tv Washington Journal Eleanor Clift Discusses President Trumps First Days in... CSPAN January 27, 2017 7:35am-8:34am EST
to engage but beware. [applause] there is nothing inevitable about conflicts between russia and the west and days of the cold war, but we should engage with russia from a position of strength, as we should build the relationship, systems and processes that make cooperation more likely than conflict. that particularly, after the crimea,annexation of give assurance to russia's neighboring state that their security is not in question. we should not jeopardize the freedom that president reagan and mrs. thatcher brought to eastern europe by sending president putin's claim that it is in his experiment influence. sphere ofis influence. [applause] host: joining us now is eleanor clift, the washington correspondent for "the daily beast," here to talk about the
president's first days in office, his policy decisions, and what to look for in the weeks ahead, including a nomination for the supreme court. thank you for joining us. guest: glad to be with you, kimberly. host: let's start with a topic we discussed during the last segment, the twitter war between president trump and president pena nieto. what sort of tone do think that is in terms of one of the president's first diplomatic ask? guest: i would not call it a diplomatic act. this is the president picking a fight with one of our closest you have tond really look at the facts behind this. it is his pledge to build a wall and to have mexico pay for it, so now he is squabbling with his own party about how to get mexico to pay for it and they are floating various taxes,
which would be passed on to the american consumer, number one, and number two, would likely hurt the economy in mexico, which would have the end result of perhaps increasing migration from mexico, which is at an year low,ow, a four so i think the president seems to react impulsively to a lot of things and the people in the white house, on the hill, journalists, they are scrambling up to figure out what this means, so i think this is not a good start for president who really does want to change the way america is business with other countries, but canceling the visit and angry the leader of the of the country. i do not think that is a fortuitous way to begin a relationship. host: the president has been busy signing a series of executive orders in a number of
areas from immigration to obamacare. and a little bit about that is he living up to his campaign promises that way? guest: he seems to feel compelled to put on markers in every area where he made campaign promises. he is very sensitive to the way he has been covered and reported on, and a thinker has been an element in the news coverage that says, well, these are campaign slogans. he will not be able to deliver on them, maybe we should not taken that seriously. some advocates of the president say take him seriously but not literally, so he has spent his first five days or six days in office signaling that, yes, he really means it, he means it on trade, obamacare, he means it on immigration, and every one of his announcements has ripple
effects to the affected sparkedies, so he has demonstrations against him on the immigration and he really has sent his own supporters scrambling to figure out how to implement when he then says he wants done. the wall in particular, which i it iseen reporting about, a very long border, almost 2000 miles. there is fencing along a great deal of it. some of the terrain is impassable. you really cannot build anything there. the appropriation that the president is asking for is between $12 billion and $50 million to build this -- $15 wallin andbuild this places, at a time when immigration across the border from mexico is at a 40 year low
and people are coming from central american countries through mexico, and they are walking up to the border officials and turning themselves in. .ou really don't need a wall the immigration picture has changed and president trump is responding to the way immigration was 20 years to 40 years ago. you would hope that the facts would catch up before we spend a lot of money and create a lot of difficulties. the hypocrisy of the republican also extraordinary. they never wanted to spend money on anything. -- on anything when president obama was in office. it all has to be offset with other cuts, and now they are blithely talking about coming up with $12 billion to $15 billion without blinking and i. paul ryan, speaker known to be fiscally
conservative, said he was on board with this. guest: yes, so i don't know how they would pull that off, and along with the tax cuts that the new president has promised. host: we're talking with eleanor clift of "the daily beast" about president donald trump's weekend office so far and what you might accomplish in the future. democrats can call (202)-748-8000. republicans, (202)-748-8001. independents can call (202)-748-8002. bit, jumpinglittle off on that discussion about the reaction from house speaker paul ryan and leader mitch mcconnell, they have the majority in the congress, and the white house. how much, if any resistance, mike the president pace from his own party? so far, it does not seem much but they differ on a lot of issues. guest: they do, and when they get down to crafting legislation , and again, coming up with the
dollars and the congressional costs everything out, we will see in bold letters how this inflates the deficit, so i think they will be political fights ahead, particularly over obamacare. if the president approaches this like the ceo he was, it all seems easy, you replace it, do it, make it better, and it is a lot more difficult and government, or you have checks, balances, many different groups competing. with obama care, you have hospitals for the first time are getting reimbursed for the emergency care they provide, you people who have health insurance who did not have it before, so it would be disruptive to repeal obama care without having a serious plan to put in place. the wayho has looked at
health care works in this country, because the insurance companies are at the center, it is really a balancing act, and you have to come up with revenue somewhere, and if you don't like taxes, if you don't like a mandate on people who are healthy to buy health insurance comes of that when you are sick, they will be covered, there are not a lot of praise to get to the outcome you want. i think the democrats on one hand a kind of enjoying watching the republicans squirm over this. in the end, they are real lives, real people, and they are nervous about the prospect of potential removing health coverage. have glenn tilton from lansing, illinois, democratic line. you are on with eleanor clift. caller: [indiscernible] host: are you there? gwendolyn.lost john is from maryland on the
republican line. good morning. caller: how are you? host: good. caller: i am calling in to comment on some of what the callers have said. i think how people are supposed president,rting our and telling the public that he is hit their-like, that detracts from the caller -- that he is hitler-like, that detracts from the caller. as for the executive actions, they are to undo unlawful executive actions that have been put in place by the last president. host: ok. guest: first of all, i would agree that hitler's analogies are never good and president obama in his final press conference said, people are saying this is the end of the world. he said, nothing is the end of the world into the end of the world, so you do have to use your metaphors carefully and
appropriately. , thetive actions president's executive actions were lawful, not challenged in court, not overturned. the president does have a broad range of authority with these executive actions, and i think president trump is now doing the same and his actions will be tested in the court of public opinion, as well. upt: there are people lining for today's march for life, a pro-life demonstration that is taking place in washington today. "usa today" reports that vice president pence will be speaking there. it says vice president pence would become the highest-ranking government official to speak in person at an annual antiabortion march in washington on friday. "new york times a quote reported , who was an early
congressional leader of efforts to defund planned parenthood, was a speaker at the march for life during the 12 years he served in congress. talk about the issue of abortion in this administration. is this a time that republicans can gain more traction on the issue? is it the likelihood that planned parenthood will be defunded? guest: i think there will be greater numbers for this year's march, perhaps compared to recent marches because i do think opponents of abortion rights to feel emboldened by the administration. vice president pence was in the forefront of efforts to defund planned parenthood. bills that number of restrict access to abortion in his home state of indiana. orders i believe that president trump signed was to ban onte the global
giving american aid to groups, not only that perform abortions, but that even council to mention the possibility of abortion in the counseling, and that has been dubbed in mexico city -- dubbed the mexico city banned because it originated in a meeting in mexico city when president reagan was in office, and republicans often reinstated the band, so list i think the division between the two parties is quite evident on the issue of abortion rights and it will play a big role when the president names his nominee to fill the vacant supreme court seat. generally, senators are wary nominee tong a commit one way or the other that
-- propport the leeway be weighed and the nominee skirts around the come up but i think both will be direct on questioning ofhe the nominee because that goes to one of candidate trump's specific pledges that he would name pro-life judges to the court. host: a programming note, we will carry coverage of the march for life rally on c-span at noon. can get that on www.c-span.org and on c-span radio through our c-span radio app. al from buffalo, new york, independent line. the morning. caller: good morning, everybody. guest: good morning. caller: glad to be part of this. from aing to speak military point of stance because i have been there for 25 years. the ground troop.
the things that trump is doing, he is coming up with a hatchet. he is the only one swinging that , but the people he is singing it on are the ones who are trying to back him up. -- my fingers -- my really needey don't that there. germany had it, it did not work. it came down. my other think is abortion. raped? this person is you know what i mean? obamacare, wethis are talking $30 million from the day he rebukes it. host: let's let eleanor clift respond. guest: i think the caller makes good points. asdid identify himself
former military, and i would add we have not even gotten to the president's with the idea of and saying torture that he has talked to some very smart people, and he of course is smart himself, and they say it works and he believes it works, and then he flips and says, well, general mattis, the new defense secretary, who when he was being interviewed initially for the job of the defense secretary, and then president-elect trump asked him about torture and general mattis , and theid not work president-elect adopted that position and now he has flipped back and said, yes, he will follow general mattis. this back-and-forth and this assertion that, yes, he believes in torture, yes it works, really unsettles leaders around the
world, particularly the new prime minister from the u.k., who was with the president yesterday addressing the republican retreat and to he will meet with today. think many people look at general mattis, who was , only ad with 98 votes single vote against him, new york senator, because he had not spent the requisite seven years out of the military. there is a great deal of confidence being put in general mattis, who restrained president trump on some of the top of the head judgments that he tends to make. host: on the one senator who has opposed all of the president-elect's cabinet picks so far, but it appeared to have no obstacle to confirmation. what about that and have the
democrats are responding, and even some republicans, marco rubio expressed concerns about rex tillerson before voting for him, what to think about the reaction from congress, particularly democrats about president trump cabinet picks? democrats don't have any power. the only power is to shine a light on these nominees, some of their ethics problems, complex they have in terms of the agencies they will head or the complex the president trump, but they don't have a boat. they are 52 republicans, 48 democrats, including the two who are independent that caucus with the democrats. in 2013, i think it was, the democratic leader changed the rules with the consent of the democrats that they gave up the right to filibuster executive appointments and lower court
judges, and they did that because they cannot get every -- anybody confirmed for the obama administration and they did get some important to do so seats -- judicial seats still, but the consequences is that everyone of these nominees, if the republicans stick together, everyone of them will be confirmed. you have president trump grumbling that it is taking so long. again, he is responding like the ceo. if you are the ceo of a global corporation or enterprise that he was and still is, you are used to stopping your finger and everybody gets things done. it is frustrating to him that democrats are using what little power they have the slow down some of these nominations by a matter of days. host: we are talking with eleanor clift, the washington correspondent from "the daily beast." covered every presidential campaign since 1976, formally a white house
correspondent for "the los angeles times." from north carolina on the democratic line, hi. doing? how are you last week, all i have heard about it is how they are trying to [indiscernible] donald trump. you know, about 18 months ago, donald trump started to de -legitimize the world, he has talked about the pope, the cia, arnold schwarzenegger, meryl streep, governors, foreign leaders, everybody that said anything, he put them down. and then they get up there and they start crying about june -- de-legitimizing [indiscernible] come on, mr.. in this wall.
they will probably start trying to build it and they will build some. it is something like the alamo now. part -- it will be a think in our history like stagg field out here in bolden county. it is an old slave plantation, but we keep it as a dark spot in our history. we have pearl harbor, things we have done, wounded knee, they haven't think out there about it, the largest mass shooting in the history of america, a bunch of white european christian immigrants or sons of immigrants come over here under the direction of the white guy and
killed on the indians. host: eleanor clift -- let's let eleanor clift respond. guest: that was appropriate history that he sided carried if you project 50 years into the future, if there is part of this world built, it could be kind of attitude thatan we will not be proud of at the time. host: let's talk a little bit more about democrats and how they are reacting or might react to president trump's presidency. in "politico," there is a piece that talks about a potential scorched earth strategy by the democrats, that says what began as a high-minded discussion about the position the democratic party against president donald trump appears to be nearing its conclusion.
host: the goes on to say they were entitled to a grace period, but there is damage to the credibility of the presidency that has already been profound, said washington governor jay inslee. they were entitled to a grace period, and they blew it. what do you think? guest: i think they are going to be very oppositional when it repealing a obamacare whatevernd looking at replacement it impacts. i think it will be very oppositional on the immigration proposals that he is putting in. the president so far has not
touched doc, the executive order president obama signed that allow children brought here by their parents, basically grown up as americans to be free of prosecution for the immediate future. he is not going near that. i think there will be some reasons for democrats to collaborate. there is a political reason. you have democrats who are up in 2018, senators in states that , so i am notwon sure that the reflexive opposition to everything is going to be a place for them at home. there is great hope on the that talks about donald trump's announcements about a big zsa zsa gabor be
something democrats would go along with. president obama tried to get money for infrastructure will time in office and republicans it did not want to spend money. it is now uncertain what president trump means, money for the social projects or simply tax breaks for big developers to be building projects of their own choosing. iat has to be decided, but think democrats want government to work, and i think there will be times when they will work with mr. trump. host: liam from louisiana. republican. hi. caller: good morning. guest: good morning. caller: this is retired command sergeant william h hood for the united states army. i would like to speak to my lady eleanor. can i speak?
host: go ahead. caller: my lady eleanor, i am 82 years old, i have watched you many years, my lady. once upon a why don't you tell the truth about that 20 million people that are on medicaid that you all keep talking about. the tax bakers -- the taxpayers of the ones making sure they had that health care. why don't you tell the truth? once upon a time, you were a truth splitter, right down the middle. now you jumped on the democratic side, ma'am. don't break my heart. you were one of my great, great reporters. and now you are jumping on the democratic side, and it is obvious. don't do that. once theevidence investigation is complete, i see
it myself, there is a lot of fraud. bill,is a lot in the louisiana -- a lot here in louisiana. california, new york, and chicago, and investigation will prove that come and you know that. host: let's get eleanor a chance to respond. guest: first of all, i reported the truth as i understand it from the people i talked to the research that i do. that everyone across the political divide understands how disruptive it would be if you took away obamacare. i think a lot of republicans are nervous about that as well. host: speaking of the plan to replace obamacare, the hill points out there are competing plans that republicans are mowing, and they highlight the gop divide. gop bill introduced by senators
bill cassidy of louisiana, and susan collins of maine speaks of a middle ground to replace obamacare, but invited harsh opposition from both sides despite a plea for bipartisanship. democrats have blasted legislation. senator rand paul introduced the only other senate proposal with legislative language, simply called the obamacare replacement act, after calling the cassidy plan not conservative enough. senator cassidy said it is really difficult to keep the coverage for pre-existing conditions and other things without a mandate. what might the republicans come out with, and how might it be received? guest: the whole point is that everybody pays -- the healthy pay as well as the sick. if you only have an insurance full of sick people, then it
would be very costly and insurance company are not going to want to pay for it. and healthy people do face the risk that they will get old and sick someday. so it makes a certain amount of sense, and it is very difficult to take away that mandate and still provide coverage. billusan collins/cassidy would allow states where obama , and allow the states to keep it, and there are a number of those states that is true. i believe they include indiana, mr. pence's home state, kentucky, ohio, as well as other blue states -- california. obamacare is usually popular there and they have really -- and they have many enrollees. republicans recoil against that theire it goes against premise that obamacare is a massive failure, so they had a political problem there.
collins is onto something. and that is to get the state more flexibility. and if they don't like obamacare, let's tonight a kind of plan they want with the understanding that they have to have some sort of a mandate, or else have you pay for it? host: gerald is calling in from greenville, north carolina. you are on with eleanor clift. caller: yes, i want to make a couple of comments. one thing about the wall and who will pay for it and what have you. the money that was millions and millions and millions that we will save and cutting off funding to all of the sanctuary cities like los angeles and chicago and new york, that money will pay for a good portion of we don't wall built so have to pay money they are now willing to abide by the law of sorts.
obamacare, i just want to say, that plan shot itself in the foot when they allowed 25ldren, or young adults age , to stay on their parent's plan. young people staying on their parent's insurance too long. -- when they get 18 and groaning get out on their own, they should have to buy obamacare plans, too. when you take the young, healthy pool and added into the higher, high risk people, that spreads out the risk, and should make the cost more affordable. you take all these young people and leave them on their parent's
plan, you are taking out the young, healthy people and taking them out of the risk for. um, i think if the caller had people familiar with all of these aspects of insurance coverage in payments, it would be clear to him that those number simply don't add up. try to take, if you away all of the provision of young people staying on their parent's plan until 26, you will probably get a big revolt in this country. that is one of the most popular provisions. secondly, he talked about the older pool. at age 65 in this country, you can get onto medicare, which is one of the most popular programs among seniors ever. [laughter] quote government run. government does pay for people's coverage.
and so, the notion you can withhold grant money to big thats and sanctuary cities goes to the police department, and somehow that would come up with the money to pay for the wall, that would not work either. [laughter] anyway, it is the kind of mythology that is out there. and it doesn't really hold up under scrutiny. host: we are talking with eleanor clift, the washington correspondent for the daily beast. our callers can join our conversation -- democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. and independents, 202-748-8002. you mentioned the supreme court case that is coming up today and the washington times that points out the dnc is divided on
whether to block donald trump's supreme court pick, heresentative keith ellison, has been strikingly silent on whether his party should flexed the filibuster to block a gop supreme court nominee, getting his competitors an opening to draw distinctions. the issue surfaced this week after former labor secretary thomas perez widely considered mr. ellison's top rival for the dnc post, said republicans did everything to gum up president obama's agenda, so democrats should return the favor by filibustering president trump's upcoming high court pickering you expect the filibuster and president trump announces his pick next week, my the democrats wait and see who was chosen? guest: there is never been a full-blown filibuster for a supreme court nominee, although the threat is always been there.
i think the democrats feel that they have some cards to play diduse the republicans something a president, which was refused to consider president for almost a year. justin scalia died in february of 2016, and they sat on merit nomination and refused to give him a hearing or a vote. if you look at the list of names that have been floated by the trump white house, there are some on that list that would be very easy for the democrats to oppose, and i think also to filibuster. trump does come up with , do know,o is probably conservative in what we consider a range of views that
is not so extreme, i think the democrats would consider him. this is the scalia seat, so filling the seat will not change the ideological makeup of the court. the president is likely to get one or two more, if other sitting justices decide to step down, and the older justices tend to be on the liberal side. so, there is an argument to be letting the president have his choice, as long as it is not one of the more string choices, and really holding his feet to the fire. democrats are more gaining this thesery carefully because are lifetime appointments, and the people being considered are
earlyly in their 40's, 50's, and they could be on the court for 30 years. host: politico reports that president trump is backing the nuclear option if the democrats to try to block the supreme court nominees. trump is openly threatening to kill the filibuster. how likely is that to happen? guest: that is possible. what that means is you take away the last two rule the minority -- minoritybuster has to filibuster the supreme court judge. but there could be a democrat in the white house and that could buy the republicans. you do have institutional leftists, including mitch mcconnell, who might not be eager to do that. host: stevens calling in from lorain, ohio honor democratic line. hi, steve. caller: good morning, eleanor.
admirer of your liberal stance. i have one statement and a question i wanted to ask you. i really believe that the american people who had half a brain would still be catholics. [laughter] that they aref going to put a mexican imports, what do they think the largest import from mexico is? piñata's? it is criminal. tax with 20% import spike the gasoline cost to over three dollars a gallon. senate president kenya really get irritated with trump's fiascoes, i think he may just put all of that oil on a tanker
and send it to china. [laughter] what do you think we would be paying for gas then? [laughter] guest: i think you make some excellent points there. president trump approaches this as though he has got all of the cards and he is a dominant player, but mexico has some leverage over us, and you point on a very big one, and that is gas prices. you have gas prices go up and see how quickly the american people respond to that one. host: in usa today, they report about other effects of potential terrorists on mexican imports -- iffs on mexican imports. americans may have to pay more from vegetables to beer. codirector of the tax policy
center says that while a stronger dollar could minimize the pain u.s. shoppers feel, putting a careful mexican goods that it raises consumer prices in the u.s., consumers would be paying for the wall, not mexican producers. would be veryes regressive. they would hit the middle class consumer and their pocketbook. -- consumer in their pocketbook. --the economy in mexico has been doing better. they are not coming across in the numbers that they were. it is a whole other set of immigration challenges that we have like through guatemala and the thirdand i forget one. there are three central american countries. el salvador.
they are getting infested and people are escaping from that, and they are coming up through mexico, and they are the ones coming over the border, and you cannot just return them quickly. themetained them, give hearings in court dates, and then they melt into our society. and you have a backlog of immigration cases of three to five years. what we need is more immigration judges, not a wall. that is not going to keep people out. people are present themselves at the border with their children. saying, we need help, please accept us. it is a very different immigration challenge that we face today than the one we --and the one donald trump is responding to. he is frozen in time and responding to a challenge that went away a decade ago. host: chris is on a republican line calling from kentucky. chris, you are on with eleanor clift. .aller: hello are ms. eleanor
i have been watching you for 20 years, and i know what you have said over that period of time, and i agree with sergeant major that called in earlier. you need to tell the truth. written hasou have with bovined droppings. i have not agreed with anything you have ever read or said, and why you have a job is beyond me. host: please treat our guests with respect. guest: i guess he does not agree with me. [laughter] the president is investigating what he calls voter fraud. he keeps repeating the contention that up to 5 million of legal votes were cast despite that being by everyone. politico says the white house is president trump at sign an executive action to begin an
investigation into voter fraud on friday or saturday postponing a move that had been expected thursday according to a full report. spokesperson says trump returned a little late from the republican leadership retreat in philadelphia and got jammed up on some meetings that needed to occur. delayo you think of this and calling for this investigation? we have had numerous investigations into voter fraud in this country, and they come up with zero. or two or three. in the last election, there was one woman who tried to vote for donald trump twice. is citing examples of people who are registered in multiple states, which apparently is true of his own daughter and some of his own campaign aides and his white house aides. if you are registered in more than one place, that does not mean you voted more than one place. [laughter]
we have not seen evidence of that. people --ere are good he says there are did people -- he says there are dead, but the dead people don't show up at the polls. what was the motivation behind this? the latest theory is this is now thatr for an investigation will give states a green light to further crackdown on voter registration, and the ability of american citizens to vote. the republican party has a very checkered history in this matter of trying to keep people away from the polls who they think will not vote for them. i think this is dangerous business, and it also highlights this president's penchant to respond emotionally and
instantaneously to something he sees on tv, or some perceived insult, and now he has all of the tools of the presidency, and he can order an investigation and spend millions of dollars of taxpayer money to go chasing this? we have seen too many of these baseless investigations. i would put the benghazi into that category, and how much money that cost to come up with nothing. host: president trump talks about the investigation into voter fraud in an interview with abc news. let's take a look at that. [video clip] >> i said it and i said it strongly because what is going on with voter fraud is horrible. that is number one. number 2 -- i would've one the popular vote if i was campaigning for the popular vote. i would've gone to new york, i would've gone to a couple of places i did not go to, and what i have -- and i would have one through that easier than the electoral college.
electoral college is all that matters. with that being said, if you look at voter registration, you people the dead registered to vote, you look at people who are registered in two states, you look at all of these major things that are happening with registration, you take a look at all of the registration, -- and we are going to do an investigation. you have people who are registered who are dead, who are illegals, who are into states. you have people registered into you have people who are states -- you people registered in two states and vote twice. david, i am talking. i want the voting process to be legitimate. i'm asking, when you say in your opinion, millions of illegal votes, that is something that is extreme and fundamental to our functioning democracy of
fair and free election. say you are going to launch an investigation. what you presented so far has been debunked and has been called false. i called the author of the pew report last night and he told me they found no evidence. he said no evidence of voter fraud. pres. trump: then why do he write the report? again.'s groveling >> so you have lost an investigation? pres. trump: we will launch an investigation to find out. all of those both cast, none of them come to me. they would all be for the other side. host: what is your reaction to that? it will beink that debunked and i hope he doesn't spend any more taxpayer dollars investigating a bogus claim.
in ourob calling democratic line. good morning, bob. caller: good morning, good morning, eleanor. show you have the been on in the forms you have been on. one of the first thing i did last monday when a great president came in was i called the white house hotline, you know, the comment line. he turned it off. -- they turned it off. i checked it before i called into your show, and the white house no longer has a comment line. you have to have an internet connection to talk to our president. that shows how much he is supporting the slave staters. he said they could not afford to fly to washington to protest. now people cannot use a telephone to comment about the president.
it is hard to get an internet connection in the rural areas. he is going to have problems getting comments from those people. the other statement i have to treatedthe republicans nr president as is he was the word. i think we should fight back against mr. trump. he is trying to hurt our country and i heard a general call in. he forgot his government pay he lives on. we have a lot of airbases and more bases down to the south. it is an employment agency waiting for the boys to get out of the south and into the rest of america where they can get other jobs other than working on their farm, or skinning chickens. host: let's get eleanor clift the chance. guest: he is telling me something i did not know and that is that they suspended the comment line. i imagine this new president's
first week in office has triggered so much outcry from so many different corners of america that that line would've been overwhelmed, and maybe that is the reason. let's see. they did not discontinue a provision that the obama administration started, and that you could generate petitions online, and if you reached a certain number, i think it 100,000 maybe, you within get a response. reached that and thatetty easily, was for the new president to release his tax returns. and that is something mr. trump has said repeatedly the american people don't care about, but collectively, we do. host: the president is going to the pentagon today for a ceremonial swearing-in for general mattis, the new defense secretary, and to meet with the joint chiefs to discuss
strategies. they report that the plan would be to strike isis harder and the white house is drafting a presidential directive to call for the defense secretary to draft plans to more aggressively strike the islamic state, which could include american artillery on the ground. army helicopters to support on the group's capital, raqqa, officials said. what is the likelihood they will see a policy shift? guest: i thought he was getting his generals 60 days or 90 days to draft a plan. host: it says 30 days. guest: ok. that is a pretty short timeline. putin is directing much of what is happening on the ground in syria now. i gather the white house is
saying that president trump will be talking with president putin this weekend by phone. so, i would be interested in seeing whether this new strategy that they are coming up with is in accordance of what the russians are doing on the ground there, or if this is an independent strategy? this does sound like upping the president with no boots on the ground, which is always a redline lawmakers have been unwilling to cross. he has promised he can eradicate isis, so i do expect that he will come up with something. if he does not think it through, people will be looking to defense secretary general mattis to think through whatever else the u.s. might do in that region. and the possible consequences and low back.
host: angela is calling on a republican line from florida. hi, angela. caller: good morning. ahead.o you are on the eleanor clift. caller: yes. talking.e lady is can you hear me? host: yes. go ahead. caller: ok. she is very inaccurate in most of the things she is saying. i can go on and about some other thing she is, but i have one comment. madame, retire, go play bingo, because you are offensive to the journalistic -- to the journalists. you are too bias. please retire and play bingo. .ost: ok,= ok. guest: i will take that as a badge of honor. [laughter]
i am not going anywhere. host: there has been a divide. -- talkof white house it is like to be a journalist where drillers are a player, or at least a target of criticism? guest: this is not new. -- gok to president send back to president nixon and my good friend buchanan. he wrote some of those speeches nateringd the press nabobs of negativism. who won a number of states in the democratic primary and the general election would do many of the same things
that we see donald trump doing today. pointing to the press and making fun of them, and really setting them up as the enemy. it is a tactic. the animosityear about his policies, and steer that for the messengers and the mainstream media, that is a win for him. that is how i look upon it, and i do not think -- it does not change one bit the way we do our work. host: chuck is calling in from springfield, pennsylvania on our independent line. hi, check. caller: hi, how are you doing question mark guestg? calling about a comment that was made a half an hour ago when he said president trump has taken executive andons that are illegal eleanor clift said that was not the case. i am surprised by that response
9-0 at he was defeated the supreme court level, and that includes supreme court justices he had appointed. alsos defeated there, and defeated with the universal amnesty plan. i am wondering why she answered the way she did. those are two examples, but there are others as well. guest: there are other examples upheld as well. chain,ent further up the it would probably prevail. an executive has executive authority, and president trump is using it. importantly, they will be challenged in the court of public opinion. what he is doing is triggered a lot of opposition from the public. host: eleanor clift, washington correspondent for the daily
beast. thank you so much. guest: thank you so much. host: up next, we will be taking your calls. democrats can call 202-748-8000. publicans, 202-748-8001. .nd independents, 202-748-8002 collect your thoughts. we will be right back. every weekend, but tv when she 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors, and here is what is coming up this weekend. saturday night, peter haynes, academic committee chair and author of "why: in the holocaust." >> why were the jews killed? because of a long-standing tradition of hatred acting under political circumstances. fermented by a regime that was thoroughly capable of whipping up the population to participate
in it. then undertook a war into a region where there were hundreds of thousands of people defined his enemies, and it resolved under the conditions of wartime to wipe these people out. >> at 10:00 p.m. eastern on afterwards, professor emirate looks at the -- looks at frugal living, white less is more, more or less. he is interviewed by a syndicated columnist. >> the crucial thing is not to spend on any luxury at all, it is to be self-aware about what gives you value in what is worth spending money on? and what is something you are just wasting money, or spending it because people tell you this is what you ought to be doing? >> sunday at 7:30 p.m. eastern, professor michael eric dyson
looks at the country's racial divide. cessation want is a of the velocity of stereotypes, and a granting to us of the same humanity that you grant each other. >> go to book tv.org for the complete we can schedule. washington journal continues. host: we are now taking calls for our viewers with open phones taking your thoughts. immigrants can call 202-748-8000 -- democrats can call 202-748-8000. democrats -- republicans can call 202-748-8001, and independents can call 202-748-8002. susan is calling on the republican line. good morning, susan. caller: good morning. that lady was a wing dinger