>> this c-span survey asked whether they prefer a voting system, 67% chose winner take all and 37% chose the winner takes -- ranked choice system. inside the target center arena in minneapolis, president trump will be addressing supporters at a campaign rally tonight. live coverage here on c-span, starting at 8:00 eastern.

>> this is bill gholston. he's with brookings institution. he serves as the studies chair and senior fellow. good morning to you. >> good morning. and the actual chair would be distressed to learn i staged a coup. [laughter] when it comes to public sentiment, particularly on impeachment, what does history teach us? guest: my two touchdowns our 1974, nixon impeachment, and 1998/99 of the clinton impeachment. in the case of richard nixon, sentiment started off very low, below 20% support for impeaching the president from office, and it rose slowly through -- but steadily through the last half of 1973, through 1974 and did

not go above 50% until the very end. clinton,port for bill his job approval was in the 60's and support for impeaching him was very low and never got higher. the endpened in reflects those differences in public opinion. host: meaning what? guest: by the time richard nixon was facing the republican delegation led by barry goldwater, not only had support in the senate collapsed for him, but senate among the american people was collapsing as well. there was never such a moment for bill clinton, and as a result of which, not a single democratic senator broke ranks when the impeachment articles came across the capital from the house to the senate. it had the optics of a partisan exercise that was a total failure for republic -- republicans.

host: polls coming out in a rapid pace asking people about impeachment this morning, fox news paul saying for those that thoseded, most of reporting support for impeachment. have ashington post" similar poll this week. much attention should we pay to these? guest: they are a good snapshot of public sentiment. the trendline over time, and not the snapshot right now. we have to look at the way the questions are worded, because some of the surveys ask about an impeachment inquiry and others talk about impeaching him in the house and removing him in the senate. there is more support for the senate -- inquiry than for a specific outcome. host: how does the factor of how the president behaves during this process and how democrats

behave factor into public opinion and sentiment? guest: the behavior of the president and the people close to him, on the one hand, democrats on the other, will make a difference. markig analytical question is how big a difference it will make in our highly partisan and polarized times. specifically, are there a lot of republicans who are wavering in their support for the president and who could be persuaded to jump ship by the accumulating weight of evidence? we don't know the answer to that question. some people believe the president's rocksolid support is as high as 40% or 45% and all the change that has occurred will occur. others believe the dam is breaking and the floor of support is closer to 30%, and a

lot depends on which of these analyses turns out to be true. host: if you want to ask questions, (202) 748-8001 four republicans, (202) 748-8000 democrats. independents, (202) 748-8002. three things to watch out for. is president's job approval first. can you expand? guest: the president's overall job approval number is a pretty reliable indicator of the number of people who are likely to stick with him. one of the things that struck me about the survey research is that the president's job approval numbers have barely budged in the last two weeks. they started off in the low to mid 40's and are still in the low to mid 40's.

if i squeeze the data, i suppose i could argue that there has been an erosion of a point or two, but nothing like the bottom dropping out. to job approval numbers tend map onto presidential vote shares in general elections. host: we have talked about support for the impeachment, but you add bipartisan support in factoring in how to look at these things. guest: that is important, because if republican sentiment does not shift, grassroots sentiment, than it is relatively unlikely that lots of republican senators will decide to desert the president, and more unlikely that lots of republican house members will desert the president. 1974, sixmber that in out of 17 republicans on the house judiciary committee voted

for the first article, and seven out of 17 voted for the second. those were tough votes for those republicans, but they took them, and that was in indicator of rising bipartisan support for impeaching and removing the president. it is important to look carefully, if it comes to a house vote on articles of impeachment, will any republicans break ranks and if so, how many? host: we have seen susan collins, ben sasse, and mitt romney expressing concerns. is that signs, or something to keep an eye on? collinsf i were susan running for reelection in a , illy hotly contested race would certainly be expressing concern. there are a few republicans voting -- running for reelection

in tough states. cory gardner in colorado is at the top of the list, and i would expect them to try to steer a middle course as long as they can, express concern, give the impression, and i hope it is a valid impression of being fair-minded and high-minded, and hold their fire as long as they can. i would expect republicans from bright red states, republican senators not to do anything of the sort, and if even one of them shows signs of breaking ranks, that is an important signal. host: our first call is from steve from norfolk, virginia, republican line. calling. was just my opinion on all of this is the president really has not really

done anything incorrectly or wrong. this is just one of those witchhunts that we are really trying to protect obama and biden because if the truth about everything comes out, we are going to find out that obama was incompetent or he knew about everything. i think we are looking at the wrong direction here. i think the president does have the right to investigate and look into things, and we are just trying to figure out what really is going on in our federal government, and why we are spending millions and millions of dollars, basically wasting them. guest: there are a lot of people who agree with you, and one of the points i am making is that as events unfold in the coming weeks and months, people who are

concerned about the weight of the evidence will have more and more to work with. ordinary citizens will be bombarded with a flow of information, traditional and social media, and people who want all sides of the story to come out are likely to get their way, for better or for worse. line, cocoa,ts florida, this is eli. caller: i am democrat and the president -- president trump is doing an excellent job. he brings factories back to the united states and really, he has rights under the second thedment, to make all of foreign relationship -- he initiated, not the congress. he is against corruption.

in any place. he said it about hillary clinton let russian he said find her emails. that democrat and saying representative pelosi speaking they didssue, because not vote for johnson in the 1800s, they voted for nixon, the house, and they voted for clinton. host: thanks. would pick up i one of the points that you made about article two of the constitution. which is the portion of the constitution that deals with the executive branch, executive powers. president trump said in an

interview in june or july that article two basically allows him to do anything he wants to do. executivet a view of power that is widely shared among constitutional scholars. the president has, yes, the executive power, but that is only one of three powers in the government, in the congress of the united states is designed constitutionally to have a say in foreign policy in a couple of ways. congress and only congress can declare war. congress and only congress can authorize the funds that allow the president to conduct foreign relations, and when necessary, use the u.s. military. we are talking about a situation now where the president is using his executive powers in the area of foreign piracy -- policy, but

that does not mean the united states has nothing to say. weekend,dent, over the made a decision to withdraw american troops from the front lines in syria, the border of turkey, as a result of which turkey has invaded syria. senior members of both political parties have strongly criticized that decision. that theeve rightly congress of the united states has a legitimate right to weigh in on these questions, and i'm sure the congress will. twon't agree that article basically gives the president a blank check as soon as he left his eyes and looks across the borders. host: what do you think about the impeachment inquiry? is it needed? guest: i think the revelation of what happened in the ukraine

made it inevitable. inquiry, ifthat the done right, can only do good. good if it lays ,ut facts only known to a few for the american people to make their own judgments. that is the way our democracy is supposed to work. there is some problems, some areas where sources and methods of our intelligence community are at stake and there could be some restraint, but as far as i can tell, most of the information likely to come out has not fallen in that category. hopee in the white house will not come out but probably should and will. host: alan dershowitz has a piece talking about alexander hamilton.

politicaln inevitable -- component but should only come into play if the constitutional criteria are met. if a prisoner -- president did not commit high crimes and misdemeanors, the house could decide not to move forward on impeachment. necessitate it. if i were litigious, i might sue mr. dirt truitt's -- mr. dershowitz for plagiarism. ihave a weekly column and wrote that impeachment is a constitutional option, but not a constitutional obligation. that,inue to believe because in the largest sense, impeaching and removing a president is not an activity that is undertaken under the

criminal law. it is a political decision. it is a political decision about preserving, protecting, and defending the constitution, and that moves it into a zone where you have to ask yourself in a particular situation, what is the best way of preserving, protecting, and defending the constitution of the united states? sober minded people could reach that conclusion that maybe an election would be the better course. host: one of the options thrown out is the idea of censure. guest: i have advocated that myself. this is an option that is not something made up. .t would be pursuant to law either house of the congress could go down that road by itself. it is what happened in the

1830's when the senate of the united states censured president ,ndrew jackson, interestingly for his failure to turn over documents to congress for his decision to defund the bank of the united states. i have argued publicly that censure would be the better course, because it would lay out the facts to the american people and allow them to make a decision in november 2020. i do not agree with the argument that that would be an abdication of congressional responsibility, i think it would be an exercise. arlington, virginia, independent, caroline. caller: i feel like i have conservative principles, but if you are paying attention to this man, donald trump, he is not a conservative.

just came5 women that out and said he is a predator, and what he did in ukraine and trying to get money from the gas companies, i feel like, why are good people surrounding him? what are they getting out of it and why are they going to survive aligning? host: are you there? thank you. guest: that is a very good question. have many you that i friends who are deeply conservative who are asking the same question, as president trump really a conservative or is he doing something else? he cuts taxes, that is what conservatives do.

. approved by judges the federalist society. other hand, on trade and immigration and international relations and the conduct of the presidency itself, these conservatives argue he is anything but conservative. a real conservative, they argue, honors tradition, respects institutions, strengthens the norms that hold us together as a country, seeks to unite rather than divide, understands the united states as one nation and not two warring nations, these are the arguments they make and i have to say speaking as a lifelong democrat, they have resonance. hello.emocrat, kathy,

one more time for kathy in california. mind, folks,'t turn your tv down. from michigan, democrats line, brent. opinions suggest republicans do not care about the country and only about being reelected. with republicans, the facts do not matter. it is only held trump spins his lies. if you want the story, you have to go back to a 2015 article by james wise and. wanted, eu, and u.s. all -- removed, not to stop the the call ofn into the chefs key -- but because he

would not cooperate in their isma.tigation of bar host: when it comes to the process of impeachment, what do you want to address? impeachment, ias think trump is unfit for office. it was also biden's son to sell his name to benefit barisma but what trump did is a crime and he should be impeached. guest: although this isn't quite what i came on to talk about, i will be happy to address it anyway. vice president biden has insisted from day one that no credible evidence has ever been developed connecting his

advocacy of the administration's anticorruption policy in ukraine and the efforts to get this corrupt prosecutor removed. i believe that remains true to this day. so the gravity meant of the new york times story you cited -- gravement of the new york times story you cited remains to be seen. i do think that is regrettable that there has been what i can call a rush to moral equivalence on the part of some people, , a tactic that is known as what about-ism. made, the a charge is president will gin up a counter charge.

i think we can expect more of this. the: the president, republicans have called for a formal vote to launch an impeachment inquiry. can you talk about the importance of that and what history tells us about that vote? guest: like impeachment itself, vote to, the formal launch an inquiry is an option but not a constitutional requirement. the argument that the democrats are somehow breaking the law or violating the constitution by not holding such a vote is not strong argument. if one gets to the politics of the situation, i think a lot of fair-minded people hearing that argument will probably say, there is something to that comment that if congress is , itg to go down this road

would be a good idea to commit itself publicly and formally to going down this road, and also putting some procedures in place officiallyuarantee what i believe is going to happen anyway, namely a fair process for both sides. house'sthat the white response has been remarkably weak bang on the merits -- remarkably weak on the merits with respect to that point. host: iris in michigan, independent line. caller: good morning, and to all my jewish friends, happy new year. i was thinking, wouldn't it be wonderful if we could turn our government to the way we do school elections?

no one runs on a party line and we vote on the person, what they have to offer, what we know about them, and separates nobody from one side to another. we all just elect the person we think is the most qualified for the job on what they set forth in the way they would like to see this country go forward. split -- don't split them down the middle. this system we have is splitting up everybody into taking sides. , has remarked about the president and did a deep sigh afterwards. i don't think they have any more right to give their opinion than anyone else because they don't hold the post. host: we will let our guest respond.

guest: i have three responses, actually. 2%,t, as a member of the thank you for your wishes. secondly, as a resident of the washington, d.c. area, let me do a shout out of my own to the washington nationals who have overcome their odds and sorry history in game five to move on to the national league championship series. go, gnats! now -- nats! the unitedunders of states did not plan for a party system, did not want a party system, did not put a party system within the constitution, but within a very few years, we had a two-party system and have had one since. i don't think presidential

elections will ever be like school board elections and probably should not be. parties are ways of organizing people and also the competition of ideas and policies in a very large, diverse, continental republic. that said, i am plenty old enough to remember a time when party identification did not fully determine the vote that one would cast, even on serious issues. i believe along with a lot of other people that party polarization has gone much too far for comfort, is not helping the country, is splitting the country, and the impeachment inquiry in these votes might conceivably be a way of bringing us back together, but more likely will divide us further. galston ofis bill

>> president trump is in minneapolis holding a 2020 campaign rally at the target center arena. this will be his first campaign rally since the launch of the impeachment inquiry. the president lost minnesota to hillary clinton by a small margin in the 2016 election. you are watching live coverage on c-span. ♪

♪

>> live from minneapolis at a rally being held for

president trump at the target center. this will be the first rally since the impeachment inquiry. we will take a look at some remarks he made to reporters earlier as he departed the white house for minneapolis.

president trump: we just completed a negotiation with china which went very well. we are having another one tomorrow. i am meeting with the vice premier at the white house. i think it's going really well. i think it's going really well. we had a very good negotiation with china. they will be speaking a little bit later. they are basically wrapping it up. we are going to see them tomorrow right here. it's going very well. reporter: [indiscernible] president trump: who took 900,000? reporter: [captioning performed by the national captioning institute,

[indiscernible] pres. trump: i hope it's not true that joe biden took $900,000. i haven't heard it. i hope it's not true. for the sake of the country, i hope it's not true. i don't know anything about it. >> [inaudible] pres. trump: what? who? >> [inaudible] pres. trump: i know the whistleblower has been very inaccurate. when we released the transcript of the conversation i had with the president of ukraine, who frankly was very good today. they gave a news conference on unrelated things. he said, president trump caved in a perfectly fine manner. there was nothing wrong in any way shape or form. something to that effect. i appreciate that. the president of ukraine, that should be case over. the president of ukraine said that call was fine. he said it resembled, he remembered it, it was just like the transcript.

the transcript is a perfect transcript. there shouldn't be any further questions. the president of ukraine just made that statement. >> [inaudible] pres. trump: i don't know those gentlemen. it's possible i have a picture with them because i have a picture with everybody. i have a picture with everybody here. summit he said there may be a picture or something at a fundraiser or somewhere. i have pictures with everybody. i don't know if there's anybody i don't have pictures with. i don't know them. i don't know about them or what they do. i don't know. maybe they were clients of rudy. you would have to ask him. i don't know. >> [inaudible] pres. trump: no. >> [inaudible] pres. trump: i don't know how you could impeach on a conversation with the president

of a country, in this case ukraine, which was a perfect conversation. the president of ukraine just said there was no pressure put on him whatsoever. we had an absolutely perfect conversation. on top of that, maybe less importantly, we have a transcript of the conversation. fortunately, it's perfect. i think it's very unfair to heads of countries when they think every time they make a conversation, with the president of the united states, it will be all over the world. that's very unfair. in the case of what we are talking about, we released a perfect conversation. the president of ukraine just confirmed that. that should be case over. i will say this. adam schiff took the conversation before he saw it and fabricated a conversation.

to me, that is criminal. what he did is criminal. >> [inaudible] pres. trump: i just don't think you are running a country, i just don't think that you can have all of these people testifying about every conversation you had. in this case, we have a transcript. i've given it almost immediately. full transparency. nobody has been more transparent than me. you have the transcript. in this case, you also have the president of ukraine confirming that it was absolutely a perfect conversation. the democrats have committed crimes because they made up the conversations. the whistleblower was wrong.

i don't think people should be allowed -- you have to run a country. you shouldn't be allowed to do that. >> [inaudible] pres. trump: i can't hear. >> [inaudible] >> [inaudible] pres. trump: you are talking about in u.k.? they are in the process of being spoken to. we are working that -- on that. i had a good conversation yesterday with boris johnson. talking about diplomatic immunity. it's a very interesting situation. we are trying to work something out. we will try to work something out. i think we will be able to. >> [inaudible] pres. trump: how many people can they talk to? we had a simple conversation. everybody knows what the conversation was.

i gave it immediately when i heard about it. the whistleblower, who seems to be a democrat that is involved with a lot of people, gave a false interpretation of the conversation. we have the conversation. the president of ukraine just said, just now, that the conversation was absolutely perfect. no problem. it was a very good conversation. i don't know why they would be calling rick perry. i don't know why they would be calling of these people. it's a very bad situation for our country. >> [inaudible] pres. trump: it was reported. >> are you concerned rudy giuliani could be indicted in all of this? pres. trump: i hope not. i don't know how he knows these people. what? >> they are his clients. pres. trump: they are clients. he has a lot of clients. i just don't know.

i haven't spoken to rudy about it. from what i heard, they said, we have nothing to do with it. we have nothing to do with it. >> [inaudible] pres. trump: was i what? >> [inaudible] pres. trump: china has to do whatever they want. if they want to look into something, they can look into it. if they don't want to look into it, they don't have to. frankly, if china wants to look into something, i think that's great. if they don't, i think that's great. that's up to china. >> [inaudible] mr. trump: trey gowdy is a terrific guy. i think there is a problem where he can't start for another couple of months because of lobbying rules and regulations. you will have to ask about that. i just heard he can't start until after january because of the lobbying rules and

regulations. so i don't know. but we will have to see. i have not spoken to him. >> [indiscernible] mr. trump: perhaps the last one, i hope. i hope the last one. of the three i hope it is the last one. we have no soldiers in syria. we have won, we beat isis. we beat them badly and decisively. we have no soldiers. the last thing i want to do is bring thousands and thousands of soldiers in and defeat everybody again. we have already done that. we have two choices, bringing in the military and defeating everybody again or you have the choice of doing strong things to turkey so they take it easy on competition that is, i don't

think it is being fairly traded in. we have a good relationship with the kurds. i hope we can mediate. >> [indiscernible] mr. trump: turkey knows where i stand. ok, very simple. we had a big victory, we left the area. i don't think the american people want to see us go back in with the military and go back again. we won, we left the area. let's see what happens. we are going to possibly do something very tough with respect to sanctions and other financial things. [indiscernible]

mr. trump: i think we can win. it has been a long time since a republican won. we have a 20,000 seat auditorium, essentially madison square garden and it is sold out, over 80,000 people requested tickets. it will be totally sold out. i don't know who is going but it will be sold out. they have a line. we have a line. in minnesota it is many blocks long. i think i can win minnesota. i think omar is helping us win in minnesota and other places. i will see you all, i will see you in minnesota. i will see you in minnesota.

♪ >> live this evening here in. we are showing his remarks from earlier. the white moment ago house chief of staff the officer of management and budget mick mulvaney here in attendance. we are expecting this to start shortly. 2020 campaign rally being held for president trump. the first since the launch of the impeachment inquiry by house democrats. ♪