wiretapping of u.s. citizens is ♪iscussed by joshua geltz good morning, this is friday, february 2. even though the house and senate are not in legislative session today, it could turn out to be a very significant day here in washington. as you have probably heard, the president is poised to possibly approve the release today of a classified memo that the republicans alleged shows improper surveillance of one of the presidents armor campaign aides. president's former campaign aides. we want to get your thoughts on what is being called the release of the nunez memo. if you agree with the release of the house intelligence memo, call this number --(202) 748-8000. if you disagree, (202) 748-8001 is your number to call. and you can also weigh in on social media. you can comment on twitter, or on facebook. we will start things off with billy house, the congressional correspondent bloomberg news. you this from the top, if could. explain for our viewers what this memo is all about and why it has become so controversial. guest: the memo is a four-page document based on classified material that only a few member of congress -- members of congress had seen. it was drafted by devin nunes, the chair of the house intelligence committee, and purports to display surveillance abuses by the fbi early on in the russian probe last year. emma kratz have said it is full of errors, the fbi says -- it is fullave said of errors, the fbi says it is an accurate, and the president has decided to allow wide release to the public of its contents. just a few minutes ago, the is --ent tweeted that he rank-and-file, the fbi are great people, but the top leadership of the justice department and the fbi have abused the sacred investigative process -- politicized is his word. be a this is supposed to big day potentially. what are you looking for? guest: that is where we come into a very obscure rule called house rule x, which has never before been carried out. that will dictate how this is released. unfortunately, nobody knows what the rule is. the white house can simply release the memo with fully the way it was written. they can send it back to devin nunes and his committee, and they can decide when to release it -- perhaps today -- and some say it has to go before the house. this was dabbled in, but members are not really there, and it could be read into the congressional record and then released. we are not sure which one of those is going to happen, if any, but the betting money is that the white house will simply just release it sometime. host: you can watch the session that is brief, in fact, and we expect that to be. it is 4:30 p.m., here live on the span. -- c-span. take us to the other side of the aisle. a piece in bloomberg's a democrats believe republicans secretly altered this fbi russia memo. speak to that, and then to the fact that they have their own memo that is currently not being released. the first point, two nights ago, adam schiff, the top democrat on the house intelligence committee, with senate minority leader chuck schumer's backing, issued a statement and a letter he had sent to devin nunes, complaining about changes that have been made to this four-page memo after his committee had approved it and sent it to the white house, which schiff said was against all recalled. spokesperson says those were grammatical changes requested by the fbi, so that shows the back and forth going on right now. , with his staff, has written his own response to the republican memo, which he purportedly shows how it is in error, with exaggerations and omissions, but republicans are saying it has to go through the same screening and vetting process as the other memo did. host: can you describe the scope of feedback so far on the senate side? guest: let's keep in mind, unlike rank and file house members who have to be able to read the memo, senators, including chairman of the judiciary and intelligence been.tee, have not senator burr, who is nunes' opposite on the senate intelligence committee says whatever classified information he based this memo on, he will use this and included as part of a larger report from the committee later this year. so from that statement, you get an idea that the senator's think this stuff should be part of a larger report and not troubled democratsbbled out as are alleging, to perhaps undermine the underpinnings of special counsel robert mueller's russia investigation. host: and as we wrap this up, billy house, let's put this into a broader context of the debate and the push and pull in washington. what does all of this mean? guest: i think in the long run, it will mean that we are on the ageipice here of kind of an where the law enforcement community is being undermined by cast onident, and doubt ity,or rapsody, -- verac it's fairness, and the relationship of the branches of government are being frayed, even within the executive branch. whether this has long-lasting damage, we will wait and see, but now republicans are attacking law enforcement, and democrats are standing up for them, which is a role reversal. host: billy house, thank you for joining us. guest: sure. to yourfore we get calls, president trump spoke briefly about law enforcement at the gop retreat yesterday in west virginia. take a look. [video clip] president trump: the priorities of the republican congress are the priorities of american people. we believe in strong families and we believe in strong borders . [applause] president trump: we believe in the rule of law, and we support the men and women of law enforcement. [applause] host: the president also tweeted this morning, as our guest billy house mentioned. here is what he wrote a short while ago. "the top leadership and investigators of the fbi and the justice department have politicized the sacred investigative process in favor of democrats and against republicans, something which would have been unthinkable just a short time ago. rank and file are great people." to more point before we get the phone calls. the new york times talks about the republican plot against the fbi. they write "this is what a partisan witchhunt really looks like. in a demonstration of unbridled self-interest, the white house and the republican minions in congress are on the cusp of releasing a "memo that reports to document the biggest political scandal since watergate." to pull it off, they are undermining the credibility of the law enforcement community that republicans once defended so ardently, on the noble sounding claim that american public must know the truth. don't fall for it." our first call is from new jersey. what do you think? caller: good morning. i think i am very disappointed that the three branches of government are being compromised , and they are not able to do their separate tasks. there seems to be some connection in my mind between the concerted attacks on the fbi and doj, especially by mr. gowdy , who has decided to step down from his position, conveniently at a time when there is a possibility that there may be some vacancies at the top of the .eadership of the fbi or doj i am very concerned about that, and i hope people are watching what is going on in our nations capital -- nation's capital, and maybe something can be done in terms of people looking at the larger picture. we have three branches of government so we can have some checks and balances. host: thank you for calling, yolande. new york, good morning to you. caller: yes. i disagree with the caller. the department of justice and the fbi are very wonderful people who are doing their job, but there are also bad guys, bad actors. we solid they were saying behind and trying to undermine this person before the election and after the election. -- nobody blames the justice system, but the justice system should also be overlooked, who is doing that, the checking the balance of this system? for me, i do not understand this argument that this has a national implication, national security. there is no one to convince me that this has to do with other internationals and security concerns. no, this is a local issue. the government, the checks and balance is gone. someone has to check it out, and we have to be informed. we cannot judge things. we do not know anything. i can tell you that. our administration uses the justice system wrongly, there are some things that are showing. there are some lights that show to that direction. me,e, i am not going -- for i am not going to say this is complicit with the president and his party to undermine the fbi. there are bad guys, and they have to be rooted out and we have to know the truth. host: thank you for calling. frances townsend, the former security adviser to george w. bush, tweeted this as well. expects the fbi memo to be released today with you, -- with few, if any reductions as early as today over the directors objections." linda, good morning. what do you think about this? caller: i have been watching this closely, really since the inauguration last year, and it is a horrible, horrible stuff that is going on. i think russia is getting what they want, having made us divisive against each other and with trump at the head of it. he is their boy. i am just disgusted, really. i really thought when he got because he scared me has been a nasty person his whole life. he does not care about anyone but himself, and i have been following him for years, ever since the divorces and all of this, seeing what he has done with his life. i thought there were checks and balances, like the former caller was talking about, that would stop him from doing anything to insane. insane. what i am learning now is that presidents seem to have too much power. i did not know they could fire the head of the fbi. i did not know he could get away with as many things as he has gotten away with. presidents before had the sense to not do insane things like that. we will have to instill some new laws, like you cannot even run for president unless you release your taxes, and somebody gets to decide that just him gets to declassify things -- i am making a list of the new laws that should be put in place if we ever get another insane president like this man, this nasty person i am so embarrassed by. host: moving on to jack in buckeye, arizona. good morning. caller: good morning, thank you for taking the call. what we are going to see in this is it is going to come out that this goes clear back to, if we did.ber, what obama are you still there? host: we are, keep going. caller: the day before he gave up office, when he released all the intel. the reason i bring that up is because we go clear back to win all of this started, with the dossier. this all thing. getting to the bottom line, this goes right to the truth. we are getting to the truth. this is why so many people are involved in this, because once the truth comes out it is going to be turned around to the point where what this comes down to is how far left they went to try to keep this man from becoming the president of the united states. we are talking about power, and that is it, the bottom line. that is what happened, and the truth will, out. host: -- the truth will come out. host: lots of voices out there, including the fbi's association. -- the fbi agents association. they put out a statement, saying fbi agents association appreciates fbi director chris wray standing shoulder to shoulder with the men and women of the fbi as we work together to protect our country from criminal and national security threats. as director ray noted, fbi special agent's i remain steadfast in their dedication to professionalism, and we remain focused on our important work to protect the country from criminals and terrorists, both to mess to investigate international. special agents take a column of to our country and to the constitution, and the american public continues to be well served by the world's preeminent law enforcement agency." nikki haley was also at the gop retreat, and a couple of colors were talking about russia. here is what she had to say about russia yesterday. [video clip] >> there is one thing we need to be clear about -- russia is not our friend. [applause] there may be some things we can work with them on, and we should do that when we can, but russia is not, will not be our friend as long as their government has the values that it has, and as long as it conducts itself the way it does internationally. russia is the defender of a brutal regime in syria, aiding and abetting atrocities against syrian civilians and vetoing every effort at the u.n. to hold assad accountable. russia has an increasingly close alliance with iran, and protects iran against more vigorous .uclear inspections russia continues to illegally occupy ukrainian territory. in our own hemisphere, russia is the defender and bank roller of roe corrupt and lawless madu regime in venezuela. and yes, russia did meddle in our elections. that is not a controversial statement. russia has been meddling in elections for many years. they have done it in european elections just last year. there is no reason to think that the russian interference made any difference between who won and lost in the u.s. election, but the very fact that they did , and an outrageous thing something be a minister nation is taking steps to prevent in the future. -- the administration is taking steps to prevent in the future. but with all the talk about russia and its role in our elections, one huge fact has been massively overlooked. that fact is, in the last year, this administration has been tougher on russia than any american administration since ronald reagan. the washington post writes this on its editorial page "a process that tarnishes the house." they say in all the noise around the memo, it is easy to lose sight of the scary truth that a hostile foreign government attempted to influence the 2016 election and shows every intention of trying to do it again this year. you would think mr. nunes' comittee would be alarmed by this threat to american democracy. instead, mr. nunes, with mr. ryan's aid and comfort, is helping mr. trump impeded an investigation into these very issues. it is said to see this week or the house to be tarnished in this way. let's go to vincent in florida. caller: hello? host: you are on the air, sir. caller: [inaudible] line, if the people understand what is the story, they will understand what is going on. [inaudible] was why the rush of its -- was why the russians reached in, even before the election, before everything. [inaudible] so it is before the election. if we talk about losing carter page to get rid of the ruler and they get the director of the fbi, [inaudible] and they know about mr. page, but the thing is it'll started -- it all started a long time ago, 2015. host: ok. tyrone is on the line now, good morning. caller: good morning. continue -- should i think there are too many people in the republican party that are stuck on this mantra of destroying the federal government. this memo has the insinuation of what steve bannon said, deconstructing the admin straight of state. people continue to go down this path, you tear down -- administrative state. people continue to go down this path, you tear down everything involving the united states government and they cannot contact we -- protect we the people. steve bannon wanted to make the government small enough to drown it in a bathtub. reagan said the most terrifying words in the dictionary are "we are from the government, and we are here to help." the republican party, not all of them, have shown they have a disdain for the government, and this is the path they are going down. host: rob is calling from new york. good morning. caller: good morning, john. i love this show. everyone is making such a big deal out of this nunes memo, but the initial five the documents have been out -- fisa documents have been out for a week, and they have the initial documents sent by the whistleblower. it is even worse than what that documents are going -- that document is going to tell us. whoever is in power is going to get attacked by the other side. it is how politics works in this rotten two-party system we have. colin, college park, maryland. what do you think. iller: i support this, and think it is a good idea, because i think the government needs to be more transparent. but i also want to know what people have to say about chelsea manning running in maryland for senate, because with her history of transparency. host: ok, thank you for calling. some of our facebook comments this morning. ae says "who cares, it is partisan memo written by the party of lies. it will be written by the ignorant -- read by the truth, and the rest of us will see right through it, like we do trump. let the little guy have his fun trying to undermine the government, it is cute. [video clip] is difficult to say what the consequence is. we know the department of justice and the fbi feel this is an extraordinarily reckless step to take, because the information has not been able to be vetted and they have not been able to do an analysis on the impact and what the sources are. while than analysis is supposed to go on, you have a president at the white house who has not even read the memo, who is 100% certain he will release it. >> the president is aware of the content. he believes the memo vindicates that his origins of the investigation are tainted. does this indicate the president? >> know, and this was the same president to felt vindicated when chairman nunes went to the white house to prevent evidence that he said he had obtained that showed a vast unmasking conspiracy in the obama administration. the president said i feel somewhat vindicated, and there was nothing presented that vindicated him, and the material had been, in fact, obtained from the white house. i am handicapped in discussing this point what is even in the gop memo, but i think you can probably tell all you need to know about it by the fact that the chairman had not even bothered to read the underlying documents it characterizes. when i made a motion in the committee to allow the department of justice and the fbi to come into our committee and brief members on the inaccuracies in the memo, lack of context in the memo, concerns about sources in the memo, sources and methods if it were to be released -- on a partyline vote, the gop members voted against king informed of what -- being informed of what the content, the underlying documents were, which they have not read, with only one exception. this is not about the facts, this is about a narrative that the chairman wants to put out, a misleading narrative to undermine the fbi, undermine the department, and ultimately undermine bob mueller. the danger in all of this, besides the obvious one of politicizing the intelligence process, is that it sends a message to the white house that he can fire rod rosenstein, bob mueller, and there are gop members that are so invested in his presidency that they will roll over. host: a couple of tweets this morning. "released after the investigation is over. doing before makes the investigative look guilty." here is another one, that write "the democrats are whining because president trump is shining on their involvement in fbi corruption." we are taking your calls this morning on the potential clearing today by the white house of this memo, this house intel memo. many are calling it the nunes memo for the republican chairman of the house intelligence committee. we are asking if you agree or disagree with the release, and will be tracking the reaction today. david, south carolina. good morning. sir, i only called about one time before, and i wanted to call back to say the same thing that i said. as far as all this stuff goes, how news and the idea about this all started, even the news junkies don't know. news, i used to watch them, and then i turned against them when i heard and coulter a -- ann coulter tell the fox news commentators that the only way to beat the democrats is to lie, tell that lie. and told them we can't do that. well, they did it and they said it would not work. evidently, it looks like it is working. ever since then, i never watch fox news, and i am not really into politics, but that made my stomach sick. this has turned the whole story around. it is disgusting. thank you, sir. host: on to another david, this one in georgia. morningstar. -- good morning, sir. caller: good morning, thank you for c-span and the washington journal. first, in response to caller, in the culture wars, the republicans lie in the same way the democrats do. is about schiff here, he aiding and abetting this on the left and making false claims that devin nunes changed the memo. all nunes did was corrected the out a messageok that would damage the intel committee and possibly some agents. so this needs to be released. it shows the corruption at the top. false information was given to a judge to get a fisa warrant. see it.people as long as you are not going to damage anybody in the intel , as far as safety goes -- schiff is not doing anything but finding a spot on nbc, abc, or cnn. that is clear. really, the way i see it, let's make our own opinion of that. as far as the democratic memo, we need to see it too so we can see how -- ann coulter was talking about this -- we can see how the democrats lie. all she was saying was the republicans need to do the same thing the democrats did. host: ok. thank you for calling. we have a call in akron, ohio. good morning to you. caller: good morning. i think it is too early to release the memo. you know, like when the police come into your home and take your drugs, and you go to court for your trial and say they should not have taken my drugs, the search warrant was not right? what you have now is a trump advisor who is using trees and and espionage in washington to get mr. trump elected -- treason and espionage in washington to get mr. trump elected, and if they get hit with these charges, they will say oh no, you should not have been recording my conversation. you should not be reading my emails where i colluded with the russians. is invalid.warrant i think we should wait to release the memo. l continue to take your calls for the next 30 minutes or so on this potential clearing of the house intel memo. some headlines this morning, trump's expect it to clears the memos released, as we have heard. memo'scted to clear the release, as we have heard. off aear action might set new crisis for the white house. ,nd the washington times will test fbi's relationship with congress. congress is trying to peers the veil of secrecy that the republicans say has been used to hide wrongdoing in the government of the security agencies. government's security agencies. the decision pits mr. trump against fbi director christopher wray, who asked the memo remain secret. the washington times goes on to write "analysts say bigger issues are at stake, including congress's ability to oversee a powerful national security bureaucracy that might be trying to avoid a deserved blackeye. paul ryan did talk about the democratic memo at a certain point this week, and said it could be released, possibly with some further review. he said at the retreat yesterday in west virginia -- he was asked about an fbi statement, saying the release of the memo, the nunes memo, poses a grave danger. here was his response. [video clip] respond to president trump's own fbi director of pointy saying that the memo you have read and say should be released could pose a grave danger to the country? >> let me step back for a second. first of all, let me tell you what this memo is and what this memo is not. what this memo is is congress doing its job in conducting a legitimate oversight over a very unique law, fisa. and if mistakes were made and individuals did something wrong, it is our top is the legislative branch of the government to conduct oversight of the executive branch of the abuses were made. fisar, -- remember, involves american civil liberties. if those were abused, that needs to come to light so that does not happen again. what this is not is an indictment on our institutions of our justice systems. the memo is not an indictment of the fbi, of the department of justice. -- it doesmpugn the not impugn the mueller investigation or the deputy attorney general. this is congress's legitimate function of oversight to make process is being used correctly, and if it was not being used correctly, that needs to come to light and people need to be held accountable so we do not have problems again, because this does affect our civil liberties. the newe headline from york daily news, "james comey defend the fbi," and here is the full tweet. the fbi is speaking up. i wish more of our leaders would. in the longshows run, weasels and liars never hold the field, so long as good people stand up." the memo, the fbi is right to have grave concerns, as it will shake the organization to its core, showing america how the agency was weaponize by the obama officials, and the dnc and hillary clinton to target political adversaries. calls waitingyour period tom in idaho, good morning. -- calls waiting. tom, ohio. good morning. caller: i appreciate this show. it is one of the few shows that is not biased one way or the other and we have a voice. anyone could be against more information. the only people in the fbi afraid of this memo are the ones who are guilty. i do not know why anyone would doubt that our government intelligence agencies and other agencies are politicized. look what the irs did. they got caught red-handed targeting political opponents of city presidents. our intelligence community got caught red-handed wiretapping. an opponent of the said president. been corruptt has for years. all you need to do is go watch the speech that mr. kennedy gave the week before he got shot, talking about secret societies and corruption within the government. our government has always lied to us. the anon, they told us we need to get in there, there were , theywe need -- vietnam told us we need to get in there, there were wmds, we need to go there. arrest themo, let's people who are actually corrupt and put them in prison, and set a tone that you must tell the truth if you want to serve the american government and the american people. people the american against the establishment, and the establishment is doing everything it can to retake the power that the people gave donald trump. media, all of the people on the left, all of the people on the right that have been against him are the establishment against the american people. god bless america, release the memo. kentucky.in your thoughts on the potential release of the house intel memo? caller: yes, thank you for taking my call. i agree with the last fellow, you should release it. the truth will set you free. i agree with that, but you know, i hear some of them talking about russia this, russia that, and what i do not understand is it is not the russians who are our enemy, it is our own mayors and governors in sanctuary cities who know well they are breaking the law. i do not understand why they do not try them for treason. no money time, no jail time, deportation for life. it is like cancer. if you do not cut it out of the body, it will die. host: body, columbia, maryland. good morning. caller: good morning. i believe we should release the memo, and i will tell you why. people need to understand this is about the f ei. the top management of the fbi concluding -- fbi. the top management of the fbi colluding with the hillary clinton campaign. it is illegal to use a dossier court andt to fisa use it against president trump and private citizens. that is illegal. what people need to understand is what happened and what this memo will tell you is that funny things and illegal things are being done at the fbi. this is not the fbi. they want to get out they were actually -- many of them were working for the hillary campaign and the dnc. this is what you are going to find out. that was why mccabe was removed monday. and said theremo was nothing incorrect about it at the time. people really need to understand what happened when you politicize our agencies like the fbi or intelligence agencies. the state department was politicized in the last administration -- that is wrong, that is illegal. you cannot do that. i worked for the government for almost 50 years. you are supposed to remain neutral. you are not support to be -- supposed to be working for any campaign while you work at a desk job in washington dc. it is totally illegal, and that is what this memo will tell you. it will not give any secrets. we cannot do that. there is zero evidence of collusion, by the way. i want everybody to understand that. russia was involved in helping bring that dossier that hillary clinton paid for. the media is not telling people the truth about this, they are really not. i listen to cnn, msnbc and some other people -- they are not telling you the truth. they do not want you to know the truth. agencies in d.c. are politicized, the fbi, people at the very, very top. the fbi agents are fine, good people. the fbi is a good organization. some people at the top, in top management, were working for the hillary campaign on company time, which is illegal, against the trump campaign. host: we want to get in some other voices, including mike. what would you like to say this morning? caller: good morning, and i would like to say that devin nunes is the same guy who was caught red-handed trying to sneak into the white house to tip donald trump off it was coming. this document, even after congress cleared it to be released, has been changed by devin nunes. i think that this whole thing could be done and over with as soon as bob mueller subpoenas donald trump with his subpoena power, and then donald trump will have nobody to cover up his him. butt for as far as the state of the union goes, our union has never been 1860's, andce the we know what that brought around. donald trump is a crook, and he needs to be subpoenaed so the knowle can it know -- can he is a crook. host: more voices from lawmakers out there. a story out of politico. it says the senate needs to see the fbi memo before it is released. the senate intelligence committee should be able to review this classified memo. thuneame from senator yesterday. and senator richard burr, he says congress should be able to read the memo before president trump releases it. it would be helpful. -- senator burr should be able to read the memo before president trump releases it. i think it would be helpful. buttal memots' re should be made public at the same time. the minority leader in the house over on ryan to oust nunes this bogus memo, as she calls it. she urged leaders to oust mr. chargingm the top, that this quote has "deliberately dishonest claims of department of justice abuse to serve asit chairman." -- to uphold and protect american civil liberties, yet they pass taking these same liberties away from us. another tweet, that's right. comey, liars and weasels. fired.ir asses brian from massachusetts. caller: i agree they should release the memo, because it will put egg on the face of the republicans. fisa warrants were people who are colluding with russia, like carter page was doing. that is why they got the carter cap onwiretap, the carter page. and in the russians were on the ,0th floor of trump tower colluding against hillary so trump could win the election. talk about treasonous acts. people -- fox news? i can't wait. they are all going to look like fools. we are all americans. i'm glad to see those people in tennessee and missouri are doing their homework and do not think of democrats as the enemy. if you start thinking of people as lesser than you or your enemy, it is easy to not see the facts. we are all americans. i love my country, and i do not want to live in russia, i do not want to live in china. i want to be able to call into a place like this and speak my mind, and the truth should set you free. the people like nunes, carter page, trump junior, and trump himself -- the top five. look what trump did with those top five, the five kids who were found innocent. trump said they should remain in jail, and when they were pardoned for the crimes they did not commit, trump still cannot apologize to these men after some of them served 20 years in jail? child on of man has a ? theay and is out screwing light is going to shine. god bless america. calling.nk you for the washington post "trump is messing with the wrong guy." the fbi wins fights with the president, and trump will learn this the hard way. and ridiculously painting its agents as leftist political hacks. those members of congress have also understood how unwise it would be to pull such stunts. with trump and his hapless henchmen on capitol hill, led by representative devin nunes of california, have chosen the wrong enemy. history strongly suggests they will be sorry. one other bit of news in the post this morning, a short-term spending bill, as we have gone to some other topics. government funding runs out at the end of next thursday, and with a shutdown deadline looming and no long-term deal at hand, congressional republican leaders said thursday, they will have to pass another short-term spending deal to keep the government open. they are eyeing a new bill that would go through march 22, although that date could change. it would have to pass early next week, and we will see how that plays out on the floor in the house and senate. also, immigration very much out there. president trump yesterday at the retreat spoke about immigration reform. here is what he had to say yesterday. [video clip] pass have a chance now to into law the immigration reforms that the american people have been demanding for decades, and that many of you have been working on for your entire careers. opportunity as a republican party, as the republican party, we have a great opportunity. we are getting very little help from the democrats, but i hope after we leave this room, we will get a call and say let's go. they talk a good game. we have to get help from the other side, or we have to elect many more republicans. that is another way of doing it. really, that is another way of doing it. and based on the numbers we just saw, we had a real chance of doing that. 2018 will be very interesting, but either they will have to come on board, because they talk a good game with daca, but they do not produce. they come on board, or we will have to really work and get more people so we can get the kind of numbers that we need to -- pass in a much easier fashion legislation. we will all have to make compromises along the way to get it done this way. the other way -- if we win more, we do not have to compromise so much. with the tax bill we got what we wanted, because we had essentially a unanimous vote. but we have to go and we have to get it done and get it done properly, and we will have to compromise, unless we elect more republicans, in which case, we can have it just the way everybody in this room once it. -- wants it. willing to give a little in order for our country to gain a whole lot. host:and a couple of headlines immigrated related to the immigration story. the white house says the president is willing to walk away from immigration talks if the democrats do not agree with his turns. terms. the white house asked gop leaders thursday to put the immigration framework, the one from the state of the union, up for a vote in the senate when the chamber begins its debate in the coming weeks, moving to make his four-point plan the head of the movement. it is likely to meet with resistance from democrats and even republicans, who are working on alternatives but have yet to reach a deal on anything mr. trump good sign. we will see how that plays out -- could sign. we will see how that plays out in the coming weeks. bill from pennsylvania. what do you think about the memo? caller: good morning, how are you? i am very disgusted, because i have never seen -- and if you let me go, i can tell you that, because my wife used to work for the government. i know the whole deal with the government here in pennsylvania too that is going on. but when people's eyes call names to the president of the united states who has only been in office for one year? peoplenever seen criticize a president like they do donald trump. it is a shameful thing, and people should be ashamed as americans. [inaudible] i do nothing donald trump has anything to do with it, and has nothing to do with russia. hillary clinton is the biggest ok i ever saw in my life, and ted kennedy killed that woman. we do not talk about that. of course they are going to stay with the democrats, because that is the only way they can survive. they can only survive up there. and this is ridiculous as americans. i have been here my whole life, and i have never been so disappointed in this country. it is not the president, it is the crooks in congress. the only way they can change that is [inaudible] a note and become a politician and make a mistake, you should get the death penalty right away, period. host: that was built. hundreds of tweets coming in as we take calls, hundreds, including this one from james. "america is not going to look kindly on an obstruction of justice charge where there was never an underlying crime." we have dan on the line in oregon. good morning. caller: good morning. i would like everyone to take a close look at this. if you look at the entire situation, the democrats are not in trouble at all. everyone getting fired, investigated, everyone doing the investigation are all republicans. it sounds like they are trying to do themselves in. and by the way, when i was young, we used to say better dead than red. apparently that is not so anymore. web: tom is with us now in city, missouri. good morning. caller: good morning. number one, this memo is written by one person. nobody knows as far as the american public, what is really re, and it is having the exact effect that republicans wanted it to have. it is dividing the american people and making them choose sides on this issue. the american people have no idea what this says. they will never know exactly what it says or what is going on, but that is how the republicans are designed. they get on offense and make the democrats get on defense, and it works for them. said they are releasing this memo for the good of the american people. if he wants to do the good of the american people, they can have private closed meetings and investigations about this memo, and about what nunes has to say and what the fbi allegedly did. they do not have to give this information to the public until they know what the truth is. i think that is what they needed to do. they need to speak privately on this issue, and stop firing of the american people and making them take sides on this issue. we are so divided now, i am afraid we will never get back together. host: we will look for any action that happens with this republican house intelligence committee memo. the houses in at 4:30 p.m. today , with a marker billy house of bloomberg pointed to, where there could be some dialogue on the floor about this. there will be no legislative business, but we will be watching to see what happens. more from president trump yesterday, last night. breitbart has this headline. "donald trump criticizes the " beforein the press sending them out during his speech." it was an event at the rnc dinner, he did a speech that we attempted to do live on c-span, but after a couple of minutes, here is how it play out. [video clip] >> did anybody not see the state of the union? [laughter] >> even the haters back there gave us good reviews on that one. they came up with fake polls, but even the fake polls were good. they said what are we going to do? forook a couple of hours them to figure before they went negative. they got calls from the boss that said you cannot say that about trump, you cannot say good. but we have had an incredible time. just about everybody -- i recognized so many people -- but about everybody in this room has been here from the beginning of this incredible journey. we have a few terms. it will always be america make -- make america great again. that will always be our baby. that will always be our baby. [applause] >> but we also have america first. we are putting america first. we are putting it over other countries, and i think this is because americans -- [inaudible] country andng our our companies -- >> shut it down, shut it down. host: that is what we saw on the air when it happened. we thought it was technical difficulties, as we explained to the audience, but it turns out the pool the white house allows for the president, cnn was the feed provider, and you see it goes to black. wastbart writes the pool escorted out after five minutes. trump also mocked democrats for blocking immigration reform in congress. robert is calling from aurora, indiana, on the issue of the intel memo. good morning. caller: yes, i think it should be released. i cannot understand the democrats. tuesday night was a disgrace to see a bunch of idiots sit there like they were glued to their always want to criticize him. he did not have to run for president. he did not have to run. why would he want to ruin the country when he has children and grandchildren that he loves? he is a family man. these idiots out in the world are blinded to the truth and do not know what they are doing. all they want to do is cause trouble. absolutely trouble. if they want to work with trump, work with him. if they do not, stay out of the way and let him do his job. host: thank you for calling. renee, thank you for waiting. good morning. caller: good morning, how are you? host: doing well, how are you? caller: good, thank you. i think, isis memo, incredibly irresponsible of our government. i think it should be discussed privately in closed sessions. i think it is just going to divide our country even more. you are releasing to the public in complete information -- incomplete information, especially with them not releasing the democratic response to it. i think it is very, very poignantly going to divide our country, even more than we already are. i think the russia investigation is over. both memos should be released, and people can decide then what the truth is. but right now, i think it is in very bad taste. kim, on two kim -- on to calling from ottumwa. are you there? kim, are you there now? one more time, kim from iowa. i think we lost kim as well. we will try to squeeze in another call or two, if we can, and point you to a story in the wall street journal. trump eight was on the aideorities radar, -- was on the authorities' radar for years before he became a person of interest in the dossier about the future president's ties to russia. the white house will release that this week, possibly today, this particular memo. and you can read this wall street journal story that moved this morning. jerry, a call from new jersey. are you there? everybody.d morning, i definitely believe that trump should -- well, the house, nunes should release the memo. the colors here are talking ers here arel talking about how it should wait -- there have been so many weeks about this russia investigation heretrump, and no caller saying they should hold this memo is complaining about everything that has come out about trump that nobody even knows if it is a fact. but they listen to it every day. they think it is ok to have it come out and crucify trump every day, not knowing for sure anything. , andhe leaks keep coming who you think is planting those leaks? who you think is planting them? -- cnn,the news media msnbc, 24 hours a day about russia, russia, russia, the leaks. crapave all of this coming out and it is ok, it is ok. everybody wants to hear that, but nobody wants to see the memo on the democrats side. this is too funny. you people are going to be in for a shock. you know it is true, you know it is true. you know hillary clinton -- she got rid of bernie sanders. she is not beneath what everyone is talking about. the woman is so criminal it is unbelievable, with these emails and the server, and obama knew it too, and i think that is what is everyone is -- what everyone is afraid of. host: rupert from texas. are you there? go ahead, rupert. have -- hink we caller: hi, ok. on this memo and the russian thing and all that, back when washington was here and they were doing counterintelligence, do you think they would tell the brits what we were doing and how we were counter-intelligence? it does not make sense. with the media talking about russia, russia, russia, i do not understand. they are doing counterintelligence when this started during obama's term and you kept it going in the media, you are telling them what we are doing. if you are doing counterintelligence, the american people are not so stupid that you would tell the british when washington was here what we were doing, and we were going over to the potomac. if mueller wants to do his job, he has to look at everything. i voted for trump. if trump is guilty of something, then trump should be out of office. you can paste a comment on her facebook page or our twitter page. of tape from ginsburg, ruth bader spoke to some people in d.c. at one of the local synagogues. is ourdent judiciary hallmark and pride. ginsburg said judges shouldn't be the one to defend themselves if attacked. is more of what she had to say about the role of the judiciary last night. reactive part of government. generatet controversies. bits reactive to what's out there. they do their best to put them out. all i have to say is read the opinion. hallmark andion's pride, the independent judiciary. >> are there any decisions you regret? >> i would tell you the advice i was given when i was a brand-new judge on the d.c. circuit. ruth, every opinion you released andt's it's over and done it, don't look back. worryingte your time about what stein appeared go on to the next case. give it your all. that was wonderful advice. that?e you able to follow >> without any difficulty, yes. entireou can watch that event with justice ginsburg. up, one year into the trump presidency, hundreds of top jobs in the administration are vacant. we will talk to that group about the impact of these vacancies. the president is calling for an end to what is called chain migration. we will talk with the cato institute about the fact and fiction surrounding this controversial program. we have more time. calls. we will be right back. >> this weekend on c-span3, on lectures in history, university of north carolina at chapel hill professor molly worsen on the origins of pentecostalism. >> fundamentalists are conservative protestants who new ideas oppose , and the bible, science society. railamerica, the documentary. >> over 12 million manic, william -- men, william, and children passed this way. they but tickets for 1000 places in america. they traded their money for dollars. they sang their first american songs and experienced their first american christmas and hanukkah. >> sunday at 10:00, and interview from the west point story for oral history. to work inwork was the vietnamese hospital. hospital, i went to do red cross work. history tverican every weekend on c-span3. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, cspan was created as a public service of the american cable television companies and is brought to you today by your >>le or satellite provider. washington journal continues. joining this is the president and ceo of the partnership for public service. we are talking about presidential appointments and the filling of federal positions. the 101 about your organization. we are a nonpartisan nonprofit organization trying to make the government more effective. there are 1.6 million nonprofits out there. they are about all kinds of important things. we only have one tool for action to deal with our most medical problems. that is the federal government. we need all those nonprofits to focus on the decision of policy. our government is effective at delivering good results to the public. that is our focus. how do you make sure the government is well led and the system is effective. had you get people to care about what government does and that it doesn't well? our funding comes from wherever we can find it. we get donations from individual foundations, corporate support. we train leaders in government. i spend a decent chunk of my time getting the resources to fuel the activity where trying to get done. host: what is the president roland fettered -- filling federal positions. democracy oner this planet has anything close to it, the president has 4000 political appointees. 1200 require senate approval. identify 630 of the most fundamental jobs and running the government. the person is chosen by the president. the senate has to confirm them. the president has to create a system that fills these jobs with highly effective people. andresident has done that the system has to change. this administration is well behind prior administrations. host: we want to invite viewers to colin. we have two numbers to call in. he is the president and ceo for the organization for private service. 239 have no nominee this point. and 245 been nominated confirmed. take us through those numbers. that is 400 positions that have not been filled. guest: it begins at the beginning. all presidents come to be president without the experience of having done it before. it's an incredible left to take over the united states government, the most important organization on the planet. very few recognize the work you need to do in order to be prepared for an effective presidency. this administration didn't start well. governor christie led their effort. he was removed after the election. by and large, the operation he created was ignored. they got behind. they did not have the infrastructure in place to fill these jobs with quality people or understand the complexity of the process. it's crazy what you have to go through in order to be confirmed. host: one of the keys, the top jobs not filled? guest: they are across the board. look at the world we live in today, we don't have a nominee for south korea. that's a critical hotspot. a census to.g that's an incredibly big lift. there's not an agency that's not missing fundamental talent. jobs,are people in those but they are not fundamentally equipped to do those jobs effectively. they are not named by the president and confirmed by the senate. it's a substitute teacher phenomenon. the: thomas shannon is third highest ranking official in the state department. he is a standardbearer of diplomatic integrity. he is leaving. tingerved as ac secretary of state. ofhough the total number employees has not diminished significantly, they have suffered a brain drain of experience and respected diplomats. others were pushed out or resigned because they could not support the america first foreign policy. morel is low among many remaining employees. shannon councils some of them. it's sad. the state department plays a fundamentally critical role in protecting us as a country and managing the relationships we have with the rest of the world. that morale is down. we produce some of the best places to work rankings. the survey was from april to june last year. overall government numbers went up, state department numbers went down around senior leaders. it's challenging to be able to look at the data because we don't have good metrics on the highest performers. there is a lot of evidence that suggests the state department is not bringing enough talent and to replace the people that are leaving. it's an agency that's in trouble. host: the you have a sense of what the administrations broad plan is at this point to fill these positions? guest: my sense is they are trying. operation as all administrations do. the challenges we are a year plus into this administration. it's the patriots showing up at halfuper bowl and having their defensive line not on the field in the second quarter. there's no question that have been nominating people. liesof the responsibility with the senate. they need to do it fast. host: brad is from minnesota. you are up first. caller: good morning. i just want to ask him one question. what is the world going to conclude that we have in our premier agencies political moles? yout: i can start by saying are the first person to describe me as a young man in a very long time. it's very interesting. there's been a lot of attention to the question of burrowing. that would be political appointees. i think there are way too many who take on career positions. there is a substantial effort now making sure that is tracked very carefully. they have to review this. it's a legislative watchdog, they do a review of this. the numbers are tiny compared to the full workforce. you were talking about tens of people. bulkd large, the vast of the workforce are there because they want to help the american public. data, it's at the below the private sector in terms of the respect for their leader. where they exceed the private sector is their commitment to mission. they are willing to go the extra mile because they care about what they're doing. i'm not pretending you won't find examples, but they are tiny compared to the vast bulk of the workforce. this is only a part of the workforce is under the age of 30. they need to grow the talent that is already there. host: susan is in arizona. questions with the workforce, are you specifying about the fbi or the white house or the congress? guest: we will take any question. host: are you interested in a particular part of the government? caller: the fbi. i have family members in the fbi. they want the memo to come out. it's embarrassing the ones that are doing good for the ones being bad. it's the same with the sheriff's department. caller thing, i wanted to the other day. host: let me mention that we are talking more specifically about openings in the workforce with federal employees and the fact that a lot of administrative positions of not been filled yet. it's so hard to get them to be filled. it took almost four months for the background. a lot of people don't pass it. it's a real challenge for the federal workforce. employees,olitical there are 2 million career civil servants. that's not including the postal service. number as same existed in the early 1960's. people say the federal workforce is growing. it has stayed steady as responsibilities have increased. i think the point is correct. when you say three to four months to get through the process, it can take beyond the year. a lot of people can't wait that long. one area that the government has to change is the hiring process. if you talk to anyone on the inside that cares about the operation of government, they will point to that. take explain why it make three or four months. guest: to be clear about this, i'm talking about career hiring. there are some similarities. part of it begins with the process. it's incredibly difficult. there's a lot of information that's required. the federal government adopts .rocesses that are unique i think that's something more that needs to happen. security clearances, there's a massive backlog. that could be a huge hindrance in getting talent. host: who would play the biggest role in making changes? is a combination? load is onbiggest the executive branch. the rules need to be modernized. many of the rules that govern how the executive branch brings , many are 70 plus years old. most of it is in the part of the leadership. leaders,political crisis management, policy development, don't run their organizations effectively. host: we are looking for federal employees who want to colin. we want to hear from you. caller: thank you very much for c-span and taking my call. appreciate the effort of what you are doing. i have some concerns with a couple of statements. i've been in federal government since 1999. i am a career civil servant. regarding persons and acting capacity, you referred them to substitute teachers. this is not accurate. i have worked with plenty of people who were in senior capacity who functioned in that role for years and were successful. whether or not someone is able to keep the mission associated with that moving forward, it has more to do with the individual than with any limitations. in fullame as being capacity, no. plenty of them are functional in the roles. the second one has to do with the difficulties in filling those positions. is ii have to say there truly believe this administration has been handicapped by the response from the agencies. i spent my career in the intelligence committee. i left because it's over politicized. thecame so fed up with actions of appointees from the obama administration that i would not work in that environment anymore. believe absolutely and i know many people who work in other agencies to leave there is a deep state that is undermining the administration. something about numbers of people. you said it was not a lot of people. the majority of federal employees follow the rules. they will not raise an issue about somebody who is doing something wrong unless evidence is obvious. they know they will be the ones taken to task for raising a complaint. news more for complaining. -- you lose more by complaining. they are able to get away with it. host: you made several points. out three andull i will try to respond to them in a helpful way. first, the with the metaphor of the substitute teacher. i think we have more agreement and disagreement. by a large, the people in these acting roles are better oflified than the majority political appointees who come from the outside. is and i would expect you would agree with this, every one of those individuals would say they would be better off if they were the hearse and confirmed i the senate. -- by the senate. they don't know if they are going to be there for three months or six months or nine months. they are not going to make decisions with the expectation that they will see them through. they will not be perceived by those is having long-term authority. invest inn't going to the same way as they do with someone they expect to be around. there's no question that person teacheras substitute would be better off in a permanent place. it talked about difficulty of filling the jobs and whether the deep state is at play. i personally think the nation of bad one.state is a there are people who don't do their jobs well and are career people. the vast majority are there to follow the lead. they understand their jobs and do what the president's directing them to do. they may have a different view, but they are sworn to follow the rule of law. the president has a responsibility to create effective leadership teams. with the are unhappy bureaucracy and the choices being made, they are not making it harder for him to find or pick people. that's his responsibility and something he owns directly. the third point is very important. -- ialked about whether mentioned the survey. on the surveyr 17 asks are you able to raise a violation of ethics? i think this is a critical question for any organization and a public sector one. when you look at the challenges the obama administration had at on,v.a. or the irs earlier this is fundamental to the problem. somewhere someone is going to do something stupid. what does the rest of the culture do? do they raise the problem? if you don't have a healthy culture, people don't raise that information to leadership. this is not unique to obama or trump, federal workers will believe they are in an environment where they are safe. political leader should hold themselves that accountable for creating that. it's onlyies will say about one third of the workforce that can raise a violation of law or ethics. that number is more than 15 points lower than the private sector. that's a problem. host: we have time for a few more calls. let's take a look at this. you can see it's a large agency. people read this chart? guest: you are a kind man to raise this. a lot of people talk about running the government to business. you can't. government is fundamentally different. public good rather than financial return. it's more challenging. one commonality whether you are in the private sector or government is the engagement of your employees. it's the most important element of success. host: let's get to more calls. gina is in florida. caller: the color from virginia said that there is a deep state that is trying to undermine president trump. that was a real propaganda call. expression, many mistakes are made on purpose. when you get what you've got now, this authoritarian government with so many generals are running around the white house. they are going to diminish the department they find unnecessary. they will focus on what they want. this administration wants provocation in the middle east, claiming israel -- jerusalem is the capital of israel. trying to destroy the iranian nuclear deal. it's very obvious that they are trying to do. the department of defense, general mattis, he said he wants more diplomats. it's just the opposite. i think the idea of the isp say -- state counterproductive and not accurate. americans should understand they have a phenomenal government but it won't stay that way if we don't invest in it. one of the great challenges is a polymerization of the -- that's theion -- reason why you serve. is a mission oriented workforce trying to do their best. they are being failed by the system they are operating in. if we want to stay at the top of the world, we need to make sure we are taking care of our government in an effective way. the other quibble i would have is the notion that the generals are part of the problem. military,k at our they have in many ways the most effective talent operation, more than the civilian side. they look at their people as an asset. looke civilian side, most at the talent as a cost. we need to look at it as an asset. those people should understand the civilian workforce is more than a majority focused on national security. host: at the state of the union speech tuesday, he talked about the the a accountability. passed aear, congress landmark the a accountability act. accountability act. my administration has already employeesre than 1500 who failed to give our veterans the care they deserve. we're hiring talented people who love our veterans as much as we do. i will not stop until our veterans are properly taken care of, which is been my promise to them from the very beginning of this great journey. all americans deserve accountability and respect. to ourwhat we are giving wonderful heroes. tonight, i call on congress to empower every cabinet secretary with the authority to reward good work and to remove federal employees who undermine the public trust or fail the american people. host: thoughts on the message? guest: the most important thing he said was toward the end when he said i want to import -- reward good to employees. we will never have the government we wanted is all we do on firing people faster. you have to create an upside. you have a risk averse workforce. there's a great example of that. people don't do it because there is a risk. there is no benefit to doing good work. host: one last call. welcome to the program. subject ishink the the most important issue that we face. people that are running this government. this president is a visionary. he sees a solution the, not the problem. tos like when a person wants cleanse the product they eat, they wash it. i think were going to see government employees rising to the top. they will make it up there running government. this president talks about the american public. that's his main concern. it has to start with who's running the government. president is a visionary. he sees the solutions. he doesn't get worried about the problem. i think we are going to see more and more of that coming to fruition as time goes on. the public is going to recognize this man is talking to the american public. i hope we continue to grow. i'm and 87-year-old man and this is the most promising future. guest: congratulations on 87 years. i think what the caller said the inside being leading the changes that need to take place is incredibly right and fundamental. the workforce is hindered by way too much process. we need leaders in place to help ideashem top cover so the can actually happen. it's true in any organization. how do you make the place better? -- it's powerful given the right leadership and the right institutional support. our guest is been the president of the partnership for public service. thanks a lot for your time. guest: thank you. host: coming up, the cato institute will be here to talk about the call for an end to so-called chain migration. later on, we will do a one-on-one on the fisa program. approvalalk about the of getting a wiretap. we will be right back. >> former speechwriter for president george w. bush and columnist david from with his book trumpocracy. he is interviewed. it's a book about the study of how. this is the study of donald trump's power. how does he get away with it? it's the system of enabling. trumphe system between and the media that enable him and create the system that involves the republican party. it's between him and that core group of his voters who have enabled him to win the republican nomination. after words on book tv. >> watch the 2018 writers festival. starting with karl rove on presidential elections. columnistimes op-ed on u.s. foreign-policy. dave barry talks about his. margaret macmillan and john meacham on their favorite historical figures. watch the writers festival starting at 2:00 eastern on book tv on c-span2. >> washington journal continues. host: joining us is alex with the cato institute. policy immigration analyst. we wanted to do find this term that some people use, chain migration. we want to learn about what this program is about. we wanted to hear first from the president at the state of the union tuesday. he talked about chain migration. final protectsnd the nuclear family by ending chain migration. under the current row can system, a single immigrant can bring in virtually unlimited numbers of distant relatives. plan, we focused on the immediate family by limiting sponsorships to spouses and minor children. this vital reform is necessary not just for our economy but for our security and the future of america. in recent weeks, to terrorist attacks in new york made possible by the visa lottery and chain migration. in the age of terrorism, these programs present risks. we can no longer afford it. it's time to reform. these outdated immigration rules and finally bring it our immigration system and to the 21st century. this term chain migration, what does it mean and where does it come from? it refers to american citizens or residents of the united states been able to sponsor family members to come lawfully on green cards and live permanently. the term chain migration goes back 70 years. it's been used by social scientists to describe the phenomenon through our history. openwhen the u.s. and borders in the 19th century, a wage earner would, and then get a house and a job and send for his family to come. the first person to go through ellis island was a young minor child who was meeting up with their family here in the united states. legally, family sponsorship or unification wasn't part of a immigration law until 1921 when congress put very high quotas on immigrants outside northwestern europe but made an exception for immediate relatives. it, it was changed in 1965 and expanded. family sponsorship has been a major portion of the immigration system. -- there have been unintended consequences. you have basically two big portions of family sponsorship. one is the immediate relatives, spouses, parents, children. that's 48% of immigrants in the united states. ofhave another portion family sponsored preferences. they are 20%. they add up to 68%. it started in 1965, people wanted to keep american immigration coming from europe. most immigrants were from europe. the idea was only their families would be able to come. that became a way for a lot of latin american, asian, african immigrants come in substantial numbers. 9/10 of all immigrants are from places other than europe. numbers.have the phone we have a line for republicans (202) 784-8001. democrats (202) 748-8000. .ndependents (202) 748-8002 have a line for legal immigrants. we want to hear from you. senator chris murphy from connecticut says chain migration is a made up term by anti- immigrants. the purpose is to dehumanize immigrants. review, to keep using the term chain migration. familyw the left reunification. we will do a grave disservice. a little bit more on the terminology. guest: i think both of those people are wrong. it's been used by social scientists since the 1940's. it was not made up by anti-immigration people. the national review writer is also incorrect. preferences,red that's the name for another portion of the family sponsored immigration. if you want to be legalistic and accurate, family sponsor is fine and appropriate. chain migration is also appropriate. host: here's what the president said about making changes, what do you see him putting out there? guest: we have the bullet points of a plan. if you look at that, it would cut out green cards for the that's of u.s. citizens, 170,000 people year. there would be a phaseout of the rest of the family sponsored green card program, which includes sons and daughters of older,tizens who are theul permanent residents, children and daughters, married sons and daughters of u.s. citizens, a lot of them would be eliminated from the program. it would be a general phaseout. in many of these categories, there are people from mexico, , theirlippines, china elong backlogs to get these green cards. it would take 25 years to clear them. host: what do you expect the reception to be in congress? guest: there he negative. there is zero appetite among democrats and republicans. host: good morning. all, i agree of with you wholeheartedly. migration,chain those are all made up words from illegal to candy coat immigrants. besides that, the biggest problem is the majority of people are on board with daca on a pathway to citizenship. beyond that. the democrats want to reveal the real numbers. you are going from 800,000 too close to 10 million people. that's the biggest concern. the democrats are being less than genuine's when they don't reveal real numbers. guest: thanks for the question. what we are talking about, family sponsored green cards, these are for illegal immigrants. not illegal immigrants. to your point about whether wouldzing the dreamers lead to an increase in change migration -- chain migration, most would not be allowed to sponsor their parents or other family members to come over as a compromise. even if they were allowed to, research from the 1990's shows each immigrant brings over three and 3.5 immigrants. let's say they legalized 800,000 240,000 -- 2.4s or 2.9 million people in addition to that. host: good morning to you. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. 1960erved something in four. -- 1964. children,passed the workers were busted. wondering what the impact of that was on immigration. they left the workforce because of that situation. guest: there's a lot of academic research on the effects of welfare on labor force petition patient rates varied. when you don't pay people for working, they don't work as much. there is a lot of evidence of immigrants who have come to the united states since then have filled a lot of jobs on the low-end and the high-end of the american labor market. they work at higher rates than americans. be thethe reasons might green card don't have access to welfare for the first five years they are here. host: good morning. caller: how are you doing? . wanted your thoughts guest: on homework? caller: they have declared a war on homework. they're not going to do that. about you are talking chain migration? are you connecting it in any way? let's just move on. i thought he was going somewhere else. let's stick to the topic of hand. good morning. caller: this is my biggest problem with your guest. he wants to define them as chain migrator's. i have a problem with that. be labeled the way they want to be labeled. you wouldn't say that to a person from these countries. a long time ago, black people did not like that. people like to keep saying things like that that the human eyes as a person. you can hide behind discrimination with little tricks. we know the term chain migration is a derogatory term. say what it is for what it is. it's for family reunification. host: let's get a response. guest: i think both terms are entirely legitimate. i use all of them to talk about it. if you follow our work at the cato institute, we are against cutting immigration. we want to make it easier for people to read night with their family members in the united states. thet of this focuses on term gets away from that core issue. host: by the numbers, it's the most common form of legal immigration in the u.s. 238,000 immigrants were categorized as a family sponsored preference. also, 560,000 people came to the u.s. as immediate relatives. these are spouses, kids. anything more about those numbers? upst: they are divided clearly. the most is immediate relatives. spouses, minor children, parents. it's important that americans, even in the 1920's when they wanted to create immigration laws based on racial origin or ethnicity or discredited , they stillories respected family migration. host: the present refers to unlimited numbers. are there rules or limits? guest: for the immediate relatives category, there is no numerical limit. you have to go through the system and make sure you are not a criminal and that you can support yourself. you are not a national security threat. system,amily sponsored there are numerical caps. unmarried daughters and sons of u.s. citizens 21 or over, that is 22,400 year. andthe category of spouses minor children, that's cap at 88,000 the year. the unmarried sons and daughters of permanent residence, that's cap that 26,000 per year. for the brothers and sisters of adult u.s. citizens, that's 55,000 year. capsned with per country results in very long wait times for brothers and sisters. a lot of people who are getting their green card now from the philippines have been in line for over 20 years. host: sharon is in fort worth, texas. caller: i would just like to say that the chain migration and reform is an antiquated thought. it went south. at the time, we need people to come here to work and help build our economy. now, the economy is not in such shape and we need to look at the americans here as far as trying to build the economy. in the past, when the immigrants would it come here and be hired, they would have more jobs. the american people here may not have the education or the technical skill, unable to get those jobs. accountablelding the workers hiring these people illegally. workersthey should hold and employers accountable as far as hiring. it was a good thought, but it went south. we need to look at change and we need to look at the americans first. host: thank you. guest: the chain migrants who come in, if they are coming legally on green cards, they are legally allowed to work and employers are legally allowed to hire them. there is economic research on the effects of immigrants on wages and employment. there's almost no job displacement discovered and the most negative finding in the peer-reviewed literature is from harvard university. 2010rants in 1990 to lowered the wages of american 1.7%school dropouts by relative to other workers. every other category, there were wage increases. 90% of americans saw wage increases due to immigration. host: wyoming, good morning. immigrants weny have in this country illegally? the ones that are legal? are thate estimates there are about 11 million illegal immigrants in the united states currently and there are about 32 million legal immigrants in the united states. caller: i thank you very much. is off thet number grid. wyoming, it is just unreal how many illegals we have. i don't know how many. , they are allound working. i would say they are a very workable bunch of people and a lot of them are wonderful people. they just, for the system. i do appreciate your time. thank you for c-span. host: thank you for calling. how do screening work? how long does it take? guest: it depends on where they are coming from. the united states government has checks on a criminal records. the government has access to numerous databases around the world about national security threats. hadast check, they suspected terrorists. if the government is suspecting par, theyn't up to have the discretion to cut back. host: we talked about numbers earlier. this is their version of the numbers. they write on this chart that every hour the u.s. settles enough migrants on the basis of family ties to fill a small auditorium. guest: immigration to the united around it's somewhere 800,000 per year coming in through family unification categories. what we need to realize is historically as a percentage of the population, they are pretty small. if you look at all green cards, the's about point 3% of u.s. population. you see immigrants was about the same number with a smaller u.s. population. host: let's hear from billy in boston. caller: i just have a question about the president's proposal to reduce legal immigration and what his thoughts are on that. and others are gung ho on reducing legal immigration. themselves?arate we just have to shore up the southern border and keep illegals out. it's possible to make the case to reduce legal immigration at the same time issuing this rhetoric. i think we need to have a water wall. i disagree with create it for the wrong reasons. host: thanks for calling. guest: thanks for calling. guest: i think it is sen. cochran: not senator cornyn, it led the charge on cutting legal immigration. i believe that would be bad for the u.s. economy and the growth of this country going forward. comment on the intentions of people who want to build a border wall, but that is intended to try to cut illegal immigration across the southwest border, the chain migration portion, they want to cut the legal system, that's entirely separate from the border wall. host: let's go a julia in nolensville, maryland. question had a quick daca,izenship, the specifically females, when they have children that are born in this country themselves, what is the citizenship status of the mother and i would certainly assume that the citizenship status of the baby would be of this country. when their parents have brought them over and they themselves have children, i was wondering what the status was? host: you are correct -- guest: you are correct, anyone born on u.s. soil except for the children of diplomats are automatically u.s. citizens, but that does not change the immigration status of the parents. under u.s. law, the folks who have children are not able to adjust their status to a green card, except under very few and small circumstances that are very rarely used, so the notion that having a child here can somehow lead to a green card for you in the future if you are still in the u.s. unlawfully does not hold true. memphis, you are on the line. caller: where i live, a lot of people's big the rhetoric about round them up and ship them out. i'm wondering how likely it is the we would set up college, you could fill a whole stadium. how likely is it that we start deporting people en masse? is that something you think we should do as americans? round them up and put them in facilities or camp situation and then import them if they don't have legal papers? guest: absolutely not. i think the u.s. immigration enforcement should focus 100% on people who are actual criminals, people who commit violent and property offenses, national security threats, and those who have communicable diseases, and that's it. put enforcement should be for people whose only violation is breaking immigration laws. whether it's possible or not, think it would be very difficult and expensive and would destroy a lot of american civil liberties, not to mention the civil liberties of immigrants and their families to do something like that, trying to deport 11 million to 12 million people. the biggest deportation rates we saw were in the first term of the obama administration, which decreased substantially in the second term and i think it's going to be nearly impossible for this administration to even reach obama first term numbers for deportations. host: our guest is alex and alex nowrasteh. employment numbers -- a new for january,out 200,000,s added were for a perspective from the new , wall street economists expected in increase of 180,000 as opposed to 200,000 which is what bloomberg is reporting as well. the jobless rate is 4.1%, the lowest since 2000 and average earnings rose by nine cents an hour at around 2.9% over the past year. one hour left in this friday edition of "washington journal," and coming up next, joshua geltzer of the national security council during the obama administration. pfizer give us a 101 on and the process for the government to approve a wiretap on the -- on american citizen. >> c-span's history series landmark cases returns each month with a look at 12 new supreme court cases, each week, historians and i first join us to discuss the constitutional issues and personal stories behind these significance of report decisions. 26inning monday, february live at 9:00 p.m. eastern and help you better understand each case, we have a companion guide written by veteran supreme court journalist. landmark cases, volume two, the book cost $8.95 plus shipping, to get your copy, go to c-span.org/landmark cases. >> sunday night on "q&a," author bill james talks about his book the man from the train, in which he investigates one of the deadliest serial killers in american history. happenedf the times within 100 yards of the railroad track. and one of the things that helps us identify his crime as opposed to somebody else's is a usually happens at the intersection of two railroad tracks. within the intersection of two railroad tracks presumably because he knew after he committed his crime, he had to get out of town for don. and he didn't want to be stranded waiting for a train to come through that he could hop on. so being at the intersection of multiple railroad tracks gave him more opportunities to get out-of-town before the crime was discovered. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "q&a." >> for nearly 20 years, in depth on book tv has featured the nation's best-known nonfiction writers for live conversation about their books. this year, as a special project, we're featuring best-selling fiction writers for our monthly program, in depth fiction edition. join us live sunday at noon eastern with kohl's and whitehead, author of the 2016 best-selling novel the underground railroad, which was awarded the pulitzer prize and the national book award. his other novels include zone one, sag harbor, and the intuitionist. our special series in depth fiction edition sunday live from noon to three clock p.m. eastern on book tv on c-span two. >> "washington journal," continues. host: joining us as joshua geltzer, a former counterterrorism senior director this on the national security during the obama administration. good morning. i want to have he wants sort of give us a 101 on pfizer and the wiretapping of u.s. citizens. i wanted to get you to elaborate more on a piece the recently don't need to know what's in the noon is memo to worry about its release. itst: i'm worried about release. the executive branch has the responsibility to protect classified information, sensitive national security information that americans risked their lives together in some instances and is built on a system that asks the executive to good care of that information. what worries me here is whatever congress may decide about the release of this congressional document, it is still the executive's responsibility to protect sensitive sources and methods that may be in it. while reports to the classified document, it's treated that way by all reports and yet, some indications are that the president just wanted out in full. that would really break with the tradition of having the excellent in the executive branch review it for release reactions to protect american security information. --t: let's talk about pfizer fisa, what is the wiretap all about and when did this law actually start? ofst: it's in the middle something of a spectrum. on one side of the spectrum, you have surveillance for purposes of ordinary criminal law enforcement. they are, he wanted collect information, you need to comply with the fourth amendment's crime wasause that a puretted and then you have foreign intelligence election. , andhen you have fisa --le i of particular tasks which asks there is probable cause that they are a foreign agent. host: what were the circumstances that led to fisa? guest: in 1972 you have supreme court case that dealt with domesticn for intelligence purposes and declined to answer how it might intersect with the fourth amendment. it urged congress to do something about that and congress did. congress is acting against the backdrop of abuses of the authorities that were in place at times. in the 70's, they were hearings on the hill that brought out the it had been abused to go after political opponents. in the late 70's, congress creates this scheme the gets all three branches involved. it has the executive signing off a high level, it has a federal judge serving on the fight is a -- the visa -- the fisa court. host: we are often this is used? guest: we don't have exact numbers, but in the public record, it's not infrequent to ,ely on title i of fisa especially given the range of threats we face this day. host: phone numbers for joss belzer -- joshua geltzer. we will leave them numbers on the screen for republicans, democrats, and everyone else. what are the standards for fisa? process?he application guest: it begins usually with somebody who is investigating. imagine, for example, an fbi agent who with the source or some other set of materials, usually a host of materials, is concerned that somebody may be spying in the united states. that agent is going to do what a good fbi agent does -- work the sources and try to figure on what's going on. and eventually work up through his or her leadership the beginning it -- the beginnings of an application to the court for fisa coverage. they will complete a fisa application package of the lawyer thinks the standard is met. that theable cause proposed target of coverage is an agent of a foreign power. and only if that gets signed off at high levels of both fbi and the justice department does that go over to the fisa court. they will determine whether the average of probable cause has been satisfied. host: loop this back to the z memo.ed noon is -- nune of an the memo consists z about written by nune how a certain fisa application or at least its removal came to be. i gather with the memo is designed to do is cast aspersions on some of the materials that may have been part of that fisa application, in particular the materials that seem to be an issue involve the so-called steel dossier that was a subject during the campaign. , he: we hear paul ryan talked a little bit about -- you gave his response to a question about whether the potential release of this memo poses a grave danger to the country. howdy respond president trump's own fbi director appointee saying the memo that you read and say should be released could pose a grave danger to the country? paul ryan: first of all, let me tell you what this memo is and what is memo is not. what is memo is is congress over a very unique law, fisa. if individual did something wrong, is our job to conduct oversight over the executive branch if mistakes were made. involves american civil liberties, and if american civil liberties were abused, then that needs to come to light so that doesn't happen again. what this is not is an indictment our institutions of our justice system. this memo is not an indictment of the fbi, the department of justice, it does not impugn the mueller investigation or the deputy attorney general. what is, is the congress is legitimate function of oversight to make sure that the fisa process is being used correctly, that if it wasn't being used correctly, that needs to come to light and people need to be held accountable so we do not have problems again, because this does affect our civil liberties. host: let's get a reaction from joshua geltzer. guest: i agree the congressional oversight is critical, particularly when it comes to fisa authority. this is a bizarre form of oversight to release a fairly partisan document without reviewing it for the national security concerns that might be brought out by making it public and having particular experts review it, not those involved politically, that's a very strange form of oversight and that's where take issue with that. host: a moment cocoa in, good morning. caller: good morning, c-span. i like how there are worried about sensitive information obamag out in the administration just slinging it out on servers and everything else. the fbi was letting her get a now pass, but now listen -- all of a sudden they don't let this stuff out. host: the tear from our guest. so divinely.it i was part of the processes to review congressional documents that did have sensitive national security information. one instance of that was quite well-known was the senate intelligence committee's report on torture and waterboarding and other forms of enhanced interrogation, so to speak. -- itocument went through was a congressional documents that the congress decided to release, the executive branch than fulfilled its responsibility of reviewing it for redaction's to protect information. there was a dialogue between the executive and congress, but ultimately, that strikes me as a healthy form of the process. that's what i'm worried may not be occurring here based on the president's push to release this thing in full. seniorur guest is a executive branch counselor during the obama administration. guest: it was an obama -- it was an honor to serve. to work with folks across the key -- to keepur our country safe. you gave me great says action to be able to part of a mission that is ultimately about ejecting americans lives home and abroad. livestecting americans home and abroad. geltzer.h is here is ancern hastily passed kind of when we are confronting terrorism and then expanded by a liberal regime, and now is in the hands of god knows how to characterize the current regime, but essentially, it's a hidden process, there is no review other than terms that you use like experts, reliable, all of this, about people who are not representative of the general public, in the sense that what we want -- would we want this to happen to us and this is what the republicans are now trying to do. essentially, come forward with a document where they make some claims, and most people favored this because it opens a window on the fisa process. the fisa process was a closed window and the lights out and this you can eliminate in any of your explanations. and that's un-american. that's what i experienced in the communist world, that's what other people experienced in the other world and even if it runs ,moothly and nobody gets hurt it violates the principle on this country was built. core point on a which we agree, the need for responsible transparency. there was unauthorized disclosure and it would provide it of a window into the how this to allowme functions friend of the court briefings to andr at the fisa court there is value in responsible transparency. what i worry about is transparency that is not being done responsibly. without a review of this document, that's where i see the problem arising. it's hard you track of the different parts of fisa, we are talking about this morning the title i was actually passed back in the 70's based on pretty extensive deliberation by the congress after the backdrop you and i have been discussing. more recently, there have been other amendments to fisa that have cropped up in varying contexts. it's hard to keep these different parts in line. host: it reminds him of between the president sent out many days signed the bill to reauthorize foreign intelligence collection. thatis not the fisa law was so wrongly abuse during the election. what is he saying here? guest: it's a different provision of fisa. renewed, thats targets non-us persons located abroad. the only connection to the united states is the type of intel provider they use -- email provider they use. title i seems to be at issue in this memo and that involves collection of individuals that may be on u.s. soil. host: catherine. good morning. caller: here's my question. this is all because of carter page, carter page will be called by mr. mueller and he will give evidence. and president trump is trying his best to stir up as much dust as he can, so that when mr. carter page testifies, because he has colluded with russians multiple times cents 2013. it's all about carter page. he has to make everything that otherwise,egitimate, it all falls back on trump. it's his baby, and he is trying to protect it. so what i say is i support the fbi, i support our court systems, i support the supreme court, and all those who are trying to protect me and would have never picked up his name had they not picked up his communications with the russians. so that's all it's about. thank you, sir, and i thank you for your service. host: josh geltzer. guest: a bridge at the kind words and i share the idea that there's ulterior motive that seems to be at issue here in terms of this document to release rather than some pure transparency push. there has been speculation that the police -- the release may be designed to discredit or undermine the current deputy attorney general, apparently because he was part of the process that led to the fisa court approving renewed coverage of carter page, or it may be -- these are not naturally exclusive -- decided its release to cast aspersions on the original cover, suggesting perhaps that somehow law enforcement added in for the current administration from before the campaigner during the campaign. i'm not sure how any of that actually will be borne out by releasing the documents, but going up a level of generality, that's not white he sort of documents should be released. host: out of fort lauderdale, tony. caller: good morning. i guess i got one answer by listening to the guest, wasn't sure if he was in favor of releasing the memo or not to it seems like he is definitely against it and i have a question, since when did liberals become so protective of government, of the state, and so trusting and so distrustful of people that if we get the information, i have no idea what's in there, why can't we get it if there are false things in it, they will be embarrassed and chased out of the public square, and if they are not, we deserve to know. then i hear people saying we can't question law enforcement and the same people take colin kaepernick, who is saying that cops murdering a hunting black people and take him as an icon. that's called cognitive dissonance. you can't say that law enforcement to a man is hunting people like dogs in the street, and then say we can't expose or even question the higher-ups. this is just hypocrisy. it's more than hypocrisy, this is un-american. if he is lying, he will pay the price. they will be able to bring the fact out and embarrass him, but i need to know. i need to know so i can make my decision. you don't get to decide what i should know. i'm an american, and i need to know. thank you. i'm all for responsible transparency. here are my concerns. one is mighty cold and balance. from what we were able to glean publicly, this memo is coming out and the minority members of the house intel committee were not allowed to share their own memo designed to release response to this one. that seems not to inform you look debate as it is to slanted. side, i am for responsible transparency, but i'm also all for protecting information that is collected to keep americans safe and the lives of americans to collect in some cases. not clear whether the process to protect that information will be at here to hear. host: some basic questions about fisa, are all fisa matters classified until deemed otherwise? guest: it was a classified world of foreign intelligence information, yes. is it fair to say the visa has been used more frequently since the creation of the department of homeland security? guest: i don't know the answer to that. we have seen that is part of the evolution of fisa and the emergence of section 702 that we were discussing earlier was in response to an uptick in what was needed to keep americans safe, especially after 9/11, recognition that there is this range of terrorist threats and other nationals concerning -- national security concerns. host: compare and contrast the process of seeking a fee so warned and the process for local receiving a warrant. executive have the going to a court, a judge, a magistrate judge and seeking some sort of approval for collecting affirmation. and that was what the fisa regime in particular, title i was designed to mimic in a sense, while adapting it to the particular needs and contacts of foreign intelligence collection rather than ordinary criminal law enforcement. host: plenty more calls coming in including becky for massachusetts for josh geltzer. caller: i would like to make a comment. memo, i heard it was redacted so there shouldn't be anything that should come out that would hurt anybody in the governments and the security of the nation. but, i think that the republicans, my party, and the should have turned around and said i refuse to allow this memo to come out in the public, because all of a sudden, all of these democrats that say they would want it to come out now. and talking about fisa also, when the tsarnaev brothers, one of them had gone back home and there was supposedly a threat, was there a fisa put on him that might have prevented the bombings in boston? thank you. guest: x for calling. let's go back to the first part of the caller's question. i would be delighted to hear that there are the reductions done in a surge protection and security. my in particular they are done not by folks sitting at the white house, but by the experts from places like the fbi and to the extent we read that the fbi director himself has gone over to the white house to plead for that, i hope that that plea has been adhered to. in my experience, you don't want classification decisions made politically, you want it made by the career civil servant experts who know how to protect this information. host: how do you take thousands of pages of information and pages andto four memo not lose the integrity. they have been watching wag the dog too much. guest: we will find out if this memo is released what it says, but it does seem that the question goes for broader point about whatever is happening here, this doesn't seem like the right snapshot into understanding of the public and that's what folks are worried about its released. reaction, theour public should know if as part of its worn application, the fbi is the crystal or steel dossier was financed with hillary clinton campaign and house intelligence memo may answer that question as well as whether the fbi made other misrepresentations or omissions in its fisa. guest: there are federal judges whose job it is a look at these application having work with the great folks who practice in front of them, those judges and staff asked really hard questions. the reason that stem classified setting is because the information flowing to those judges is sensitive and the collection that they choose in some instances to authorize another instance is not authorize is also sensitive to his congressional oversight as well as should be in the decisions before they get to the judges are reviewed at very high levels of the executive branch. that seems to be oversight regime that congress had designed in the past in the late 70's. host: alex from pocomoke city, maryland, good morning. good morning. i wanted to comment on this. i believe that the whole fisa court is a violation of the fourth amendment and you should have an individual warrant and the burden of proof is on the state, not the individual to , so thetheir defense release of this memo i think will show how corrupt and how abusive the powers of got in the federal government and the other thing i've ever seen the fbi do is give terrorists the opportunity to commit crimes so they can say look what i did. thank you. the fbi isake on somewhat different, i worked and ibi in various roles admire immensely how hard they worked keep our nation safe. as i mentioned before, the visa scheme was designed to respond to an invitation by the supreme something that would deal with foreign intelligence collection that would not exactly be the fourth amendment and its requirement for probable cause, but would and wouldor to it have federal judges involved as well, but the balance congress tried to strike and how these applications going over to rotating sets of judges to review it as part of the fisa court. that system strikes me as having had a lot of validity. congress has found it quite satisfactory over the years in many respects, exercising that important congressional oversight. host: does the guests believe the fbi needs help preserving records and their own text messages, etc.? guest: i have not followed details of that and i know the fbi is quite rigorous in looking at these things and what concerns we really is when the work of law enforcement is subject to a lot of political dialogue and political bantering. we have a tradition this company -- in this country of keeping law enforcement somewhat insulated and protected from the push and pull of politics and i worry that is beginning to fray. host: break apart fisa into its various parts. guest: maybe a good way to start is to contrast title i with title vii, which we had in the news recently as being reauthorized. title vii in some ways is the part of the spectrum closest to what i originally called pure foreign intelligence collection, they don't have a connection to the united states. title vii focuses on those who were non-us persons located overseas but they do have connections. there was the balance that congress struck and has really renewed is to set you don't need to bring every one of those proposals for every individual target to the fisa court, because these are individuals who don't have constitutional protections. they are not here in the on non-us persons. the same time come by virtue of using some sort of u.s. provider , running through the u.s. wires, so to speak, congress felt there was a role to play for court. so you have these directives issued by the fisa court that authorized categories of coverage under title vii. from i requires a lot more the executive branch it is on target by target bases and asks the question whether particular individuals appear to be the agent of a foreign power and they are spying for a foreign power here in the united states, for example. and that approval can last for up to 90 days, it's a shorter timeframe and if the executive think there is still information to be gathered in the individual so meets that standard, they go back to the fisa court and seek renewal. host: how many fisa judges are there and we know who they are? serving the judges ordered by chief justice roberts? court he selects the fisa and the court of reviews. it's a group of 11 judges who serve on the fisa court and they rotate among the responsibilities, judges are pulled from across the country and that group of 11 itself of people, on and off it under the chief justice. hear from tulsa, oklahoma. caller: we in the heartland are amazed at the cover-up that ,oing on by the liberal media the former obama officials, because obama weaponize the irs, the justice department, and the fbi in the justice department to promote the socialist and democrat agenda. and if hillary had been elected, none of this would be out because the weaponization would have continued. of ais a simple thing fusion gps, democrat paid for propagandang russian that was used by the fbi to get a fisa warrant to spy on the mpunk campaign -- the tru campaign. prosecuted,was not just took the fifth in promoting attacks against conservatives by the fbi. we know that eric holder was impeached, but not pursued by the obama justice department. we know that loretta lynch met in thell clinton investigation, which contaminated the investigation of hillary clinton, who was protected by james comey on the fbi. all of this is now coming out, so you have people like you're just here attacking the information flow, trying to promote the cover-up of an obama administration that was corrupt in its attack on week, the people, in the united states. host: let's get a reaction from josh geltzer. up for then stick justice department and fbi, not just for my personal extremes, desiderio we see now in many respects. i was heartened to see the person toent over in the white house or to give it concerned about this memos released at least without its review for proper classification and actions. the dni director of national intelligence reported to have weighed in as well. i see a system in which there are those who work under either party, under law enforcement of the intelligence community to to keep americans safe and my hope is that those who take on an important mission are able to keep doing airport jobs without it being politicized. host: uncharted chattahoochee, florida, you are on the line with joshua geltzer. caller: good morning. i would like to say my question to the would happen democrats if they was to go release this of the same time republicans release theirs, what would happen to them? what paul ryan is saying you can see through that what is and what it's not, because they are trying to hide something. host: where do you stand on the potential release of the democratic memo? guest: i think it's important to provide it is going to be something about a strange public to be on this, at least a more balanced public debate. that being said, i respect for the democrats are going through the proper channels on this. there was a vote at the committee which is the proper channel for the release of this sort of document. it sounds unfortunate with a result of that vote is, but that's the process and i believe speaker ryan indicated that over time, you might consider the release of it is that would inform public opinion, i don't know if it would, but the first document has a certain slant to it and it would be nice to have balance. host: to dennis in montgomery, texas. caller: i wish you would've had another guy on their as opposed to the obama guy. my concern about the fisa court is when these house-senate committee's request information from the doj, aren't they department,om any they never give them the information they requested. it still has to be done by the lawyers, civil liberty people, i think anytime congress, no matter who they are, once information, whether it's on hillary or whatever it's on, it should be brought within 48 hours, not years and years later when it could be alleviated immediately. that's my main concern. to the people are entitled that information who are these people to tell us we cannot have it, that is something wrong with this country. thank you. guess my experience of how the justice department particular response to the intel committees is a bit different from the caller's characterization. there used to be boxes and boxes and boxes of documents that would go over to these intel committees, with respect to freeze in particular, to facilitate this critical oversight responsibilities. i'm all for that, if the healthy system in which you have those on the hill overseeing this work in asking questions, often in closed sessions, asking very tough questions of those from justice and elsewhere in my experience is that those who were answering those questions to their very best provide those documents and answer those questions. host: "new york times," wrote judges rarely deny applications for fisa, critics are seeing sort of a rubber stamp process they might say. is that a fair assessment? guest: i don't think it is. if you look at the numbers, the percentage of approvals for title i fisa applications is actually ever so slightly lower than the percentage of rules of ordinary title iii criminal warrant application. in some cases, the numbers really high, but the numbers really high in the case of fisa which i have more direct experience because the executive branch is very rigorous before it brings something to the fisa court. atgoes through senior levels fbi as well as justice and there's often dialogue before the formal application to the fisa court with the judges and staff to see if there are questions that should be answered, holes to be filled and only at that point is a go over and still sometimes, the judges say no. host: after listening to all this political group, twitter says please ask the guest where in the constitution is fisa an enumerated power of the federal government? guest: you are not quite a find that they are which leads to the question of how does foreign intelligence collection fit in with what is in the constitution. the supreme court indicated that probable cause is geared towards ordinary criminal work and it did not give the answer of exactly where foreign intelligence collection would fit into the constitution of the cons -- into the constitutional scheme. that's what congress did with fisa. host: bill in oklahoma, thanks for waiting. caller: who are you representing? are you hillary clinton's brother-in-law? guest: why do you ask? caller: you sound like you are promoting the obama administration and the common man out here in oklahoma, we need some help. local law enforcement, the illegal search and seizures, they will take your vehicle, only up to the fbi, which many of them are representing, still representing the obama administration and many of them we think should be prosecuted. jeff sessions -- i don't know what he is. he's just blowing his money, i suppose, because he's not doing his job. i would really like something done, some true, honest people involved. honesty. does anyone believe in the truth anymore? host: last call and left comments. guest: i'm trying to represent my experience and i think in the context of this memo, is important for those of us who have had the privilege of working with folks at justice, fbi, intelligence committee and elsewhere to stand up for the important work that they do, how hard they work to protect our nation, its citizens, and to do so under the rule of law. as part of what got me interested on weighing in on this issue. host: joshua geltzer, former counterterrorism senior director on the national security council under the obama administration from 2015 to 2017, thanks for your time. 20 minutes left on this friday of "washington journal," would take a short break and then we do open phones. republicans, call (202) 748-8001 , democrats, call (202) 748-8000 , independents, call (202) 748-8002. you can talk about anything you like in the public affairs area. we will be right back after we take a look, a brief look at part of the "newsmakers," segment, we interviewed the president of americans for prosperity, tim phillips and we talked with the group's plan for campaign 2018. one of the things he talks about was the trunk presidency -- the trump presidency -- the rtrum presidency. calexico network was not going to -- >> the coke network was not going support the president. do think there's any possibility that heading into 2020 couple years from now, you be spending money to help the president's reelection? >> that's a long way down the road. we have 2018 on a policy front and 2019 policy front, we will make the decision down the road. host: you weren't ruling out? through 18.o get there's a lot of ball to be played. i will say this, this president has one of the most productive years for president on actually brought an opportunity and genuine freedom of any president in a generation going back to reagan. that's have a year this president had we look at only accomplished on the economic front, especially with the da appointment, the interior appointment in the reforms we are seeing that are giving energy independence, they have a really good first year, it was impressive. >> where the vagaries you think he has fallen short of where the network's priorities are and where americans for prosperity's priorities are? >> the done so much good in the first year, wanted be careful of criticize, because they have done really great job. to bring onhem entitlement reform and's or rolling back spending, because that's so important for the country. tax cuts are crucial, they did best tax cut and a generation, even better than the 1986 tax reform that led to so much economic growth. genuinelyrge them to rethink the entitlement reform, because our nation's path, even though we are sorry to have economic growth, safely, we are on a path to bankruptcy if we don't make some dramatic changes and that's an important thing they could do. some of the rhetoric on trade is worrisome. we think free and open trade is something that is crucial for prosperity and the long-term health of our nation and also the world, but especially our nation. it's been good for our nation. >> "washington journal," continues. host: this is open phones at 9:45 a.m. in washington. we will do this for 15 minutes until the end of "washington journal." minneapolis, would you like to talk about this morning? caller: i really want to make a understandingmy -- i keep hearing about everyone being from the obama administration is in control of everything now and the fbi, fisa court, etc., etc. i would just like to point out that we had to give democratic presidents since bill clinton, we had george h.w. bush, george clinton and then bill for eight years and then we had george w. bush for eight years in the me had obama, the funny wasg is that mueller appointed by a republican, my understanding is that the fisa byrt judges were appointed justice roberts, who is also a conservative. as a matter of the fact, had an encounter with a knife by i agent being hired and they came reference,k for which i gave the young man, and of course, it was pointed out he is a republican. originally of fact, from chicago i was originally his landlady and he was a very nice young man, i'm an independent, but the truth is that most of these people, including comey etc. were conservative republican. it amazes me now that everyone's accusative in the fbi of being democrats, the fact is that they are republicans. host: judy, that's recalling. dave in grand rapids, michigan. thanks for calling in. what would you like to add today? caller: everybody seems to be dogging on the obama administration. they are out of office and i really don't see where this deep state thing applies. i would be like saying when president obama was elected that there was a republican deep congressich the way and the senate treated breast obama, you could say that was more the point. the lady that was just talking, she hit it right on the head. we've had way more public and presidents in my lifetime. we actually back to the downfall of this country i would go back and hisand -- nixon meeting with china. when clinton and obama, president obama, when he tried to rescue this country, people just make it incredibly hard for us to advance. i understand that would you like to think of ourselves as conservative, but we also have to look to the future and evolve as humans. agenda is not helpful to involving humans. host: on to scott on a republican line. caller: yeah, just wondering a little bit about the previous guy, how it makes sense to him leaks and releases can come from all these agencies, but now it seems like there's a document that is going to come out to describe how these things happen and how they negatively affected just the republican party. and now all of a sudden the leaking of his ability to get information out without people knowing it or knowing it's coming out is somehow bad. himself which is releasing stuff is it was no big deal. i just don't quite understand that hypocrisy of the two situations. host: we are waiting for the potential release of the intel memo, what some are calling the nunes memo, possible today. we will have crews on capitol anything does happen, the housemates for a very brief pro forma session today at 4:30 p.m. on normally very quick, very in and out, but we will be tracking that as well in case anybody does come to the floor to post anything more read anything more say anything. the house and senate have been out this week, primarily because of the republican retreat, democrats will do their retreat later this month. week andback next government funding runs out of an end of next thursday. we expect another temporary bill, something through the end of march is what we are hearing and then there may be some debate on immigration. as far as the tax law that congress just passed, the hill has the story about the state of maryland is going to sue over the trump tax law. attorney general will sue over the tax law, joining new york, and connecticut in challenging it. it issues a $10,000 cap on the state and local tax deductions, what they referred to assault and they say is unconstitutional. a legal challenges when the several maneuvers that blue state politicians are considering as they try to figure out how to circumvent the cap on that salt reduction. ist's on the hill today, tom on the line from gerard, illinois. you are on the air. caller: josh, this is tom calling from grand city, illinois. not gerard. i'd like to ask your question about the black budget, we have the federal government operating with our tax dollars doing a lot of subversive things. i'm a combat engineer, army veteran honorable discharge i've seen a lot of things that i didn't think made sense. how was it that the government can come in, utilizing the nsaid everyone's, the patriot act, and basically survey later when the country of any to a communication device and recorded for posterity and have it be legal using the cray supercomputer. guy probably an essay stuff, can you explain why we survey loan citizens? -- our own citizens? patriots toblooded use for possible prosecution at some point in the future? host: tom, that's recalling. usa today cover public and retiring from the house in , house have 41 now republicans members said they are will retire or seek another office compared with 16 democrats, according to the house press gallery, that in "usa today." some of them want to think twice about fleeing, numbers of them going down in recent days and weeks, the right in their editorial, midterm elections nevertheless tend to be heartily with public and presidents party and republicans will almost surely lose some seats in the house, regardless of how swimmingly the country is performing at may the senate with him at this rally to republicans, the party may gain seats, to swell the ones he majority but he just did bleeding in the house appears to have stanched according to "washington times conquer which should persuade the frightened to think twice before deciding to quit. consider some distance in between here in november. let's hear from marcus in jacksonville, florida. good morning. justice is the nobility of this nation. the union of liberty and its laws that stand, freedom of classes leads to the intellectual thought compromising the sovereignty of america. elizabeth in san diego. good morning. i just want to say this whole business with the state nunes memo just underscores the hyper partisanship that trump has brought to the white house. used a little charade, a skit a few months ago pretending that he has an information that the white house needed to see, i think he's got it from the white house. it's ridiculous. they are about to do it again. withve broken the rules having oversight, bipartisan oversight on their committee and they are going against the republican fbi director, republican rosenstein's advice and releasing this. it's really shameful. it kind of connects that to the tax bill you just mentioned. blue states are paying for the tax cuts for the red states. ass really horrible, as far $1000 of people are going to be getting, people are getting $1000, but they put this tax cut charge card. down the road, we're going to be paying for it. the big corporations are getting millions, little guys are getting $1000, and our kids are going to be paying for that tax cut. the fact that it's hyper tax cut is really unheard of. it's extremely unfair and when you listen to the people calling in to your show, i can see that anybody that's listening to fox states, theyed don't believe anything the democrat says or anything from a former obama administration person. host: elizabeth, thanks for calling. now to the last couple of minutes, we want to remind you that this weekend, the c-span cities tour continues to explore the american story as book tv in american history tv travel fayetteville, arkansas to feature the city's history and literary style here in the short clip, the mayor of fayetteville, lie all jordan, talks with the growth of the city and its connection to the university of arkansas. >> is located in the great state of arkansas, the fayetteville south end of any of springdale, rogers come in bentonville, home of walmart to the north. all four of us are pretty much located together in a region. my family has lived in the northwest quadrant of arkansas since 1866. so we always have been the type of folks that have been progressive thinking people. but we have seen the challenges of the growth, the explosion of inwth, we've quadrupled population in the last four years. when i first came here, those from 20,000 people living in the city and now we are sitting at about 83,000. we are averaging a brand-new business a day coming into the city, over 1000 jobs in the last year. we are known as the startup city of the south. arson strong emphasis on entrepreneurial type businesses and we have a lot of people coming in, we read is the fifth blessed -- fifth best place to live. we are an eclectic group of people in diversity is our strength. june in this weekend to book tv in american history tv as we travel fayetteville in arkansas and watch a video of fayetteville in all the cities we have visited on the c-span cities tour, go to c-span.org/ citiestour. tony in maryland. good morning. caller: thanks for taking my call. i just wanted to mention that the release of the memo, i think we only to do that. there's a lot of shenanigans going on and if not, there's a big question mark in everybody's mind and i would like to be able to clear the air. if they've got to redact and keep things from undermining the secret, they could block that out. but they only american people to truth, good or bad, myself personally, i lean to the right, but i don't mind having a little egg on my face just to know the truth of what's going on in this country. so we can get back to trusting the doj and the fbi. host: bridget, the last call in austin, texas. caller: hello, how are you doing? host: doing well. caller: concerning the latin people, i wish they wouldn't call them dreamers, is , call the latin group of individuals that have come , the blessing of them being bilingual, it seems like we -- and we get some grassroots going to get people to donate to help them be able to tutor. you have people phoning in your program that are caucasians and they are frustrated with some of the latin youth and they say we are competing with our children here. they point out if you get a bilingual education, it helps a lot of people climate into what people are up against in kentucky in the coal mines, they would like to have more quality work and that's the only place they can work in mines, filthy minds that cause -- filthy mines that causal terms of health problems and from their lifespan. it would strengthen a lot of individuals and help them climate of the middle class. if you have a bilingual education, you can get management positions in a lot of different fields and a lot of different types of jobs. host: bridget, thank you for calling, and thank you for everyone who has called in. washington journal heirs seven seven days a- airs week. we tomorrow on saturday. in the meantime, we hope that you enjoy your day. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

Related Keywords

Ohio , United States , Bentonville , Arkansas , Akron , Maryland , Idaho , Calexico , California , Washington , Iran , Mexico , Jordan , Israel , New Jersey , Ukraine , New York , Wyoming , Springdale , Whitehouse , District Of Columbia , Pennsylvania , Michigan , South Carolina , Wallstreet , Missouri , San Diego , Texas , North Carolina , Iowa , Fort Lauderdale , Florida , Oklahoma , Minnesota , Chicago , Illinois , Indiana , Kentucky , Russia , Virginia , Venezuela , Georgia , Togo , Massachusetts , Syria , Capitol Hill , South Korea , Jerusalem , Israel General , West Virginia , China , College Park , Vietnam , Republic Of , Arizona , Connecticut , Daca , Tinh Vinh Phuc , Ukrainian , American , Russian , Russians , Vietnamese , Americans , Frances Townsend , Loretta Lynch Metin , James America , Chris Murphy , Billy House , Devin Nunes , Margaret Macmillan , Bob Mueller , Bernie Sanders , George W Bush , Tim Phillips , James Comey , Adam Schiff , Ann Coulter , Hillary Clinton , Steve Bannon , Richard Burr , Paul Ryan , Nikki Haley , Emma Kratz , Thomas Shannon , Sen Cochran , Oron Facebook , Coulter A Ann , Karl Rove , Dave Barry , Ted Kennedy ,