot of democrats, that there will be, they would like to see some kind of reckoning for trump. they look at his business dealings as the most promising avenue for that. things these types of are more rumored about than reality. even if there is just litigation, even if there is some just legal wrangling that

happens, it could influence how involved he wants to stay in politics past 2021, or if he will otherwise be occupied for a bit. host: we would like to thank james antle for being on with us and talking about donald trump's legacy >> stay with c-span for our continuing coverage of the transition of power as president elect joe moves closer to the presidency. voteshe electoral college cast, join us on january 6 live at 1:00 p.m. eastern where the joint session of congress will declare the winter for president and vice president. noon on january 20, the inauguration of the 46th president of the united states. our live coverage begins at 7:00 a.m. eastern

from the statehouse to congress to the white house, watch it all live on sees and, on the go with c-span.org, or for free on the c-span radio app. >> the white house did not release a weekly address this week. however, congressman mike levin, of california, chairman of the house veterans' affairs subcommittee on economic opportunity, delivered the weekly democratic address. rep. levin: hi, i am congressman mike levin. i am proud to represent north county san diego and south orange county, with marine corps base camp pendleton at the heart of my district. as we celebrate the holidays this year, we also mourn the loss of more than 320,000 americans to this pandemic, including more than 5500