tv Washington Journal 10102019 CSPAN October 10, 2019 6:59am-10:04am EDT
presidential candidates on the campaign trail and make up your own minds. your unfiltered view of politics. >> live thursday on the c-span networks. former national security advisor, h.r. mcmaster speaks at the foundation for defensive democracies at noon eastern on c-span. later new america hosts a forum on choice voting. also known as instant runoff voting and we'll take you to minneapolis for president trump's campaign rally. on c-span 2 immigrant health skir discussion and at 12:30 p.m., a forum on cent this com's strategy for security in he middle east and c-span 3, looking at universal national service. coming up in an hour, the
brookings institution discusses public opinion about impeachment. nd then michael pills brie discusses on the growing rift between the nda and china. [video clip] >> he has already convicted himself in full view of the world and the american people. donald trump has violated his oath of office, betrayed this nation and committed impeachable acts. ♪ host: this is the "washington journal" for october 10. joe biden spoke those words in new hampshire yesterday. the former vice president did not make -- did not plan to make those comments, but the actions of president trump the last two weeks prompted him to do so. you can comment on the bryce -- on the vice president's call for impeachment of president trump and we will show you the reaction from president trump. you can call us at 202-748-8001
for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats and independents, 202-748-8002. if you want to text us your comments about joe biden's comments, 202-748-8003 is how you do that. post on our twitter feed at @cspanwj and you can go to our facebook page at facebook.com/cspan. axios pointing out for perspective to date, all 20 democrats running for a president of the united states have made the call for the impeachment of donald trump, joe biden being the last to do so. for weeks, biden spoke cautiously about impeaching the president even as every other major democratic candidate proved -- called for it. biden was not aggressive enough for democrats, who want the fight taken to the president. biden attacked the president in the sharpest, most personal
terms he has used since entering the democratic primary. here is joe biden. [video clip] >> he should be impeached. that is not only because of what he has done. the answer weather he has committed acts sufficient enough to warrant impeachment is obvious. we see it in trump's own words. we see it in texts from state department officials that have been made public. we see it in his pulling much of the united states government into his corrupt schemes. individuals in the government, his appointees. impeachment isn't only about what the president has done. thes about the threat president poses to the nation if allowed to remain in office. one thing about this president is absolutely clear and i don't think anyone can contradict this
, he has seen no limits to his power regardless of what the constitution says. he believes the entire united states government can be corrupted. he is even willing to hold congress and congressionally appropriated aid hostage to his personal, political demands. believes if he does something, it is legal, period and perhaps most importantly, he believes there is nothing we can do about it. he believes he can and will get away with anything he does. we laughed when he said he could stand in the middle of 5th avenue and shoot someone and get away with it. it is no joke, he is shooting holes in the constitution and we cannot let him get away with it. host: that is joe biden from
yesterday. it was hours after the vice president's call for impeachment that the biden campaign was fundraising off of it. joe called for trump to be impeached. the president was furious. the trump campaign noticed the change in direction immediately. the president began tweeting about joe biden before his first speech was even over and the campaign later slammed mr. biden's new stance on impeachment. the president at the white house yesterday talking at a forum made comments about joe biden. [video clip] >> he is falling like a rock. we have him on tape with corruption. he is getting the prosecutor for i guess $2 billion -- we are not going to give you the $2 billion unless you get rid of this prosecutor. lo and behold, the prosecutor was gone. that was a prosecutor.
excuse me, joe? >> $1.2 billion. >> not a lot of money. and his son takes money from china. the $50,000 a month he was getting, it looks like it is $168,000. also, there is a payment of about $3 million. his son got thrown out of the navy. biden is dropping like a rock. i don't think he is going to make it. i guess this is one way he can do it. he did not see that until right now. i guess he is no longer the front runner. i feel badly for him because i know he is going through a lot. he has been hit and caught red-handed. here is a man on tape saying exactly what he is going to do in terms of corruption and he gets away with that. if he -- if that happened to a
republican, they would be getting the electric chair. it is a whole different standard. host: you can make comments on joe biden's comments from yesterday and the reaction from president trump. 202-748-8001 for republicans. democrats, 202-748-8000. and independents, 202-748-8002. if you want to text your thoughts, text us at 202-748-8003. make sure you put your name and city and state and post-on our social media sites per our republican line starts us off from maryland, we hear from larry. what did you think about the former vice president's comments? caller: he is indicting his own self. he is on the council of foreign relations. . those two individuals from the central intelligence agency, they are the cia operatives, the
they have biden his othern -- company, ukraine and china. of the media, they are protecting him. it is a big counterintelligence deflection by the cia and there is another connection with hillary and the ukrainian who acknowledges he worked with hillary. all this stuff started from ukraine. host: line for democrats. good morning. caller: good morning. convoluteda hear how these crazy conspiracy theories are on the right? macrame artista to get all of these points of the cia and deep state and ukrainians, they did this and
they did that. host: what did you make of the comments of mr. biden? joe finally glad took the initiative to fight back, to push back because he has been too quiet. you cannot let the room be filled with all this crazy nonsense that continues to spew from the right. they have the luxury. these people, especially white men on the right who really have an agenda to keep america white, what is happening is they are taking up all the air in the room and they have the luxury of believing all this nonsense finally all it is settled, what is going to happen is they are going to go, i did not know. he for me. and then they will go on about their lives. in the meantime, billions of people around the world, including those poor kurdish people going through it right now because of the unilateralism
of trump, they are going to be dead. host: do you think mr. biden's comments was a political move as far as his campaign is concerned? caller: i think it was an american move. we knew to designate a date, sunday needs to be showdown sundays where we take to the streets and do what the people in hong kong are doing and we make it known that the hypocrisy especially, we have to fight for our country, this does not end well if we continue to be passive. patrick in alabama, republican line, go ahead. caller: good morning, c-span. i guess i have to start off saying i am a hypocrite because if barack obama was the greatest chief i ever was, i don't understand.
the subject was joe biden. i am with joe, he must have more proof about donald trump's impeachment than adam schiff, ,ianne feinstein, nancy pelosi jerry nadler, so i say bring it on, joe. why do you say that about joe biden's knowledge of information? caller: he is the inside man, this ukraine thing goes back to him. they say it stinks in denmark. i think it is really swampy in ukraine and with hillary's shenanigans and the whole deep state -- i heard her say that, deep state. brennan --world is joe brennan? the cia director. do you know he went to ukraine in 2016 under a false passport?
host: how that relates to mr. biden's comments? if joe thinks my president -- the chief, our president should be impeached, joe better bring his proof to the table and put it on the floor of the congress. john int's hear from new jersey, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning, pedro. good morning, c-span. i would like to make a comment here. it is not our generation. i am in biden's age group now. it is not our country anymore. it is for our children to grow up in. it is for our children to inherit this country. that being said.
intelligentlyvery speaking out of his mouth. he did not hold off and say -- and he knew what he was talking about. host: does it matter that he was the last one to call for impeachment among the democratic candidate? caller: being the last one doesn't mean you aren't the first one. he had to hold off because he wanted to hear everybody's point of view. i even here the point of view of the republicans before i make my decision because i used to be a republican. i don'tietnam vet appreciate donald trump being in office in the first place. these old people calling in right now are not the use --
youth of the country. it is not going to be inheritance of the old people, it will be the youth of this country and republicans have lost that already. host: joyce off facebook posting saying when it comes to those comments from the former vice president, the best way to cover up your own sins is to blame the other guy. why did joe biden wait until this point to call for mr. trump's impeachment? he should have called for that on day 1. from facebook, while democrats do nothing but talk about him and try to get him out of office , the one is at least doing something, anything. facebook is at facebook.com/cspan. our twitter feed at @cspanwj. you can text us at 202-748-8003. just put your name and the city and state you are from when you text us your thoughts on this matter. from john in new york, democrats
line, you are next up. go ahead. caller: trump is a propagandist. he has worked in the tv industry for years. are peoples audience of the cultural, racial, -- the people scared of the cultural, racial, demographic changes and they want to go back to 1955. i am a 73-year-old adult and for me, i think young people should say go get it. host: what do you thing about this call for impeachment from the former vice president? caller: i am glad he did it, but i think he did it a little too late. as a democrat, i would have wanted a more assertive response. host: when you say a little too late, do you think that impacts him in the long run as far as his bid for presidency? caller: i just think it is a
pattern. i am more of a supporter of elizabeth warren and he seems to be kind of slow. trump's way of saying slow joe. host: that is john in new york. if you are making us, make comments about joe biden's comments for impeachment, you can do so. if you are on the line, hang with us for a couple minutes. towant to take the time speak to the middle east correspondent of the wall street journal calling to update us on the latest on this syria offensive done by turkey joining us on the phone right now. good morning. guest: good morning. host: one of the terms being used and even a story of yours recently talks about uncertainty. could you talk about that topic in relation to what is going on actively when it comes to this effort in syria?
guest: sure. it is a very uncertain time. what has been interesting since turkey lost -- launched this offensive yesterday is a near universal condemnation from around the world about turkey's actions. the u.s. opposed it, europe opposed it. countries in the middle east opposed it and it is unclear exactly how this will play out. there is a lot of uncertainty about turkey's ability to seize the area. there are thousands of islamic state fighters held by the u.s.-backed kurdish forces in that area that president trump has said turkey needs to take responsibility for, but it is unclear if and when they will be able to do that and what would happen to them. it is unclear what will happen to the u.s. forces in the area. there are 2000 u.s. troops in there president trump has tried
a couple of times to pull out read it is unclear what it will mean for the fight against the islamic state and turkey's role with nato and efforts in congress to impose new sanctions on them. 24 hours into this operation, there is quite a lot of uncertainty and anxiety. host: one of the topics of concern at least perhaps uncertainty, what happens to refugees from syria? guest: that is right. there are sort of two issues there. one is the peaceable -- people being forced to flee the offensive. there are thousands if not tens of thousands of people trying to get out of harm's way and in turkey, there are millions of syrian refugees turkey would like to send back to syria in this safe sound when they step -- safe zone when they establish it. weather they won't -- whether
they will want to return there is a question that will have to be answered. the question that needs to be addressed is what turkey's goals are and weather they will -- whether they will be able to accomplish them. host: have they spoken those out? guest: president erdogan talked about pushing the kurdish forces off the border. it is about 300 miles long. he wants to establish this safe stone about 30 miles deep. that is the stated goal. they seem to be focusing on a more narrow 70 mile band of the border as they have gone in with airstrikes and artillery and apparently limited ground operations for now. this is really just the opening days of what could be a protracted fight for turkey. host: what is the scope of the manpower actually being used in this effort? guest: that is not entirely
clear at this point, there are tens of thousands of turkish soldiers and syrian fighters they work with that typically lead these operations on the ground. it will have to be an expensive operation. one of the things we saw overnight was back and forth shelling on the border in other parts of the border not in this 70 mile stretch. it turkey carried out two previous operations into syria and those have been massive operations that eventually have been successful. how much manpower turkey will need to enforce this and patrol it will have to be worked out. host: the president himself saying in the case of losing control or the kurds or turkey you -- losing control, two of them being taken into custody by
the united states. another tweet this morning talks about those prisoners saying they will keep -- president erdogan saying they will keep those prisoners in prison. could you update us on the reality of that and the isis militants, their future? guest: this is a big piece of this that there are more questions than answers right now. a number of these fighters are held in parts of northeastern syria that turkey has no intentions of trying to seize control of. president trump has put the onus on president erdogan to take responsibility for maintaining control of all these prisoners. president erdogan himself is not spelling out a planta seize control of some of these detention centers where isis fighters are held. we don't know exactly how that will play out.
the kurdish fighters have warned they might have to send some of the guards keeping watch over islamic state fighters to fight turkey. we have not seen significant indications of that happening, but what -- one other concern the fighters and their families might try to use this as an opportunity to break out. that is something everyone is watching quite closely. thank you for your time this morning. guest: thank you. host: back to your calls on this call by joe biden yesterday in new hampshire for the impeachment of president trump from new york on our democrats line, john, thanks for waiting. caller: thank you. host: john from new york, go ahead.
we will go to darrell in maple heights, ohio. republican line. good morning, you are on. caller: how are you doing, pedro? host: fine, thank you. go ahead. caller: i want to talk about what joe biden said. what joe biden said was insane. this inquiry, this impeachment fiasco is illegal. you cannot impeach a president of the united states without a crime. with nixon, there was a crime. if you don't have a crime to impeach the president -- you cannot impeach the president for any partisan reason. tell vladimir i will be more flexible. the speaker of the house said we will start a unilateral impeachment inquiry and led to the articles of impeachment.
about mr. biden's comments, what were you not satisfied with? caller: the whole thing. this whole impeachment inquiry is an illegal inquiry and what joe biden is basically trying to do is he was trying to cover up .is tracks do an impeachment inquiry on the floor and hold a houseboat. you could impeach jimmy carter for the oil crisis if you wanted to push it through a partisan way. the reason to have an impeachment inquiry is the -- is because the minority gets to subpoena witnesses. it is what they did with nixon and clinton. host: let's hear from robert in englewood, florida, independent line. you are next up. caller: good morning. joe biden that they
should impeach trump. i believe his own people are probably the ones that turned him in. host: what do you mean by that? caller: it is probably somebody in his own -- it -- he is paranoid, it is probably somebody in his own circle that sees what he is doing and knows he is heading for jail and they don't want to be -- go along with him. barr, giuliani, pompeo, nobody want's to talk or say a word about it. they don't want to go to congress and tell their side of the story, something is not right there. featured biden prominently in a new ad from the trump campaign. here it is. [video clip] pressuredoe biden
ukraine to fire its prosecutor. >> if the prosecutor is not fired, you are not getting your money. >> the prosecutor said he was forced out by leading a corruption probe into hunter biden's company. democrats want to impeach president for discussing this with ukraine's president. i am donald trump and i approve this message. >> joe biden pressured ukraine to fire its prosecutor. >> if the prosecutor is not fired -- riverdale, maryland, democrats line, you are next up. good morning. caller: good morning. host: you are on, go ahead. caller: i just want to make a point about joe biden. i think trump should be impeached. he is a corrupt guy. everything about him is corrupt. what he is doing to this
country, it is a bad press having him as president. if you don't get rid of that guy, it is sending a message that democracy of the united states is a joke. host: what do you think about joe biden's call for impeachment? caller: i support him. tulsa,aul is next in oklahoma, republican line, hi. caller: didn't biden just do what president trump is accusing of doing by asking the democratic party to impeach his political candidate or political opposition by asking them to impeach trump? didn't he just do that? the same thing trump is being accused of doing. host: your point? caller: my point is he is doing the same thing trump is being accused of doing the last two weeks. he just want's trump to be
impeached so it can clear the way for him to become president. tulsa.hat is paul in yolanda in maryland. has defied president all the constitutional norms and gotten away with it. republicans better realize all the president is doing is moving america further away from democracy and closer to a dictatorship. jd saying has anyone else noticed president obama has not come out to support joe biden or defend him from these ukraine accusations? from our twitter feed, dirk saying nobody cares what biden thinks. you can comment on social media sites and text. you can call us at 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats and independents, 202-748-8002. michael, you are up next, kansas city, missouri. caller: i want to comment on
that biden called. it might have took him a long time to make that call for impeachment, but at least he did. i have been waiting and watching all these probe -- these programs to see if the republicans will stand up. they won't because they are as crooked as he is. when democrats take over the white house and take over the senate and retained the house, make a pledge not pardon this corruption coming out of the white house. host: mr. biden's comments, as late as they come -- he hung up. dan in virginia, republican line. caller: good morning. my comment is about the lady about five calls ago talked andt assembling on sundays protesting conservatives. that is a constitutional right to assemble. likewise, she was pretty
critical, this is how it relates to biden, she was critical of conservatives in general. not all republicans are conservative and not all republicans are on the left. the right to assemble is constitutionally protected and so is the second amendment. those two go hand-in-hand and people like to talk about china. i wonder what the right to bear arms is in china. host: mr. biden's comments yesterday, what specifically do you think of that? host: i think -- caller: i think it is telling he waited last. one part of me said he is waiting to get the assessment of what the facts are, but the facts are not enough. it makes sense he delayed, but i don't think all the facts are there. there hasn't been a proper investigation. just like the guy who was angry earlier yelling, it does seem like being a political candidate is carte blanche to being immune
from being investigated, which i have a problem with. i agree with the people who was angry earlier. host: democrats line from alabama. mike, go ahead. ,aller: under the equal justice one criminal does not point his finger at another criminal to get off the hook. we need an impeachment investigation, this is not an impeachment, this is an investigation. if you go back and look at mr. trump's modus operandi, any judge or anyone who said anything against him, he is mouthing bad. what we need more than anything is some young artist to come up with a montage of everything that comes out of his mouth. i am christian, yet i have never asked god for forgiveness because i have never sinned. host: before you go too far, mr.
biden's comments, what did you find most interesting about them? caller: i think he should not have used the word impeachment, he should have used the word investigation to impeach. host: mike in alabama. this is the wall street journal. could let the house vote to authorize an inquiry with order and rules that give the minority subpoena power and everything done in public. this was the house standard for clinton. she might lose house democrats without gaining many republicans, which would make the partisan nature of the exercise clear and undermine its public credibility. we don't recall democrats fretting when there were claims made -- trump raised not a whit of
concern when eric holder denied documents to congress and was held in contempt. now their hatred of mr. trump, normsilate constitutional and ignore when it suits them politically. here is from the editorial page of the new york times this isning saying first, there nothing magical about a house vote authorizing impeachment inquiry. the administration's letter called it a "necessary authorization or code that is false -- "necessary authorization." that is false. a similar vote was held by the house during the impeachment proceedings of presidents richard nixon and go clinton. the votes were necessary to equip the inquiries with investigative authority such as expanding subpoena power, changes to house rules made that unnecessary.
this factors in from the former vice president's call for impeachment of president trump. we are getting your thoughts on that on phone lines. from missouri, independent line, we hear from rhonda, good morning. caller: good morning. maybe it joe biden and is not good for him to come out and say that he wants to impeach him, but what has he said about joe biden? it is not even corroborated. son were and his never, ever charged with anything. host: does it matter mr. biden was the last one to make this call? caller: what do you mean he was the last one to make this call? host: of the democratic presidential candidates. mattersi don't think it
. as far as them not doing a vote on the floor, i think nancy pelosi is smart about that because when it goes to the senate, mitch mcconnell is shutting it down. host: ken is next from washington. ander: i wanted to call comment. this is so frustrating, the news and everything. the question you keep asking everyone is does it matter that joe biden was the last one to come out. i don't think it matters at all. i don't think the candidates should be worrying about that because we have politicians in office and that is their job. the candidates that run, it doesn't make a difference. i am not a donald trump supporter by any means, but what joe biden has been caught doing, even though it is probably not illegal or anything, but it does look bad. host: why doesn't it matter the
presidential candidates comment on it if it is going to be part of the narrative of 2020? caller: because they are not in office, they are candidates running. we have politicians in office that need to do their jobs. i, personally, think we should have done this a long time ago. it looks like we are playing politics and when we start playing politics, it starts that tribalism with everyone else. either we are going to impeach the guy or we are not and i think that is the way it should be. host: the former vice president addressing those actions in ukraine during his time as vice president, here is joe biden from yesterday. [video clip] >> there is no truth in the charges in the attacks against me and my son, zero. every independent news organization that reviewed the charges at length found them to be flat out lies and trump knows it. veryld method he has used
well since he was a businessman, repeat, repeat, repeat the lie. my insistence that a prosecutor viewed as corrupt be replaced was the official position of the president of the united states, the united states government, supported by republican senators who sent a letter, sent a letter in 2016 calling for the removal because of corruption. supported by the european union. the international monetary fund, our allies, including the u.k., france, germany. what trump did in ukraine was to carry out a secret policy for his own personal political benefit in the hope he would not have to face me and my guess is everyone else he thought was
likely to win. i saw two replace a week prosecutor for one we hoped would go after corruption. the rest of the world was threatening not to continue to support ukraine unless it dealt with corruption. hostagemp did was hold political support and hundreds of millions of desperately needed dollars to a country at war to advance his own political demands. a it had been written as sitcom, it would not have been believed. ,ost: let's hear from al republican line, in warren, ohio. caller: talking about corruption, you know both of his sons, i don't know if you guys know this or not, they both -- hello? host: you are on, go ahead.
caller: they both work lobbyists. i don't know if the american people know this. you know what a lobbyist is, they go around different countries and get money for the presidential guy. we should be talking about the trade between canada and mexico. biden will never be elected. would you want your taxes erased? democrats never gave anybody the tax cut. host: back to mr. biden's comments -- specifically what did you find wrong of them -- with them? caller: calling the cattle black -- kettle black. from ohio.is al the president will be speaking at a rally tonight as part of campaign reelection efforts in
minneapolis as part of our campaign 2020 coverage. you can see that starting at 8:00. c-span andt on listen on the radio app. stacy is next in maryland, hello. biden is a citizen so there is a huge difference between trump using the power of the office, which would be a threat to ukraine -- there is a difference between the most powerful man in the world making biden sayingersus be --rump should mr. biden hadhink to respond because of the comments mr. trump has made? caller: i think he should have responded, but i don't think he needed to respond.
he is a citizen. what his son was doing wasn't any different than what anybody else was doing that is not criminal. what the president has done is corruption and he has been caught in it and caught by the cia. world tourveilled the ensure america's interest are intact and they caught his people talking. he is caught red-handed. that is why he is going crazy right now. host: we will hear from jan in florida. caller: good morning, pedro. i watched joe biden's entire it wasyesterday live and after that speech and everything decide ias helped me am going to support biden. biden is the complete opposite of donald trump.
he is calm, thoughtful, issuering and the whole shows he has impulse control, he doesn't run out there and say anything anytime, he thinks about what he says. i would challenge anybody to watch joe biden's speech yesterday. he convinced me to support him. host: who did you support before yesterday? caller: i liked kamala harris, but i did not like her bussing remark because that was a mixed issue. a lot of children did not like to be bussed and it caused increased racial strife, i think . i did not like that remark from her. i also thought she would make a joet vice president to biden. one more thing i want to say about joe biden, it shows his
impulse control, he is thoughtful, he is calm and i trust him to do the right thing. host: is your support because of the call for impeachment or the maid he weighed -- the maid he weighed -- the way he made that call? caller: it was slow and measured and thoughtful. it doesn't matter the timing, that is an extremely petty thing to talk about. it means nothing. we have a mad man the white pettyright now that things that democrats are being picked on about is ridiculous. host: that is jan in florida. some of the other candidates being profiled in the newspapers . the new york times talking about a decision by the warren campaign about avoiding fundraisers. there are some caveats saying -- confirmedform
the decisions. while she would forgo fundraisers for the campaign, if she were nominated, she would headline events -- her spokes were the -- her spokeswoman said mr. warren -- is this warren was -- become one of the strongest democratic fundraisers of the millionld raising $24.6 from more than 940,000 donations second only to senator bernie sanders of vermont. that is from the new york times. if you go to the washington times, pete buttigieg talking about his candidacy and being profiled saying several more moderate candidates are angling for mr. biden's spot including the mayor. so far, he has the most traction. he consistently placed fourth in most polls and has already been
top three in the money race. behind mr. sanders $25.3 million -- mr. biden raised $15.2 million. a sharp decline from his 21.5 million hall in the second quarter. mayor pete will join 11 other candidates who qualify for the debate in ohio. in minneapolis, joining us on the line, republican line in st. paul, go ahead. caller: yes -- host: you are on, go ahead. are you there? caller: i am here. host: go ahead, you are on. caller: i think the whole thing is a farce. i don't think trump has done anything wrong. i think he is being persecuted by democrats because they don't like his policies and i support him 100 percent and i don't see
anything on the democratic side but falsehoods. host: mr. biden's call for impeachment, what did you think of that? caller: i thought mr. biden's call for impeachment was just a reaction to trump calling his son and him what they did in ukraine is more impeachable offenses than what he has done. i don't think mr. trump did anything wrong with this phone call. for biden to come out and call for his impeachment i think is just an act. the: minneapolis will be state where the president will be appearing in that rally. you can see that tomorrow night. thewashington post profiles reelection efforts of the aesidency it -- saying he has roaring reelection apparatus. there are 6 committees working to secure a second firm.
together, they have raised over $736 million, more than any previous presidential candidate at this point in the campaign. nearly $92 million has gone to 76 vendors that provide political consulting. each one drawing 50,000. according to a post-analysis of federal election filings, the story adding the president is benefiting from the decision different from his predecessors to begin fundraising for a second term as soon as he was elected. he has been successful raising money from his base giving $20 at a time as he done -- as he has done with wealthy donors. more about those numbers of the trump campaign available from the washington post. one reason for impeachment would be to revisit helsinki.summit in
i don't believe trump will get white female vote from suburban areas. i think he is done. host: why do you think the putin summit is worth revisiting? caller: put it back on the screen and look carefully what has happened since then. host: give us your assessment, why specifically that instance? caller: caller: he is calling about putin investigating our justice system. next, how are you? caller: i have a problem with these republicans. everything is right in front of their face. -- nobody is supposed to do anything to him.
he acts like he is a dictator instead of president of the united states. we have three branches of government and all are equal. he keeps on denying access for his people to go before congress and the senate with information they know exists. to joe biden, his call from yesterday. what do you think about the call and what the impact will be? delaware is a small state, so i have had personal conversations with joe biden and i find him to be a very truthful man. he was obama upon vice president, so i think he is very informed on everything going on. host: do you think the call came too late? caller: yes, i do. no, it did not come too late, but it came. i think there is no such thing
as calling too late for this guy to be impeached. finish your thought. caller: what i have a problem with c-span. every morning i wake up, there is always a trump rally on there. i believe c-span had a lot to do with donald trump getting elected. every morning, trump rally. i wake up at 4:00 in the morning, trump rally. host: we cover the rallies of this president as we have covered rallies from any president. go back to our video library and look. caller: this is not what i saw. when i wake up every morning and watch c-span, i ca trump rally. -- i see a trump rally. coverage, weection will cover a lot of rallies weather with president -- the -- whether with the president or presidential candidates. i invite you to go to our
website and check out things we have done in the past when it comes to coverage of rallies. muchgn affairs in the news these days. two events on c-span you might want to keep an eye on, particularly the news, you will hear from h.r. mcmaster and others, he will discuss the trump administration's foreign strategy, including the decision to withdraw troops from syria. you can see that live noon today. the the radio app and former commander of central command is going to discuss u.s. security operations in the middle east hosted by the middle east institute in washington. coverage of that event starting at 12:30. c-span 2 is where you can see it as well as .org and the radio app. if you go to our website, you
can find all the information. from south carolina, republican line, monica. hello. caller: hello. to your last caller i want to areone thing, c-span, you fair and square. donald trump got into office working-class law-abiding people voted for him. these, when they start impeachment hearings, i hope they bring hunter biden to the hotseat along with his father and question them as well. i want to know, where is hunter? why is he hiding and where -- why is he being quiet? host: what did you think about mr. biden's call for impeachment? caller: i think mr. biden is covering up something.
i don't trust him. -- ide a comment yesterday think every reputable news covered this and ruled hunter out as being involved in any sneaky stuff. we don't want news agencies, we want the legal team to question him and mr. biden. over therd phone calls years and other president and people from other countries, we would probably collapse on the floor. hunterhope they put biden on the hotseat. thank you, we love you. host: thank you for watching monica in south carolina. a story in the washington post this morning, the headline for many under the clinton email -- those many clinton email
critics, a role reversal. on tuesday, top envoys for the u.k. and european union used personal phones and a messenger app as they conducted policy on ukraine. themost vocal defenders of trump administration's actions included the most aggressive critics of hillary clinton's handling of sensitive information including jim jordan, mark meadows, and mike a kansaso, as congressman, attacked hillary clinton by underscoring the solemn role of soldiers defending u.s. secrets. fighting toiers protect classified information from getting out, risk their lives to keep that information safe. she violated multiple laws. read more of that in the washington post. from alabama, vivian is next in alabama. caller: good morning to you.
rallyhed of the biden this morning and there was probably 100, 120 people there. was afraid ofmp him. has biden ever seen a trump rally. it is ridiculous. and iis not afraid of him am not either. our line for democrats, good morning. caller: good morning. thanks for taking the call. i have been listening to the last couple trump supporter voters and it is interesting the caller before the last one mentioned she wants to hear from the legal team. essentially she is saying she wants to hear from the intelligence department we have here in america. wouldn't that be counterintuitive to the way trump has trained the country to not trust or listen to those agencies?
the article you cited just now identified the true hypocrisy even as it relates to ukraine. we are talking about joe biden, but that is like with my kid, he is three and a half. he will say that when he goes to daycare, but he did that, i did not do it. he did do something. he did something on his own needs to be held accountable. this point, know at the intelligence agency have cleared the bidens of any wrongdoing. what we do have is a phone transcript that said -- clearly identifies what we call in the street if you talk to a couple friends, he slid his way into a quid pro quo. doesn't say if you do this for me, i will do this for you, isn't that what a saver -- a favor is? did i miss something?
it is really daunting to me we have voters in our country who can live in such hypocrisy, they can clearly turn their eyes away from truth, what is in front of him and listen to whatever he says. trumpoke down what donald does to convince the country of things that are not true. host: we will go to chris in maryland, republican line. hello. morning.ood your question about joe biden and his comments, very smooth, expertick, he is an communicator. i did some studying last night and found a timeline on ukraine and it is complex. it starts in 2014 when their president was routed out by the country of ukraine for opulence in his palace and what have you and that started a whole slide of involvement of the u.s.
government and many parties including manafort and others in the crane, so it is a complex situation. am aate from that, i purchasing guy. countryn got a job in a i even bought from, that would be reportable and something you would avoid. i don't know if there is anything criminal done, it was highly unethical. host: your characterization of mr. biden's comment as slick, can you expand on that? caller: i was bobbing my head up and down agreeing with him. it sounded so good and positive, but he left out the facts. by the same token, the republicans, including president trump, there is a lot of hyperbole in the charges. he is casted as being
corruption. i don't think joe biden is corrupt, i just think they did not disclose something they should have and it became a pattern, even in china. tennessee. hear from caller: good morning. ofo along with the idea proceeding with impeachment. basically what i would like to see done in this process is both sides have the equal opportunity to speak before the american witnesses.ubpoena that would even include president obama. i think he should be subpoenaed and appear before these committees to answer questions in regard to the ukraine and any of the other situations that have been brought up involving the impeachment of the
president. host: do you think it is anything of note mr. biden made a call for this? caller: i think that is great. i think you should do. i just hope it does not come back and bite him. he will have to open it up and the more they open it up, we have been listening for three years from both sides all the time, everybody painting it the way they want to see it. let's get it all out in front and get these people involved in both administrations to appear under subpoena and ask questions about their involvement in these situations. last victoria, you are the call, west virginia, democrats line. (202) 748-8000 i feel like -- caller: i feel like trump is afraid of a potential loss. joe biden is truly not american.
i believe trump will keep saying this and that, he is going to do this and that for west virginia, he is not going to do anything for us. host: that is the last call for this segment. we will continue talking about impeachment in the role and realm of public opinion. , andu are seeing in polls some historic contacts going clinton and to the nixon impeachments. later on, we will be joined by michael pillsbury, and informal advisor to president trump. we will talk about the growing rifts between the nba and china, coming up on "washington journal." ♪
>> sunday at 9:00 eastern on ,fterwards, in her latest book former obama administration national security advisor and u.n. ambassador susan rice talks about her life and career in american diplomacy and foreign policy. she is interviewed by robin wright. russianou worried about intervention in the 2020 election? >> it is important to understand it has not stopped, this has been constant. they were actively involved in 2016 through hacking and stealing emails from the dnc. they tried to infiltrate our electoral system. they put out false information, and then they were very active on social media trying to pit
americans against each other over domestic issues of contention whether it is race or immigration or guns. their aim is to discredit our democracy and cause people to turn against one another, and ken to week bangen us -- wea us from within. >> book tv has live weekend coverage of the southern festival of books from nashville, tennessee, starting saturday at 11:00 a.m. eastern, featuring chris evans with his book, jason day paro, paul saeed jones talks about his memoir. our live coverage from the southern festival of books continues on sunday at 1:00 p.m. eastern. p.m., susan nyman
discusses her book. samantha powers talks about her book, and david katie with his book. be sure to watch our live coverage of the southern festival of books starting at 11:00 a.m. eastern on saturday and 1:00 p.m. sunday on book tv on c-span two. "washington journal" continues. --t: bill gholston is with bill galston is with brookings institute. guest: good morning. when it comes to public sentiment, particularly on impeachment, what does history teach us? guest: my two touchdowns our 1974, nixon impeachment, and
1998/99 of the clinton impeachment. in the case of richard nixon, sentiment started off very low, below 20% support for impeaching the president from office, and it rose slowly through -- but steadily through the last half of 1973, through 1974 and did not go above 50% until the very end. clinton,port for bill his job approval was in the 60's and support for impeaching him was very low and never got higher. the endpened in reflects those differences in public opinion. host: meaning what? guest: by the time richard nixon was facing the republican delegation led by barry goldwater, not only had support in the senate collapsed for him, but senate among the american
people was collapsing as well. there was never such a moment for bill clinton, and as a result of which, not a single democratic senator broke ranks when the impeachment articles came across the capital from the house to the senate. it had the optics of a partisan exercise that was a total failure for republic -- republicans. host: polls coming out in a rapid pace asking people about impeachment this morning, fox news paul saying for those that thoseded, most of reporting support for impeachment. have ashington post" similar poll this week. much attention should we pay to these? guest: they are a good snapshot of public sentiment. the trendline over time, and not the snapshot right now.
we have to look at the way the questions are worded, because some of the surveys ask about an impeachment inquiry and others talk about impeaching him in the house and removing him in the senate. there is more support for the senate -- inquiry than for a specific outcome. host: how does the factor of how the president behaves during this process and how democrats behave factor into public opinion and sentiment? guest: the behavior of the president and the people close to him, on the one hand, democrats on the other, will make a difference. markig analytical question is how big a difference it will make in our highly partisan and polarized times. specifically, are there a lot of republicans who are wavering in their support for the president and who could be persuaded to jump ship by the accumulating
weight of evidence? we don't know the answer to that question. some people believe the president's rocksolid support is as high as 40% or 45% and all the change that has occurred will occur. others believe the dam is breaking and the floor of support is closer to 30%, and a lot depends on which of these analyses turns out to be true. host: if you want to ask questions, (202) 748-8001 four republicans, (202) 748-8000 democrats. independents, (202) 748-8002. three things to watch out for. is president's job approval first. can you expand? guest: the president's overall job approval number is a pretty
reliable indicator of the number of people who are likely to stick with him. one of the things that struck me about the survey research is that the president's job approval numbers have barely budged in the last two weeks. they started off in the low to mid 40's and are still in the low to mid 40's. if i squeeze the data, i suppose i could argue that there has been an erosion of a point or two, but nothing like the bottom dropping out. to job approval numbers tend map onto presidential vote shares in general elections. host: we have talked about support for the impeachment, but you add bipartisan support in factoring in how to look at these things. guest: that is important, because if republican sentiment does not shift, grassroots
sentiment, than it is relatively unlikely that lots of republican senators will decide to desert the president, and more unlikely that lots of republican house members will desert the president. 1974, sixmber that in out of 17 republicans on the house judiciary committee voted for the first article, and seven out of 17 voted for the second. those were tough votes for those republicans, but they took them, and that was in indicator of rising bipartisan support for impeaching and removing the president. it is important to look carefully, if it comes to a house vote on articles of impeachment, will any republicans break ranks and if so, how many? host: we have seen susan collins, ben sasse, and mitt romney expressing concerns.
is that signs, or something to keep an eye on? collinsf i were susan running for reelection in a , illy hotly contested race would certainly be expressing concern. there are a few republicans voting -- running for reelection in tough states. cory gardner in colorado is at the top of the list, and i would expect them to try to steer a middle course as long as they can, express concern, give the impression, and i hope it is a valid impression of being fair-minded and high-minded, and hold their fire as long as they can. i would expect republicans from bright red states, republican senators not to do anything of the sort, and if even one of
them shows signs of breaking ranks, that is an important signal. host: our first call is from steve from norfolk, virginia, republican line. calling. was just my opinion on all of this is the president really has not really done anything incorrectly or wrong. this is just one of those witchhunts that we are really trying to protect obama and biden because if the truth about everything comes out, we are going to find out that obama was incompetent or he knew about everything. i think we are looking at the wrong direction here. i think the president does have the right to investigate and look into things, and we are
just trying to figure out what really is going on in our federal government, and why we are spending millions and millions of dollars, basically wasting them. guest: there are a lot of people who agree with you, and one of the points i am making is that as events unfold in the coming weeks and months, people who are concerned about the weight of the evidence will have more and more to work with. ordinary citizens will be bombarded with a flow of information, traditional and social media, and people who want all sides of the story to come out are likely to get their way, for better or for worse. line, cocoa,ts florida, this is eli. caller: i am democrat and the president -- president trump is
doing an excellent job. he brings factories back to the united states and really, he has rights under the second thedment, to make all of foreign relationship -- he initiated, not the congress. he is against corruption. in any place. he said it about hillary clinton let russian he said find her emails. that democrat and saying representative pelosi speaking they didssue, because not vote for johnson in the 1800s, they voted for nixon, the house, and they voted for clinton. host: thanks.
would pick up i one of the points that you made about article two of the constitution. which is the portion of the constitution that deals with the executive branch, executive powers. president trump said in an interview in june or july that article two basically allows him to do anything he wants to do. executivet a view of power that is widely shared among constitutional scholars. the president has, yes, the executive power, but that is only one of three powers in the government, in the congress of the united states is designed constitutionally to have a say in foreign policy in a couple of ways.
congress and only congress can declare war. congress and only congress can authorize the funds that allow the president to conduct foreign relations, and when necessary, use the u.s. military. we are talking about a situation now where the president is using his executive powers in the area of foreign piracy -- policy, but that does not mean the united states has nothing to say. weekend,dent, over the made a decision to withdraw american troops from the front lines in syria, the border of turkey, as a result of which turkey has invaded syria. senior members of both political parties have strongly criticized that decision. that theeve rightly congress of the united states has a legitimate right to weigh in on these questions, and i'm
sure the congress will. twon't agree that article basically gives the president a blank check as soon as he left his eyes and looks across the borders. host: what do you think about the impeachment inquiry? is it needed? guest: i think the revelation of what happened in the ukraine made it inevitable. inquiry, ifthat the done right, can only do good. good if it lays ,ut facts only known to a few for the american people to make their own judgments. that is the way our democracy is supposed to work. there is some problems, some areas where sources and methods of our intelligence community are at stake and there could be
some restraint, but as far as i can tell, most of the information likely to come out has not fallen in that category. hopee in the white house will not come out but probably should and will. host: alan dershowitz has a piece talking about alexander hamilton. politicaln inevitable -- component but should only come into play if the constitutional criteria are met. if a prisoner -- president did not commit high crimes and misdemeanors, the house could decide not to move forward on impeachment. necessitate it. if i were litigious, i might sue mr. dirt truitt's --
mr. dershowitz for plagiarism. ihave a weekly column and wrote that impeachment is a constitutional option, but not a constitutional obligation. that,inue to believe because in the largest sense, impeaching and removing a president is not an activity that is undertaken under the criminal law. it is a political decision. it is a political decision about preserving, protecting, and defending the constitution, and that moves it into a zone where you have to ask yourself in a particular situation, what is the best way of preserving, protecting, and defending the constitution of the united states? sober minded people could reach that conclusion that maybe an election would be the better course. host: one of the options thrown
out is the idea of censure. guest: i have advocated that myself. this is an option that is not something made up. .t would be pursuant to law either house of the congress could go down that road by itself. it is what happened in the 1830's when the senate of the united states censured president ,ndrew jackson, interestingly for his failure to turn over documents to congress for his decision to defund the bank of the united states. i have argued publicly that censure would be the better course, because it would lay out the facts to the american people and allow them to make a decision in november 2020. i do not agree with the argument that that would be an abdication
of congressional responsibility, i think it would be an exercise. arlington, virginia, independent, caroline. caller: i feel like i have conservative principles, but if you are paying attention to this man, donald trump, he is not a conservative. just came5 women that out and said he is a predator, and what he did in ukraine and trying to get money from the gas companies, i feel like, why are good people surrounding him? what are they getting out of it and why are they going to survive aligning? host: are you there? thank you. guest: that is a very good question.
have many you that i friends who are deeply conservative who are asking the same question, as president trump really a conservative or is he doing something else? he cuts taxes, that is what conservatives do. . approved by judges the federalist society. other hand, on trade and immigration and international relations and the conduct of the presidency itself, these conservatives argue he is anything but conservative. a real conservative, they argue, honors tradition, respects institutions, strengthens the norms that hold us together as a
country, seeks to unite rather than divide, understands the united states as one nation and not two warring nations, these are the arguments they make and i have to say speaking as a lifelong democrat, they have resonance. hello.emocrat, kathy, one more time for kathy in california. mind, folks,'t turn your tv down. from michigan, democrats line, brent. opinions suggest republicans do not care about the country and only about being reelected. with republicans, the facts do not matter. it is only held trump spins his lies. if you want the story, you have
to go back to a 2015 article by james wise and. wanted, eu, and u.s. all -- removed, not to stop the the call ofn into the chefs key -- but because he would not cooperate in their isma.tigation of bar host: when it comes to the process of impeachment, what do you want to address? impeachment, ias think trump is unfit for office. it was also biden's son to sell his name to benefit barisma but what trump did is a
crime and he should be impeached. guest: although this isn't quite what i came on to talk about, i will be happy to address it anyway. vice president biden has insisted from day one that no credible evidence has ever been developed connecting his advocacy of the administration's anticorruption policy in ukraine and the efforts to get this corrupt prosecutor removed. i believe that remains true to this day. so the gravity meant of the new york times story you cited -- gravement of the new york times story you cited remains to be seen. i do think that is regrettable
that there has been what i can call a rush to moral equivalence on the part of some people, , a tactic that is known as what about-ism. made, the a charge is president will gin up a counter charge. i think we can expect more of this. the: the president, republicans have called for a formal vote to launch an impeachment inquiry. can you talk about the importance of that and what history tells us about that vote? guest: like impeachment itself, vote to, the formal launch an inquiry is an option but not a constitutional requirement. the argument that the democrats are somehow breaking the law or
violating the constitution by not holding such a vote is not strong argument. if one gets to the politics of the situation, i think a lot of fair-minded people hearing that argument will probably say, there is something to that comment that if congress is , itg to go down this road would be a good idea to commit itself publicly and formally to going down this road, and also putting some procedures in place officiallyuarantee what i believe is going to happen anyway, namely a fair process for both sides. house'sthat the white response has been remarkably weak bang on the merits -- remarkably weak on the merits
with respect to that point. host: iris in michigan, independent line. caller: good morning, and to all my jewish friends, happy new year. i was thinking, wouldn't it be wonderful if we could turn our government to the way we do school elections? no one runs on a party line and we vote on the person, what they have to offer, what we know about them, and separates nobody from one side to another. we all just elect the person we think is the most qualified for the job on what they set forth in the way they would like to see this country go forward. split -- don't split them down the middle. this system we have is splitting
up everybody into taking sides. , has remarked about the president and did a deep sigh afterwards. i don't think they have any more right to give their opinion than anyone else because they don't hold the post. host: we will let our guest respond. guest: i have three responses, actually. 2%,t, as a member of the thank you for your wishes. secondly, as a resident of the washington, d.c. area, let me do a shout out of my own to the washington nationals who have overcome their odds and sorry history in game five to move on to the national league championship series. go, gnats! now -- nats!
the unitedunders of states did not plan for a party system, did not want a party system, did not put a party system within the constitution, but within a very few years, we had a two-party system and have had one since. i don't think presidential elections will ever be like school board elections and probably should not be. parties are ways of organizing people and also the competition of ideas and policies in a very large, diverse, continental republic. that said, i am plenty old enough to remember a time when party identification did not fully determine the vote that one would cast, even on serious issues. i believe along with a lot of other people that party
polarization has gone much too far for comfort, is not helping the country, is splitting the country, and the impeachment inquiry in these votes might conceivably be a way of bringing us back together, but more likely will divide us further. galston ofis bill the brookings institution to talk about impeachment and public opinion. for 15 minutes or so, we will return to the question we started with about vice president biden calling for the impeachment of donald trump. republicans.1, (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8002, independents. we will take those calls when "washington journal" returns. ♪
thinking about participating in c-span's studentcam 2020 competition but have never made a documentary film before? we have resources on our website to get you started. it out ondoes check studentcam.org for producing information and video links. teachers will find resources on the teasers materials page -- teachers material page. >> anyone who wants to compete, find a topic you are passionate about and pursue it. to --are asking them c-span will award $100,000 in total cash prizes, plus a $5,000 cash prize. >> get a camera and a microphone, and start building
and produce the best video you can produce. >> visit studentcam.org for more information today. >> c-span's campaign 2020 coverage continues as president trump hosts a keep america great ,ally in minneapolis, minnesota tonight. c-span.org and stay connected everywhere you are with the c-span app. "washington journal" continues. host: if you want to text your thoughts on the former vice president calling for the impeachment of the president, you can do so on (202) 748-8003. ourcan post on c-span and facebook page. richard from pensacola, florida, republican line.
guest: good morning. i am amazed this representative from the brookings institution so easily dismisses the extortion by former president joe biden, where on television it is taped, he looks at his watch and gives the ukraine government six hours to fire a prosecutor or we will withhold $1.2 billion in loan guarantees. i second point is if you look at the last section of article one, the houseo, it says of representatives shall choose their speaker and other officers and shall have the sole power of impeachment. no, it does not say nancy pelosi , the democrats, or anything else, it says "the house of representatives." that is where the tradition comes from having a house floor want because the founders
the representatives to be held politically accountable for such an extraordinary remedy, or invoking that extraordinary remedy. host: since you started with joe biden, what do you think about his call yesterday? caller: he is jumping on the bandwagon. everyone is calling for it. i was in washington, d.c., during the nixon impeachment going through training at quantico. as the press pounded nixon every single day, public opinion, as your guest pointed out, slowly changed. that is happening now, except all the media except for fox is pushing for impeachment. there is a propaganda arm of the democratic party pushing for it and i would not believe the polls unless you want to go back to 2016.
patrick in leopold, missouri, democrats line. we are not pushing for impeachment neither, since you cited fox. caller: good morning. out thatnted to point the underlying issue of this, especially when it comes to impeachment, is if the president committed a crime, that is pretty straightforward. askingftc chair is someone to interfere in the election is a crime, and president trump went on television and said that is what he wants to happen, that is a crime. if joe biden did something wrong, then fine, that is the game, and if they find it, prosecute him. the same should apply to president trump.
if he does something wrong, which he did, why is anyone making excuses for him? host: from linda in virginia, republican line. caller: good morning. i have got just a simple statement. i have been watching everything since he has become president. bill clinton was impeached and they left him in office. he could do no wrong. president obama, which i supported and voted for, he could do no wrong, but obviously they did so many things that were wrong. president trump has been attacked from day one. mouthn could not open his without the press coming down on him. for the least little thing, they followed every movement and dug up trash on him that was obviously made up by democrats and other people against him.
if he does something wrong, please bring it out and show it and impeach him, but if he hasn't, i wish they would leave him alone and let him do the work. call for biden's impeachment, what did you think about that? guest: i am not sure. he is supposed to be supporting president trump. he has found some things he does not like, and those things should be addressed and brought out. if president trump has done things illegally, he should be impeached. host: john in cleveland, ohio, independent line. caller: this is going to end up as a moot question partly case,e unlike the nixon when goldwater and republican -- it iswent to him, going to be an impasse and there
is no support in the senate. the whole thing will be wasted. unfortunately, there will be the reelection and foreign powers will be executing this on all the misinformation. russia is enjoying it. putin is having a dance party and america is getting nowhere. host: kathy in arkansas, public and mine, go ahead -- republican line, go ahead. caller: i don't know why it is so important that this one person's opinion, joe biden, a former vice president thanks, not just one part -- thanks, not just one person -- thinks, not just one person. shouldn't joe biden have an opinion? caller: he should.
it is the public's opinion. host: the former vice president making those comments in new hampshire. >> he should be impeached, not only because of what he has done. own words, trump's in the texts from state department officials that have been made public, we see it in the united states government into his schemes, his appointees. we have to remember impeachment isn't only about what the president has done. it is about the threat the president poses the nation. one thing about this president is absolutely clear. i don't think anyone can contradict this.
he has seen no limits to his power, regardless of what the constitution says. he believes the united states government can be corrupted and to furthering his personal political needs. he is even willing to hold and congressionally appropriated aid to a foreign nation hostage to his political demands. somethings if he does , it is legal, period. most importantly, he believes there is nothing we can do about it. he believes he can and will get away with anything he does. we all laughed when he said he could stand in the middle of 5th avenue and shoot someone and get away with that. it is no joke. he is shooting holes in the constitution and we cannot let him get away with it. host: those comments available
to you on our website at c-span.org. new york, democrats line, michael. caller: a couple of things. trump did exactly what he wanted to do, which was damaged biden, which is sad because he is scared out of his pants of biden. biden should have been much stronger coming out when that happened to fight for his family and his honor. with trump, he is always projecting -- he talks about corruption -- his family is full of corruption, and it just blows my mind that when republicans or people that support him do not read, did not read the mueller report, which was clear. they did not read the thing that came out about trump's phone call.
when you saw kevin mccarthy on tv not even knowing the words trump said. host: back to joe biden, you said it came too late. tell us why. caller: he needed to come out and be strong. he is running for president, and trump does this for everybody. he throws out garbage and biden should be much stronger. i am supporting anybody who was a democrat, but biden had the chance to blow away trump hands down, and he needs to continue strong and fight back. president,ormer vice the last of the candidates to comment specifically on impeachment. you,ple of texts to show from cesar in columbia, maryland -- i question why nancy pelosi will not bring an impeachment vote to the floor.
i suspect they will never vote on impeachment. it is just part of the dnc's 2020 strategy. bill from pennsylvania saying -- i think it shows patience and good judgment not by rushing to impeachment. bandwagons are easy to jump on. raising evidence is a better practice. john in washington, d.c. -- the president will have to defend himself but biden is "crooked." texting is available to you when you text (202) 748-8003. state,r name, city, and and you can send that to us. robert in edward, new york, republican line. caller: i am calling because i think president trump is doing a great job and if the democrats
would leave him alone and let him do his job, they would not be doing all of this. biden has done wrong and he has a lot he and his son have done wrong. biden should be impeached himself if he is trying to impeach trump, because trump has done more for this country then then a president in the united states has. if democrats had left him alone and gone on his side and joined with him, we would get along better instead of fighting between ourselves. i am tired of hearing all of this about trump. since he became president, they have nothing but picked on him. patty in forest grove, oregon, democrats line. caller: i originally was a gold republicanoldwater
and my first presidential vote, and i stayed republican all these years until the bush presidency, because i did not agree to go into iraq. that turned myself around. i went to become a democrat and i voted for obama. statements,den's what did you think? feel -- i completely support him. wasel that mr. trump, i very sad all day yesterday because i feel he was complicit in genocide in what is going to happen in turkey. host: that is patty in forest grove, oregon. here is president trump from yesterday responding to joe biden. [video clip] >> he is falling on -- like a rock. we have him on tape with corruption.
fors getting the prosecutor $2 billion, saying we will not give you the $2 billion unless you get rid of this prosecutor, and he says lo and behold the prosecutor was gone. >> $1.2 billion. >> a lot of money. then his son takes out $1.5 million from china, and the $50,000 a month he was getting -- oaks like it is $168,000 else among him and someone , and a payment of $3 million to his son. his son just got thrown out of the navy. biden is dropping like a rock. i did not think he was going to make it for a long time, and this is one way. i guess he is no longer the front runner. look, i feel badly for him because i know he is going through a lot.
he has been hit and caught red-handed. here is a man who is on tape saying exactly what he is going to do in terms of corruption, and gets away with it. if that ever happened to a republican, they would be getting the electric chair right now. it is a whole different standard. host: mark in fort lauderdale, florida, republican line. caller: as always, thank you for c-span. i am calling on the independent line because i left the democratic party during the john kerry campaign, mainly over the fact that he did not really swiftback over the building thing and let them tell the public what he is. that was so weak. joe biden basically sat around for a couple of weeks leading
trump slap him, slam him, attack him, tell lies, and now he is coming out. i am not in favor of impeaching trump right now because mainly i adhere to the old saying, which i think may have come from france -- i am probably paraphrasing -- you get the politicians you deserve. there is nothing about trump that was not known before he ran , his lying, cheating, stealing, thieving, etc.. that was common knowledge. now we are stuck with him. let's see what the new election brings. host: one more call from chris in hickory, north carolina, republican line. caller: i think it is ridiculous that someone like joe biden has .een in office 42 years
it is nothing more than an attempted coup by the media and politicians in washington. obama wasget, barack on tv laughing at donald trump about there is no way anyone could ever appear in our elections. i find it absurd, a man gets caught with his pants down with bad deals, and trump points that out, plus the ukraine points that out. it to reverse it on donald trump. what needs to happen in this country with an attempted coup and if it is successful, we need to have another civil war. host: chris will be the last call on this topic. coming up, we will hear from michael pills very from the hudson institute. also, an outside advisor to
president trump on matters concerning china, we will talk about china, concerns over trade, and related matters. ♪ >> this columbus day weekend on american history tv, saturday at 10:00 p.m. eastern on reel america, the film "the whole thed is watching" about anti-vietnam demonstration in washington which resulted in massive unrest. >> thousands swarmed onto washington circle. over 1000 morehead georgetown. -- more hit georgetown.
hisarvey pratt shares vision for the native american veterans memorial. >> in the middle is a 12 foot stainless steel circle, and at the base of that is a fire. so you can use that fire to light your sweetgrass and sage and things that you use, and you can touch the water and use the fire. we call that the drum. (202) 748-8002 monday, -- >> monday, columbus day, ruth bader ginsburg and sonia sotomayor discuss the judicial impact of the first woman on the supreme court, sandra day o'connor. >> if you read between the lines, what she is saying is if you want to improve the status of women, the best way to do it is to get men to want to do the
job, because pay inevitably will go up. [laughter] >> explore>> our nation's past on american history tv each weekend on c-span3. continues. journal" host: this is michael pillsbury with the hudson institute, former special assistant for asian affairs in the george h w bush administration, and an outside advisor to the president. when it comes to affairs of china and the u.s. reportedly today, trade talks between the two countries, what do you expect from the talks themselves? guest: this is a rising power that has reached 75% the size of our gdp. we were quite close during the cold war, cooperated in covert action on many issues.
as the chinese tried to surpass us, it is creating an effect in our political system. would this be a good thing to have a communist party country surpassing us, being the world leader in economics? that is what is at stake in the trade talks. the president has a lot of bipartisan support for rebalancing the trade talks. the word he likes to use is "reciprocity," but the chinese do not see it that way. they see themselves coming out of 100 years of humiliation by the west and they have made a dent big time. they see this as a way to harm their economy so they never will be able to surpass america. i refer to this as two porcupines meeting. it is difficult to conduct these talks, even though it sounds simple, like why can't we have
reciprocity and increase trade and investment between the two countries? the trade talks have turned up a number of issues that nobody really thought would happen in advance. host: to the fact that they are meeting face-to-face, is this a positive sign? do you advise the president on how to advise -- approach these matters? guest: i advise everyone by going on television interviews. this is round 13 in terms of face-to-face meetings. daysusually last couple of . it is not negotiations that go through a couple of months. each side's back to the leadership and go through what each side is demanding. there talks are secret. that isted information out can be summarized in like two sentences.
there is a 150 page draft agreement. china reneged on some of it. it has seven chapters, and according to the person in charge of the talks on behalf of president trump, ambassador lighthizer, it has an endorsed dutch enforcement with three layers of appeal where companies can complain about something, and there is an adjudication to a higher level, and ultimately some sort of punishment would happen, and the other side would not retaliate for that punishment. that is all that is known about the talks. host: do you expect at the end of it anything to come out, or is this part of another multi layer of talks to go forward? guest: both sides want an agreement. president trump says the chinese side wants it desperately due to
the level of pain they are feeling. china says it is america who is desperate for the agreement, they can get along without it, but both sides want an agreement. the question will be, how soon? the idea of what the president has somewhat called the grand agreementsem all being struck today are tomorrow, that is not likely, but they want to get back to trade and investment on a reciprocal basis. oft: we hear certain sectors manufacturing talking about how it affects their business. is there a point where short-term economic harm becomes a matter with these talks? guest: yes, and obviously it is a matter of relative pain, which economy is feeling the pain subjectively and objectively.
to some degree, i think a communist party controlled country like china can observe more pain in terms of the leader does not face reelection every four years. president xi does not have the blessing of a nancy pelosi in his house of representatives to criticize him. will unclear whether china ever have an election again. there president has called off the infernal to arm limit they use to have -- term 1 -- informal term limit they use to have. "blessing" on the chinese side. side, there trump's is support on the principle, china should not steal our intellectual property, steal our subsidies, their market is open to us. ,hen you get into the details
you get various pressure groups or individuals criticizing the president about the various details. that is where the pain comes out, what are the farmers who are part of his electoral base way see this in a patriotic , or will see their farms collapsing and turn away? host: what is the potential for more tariffs? guest: the president has a number of escalation options. tariffs are low. there is no limit on how high you can put tariffs. you been 100% and 200% if really want to harm trade. tariffs in the beginning were to protect industries. that is the alexander hamilton concept, our first steven mnuchin. these are low-level tariffs.
moreresident can cover sectors and raise tariffs to a higher level, but has other options to l -- escalate as well. , how dochael pillsbury you define yourself specifically with your relationship with the president on china? guest: i am like a friend or guest to answer questions. host: here to talk about u.s.-china relations, if you want to ask questions, (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8000, democrats. . independent, (202) 748-8001 if you want to text us, (202) 748-8003. you can post on facebook. our guest has written a book. i want you to respond to a story on the daily beast website. i will redo the headline, you
are quoted as an advisor handed information about hunter biden from the chinese. i said last night on the blue dobbs program. to beijing.nt visit i said the chinese are unwilling to say anything about hunter biden. i had never seen them so secretive about an issue. the story says reportedly, you were given information about a trip there last week. were you in china last week? on octobers in china 1. i did meet with some chinese. did not give-- i me any intelligence about hunter biden. host: i only say this -- guest: i do not know where the report came from. host: the financial times is quoted as you saying, i got quite a bit of background on hunter biden from the chinese,
pillsbury told the financial times. guest: i have not spoken to the financial times for a month. i was interviewed by them about the trade talks. host: no information from the hunter biden on the chinese concerning hunter biden. guest: they would not talk about hunter biden. host: any sense of where this is coming from? guest: no. the financial times is a very rapid will newspaper. i subscribe myself. i have been interviewed by the many times but not about hunter biden. host: so you can respond that you run foxbusiness wednesday night. you raised the issue of the trip to china. that was true. dobbs business show last night. i said the chinese did not want
to talk about hunter biden. that is all. host: their last line of the president asking you to raise the issue or not. guest: he did not ask me to raise the issue. i wanted to clarify that before we got to our discussion on china. rich starts us off in ohio. you are on with our guest, michael pillsbury. caller: interesting discussions going on here. oneresting discussions going that china has joined organizations and they are supposed to agree on certain things. if they would join, they were supposed to do things. they were supposed to do certain things. they choose not to do them. meanwhile, when they say you should do this, they say they are getting bullied. they agreed to the benefits of the organization that they should do these things.
that they call it bullying in the press goes right along with them. does their talking points and puts us in a difficult point. the second point is, people in china can get tripped -- to get tracked by saying bad things. they can get tracked in the united states through some of our internet companies. i will hang up and hear your answers. guest: well, there is not really a question in there. the chinese have joined many organizations. they generally abide by the rules of all of them. mostthey violate rules -- outrages from my point of view is the wto. it took 15 years of negotiations before they were allowed to join the wto. when they violated those provisions -- one example is not to provide government subsidies
to injuries -- when they violate those rules, there is a dispute resolution -- sort of a committee of judges in geneva. we have sued china. they have also sued us in this court. they have a nasty pattern. i will give you an example. they lost a case in 2012. they were accused of not opening their market to our main credit cards, mastercard, visa, discovery, american express. they lost fair and square. they admitted it was true. the order from the dispute settlement council was they would open their markets. that is in 2013. they never really opened their markets to our main credit cards. you can use them in some international hotels but not all
1.4 billion consumers. drain the time china has not abided by this ruling against them, they have subsidized their own international credit card, which is now the largest revenue of any credit card in the world. you may have seen transunion -- it has different names in different countries. relatedly keep their markets closed, not only did they recognize they lost the case fair and square but didn't implement them -- but didn't and from the majors required, but they build up their own credit card in the meantime through the use of chutzpah or deception. this is the kind of thing the chinese have been doing in lots of other fields. that is why i wrote the 100 year marathon. i tried to chronicle how the stories began at how clever the chinese are in denying something right to your face. i did not just steal your technology. for how to make an airplane. i look over and say, a looks just like my airplane.
you did steal it. they say, take it to the court. this is what is behind the trade talks with president trump. to get them to have a binding enforcement mechanism. when a ruling goes against them that they violated something they signed, there will be an enforcement procedure. they have to consent to this otherwise it is not going to happen. host: you reference the 100 year marathon. if you want to read more of the fuse on china, that is the book cover. we will go to columbus, ohio next. danny, hello. caller: hello. i wanted to comment on the protest in hong kong. i am -- i wonder if you are guest would agree that -- i am somewhat impressed with the discipline. of the -- demonstrations at that
level here in this country, i am afraid they would be dead demonstrators. that -- or i think that the most important foreign policy -- i am 65. handle our we relations with china. how'd like to get your input. birth i agree with you on of your ups -- on both of your observations. see, iforwards as we can wrote the book about the 100 year marathon. it is up until 2049. i was in hong kong four nights. i agree with you. throughout asia, the hong kong police force is admired for their discipline and training. there is about 30,000 of them.
trainedn percentage is in how to handle demonstrators. what to do. they are not shooting people with machine guns. teargase beanbags and and so forth. the police are also somewhat ambivalent because a lot of them agree with what the demonstrators are protesting. there was an agreement in 1984 between the british and chinese. it did not involve hong kong. later on passed into law by china. it is the constitution of hong kong. they both say the same thing. ,he hong kong social system economic system, the rule of law, all of this will remain as it is for at least 50 more years until 2047. that has been eroding. the communist party has a unit in hong kong. the leader of hong kong is not chosen by the direct election. it is an indirect election. she is not a communist party
member. she must be and is a member -- a resident who grew up in hong kong. they have autonomy, but they often call the higher form of autonomy. it is still somewhat vague. the demonstrators are concerned -- especially about the extradition law -- that china will weaken the autonomy. that the chinese government itself agreed to. it was a colony. it has never been free and independent as a country. to go from a british colony to a chinese colony was not quite what the agreement says. it had all these safeguards. they are still largely in tack -- in tact. the chinese government itself says peaceful demonstrations are ok as long as you get a permit. you can have a big -- you can have as big a demonstration as you want. the police are there to try to
keep the violence from happening at all. not to get involved in a civil war on the streets of hong kong. so far, it has been quite disciplined. host: with that in mind, what did you make of the back-and-forth between the national basketball association and china over the comments made by the houston rockets management? matteri thought the nba is an example of how powerful china has become with most people, including nba and coaches. not appreciating how this has happened. this is not panama or costa rica where you can just say whatever you want and nothing will happen to nba games. china can destroy the nba. it has already done some warning signs. stopped the preseason coverage. the nba has already been discussed in several newspapers.
they had a plan that the majority of the revenue in the future -- the majority of the profits would come from china. american bankable is extremely popular in china. -- american basketball is extremely popular in china. nba executives in terms of counting their money, they are realizing that if somebody tweets something that angers china -- something that is very innocent. we should stand with hong kong. just taking the tweet down was not enough. now, the nba faces a what other american companies are going to face in the future. a superpower saying, you hurt my feelings. i am going to make you bankrupt. sees bank, i am going to close c-span because of something pedro says. pedro says, i take it back. i did not mean to say china is a dictatorship. i meant to say it is well-managed. we don't care. we went pedro fired. we want c-span closed. we want the existence of c-span
to be taken away forever. cool tvl tend to interview hosts from offending china. that is just what they want. the nba case is nationally known now to americans because everybody cares about basketball and the nba and our stars. they are beginning to realize, this is not just panama and costa rica. guest: this is michael pillsbury joining us. stephen is in indiana on the democrats line. caller: good morning, gentlemen. us americans are fortunate to have somebody as intelligent as you are, sir, helping out president trump. guest: you are praising me or pedro? caller: who is pedro? guest: right here. host: go ahead with your question or comment. experience ins
politics, no other republican or democrat would try this. this is the only thing he has done that i cannot argue with. another thing -- guest: the china trade talks. caller: the tariffs is what i am referring to. i do not care about the biden stuff and the basketball stuff. this is what they should be about. the farmers losing money is the biggest challenge without a doubt. these tariffs are taxes. republicans doing taxes, oh, mercy. is when heot like says, all the money we are making. this is a big challenge. this.ot argue with it is tough. host: thanks jane guest: just at -- host: thanks. guest: just to add, the tariffs are attached. they produce revenue.
the exact figure is not available. sometimes the president has said $60 billion has been given to the u.s. treasury through the tariffs that have been imposed. recycleffs are a way to money to farmers and other parts of our country to try to reduce the pain we are inflicting on ourselves through this. i do not see any other way. the chinese would not come to the table before the tariffs were put on. thingsve agreed to some in this 150 page agreement. one can still be optimistic. i agree it is very unusual, republicans wanting to raise taxes like this. republicans was alexander hamilton who had much higher tariffs than what president trump doing. the president has room for escalation. twitteris is steve from asking you about the transpacific partnership and whether the u.s. should have
entered. down, it you break it had a lot of present -- a lot of provisions that the president is now applying. in the u.s.-japan trade agreement that was recently agreed to. protect the labor force, the environment, that of provisions. what the president said during the campaign, we can get a better deal and a bilateral trade agreements but also take some of the ideas from the transpacific partnership text and put them into these bilateral agreements. overall, it is a better deal with each agreement. one thing president trump is working on now is one of these asde agreements with britain brexit takes place through the whole concept can be take -- can be kept alive. election,during the after president trump began to
attack tpp as a bad deal, i noticed hillary clinton pulled her support for it as well. tpp is not popular with our labor unions even though it has some things that protect workers for a variety of reasons. tpp is a concept i think is dead. i is dead. concept, -- i think is dead. line -- ondependent our independent line from california. caller: thank you for taking my call. i just learned, and i do not know how true it is, but my question for michael pillsbury is, who was president at the -- at the timeed in our united states that decided to give the money plates
to china? that kind of bothers me because they are not going to be hurting for anything. i will take my call on the tv. thank you. terms of financing china, it all began under president nixon and president ford. for a long time, the chinese would not take any foreign investment or loans from foreign countries. that changed after the bow -- after mao died in 1976. our banks begin to give loans to china and ultimately, massive. hundreds of billions of dollars went in private equity to china to fund private equities. the largest issue right now is there is apparently $1.2 trillion worth of stocks that chinese companies -- about 150 chinese companies according to the china commission here in the
same building -- ledger 50 chinese companies are on them -- 150 chinese companies are on the nasdaq and uric stock exchange. they are audited -- and new york stock exchange. they are audited. china says these are not going to be turned over to the stock exchange. every other country and our american companies have to do this. if i audit a c-span company and there is a problem, it has to be to disclosed -- it has to be disclosed. there has been a weaver granted in 2013 under president obama that the sec does not require chinese companies. they objected. they said it is a state secret. we cannot tell auditing problems of our companies to the sec. they gave a waiver. $1.2 trillion worth of chinese
companies being funded for activities in china to grow china stronger is not being by what was supposed to be a temporary waiver. it is already six years. one of the options president trump has -- he could end the chinesend say, all companies, the 1.2 trillion capital have to be audited. the audits made public just like any other company in the world. if he does that, you can imagine the price of these chinese stocks might go down, especially the ones that might have auditing problems. theight cause damage to chinese economy. this is one option president trump has. host: the u.s. office of trade representatives tells us for goods and services, trade with china was $37 billion exports and 557 billion --
this is michael from cedar rapids texting us, talking about trade imbalances and if that is a problem. guest: economists differ on this. a lot of economists say a trade deficit does not matter. this kind of thing can be balanced out naturally over time chain -- over time. president trump and his economists do not agree. they see the trade deficit as the -- as causing damage to american jobs. the president has put pressure on the chinese to buy american products. that is about 500 billion. this is what we are selling to them to get them to buy more american products. that is where their tariffs get in the way. the prices of american cars are driven sky high because of the tariffs. talks,he core of the
trying to rebalance the trade deficit. the president has written about this long before he was president. in the year 2000, he published a book called the america we deserve. discussion of china, the trade deficit, and iteris. what he would do if he were president. democrats the lampshade -- on the democrats line. caller: i understand both parties came to the idea they could trade with china and somehow by trading with china, they could bring about democratic china. i think it is completely opposite of what they thought was going to happen. now, they feel they are in a boat that is thinking because if they poke more holes into it, they are going to go down with it. somehow, our future in trading
and getting ahead is linked to china. be -- i do not care what corporations who are talking, and ba, agriculture, or check -- they have to stick with this. the chinese government is an authoritarian, communist party. it is probably moving towards a national socialism model. you -- how does america think they can get a fair shake is what i'm saying. thank you for taking my call. guest: that is why i wrote the book, the 100 year marathon. i'm trying to expose what the strategy is and has been since the 1950's. one thing the american government can do is what president trump has begun. the mandatory trade talks, the tariffs.
there is a little-known law. it created the entity list. it is not clear exactly how you can put a company on the entity list. usually, it is for national security. a couple of days ago, it was for human rights inside china. the president has the power to place individual chinese companies on the entity list. under the law, u.s. companies cannot sell high-tech equipment to any company on the list. while way is on the -- huawei is on the list. a company that builds nuclear reactors. they have been put on the list. one by one, these chinese companies that china is very proud of -- these 120 companies in china: national championship -- national champions. nationalna called champions.
can be presented to the national champion. those national champions as they are moved to the entity list, it cuts back their profit and their success and their global market share because they cannot buy components from us, especially in the high-tech area like chips. to slow thegned chinese down until they are more fair in their reciprocal relations. host: republican line. james is next up in connecticut. caller: thank you very much. toquestion to you relates the negotiations with china. obviously, china watches are political process and sees that only two years into president trump's term, we have both our national media and the democratic candidates claiming
-- that terrorists are the tariffs are too difficult for the farmers. i wonder if you have seen in chinese literature, a preference from china for the democratic candidates coming into power in the next election as a weaker opponent in the negotiation. guest: that is a very interesting question. chineseead such materials examining the various candidates. in a way, bernie sanders and elizabeth warren are very scary to the chinese. bernie sanders was almost teasing president trump last couple of years that president trump had promised on his first day in of his that he would declare china a currency manipulator, which has very negative consequences in terms
of punishment for china. president trump did not do that. he did a recently after two years. amnie repeatedly said when i president, i will declare china a currency manipulator. elizabeth warren has a trade plant that has echoes of the trade union leadership should that does want to take a tougher stance on china. both of those candidates are quite scary. some of the other candidates have also said things that are harsh about china having a violation of human rights. joe biden might be better for china. the irony to me is in 2016 they clearly preferred president trump. they had articles about how he was a businessman. he would be less ideological. he would not bring up human rights. he would make a good deal for china. china welcomed him in the beginning. after the trade talks have been
so tough, their love for president trump has gone down. they still respect him and nervously. in some sense, they are afraid of his negotiating powers and have repeatedly written about president trump, if we make it a session -- a concession in the trade talks. you can buy the art of the deal in chinese in all of their bookstores. lighthizerbert negotiates on these -- what faces him as he negotiates? the firstwas one of to oppose the chinese entry into the world organization. in some of his public testimony recently, he has even teased nancy pelosi by reminding her she had the same view. she voted against china being given most favored nation treatment and joining the world
trade organization. that is when experience. ambassador lighthizer is one of the first to see the problem of fair trade from china and to believe they would never adhere to their wto agreement. he also had of -- has a lot of experience with japan. attorney,trade ambassador lighthizer knows the kind of language the japanese agreed to and that he was the chinese to agree to. that the text itself will be legally binding. will not something like, i -- promising something like, i will never see her i would never steal american intellectual property again. wamtsador lighthizer legally binding language. that is the sticking point with the chinese.
we have studied success with japan. -- they have studied his success with japan. every now and then, you will see a newspaper article warning that what lighthizer did to japan, he is not going to do that to us. you can get an atmospheric feel for the chinese negativity as they go into these talks. ambassador lighthizer as a great gift. he is able to show the chinese, this is good for you if you agree to these terms. host: this is from new york. democrats line. caller: good morning. i have a question. what if every single american just, one day out of every month said, i am not going to buy anything made in china. what that have some kind of itact in at least bringing to our minds just how much we
buy? what you think would have been? guest: it is an interesting idea because one problem the president faces, even though nancy pelosi supports the tariffs, senator chuck schumer has criticized the president for not putting the tariffs on sooner even though he has bipartisan support. the public at large is still working with an old image that china is poor, backward, is kind of a charity case. that we have an obligation as a wealthy country. we need to help this poor, backward china. if you're talking about a one day a month boycott of chinese products, it would have an impact not only on china but on public recognition that your dealing -- that we are dealing with a strong power. one of the phrases trump has used several times, he says
china's ambition is to surpass us. it is not going to happen on my watch. host: one more call from gainesville, virginia. we will hear from john should caller: thank you -- from john. caller: thank you for taking my call. forgive my ignorance. do you feel that the south china sea dispute will have any influence on the trade talks? --nk you for taking michael for taking my call. guest: it does have an obvious impact in the sense of whether china keeps it word when there is no binding enforcement mechanism. to filipinos took the case what amounts to the world court. the chinese lost. the judges found china had no legal claim to the whole south china sea. instead of abiding by that, china said, we did not participate in the process
although they actually had participated, therefore, it does not apply. of thes in violation u.n. ruling, but it had no enforcement mechanism. the trade talks have to have an enforcement mechanism. the other part of the south china sea that is worth mentioning -- they promised president obama -- it was president xi jinping standing next to obama in the rose garden in a public press conference. the translation came through, i will not militarize the south china sea, which to us, i will not put missiles or jet fighters or fly bombers out there. within a few years, they have done all of those things. that agreement with president obama was nonbinding. it was not written down. it was a vocal promise. they, in our view, violated it.
the lesson seems to be, chinese expressions of their aspirations and hopes are not going to get the job done. the: michael pose berry of hudson institute -- a michael -- michael pillsbury joining us from the hudson as the two. we have a new poll c-span has conducted with ipsos. we want to talk to you about your confidence in the integrity of the 2020 election, particularly when it comes to specifics. we will show you what you told us. republicans can call us about the idea of election security at (202) 748-8001. emme kratz, (202) 748-8000 -- democrats, (202) 748-8000. we will take the call when washington journal continues.
>> book tv has live we can coverage of the southern festival of books from nashville, tennessee. starting saturday at 11:00 a.m. eastern, featuring chris edmonds with his book, no surrender, jason paul, with a good provider is the one who leaves. say jones talks about his memoir, how we fight for our lives. live coverage from the southern festival of books continues on sunday at 1:00 p.m. eastern. at 2:00 p.m. eastern, the book, learning from the germans. samantha power talks about her book, the education of an idealist. book, --ie, with his sure to watch our coverage of the southern festival of books
starting at 11:00 a.m. on saturday and 1:00 p.m. on sunday on c-span two. >> washington journal continues. host: c-span and the polling organization, ipsos, did a poll and got together on election security. a crisis of confidence is one of the phrases that came up. joining us to talk about it is cliff young. he is the president of ipsos. thank you for joining us. where did this come from? >> we had a relationship with c-span with you all. the last poll we did was on the moon landing a few months back. we thought of victorio reform and threats to the election system was something that was in essence, nonpartisan. it was longer looking. we wanted to see when americans think about it. there is not much pulling on the subject matter.
host: so the first thing you did was take a look about -- take a look at and show findings. what did you find? guest: the results are as striking as worrisome. i agree unequivocally with the headline in the hell that we wee a -- in the hill that have a crisis of confidence in elections. 53% of americans are confident the 2020 elections will be open and fair. there are huge partisan differences in respect to the specific question. on the one hand, republicans, 72%, are confident. only 39% of democrats. overall, a poll showed on the one hand, the lack of confidence in the system. on the other, stepping back a bit, a widespread belief the system is broken and rate. -- and rigged. it raises the alarm.
something that all of us should be focused on. host: you see the partisan divide particularly on this issue of security. any sense from the polling of what is causing that? guest: there is a number of factors. part of it is sour grapes. the party out of power are more critical. in 2016, it was the republicans. i would say two things. the acute -- the acute problem of foreign intervention and the threat that foreign powers posed to the election system. 53% of americans believe that. 41% of republicans. 77% of democrats. the foreign threat to our elections and democracy specifically is the root cause. what we find in relationship to that, only 31% of americans are confident that the government today has done enough to counter the foreign threat, the foreign
minister. once again, even though it is 31%, we see the huge partisan differences. on the one hand, 4% of republicans believe the government has done enough. only 16% of democrats. huge partisan differences when it comes to the confidence in the electoral system. i will repeat the initial point at the beginning. andlieve we see a crisis confidence in our u.s. election system. host: when people are talking about the polling, are they citing russia? guest: we stayed away from specific charge issues like that. we do a lot of polling. we know it is ukraine and more specifically russia that is cited. in this poll, we try to stay away from these buzzwords and phrases. the other point we wanted to hand,as that, on the one
foreign influence, the foreign threat is probably the key driver of this lack of confidence. see more structural issues like the electoral college. believe thecans electoral college should be abolished in favor of direct routes. there are huge partisan 84% ofnces with americans believing -- of democrats believing the should be a polished. only 33% of republicans. we have this problem of the foreign threat. they are more structural, institutional issues that divide people in their view of the sanctity of the electoral system. host: the poll is available at our website c-span.org. will beung of ipsos back later to talk about the
details. for the remainder of our time, your confidence in the integrity of the vote. you can call and let us know your thoughts. four republicans. (202) 748-8000, for democrats. -- independents, (202) 748-8002. joseph is up first on the democrats line. you are up first. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say that we really need to be serious about protecting our elections. i think we are in a dire moment in our history. i think republicans should be concerned about it too. i do not particularly think -- look at it through the lens of partisan warfare. we are in a time when it is
possible that a growing majority of americans will not be represented at all by our elections. to win theble electoral college and lose by an even more massive popular vote. host: what is it about the current system that concerns you the most when it comes to security matters? caller: i think there has been a lot of work done behind the tones by this administration create more holes, to create more lapses. they know that it favors them. they definitely have shown a beyond the to go rules to win. they just want to win. -- the ballots from state to state -- some are
online. some are on paper. everything is all over the place. i am not an expert. i should preface that. i do think they are eagerly looking for holes. host: let's hear from ralph in washington, d.c., independent line. you are on, go ahead. caller: my biggest issue is, we need paper ballots. we have to have paper ballots. election,h's first bush two, the election polls in every race where there was a close margin, somehow, the republican won. if they win 5% of the expected vote that the republicans won. the ceo of the electronic machines -- and i worked in computer science for a long time -- they are easy to temper with. they went out -- to tamper with.
they went out and made software changes. said, isrote bush and there anything i can do to help you win the election? something to that effect. there -- that is criminal activity. you aidlaws to say, if and abet fraudulent voting, you go to jail. there is a city in california that they decided they are so liberal, they are going to let illegal aliens vote in elections. they were supposed to be for local elections. how do you let an illegal alien go to a poll vote in election and limit that person only to local elections? we have to protect democracy. thank you. host: that is rough in washington, d.c. this is linda in charlotte, -- that is ralph in washington,
d.c.. this is linda in charlotte, north carolina. caller: thank you were taking my call. i am 70 years old. i have seen a lot come and go. i am very concerned about the corruption and our election electedamong our officials. it is disappointing. partisan politics has gotten to the point where our president -- i do not care whether he is a democrat or republican -- cannot do his job because of the constant harassment. needs to stop. host: back to election security for a minute, what you think where it stands and if improvements are needed? caller: i think we need to have -- i do not understand why it is so against voter id when we need to know that anybody who votes in this country is supposed to
vote. i do not know why anybody would be against that. why that is such a big issue. i do not understand why when we have the kind of money we have in this country and the way we spend it, we cannot have a system that absolutely makes sure our election process is above or did and can't -- is aboveboard and can be counted on and that every vote matters. host: that is linda in north carolina. -- from new jersey is next kevin is next from new jersey. hello. the election, trump had 20,000 more votes after the recount in wisconsin. it was 40,000 in michigan. there is connecticut with the paper things that go into trunks. there is all of the college kids
ist vote where their college like in dartmouth. . vote in their home state too no one is able to check on that stuff. host: what are the fixes needed? to havethey were going a commission on election security. everybody said, there is no evidence of election corruption. they stopped the commission. there is corruption on both sides. host: you can find it online. the senate intelligence committee just point -- just put out there report this week on russian influence in the 2016 election. some of the finding is that the mehdi found the research agency is that russia sought to influence the election by harming larry clinton's chances -- harming hillary clinton senses -- clinton's chances of success.
2016d the result of the 2016 election. the announcer -- the analysis of the activity reports the key judgment of the 2017 intelligence community assessment. assessing activities in and tensions in a recent u.s. elections. the committee found that the russian government supported the iras interfere meant i had a the 2016 election. the relationship between the ira owner and the kremlin. the aim and scope of the interference by the ira and the correlation between actions and interference. it is the senate intelligence committee. they just put out the information if you want to find it online and read their assessments. also online are the c-span -- is ll. c-span ipsos po joining us as he did before, clifford young of ipsos, to talk about the details.
some more information when it comes to this topic. view of the fair elections, what did you find? independents see the republican party as being a less fair and accurate than democrats. notion in public opinion especially with independents that republicans may be tilting the odds in their favor. we can think of voter id initiatives and some initiatives to restrict the vote as some democrats would say. the divide is not as large as we see across some of the other questions. i wanted to riff a bit, talking about and responding to some of the colors. we are in highly partisan times. we find 30, 40, 50 point differences across multiple domains.
findspecifically, we do consensus on a number of issues including gerrymandering. no one is in favor of using partisanship to define a congressional district. on the one hand, or on the other hand, more specifically, americans -- a majority of americans are in favor of actually having voter identification. that was a very striking and interesting finding. we expected democrats to not be in support of that. we find a majority to be in support of that. host: a couple of other questions. you asked the question, are democrats committed to fair and accurate elections? tell us the numbers. guest: 61% of americans believe democrats are committed to fair and accurate elections. if we have a fair integral electorate system, it should be large support behind that. it is in line with what independents say.
again, if you look at in-state initiatives to restrict the vote, it tends to be a republican plank or initiative or orientation and not democratic. these data reflect the reality on the ground. host: you ask the same of republicans. committed to fair elections. guest: 49%. there is a 20 point difference between the republicans of the democrats. we found the same with the independents. publicans have had initiatives in the states to restrict the vote. a variety of different policies this is reflective of the data we see here. host: you take a look at some other related questions about election reforms. let's go through with them. the idea of supporting presidential candidates to release tax returns. guest: we were surprised by the question. 53% of americans support requiring candidates to come out
returns -- their taxes. only 26% of republicans. 75% of democrats. it is reflective of the highly politicized and partisan times we live in. donald trump and his taxes are a key political issue at this point. it is hard to disentangle what is important for the country as a whole versus what is important from my politics. host: you finish up by saying the number of people who support the idea of id to vote. guest: we were surprised. i was surprised by the results. i thought there would be a minority of democrats in favor of it. a supermajority, 67% of democrats in favor. 70% of americans in general. -- 78% of americans in general. well there are huge partisan differences especially when it
comes to what the election will look like, there are points of consensus. one is actually requiring ids. on the one hand, the polls also show no one is in favor of partisan drawing of congressional district. those are two points of consensus that the poll found. host: before we let you go, there is a viewer off of twitter asking the details of how the poll that was taken. the people who were polled, the number of democrats and republicans. can you snapshot that? guest: it took about a week. 1000 -- 1030 interviews. sample oftative americans. the number of democrats and republicans and independents are reflective in the poll given population statistics. we have theure that correct distribution geographically, politically.
have are that we representative sample. host: clifford young is the president of ipsos, who partnered with us on the poll. thank you for walking this through with us. if you want to find it online, you can go to our website at c-span.org and see more of the details of the poll looking at election security. that will be the topic for the remainder of the program. debbie, thank you for waiting. on the democrats line. caller: the president's daughter just got patents from china for voting machines. in the u.s. where her father is going to be a candidate for reelection on those machines. i have serious concerns about a conflict of interest. is anybody else see it? no democratic family cafe candidate has avenue -- family
of a candidate has ever brought voting machines. host: that was debbie. this is john in miner villa, pennsylvania on the republican line. isler: hi, my concern electronic voting machines. election, i heard on the news that while texas has early voting well before november were revoked here, that peeped -- where we vote here, the people were voting for donald trump and hillary clinton's name was popping up in hillary clinton was -- was popping up. tiller clinton with getting credit for the vote. stuck in my brain. november, i here in voted for donald trump. heaven behold, hillary clinton's name pops up. she got credit for that vote. i continued and finished my
voting. i went up to the woman in charge and reported it to her. was,d her -- her response though, that has been happening. that shocked me. forked her a phone number who i could report this to. she gave me three phone numbers in pennsylvania. one in harrisburg, one in scranton, and one in philadelphia. i call the number in philadelphia. i spoke to a person. he told me, they reported to me that we have been getting reports of that in two or three counties. host: that is john chang caller: they gave me a number in -- that is john. caller: they gave me a number in washington, d.c.. i called that number. they took all of my information and said, thank you very much. i do not have much faith in electronic voting machines. host: john in pennsylvania.
thank you for the call. the previous caller who mentioned a ivanka trump. you can find it online if you do a search. this is from reuters about a year ago. china grants trademark approval for a ivanka trump. says from redmond, oregon when it comes to voting, he is thankful for oregon's paper ballot. threadsaying one of the is the distressed americans have in the system that is perpetrated to keep people from voting. do not stay home. vote. ,inda from missouri saying abolishing the electoral college be a mistake. 33% of thecoln won thelar vote but won electoral college. those of us who live in flyover country might as well not vote at all.
texting is available to our program right now. --t us that (202) 748-8002 that (202) 748-8003. make sure you put your name came -- your name. denise. caller: i do not have much faith because -- and i know that russian interference is kind of a hot button issue. the robert to mueller report, we also had the senate intel committee come out and say it was russia. the attorney general is flying around the world trying to say it was someone else. i do not think the government right now is really focused on onterference and that i to agree we need paper ballots. you cannot trust voting machines. the only thing that gives me state, that even in
county to county, voting systems are done in so many different ways that it does give me a little faith that the tallies will be host: correct. host:you mean the actual -- will be correct. host: you mean the physical ballot? or the actual receipt of the ballot? caller: in jersey, we are one of the only five states that do not have paper ballots. i do my vote -- i do not know if it is absentee or by mail. we are allowed that option here. i do it so that i have confidence there is some kind of physical paper record. host: that is denise in new jersey giving us a call. ronald is in minnesota. that is where the president will be tonight at 8:00. you can see that on c-span. ronald on our republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call.
we need the paper ballot. the type of ballot that you physically mark the square and not poke a hole in it but actually mark the square. that ballot is counted right in that voting room and run through a machine. some of these paper ballots -- i remember the last election, a box of ballots was lost in the trunk of a car in transportation. i agree with the fellow with electronic machine that that is no good. why can't they compare the voter registration with the social security database? when somebody dies, that name is removed. deal.k that should be a along with voter id, there should be a government issued voter id. host: that is ronald in minnesota. that will finish off the program for today.
we thank you for participating. wayher program coming your at 7:00 tomorrow morning. we will see you then. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] a new c-span apes those poll shows that just over half of americans are confident that the 2020 presidential election will be open and hair. -- open and fair. there is a significant partisan gap on the question. 72% of republicans are confident in the system. only 39% of democrats sure that belief. republicans share in the concern that foreign governments will interfere, but more than
half of democrats and independents believe that foreign governments may interfere with u.s. elections. theof the people believe federal government has done enough to protect elections from foreign interference. 54% of republicans report having a great deal or a fair amount of confidence in federal efforts. only 16% of democrats and one quarter of independence agree. can find all the results, including whether americans thing presidential candidates should be required to release their tax returns, or whether citizens should be required to show a government id to vote at c-span.org. >> the headline in the hill, the president tweeting about it as well, ukraine's president says no blackmail in the call with president trump. the president told the associated press at an all-day media event. several news organizations sending out this clip this week from c-span's video library from 1998 of the in-house member lindsey graham during the
clinton impeachment proceedings, saying "the day richard nixon failed to answer that subpoena is the day he was subject to impeachment." our entire video archive is online at c-span.org. just ahead on c-span, a presidential event with joe biden in new hampshire yesterday, and we will go live to the white house for a news conference with the acting director of u.s. customs and immigrations enforcement. later, retired general h.r. mcmaster will be part of a discussion on u.s. foreign-policy, including the recent pullout of u.s. troops in northern syria, live at noon eastern. a reminder, you can find all of our events online at c-span.org. follow and listen live on the free c-span radio app. >> c-span's campaign 2020 coverage continues as president trump post a keep america great rally in minneapolis, minnesota, live tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span.
watch any time on c-span.org and listen wherever you are using the free c-span radio app. ♪ thinking about participating in c-span's studentcam 2020 competition, but you've never made a documentary film before? no problem. we have resources on our website to help us get started. check out our pages on studentcam.org for producing information and video links to footage in the c-span library. teachers will also find resources on the teachers materials page to help introduce studentcam to your students. >> my advice to anyone who wants to compete this year, find a topic that you are truly passionate about and pursue it as best you can. asking year, we are middle and high school students to create a short documentary on the issues you would like the presidential candidates to address during the 2020 campaign. award $100,000 in
total cash prizes, plus a $5,000 prize.- grand >> go start filming and produce the best video you can possibly produce. >> visit studentcam.org for more information today. campaigning in new hampshire yesterday, presidential candidate joe biden call for the impeachment of president trump. the former vice president spoke to supporters in rochester. [inaudible] >> ladies and gentlemen, please give a warm welcome for congresswoman carol shea-porter.