tv Washington Journal News Headlines and Viewer Calls CSPAN April 6, 2017 6:59am-8:01am EDT
cng they areot as long as having a problem with losing the elon. that seems like it is the whole thing. it seems personal almost. i just cannot understand why they can't get along and try to do what is best for the country. host: thanks for the call. scott is next from columbia, maryland. good morning. caller: good morning. hi. good morning. host: morning. caller: i would like to comment on that sweet you said -- tweet you said. i think that person really great point. host: that is from jan, is probably one of our most frequent tweeters. we can show that again. thanks. caller: if you will uphold the constitution, i don't see how you can agree with this change. it has been 200 something years of the same thing. now that people are upset, they
think they can change it on a whim. i don't believe that is right. i don't believe it supports the people. host: we will go to candy next from iowa. the gorsuch nomination heads for a nuclear standoff. good morning. caller: hey. how are you doing? host: we are fine. did famouslylong say a lot time ago the democrats and republicans are two waiters bringing you the same suit from one kitchen -- soup from one kitchen. they can filibuster all they want. they have to to raise money. that allow the republicans to sit back and say we have to do this. therefore, it does not matter what side you are on. he is getting the job. the with it and move on -- deal with it and move on. that is all we can do a deal with each other face-to-face
tomorrow and tomorrow the same way we do every single day. host: thank you. will go to washington, doug on the republican line. your thoughts on all of this. caller: i think it is a shame that the democrats are going to force this nuclear option, but again, if another justice i would not want anybody to pass away but does, thatyo wouldn't you think even if the democrats gave the eight votes that they would be forced to use this nuclear option if for some chance donald picks another justice? then it would be a bigger fight so they would do it anyway, so what is the difference? host: thanks for the call. the filibuster made famous by
the infamous movie "mr. smith goes to washington." the story this morning from the "boston globe." the senate republican leader mitch mcconnell yesterday on the floor. [video clip] >> i understand that our democratic colleagues are currently under a great deal of pressure from special interests on the far left. i think everyone in elected office can empathize with the situation they are experiencing. to these special interests may seem like the politically expedient thing for democrats to do for their party today, but i would ask them to make a decision based on what they know is right for the country tomorrow. there is still time for them to make the right choice. still time for them to support a nominee, who even longtime democrats have praised, or at the very least do not block him
would the first successful partisan filibuster in american history. i hope democrats reevaluate their position before the important vote will take tomorrow. i hope they consider whether actions will mean for future supreme court confirmations. i hope they will consider what their actions could mean for the future of this body. host: senator mitch mcconnell yesterday on the senate floor. politico has a story of the efforts senator mcconnell is making reference to for and against gorsuch. the headline and story available at politico.com. the ads now on the air in advance of tomorrow's vote in the senate. >> i put that if i confirmed, i a faithful my power servant of the constitution of this country. >> neil gorsuch is dedicated to the constitution, and he understands the great power given to the american people.
completely qualified with bipartisan support. neil gorsuch is just who we need on the supreme court. >> we can't just sit back and let it happen. dollar terms nominee for the supreme court neil gorsuch doesn't respect the constitution, when powerful interests ahead of the -- putting powerful interests ahead of the american people. we are fighting back. we the people. >> the people still believe that the constitution -- >> was meant for all of us. >> not just the powerful. >> reject neil gorsuch for supreme court. host: some of the ads now on the air in advance of the vote. the debate today triggering the nuclear option. you can listen to it on c-span radio. some more tweets.
joe, montana, democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. i am proud of our senator opposing the nomination of this man for the supreme court. i am an attorney. abelieve that we have had losing struggle against corporate interests for too long. his vote is all it will take for them to prevail more and more. i really object to people like the caller from minnesota in the one from louisiana thinking that this is all politics. it is really a philosophical
difference. glad they are opposing him. it is too bad he is probably going to be successful nevertheless. host: thanks for the call. dennis, your next. maine, independent line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. and givent to take your viewers a little bit of history. back in 2000, president george w. bush wanted to appoint and by the way, i did not vote for president george w. bush. i want that to be clear. and senator chuck schumer came up with the 60 vote threshold. president obama wanted to flood the lower courts with liberal judges in 201.
3. we had a problem because of the 60 votes thing. that is what harry reid with nuclear to make it -- went nuclear to make it 51. that is just to give everybody a little bit of enlightenment at how we got to this pretty poor deal with the senate. host: thanks. thank you for adding your voice to the conversation. some of your tweets. send us your comments. we will read them. this morning, from page of the "washington times" focusing on taking on history and hypocrites. looking at the gorsuch nomination. a sidebar story.
they write the following. "back in 2013, harry reid triggered the nuclear option. republicans who pondered the nuclear option a decade ago and opposed it in 2013 are now pushing it." the story this morning from "the washington times." from lincoln, nebraska, christine his next on the democrats line. your take on all of this. caller: i think everything you are covering is excellent. thank you for having me on the news here. host: we are glad to have you. iller: i wanted to say that think gorsuch is a very good
man, a very kindhearted man, and he is a hard worker, and he is very knowledgeable. i don't know how donald trump got away with assaulting women and still become president. i have been a victim of violent .exual crimes it has really hurt my life. i don't even think he should be president. he ought to be ousted. may be impeached. he is always putting everybody down. it is a shame because he cannot grow up. that is all i really have to say. host: thanks for sharing your
own personal story with us. we appreciate it from lincoln, nebraska. 202-748-8001, our line for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. we are focusing on the nuclear option. do you think it will change the senate? front and center the debate over neil gorsuch, who was born in 1967. he was raised in denver, colorado. a graduate of harvard law school graduating in 1991. president george w. bush appointed him to the 10th circuit court of appeals. he was a clerk for two supreme court justices. he studied at oxford university and columbia university. we will go to john from virginia. good morning. welcome to the program. caller: good morning. thank you. 20 years ago i was a naval officer and a congressional liaison from the pentagon. in my first day of work, i heard about this vote. i thought what is this closure vote all about?
i was not that bright. but i got smarter about the rules of the senate. two points. a very goodhad article last week about how we got to the 60 vote threshold back in the 1970's under then majority leader mansfield. for might be worthwhile people to read if they are interested in history. second point, even though i am a conservative, i am actually against what i think the republicans are going to do later today because i think you need bipartisanship, but on the other hand, i think the democrats have undercut their own argument by some of the very deep ideological comments they have made both in committee and on the floor. i think the rhetoric is not healthy to the case that they have a legitimate story for. host: thank you. thank you for your service.
a couple more tweets. from inside the "new york times," this headline. "the court clash is a loss for the country." senator chuck schumer front and center regarding democrats triggering the nuclear option. this is from senator harry reid in 2013. [video clip] >> the change we propose the change we propose today will ensure executive and judicial nominations. yes, no. the rule change will make closure for all nominations other than the supreme court majority threshold vote, yes or no. the senate is a living thing. , it must change as it
has over the history of this country.the average american adopting rules to make the senate work again is common sense. this is not about democrats versus republicans. this is about making washington work regardless of who is in the white house or who controls the senate. to remain relevant and effective as an institution, the senate was be involved to meet the challenges of this era. i have no doubt my republican colleagues will argue the fault is ours. it is the democrats fault. i can say from experience that no one's hands are entirely clean on this issue. today, the important distinction is not between democrats and republicans. it is between those who are willing to help break the gridlock in washington and those who defend the status quo. now?e senate working can anyone say the senate is working now?
i don't think so. host: some perspective from 2013, november of that year. senator harry reid invoking the nuclear option for all but the supreme court nominee. that appears likely to change today. a live look at the u.s. capitol on this thursday morning. the house and the senate in session today. lawmakers will recess this weekend for a two-week easter passover break, returned just in time to focus on another big issue, passing a spending bill april 28 is the deadline for that. if they do not, there is a threat of a government shutdown. let's go to our facebook page. you also sharing your comments. -- a lot of you also sharing your comments.
that is in reference to a story that broke yesterday on politico.com. some passages from neil gorsuch were verbatim from earlier pieces of work. jersey,ckson, new republican line. thanks for waiting. caller: good morning. how are you doing? e, thank you.k youne caller: it is nerve-racking watching everybody complain. democrats talking out of both sides of their mouth. republicans arguing. all judges are supposed to follow the law. on a supreme court, there should not be republicans or democrats or anything like that. you are supposed to follow the law. you are not supposed to legislate. given a law
argument in front of them. is that a ruling on what was put in front of them, they went ruling on instead of what was put in front of them, they went outside the boundaries and say what he did on the campaign. that is legislating from the bench. no judge should do that. host: thanks for the call. peter baker, glenn thrush also reporting a story getting a lot of traction this morning on steve bannon as president trump removes them from the national security council post. claims stevees" bannon resisted the move and even threatened to quit if it moved forward. mr. vince can deny -- mr. banno n's camp denied that. he was appointed to keep an eye on mr. trump's first advisor,
24hael flynn, who lasted days before misleading white house officials about what he discussed with. russian ambassadors steve bannon removed from the national security team. he is of course the chief strategist and campaign advisor to president trump. we will go to steve in illinois, democrats line. back to the nuclear option. good morning. caller: morning. ake the one guy said earlier, lot of this argument started when mitch mcconnell said the day after barack obama got elected that he will find everything he did -- fight everything he did. you had a year that we went without a supreme court judge. when they wanted merrick garland to be on there and he had been praised by the republicans for , but because it is
president obama, they were not going to pass it. he was a judge that would sit in the middle of the fence. , most of the people he has put in place so far that is pretty much kind of hysterical or dangerous. i am glad to see they got steve bannon out of there. you have a judge that says he is not political that they are going to put on there, but if you look at the briefs he wrote on some of the things he has judged on, that with him on the political side. he sat during the hearings and said i am not into politics, but then you look at a lot of the cases he breathed on, with put it into political aspect. -- which put it into political
aspect. it is all kind of crazy. mitch mcconnell started the fight in a way. at the same time, they tried to kind of like what goes around, comes around. host: thanks for the call. our facebook page. that is our question. we have another 20 minutes with your comments whether or not you think today's action in the senate will change the institution. a political note from emily smith of "the new york post." donald trump junior considering a run for governor of new york. he wants to run for political office, telling members of an elite gun club you can set his sights on becoming the governor of new york. he spoke in new york and was
asked about his political ambition. he said he did not want to be one of 100 senators or congress, but the position of mayor or governor would be "interesting'' let's go to alan in san francisco. good morning. caller: morning. i look at his conversation, and i keep thinking back to when i was in school in kansas. i originally them from kansas -- am kansas. i remember the filibuster is there to prevent majority rule and majority domination. thatconstantly remembering world,ially in today's where we lived with so much happening so quickly. totally inat, i am support of the nuclear option at this point simply because they should filibuster. they should filibuster and make
it happen. this is our chance and our opportunity to speak and prevent majority rule. it is only going to require majority dismantling that. host: thanks for the call. gail has this sweet with merrick garland's nomination, who was put forth last spring. no action in the u.s. senate. we all want late-night humor, whether it is snl or jimmy fallon or some of the other late-night programs, stephen colbert. a possibility of a strike taking place in early may. thewrap.com. the writers guild of america has stated its intention to go on strike as of may 2 if it is unable to reach a new deal. the guild sending a letter
tuesday. the threat of a work stoppage for the writers are big and small screens poses the most immediate threat to late-night tv, impacting the tonight show with jimmy fallon, snl, and jimm jimmy kimmel live. penny, your next, independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. yes, i would like to say, why won't they pay back social security? the took.ney that obama in his eight get all of thee houses fight him?
host: thank you. this headline at the "l.a. times." let's go to anthony joining us from los angeles. good morning. caller: good morning. host: you are on the air. go ahead. why it's want to know the president make the appointment, why isn't each person that the president put in is not given a chance in front of the senate? ignoreld they sit up and who obama appointed for a whole
year and then want to skip the nominee for the new one? that is what the problem is. host: thank you. horrific situation inside syria. the death toll now in excess of 70. hundreds injured. believedxic sarin gas to be responsible for this attack. want to show you this headline from the "wall street journal." ambassador nikki haley showing pictures, including more than a dozen children who were killed as a result of this attack by the assad regime. this is likely among the issues that will come up next week when rex tillerson traveled to moscow. he will have a meeting with the russian foreign minister. that again takes place next wednesday. the president today traveling to mar-a-lago. he will meet with president xi of china. tom, malibu, california,
republican line. good morning. the nuclear option, will it change the senate? caller: no, i think these and it senate willhink the continue to be the same. thanks to your dad. host: not my father. caller: you are not steve. host: i am. vinbeen skelly -- not skully. caller: oh ok. [laughter] will it change the senate? if you go back many years, senator alan cranston was debating william buckley. the liberalsated interpreted the constitution as they wish to interpret it and the conservatives interpret it as it was written.
the constitution has lasted us 200 years and has been a blessing to us. democrats live by the sword, die by the sword. they have a tremendous degree of arrogance. i am so pleased to see trump because when i was 20, i worked for jfk and i was thinking, wouldn't it be nice if we had a professional ceo run the nation. there is responsibility, time limits, common sense, rational thought, and logic. now i have one. it is draining. it is absolutely amazing. maybe people will get smart because they are not left saying we need states rights. maybe we will get back to interpreting the constitution, and our country will be so much better for it.i thank you for your time . host: thanks from malibu, california. what to say to mr. xi?
that is the editorial this washingtonom the "new york tim s post." this from the "new york times." from eagleville, missouri, james. good morning. caller: good morning. first off, i would like to say i don't understand how we can have an investigation going on and a supreme court justice being voted in. i don't know how this is going to turn out, but when it reverses and the republicans decide to start whining and crying again because what they have done now will come back on them just like they say it comes back on the democrats. this is a very important position. there are so many things. roe v. wade, our education, and stuff. if the guy does not care whether
that exists or not, he should not be in this office. he should be where he is at right now. go home. there is more things in life than trying to force people into something that they don't want because of a political reason. i want to thank you very much for taking my call. host: among the editorials this morning, this from the opposite of the "new york times." don't fear the nuclear option. this tweet. from north las vegas, nevada, democrats line, sylvia. good morning. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: sure can. caller: yes, this is all i have to say is have we forgotten that when obama was voted in, the
republicans were the party of no? everything that obama tried to do, it was no for no other reason than he was a black man. have we forgotten that? i sure haven't. i am hispanic, by the way. i believe that any supreme court plagiarize needs to somebody else's work, something that i can do myself, does not need to be in the supreme court. host: thanks for the call. this morning's front page from the "washington post." the president meeting with king abdulla of jordan. the president hinting at some action in syria in light of the latest attacks that killed scores and injured more than 100 others. meanwhile, from the hill
newspaper, republican talks stalled. a breakions will take now that congress is in a two-week recess starting tomorrow, friday, and likely to come back at the end of april. don is joining us from tennessee. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you doing today? host: we are fine. caller: it finally happened. somebody made a comment more inane the nancy pelosi what she sai. chuck schumer today was talking about how the time is over for finger-pointing. they started it. it is that kind of an attitude that makes us shake our heads. i am in favor of the nuclear option if it means the president gets a 3:00 a.m. call to push button in all 538 go in
the full story at washington post.com. robert from cincinnati, good morning. republican line. will it change the senate? caller: i believe it will change the senate, but i believe that good morning by the way. is the only option they have because all i am seeing from the democratic party on the hill is being obstructionists. trumpoverriding hate for is coming forth to where they will not allow anything that he does to go through. 2013 socrats did it in they should not cry too much about it as the republicans will do it this time. that is my opinion.
thanks for having me on. host: thank you. how the tables have been turned between the two parties. daytona beach, florida, on the democrats line, good morning. caller: good morning. my problem with all of this is it will change the senate. do you hear me? host: we sure do. caller: it will change the senate because the republicans, they keep coming up with conservative seats. where was that written into the constitution? they have been doing this ever since barack obama was elected president. it is unreal. we only have one supreme court. it should be fair and just for the entire nation, but now, it is all republicans. the whole government is republican.
now that they have the entire three branches of government, they cannot govern. this is unbelievable. that people should wake up and realize that we are back to the north and south again. the civil war is being fought in a different way. now, the south is in charge. like they said, this out will rise again -- the south will rise again. it will deepen the partisan divide that has infected our politics and our nation. sadly the founders and mr. franklin were right about human nature. david from north carolina, independent line.
good morning. caller: yes, good morning. i find it very ironic that the democrats are so against the nominee for supreme court when every major law organization in the country has given him a+ rating as being a fair and impartial judge. merrick garland, i feel sorry for the guy, but that was chuck , the former vice president from delaware, who wanted to suggest that no nominee for the supreme court should be put up in an election year. harry reid's action when he did his action, that was the beginning of the end for 51 votes. garland is a is good man. he is being badmouthed in the
press. he has had one case overturned out of 2500 while sitting on the bench. the man must be doing and job,te job -- an excellent and he is getting badmouthed by the democrats and the only reason for that is politics. host: you say garland, but you meant neil gorsuch. caller: yes. garland is the one i was talking about that i felt sorry for him because he did not get put up, but there was a reason for that. schumer and biden were both involved in that. nobody should be put up in an election year because everybody wants to get out there and get reelected. john gorsuch is a man. an the -- judge gorsuch is excellent man. that is the irony of it all, which tells me it is typically politics. i think the man should be confirmed by any means necessary. host: thanks very much for the
call. a couple of tweets. this is a story from "usa today." wars as president trump prepares to meet with president xi of china. joining us live on the phone is sarah west with. she is covering the story for the "washington examiner." good morning. thanks for being with us. guest: face for having me. calling itditorials was aborted meeting so far between president trump and a poor leader. would you agree with that -- and a foreign leader. would you agree with that sentiment? guest: i would because when president trump was campaigning, china was his favorite bogeyman. he was notably softer on russia than a lot of other members of his party.
china was where he directed a lot of his outrage on china and what he sees as to accumulation on china's intellectual property. these are issues that he constantly brought up on the campaign trail as a reason to lie american jobs -- why american jobs were leaving. now it is time for president trump to back up the tough talk with real diplomatic efforts. this will be really telling whether he sticks to that ordline against china now now that he is in office, he will take a more nuanced approach. host: part of the political effort will include north korea as the testing continues.another missile test this week in advance of the meeting at mar-a-lago. can china control north korea? what can china do? we heard the president basically saying if china does not help, the u.s. will go it alone. guest: north korea really still
exists in its form because china has backed it all these years. china enables north korea to be the way it is, basically. the u.s. is now under trump starting to take a zero-tolerance policy to north korea. this is a departure from what we have seen in the past with previous administrations allowing north korea to exist on its own, sort of turning a blind eye to it. now, president trump has made north korea may be the focus of where the u.s. will be most aggressive. it is not in syria. it does not appear like it will be against iran, russia. it will be north korea. it very telling that this week, the senior official said all options are on table. is now being considered against north korea where it was not really on the table before. president trump is expected to press president xi on china's
responsibility and getting with we had to abandon its nuclear activity. host: earlier this year, the president hosting the japanese prime minister and now the chinese president at mar-a-lago. this seems to be the preferred choice so far for president trump. guest: it is interesting because previous presidents have done this before. president george w. bush brought merkel to crawford ranch. there have been different areas where certain presidents like to bring very important leaders to have a more informal setting to maybe have more personal interactions with those four foreign-- those four leaders. there has been criticism for why the president selected mar-a-lago over the white house. may it was a bit of a deviation from protocol. it is sending a clear signal to the chinese that president trump wants to be on his home turf and wants to have a deeper more
personal conversation with president xi. host: protocol is key, especially for chinese leaders. quick question from the "new york times" this morning reporting the steve bannon had threatened to quit. he was taken off of the council. what have you heard? what have you heard? guest: the white house is trying to spin this by saying bannon's role on the national security council was always temporary and was just in place to "deoperationalize it" from when the obama administration brought politics to the table. it's not clear if that was ever the case because this is something that was codified in an executive order that pahrump signed. it didn't seem to be temporary when he implemented it but it's the first sign that we're seeing of steve bannon's power, perhaps, being diluted and it could portend more shake-ups in the west wing. we've already seen a high profile departure in the deput
IN COLLECTIONSCSPAN Television Archive Television Archive News Search Service
Uploaded by TV Archive on