why do they want to disarm us? >> i would like candidates to address national solidarity and the trade union movement across borders. thealso where they stand on former president of brazil. zegs. ur kids are being left behind. in education the government tells you you have to do this an do that but no funding available. then the taxpayers have to come up with it. >> voices from the campaign trail part of c-span's attleground states tour. >> campaign 2020. watch our live coverage of the presidential candidates on the campaign trail and make up your own mind. c span's campaign 2020.

your unfiltered view of 308 ticks. -- of politics. >> each week when congress is in session we like to take time to look at the week ahead in washington. joined by jason dick deputy editor at roll call newspaper and alana treene. last week's impeachment inquiry involved several current and former members of the trump administration testified behind closed doors, is that going to continue again this week and if so who is on the docket for the investigative committees? alayna: it will continue and i imagine it will extend beyond. right now we are seeing the schedule for this week. the house committees investigating the president and ukraine and annie and propriety potentially -- and any impropriety, they are ramping this up quickly and moving fast. they scheduled on sundays this week, two people a day to come in and testify behind closed

doors. people from the nsc, people from omb, the office of management and budget. technically acting omb director which is a semi-cabinet position. we have -- i'm looking forward to tomorrow's testimony by bill -- replaced the former u.s. ambassador to ukraine between text messages and past testimony we've seen layout over the past few weeks he will definitely be an interesting person to watch. ick who's going to get the most attention? jason: i'm curious toward the end of the week, if he does show up at the deposition, the president and the white house counsel past -- they sent this broadside a couple weeks ago to congress saying they would not cooperate in any sense whatsoever in the impeachment inquiry. people have been showing up for depositions. they've been testifying.

it might be related to the fact that congress over the last couple of years has passed a series of laws that go into their appropriations bills saying if you try to prevent somebody from testifying to congress you can dock your pay. this may be what's at work for some of these folks showing up. directorets to the omb , he's close enough to the president being and acting cabinet member that we will see whether that firewall the president and the white house isnsel have tried to erect how porous. i'm fascinated by the fact that so many of these folks have been showing up, granted some of them have a little bit of a bone to pick with the president and rudy giuliani, his personal attorney. it's going to be pretty interesting, starting with bill taylor. host: behind closed doors it's the house oversight committee, the house intelligence committee the foreign affairs committee

that will be meeting in these closed-door testimonies. if likely to go past this week. how long is this aspect of the impeachment process going to last? i spoke alayna: with a lot of members on the hill last week -- speaker pelosi has been saying she wants to get this wrapped up as efficiently as possible but no one is putting a distinct timeline on it. willsay they are -- they see as many people as they need to to get a good sense of if they move forward with they will write in the articles of impeachment senate majority leader mitch mcconnell has said and he spoke with -- he's hoping that the house will vote on impeachment by thanksgiving so that they can have a senate trial wrapped up by the end of ae year that is not definitive timeline. i spoke with mcconnell's team as well. he has not even spoken with

speaker pelosi or senate minority leader chuck schumer yet so everyone is putting some sort of timeline on this it's not fully baked in just yet. host: connecticut democrat jim himes, member of the house intelligence committee am a part of this process, he was on sunday shows yesterday. talked a little bit about timing. this is what he had to say. [video clip] >> this is no way for the republicans to defend the actions of the president here. what the chief of staff, mick mulvaney, said. no way to defend that behavior. as a result, they are attacking the process. let me spend a second on that process. the previous impeachment inquiries of nixon and clinton -- a special prosecutor star in the case of nexen by different special prosecutor. we are doing that now and an investigation does not happen in the light of day. there will be open hearings every transcript after

classified information will be released publicly. this will ultimately be all out there for the american people to see and with the american people will see as there is not one word of testimony, written or spoken, which contradicts the notion that the president used the assets of the united states military aid, white house meeting, to advance his political interest of getting ukraine to metal in the next -- the upcoming presidential election. >> when will those documents be made public. thehen you are shocked by chief of staff saying there was a quid pro quo, it's a little hard to make any predictions whatsoever about what the timing will be. margaret, my belief is -- shocking things happen every day. my belief is that the house speaker would like to get this wrapped up by the end of the year. i think that's probably possible. host: your thoughts on the timing here? lot -- alana said some

heard same things we have . mitch mcconnell thinks it would be great to have a vote before thanksgiving that there would be -- it would be great to wrap up the trial before christmas. senators are saying it would be awesome. i don't really want to be here around christmas. it seems to be a little bit wishful thinking. i think they caught a little bit of a break when the president backed off hosting the g7 next year. int was possibly in the mix terms of having to pursue that with impeachment inquiry. everybody does want to wrap this up because i don't think they wanted to start interfering with the presidential primary and caucusing system which we are looking at january february will be go time. it seems to be beyond their control and the longer they have a 12 hour deposition for one person, a jet sorts of -- sort of bleeds one week into the

other. mcconnell wasn't soliciting saying when they have to work weekends -- we are talking's sake or ground. host: the week ahead is our topic. what do you want to talk about this morning in the week ahead in washington? republicans, (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000 .ndependents, (202) 748-8002 dic come outside of impeachment inquiryk about turkey sanctions on the docket -- talks about turkey sanctions in the docket. wasn: a lot of the schedule laid out before we realize the speaker of the house would lead a congressional delegation to the middle east and afghanistan. it seems like even as they were putting the schedule together on friday evening, things may have changed a little bit.

before the end of the week, this week will be wednesday because the funeral services for the late elijah cummings house member from baltimore who died last week, they wanted to vote on a bipartisan series of sanctions on turkey by the end of the week. sometime before wednesday, more likely it would be on wednesday. this is there fly in day. they are not getting it until this afternoon. they have a series of quick with they can deal with, some noncontroversial things before they get very controversial thing which will be whether to censure adam schiff, the intelligence committee chairman that republicans pushed to censorship over how he's handled the impeachment inquiry. the vote was scheduled for thursday. of day coming -- the sponsor that resolution andy biggs is the chairman of the freedom caucus held off and was able to offer -- democrats are going to .able it

to turkey sanctions and also election security, there is that issue. election security measure will likely be voted on tuesday or wednesday. host: on the turkey sanctions what did the white house say about it? whatever the house comes up with is this something the senate takes up? alayna: this is actually really interesting because we've seen one of the president's fiercest grahamrs senator lindsey

definitely coming out with some of the most forceful language -m definitely coming out with some of the most forcefulin his cornt watches every day have been sharing some of the fiercest criticism over this. host: you mentioned lindsey graham, an interview on ask he is on hbo with lindsey graham, he talks about this featured in the ask he is sneak peek that came out late last night. alayna treene the author of that last night. taking your calls, your questions about the week ahead in washington. chuck is up 1st avenue dayton. good morning -- out of dayton eerie good morning. caller: good morning thank you for c-span. i'm wondering how long the republicans -- i was a republican for a long time. what?how long republicans caller: how long they are going donaldmoscow mitch done trump and the three amigos run this country into the ground.

absurd what's going on with the country right now. the only person ever talked about a revolution is donald trump. host: chuck in ohio asking about perhaps cracks in the republican coalition behind the president. the clip on grandma that was on hbo. i see this as a broadside to the president. somebody like lindsey graham who knows his political fortunes are presidents if he is willing to go on ask eos and say i would be open to impeachment, that's got to set off a lot of bells in the white house. with mcconnell, mitch mcconnell is a very deliberate politician. he does not really do much that he does not feel he has to do in order to move the needle he wants to.

and op-ed rein in the sunday paper about how the syria decision was the wrong way to go. did not mention the president by name but those are cracks in the armor right there. host: calling it a great mistake on syria there is the op-ed from yesterday's sunday cost washington post. alayna treene, talk about francis rooney, republican congressman from florida getting a lot of attention about his comments on impeachment. alayna: he's the first to come out and say he would support potential impeachment against the president. he also said he's not running for reelection which i think is a big caveat to all of this. a lot of people on the hill who will privately say's or misgivings or criticize him behind closed doors don't do so publicly because they don't want to be seen as tucking their party leader but also politically it can be damaging to some people who are up for reelection and this is something we've seen play out over the past few years. a lot of republican leaders not

willing to go about publicly and criticize president trump because of political ramifications. host: do you think their attention a retired member of congress that he's -- the attention he's going for this is overblown? jason: granted francis rooney is not in the leadership structure or an influential chairman. at the same time it speaks that people are fed up. rooney is one of those guys who, if he wanted to stay in congress for the rest of his political career, he could and he seems to be like, i've had enough. by the way, i would be open to impeachment. another retiring member and their actions speak louder than words, max fortenberry, the from a deep red state -- deep red district in texas. he accompanied the speaker of the house, nancy pelosi to her

congressional delegation to afghanistan. i think the thing the white house must be the most concerned about is not so much that you've got a backbencher who is retiring and he got another guy who goes on a congressional delegation but the fact that they do not need to worry about the consequent as anymore. you start to lose control of the narrative. host: okeechobee, florida, your next good morning. caller: i have two things i want to comment on. it that thehy is news reports and all the paper and even him right now talking about being a bipartisan trip, a side trip pelosi took to afghanistan only one republican there how can they be bipartisan when they were all democrats and only one republican and yet they say it's bipartisan.

news you had a guest was asked a specific question from one of the commenters about why here in america we are part of nato. we pay money into that. big money. why is it where the only country that goes out and has our men all over the world killing with no help from nato. where is nato? those are two questions. thank you. host: jason comedy want to take up the idea of bipartisanship? jason: one thing that it is just a fact that if you have a republican joining democrats it is bipartisan even if the ratio may not be one to one. host: on legislation that comes through if there's one sponsor from the other side is touted as bipartisan. jason: that is not something that people in the media are pushing. that's not a narrative they're pushing. that is just a fact.

it becomes bipartisan even if it is one person. there is a lot of significance there because of thornberry's position. as the top republican on the armed services committee. a former deputy secretary of state in the reagan administration. a trueblue republican. this is not somebody nobody has roundof in the defense three people in the pentagon respect what mac thornberry says. he might have retired regardless of the situation with the president but this is an influential person and he does add some have to to that. in terms of the concerns about nato, for me i don't have an answer to that. the administration has made this one of its concerns is that they don't feel nato other members of nato are stepping up and a lot of the world conflicts. that is something to other people but it is certainly on the table in terms of issues.

to host: host: jump in with what the white house is saying about nato's role in mid what's happening in the region? alayna:alayna: they are sticking to what the president has been saying since who's on the campaign trail. that he does not believe other members are paying their dues. we see him criticizing european leaders like angela merkel, prime minister of germany, and for their cooperation and participation and this is a big reason why the president felt that we should be pulling some of the u.s. troops out of syria. he things wise this our fight. this endless war is a gripe of his. why is it that we are the ones who are responsible for was happening. isis anding of counterterrorism measures are important to the president. we are seeing a bit of a power struggle. we know that people, leaders on the hill are coming to the president including lindsey graham. one of his fiercest allies trying to convince him that america needs to step up and show that leadership roles and

have a presence to make sure all the work that has been done over the past several years is not dissolved over this one move. host: over the weekend announced that troops are getting right to be deployed from iraq to syria may be 1000 troops will be in western iraq. is this undercutting that idea of ending the endless wars? is the white house saying criticism on that front? i think there will be criticism alayna: not pulling troops completely as the president had said i was a campaign promise. i think most people are of the mind we are seeing republicans being some of the most outraged over the issue. they want people there, they isis and thee that other terrorist organizations fill this vacuum with troops in place so we do not fall back into a pattern of what we saw

over the past few years. i think there's reports we have seen from the new york times and wall street journal overnight that some troops may be capped there to help defend the kurds and tried to prevent isis from researching. it will be interesting messaging for the white house. jason: some of the oil wells there are a place the troops would protect. alayna: we've seen the president referred to protecting the oil fields in syria frequently throughout. people have raised eyebrows saying is that what we are protecting? not the kurds? that is definitely a location that the president has been wanting. host: 8:30 on the east coast. --yna treene, white house taking your comments and questions about another busy week ahead in washington.

charles, st. petersburg, florida democrat, good morning. caller: good morning. i would like to say i'm not the most versed person on what's going on in the world today in terms of politics but i would like to say that i implore everyone, particularly any other party, start getting information from other sources other than just fox news's of the world. to educate themselves on what's going on. common decency and understanding, what we've got going on in our society is horrendous. we can't even agree on truths. we have to find ourselves debating truth and alternative facts. it is a shame and i hope we all can do better.

host:host: if you want to learn more about the situation in syria at least four congressional committees are holding hearings on that topic. senate foreign relations committee has a hearing on tuesday afternoon schedule. wednesday morning as the house foreign affairs committee. wednesday afternoon it's the house oversight and reform committee. also wednesday afternoon the senate appropriations committee. ck, which hearing will you be watching? jason: one of the more interesting committees to look at, no offense to the house, with the house leaders we kind of know where they are going in terms of their criticism of the president and where their energy is heading with impeachment inquiry. on the senate side, with formulations and appropriations you are seeing the face of we conductor how ourselves diplomatically and how we fund things like sending troops to syria and redeploying them.

if more republicans are starting to show concern, particularly about isis i think that's going to be what i'm interested in. you've got diane out of hartford, connecticut. good morning. caller: i have a couple of comments and a suggestion for future show which will get people up in arms. --uestion why there was not when people came out with immigration why there was not much done about obama's message about not allowing people to come into our country under refugee status based on crime, -- there was a third one. we do not allow them to come in east on a poor neighborhood i guess and my other comment has -- i had them all

practiced. obama, maybe i misunderstood but on the show a couple of sundays ago there was a gentleman on that said there were eight whistleblowers under obama and four of them were put in jail. i would like clarification on that and my suggestion for future show, you have people calling and saying we need to go back. many democrats who we know do not want more. i would love to know whether or not these people would want the draft to be brought back. maybe that would level the playing field and people would have a clear idea of what it would be like if their son, daughter or relative was sent to the military and how they would react if the driver brought back. a question we could ask in one of our first our conversations with viewers, should we bring back the draft. appreciate that. going to write that down for future use. amateur -- immigration was one of the topics in whistleblowers

as well. alayna: the way president obama handled immigration is something republicans have been pointing to during president trump's administration. many more immigration apprehensions in the u.s. were higher especially in the trump administration the first few , higher than president trump as done and that is something a lot of people have pointed to. i think the messaging around family separation, that is something as well that a lot of people said president obama did something similar during his administration but the rhetoric and the language and policies the trump administration implemented them seek a lot more criticism.

is rhetoric behind it that one way would argue the immigration question and on whistleblowers it hard to compare one whistleblower to another especially when you don't know the identity along those lines and we won't get into that. the current whistleblower in the ukrainei would argue they have y been found to be credible. dni inspector general has set a lot of people within the intelligence community who have been working with the whistleblower and going through his complaint, a lot of that was corroborated. memo, the in the call memorandum of the call, a lot of that being corroborated. place to getrous into the credibility of the whistleblower. host: on was a lowers, the new york times editorial board, one of their op-ed pieces " public servants guarding the republic."

in defense of the whistleblower and others saying the deep state is alive and well but it is not the sinister anti-democratic cabal of trump's fever dreams but a group of public servants. this is the president from just a few minutes ago with a book recommendation over twitter. 'exonerated' book the failed takedown of president trump by the swamp ." we will keep monitoring the president's twitter page. jeff from indiana, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. i got for c-span. c-span, you are definitely fair and balanced unlike fox news. for fascistsonym

over exaggerating. these republicans are still as a -- upset with obama. obama is gone, he is not coming back, get over it. we have a serial sexual predator in the white house, a criminal, a grifter. we have a grifter president who through the kurds under the bus to be slaughtered, he probably has a business deal with erdogan. the big winner will be vladimir putin and the party in iran. why don't you trump supporters do us all a favor, you cannot read or write. host: we got your point. robber in memphis, tennessee, republican go ahead. caller: hello? hate to wake up and find

bidenu're going to have or warren running this country. [indiscernible] democrats are going to keep going -- host: that is roberts in tennessee bringing up the 2020 election. it was i was -- guest: warren who has elevated to front runner status, if you will. if you watched the debate all of her colleagues consider the front runner. she has said she will give in a bid and release a cost estimate for medicare for all. this has been a big part of the debate in the democratic primary. the previous front runner, joe biden,, i hate to say anyone is

not a front runner because it is early. if you look at national polling there are a couple of people in warren,t tier and biden, and bernie sanders are in that. warren and sanders are big proponents of medicare for all. former vice president joe biden is not. some of his colleagues expressing skepticism and this has forced warren's hand. she will release a cost estimate in the coming weeks. if we get surprised into thursday and friday and there is a lot of news and funerals maybe it slips to next week. feeling enough heat to have to explain it is a new wrinkle. schedule president's this week, does he have any more rallies? guest: he does. i have been speaking with the trump campaign about planned rallies and he will be traveling

-- he has gone to texas already. they have targeted places like minnesota, nevada and new mexico. they will be traveling to these places over the next several months. it is interesting to watch where the president goes especially when he tries to do counter programming with these democrats. debate theyirst debuted their latin coalition or hispanic coalition in miami just next door to the debate. theve been told to expect counter programming over the next 10 months. thet from this week i think big picture looking forward to seeing where the president goes will be an interesting map of where the campaign is trying to dig in. >> what else is on the president schedule? >> he will be presenting a medal of honor to a former race car driver later today.

he will be having several meetings with people on syria. i am told he will be having meetings with people in congress on syria and other issues. we are going to see later this week the president is traveling for his rallies. i am blanking on where he is going but he will have one of those. ramping up to be all must every week which is an incredible pace. that is what we can expect from him. host: the congressional schedule, it is a shorter week when it comes to legislative work because of the late congressman cummings 's funeral. caller: -- guest: the house will wrap up its floor agenda by wednesday because on thursday -- there is debate about the term but he will lie in state in statuary hall. not in the rotunda but in statuary hall. there will be a memorial service

on tuesday morning for members of congress and the family. there will be a public viewing where people can walk through and pay their respects. his funeral will be in baltimore the morningarly in between 8:00 and 10:00 a.m.. that will wipe out the house's floor schedule. depositions for the impeachment inquiry will continue but the house will be done on wednesday. the senate will be a little longer. in forard to get a word things like the funding the government sort of debate but we are operating on a continuing resolution which means the federal government is on autopilot until november 21, there is that holiday again. congress needs to pass funding bills. for the rest of the government. will take a crack at two of them this week and that can occupy some time.

we have some procedural things that might make things interesting. the congressional review act is a way congress can take a shot at undoing a regulation, democrats said they will force the administration's hand on a couple rules they may want on taxes and how much you can deduct at the state and local level. another is on insurance plans that democrats have criticized for being stingy. there is a lot that will be going on. there is a lot of messaging that can go along with those. it is hard to get people excited about funding the government but if you are talking about people's taxes that can be an opportunity for some messaging. we expect the senate will be in their normal hours through thursday before the jet fumes can be smelled in the air. it is going to be a lot packed into those first few days. >> this begins at 3:00 p.m. this

afternoon. gavel-to-gavel coverage. at noon today gavel-to-gavel coverage on c-span. david is in west roxbury, massachusetts. independent, good morning. caller: very interesting questions from the callers earlier about whistleblowers and the draft. i hope you are able to follow up on that later on. i have a question. my question for the panel was about the historical aspect of impeachment. as i understand that there were four presidents that faced impeachment proceedings and i am curious to know how it affected -- what the fallout from those impeachments was. if they can talk about that. host: david, before you go, were you around for the clinton

impeachment? guest: alive, i was a kid back then. it's a conversation we had with viewers last week or the week before about memories of past impeachments. jason, do you want to start? johnson whoandrew became president after abraham lincoln was assassinated in the later days of the civil war, that is the what we know the least about. -- there werely questions about the direction of and whether reconstruction would continue in the manner the republicans thought was more appropriate for the south. he was impeached by the house. he was acquitted in the senate very narrowly. wounds, wesolve any were still fighting these battles. richard nixon was the next one, that never got to the floor.

it was years of investigation with watergate and certainly we are still seeing some of the effects of that. it is interesting that nixon did not wait for the floor preceding when the the word for judiciary committee reported on its articles of impeachment. he saw the handwriting on the wall and do that. with bill clinton's impeachment that was when i first got to washington. hows so interesting to see different the administration approached this with clinton. he was impeached by the house and acquitted in the senate, and dragged on for a couple of years. i feel like we are still dealing with some of the same issues about what is appropriate presidential behavior and what is not. i don't feel like we learned a ton. we continued to revisit some of that.

doing a lot.been the lanny davis story, i want to feed to that because i found it interesting. guest: thank you. it is a very different approach the trump administration is doing. andicularly bill clinton the jason is mentioning lanny davis, i spoke to him over the phone and he walked me through some of the clinton impeachment war room process. he was a big part of the war room back in the 90's. he said the approach the trump administration has to this is basically a 180 from what they did. they were meticulous in how they would respond on television. only certain people could go on television to defend bill clinton. they said their idea was to cooperate. saw that bill clinton testified himself in front of not only congress but on national television, definitely

different from this administration, no compliant line. how we arent on still billing the effects of the nixon impeachment process. his way through since he did choose to step aside before that really only happened. i am reading a great book, looking back on the impeachment baker.meacham and they covered this over the past several years. they made a great point that between johnson, nixon and clinton we have seen america divided and it is a very divisive time and i think that is what we are seeing with the current impeachment inquiry. host: in terms of the strategy of who can go on tv to defend the president, can you talk about the reaction to acting chief of staff mick mulvaney and his performance in

his recent appearances defending the president on ukraine? guest: i was in the room during that briefing and every reporter in there was stunned by what had transpired there. i spoke with the white house after the briefing and i asked what was the preparation for that. there was a very normal level of preparation they have. stephanie grisham, the press secretary organized it but was not the one that went out there. she has been not been doing these press briefings. to have the acting chief of staff come out and announce a controversial decision, the briefing was over the decision to host to the g7 at the president's resort in florida. officete house counsel's and lawyers were in that meeting and they consulted with people for the g7 process. we have seen a big thing about -- a big thing about his performance, the white house said the president was satisfied

with the way he did it. he released a statement hours later walking back his statements. it is interesting these briefings are mainly done with an audience of one. they are all looking to impress the president. we will see that continue if we do see anymore briefings. that has caused chaos on the hill and throughout washington. minutes weg up in 15 will focus on acting chief of staff mick mulvaney and get reaction to how he is doing in that role. how is he doing in that job? guest: i don't know if he quite righted himself over the weekend by going on the sunday shows and continuing his walk back. it was extraordinary. become to bethat defined by an extraordinary act or extraordinary event, last week when he said -- we heard that from a viewer.

get over it, it's on t-shirts. people who have been in washington remember marion barry said that the people who were not happy about his reelection in the 90's. -- knockedstunning people on their heels moment. it speaks to the danger of not prepping people. -- certainlyaney other people were not prepared. kevin mccarthy, steve scalise, ,itch mcconnell, lindsey graham nobody was ready to defend this. it seemed to catch everybody off guard. in an attempt to change the conversation -- it certainly changed the conversation and left people in a tough spot. for mulvaney's former colleagues, he was a bomb thrower in the house freedom caucus.

they did not know what to do. host: viewers can start preparing their thoughts on mick mulvaney. 9:00 to:00 hour from 9:30 we will get your thoughts on the acting chief of staff. your thoughts on the week ahead in washington. republican from south carolina, good morning. caller: great conversation. one item that has been working on me is the trip that was taken over to the middle east by nancy pelosi and company, why is this not -- have a great morning. host: do you want to start with what the logan act is? prohibits people from using their government positions to lobby. to gate --supposed

engage in electoral politics through your official duties. host: the congressional delegation just a run through the members, the announcement from nancy pelosi's office on the trip to jordan it was the speaker, the ranking member, the chairman of the foreign affairs committee, chairman of the homeland security committee, chairman adam schiff of the intelligence committee, susan davis of the armed services committee, stephen lynch the chairman of the house oversight and reform subcommittee on national security and congresswoman alain barrio of the house armed -- few alain barrio -- to that delegation at the white house, did it raise any eyebrows? alayna: you saw the president tweet about it. the president was taken off guard. -- the white house was taken off guard.

or is not much coordination between congress and the white house. trip so itsurprise was definitely out of the ordinary in that sense. it happened overnight. delegations to these areas all the time. they frequently go to different members ofere the foreign affairs committee engage on these trips frequently. the most interesting thing about this is the timing and that it was unannounced and the white house did not know about it. host: out of conway, missouri, independent good morning. see if theed to guests had read the mueller report. on page 47 the russians did hack an apple computer belonging to and pulled-- podesta

31,000 emails off the computer. they gave wikileaks 21,000 of those and they gave it to the news media the day of the democratic convention in chicago. that is one thing. night fiveram last withe that were named giving almost $1 million to the military-industrial complex are the ones that complained about pulling out of syria. wasmain thing is, romney one of the ones that complained. delaware0 million in so he did not have to pay taxes. -- lindseyhim on graham also received almost $1 million from the military-industrial complex and

that is my answer for today. host: let's talk about mitt romney. we saw his speech on the senate floor last week blasting the trump administration for the decision on syria. news over the weekend on his anonymous twitter handle. is where- rob: this we are getting into the more shakespearean aspects of politics. [laughter] romney was a never trumper before he was ok with trump in the 2016 election. he was very upfront in his opposition to trump saying he was unfit for office then we see at trump tower in hopes he would become secretary of state. this is a complicated relationship to say the least. i am not as familiar with the political giving and efficacy records for donating to romney's

campaign as a former governor. he has been around for a while and he solicits a wide array of donations and republicans are always will be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i send to the desk a privileged report from the committee of rules. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 648, resolution providing for consideration of the bill, h.r. 2513 to ensure that persons who form corporations or limited liability companies in the united states disclose the beneficial owners of those corporations of limited liability companies in order to prevent wrong doers from criminal gain, to assist law enforcement in detracting and detecting, preventing and

punishing terrorism, money laundering involving united states corporations and limited liability companies and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona seek recognition? r. biggs: pursuant to clause 2-a-1-9 i raise a question of the privileges of the house. the form of the resolution is as follows. resolution condemning and censuring adam schiff. . . whereas president trump subsequently released the whistleblower complaint of august 12, 2019. whereas in a september 26, 2019, hearing on the whistleblower complaint, house intelligence committee chairman adam schiff purported to relay the content of the phone call to the american people. whereas instead of quoting directly from the available transcript, chairman schiff mf

manufactured a false retelling of the scofferings between president trump and president zelensky. whereas this egregiousry false and fabricated retelling had no relationship to the call itself. whereas these actions of chairman schiff misled the american people, bringing disrepute upon the house of representatives and make a mockery of the impeachment process, one of this chamber's most solemn constitutional duties. whereas for more than two years, chairman schiff has spread false accusations that the trump campaign colluded with russia. whereas on march 20, 2017, then-ranking member schiff read out false allegation from the steele dossier accusing numerous trump associates with colluding with russia. whereas then ranking member schiff claimed in an interview to have more than circumstantial evidence of collusion with russia. whereas then-ranking member schiff negotiated with russian comedians whom he believed to be ukrainian officials to obtain materials to damage the

president of the united states politically. whereas according to "the new york times" article on october 2, 2019, chairman schiff's committee staff meb met with the whistleblower prior to the filing of his complaint. whereas chairman schiff concealed his dealings with the whistleblower from the rest of the intelligence committee. and when asked directly in television interview whether he had any contact with the whistleblower, he lied to the american people and said, quote, we have not spoken directly with the whistleblower, closed quote. whereas members of the intelligence committee have lost faith in his objectivity and capabilities as chairman. with every republican member on the committee having signed for a letter calling for his immediate resignation as chairman and whereas chairman schiff has behindered the ability of the intelligence committee to fulfill its oversight responsibilities of the intelligence community, an indispensable pillar of our national security, now therefore

be it resolved that, one, the house of representatives censures and condemns representative adam schiff for conduct that misleads the american people in a way that is not befitting an elected member of the house of representatives. two, representative adam schiff will forthwith present himself in the well of the house for the pronouncement of censure. and three, representative adam schiff will be censured with public reading of this resolution by the speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the chair can now recognize the gentleman from arizona to offer the resolution just noticed. does the gentleman offer the resolution? mr. biggs: yes. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 647. whereas president trump released the transcript of a call between him and the president of ukraine. whereas president trump subsequently released the whistleblower complaint of august 12, 2019. whereas in a september 26, 2019, hearing on the whistleblower complaint, house intelligence committee chairman adam schiff

purported to relay the content of the phone call to the american people. whereas instead of quoting directly from the available transcript, chairman schiff manufactured a false retelling of the conversation between president trump and president zelensky. whereas this egregiously false and fabricated retelling had no relationship to the call itself. whereas these actions of chairman schiff misled the american people, bringing disrepute upon the house of representatives and making a mockery of the impeachment process, one of this chamber's most solemn constitutional duties. whereas for more than two years, chairman schiff has spread false accusations that the trump campaign colluded with russia. whereas on march 20, 2017, then-ranking member schiff read out false allegations from the steele dossier accusing numerous trump associates of colluding with russia. whereas then-ranking member schiff falsically claim -- falsely claimed in a march, 2017, interview to have more than circumstantial evidence of collusion with russia. whereas then ranking member

schiff negotiated with russian comedians whom he believed to be ukrainian officials to obtain materials to damage the president of the united states politically. whereas according to a "new york times" article on october 2, 2019, chairman schiff's committee staff met with the whistleblower prior to the filing of his complaint and staff members communicated the content of the complaint to chairman schiff. whereas chairman schiff concealed his dealings with the whistleblower prosecute the rest of the intelligence committee -- from the rest of the intelligence committee and when asked directly in a television interview whether he had any contact with the whistleblower, he lied to the american people and said, we have no-no -- not spoken directly with the whistleblower. whereas members of the intelligence committee have lost faith in his objectivity and capabilities as chairman. with every republican member on the committee having signed a letter calling for his immediate resignation as chairman. and whereas chairman schiff has hindered the ability of the intelligence committee to fulfill its oversight

responsibilities of the intelligence community, an indispensable pillar of our national security. now therefore be it resolved that, one, the house of representatives sentures and condemns representative adam schiff for conduct that misleads the american people in a way that is not befitting an elected member of the house of representatives. two, representative adam schiff will forthwith present himself in the well of the house for the pronouncement of censure and, three, representative adam schiff will be censured with the public reading of this resolution by the speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the resolution qualifies. for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland seek recognition? mr. hoyer: madam speaker, i have a motion at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: mr. hoyer of maryland moves that the resolution be laid on the table. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from maryland. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the motion is not adopted. mr. biggs: madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona. mr. biggs: i request the yeas

and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, this 15-minute vote on the motion to table will be followed by five-minute votes on motions to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 4406 and h.r. 4407. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]