tv Washington Journal Noah Bierman Siobhan Hughes CSPAN July 23, 2019 2:31am-3:31am EDT
wherever books are sold. robert mueller testifies to congress on wednesday about possible obstruction of justice and abuse of power by president trump and russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. our live coverage starts at 8:30 on. on c-span3, listen c-span.org. before the hearing, listen to the complete meal the report at c-span.org on your lap top or mobile device. ine you'll the report audio the search box at the top of the page. the audio is courtesy of timberlane audio. >> we are going to take a look at a very busy week here in washington with our guests. one is the white house reporter for the l.a. times. we also say good morning to siobhan hughes, congressional
reporter for the wall street journal. good morning to you as well. let's start with the new large hearings which will happen on wednesday live on c-span. to will get each of you weigh in but we want to hear from jerry nadler, the chairman of the house judiciary committee on fox news and was asked why he's putting robert mueller through a congressional hearing. [video clip] >> we want the american people to hear directly from special counter mueller what has investigation found. the president and attorney general and others have spent the last few months systematically lying to the american people about what the investigation found. they said it found no collusion, it found no structure and, it exonerated the president -- all three of those statements are absolute lies. it found a great deal of collusion and a great deal of obstruction of justice by the that itt and it found refused to exonerate the president. we think it's important for the american people to hear the fact because this is a president who
has violated the saw -- the law six ways from sunday. if anyone else had been accused of what the report finds the president had done, they would have been indicted. not have aant we lawless administration and a lawless president will stop it's important people see where we are at and what we are doing and what we are dealing with. >> i want to follow up with him violating the law. the 448 page report. do you believe the president is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors, the marker for impeachment by the house question mark >> i think there . >> i think there were substantial evidence that the president is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors and let miller present those faxed to the american people and see where we go from there. the of ministration must be held accountable and no president can be above the law. onne: let's begin with shav
hughes. what is the mood on the hill leading into the hearings and what can you identify as awin or something for the democrats to say this was worth it question mark guest: i would say the mood is one of anticipation on the part of democrats but also of anxiety. the stakes are very high for democrats. nancy pelosi has said they will not proceed to impeachment proceedings unless they can bring the public along. democrats are viewing bob mueller as the best shot at doing that. beerman, was the current posture of the white house leading into these hearings? worst -- best and what is their best and worst takeaway? tried toey have undermine the credibility of the investigation so there will be a lot of people on the hill making that case. thingsmply, one of the his allies can do is to continue
to ask out loud -- there are things come as much as there are difficult things in the report, there are things in his favor which is the ultimate questions of cooperation with russia to become involved with the election. and the fact there wasn't enough evidence there to form an --ictment of the president not an indictment but recommend impeachment on that issue i think is an important point. host: the hearings happened is wednesday and you can watch it live on c-span3 starting at 8:30 a.m. and at www.c-span.org with live replays in primetime on the c-span networks. we will put the phone numbers on the bottom of the screen for our guests. we have three separate lines to phone in on them we will get to your calls in a couple of minutes.
staying with the mueller hearings, take us to the gop side of these two committees question mark what are they hoping to achieve with these hearings? it's an opportunity for them? guest: exactly, a big focus for the gop has been to the credit -- to discredit the report, in particular the origins. thegop is not convinced russian interference grew out of anything legitimate but they feel it grew out of a dossier for aas compiled republican taken over by the clinton campaign. the arjun has to do with a tip that the federal government got s but wrapped up in this information was in the dossier. there are three hours for robert mueller to testify. however, there are 41 members who technically are entitled to five minutes each. if you do the math, you can see
that there will be 25 minutes and those 25 minutes technically comes from the democrats time. it will be interesting to see if republicans use all of their five minutes and maybe go over and make the democrats anxious that some of them are not getting their time. host: what else will you be looking for? guest: i think that's always the question with these hearings. how much are we seeing individual members try to showcase their own talents as interrogators or defenders of the president? that's always huge. another thing i am looking for is democratic leadership which is anxious about this energy toward impeachment, there seems to be -- they want to keep the pressure on robert mueller -- through mueller on the president at not so much so as to get groundswell toward impeachment from their own members because they are not sure politically of that the best thing to do. you pushed the throttle but
not too hard? what is success in those terms when you put so much pressure on these hearings? general notion has been reported that robert mueller is a reluctant witness. he had to be subpoenaed to come in and says don't expect them to stray from the report that he what tactics might you be looking for members of congress to go off script? that robertight mueller's letter came out that he was -- with the report, happened to spot him at his favorite restaurant. he was with his wife and another couple in a quiet mood in a quiet restaurant. he does not like the limelight at all. siobhan wasts, caring in a book -- was carrying in a book this thick but most people of not read the report.
if he stays within the four corners of the report, there are many things the american public is not aware of and if they can get him to say those words out loud, to bring those stories to light and the voice of a credible person, than they are getting that information from the public in a way that might not otherwise. not read theans do book and maybe they will see the movie. that is essentially how democrats are viewing this. in particular, they were focus primarily on five episodes. they will take you back to june of 2017, the washington post had just reported that special counsel was investigating mr. trump for obstruction of justice on that set off a dramatic phone call from the president to don mcgahn. that is a big moment you will be taken back to. host: calls for our guests, robert is calling from new york city, either. -- hi there. caller: thank you for taking my call. two things about trump --
first i want to use this point to hiso tweets about the four congresswomen. i think he has criticized america more than them. the hypoxia this man. he has spent years criticizing from praising foreign dictators and himself in the process. it's despicable and continues to show he is unfit to be president of our great country. he once said of you don't clean up our country of the garbage going to do aust tough spiral and he tweeted that on september 17, 2017. he called this country third world country and the washington greataid the idea of american greatness as leader of the free and unfree world has vanished. host: with that commentary, do
it -- do you have a question for our guests? caller: sure, i want to ask one thing. time that we should have evidence to call him what he is, a racist. he has no respect for the presidency and we have had some pretty bad presidents in contrast to donald trump but they have some respect for the office. right, let me go back to the tweet about 24 hours ago that started a new fresh round of back-and-forth about all of this. the president wrote that i don't pollute before congress women are capable of loving our country and they should i apologize to america and israel for the horrible and hateful things they have said, they are destroying the democratic party and there we can insecure people who can never destroy our great nation. can you give us insight into
where that tweet came from? guest: i think it came directly from the president. we know these kind of tweets don't have a lot of consultation with others in the white house. act ands been so much forth this week inside the white house about whether these kind of obligations are helpful or hurtful for the president politically. we are also discussing the merits. i think the president does not like to back down and we know that. as much as he may have been persuaded by members of congress to somewhat dissociate himself from the chants, he was quick to was back and say, which predictable, to double down on this. hughes had this piece last night about rashida tlaib.
to leavenapologetic his fans in michigan. take us to michigan. i went to the district over the weekend and i discovered she has an equitably strong base of support. her voters really like what she has done in times of trying to protect the environment but there is an asterisk next to that. what they don't like and what makes them uncomfortable is that rashida tlaib, the day of her swearing in, got up and said i will go in there and in peach. they think that language is an appropriate and at least in some parts of the community, particularly in the african-american part, it's a majority black district. people are wondering is she getting so much national attention that she is not going to deliver for us back home? frankly what we need his help. host: chicago, kathleen, you're on.
caller: good morning, how is everybody? i wanted to ask everybody on the panel -- all i hear from the talk shows to people like democrats, democrats -- are we a two-party nation or one? why is it everything has to be done is on the democrats? .e elected a senate those a republican sitting over there. they are getting paid like the democrats. why shouldn't they have a stake in what's going on? trump is hurting both parties. trump is hurting everybody, john -- not just the democrats. everybody should have a problem with what trump is doing. when i hearnors people say trump won back down and trump is this and that. he is not a holy. i have seen several times on nationwide tv like the time trump was at the podium and i forget what state he was in
campaigning. one man went to climb on the stage and he would tell people if somebody comes up in her, not them down and i will pay your way. when he turned around and saw that man coming up, just one man, one-on-one, if it hadn't been for the podium, he would have fallen off. if you want to make trump to make out something he's night, you are feeding the monster. back to my first statement, this is a two-party system. if everything is on the democrats, why are we paying mitch mcconnell and all of those republicans thousands of dollars per year to do nothing to blame the democrats? this is everybody's fault. trump doesn't hate immigrants. i say that because he's married -- because he married two of them. he just hates the dark ones.
his kids are parasite immigrants so we need to get straight with trump. he is not what america has tried to make him. he's a big nothing and he's not getting away, he's getting by. his day is coming so it wish people when the, these shows would say it's everybody's problem, not just the democrats. host: thank you for calling, let's hear from our guests. there are concerns in the white house that this vitriol will completely stop progress on legislative issues? there are things they want to get done. guest: that's a good question. we don't know what will happen in the president's main legislation is the renegotiated nafta. that's a legislation that has a chance. toomore it becomes difficult for the parties to work together and the more it becomes too difficult for democrats to work with trump, that's a danger for him.
to getek, he needs spending and debt ceiling issues resolved to avoid risk of default of the country. track.oks to be on things can always fall off track and we have seen that. i think there are issues and we need to make sure that as much as they are playing for 2020 right now that they don't completely make it to toxic for democrats to work with. take us up to congress and the posture of the democratic leaders. how are they balancing with their hearing from the president and what some are saying back but also the need to move forward with legislation and balancing talk of impeachment? take us through the mindset of the democrats? what a lot of people view as racist tweets from last week have been incredibly unifying for democrats. they are in a somewhat better spot than i have been.
underneath the surface is this tension between the group that wholeheartedly wants to impeach president trump and the group led by nancy pelosi thinks this would be an absolute disaster for the democratic party. offill take democrats ewyes the ball. they want to improve people's health care, lower pharmaceutical prices, and the youership is terrified that risk undercutting yourself by losing the election. this headline in the washington times -- gives a preview of what that meeting might be like. guest: things have been fairly tense as i'm sure you and your viewers know between aoc and nancy pelosi. pelosi has given an interview tomorrow in doubt where she says they have their public whatever and they are on twitter but so what? backas furiously fired that the public whatever is
called public sentiment and it's how you affect things in congress. they will just have to have some kind of rapprochement between the two sides of democrats are going to be able to proceed forward and not get caught up in their internal politics. host: dave in rochester, michigan, democratic caller, good morning. caller: good morning of thank you. i'm curious what church journalists or panel thanks -- i'm curious about what your journalists or panelists think about the upcoming hearing. will they mention the people and trump's orbit that made contact with the russians? one thing that interest me and i asked my republican friends, when paul manafort gave the of then information battleground states with the russian agent, if that is not called collusion, what was that? is that being neighborly? these kind of interactions between people and trump's orbit
and i hope they focus on that. they lied about it whenever first question so to me it's for interesting what was going on there. do you think they will cover that? guest: i think you raise a very big point of what we can expect with this testimony. there is no impeachment recommendation that there were individual pieces that may be troubling to people and there were efforts by the trump campaign to capitalize on some of those things that russians were doing including some of them perhaps unknowing, retreating tweets. some of the more specifically like trying to keep tabs on what was going on and roger stone becomes an important character in all of this.
i think democrats will try to highlight that and the fact there actually were enticements that pre-suit of the report that were related to russia and members of the trump campaign being involved in activities that got them in trouble with the law. guest: the caller hit on something that a lot of democrats are really concerned about, the episode in which paul manafort shared polling data with the russians. a lot of democrats of privately said that if that's not collusion, what is? in the area of the house intelligence committee which is volumeo be focused on one of the report, the portion that deals with russian interference. the caller shall look for that question to come up there. host: that's the second of the two hearings? guest: yes and it begins roughly at noon. host: house judiciary begins at 8:30 a.m. and will go a few hours and take a short rack and -- it -- take a short break and
come back with the house intelligence committee. watch all here on the c-span networks. john from orlando, thank you for waiting, republican caller. are you there? caller: yes. host: go ahead, sir. [indiscernible] you have palu see and schumer talk about -- you have pelosi and schumer talk about calling him a racist post up he has given more to the naacp and all this than any other person i have seen. why is it always the media out malign trump about everything? host: why do you think that is? caller: they hate trump. host: the media hates trump. how do you keep objective in
this reporting about everything going on? trying to do just our job. i know that sounds like something we sail up but it's true. there is a lot to cover. he gives us a lot to cover. we don't write the tweets and we -- we are reporting on how people respond to them and certainly many people responded to the tweets at the rally, believing they were either racist or inciting racism and whether or not the president , where he fits in that spectrum is another question. we certainly cover it and it's newsworthy when the president says these kind of things. hughes, let's talk about the emerging budget deals in recent days. we know the spending limits and the debt ceiling are two of the biggest issues that they want to hammer out soon. what is the latest on the
negotiations. post" "the washington came out with a report that we are close to a deal on budget caps and raising the debt ceiling. we have not been able to report that ourselves so i cannot give you details on that except to say that it looks from the tone that we are on track to have something by the end of the week. were multiple calls between nancy pelosi and treasury secretary steven mnuchin over the weekend and talking is always a good sign. host: what is the likely outcome? it may include few if any spending cuts. guest: that's a problem for republicans. there was a message appealing to donald trump saying that we have a problem with spending cuts in many to get the budget under control. standing posture of that committee so there is an
asterisk and am waiting to see how that plays out. deal and then a pulled back and change his mind and i don't know how that shakes out. host: the predatory's the white house and the president? guest: there is a debate within the white house how far to push justpending cuts versus getting it done. steven mnuchin is on the getting it done side but mick mulvaney, a former budget hawk in congress who is the acting chief of staff has advocated for more spending cuts. he has been unsuccessful so far while working for trump in getting a lot of budget cutting. it is been more of an administration that is not as concerned about the deficit so that's an area where the president campaign is a deficit hawk but also campaigned as somebody wanted to spend more money on the military and veterans and want to give tax cuts come all these things make it difficult to also be a deficit hawk. so far the president's inclination is been to get it done and get past this.
talkingti-deficit is a point you don't usually get penalized at the polls for it. host: there is that headline. we did hear over the weekend that the present said there will be cuts in his second term, maybe not now. how is that likely to sit with his republican colleagues? which ones.pends so far, they have not been willing to cross this president. to the point why the senate is not going after the president which is republican-controlled controlled as they are not willing to cross him. who have been bigger critics of this president are mostly gone. we have seen over and over again that even if there are issues where they may have stood on one side before he became president,
they are following his lead and especially on the budget. host: a half hour left with our guests -- hughes.rman and siobhna from is on the line caller: georgia. good morning. we have chuck on the line. caller: the hearings will be wednesday. who will watch them? i believe it will be the people who have their minds made up. everybody else is on vacation. the country is in great shape. people are making a lot of money. democrats want to run the country down. i don't understand it. we are in good shape. there are no wars going on. all the democrats talk about is how bad things are. good grief. host: that being said, are you going to watch? caller: actually, no. i'm going to head to the beach.
i won't be watching this. host: beach, barbecues, summer, nobody cares. siobhan hughes, is that sentiment correct? guest: that is certainly something democrats are worried about. a lot of democrats think they will have a wide viewership, but chuck is not wrong in that democrats could be talking only to their own base. guest: i guess we are the only one carrying the mueller report to the beach with us. i think that is a serious issue. i think that is one of the reasons you see a lot of attempts to make moments at these hearings, because they know most people are not watching them gavel-to-gavel. they may be seeing highlights later, so people are trying to create highlights. that is so much of what we are doing now and politics. they just want highlights and viral moments. i think that is what they will attempt to do. some people may not even see the highlights because of the beach.
i wish i was going to the beach with you, check. --chuck. host: you can listen to the hearings as well. they start wednesday at 8:30 in the morning. the house judiciary committee goes first. the intelligence committee we expect in the early afternoon. this wednesday. brighton, massachusetts, you are on the air. caller: good morning, c-span. i don't think a lot of people will watch these hearings. they will see highlights in the democrat election ads. i would like a reporter to ask some representatives to take back their intense rhetoric about the detention facilities as concentration camps. there was just an attempted terrorist attack there. using theers are
language democrats are using. shooter tried to shoot up an asylum -- if a shooter tried to shoot up asylum center, it would be in the news for weeks. good to hear from you reporters if they think that is here --fair or thought. host: let's start with noah bierman. guest: it is interesting. trump's rhetoric against the squad has obscured a debate that was internal in the democratic party about how far to go in their own rhetoric on the immigration issue and specifically with a.o.c. using the word "concentration camp" which is a very loaded word. i don't think you will see democrats back away from the criticism overall of the facilities for asylum-seekers and others at the border because some of the reports out of them have been fairly shocking and
showing some fairly difficult conditions and deaths. i think we probably are where we are. host: there is a tweet from the president last night. hastor chuck schumer finally gone to the southern border with democratic senators. this is a great thing, writes the president. nearby, he missed a large group of illegal immigrants trying to enter the united states illegally. some agents were badly injured. they rushed border patrol. based on the comments made by schumer, he must have seen how bad for the border it is. it is not a manufactured crisis. he says he wants to meet. i will set up a meeting asap. siobhan hughes, what would a meeting between the president and the minority leader look like? guest: it is hard to imagine that sort of meeting would go smoothly. the democrats are very concerned by the quality of life with what
they see as subhuman standards of living in those facilities. i am not sure any deal would come out of this. host: any thoughts? guest: yeah. you certainly have had chuck and trump originally dubbed them, they have been interested in meeting with trump, but i think the appetite has shrunk over time particularly when these meetings have been fully televised and they felt the president was using them. i think there would have to be a lot of preconditions before they would agree to do it. and even with preconditions, i think siobhan is right that it might spiral out of control quickly. you: any legislative action see in the immigration area? guest: at a minimum, there will be a vote on the house floor this week in terms of standards
for some of the facilities. that is likely to clear the house. probably not go anywhere in the senate. i expect there will be a lot of conversation on immigration deal and nothing happening. host: leo is in pittsburgh, democratic caller. caller: yes, i want to make a comment on president trump's claim that he loves america. if he loves america so much, why has he embraced china and russia? why has he cheated on his taxes? dodger ifs he a draft he loves america so much? the only reason he claimed he loves america is because he was able to cheat and make millions of dollars from this country. host: comments from leo. noah bierman, want to take that? guest: that gets to the heart of a lot of difficulty of politics
when you try to determine who loves america who does not. that is probably an individual interpretation by the voter. host: let's go to mary in louisiana. hello. caller: i want to tell everybody i used to be a democrat until i found out the truth about them. andnt way back in history saw they brought slaves over here in 1619. i'm going to tell you why they hate trump. the democrats hate trump because for years they had demonized the republican party. they branded them as being racist. a lot of people don't know because they do not read history. it is like this. reason they hate trump is because trump fights back.
he is just like a stallion. he will wear up and kick right back. now i will tell you what is going to happen when trump is out of office. if the democrats ever get the presidency and get the senate back, they are going to destroy this country. they are going to turn this country into venezuela or puerto rico. you can smile, baby, if you want to, but it is like this. the democrats, the only thing they care about is getting into power. i want to make one more statement to all the black people out there who think the democrats care about them. forl are being traded in the south american people. it is up to you all who you vote for, but i will tell you this.
if trump is thrown out of office, this country is going to regret it. host: rob is in missouri, republican caller. go ahead. caller: actually, i called on the democrat line. good morning, everyone. i wanted to ask your guests if they have seen the series " the loudest voice" on showtime. fascinating series. it explains how one network has effectively divided this country against itself, and the rest of the right-wing media as well. the question i have your guests is that greece just went through an election. thery centrist person won prime minister. greece went through a similar crisis like the u.s. with the immigrants and everything. and the right-wing nationalists coming in and saying we are going to fix it, we are going to kick the immigrants out, and they did not do anything.
this guy beat a very populist prime minister and won. sticking to the policies about how he would ask the problem greece is facing with the european union and their relationship with america. the stock to the policies and did not give into the populist -- he stuck to the policies and did not give into the populists. what are your thoughts on that? host: thank you for calling. have either of you seen the series? guest: i have not. host: to the caller's point, is there a comparison to be made between what is happening in greece and what could happen in the u.s.? guest: i think the question you bring up, and i am not as familiar with greek politics. i know it is often difficult for us to compare our politics on the micro level two european countries where they tend to have slightly different forms of
democratic governance. i do think that question democrats are grappling with now that you brought up. do you really want to make this a clearly policy-oriented debate for 2020 or do you want to talk about personality of trump, which we hear from the callers is so polarizing? i think democrats felt in the midterm elections where they were successful that they did well talking about the policies and then being aware voters were certainly aware of trump. and they did not even need to talk about trump. they just knew that voters were aware. we will see this week that equation may not be the same. that is certainly the debate between pelosi, who i think is more toward let's talk about the policies and leave trump the personality as a player but not the central focus. base of democrats and the
is fired up and believes trump needs to be front and center in election. caller was talking about, can the middle rise? one person interesting to me but the republican party did not join the democratic party. he became an independent. he has begun to question the two-party system. republican aides privately will talk about, does there need to be a real lineman? democrats andm of republicans need to be rethought and are we at the beginning of that? dan, hi. noahr: my question is for bierman. my main question is rhetorical. out criminal referrals came of the robert mueller report? the answer is zero. all right? mike second question is -- my
second question is, i am very interested in you. what was your education? "l.a.s it like being an times" reporter at the white house? guest: thanks for asking. i will take your rhetorical question first. there were indictments. they preceded the report. there were many people indicted on a variety of issues related to the investigation. an "l.a.at to be times" reporter covering the white house. i am not from los angeles although i have family there and have gone there a number of times. i guess it speaks to the broad interest we have in the federal government and specifically this president. we have about 20 people here for the "los angeles times" working as reporters and editors and covering every aspect of the government. we are fully committed to that. is very important that we get a
broad array of outlets with different interests. we have different interests coming from the west, some of the water and environmental issues that impact our region specifically. , wejust like anybody else are all interested in what is going on in washington. as much as we are talking about disunity in the country, i think there is a unified interesting what happens in washington for sure. host: noah bierman educated at duke university. he has worked for "the boston globe" and the "miami herald." we are also talking with siobhan hughes. prior to working at the "wall street journal," worked at "gq." cbs news reminds us a vote is coming in the senate tomorrow on the 9/11 victims compensation fund. it was quite a path getting to
this final vote. bring us up to speed on where they are and how they got there. guest: it is looking like the senate will vote probably tomorrow on making permanent the 9/11 victims compensation fund. people, maylot of be an estimated 90,001st responders, but also a lot of other people who inhaled contaminants at the site. a lot of people remember jon stewart coming to the judiciary committee and raking the committee over the calls for the poor attendance at the hearing. that probably propelled a lot of the impetus behind the movement. the bill passed the house. likely to pass the senate this week. host: rand paul put up a blog of sorts last week. why and how do they get past that? guest: rand paul put up a blog on budgetary grounds. he decided the fund needed to be paid for in some way.
this caused a huge uproar. it looks like republicans may offer him some type of amendment vote. for this is an instance when mitch mcconnell would be willing to burn up for time. host: senate vote tomorrow on c-span2. you can watch it live. leaders willtani be at the white house visiting the president. here is a headline in "washington times." "meeting outcome uncertain." what are the goals? guest: white house officials are downplaying any potential for a breakthrough or news with this meeting. i think they have described it as a getting to hear each other out meeting. getprime minister wants to in better graces with this president. but there is still a lot of concern from the united states about cooperation on terrorism, on afghanistan.
that has been a long-standing issue with pakistan that has gone back and forth. host: what else does the president have on his agenda this week? we willhe big thing probably see the most from is a rally wednesday to counter whatever happens in the mueller hearing. interestingly enough, last wednesday's rally which tended to be the news of the week because of the "send her back" chants was originally scheduled because mueller was supposed to testify that day and got moved back. to rally is there for the president to have a chance to say his piece. discordy, the level of right now made these rallies even more rollicking and more of a chance to go off the rails as they did last week. host: had her details about where the rally might be? guest: scheduled for west
virginia. a colleague of mine will be there. read the los angeles times wednesday night or thursday morning, you will find out what happened. host: got it. back to the hill. the senate will vote this week on a new defense secretary. who is he and what does he bring to the table? guest: he is mark esper. what he brings is an actual defense secretary at a time when there is a lot of turmoil around the world. the u.s. almost intervened militarily in iran. you do need somebody at the top making decisions. host: noah bierman, how does mr. esper fit into the picture at the administration? guest: this is the longest we have gone in our history not having a full-time defense secretary. i think he is going to be confirmed largely on that basis. democrats and republicans want somebody there. last week, we had more tensions with iran and continue to have
hotspots around the world. withve not had somebody full confidence of the president and senate which is strikingly important in that position. and so, i think with the white house, i think they realize they have had a little bit of trouble with her last nominee so they are happy to have somebody likely to be confirmed. lara in washington, republican caller. caller: good morning. my concern listening to the reporters is that there are a lot of facts being lobbed around. for example, regarding the russia/mueller thing. is a proven thing there was false evidence brought by obama,
clinton, and the rest of them. those are facts. that is not an opinion. concern right now is the four -- whatever they are called -- the group. those people ascribe to an ideology that has 27 million black african slaves owned by country, muslim countries. that is not 150 years ago. that is now. where are the democrats leading us to? i have to ask that question. guest: i have to interject. if we are going to talk about facts, let's not accuse these congresspeople of owning black slaves -- owning slaves. one of the congresspeople was born in somalia.
they have never owned slaves and have not advocated owning slaves. i don't think we want to go down those roads. guest: this is one of the things happening. republicans consciously made a decision to focus in on the four members of the squad. as the face of the democratic party and trying to focus on the fact they are socialists. they are also people of color. instead of focusing on policy, we have started to veer into questions of race and identity riskare very personal and taking us down the road of violence. host: robert is calling from virginia. good morning. caller: good morning.
i got a little off track listening to that. i have been calling for the past six months. i'm going back to the budget. have you looked in seeing what whatresident -- and seeing the president has done since they pulled out of the nuclear deal? he is trying to bankrupt this country. from the time they pulled out of the nuclear deal, it was katie bar the door. he started spending our money like it was his own personal stash. he did not want any investigation. the more money you could spend out of our pockets, the more he likes it. for six months now, he has set us up for bankruptcy. he has already planned this war before he even got started. he already knows what is going to happen. inhas to set up a war different parts of the world. do you know how much money that will take the fight a war on two
continents? war on theing a south of the border war. he is putting millions of dollars into that. his wall, he likes to spend money on that. he likes to spend our money like it is his own. he can spend his own money, not mine. guest: i am not sure i am as confident as you that the president was to wage war. i think you're talking about iran weather has been tension. i think he is very skeptical. there could be more provocations. there could be strikes. the president pulled back from launching a strike against iran last time by his accounting. he is not eager to be involved in a war, whatever complaints you might have about his governance.
at this point, he has not been someone eager about getting the military involved overseas. dan from north carolina, a republican. caller: i want to thank you for the program. sometimes you get long-winded people on here. i will try to be -- considering the mueller circus, it is going to be going on tomorrow. i intend to watch it. i think anybody that is expecting anything significant to come out of it is going to be very disappointed. i think what we are going to is a big firm fight between the democrats and republicans on the committee, just like we did at the kavanaugh debacle. i think what we will hear more is, "mr.hing else
" and "pointobject of order" and all those other andlistic phrases i everything. it will be sort of entertaining but i don't think much will be resolved. what siobhan hughes, wil will you be looking for? will this be easy to watch? guest: the format is we toggle back and forth between republicans and democrats. it will be hard to stick to a cohesive narrative. as soon as you get to one moment, you will be dragged back out as another party focuses on their own interest. it will require active involvement by the viewers. host: as we run short of time, we will have time for a couple more calls. i want to look ahead further. siobhan hughes, the obvious break is coming for the house. the senate will be in part of next week.
what us to the want to accomplish before they go out for august? guest: the big one is the caps and spending deal. if the country does not raise the debt limit, it literally runs out of the credit it needs to keep operating. and say mark esper is the other say mark- i would esper is the other big one. democrats have been doing these domestic votes because they would like to say here is what we are trying to accomplish for you. mitch mcconnell wants to confirm as many judges as he can because he has an agenda of reshaping the courts. that is part of the message he takes out with him in august. with the towns hall meetings, there seems to be one thing. do you see one thing emerging? guest: i think trump is such a dominant figure and the tweets aimed at the squad, it is hard to see how that does not dominate the entire new cycle. host: noah bierman, what does
the month of august look like for the president? guest: he likes to spend a couple of weeks in new jersey. i think we will probably see that. hopefully for him, the weather will cool off a little bit. i think that is the main thing. later in august, he will be going to the g7 in france. that will be a big international stage. the g7 before, he had quite a few clashes with allies and it dominated any of the official business that was supposed to happen on the conference. host: let's get the final calls in for our guests. patricia from iowa, independent caller, thank you for waiting. caller: good morning. about to say one thing the mueller testimony is the truth and that is what we are after. president trump
sucks so much oxygen out of the room that we are not talking about his cabinet and what is going on. temporary ore 14 acting heads of departments. out why theind security clearances were approved by him and what they were about. what really concerns me is the 30,000 regulations that were repealed. on thate things going never get talked about like a pesticide that will kill bees they are trying to get, about people losing their jobs, scientists, because they have 30 days to move to kansas city or somewhere from washington.
he is doing things that never get talked about on tv because we are so busy talking about him. host: let's hear from our guests. guest: this is exactly what democrats are contending with at this wednesday's mueller hearing. there are so many things happening on open cabinets. we need a replacement for alexander acosta. it looks like they have found their man, but it is one more story line. guest: i think the caller is right on this. there is a lot that gets ignored. the instability in the cabinet is a big deal. presidentvented the from getting a lot of his agenda done because there are not people loyal to him at the top of some of these agencies so you tend to centralize things in the white house. they can write executive orders. put who will -- but who will execute the executive orders? a lot of them are open-ended because they do not have the
power of law behind them. host: let's go to tennessee, democratic caller. wondering, do not ay know this is democrat or republican problem. right now, we are dealing with an american problem. i remember when obama had come in. there were a lot of things that needed fixing. he tried to fix them. the senate would not approve anything he was doing. now that we have trump in there and they are approving the same things obama wanted to approve, i am wondering, do anybody realize no one wants to be in a place where they have to ask for help. everybody wants to be able to reach their full potential. we did not break the glass ceiling with hillary clinton, whowe did with donald trump is letting capitalism sink through the cracks.
now the problem before obama came in is even greater. how is that? people are not paying attention to what this country needs. it needs people to work. i'm really tired of hearing that. host: that was our final call. we have time for one last comment from our guests. let's start with siobhan hughes. guest: the big thing i am focused on is the mueller report and seeing whether or not some of the dramatic details can actually be translated into a made-for-tv movie. host: noah bierman? guest: i agree with that analysis. i also am interested to see what the president might do to try to distract attention from that testimony. we saw last week, he is fully capable of doing that. we just don't know how or when it might happen. host: noah bierman and siobhan
hughes, thanks to both of you for your time and morning, up this morgan and political -- politico congressional reporter duane us to preview robert mueller's testimony on wednesday. reporteralk with a about his reporting on the life and career of special counsel mueller. he sure to watch c-span's atshington journal" live 7:00 this morning. join the discussion. torobert mueller testifies congress on wednesday about possible obstruction of justice and abuse of power by president trump and russian interference in the 2016 presidential
election. our coverage begins at 8:00 eastern on c-span3, online at c-span.org, or listen wherever you are with the free c-span radio app. listen to the complete mueller report on your laptop or mobile device. the audio is courtesy of timberlane media. former national security onisor h.r. mcmaster speaks threats to free and open societies. a scottish historian and his wife were also at this 90 minute forum hosted by the hoover institution and stanford university.