Skip to main content

tv   Washington Journal Darlene Superville and Al Weaver  CSPAN  January 29, 2018 12:07pm-1:05pm EST

12:07 pm
white house briefing. press secretary sarah sanders will speak to reporters. scheduled for 1:15 p.m. eastern. we hope to have it live for you during today's house recess. also this afternoon, a preview of the president's state of the union address, joining the discussion will be white house counselor kellyanne conway, nancy pelosi and senators angus king and shelley moore capito hosted by "the washington post," live coverage starting at 2:30 p.m. eastern. that's going to be on c-span3. now we take you to the start of today's white house briefing to take you to the start of today's white house briefing, take a look at the week ahead in congress. this is from today's "washington journal." "washington journal" continues. host: joining us for a discussion on many things, particularly in light of the white house and congress this week, are two guests. we are joined by darlene supervalu from the -- superville
12:08 pm
by adam weaver. if you look at the papers this morning, this is from "the wall street journal," that the president is expected to soften the tone on the speech as far as tomorrow's presentation. darlene, what do we get a sense as far as tone eating into the speech tomorrow? guest 1: the white house has said he is going to speak in more optimistic tones tomorrow. contrast that with the inauguration speech he gave a year ago when he talked about american carnage and painted this very dark picture of the united states of america. he is looking to do a little bit of the opposite and be softer, more optimistic, more hopeful in talking about immigration and some of the other issues that we are going to hear him speak about. eaver, not only will he address america, but the members of congress, what is he
12:09 pm
trying to sell to them on both sides? guest 2: a couple of things. the white house has been talking about an infrastructure deal. they wrote out this $1.7 trillion figure the other day that they said the white house -- administration would only kick in $200 billion of it. the other thing that has really been talked about on the hill right now is this daca issue. that is the thing ripping everyone to shreds up there. the white house rolled out their framework last week. 1.8 million dreamers that they want to have covered under any such deal, along with $25 billion for wall funding. that is going to be a tough one to sell to democrats even though chuck schumer has floated wall money in the past. host: darlene superville, how did the president and his team arrive at this proposal, considering everything they have set about immigration, and particularly about the daca program leading up to it?
12:10 pm
guest 1: that is a good question. the president said last week that he wanted $25 billion for the wall and border security and you might remember that there was a meeting he had at the white house with chuck schumer on the friday of the shutdown were senator schumer offered him $25 billion for the wall and border security. that could be where that comes from. chuck schumer eventually took that offer off the table and then you have the white house coming back and saying we want $25 billion for the wall. the other elements of the plan have to do with the visa lottery program, which the president wants to see eliminated or dressing -- drastically changed. and then what they call chain migration or family-based immigration, where you can come here and then bring relatives, they want to narrow down that program. those are basically the four elements of the administration's deal on immigration, including a fix for the dreamers. host: you know better than
12:11 pm
anyone else when the president talks, he talks to his base a lot of the time. in crafting this plan, how did they weigh what they want out of this over the concerns of their base? guest 1: i think it will be interesting to see because there has been a lot of pushback among the president's supporters over the portion of the plan that , a 10-12er citizenship your pathway to citizenship for these young people here illegally. you will recall during the campaign that the president talked a lot about wanting to do away with daca to his supporters regard any pathway to citizenship as amnesty. you have breitbart news that don"red to him as "amnesty last week. i think it will be interesting to watch and see whether the white house tries to peel back from that at all given the pushback they have been getting. host: (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8001, republicans.
12:12 pm
(202) 748-8002, independents. if you want to ask our guests questions during this hour. al weaver, who do we look at in congress as of today, who are the ones hashing out these large framework issues? guest 2: you look on the senate side, you have the number twos. senator john cornyn, the senate majority whip. dick durbin has been highly involved in this issue. we will see what that means moving forward. they will need to get the nine votes in the senate to get any bill passed. on the house side, you have to look at the leadership, kevin mccarthy, who was on tv yesterday talking about any sort of deal. he is going to be one of the point people in the house. the other people you've got to look for of the conservative members on both sides of the bicameral. senator ted cruz said that this would amount to no less than amnesty for these folks, as darlene mentioned. you have the house freedom
12:13 pm
caucus, who we are not really sure where they come down on this because on one hand they are very solidly red trump districts were trump did very well, but on the other hand, it is the amnesty issue and where they come down on that is going to be something interesting. from my sources, they want to meet and they get back in town. side am the white house a what kind of reaching out to these groups that al talked about? guest 1: you will remember a week or so ago when the president had the bipartisan immigration meeting that was televised and went on for an hour or so, there was a point in that meeting where he said, i will take the heat, whatever kind of deal this group gets and brings to me, i will sign it, you pass it, i will take the heat. i think also it will be interesting to see how much of a sales job the president does, if he is really serious about
12:14 pm
wanting to offer these young people at pathway to citizenship, we will see how invested he is in trying to sell members on it. because that would provide them some cover to vote for it. host: is this the president reaching out directly? is this stephen miller, mike pence? who is doing the sales job? guest 1: that remains to be seen at this point. stephen miller is involved in the policy coordination, so is the chief of staff, john kelly, but as to who will be doing the selling, we don't know yet. host: we have seen nancy pelosi already weigh in, "make america white again" and other things. what is the buzz on the democratic side? guest 2: they are not happy about this at all. the two things they are very arried about, one is between $5 billion. chuck schumer lay down the marker the other week. as darlene mentioned earlier, it is this issue of chain migration that is roiling within the democratic ranks, they really do
12:15 pm
not like this narrowing down to only spouses and children under 21. because it was previously parents, siblings, a bunch of those. right now, they wanted as nuclear as possible. the other person you've got to watch a speaker ryan. he is going to be a key figure to watch. one of the reasons he became speaker was he would always talk about any bill, especially an immigration bill, has to get the majority of the majority. that is going to be a tough sell for the republicans. what does trump do? how does he try to sell this to members? possibly say brian and his speakership -- ryan and possibly his speakership if it gets to that level? host: darlene superville, we
12:16 pm
have seen the president say, i will accept this and then soften what he wanted, are these must haves? guest 1: right now, they seem to be must haves, but the president has gone back and forth on other issues and he could very well change his mind, change some aspect of it to bring along members of congress. host: (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8001, republicans. independents, (202) 748-8002. darlene superville from the associated press who covers the white house. al weaver of "the washington examiner" and services their political reporter. .on, you are on with our guests go ahead with a question or comment. dacar: in my opinion, started in 1986. had two -- hello?
12:17 pm
host: you are on. go ahead. caller: they have had two generations of children since 1986, i'm pretty sure. if you are only going to include 1.8 million, i would like to know how this retinal scanning fromming along to keep paper sharing. host: we will leave it there. aside from the last part, history always comes up in these issues. what does the president see far as how his proposals advance those things? guest 1: that is a good question. [laughter] this has always been a tricky issue politically.
12:18 pm
again, it goes back to, i think, just how much of an effort he puts into trying to sell it. immigration has always been a difficult issue. we have a deadline supposedly now of february 8 to get a deal, which seems a little bit unrealistic for an issue as complicated as immigration. i think time will tell. host: the deadline, how does that factor into these negotiations? guest 2: i think it is there, but i don't see the february 8 thing being a big deal and i think it will probably go to march or even the summer. mean, the history going back is really fascinating. , a couplek to 2013 years ago, one of the key figures was senator marco rubio and he is nowhere to be seen on
12:19 pm
this issue right now. he is either playing a silent role or hanging behind the scenes depending on who you talk to. i think the history of this is a real factor, given who is involved and notably who is not. host: from california, the independent line, justin, hello. caller: hi, i wanted to ask your guests, does the daca legislation address say if family that comes across the border with a young child a year from now, if they pass this legislation and we deal with the people who are here, the children brought over illegally previously, are we going to be right back into the same problem a few years from now, or do all young children brought to the u.s. illegally in the future get rolled into daca? is this issue addressed? guest 2: no, those kids would not be under this or any legislation coming forward.
12:20 pm
any bill right now would work for the kids between the ages of 16 and 36 that were brought here in the past however many years that are under this dreamer status and have been rolled into daca or were afraid to rolled -- and role in daca -- enroll in daca. affect orld not impact those who come in moving forward. they would not be covered under any bill. guest 1: the only thing i would add is that one of the talking points coming up with a solution to daca's you often hear republicans say, we need to solve this situation now so that five years from now we are not back in the same situation where you have unaccompanied minors being brought to the u.s. and creating sort of a similar situation that we are grappling with right now. host: the headline from "politico" when taking a look at the speech tomorrow.
12:21 pm
-- sub headline says the midterm elections, this being the elephant in the room. how does the white house account for that? guest 1: because we have midterms this year, the legislative window for the president to get anything done, infrastructure, immigration, there is a list of issues that have been carried over from last year, like the debt ceiling that has to be done with. the window for getting stuff done is even shorter than it is in a normal year. those are some of the dynamics the president has to play too. that the side of it is republicans lost a seat in the senate. they are now down to 51 seats instead of 52. it is a little bit harder for them to get anything done. i think some of that is why you are going to see the president take this more optimistic tone, speak about bipartisanship,
12:22 pm
because that really is the only way to get anything done as al mentioned earlier. republicans now need nine democrats in the senate to get most major legislation passed. host: does the white house the president trump taking a more active role in campaigning, particularly for those in the questionable seats? guest 1: i think the president would like to be out there campaigning for republicans a little bit more. he has to be careful where he goes. not every member of congress is going to want him to come to their district because his popularity is so low, his story below a new president it is -- hiso have to be low,arity is historically low for a new president. guest 2: the average going back many years is 24 seats.
12:23 pm
average is losing 24 seats. the house democrats 26 to overtake republicans. we will see what happens. i think you are seeing a little bit of a play out in pennsylvania, western pennsylvania, you have a republican state legislator out there and he is running in this seat and if you look at the polls, trump is very polarizing. i saw a poll the other day that had 49% favorable and 47% unfavorable. won by 19 points in 2016. that underscores that this is a trump district, a place where he should have a big impact, but i think we are going to see that. the race is in march. i think that is one place to look for in the coming months. host: in new jersey, charles on the independent line. caller: good morning.
12:24 pm
i appreciate your show very much. soquestion is why are we worried about the kids that are already here illegally and so less worried about more people coming through the border illegally and what we are going to have to do in the future if we don't do something to protect the borders right now? so, where should we go? , more emphasis on the wall going up and more border security, and less emphasis on the undocumented children that are here illegally right now. , the darlene superville white house, do they see the wall the same as during the campaign? guest 1: during the campaign, they made it sound like a contiguous 2000-mile wall along the mexican border. lately, he has said he never meant it to be a contiguous wall.
12:25 pm
naturale lots of barriers along the border and you don't need a concrete wall. he has talked about see-through elements, where you can see through the other side who is trying to come over or toss drugs over. there are a half-dozen or so prototypes that are up down at the border and he is supposed to make a trip sometime down there in short order to go and see the models and maybe weigh in on which version he likes better. but to go to the caller's question, part of the issue with the docket children is that the president -- daca children is that the president has ended the program. once that program ends come march 5 were sometime shortly after that, then you are going to go back to a situation where these people are living in the shadows, living in fear, that sort of thing, so you want to sort of solve that issue and is desired coupling
12:26 pm
to solve that problem with demands for border security. ist: al weaver, if the wall not going to sell with democrats and some republicans, what version of border security are they proposing? what do you think democrats think will work? guest 2: that is the $10 billion question right now. democrats, senator schumer laid down the marker during the negotiations and told trump, you can have whatever you want and border security in essence. people have been talking that he offered up to $25 billion that trump has requested in this negotiation and that is going to be the major issue. i want to go back to the caller for a second and they mentioned how they want to solve the issue moving forward, but i think that it's one thing the white house is pushing. that is the goal as far as chain migration, as they put it, and ending the visa lottery, that they are trying to nip the situation in the bud so that we
12:27 pm
don't have these problems anymore. host: from decatur, illinois -- i'm sorry, decatur, alabama. hello. caller: hello. concerning the wall, we pay taxes, we get soldiers and we put them in every other country, why can't we take our own soldiers and put them on the borderline and let them control the border? you could use the national guard as backup when they are training. why do we have to spend borrowed money to build another wall? the arguments you commonly here on this front is the cost, the price tag of these overalls? guest 1: he's asking for $25 billion to do this. he did say he could build a wall for less when he stopped by general kelly's office. you might see the price tag shifted little bit, but with any
12:28 pm
regard, it is still an incredible amount of money for a wall that a lot of people think is not necessary. guest 2: i think the other thing you've always got to mention is going back to the campaign. i don't cover the campaign for the "examiner." was that trumple would say who is paying for the wall? the answer was never the u.s. taxpayer, it was always mexico. that was his campaign promise. host: that is a hard promise. he said it at almost every rally and that is not going to happen now. guest 1: there was a call and response during the campaign. guest 2: that is obviously not going to happen. that is a little added wrinkle. ,ost: on matters of economic tomorrow's state of the union, the president's role in economics. al weaver, first of all, what
12:29 pm
will the president say to tout that? also, what will be the expected response from congress about the reality? guest 2: the republicans are going to love it. that is the one thing the president has going forward heading into the 2018 midterms. he can say, look at the economy, look at the stock market. the stock market is at record highs. unemployment is where it is at. black unemployment to jay-z. that is one thing he and his team have really been touting. you look at last week, he went about thend spoke economic success in america right now, i think you will see more of that in the speech. he was not like his inaugural
12:30 pm
address. and he got rave reviews. i was talking to peter king about this and he mentioned how the president, his major issue has always been stepping on his own toes. he one example. after the joint session, everyone is talking about how he did a great job, but two days later, he said that obama wiretapped trump tower. i think that is going to be the issue, how does he respond in the next few days? he is not going on the road to sell this. that is going to be the million dollar question. host: does that surprise you that the president will not be selling this on the road? guest 1: absolutely. it is surprising. he is going to west virginia to speak to the house on thursday to speak at the annual republican legislative retreat, but one could argue that members of congress are not the only ones that need to hear more from the president after this state
12:31 pm
of the union. you need people out in the country who will like to hear from their president and how they are going to sell the infrastructure plan and where we are going to get $2 trillion from to build roads and bridges and how is he going to sell the immigration deal that he has put on the table? host: tax breaks will also be part of his pitch tomorrow. guest 1: tax cuts will be part of his speech tomorrow. he is very proud of that, as he should be. harkening back to his appearance at the world economic or on, he heked about that -- forum, talked about that a lot and how it has spurred a lot of companies bringing money back to the u.s. companies are giving their workers $1000 bonuses. you will definitely hear all of that tomorrow night in the speech. host: i suppose now if the timetable works out that people will start seeing more money as part of that in the next couple weeks as part of their paychecks. guest 1: that is good timing. the speech is a good segue into people opening up and seeing
12:32 pm
slightly bigger paychecks. host: al weaver, i want to play you a clip of yesterday's show. it is interesting to see how democrats approach this. here is senator bernie sanders. he was on "face the nation" yesterday. [video clip] should beverybody pleased when any worker gets a raise, but what we should also note that the tax bill should add $1.4 trillion to the deficit. at a time of massive income and wealth inequality, billionaires and large multinational corporations do not need tax breaks. it is the middle class and working families who do. host: al weaver, at the same time he talks about the price tag, he has to deal with the balance that if people get a tax break, i suppose them a credit still have to wrestle with this
12:33 pm
issue on a wide front. guest 2: i think senator sanders give a good representation of where democrats are, they are happy that you see citizens getting thousand dollars bonuses from apple and whatever, verizon, home depot. they still go back to this, eventually, it is going to go to the corporations. that is the line you are always going to hear. this point. other companies are laying off folks in order to do this. walmart was an example of that. it is a little bit of a counterbalance that democrats have to deal with right now. how do you deal with these folks getting a bump in their paycheck the next few months. do you manage that while still pushing this, eventually, it is not going to happen? host: darlene superville, the white house has built this tax cut on the idea of sustained
12:34 pm
growth in the economy that will pay for it? guest 1: the president has talked about how the tax cuts will unleash all of this economic growth. we got a gdp report and it was slightly under 3% under the last year. -- over the last year. they're counting on the alter ego down economics theory that cutting taxes will benefit is for wildly massive economic growth. host: how does the white house react when they hear that -- hear people say that the current economic climate is due more to president obama's term? guest 1: he does not like it. [laughter] guest 1: he is the only opinion that counts when it comes to that. he thinks that it is because america elected a businessman to a degree and that brought some
12:35 pm
new optimism to the country, to workers. he talked about consumer confidence being up, manufacturing confidence being up. he attributed that to himself and his personality and what he brings to the presidency. host: not surprising some of those comments coming from democrats on capitol hill. sean spicer, when he was still the press secretary, he came out when they got the jobs report, he quoted the president saying something to the effect of, "they may not have been real then, but they are certainly real now." [laughter] guest 2: it is always funny when you do with the president about a jobs number and he takes credit for those. host: let's hear from john in bethesda. caller: good morning. i think we all can agree that legal immigration is great, illegal immigration is bad, and when you look at what happened in 2014, where we had massive
12:36 pm
numbers of undocumented young children coming across our border and what you see happened more recently with the uptick in ms 13 and also human trafficking and also drugs in our communities, those have had huge impacts on it. that theo make sure next administration, whether it is democrat or republican, does not force all of these illegal immigrants on us and will abide by the law. host: mr. weaver? makes ani think he interesting point. issue people want president trump to address is the opioid crisis. susan collins said she wants to see him mention that.
12:37 pm
that is one thing to look for in the address, how he talks about that and addresses that issue. host: darlene superville, anything to add? guest 1: there is supposed to be some mention of opioid crisis in the remarks tomorrow night. host: on top of all that, you mentioned the plan for infrastructure, the desire to see that happen, do we see any more details of what we have seen floated? guest 1: i think you might. the white house was not very specific on that point when they briefed reporters on what the president would say. the senior administration officials kept saying they did not want to get ahead of what the president would say, but i think you will hear more detail. host: one of the things that have been floated as far as the ,ublic and private partnership is there something that both sides can come together on whatever track it goes down? guest 2: it depends. mark short was on the sunday
12:38 pm
shows talking about we are going to have this 20/80 slid on infrastructure, federal to state and local. i think that is going to be something to look for. is likely note going to get a 20/80 split. tois going to be interesting see how democrats respond this week. i'm sure they're going to pan it and i'm sure they will be open to it on the other hand. it is going to be different than the immigration issue. this is something that israel dollars and cents and -- is real dollars and cents and something they can really negotiate out. but there is a short amount of time given the midterm elections. host: charlie is next in north carolina, republican line. caller: morning. i had a couple points. one is, america is number one .he most open country we take in more legal immigrants than any country by far this
12:39 pm
past year. number two, we talk about the cost of the wall, but we never talk about the true cost of the daca kids and legalizing them, giving them citizenship. there is a lot of these daca kids that did not register, so the total number may be 800,000, but more estimates say it could be doubled up number. a lot of those daca people have kids that we have been educating and daca kids that are american do get in the system. the cost for the hundred thousand we are talking about, if we legalize them tomorrow, it could be up to $40 billion and if we give them legal status, how about the parents that originally hopped over the fence in the first place? we have to pay for them as well. when we are talking about a tight budget, discretionary money for veterans and elderly and poor people, if i were a veteran or an elderly person or a poor person, i would be
12:40 pm
totally against daca because we are going to have to take money from them to pay for these money to make them legal citizens. host: ok, charlie. guest 1: i would say that the amount of money you are talking about that would be spent to help daca children and people that are here illegally is probably a small fraction of the overall federal budget. is thatsecond thing is even though children are coming here illegally, you want to educate them, you don't want to have sort of a segment of the population that is running around that is not educated. and in the long run, that will benefit the u.s. and providing citizenship for them, they will end up paying taxes and paying into the system, and in some ways it may balance itself out. guest 2: you see that issue in years past. is the rick perry when he was running for governor, he can
12:41 pm
under attack for supporting the dream act in texas that gave dreamers access to in-state tuition. republicans did not like that back then. you are seeing this issue crop up again. this is the issue that crops up with the republican base when any path to citizenship is mentioned for dreamers or daca children. the larger aspect deals with what the larger idea of what america is and how we approach these specific policies. is that something the white house is cognizant about? guest 1: i think so. you have heard mark short, the white house legislative director, in recent interviews talk about wanting -- why they want to help the docket kids because they are going -- daca going toause they are
12:42 pm
school, they had no say whether they were brought here or not, largely they have no criminal backgrounds, they are trying to make something of themselves, which is in essence the american dream and why would you want to toss those people out of the country? that is one of the arguments you have heard from the white house in recent days. host: on the democrat side, you had those like luis gutierrez harshly criticizes party because of the giving and so easily as far as the shutdown and these immigration principles. guest 2: and you saw that in the interview with senator sanders yesterday. i think he was asked, do you think this was worth it? he said, morally, yes, i think it was. that the shutdown was worth it. that is what you hear from a lot of democrats. you hear it from the centrists who came together to forge a deal in susan collins' office that it wasn't, but that is the line you are hearing from rank-and-file democrats, that that we should have kept going with the shutdown a little bit
12:43 pm
longer. that this is worth it for the dreamers. larger point, it is a big issue in the 2018 elections, especially if nothing has happened by then. it could rile up the democratic base to take back the house. host: from jacksonville, florida, josie, good morning. caller: hi, i just wanted to mention that the daca's had several requirements they had to fulfill before making an application. costs $250 or $500, they apply every two years and pay that amount. there are thousands of daca's serving in the u.s. military. they are doctors, nurses, teachers, accountants. some people think they are not doing anything, but these are people that are serving our country and our economy. we said to something
12:44 pm
about legal immigrants, trump hires green card workers in mar-a-lago. they are foreigners. they are not u.s. citizens. to do the jobs of landscaping, cooking, serving. then you go to the florida state database, people looking for jobs, there are hundreds of people looking for those jobs, but trump does not hire u.s. citizens. he hires green card workers. thank you. host: thanks. let's go to mel in louisiana. independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call. we speak english in the united states and if we let the daca's give anything, they should learn english. and as far as in my community, the majority of the daca's are here on green cards. does the ama check them out to
12:45 pm
see if they are really truly daca's? all of the guest asians in my area are owned by foreigners. senator lindsey graham intimating this could be the time when the trump administration resolves the issue of immigration. what is the likelihood of that? guest 2: i'm not sure yet. i'm not sure. 5think it goes past the march deadline. i think some folks think they have until the summer given this court order or longer. it depends what happens in the courts. i'm pessimistic anything will get done by march 5. i think there is too much division right now. we have senator schumer who has laid down the marker on the border wall and you have trump who has laid down the law on the
12:46 pm
dreamer issue. two goodhose are starting points. it is going to come down to the chain migration thing. that is going to be the main issue. the democrats like calling a family reunification. i'm not sure yet. i think they can get something done. on the size of it. you can do large, medium, or small. the trunk proposal is medium. -- the trump proposal is medium. we will see something happen in the middle ground, but i'm not sure. guest 1: there is a school of thought out there that says just deal with the daca situation.
12:47 pm
take the framework the white house has released an narrow it down to what you can get done in the next few months and then deal with the family reunification or the chain migration p7 it and the visa lottery piece of it later on. and any other changes the white house may want to propose to the legal immigration system. those issues are so sticky right now. host: another topic of the last couple weeks, particularly the last 24-48 hours, the idea of the devin nunes memo. where is the white house currently on the release of this memo and why have they taken the stance that they are? guest 1: the president, as i understand it, wants the memo to be made public. as we'll know, the russia investigation has been something that has troubled him from the very beginning. he has called a witchhunt, a
12:48 pm
hoax, and mark short was on television yesterday and talked allt the white house being for transparency come as a the memo, let the public read it. host: with kevin mccarthy, who was on the program yesterday and one of the things he talked about was the memo on "meet the press." we will get your response, mr. weaver. [video clip] >> i read it. the committee voted, this is the process, devoted to allow members to read it. they have the ability to vote to move forward, then it would go to the executive branch. >> why are they afraid to send this to the justice department for review? >> aren't we separate but coequal? don't we have a responsibility for oversight? you have the executive branch and the legislative branch. as the legislative branch looks at it, they will send it to the executive branch, they have the approval whether to declassify and put it forward. >> do you want the president to declassify the memo? >> having read the memo, i think
12:49 pm
it would be appropriate that the public have full view of it. host: mr. weaver. put some context to that. guest 2: it is real interesting to hear that. you have a lot of conservatives out there, especially those on the intel committee, saying, we want this out there. they also say what is in this memo is to explosive do not come out. the justice department is saying , you can't do that, you shouldn't do that, we want to see it first before sees the light of day. on the other side, you see the senate intel committee, they are operating on their own investigation on the russian meddling. they can't see it. they really want to see it and they can't. they are supposed to me today at 5:00. 13 republicans on the panel, nine democrats. they're going to vote to released the memo at some point. it remains to be seen what is going to happen.
12:50 pm
how heavily it is redacted, that sort of stuff. host: the white house is positioning that if they do decide that? guest 1: i believe the president will sign whatever the house will send him on this matter and then at some point the document will be released to the public. i'm not sure how soon after he signs it it becomes public, but there is a process. host: how long lasting of the story will it be about the president reportedly wanting to remove robert mueller? guest 1: it lasts until the next bombshell story comes out about something that people say that he did or said with regard to the investigation. there is one of those a week or two of those a day depending on who is reporting on it. so, the shelf life of any controversy lasts as long as the next controversy involving the president. host: al weaver, on the congressional side, one of the sidebar stories is one of -- the
12:51 pm
potential of a legislative protection for robert mueller. guest 2: i think it is still kind of status quo right now. of republicans cannot yesterday and said, we don't think there is a need for it yet. despite all of these comments, the president has not fired robert mueller. susan collins mentioned that he does not have the authority to fire robert mueller. obviously, "the new york times" isorted that rod rosenstein in terms pocket right now and trump is angry with him. whatever the next story is going to break, whether it is something with rosenstein, who knows what is going to happen. among republicans, there is not much appetite to do anything on the robert mueller issue. they say that it would take time to go over it. i'm sure it would passes bipartisan support. host: this is gwyn from
12:52 pm
birmingham call and alabama -- birmingham, alabama. caller: you can fool some of the people some of the time, but some of us are not living in donald trump's tv room. you, darlene.k to as far as those tax cuts, tell me how it is going to help a woman or a man on unemployment. tell me how it is going to help a woman or a man that is a babysitter. that is not going to help us. we want a minimum wage that can help you get over what you need to get over. concerned,aca's are these immigrants, everybody is not in ms-13. these people come over here looking for better work.
12:53 pm
these people that are dealing drugs -- host: ok, thank you. darlene, the first part. guest 1: welcome, the theory behind the tax cuts is that cutting taxes will lead to economic growth and that will lift all boats and help all people. i cannot speak specifically to the callers situation. time will tell as to whether it actually works out that way. host: a viewer on twitter says -- you son nancy pelosi and debbie wasserman schultz dismiss the idea of the tax-cut cut and the benefited has to people. guest 2: that is the one issue republicans are going to have moving forward is selling the tax bill. you mentioned a little bit of it. one thing republicans are going
12:54 pm
to have to do if they want to win in 2018, they need to sell the tax bill. last week, the congressional aadership, they came out with memo that said, if you sell the tax bill, you will do well. a new poll had them at 45% approval. but they say that they did a -- thatwing it at about the tax bill is underwater right now. this is something that republicans have to confront. host: from tennessee, republican line, wesley. hello. caller: yes, good morning. i was listening to the young lady earlier who brought up a point about president trump referring to the russia investigation as a witch hunt. the information we have is that dnc was already being
12:55 pm
russians. the that was brought about, they had the information, yet they did not do anything, yet after the election was over, trump had warned that they want to do drum -- jump all over trump even though they knew the russians were already involved in the dnc and then one wikileaks started releasing all of their information, it was like as if president trump and his information -- organization were the ones that they were releasing at all to, when in reality, you can remember the james comey, after they started being released, he came out with stuff that he said he had on another investigation opened up because he knew all of the lies that he had been telling were going to come -- he coming out. that is why he came up with all he came up with all heated trying to cover himself. host: thanks, caller.
12:56 pm
any response? guest 1: um. no. [laughter] guest 2: i don't want to touch that one. [laughter] host: let's go to amsterdam, new york. republican line. caller: good morning. i'm definitely a huge trump supporter. that there is another way around building this border wall. we can probably do a human wall. as everyone knows, hunting is a $1 billion industry. i propose that we use -- that we to permits and we are able engage in nonlethal -- use nonlethal bullets or force and americans would flock to the border and it would boom the border economy. hotels,breakfasts, restaurants, transportation.
12:57 pm
it is a nonlethal bullets. when these illegal immigrants are crossing into our country, we would be able to just hit them with a nonlethal bullet, with a background checked american. host: thanks, caller. a couple of questions. senator joe kennedy. the democratic response. congressman, thank you. what is the message, as first choosing him, but the message that democrats want to sell through the response. guest 2: joe kennedy is in the democratic caucus as one is the more up-and-coming stars in the party. mn tim ryan and seth maltin, a few others. joe kennedy. the one thing you always hear from democrats and from others is how nancy pelosi does not allow others to rise within the party.
12:58 pm
you saw this on a few occasions. chris van hollen ran for the senate instead of moving up in the house. xavier becerra, instead of hanging around and trying to move up the ladder, he went off and became the attorney general of california. i think you are seeing a little bit of a way for democrats to file.ithin the rank and he is a good face of the party right now. when i give someone else a shot like that? host: as far as the creation of , do we knowpeech who is going to write it for him? guest 1: his chief speechwriter is stephen miller. his staff secretary is the man by the name of rob porter. he has been heavily involved. what usually happens is you have a lot of different cap and agencies that provide input, so it is a government-wide process in terms of receiving information, what cabinet departments are suggesting the president highlight, all of that is taken in, whittled down.
12:59 pm
as i understand it, there have been several drafts of the speech and the president has been providing input into what he would like to say. it does not strike me as being on the order of president obama in the way that he was involved with his speeches. they would often put out photos with the text and his handwritten comments in the margin. they would show him huddled with speechwriters. we have not seen any of that yet from this president. but the process is going on and we will hear the final product tomorrow night. host: do we know any of the practice that has gone into it? guest 1: i don't know of any practice sessions. the president stayed in town this past weekend. forlly, when he is in town the weekend, he will play golf at the golf club, so he did not do that this weekend, so perhaps there was some preparation with him closeted up in the weekend -- white house a weekend. host: barney in florida.
1:00 pm
caller: these people are talking about the border wall and have intof y'all ever got building work? do you know how hard that work is? host: what's the point? caller: are trump voters going to pick tomatoes, oranges, strawberries, cabbages? no. get more food stamps than they do. that is ridiculous. host: we will hear next from christine on the independent line in rhode island. caller: yes, good morning. host: go ahead, you are on. caller: yes, i was just calling because i don't consider trump as my president of the united states. first of all, if he wants the wall built, go in his own pocket and take it out. children or these families
1:01 pm
that have to come over to the united states and leave their children, how would you feel as a parent to go through this and to leave them? and it is the corporate companies that use immigrants and they know they are not legal to pay them less money than what they are paying their employees. and i just feel like this country is going backwards instead of forward. trump -- paul ryan and the rest of his clan need to go. when obama was in office, they fought him tooth and nail on everything. i have not heard anything from paul ryan with all of this russian crap going on. i just feel like he is setting this country so backward. host: ok, christine. , the republicans are going to meet this week, what is on the agenda for the meeting on
1:02 pm
wednesday? guest 2: they meet wednesday to go to greenbrier in west virginia. , last year, they went to philadelphia and rolled out the plan to overhaul the tax reform plan and the other plan to repeal and replace obamacare, which obviously has not happened , but something that could be on the docket this year. they tried twice last year and neither exactly worked out as they hoped, but it is all party matters. i'm sure 2018 will be discussed. mentionedthe caller about the resistance. you have a pheromone to democrats tomorrow who will not be in -- a fair amount of democrats who will not be in attendance tomorrow. i believe they are all wearing black, as if they are going to a funeral tomorrow night. president will travel left to the speech, what is expected as far as agenda matters?
1:03 pm
i suppose it is immigration. immigration, we have to get the infrastructure plan. right now, it has just been talked about. as far as i know. and i suspect at some point that he will travel the country at some point to continue selling the tax cut legislation. he has done a number of trips on that. there is a need to get out into the country and promote that some more and so that on the public, so i would expxp sarah: this week on the commupe kators. we take to you the consumer electronics show in las vegas and speak with industry leaders about the latest developments in artificial intelligence, robotics, virtual reality, 360 degree cam rarks and enhanced communication force self-driving cars. watch the communicators tonight t 8:00 eastern on c-span2.
1:04 pm
>> at president of the united states. >> tuesday night, president donald trump gives his first state of the union address to congress and the nation. join us on c-span for a preview of the evening starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern. then the state of the union speech live at 9:00 p.m. following this speech, the democratic response from congressman joe kennedy. we'll also hear your reaction and comments from members of congress. president trump's state of the union address, tuesday night, live on c-span. listen live on the free c-span radio app and available live or on demand on your desktop, phone, or tablet at >> coming up live coverage of today's white house briefing with press secretary sarah sanders. scheduled to begin in about 10 minutes. 1:15 p.m. eastern time. at the white house


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on