it's no secret to the members of congress that congress is a mess. and nor is it a secret to the american people that congress is a mess. routinely, congress polls very poorly when people are asked whether they approve of the job it's doing, and this trend is bipartisan whether democrats or republicans control congress, most people assign it a failing grade. the trend is also long standing. over the past decade congress has not once achieved an approval rating above 30%. it wasn't always this way. during the 1990s congress's approval ratings typically were in the 40s and the 50s. today they hover in the teens and the 20s. once thought to be the great repository of america's republic principles, congress is now referred to as a broken branch. why exactly has congress come to this point? what are the causes of congress's dysfunction? has anything changed since trump's election and the democratic takeover of the house? can this long-standing state of affairs actually be changed? can congress be reformed, and if so, what do we need to do to reform it? to

transmitted to congress. if it doesn't meet that standard, there is another provision that says employees would be allowed to go, they would just be instructed how to must contact this person at the intelligence committee who is cleared and knows how to handle classified information and your information to the committee if it is not an urgent concern. in this particular instance, the benefit -- i don't know if congress envisioned the circumstance we had right now when they wrote the statute, but the attacks on the whistleblower because younfounded have a nonpartisan professional appointed by president trump, michael adkinson, who has looked at it -- he has been in government for 50 -- 15 years or more working for the justice department before he became inspector general and he examined the complaint and found it meets the standard that it is credible and concerns a flagrant --lation within the scope that is a benefit that doesn't exist under a lot of other laws. most whistleblower laws, the whistleblower is o

congress said no. andrew jackson came to congress when he wanted to keep a goldman italian from simone boulevard -- a gold medallion. congress said no. no other president has come remotely close from the emoluments clause. this president pocket some -- pockets millions of dollars from around the world. you name it. dictators,theon of kings, and princes. the framers wanted the present -- the president of the united states to have undivided loyalty to the american people, not to foreign agents dangling cash, and not to the president himself and his business making money. the domestic emoluments clause says that the president is limited to his salary and office. he cannot collect compensation. had is the president who military stopovers organized to benefit the trump hotel and to locate military personnel at the trump hotel. we see that this president is doing everything he can to enrich himself and pocket money from the u.s. government. becauseign emoluments says no payouts from foreigners, and the domes

of congress? run a bunch was the secretary of the smithsonian, the 14th secretary of the smithsonian. have you ever thought about that? carla: yeah, it is interesting ofo because the new director the air and space museum is a woman for the first time. the new director of the american history museum is a woman. the new director of the american woman,of history is a and it is interesting. i don't think it is so much of a head scratcher as a wow. and 14th. people that like numbers, i can play 14, 14. ray: 217 years, 14 librarians, there are some long tenures in there. i hope your feeling spry and ready to do the job for a long time. carla: but the johnson papers, i had the honor of meeting with and knowing johnson in chicago. he gave me some of the best career advice i ever got. that is how i got to baltimore. i went to him because he was a mentor to a lot of people and very quietly. i respected him when the opportunity came to either stay in chicago or go to baltimore and do a good job. he said some

congress is still declining. indeed i think it's declining at increasing rate, to put it i think more economic terms. regardless of who controls it, republicans, , democrats, or subdivision thereof. you wonder whether there's something maybe larger afoot. seemed to me you can't really understand congress without understanding the relationship between congress and the modern executive. indeed, we also need to throw in the supreme court for good measure because they are not involved in lawmaking. how the branches interact, the institutional roles as institutions under the constitution, and how that has all changed. it seems to me the decline of congress is a problem, but in more ways it is a symptom of a larger problem, which is what i would like to back up and take a deeper look at, and public that the congress, and that's the rise of modern bureaucratic rule or the administrative state. because that seems to be the change that is driving this transformation as self-government is being overwhelmed by this new form

what has congress give it up? i'd like to get your cisco what has cogs given up, is it a problem what congress has given up is that a problem for the american people and what would you do about it? >> happy to start. thinking about the convergence discussion, i think yes, it is a problem and congress has given up some of its institutional authority in all of this. for many of the reason she just said in your question. the end of the day we do have congress not frankly taking ownership of some of its ownership -- oversight responsible and funding the government and dig deeper. i've seen that erosion time after time i used to be called in and talk with committee staff about what's going on in these programs and for student financial aid. those conversation so have nearly as often as they used to buy the appropriators or especially. there just isn't time because they are too busy fighting about what's going to be the next allocation can what that appropriation will be. that was pretty much common sense among my colle

you serve, you work for congress. the library is chartered by congress. is there a political aspect to your job when it comes to things like advocacy and appropriation and making sure there's enough places to keep the stuff that you are required to collect? making sure you are the resources you need to make sure it is temperature controlled and properly curated -- do you have to do more than just be a good librarian at this point? dr. hayden: now, my advocacy role is for the library of congress and their resources and staff members to do what we need to do. the technology alone and how you plan for the future when you are going to be collecting in all types of formats. there are six storage modules at fort meade, maryland that look like an amazon warehouse. that is the remote storage. there is the culpepper campus, the david packer campus that has 14 million items there in terms of film, photographs, sound recordings. and then the three buildings on capitol hill as well as the library for the blind and physically handicapped where we are doing e-books and

for the first time, we have over 100 women serving in congress. 106 women serve in the congress. 91 of them are democrats. we made a decision to increase those numbers every single election. makes a difference for people to see people who have shared their experience. we want more, of course. but this will be cause for celebration. stand onize that we the shoulders of women who fought so hard to make this possible for women and for our country. to pass the equal rights amendment, which will be very important to do. those who are fighting for that, and i count myself among those, are in the lead on this. at the same time, they are all in the lead of a bill that we passed in the house waiting for passage in the senate. very important to women. violence against women act. raising the minimum wage. over 30 million people will get a raise. aboutst goes on and on legislation just in this congress now. are of the women who advocating for e.r.a. are marking and advocating for many issues that affect our entire society, not to swim and. we believe that when women succeed, america succeeds. that

this is what is being withheld from congress. we do know the department of justice has been involved in the decision to withhold that information from congress. we do not know because we cannot get an answer to the question about if the white house is also involved in preventing this information from coming to congress. have the complaint. we do not know if the press reports are accurate or inaccurate without the contents of that complaint, but what i do is in a matter within the jurisdiction of the director of national intelligence to have an employee of that community makes a complaint and it is possible for the subject of that complaint to essentially quash the complaint or keep it from congress, then the system is broken. is written very clearly. i think the law is just fine. we are determined to do everything we can to determine what this urgent concern is to make sure that national security is protected and to make sure this whistleblower is protected of thisthe impact opinion which the department of justice has been unwill

the first congress met not in washington but new york. james madison described the congress as being in a wilderness with no path forward that had ever been written so they had to decide where was the capital going to be, the politics around the decision to locate the capital on the banks of the potomac into the -- get discussion of lands, to have congress accept that and build a capital there and the politics around that and the question of the revolutionary war. there is also the question of the committee system, how would congress operate, what would the rules be, what we do with all the deaths bequeathed to the first congress from the revolutionary war about a standing army, a government and a bill of rights because the bill of rights had not been adopted yet. will there be a bill of rights? madison was the champion but are reluctant champion. he didn't think he needed it but he became a champion of the bill of rights which had been demanded by the anti-federalists who were afraid the central government would become too powerful and o

here we are 11th century who now has the war power, the congress or the president? >> let's talk about some wars, we did declare war, the war of 1812, did we declare war there? >> we did, it was a close call and the irony that james madison, he had to do with the writing of the constitution, madison was one of those who was most worried that there might but dictatorship of some kind yet madison was the one who took us into a war, the war of 1812, england that the congress, the american people were extremely devouted about and the reasons for it were semibogus. there was no reason to go on with the car. one way of looking at the war of 1812, you know, it's always voot flam was the first -- vietnam was the first time launched to war, stop the brits from bothering our ships, didn't do that. do we owe canada today? audience response question. i don't think so. 1812 could be one could argue war that we lost and most unpopular war in american history more so than vietnam. >> we faked ourselves into it, james polk who was not high on my -- he we wanted to get a lot of land

the congress and the president does not comply with such a reply to congress.ues to obstruct congress and flaunt the law. donald trump will leave congress, in my view, no choice but to initiate impeachment. that would be tragedy. >> hmm. with me now, senior adviser to the biden campaign. simone, thank you for coming on, and what a statement from your boss. i mean, tem how the former vice president came to this decision. >> it's unfortunate here at this moment. joe biden believes this is a national security issue and why it shouldn't be an issue that divides across political lines and ideology. we're all americans and our national security seems is at rick. vice president biden came out to give his statement today to, one, reassert why he got into the race. because he believes the very foundations of our nation, our democracy, was truly at stake and time and time again in this campaign, brooke, we have seen vice president biden having to um can out and make statements like this, most recently after the shooting in el paso. the tragic shooting where he spoke forc

congress can't touch me. ask questions of anyone who has ever worked with me or anyone whose had anything to do with me, estate courts can't investigate me. the federal government can't indict me and, you know, nancy pelosi doesn't want to impeach me. i'm home free and i can get away with murder. that can't be the law in the united states. that's not why we fought a revolution against a king just in order to get a tyrant. it's astonishing and hopefully, this will finally wake people up and realize this guy has got to go. >> the president's lawyers put this in writing in their complaint today. they said state and local prosecutors have massive incentives to criminally investigate the president to advance their careers or to damage a political opponent. we've had apparently 230 years of this massive incentive that has never innocentized a local prosecutor before. >> well, we have typically selected presidents who are not criminals. this time we may have missed the mark, and we've selected a president who seems

by continuing to obstruct congress and flout the law, donald trump will leave congress, in my view, no choice but to initiate impeachment. that would be a tragedy, but a tragedy of his own making. i've always believed, and still do, that america is a truly special and unique nation. better than any other nation in history. we have made the experiment of self-government work. we have always been a beacon to other countries around the world. we know who donald trump is. it's time to let the world know who we are. thank you very much. >> on the phone with us is jennifer havoc on who covers congress for "the los angeles times." what was done regarding impeachment? >> speaker nancy pelosi announced a formal impeachment investigation today and it sounds like the vast majority of democrats are on board with this after months of debate will day, won't pay on impeachment, democrats seem fairly united in moving forward this today. >> your tweet captures the day. "a wild in the house as speaker pelosi announced an impeachment inquiry. formally, this changes nothing, congress doesn't get a new vot

when you first got elected to the congress, you first became a member. congress.n you got there, did you say to yourself, how did i get here or how did these other people get here? were you impressed with the quality of members that you ran into in your first year in congress? >> well, you're aware of the joke that a guy comes to congress and says, when i first got here i was wondering how could i have possibly gotten somewhere like this and after six months looks around and says, i wonder how these other people got here. i served in the legislature so i knew the political process and i think it's a great training ground to serve in congress. the people that served back then, you could see a lot of the older members had a different attitude, a different point of view and different ability to work together. there were a lot more friendships and it's a lot less partisan. it was also at a time when there were conservative democrats and liberal republicans so you didn't have the party divide that you had. so, it was a different group. it's become since then much more

that needs to be provided to congress. we cannot get an answer because the department of justice and the director of national intelligence will not authorize it, and the inspector general is doing his very best and being very careful that he follow the law. in some respects, if the inspector general steps one foot outside of what he is authorized to do [indiscernible] this shows how someone is trying to manipulate the system to keep information about an urgent matter from congress. >> in one of your letters, you stated your suspicion of who is involved. who do you think is involved? >> we know a few things. we know this is a matter, as i just read the language of the inspector general. the inspector general is a nonpartisan, neutral official. we have no reason to question his judgment. his judgment is this is score -- squarely within for the american people expect of a director of national intelligence. who is in a position to countermand that? who is in a position to influence an acting director of national intelligence?

niece are extraordinary members of congress. they have the most credentials when it comes to national security or military issues. they are -- many in districts that trump carried. for them to come out and say this justifies an impeachment inquiry really has change the tenor in our caucus. you had a number of progressives like me calling for inquiry. now you have moderates and people on front line districts calling for it. i can't think of something more significant than that op ed. >> significant enough to move the speaker to pursue impeachment investigations? >> i would be surprised if she does it official -- doesn't officially endorse impeachment investigations at this point. obviously you have to ask her. but given the breadth of support for that in the caucus that would be my expectation. and, of course, impeachment investigations are already proceeding. jerry nadler has started the investigations. my sense is you may the get a more formal statement from the leadership. >> a lot of focus last week and this week as well espe

for the first time, we have over 100 women serving in congress. 106 women serve in the congress. i am proud to say 91 of them are democrats. we made a decision to increase those numbers every single election. it makes a difference for people to see in congress people who have shared their experience. we want more, of course. but this is really a cause for celebration. we recognize that we stand on the shoulders of women who fought so hard to make this possible for women and for our country. those who want to pass the equal rights amendment, which will be very important to do. those who are fighting for that, and i include myself among them, in the congress, congressman carol maloney, jackie spear are in the lead on this. at the same time, they are all in the lead of a bill that we passed in the house waiting for passage in the senate. equal pay for equal work. very important to women. violence against women act. very important to women. raising the minimum wage. over 30 million people will get a raise. over 20 million of them are women. the list goes on and on about legislation j

what is congress giving up? i like to get your sense on what is congress giving up and is it a problem what congress is giving up? it's it a problem for the american people? what would you do about it? >> go ahead. i'm >> happy to start. thinking about the convergence and i think that it is a problem. congress has given up some of its institutional authority and all of this. for many other reasons you just said under question. at the end of the day, we do have called to responsibility and funding the government. digging deeper and just in my career of over 20 plus years, i've seen that erosion time after time and used to be called in with the committee staff about what's going on in these programs for financial aid. those conversations don't happen as often as they used to and the appropriators especially was too busy fighting about what is going to be the next adaptation or procreation and that was the sentiment among my colleagues with a better budget process. >> anyone else wanna take a crack at that? >> mist

. 106 women in congress. i'm proud to say that 91 of them are democrats. we made the decision to increase those numbers every single election. and it makes it difference for people to see in congress some of the people who have shared their experience. so it's-- we want more, of course, but this is going to be -- this is really cause for celebration. we recognize that we stand on the shoulders of women who fought so hard to make this possible for women and for our country and that others stand on our shoulders and those who want to pass equal rights amendment which would be very important to do. but the same-- those who are fighting for that, and i include myself as one of them in the congress, congresswoman carolyn maloney and jackie spare are in the lead on that and at the same time in the house, in the nate. equal pay for equal work, and then violence against women act. very important for women. raising the minimum wage. over 30 million getting a raise and over 20 million are women. the list goes on and on

with four members of congress. first mississippi democratic congressman and homeland security chair benny thompson. then mississippi republican congressman and homeland security committee member michael guest. later della weller democratic senator and homeland security and government affairs committee member tom carpenter. in wisconsin republican senator and homeland security and governmental affairs committee chair ron johnson. join the conversation all morning with your phone calls, facebook comments, and tweets. be sure to watch c-span washington journal live at 7:00 a.m. eastern wednesday

congress maybe? well, here was house committee intelligence chair adam schiff on thursday. >> a lot of people have been speculating, does this involve a presidential communication, does it not and if it does doesn't the president have the right to be confidential. this involves an allegation of serious wrong doing. i want to say to the whistle blower if the whistle blower is watching you tonight that we are grateful for their courage in coming forward. we are going to do everything we can to make sure this urgent issue is addressed and that you are protected. >> joining me now is johna mendez. former cia chief of disguise and author of the moscow rules. it's good to talk to you again. let's start with the time line on what we know happened between donald trump and ukraine. there's this phone call between trump and the ukranian president. dan coats announces his resignation. dni coats interrupts a meeting on august 8th to tell the deputy dni gordon that she should resign. deputy dni gordon does resign

it's being blocked from congress. sources telling cnn that the white house and the department of justice told the office of the director of national intelligence that the whistle blower's complaint was not theirs to release arguing it's not an intelligence matter because it involves the executive branch as in the president. cnn has learned there were multiple acts that concerned the whistle blower that amounted to enough of a blockbuster claim that the intelligence community inspector general felt forced to go himself to congress giving closed door testimony today. >> we can't get an answer because the department of justice and the director of national intelligence will not authorize the ig to tell us. the inspector general is doing his very best to be very careful that he follow the law. >> reporter: the inspector general not only falls within the dni jurisdiction but relates to one of the most significant and important dni responsibilities to the american people. when the ig spoke to the house intelligence committee

this is up to congress. and congress has to decide what is its constitutional responsibility. is the president above the law? will he ever be held accountable for his conduct? because if you have a president of the united states who is in effect betraying the national interest of this country, colluding with a former -- foreign country to dig up dirt on his opponent, that is a big deal. republicans should recognize that as well as democrats. host: that clip the caller was referring to. some have asked us to play that clip. here is joe biden from 2018 at the council on foreign relations. >> i remember going over to our team and with others, saying we should be providing for loan guarantees. i went over maybe the 13th time to kiev and i was supposed to announce there was another billion dollar loan guarantee. and i had gotten a commitment would takehat they action against the state prosecutor and they didn't. we are not going to give you the billion dollars. they said, you do not have authority, the president does. i said, call him. you are not getting it. i will be leaving here

and so that needs to be provided to congress. we can't get an answer because the department of justice and the director of national intelligence will not authorize the ig to tell us. and the inspector general is doing his very best to be very careful that he follow the law. and in some respects, the inspector general is in the same position. if the inspector general steps one foot outside of what he is authorized do, then he is not protected. and so this shows how someone is trying to manipulate the system to keep information about an urgent matter from the congress. >> in one of your letters you stated your suspicions. who do you think this complaint involves? >> well, we know a few things. we know that this is a matter as i just read the language. inspector general, the inspector general is a nonpartisan neutral official here, and we have no reason to question his judgment. his judgment is -- this is not only within the dni's jurisdiction, this is squarely within what the american people expect of a director of national intelli

what's the point of congress?of the american experiment might as well be dead if the body politic does not work. right now it's not functioning, it's not working. for me as a republican, i look to democrats and say, hey, we may have policy differences but, guys, you're the last hope here. and nancy pelosi, with all due expect to madam speaker, she's not doing anything. >> this does not seem to be locked, ron klain, on foreign leaders. your old bosses, my old boss, with foreign leaders and probably my old bosses that were yours to be honest, but looking to the united states around big issues. what affect does this have on our ability to lead a coalition? >> it has a huge effect, nicolle. you spend ten minutes at the climate session and walk out. the ukraine did not just follow him to the u.n., he dragged it with him to the u.n. he went out to the press to talk about it standing in front of the united nations. he's definitely no leader for the world. the u.s. is not leading the world. that means other nations are st

but it shall be provided to congress. that didn't happen. indeed, we did want find out about that because the director of national intelligence told us, hey, i'm not following the law for whatever reason. we only found out about it because the inspector general came to us and said the director's not following the law here. so that needs to be provided. there's no clause that allows the white house to weigh in, there's no provision that allows the director to go and seek a legal opinion from lawyers that are representing the president to withhold a complaint that may involve the president. so there's so much wrong with how this has been handled. but we're determined we're going to get this. we're going to have the opportunity to hear from the whistle-blower. we're going to make sure that whistle-blower is protected. and i wanted to say what's at stake here if indeed this complaint does involve the president's interactions with ukraine. it's important people understand the history here which is we persuaded ukraine to give

congress could say yes, but this president has never gone to congress to ask for congress' permission even though governments from saudi arabia, from romania, other countries, have funneled tens of thousands, if not millions of dollars into his hotel. now, the problem with that is not only he's being corrupted in the abstract, but we now see that saudi arabia, which has spent untold amounts of money at his hotel, has not been held liable. >> right. >> in any way for the killing of khashoggi, a journalist who was living in the united states. do we know that this was done because of the money going into the president's pocket, or do we know whether it was done because of some other reason? >> right. >> so the corruption is there. the framers didn't want it and for the same reason they expressly prohibited and congress can't approve it. any extra money going to the president aside from his salary, from any state of the union or from the united states itself. so it's crystal clear and this president has thumbed his nose at the constitution and has allowed the basics of government to be co

congress as the people's branch, people understand that congress is really where the nation is being worked out in a ground level kind of way, and people felt that they had a direct connection with their member of congress. when members of congress stood up and vote, particularly when you get into the 1840s and 1850s, members of congress stood up and assumed they've are were speaking to their constituents and the press was creating that conversation back and forth. so congress mattered tremendously i think in ways that now daze we aremer focused on congress for different ropes but he 20th century we ten to focus on presidents, and that was not necessarily the case for much of the 19th century. >> host: would we recognize congress today as it was back then in the early republic? >> guest: well, in the early republic, no don't think we would recognize it in the early republic or the 19th century. the early republic white -- might be what we assumed congress should look like, somewhat tamer. it is a group of men, white men in a room, above and beyond that they are debating and making de

we delegated that authority to him, right or wrong, the congress, not this congress but a previous congress, delegated that opportunity. mr. reed from new york again in a bipartisan way introduced language in february of this year, as this was unfolding the first time, say let's fix this language once and for all. let's not have ourselves miss in a partisan debate on the house floor about whether we like what one president or another did. let's reclaim article 1's power and decide that no president is going to be able to disburse funds as he or she sees fit that congress is going to reclaim that responsibility. to the best of my knowledge, mr. speaker, h.r. 1410 has not moved through committee. it certainly has not been been ered by the rule considered by the rule committees and is not headed to this floor. i don't disagree with my friends on the other side of the aisle who want to reclaim article 1's authority. i share that goal, support that goal and would gladly apply my vote to that goal. what i do disagree with is a congress that has failed to create a functioning budget process. by co

its fair part two congress would jump in with its opinion about congress. so what did the pre- acquire it potentially protected before the harm of the voters. in this way preclearance proved to be a significant means of her production in the voters. this is like congress had repeatedly reauthorized records provision. most recently in 2006, and mr mr. since skinner was the chairman of the committee at that time. 39233. the house and the senate were 98 to nothing. the supreme court and in section five in 2013, brought down the coverage formula in section four and determine which jurisdiction would be subject to the pre- clearance provision results. we have to have hearings to show the court that we have taken information that our findings are based on fact. referred so far this year and voting rights. most resilient memphis tennessee. we will further learn in today's hearing, the decision we formally cover decisions numerous discriminatory voting measures. the pastor sweeping vote suppression law that the federal appeals court said it was unconscious attentio

act of congress called the communications act of 1934. it made wiretapping by the federal government illegal. the supreme court had twice held that the statute barred the federal government from wiretapping. nevertheless, the federal government was still wiretapping. so jackson is now attorney general, and he was quite ambivalent about wiretapping. he really disliked the practice. he thought it was an intrusion on privacy. at the same time he thought that the practice was very useful in certain situations, especially espionage and kidnapping. well, when he took over as attorney general, he simply banned the justice department, including the fbi from wiretapping. at the same time he urged congress to pass a statute allowing wiretapping in certain situations with limitations. president roosevelt liked wiretapping. moreover, j edgar hoover liked wiretapping. j edgar hoover mounted a very effective guerrilla campaign against action -- jackson. and he convinced the president to overrule jackson. in this episode, jackson had told the president,

congress doans in make easy targets.eorge washington wrote of congress in terms that sound quite relevant to today, party disputes and personal quarrels are the great business of the day, while great and accumulated wereruins finances postponed from day-to-day as if our affairs were the most promising aspect. james monroe wrote to jefferson in 17 80 five, the demote -- geordie of the u.s. and congress are competent only to the inferior duties of government. on an even more cervical note, mark twain once labeled members of congress as america's only native criminal class. rogers noted, i don't make jokes, i just watch the government and report the facts. deeper than go much individual personalities. the predicament we are in today is a result of several structural changes over the last several decades. gerrymanderedy system to create --both democratic and republican, this means that in all but a few dozen districts, the primaries are the real election, and that is making most elected representatives in both parties behold

i think, i fervently believe, that congress is not empowered to ignore congress anytime the president wants to on national security issues, but that is not why i object to what they did. here is the problem, they knew there were at least two very well-known supreme court cases that indicated strongly that the president had no such power. they ignored those cases. they never had them in the written memorandum. that there was a legal problem. they simply said -- sure, you can do it, it is not a problem, mr. president. this is simply not what advisors do. three-and-a-half centuries ago there was an englishman named thomas hobbes who thought very carefully about how advisors should act and he came up with an analysis that as soon as you say it, you know it is true. you do not have to worry that thomas hobbes said it. you simply know it is true. and he said simply that. legal advisors or advisors are not supposed to dupe or deceive the person they are advising. he said the office of counselor, when action comes into deliberation like torture is to point out the consequences of it, of autho

congress needs to get this. now as our white house reporters are saying, there's disappointment about the white house. it is the law, it should be released to congress. and remember during mueller, trump said, oh, i'll be happy to testify. and then, of course, it was his lawyers who kept him from testifying. now it's trump saying, i'm happy to release the transcript. and his lawyers are saying, well, maybe you should. >> kim, i want to hear from you, but let me get this sound in. trump world has been putting up this united front. even general james mattis who left the administration last fall. this is what they're saying. >> i think that would be a terrible precedent. conversations between world leaders are meant to be confidential. >> we don't release transcripts. those are conversations between world leaders. there's no evidence it would be appropriate to release the records. >> should foreign leaders be asked to investigate political opponents? >> i don't know anything more than what i've read in the news, an

think we have had a more educated congress. congress had to approve tougher laws. so i think we can get it done. we want the backing of both sides of the aisle and we hope to get that done. >> from north carolina, in plymouth, hello. >> chief tom was a key personct who saved the population from [ inaudible ] trying to find some information on the history of that great chief known as a great negotiator. what we can do for the nationnt again. >> i wouldt point anyone who's interested in the subject to th- federally recognition process. we're a federally recognized tribe with a longstanding since this country was founded. but a longstanding relationship with this country. so that's part of what the process is about. i'd encourage him to explore that. >> you'rere still seekingas recognition from congress. what does itt look like as a short-term timeline of what might happen? >> on the short term, we're in dc this week meeting at the member level with both sides oft the aisle. leadership to chairs of committees that could offer authorization authority over this and we'r

-- >> i was elected to congress, the majority the republicans controlled congress.hy is it, they say to the democrats we are not going to pay attention to you. why not have a collaborative system? why is the system going away on that? >> andy car when he was chief of staff, there was an occurrence after the 2000 election which was fairly contested and lingered and it was the bush gore election and if i remember, it was nightly that we would have the minority come to the floor protesting the illegitimacy of the president until 9/11. 9/11 was my first year in congress and i recall the leadership expressed by the white house and president bush and how we would see a congress that came together for a while. the rules in the house allow for if you have simple majority is absolute power and it has devolved into my way or the highway when we are in charge and when you are not you are relegated. if you're asking is it that way, yes, will it change, the real issue and when you have divided congress you will in the end not do much which is the state of get to the point where

congress was not successful. about a decade later, women in utah did lose the vote when congress passed anti-polygamy legislation, but once utah got its statehood, they gave the boat back to women. one more really interesting thing about this story is this is the only time congress actually took the boat away from women, as well. the women's suffrage movement took more than 70 years. generations of women had to fight for their right to vote. one of the reasons it took so long for the suffrage movement to be successful was because there was fierce opposition to and franchising women, not just from male politicians, but from a lot of women as well. this was a period of great social change. women's traditional roles, in particular outside the home, were shifting dramatically, and lots of women really resisted that change. we have this fantastic petition from more than 850 women. they urged congress not to give them the vote, and they make a number of different arguments for why they don't want the vote, and i will j

closely and we are educating our members of congress because i hope the congress would provide allegedly the response if there was any way or that portion of the law was declared unconstitutional. the other piece is our healthcare facilities are crumbling. there's a huge backlog on construction. getting our construction dollars up so the hospitals has a chance to better quality of healthcare deliveries to their citizens we've been fortunate that we worked closely with that indian health service and have a joint venture with themly when teehee is seated -- when kim teehee is seated, she can speak to those issues because this with the united states keeping its response ability. host: peter. instead, new york. independent line. caller: yes, i am on. i have a question. one, what does your state due to help you out for the cherokee nation? caucasian, and i think there was a missing justice -- the people that came to the americas and wiped out the indians -- there is nothing i can do but support the natives. i lived in alaska for 40 years. i had many, many friends of the eskimos in alaska. so,

then became h.r. 1, when the democrats had the majority in congress. andas been one who has seen heard from the public how concerned they are about the role big, dark money in politics undermines their confidence that congress can ever act to lower prescription drug prices, to protect our environment. the list goes on and on. because of that big dark money. so his role as chair of the democratic reform task force and lead sponsor of h.r. 1 is to be commended for anyone who wants reducing thet only role of money in politics, but restoring the confidence of the american people in what we do here. i also want to acknowledge the leadership of madam chair, the chair of the house administration committee, did he do lofgren. she is a -- zoe lofgren. she is a champion, a brilliant legal mind, that we call upon in many arenas -- areas here. and a champion of securing our elections. the freshman class during the campaign, about one year ago, they sent a letter signed by 100 candidates, many of whom -- 67 or some of whom became members of congress, stating that h

no, you can't hand it to congress either. yeah, i'm happy being involved in this, even though i'm implicated in it too. who knew that william barr was going to be the star player here? i mean it's hard to look back on watergate as like the golden age of the rule of law, given that one of nixon's own attorneys general actually went to prison for his role in watergate. compare elliott richardson and his handling of the spiro agnew scandal with what william barr was revealed to have done today. in this era, attorney general william barr is up to his neck in this thing. the extent to which he's going to try to use the justice department to get the president off the hook here looks like it's going to be a major part of this ongoing developing story and it's going to be a major part of this point in -- a major point in this time in american history. unlike 1973, though, it's clear that impeachment is not going to be a refuge for this president. the house closed in tonight on 218 members of congress now publicly in favor of these im

there have to be limits and congress is right to act.en to a lot of the 2020 presidential candidates. i have never before had a conversation with andrew yang, but i'm very happy that he is here in studio tonight. mr. yang, thank you so much for being here. >> it's great to be here. i wish that we had a busy news day to talk about. >> i know. unfortunately we can just chitchat for 20 minutes or so because there's nothing happening. actually let me just say this out loud even though i said this to you off camera. because we haven't spoken i would love to do a long format interview with you where you're here for most of the show mostly because i have lots of questions to ask you. in this case you got squoze because of the breaking news but obviously you'll come back. >> obviously it is a historic occasion so i feel fortunate to have this conversation with you. >> let me get your reaction to what happened today. what happened over the last few days and today shifted you a little bit on this question of the president's liability and whether h

congress influences the public and public influences congress.i have no brilliant solution on how to promote that atmosphere. but othering and you are un-american is not a useful way to find our way out of the moment we are in. how we get beyond that, i'm unfortunately not the one to offer that answer. >> email from stephen. i was wondering if she found leaders. i wonder if her students believe the political violence ended at the civil war. the reason he has is because in his research he found a 1908 fight between a tennessee senator and a constituent. a political opponent, a block from the state capital. >> it doesn't end with the civil war, so that's a good point. it doesn't happen on the floor of congress the way it did before. you can do that - - see that when the louisiana is trying to get back into the union. two violent incidents happened within the capital not long after louisiana tries to start this process. you have northerners who steps forward and says, we want to let them back in? do you remember what that was like. the power dynamic

congress said no.rew jackson came to congress when he wanted to keep a goldman italian from simone boulevard -- a gold medallion. congress said no. no other president has come remotely close from the emoluments clause. this president pocket some -- pockets millions of dollars from around the world. you name it. dictators,theon of kings, and princes. the framers wanted the present -- the president of the united states to have undivided loyalty to the american people, not to foreign agents dangling cash, and not to the president himself and his business making money. the domestic emoluments clause says that the president is limited to his salary and office. he cannot collect compensation. had is the president who military stopovers organized to benefit the trump hotel and to locate military personnel at the trump hotel. we see that this president is doing everything he can to enrich himself and pocket money from the u.s. government. becauseign emoluments says no payouts from foreigners, and the domestic

at least congress will have it. we won't but congress will. >> if the president is interested in disclosure he should make it available to everybody. why is his conversation open, which is edited possibly, open for public view but what a government employee says is hidden from the public? that's wrong. he should declassify everything. it should be made public. whatever recordings they made to make this transcript should be available to congress. if ukraine has a tape-recording they should turn it of as a quote, unquote favor to the united states. but the president is being disingenuous. when you say to a foreign government, do us a favor, this is not a favor for the united states. if this is a serious governmental problem, you discuss it as a matter of concern to the u.s. deposit and it's not about a political opponent only. especially didn't care about any other corruption in ukraine. he cared about this -- >> this particular instance. >> the investigation of biden. >> michael, the other thing that is kocomplicatin