Skip to main content

tv   Washington Journal Robert Costa  CSPAN  January 7, 2019 11:04am-12:02pm EST

11:04 am
>> coming up at noon eastern, a discussion about how social media has been weaponized and the effect it can have on war and politics. it is hosted by the usc annenberg center. on c-span two, a discussion about modernizing nuclear security and arms control with former diplomats and defense officials live from the brookings institution at 2:00 p.m. eastern. today is the 17th day of the government shutdown. congress is not in session today. the house and senate return tomorrow. vpp spent the week and a goat -- vice president pence negotiating with staffers but no agreement was reached. here is more on the week ahead in washington. host: joining us, robert costa, a national political reporter for the washington post and a moderator for pbs's washington week.
11:05 am
thank you for joining us. your story sets the stage. tell us where we are at and what is new right now. the weekend, there were talks at the white house led by vice president mike pence, but he was the main principle involved. includedple involved administration officials, secretary kirstjen nielsen, and congressional aides, both republicans and aides to house speaker nancy pelosi. they did not make much progress over the weekend. where we stand on monday morning, i spoke to vice president pence on sunday night. the menstruation continues to maintain that they want $5.7 billion for a border wall across the u.s.-mexico border and they are talking about a steel barrier versus concrete. is that a concession? it depends on who you ask. that is their position at the moment. they have detailed immigration funding requests across the
11:06 am
government for humanitarian needs, beds at the department of homeland security to deal with migrants. they have detailed all of these different things. the administration has laid out its position, but it's position has not necessarily changed over the weekend as these negotiations have unfolded. democrats continue to say they are open to these discussions about broader immigration policy across the federal government, but they do not want to have those kind of negotiations until the government is reopened. the administration does not want to reopen until they get a border wall. where are we really heading based on my reporting? we are heading toward the president continuing to threaten to declare a national emergency. people inside the administration, some of my top sources, say they believe that is where this could head this week, with the president use that kind of declaration to force the issue. the political fallout could be dramatic or not.
11:07 am
that is where we are. host: who do you think is advising him on getting to this national emergency position? guest: there are hardliners like stephen miller, one of the top domestic policy advisers, but the president listens not only to his advisers in the administration. there are people on the outside, and conservative media, who he is listening to. he hearing this clamor on the right. if you look at talk radio, cable hosts are rallying around this position. why are they doing this? they feel the president is boxed in. how does he move off of his border wall demand without appearing to his base like he is caving? at the same time, he needs to get the government reopen if he wants to have a functioning administration at some level. there is a belief that declaring a national emergency brings that
11:08 am
administration's view to the fore in the public debate. some people are identifying with this national emergency idea. democrats have skepticism about the way the administration is portraying this. last week, speaker pelosi was skeptical the way the administration was framing this debate. they believed they were using the migrant influx at the border as a way to get what they want on the wall and not addressing it in a bipartisan way. host: robert costa with us until 9:00 and to take your question s on the current situation on the shutdown. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. you can also send thoughts at our twitter feed. the shift from a concrete wall to steel, you highlighted that. what was the thought process behind making that change?
11:09 am
guest: it is a way for the ministration to try to act like they are making a concession. the president palm -- promised on the campaign trail a concrete wall. a wall is a wall. this debate has been stuck in semantics for some time. democrats know and republicans know there has been certain kinds of barriers alongside the border for a long time. not a massive wall, but there have been barriers. there has been funding for barriers. the administration has made the idea of a wall such a signature promise for this president that they are trying to fulfill that promise. at the same time they know , democrats do not want a wall. speaker pelosi has called it to have a wall at the border. you are seeing the president trying to navigate these dynamics. he knows he is an divided government, but he believes he cannot let his base be disappointed. at this point, democrats believe they have leverage.
11:10 am
they are newly in power and they are saying to the president, this is not just about the wall. this is about defining the whole year. both sides feel if they break right now, it will define the year for them, that they were the ones who blinked first. host: if i am a congressional republican, how tight am i hanging onto this with the president? guest: that is the question. i spoke to peter kane. president trump called him. if trump is calling peter kane, that is revealing, he is trying to keep moderate republicans from breaking. you have susan collins in the senate, cory gardner up for reelection. they are calling for the government to be open. republicans calling for the government to be reopened. we saw and a vote last week in the house, moderate republicans suburbs of philadelphia and peter kane of new york and other moderates voted to reopen the government.
11:11 am
the challenge is not just convincing the country and democrats it is a national emergency, the challenge is convincing republicans to hold with the president. as speaker pelosi brings up bill after built to reopen the government, those republicans in swing districts are under pressure to maybe vote to reopen the government. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell is going to try to protect his members. there is not some kind of vote after vote in the senate. house republicans, if they start breaking away and say it is time to reopen the government, that will weaken the administration's hand. host: do think there is a connection between that sentiment and what the president is discussing as far as using a national emergency? guest: the administration, when you talk to top people, they know the window is small. maybe a national emergency is a way to force the issue in a drastic way right now. the longer this drags on and
11:12 am
speaker hello see keeps passing bill after bill they are aware , republicans are going to say enough. if food stamps are affected, if more people continue to be parks arese different closed, if you have the housing and urban development part not functioning in a proper way, if you have tax refunds for some reason once you involve people's , food, money, taxes, political pressure could increase. that is what we will have to watch. where do republicans go this week? if republicans come on tv and start using the same language president trump is using, which this is a national emergency, we know the republicans have political capital, president trump is in a decent position negotiating-wise. it is for others to decide what it all means. negotiating-wise democrats are , watching every moderate republican closely. the minute the crack gets wider, the democrats are going to say
11:13 am
we are never going to budge. host: our first call, spokane washington, laura, republican line. laura, you are on. go ahead. caller: good morning. it is good to see a reporter there. i would like to know what it is you would define as an emergency. i would like to know why it is that below see and the rest of them seem to think they can take our president and our country hostage over their fetishes. money, notaxpayers' hers. this is a national emergency. the president has a far better knowledge and wisdom than anybody in the democratic party. i would like to know what your definition of an emergency is if we have thousands of people flooding our border, people dying and everything else, and you people don't want to do anything to stop it. guest: my definition of an emergency doesn't matter.
11:14 am
i am a reporter. what matters is how you see it as an american citizen. it is also a matter of how the country sees it more broadly. that is the debate. speaking to the vice president on sunday, he kept coming back in our conversation on how he sees the migrant situation at the border, as a crisis, because of people coming up from central america, because of the way he believes the department of homeland security and the border patrol is underfunded. he defines it as a crisis. that is his definition. they havedo see, when engaged with the department homeland security crisis-like , moments at the border because of what is happening with people coming up from central america. the debate here, and what matters, is that many democratic see the same issues
11:15 am
republican leaders are already at the border. top democrats believe republicans are using it as a partisan cudgel to get sweeping conservative immigration policy enacted, whether part of a shutdown deal or a broader immigration deal. both parties can see the facts of the number of migrants coming up, the number of people coming across the border. those facts exist. both parties acknowledge that. the solution is what is being debated. that word crisis -- how do we define crisis? that is what the administration is trying to say. if they cannot get the democrats convinced it is a crisis, you may see the president demand an -- declare a national emergency. the political risk for the president is that if he does believe this and he declares a national emergency, there could be unforeseen political and policy consequences. what does it mean to have the military have a major presence?
11:16 am
what happens in public reaction if the army corps of engineers starts to dig a wall at the u.s. border? no one has seen this happen before. host: there is a question off of twitter, a viewer asking if there is an architectural plan for the wall? guest: what makes it complicated is there are wall-like structures on the border. the president has looked at concrete structures, there are slats that have see-through areas. part of the reason this steel conversation keeps coming up is the image of a concrete wall, the ministration knows it reminds people of the berlin of ominouse kind structure and they are trying to make it seem less ominous. weather still reassures democrats at any level remains to be seen.
11:17 am
i have not seen one democrats be governed go, oh, now that it is steel that suddenly changes our mind on the wall. what you see is the administration not wanting to go along with border security, which is immigration security measures that do not have to do with a security like funding. funding for border patrol, funding for ice that is what the , democrats would like to see more money to. republicans understand this. i reported that the administration lays out $800 million it would like to see added to the minute terry and at the border. it is something democratic aides have discussed. they would like to see money for that. democrats do not want to talk about adding $800 million to the budget for humanitarian needs until the government is reopened. what the ministration is trying
11:18 am
to do is try to entice democrats to talk about a wall if more money for other programs was involved in discussion. host: here is the story on the website of the washington post that our gas contributed to. trump officials make new offers, seek novel ways to deal with impact. new york, democrats line, paul. caller: congratulations for you for taking over. you have done an excellent job. i get most of my news from c-span and pbs. the second thing is could you , change your set back the way it was when you had that roundtable? guest: it is a roundtable still. it is different colors right now. you like the orange set? that's fair. caller: it was awesome and you looked awesome in it. if you could keep checking for -- false statements so people don't make statements that are not true. i get the truth from you and c-span, from pbs and c-span. a lot of regular television
11:19 am
shows say things that are not true and they do not correct them. i would appreciate if you could correct statements that are not true. guest: i would not agree with your blanket statement about cable channels. there are good reporters trying to provide facts. you have the right to your opinion, of course. i appreciate the comment about washington week. we had the same set for 17 years. we have a new set. the new set is still in her model of focusing on the reporting, on the conversation. no distractions. that is what she stood for and what we are continuing at the show. checking,d to fact washington post has a fact checking operation that is first rate. in this era, it is important for
11:20 am
journalists to make sure context is being provided at every turn. i believe at the washington post and pbs and i know here at c-span context is being provided. it demands viewers and readers to do as much as those journalists. sometimes the onus is put on journalists to guide people and that is fair. that is our job, but i would also challenge you to make sure you read more, think more, and not expect people to your spoonfeed you information and to get information on your plate every day. you can make the right kind of judgment. host: wyoming, independent line, ron. i have a question for you. it has been a thousand years since i was in high school and social studies. it seems to me there is no provision in the constitution for a government shut down, but there is a provision that a bill
11:21 am
is placed on the president's desk, the president signs it or vetoes it. if it is vetoed, it goes back to the house, back to the senate. they vote on and override. it does not appear that has been done. as far as the wall goes, i don't know, i don't care if it is built or not. i do not believe it will do any good. i don't believe the american people should be held hostage when there is a provision in the constitution to take care of this problem. thank you. in terms of the veto override, you bring up a reg -- relevant you could see house point. democrats pass something and you could see the senate pass something and put it on the president's desk. if he decided to veto it, it is his right to do so. you could have it there could be kicked back to congress.
11:22 am
there could bea veto override. why is that not happening? democrats control the house, republicans controlled the senate. you don't have mitch mcconnell trying in any way to put this kind of political pressure on his own president by taking up a house-passed bill to reopen the government, using senate republicans who are vulnerable in 2020 to reopen the government and then putting that bill on the president's desk, a president who is known for lashing out, then hoping he signs it and going through the process of a veto override with divided government. mitch mcconnell, that is not his style. could he constitutionally do it? certainly. you will not see him take up a democrat bill from the house and throw it on the president's desk. at least not yet. mcconnell has had the opportunity to do that already. the house passed the bill, the senate has had that opportunity
11:23 am
for a while. the senate passed its own legislation on february 8 through a voice vote as a way of trying to move this debate forward, but mcconnell is not the kind of person who will have a major veto override process. as the shutdown drags on, there could be pressure on mcconnell to givesomething up, senate republicans like cory gardner, like susan collins a , chance to vote to reopen the government. then we will see how the president reacts. for the moment, it is about our republicans going to hold or -- let'sve people saying separate the department of homeland security funding and put it on its own island and keep having that brutal fight month end, month out and try to fund the rest of the government.
11:24 am
speaker pelosi is a savvy political operator and she might saying bill after bill, fund the treasury. where are house republicans going to vote on that? you're not going to fund the treasury? we have tax refunds coming up, the irs under a lot of strain. we have a debt limit coming up we have a debt limit coming up needs to be extended. are they not going to fund the treasury? it puts moderate republicans in tough position. some of your voters may want a wall, but if you are up for reelection in a swing district, you may vote to reopen the treasury. pelosi is going to see how many people she can peel off this week. this is going to be a contest. can speaker pelosi figure out a way to break republicans down? can president trump come up with a way to convince the country there is a crisis? one of those sides is going to
11:25 am
make more progress than the other. host: hank, south carolina, republican line. go ahead. guest: dewar member the pbs documentary, maybe 15, 20 years shame?urt of it was in a certain section of south carolina. i live in that corridor, and we schools,nch of rural some with two or 300 students. every school in this county has two or more second-language teachers. they cannot get spanish teachers in the united states.
11:26 am
they have to recruit them from other countries. i know this is out of your lane, but maybe you could get somebody at the washington post to write an article about the shortage of second-language teachers for our schools. we are paying property taxes for and theyese students are just on the margin. host: thanks, caller. guest: this is an interesting idea and we will look into it. host: independent line, silver spring, maryland. the republicans are using the border acute -- according to the country to shut the government. i would respectfully disagree. that is very wrong.
11:27 am
it is the courts themselves. there is a government shutdown because of the influx. programs, the our first beneficiaries are americans or hispanics, not russians or chinese or nigerians. better.ey could go that is all i have to say. guest: appreciate the perspective. another topic. this was the house majority leader steny hoyer on meet the press. one of the topics that came up particularly when it comes to democrats is the topic of impeachment. do not think and impeachment process is inevitable. that is not what we are focused on. we are focused on getting the government open.
11:28 am
>> impeachment talk is a distraction? >> impeachment talk right now is a distraction. we will have to see what the molar report says -- mueller report says. what we want to do is concentrate on our agenda. we want to make sure we get reforms done on redistricting, on comp in finance reform -- on campaign finance reform. we want to make sure we get ethical reports. host: he makes that statement and seems like many democratic leadership feels the same. what does that suggest on this topic? guest: suggests leaders want to control their conference. they want to keep some of the more left-wing members who are calling for impeachment already. sherman of california has already proposed and impeachment resolution. you have the remark about president trump and impeachment
11:29 am
last week. that is hovering over the democratic conference, but democratic leaders know, having served in the congress back in 1998, 19 99 with press clinton -- with president clinton is that the way impeachment plays out can have an unpredictable element were -- where you do not know how it is going to play with the country. you want to proceed carefully so does not seem like you are using impeachment to rally your own base but doing it on behalf of the country. that is the tone of hoyer and pelosi. they are going to wait for mueller to make his final conclusion about russian interference in the campaign and the conduct of president trump in regard to obstruction of justice. the only thing i would add is let's say president trump declares a national emergency on the border and you have an uproar among democrats who think the president is abusing his
11:30 am
power and you do not have a do'a conclusion from robert mueller. this president is going to test this democratic party. speaker pelosi may want to hold back impeachment talk, but the more this president acts in ways that aggravate the market -- democrats, it is want to be harder for speaker loc to believe -- pelosi to believe she can control this situation. that is going to be this whole year, this new wave of younger democrats -- host: who may not be ok. guest: they dislike president trump. part of the reason they select the house was because of president trump being unpopular in their districts. it is going to be interesting to see how long weaker policy -- speaker pelosi can pull that off.
11:31 am
her people tell me that if she can stave off the wall and break the republicans on immigration, maybe she can get him to work with her on infrastructure or prescription drugs. try to see if the president can maybe actually play ball on a few issues. rugby orommittee's year spent time bringing everybody up to capitol hill. agencies,different pelosi knows it she has subpoena power. the democrats want to impeach not just on the russia probe, that paint a picture of an administration that is pretty tough. the carpeto pull up and so the country what has been going on the last two years that i may not know about.; out-of-the-wa to do that -- part of the way to do that is to
11:32 am
have committees hold hearing after hearing. a joins us.t cost at nbclitical analyst news and hmsnbc. caller: hi, i really enjoy you. one thing i like about your reporting, you report factually. what i wanted to see about this wall is this. forgetting mexico was supposed to pay for the wall. wall,ople that want this they haven't taken into consideration that you got to go people'sr, rocks, domain and everything to build this so-called wall. the crisis we are having in this kidsown, and all of these
11:33 am
and all the people locked up in cases at the south border, that is the crisis. what i'm trying to say is that we had a lot of opportunities to come up with an immigration package, which would have probably been fair to everybody and could have avoided all of this. the republicans refused to take it up as they had the $25 billion we were going to try to incorporate. there were. so many opportunities to fix this immigration problem for them to get on the air, especially the president and say 4000 terrorists is crossing our border and scare the american people, and some of these people bought it -- telling the american people they are going to invade our country and do this and that. bought into this
11:34 am
and really think we have a border crisis. host: thank you very much. guest: thank you for your perspective. immigrationut an deal and how the republicans of , even more recent than that were talking about an immigration deal. when you look at this administration, your point is provocative because, i think as a reporter, did the administration miss when they had an opportunity to do a doctor deal for a border wall -- daca deal for a border wall? about a been talking daca deal in exchange for a border wall. even though the president has made noise about doing a daca dacathey said no to this
11:35 am
for a wall deal. that was $25 billion. now, they are talking about $5 billion. as history looks back, they may wonder, the president decided to do a tax cut and health care first. but would it have been like if they had pursued infrastructure first? they decided to muscle through some more traditional, typical republican legislation. what would it have been like if the administration had taken the democrats offer? . the fix for a border wall? for a border wall? would it be built right now in 2019 if that deal had been taken? politics is so much about timing and understanding the deal in front of you, rather than the deal you may seek. or by whoistration,
11:36 am
champions himself as a negotiator, has had some opportunities. $5.7 billion it wants for the wall. democrats are saying no thanks. daca for a wall has come up in conversation, that both sides are so done in along partisan lines, no one is really talking about that until the government real. your points are reflective of where the country is. the migrantsay coming up from central america are a crisis. dislike there is a democratic and republican caller, as a reporter when i talk to voters, i hear totally different views about how they see the border. is most interesting to me, not just how people see the border, but it is a crisis or not, but how this administration politically has handled all of this.
11:37 am
they have said no to these deals in the past and now they are in a jam. texas, republican line. guest: i wonder if you had said negative about barack obama when he campaigned on reforming immigration in his first year in office. he said it over and over again. i bet you there wasn't one reporter who was curious enough to ask president obama in the following seven years if he was going to resolve the issue. he had a super majority and did nothing. white only look back at history instead of slamming and crushing trump on every single paragraph you utter. it drives me nuts. you're not objective. your job in washington is to go after trump. i wonder how many times you have been to the border? i wonder if you have been on horseback, in a helicopter? i wonder if you have talked to the border patrol.
11:38 am
host: you have asked several questions. we will let our guest into. -- answer. guest: i appreciate your question. we report objectively at the washington post. we pride ourselves in that.we do not take sides . you have a right to your view. i'm not here to argue with you. at the same time, you bring up a relative point. president obama, when he had control of both chambers in congress, did not achieve much on immigration, if anything significant. this like president trump did for the last two years. president pursuit democratic legislation on health care and i'm a change and other issues -- climate change and other issues, he covered those sites. -- fights. we saw in 2013, they try to have the gang of eight.
11:39 am
effort during the obama administration, but that fell apart. the whole thing collapsed. that 2013 immigration fight is in part what led to the rise of president trump. and number talking to then mr. trump in 2013 and 2014, he was paying attention to those failed immigration talks the. hen. he saw an opening in the republican party that was trying to do moderate reforms to immigration. he thought voters wanted to be with the party on that, so maybe he could be the republican that took a far more conservative position. i think your comments, respectfully, are part of this charged debate. immigration remains probably the most charged debate we cover because people wrap it up with
11:40 am
donnelly the issues at the border, but issues of national identity and the economy. there are strong views on both sides. this is part of what both parties are dealing with in washington. they know people have passionate takes on immigration. they, at times take up his passions on the press. as some have today. they also take them out on lawmakers or elected officials. this is the environment in which this debate unfolds. host: as a national political reporter, what goes through your mind when you see stories. guest: we go from the shutdown to biden? is someoneent biden talking to his advisors and saying, is there a front runner? not really for the 2020 democratic nomination. senator warren of massachusetts is already in iowa. vice president biden has to make
11:41 am
a decision in the coming months, is he going to be in this race or not? there's only so long you can wait presidential politics for your boatman. there are people like -- moment. there are people like that 00 o'rourke. there is this group of democrats that are social media savvy making moves. senator warren is signaling to them that she is what them in spirit even though she is from a different generation of democrats. where is biden? 2017. helpful in he needs to make a case for himself. where's the bike in case for biden? biggest appeal is that he was vice president to barack obama. president obama's legacy lives
11:42 am
on in the democratic party. he remains very popular. obamas association with and that whole brand is powerful. the by the brand cello has had difficulties in the past. he ran for president in 1988. he tried 10 years ago. on.ever really caught it was only as a vice presidential candidate that he caught fire with president obama on the campaign trail. he is seen as someone who can connect with voters. the democratic midwest is where they need to win back. senators in the midwest are talking about those voters and saying we can connect. even bob casey has talked publicly about a democratic
11:43 am
been. vice president biden because of his stature can wait, but he keeps telling people the best person to take on president trump, but he has to prove it. . is good to be a competitive primary biden is not going to have the same kind of frontrunner status that secretary clinton had, where even though she was she had so much of the party leadership class with her. bi has a lot of supportden, but there's not a ground swell to make sure he is the nominee. he may be waiting for that at new level, but in this dynamic or people with an instagram feed or twitter feed can suddenly half 2-3,000,000 followers of the popular insurgent, you can't sit back in delaware and hope it comes to you? host: what you think senator
11:44 am
warren faces as she has this consideration? she is still facing questions about her native senator dna test during warren is saying i'm a but about to take over wall street. she's talking about an america where someone is -- she is saying she is going to have tougher regulations on banks. speak to theo
11:45 am
trump swing voter and say you may have been tempted by , connectivityp back to the democratic party. that could resonate. this country is still looking for a change agent, someone who is going to be a force. she could be a popular candidate, but she is out there early. she's not waiting to see what senator sanders does. he is very much in her lane politically very she is saying i'm going to got to iran set the tone. she is not had a perfect last six months, but she is out there. in american politics, you have to be out in the arena to win the nomination. for now, she is ok. host: this at the utah independent line. caller: good morning.
11:46 am
really appreciate you and the perspective you bring and the honesty and truth that you bring. there have been two republican calls and one democrat called during there is 50% of this population in this country that is independent. should have two independent calls for everyone of those parties. with the congress approval 6%, hellespont dereliction of duty. they are sent to washington to represent the people and only 70% of the people are pleased with what they do. they are not representing them. bill passing on a spending in 2017 that didn't find the government. there wasn't a budget included. they are supposed to have a budget on october 1 of every
11:47 am
year. how are they not breaking the law on the constitutional level. guest: approval ratings are always pretty low in recent years. the issues facing independence on herself is the scary was still have a two-party system in this country. politically. the right has moved to much toward president trump and maybe the democratic party has moved too far to the left. where do you go? that will be something we're all watching. michael bloomberg is talking about running in the credit primary but he is centrist compared to other democrats making moves toward running. ohio governor like john kasich,
11:48 am
a republican who decides to run as an independent and appeal to a voter like you who may vote for someone who is more center-right. could someone like ben sasse, nebraska senator or senator corker, senator flake, could they run against president trump for the republican nomination to offer an independent type voter in option? or at least to make the republican party grapple with the idea that the republican party has moved to close to president trump? both parties are going to have potential primary candidates more toward the center than toward the basis of those respective parties. at this moment it takes a lot of money to run as an independent for president in this country. bloomberg is probably the best chance you would have a major independent candidate, someone who would be like ross perot who have the money to get on the ballot across the country. even bloomberg with his billions of dollars is saying it's probably best if i run to run inside the democratic party just
11:49 am
like president trump was not seen as traditional republican. it's him people think he's the first independent president we had in spirit. he does not talk about republican policies the way speaker paul ryan would talk about republican policies. but he chose to run in the republican firmament because that was the path to power. we have not figured out a way for independents to truly have a seat at the table. that is something that will vex this country for years to come until it has more of a debate about opening up the system. host: from michigan, democrats line, raymond. hello. caller: yes, hello. -- on theld like to peoplek times they think that are involved in the
11:50 am
shutdown are essential people but they are calling in sick. the reason they are calling in sick because they don't have money to fill their car to get to work. heavy research that? guest: yes. thanks for the question. they're been numerous reports about some federal employees, in particular employees at the transportation security agency, at airports, who are maybe calling in sick because they are dealing with different financial issues and having issues with their pay or they are just frustrated. this is something that has bubbled up in the reporting across the board not just that the washington post about federal employees having real difficulty if they are for load, if they are not getting paid is the shutdown continues and that is something the president has to confront as he went to camp david briefly he was asked by reporters can you understand
quote
11:51 am
the struggle federal employees are dealing with as the shutdown continues and he said he fully understands but that is something he's going to be tested on this week. it's not just about any cut a deal with the democrats or get a wall but can he hold back federal employees from really having a revolt? either going to be mass people calling in sick? knows? it shows the frustrations are mounting. peoples insecurities about their finances are mounting. that creates a boiler politically that president trump can't avoid. the more federal employees have issues, the more the federal government is not really more there aree political consequences and policy consequences so we will all be keeping an eye on that. host: the president released a couple of tweets this morning. with all the success our country is having including the just-released job numbers, the
11:52 am
figure news and dishonest media concerning my presidency has never been worse. many have become crazed lunatics going on to save the fake news media in our country is the real opposition party. we must bring back honesty to journalism, not the first time he said something like this but as a reporter how do you react to that? guest: i'm not surprised. this is lang which the president has used before. it's unfortunate. the president chooses to use the phrase enemy of the people. we are not the enemy of the people as my boss at the washington post marty baron often says, as reporters, we are not at war, we are at work. respectfully, to the president i would say we are doing our work as reporters, reporting on this administration and the shutdown as any c-span caller or any american could you are welcome with your critique of the press. we have the right to report on anything to investigate
11:53 am
anything. the president can have his opinions even if they are unhelpful. i would argue to the civic debate we hope to have sometimes in this country but he has the right to his opinion. the press is not the story. too often politicians on both sides, whether it is democrats taking their shots at the press or republicans trying to make the press story. story.s the the media can be a foil. president trump passes critiques and he has made them before. he made this morning, duly noted.
11:54 am
host: fayetteville, north carolina. caller: thank you so much for having me. i appreciate everything you have been talking about with the in.le calling the people you are announcing that was going to be running for president, if this keeps going on in the american people that have voted for president trump, they see all that is going on throughout the united states of america, and the democrats will not give in -- like nancy pelosi said the other day, she said, we have one dollar, that is what the question was. where you give one dollar?
11:55 am
-- will you give one dollar? , she said yes i will give one dollar. ofh regards to the people the united states, we're supposed to stand up for all of the people in washington. getting to the border wall, if people would really think about it, the immigrants come here to work. they do. cap has already set, he acknowledges -- trump has already said, here knowledge is that they can come and work and go back. if you look at nancy pelosi, she serves in california. if you look at her home, she has a wall about 20 foot high all the way around her property. host: for the interest of time, what do you want our guest to address? address, want him to , why dothe reporters
11:56 am
you all not report what is actually happening in washington? host: thank you. guest: appreciate that thought. when you think about the last two years, republicans held a house, the senate, and still hold the white house. there were many opportunities for republicans to pass more significant legislation with regard to the portable. here in january of 2019 remains something the administration is still pursuing, they had two years to pursue far more funding for the wall, but for many reasons, it was not put on the table. there was talk of a deal but it was always tough for republicans to come along with aspects of the wall. the administration now with democrats feeling like they got elected in part because they opposed the wall and president now, they're coming to
11:57 am
those democrats a couple months after the democrats win power for opposing the president, and the president saying, you now have to help me on the promise i couldn't achieve during my first two years, that is my demand. that is a tough thing to throw at the democrats. the president may believe he can break the democrats, he can declare a national emergency, maybe get them to come closer to his position on a wall, but the expectation, the democrats will suddenly say yes, sir right after they won the house of representatives on something the wrong base sees us totally against american values. it is an unreasonable objectively speaking to think that somehow this is just going to be something that will unite all parties here in january of 2019. of theense opposition wall in the democratic party is real. republican in the
11:58 am
ranks is very real. this is now divided government thinke president have to about what he is really willing to do. the democrats feel they don't necessarily need to budget this moment because they have power and they think the president is failing. both sides are digging in and that is where we stand. host: i want to read you a tweet that came out. it says the washington post's robert costa is reporting a day after senator mitt romney's public rebuke that the notion of trump's presidency is becoming -- guest: last week, mitt romney wrote an op-ed about the washington post about how he is frustrated with president trump's conduct in office. he doesn't like the president
11:59 am
decided to remove troops from syria. k,u see in romney a haw newly elected to the u.s. senate from utah. privacy matter? because -- why does he matter? because he is a former republican nominee. is not just someone taking shots. this is someone who was a former nominee in the seat of power on capitol hill saying enough of this, president trump. i was up there on thursday. republicans did not love this op-ed. some privately said he was getting a little too out on a limb early on for a junior senator. romney is thinking to himself, he is at a later stage in his career, what does he have to lose? why not just to find early on that he is on opposition of president trump? it sparked discussion about 2020. does he run against president trump for the nomination?
12:00 pm
should the molar report be pretty bad against president trump? should something happen with the economy? may be. at this point. if it trump administration were to collapse, who would step in? these are early days. that assist a lot of chatter. like everything in politics, is because there is chatter doesn't mean it could never happen. these kind of conversations matter as the debate unfolds. romney is going to be a key figure in 2019 as the shutdown continues, as the president continues to deal with speaker pelosi. this is senator romney on because he is a figure with stature and someone who will be looked to as the voice of the republican establishment. host: what are you paying particular attention to this week when it comes to the shutdown? pence is having lunch on
12:01 pm
monday with president trump. he has been in all of the meetings over the weekend. he isis critical because going to communicate to the president where things stand. you have to watch. is there going to be a national emergency declared or not? the president has a decision to make. this is not a president who is signaling he is taking some kind of softer approach as the shutdown that in two weeks three. three. week do moderates say enough? that is what speaker pelosi is watching. host: robert costa of the washington post and tedious, joining us -- pbs, joining us. for apan live today discussion about weaponizing social mednd

32 Views

info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on