Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
This is not about partisanship.
I have -- the president to pick his political appointees.
But I will not sit quietly.
And let him shred the constitution.
I cannot sit at my desk quietly and let the president.
Say that he will kill Americans on American soil who are not actively attacking a country.
And that was Kentucky senator Rand Paul.
-- just about one hour or three quarters of an hour into what would become a eleven hour marathon filibuster.
On the floor of the United States senate and this is power play and -- and Chris are all happy Thursday to you Internet now look.
You know this is true in Washington if you ask the United States senator what time it is that they had to make a watch he'll talk -- you for eleven minutes before he -- -- -- -- the time today.
So you have to talk an awful lot and for an awful long time for it to be -- -- the Rand Paul did that.
In protest over.
A position held by the United States attorney general that the president does have the authority that he promises not to use it to kill Americans.
Under -- agents -- stances.
So what about that what is the significance in the near term and by the way in the long term for Republicans as they get ready.
Eventually have to -- in -- presidential nominee.
Lord knows they're not really looking forward to that.
And what about gun control.
President's agenda and gun control took -- Big bump yesterday.
When folks were bipartisan bill we're -- will talk about that -- our all -- -- panel in miniature.
And we won't talk to a Republican congressman about this question the president is being nice -- nice all of a sudden after trying to so salt in their fields.
So is -- bigger deal possible does Barack Obama -- get out of sequestration jail and move on to talking about other things -- do all of that.
We will have special filibuster related power -- won't last eleven hours who do many things that you'll enjoy.
You'll enjoy none of them more than hearing from Matthew -- many.
He is in fact the editor in chief of the Washington street -- but he occasionally helps out his old chums at the weekly standard with peace now and then.
And -- well.
Thank you for having quite so I look forward to the filibuster edition of it will probably be pretty awesome.
And I should point out that something that I haven't said before.
I write a political that it -- Just because I love America that much and -- say -- -- America five times more than you know but you do on Fridays at a very excellent product.
That you basically it's -- it -- it it's like that we can review and a look ahead it's very good command.
I committed to everybody in if you follow act -- can you'll probably see it passed through over your -- -- do that but only after you read the equipment.
-- so Rand Paul.
We have not seen this kind filibuster.
In the senate filibuster means two things that either means you don't have.
You don't have sixty votes or it means that somebody holds the floor they can't go -- they can't do any thing they have to stand and talk or is Rand Paul -- -- yesterday.
Open yourself to questions from obliging colleagues.
But this -- -- a success for him he did it he he did himself a good turn there didn't -- I think he did I think if we look at it politically this is the last talking -- since Bernie Sanders did want to hold up to 2010 tax deal.
And that may Bernie Sanders kind of you know if you already was but it it -- his reputation as kind of the banner carrier of the left him.
And I think that Rand -- talking filibuster yesterday we'll -- his reputation as kind of the banner carrier of the libertarian right.
And certainly I mean this solidifies him as be in here this father's legacy.
And I think as he does this balancing act which is really what it is between.
Keeping base of support among traditional Republicans -- also bringing in that supporters of his father I think it's a pretty good -- this it look.
Like it and by the way he's going to be on with Megyn Kelly today -- for change watch that it will be it will be revealing because -- asking good questions.
That -- what's interesting about this issue to look at the issue for hours.
This is some thing that you would not have expected the president to be all whopper jawed.
Because if you noticed who came to Rand -- -- on the floor yesterday.
You had yes the people that you'd expect Mike Lee Ted Cruz other libertarian minded Republicans who are very suspicious of the the power of the president to make -- and kill people.
But you also had a Democrat.
It from organ.
What we have Ron Wyden from Oregon.
But you also had in this was talent.
-- Mitch McConnell was sorry he said.
That Rand Paul had offended people but he came out.
And to the aid and spoke in defense Rand Paul John Cornyn -- number two Republican in the senate so you had.
Anti establishment in establishment Republicans -- Democrats and lots of liberals when you can get.
John Cornyn and Van Jones on the same side of the subject you have found something of a political sweet -- I think so and I.
In congress are kind of feeling a little bit empowered.
Lately I think they feel like they're winning the sequestered -- -- Obama's approval rating sum it's now under water a lot of -- The kind of honeymoon period.
It is already severely cutting sixty with a six week honeymoon right and end.
And so I think -- they use this again to put Obama on the defensive I have to say substantively I don't really agree.
Think it's with the Republicans on this -- -- backing Rand Paul but.
You know substantively this is a debate America's been having since our founding congress is usually very suspicious.
The presidential war powers.
They were for less suspicious maybe under George W.
Bush and what Rand Paul is doing is trying to make congress more assertive now if Rand Paul would become president.
I think he might actually have.
Different take on the question once he starts getting that raw intelligence about plots against the United States.
London but now you've heard last night trophy -- -- -- This is Smart which stipulate that basically said well look.
Obviously this would be a rare circumstance but if an American -- if if John Walker -- Was leading -- brigade out of Saskatchewan.
-- invaders and would we found him at a coffee shop then we could kill and even though he was an American citizen.
On US soil in you do have to get into some pretty tortuous but tortuous kind of things to explain why this would be necessary.
And this is one way -- the defenders of the idea of presidential privilege to kill people.
To kill citizens on US -- have to make a long explanation about why that might theoretically be necessary.
Well the detractors are able to say don't kill people -- don't kill American citizens without chronicled NB.
If you because the defenders of the president's war powers doing the nitty gritty of the laws of war with it's a complicated subject has to do what authorization to use force.
It's the authorization that congress passed right after nine elevenths still operatives to keep the government seems to think so -- it.
Not a declaration of war these are you know these are nebulous.
You know legal issues that is -- that require real debate the question is is that debate helped or hindered when.
You you start saying well the government's gonna start raining death on people who are enjoying a cafe experience that believes that the phrase -- -- -- I don't think that's a very serious argument.
That is to be I mean that's that's again that's all the substantive question that's been going on and it's a you know it's a useful debate to have.
At the end of the day that the president and in our constitutional system in my view.
The president is there to make emergency decisions.
And then he's gonna be held accountable by the by the public or whether that's congress whether that's the courts whether that's people themselves are saying.
You know we'll -- people say -- process but whatever the case that we are we are in agreement on this point.
Rand Paul when he sixteen took a big step forward yes absolutely and he said very good weeks in Washington so far he's been he's been kind of -- it okay Matthew we thank you Internet please follow and and participate in his excellence as you've just -- in this excellence.
We're going to take a quick break but when we come back we'll talk about the hopes for a gun control compromise are -- but we told you that they would fade.
The question is what are the consequences of this -- And -- tell you that when we come back.
That's is a better way to break your cheek -- than many clay pigeons.
And this is power play now we know that the president and gun control president has demonstrated photographic -- that he has shotgun.
And there was once a moment where it look like the gun control debate.
Might come to dominate everything.
In Washington for a period of time because it's certainly a hot button.
A -- now in the weeks since president we did.
A picture of his an orthodox trap shooting style the gun control debate has faded and faded and faded and now.
We see that it may be on the edge of irrelevancy as what had been the only bipartisan coalition.
Put together to try to do something.
On the subject.
And Charles Schumer has broken up with -- Republican would be Republican allies on the question of universal background check legislation.
So what does the future hold.
You know who knows.
-- -- Penske knows because she aside from being a former communication -- for director for Jon Corzine.
She is and -- Fox News contributor is Smart fair minded and contagious.
Also Smart fair minded and spacious -- Ford -- -- Is Republican heat is the chairman of the civic -- back in his former advisor to John McCain's presidential campaign among other things -- welcome Julie welcome thank you.
Banks have patient and others going to be an SET components of this well that's already gave me too much credit for being Smart.
Left it off it's a law of averages guys OK so we'll just -- round everything out OK so Juli starting with you.
It looks like now.
-- what had been sort of the the read this slender reed of hope.
For bipartisan compromise on gun control has broken up on this issue of universality of background checks vs a universal registry for gun purchases.
Is that your -- -- -- -- different.
Well yeah I mean hopefully they can maybe get two majority on this issue nobody filibusters it but I much like I have no hope for anything else going on Washington these days.
I'm pretty well I'm here to tell you there's no hope for anything at all doom room.
Appear at least at least from the perspective does the city here in New York you guys might have a different perspective you -- know.
No it's it's the same it's pretty much stink Soledad great limited value over the same idea -- But -- -- yeah I don't know I mean I hope something as simple as universal background checks would be able pass and I don't see what the problem is by.
For anybody even if -- huge Second Amendment advocate.
-- to take a minute and have an instant universal background check at a gun show or even in private sale if you're doing a private -- to register the gun somewhere.
But other people obviously don't agree with that and so I -- -- don't have much hope that we will be moving forward on this issue like any other.
Order for you know how to shoot -- and I believe that because you know that you don't pressure she got against bear like that over that way but anyway.
The to Julie's point.
There was -- there is seemingly an acceptance and this was Joseph mansion.
NRA loved and loving Democrat from West Virginia.
Of having some university universality of background -- may be exempting.
Stanley gifts were both single weapon sales or something like that.
But broadening out background checks that this registry question which is where is seems to be where the divide is pro Second Amendment people.
Are not down with the idea of -- national -- Well that that's exactly right that's one idea senator Coburn from Oklahoma pulled away and once he pulled away I think there really was a signal to management current spirit.
Did the deal here is not to actually find common sense gun control but this is more about.
You know allowing the federal government actually monitor it and we didn't really curtail the rights of law abiding sentiment second I don't know.
So do you think something can be revived do you think that this is -- so it looks like you're gonna have two pieces of legislation.
That you'll have Schumer bill that has a registered background checks in registry.
And then you have occur mansion built with just as background -- look at that's a TI I think that if you can have the background checks but it comes down to it will the record keeping lead to a federal registry and I think that mansion and encourage fuel that it will -- for that reason there are to support the questions.
This will Schumer go along with it -- without -- and that's the point now and that's the gridlock and -- and that's and that's right -- is -- among Democrats if you were to do something.
As Ford has described that expanded background checks.
-- didn't let federal government track the purchases that you get to the point where there's not much reason for Democrats.
Go along right.
Yeah and land from a common sense perspective what's the issue for a law abiding citizen movement would register your got to register my car you know he registered professional licensed web what's the problem.
I don't understand.
-- out all -- -- -- -- -- that little luck -- you're going you you're allowing Big Brother here to actually track people that actually have a right to do things but you're also assuming the criminals are gonna submit to a background check I think that's the real issue and that's why -- actually have a lot -- -- For the gun trafficking bill which is one of those 341.
Of the -- Bills being proposed in the senate and I think the idea that it.
You were somebody who's lawfully allowed only gone and you -- to someone who's -- from owning a gun he should be you know criminalized for that.
It also in I think there's going to be really hard put it put in there's.
If you are basically a home.
Selling it to someone who's allowed to -- -- -- but -- that they're gonna use it to commit a crime.
That's what they're trying to -- and I think did Leahy's straw strongman gun trafficking bill I think has a lot more potential but again.
He beat you between the two -- the goal here is to -- gun violence.
Okay -- is so good the question here is.
Do you -- Something really emerging I know that you are rightly pessimistic about Washington's ability to seek the seat and succeed in common ground but do you think that something will result from this are we gonna get to December.
And I'll be right hand column that says whatever happens -- I you know you very well maybe this is -- said the gun trafficking component may be a possibility but again you know we just had like -- most horrific thing that have happened.
Happen on the issue of gun violence and happens over and over and over again.
We don't descending on this now I really have no hope -- -- on this ever and go to fourth point about criminals not being subjected to background checks look I get it which can't -- the enemy of the perfect of the good you're not a criminal and sleep decides to use the gun criminally.
And then you become a criminal but.
Even if the gun trafficking if I legally own a gun and I sell it to somebody who's not allowed to have it discovered that -- were registered to be a lot easier to keep track of.
They don't look that way way -- any big and he has a good point guns and -- indeed he actually splitting the difference between the two of you beginning 323.
As a background check works if you have been caught doing something wrong in the past that's exactly right and it -- so it isn't it isn't predictive and that.
Problem and -- that none of -- is how.
Yeah -- a background check that if we expanded background checks to people who were committed notes that since it affects you or mentally ill.
And those people should not be able to get a gun shown by gun -- other -- do that a lot of times so it's not just people doesn't run in the past people -- really shouldn't be owning guns.
Even when they haven't done anything if you were severely mentally ill and so right now.
As for you get -- I think we need to find a way to do this I think the -- -- gun trafficking -- a lot better way and I do not think the universal background checks would have stopped Adam wins from during the -- and causing new talent that's the point.
OK there it is you've you've you've heard you've you've heard from too Smart people contagious votes.
So we thank you doing thank you for -- -- -- some -- Unsurprisingly is weighing in on this question to say the constitution does not give you the right to own a car but it does give -- right to own a gun.
So the government has no right to know who owns one.
Duly noted your comment duly noted and I should point out that my -- is making he is -- full avail.
The full power play experience because he follows me on Twitter.
There by Nazis are well thereby obtaining each day the column that I write for you look at the -- power play it's there for you and also than you can -- in the -- right here and and have amplified chat status.
So let's take a quick break because when we come back we want to talk about the president's new outreach sudden.
New found like four eating with Republicans.
Does it portend a larger deal in the future we'll talk about that when we come back.
So stick around.
And that is what it looks like when Republicans go to have dinner with President Obama there at the Jefferson Hotel pretty -- spot here in Washington DC and this is power play.
Welcome back now look.
We heard from the president for a couple of months -- few -- actually.
That the idea the name of the game when it came to dealing with Republicans for the next two years was going to be fight fight fight fight.
And he took to the campaign trail he organized a permanent well funded campaign -- And was gonna do everything he could to blow up Republicans but now after a couple of rocky weeks trying to sell.
His solution to automatic reductions automatic increase in federal spending.
The president is on what is being called I would say generously.
A charm offensive -- meeting with Republicans so does this increase the chances of getting out of the -- -- game of budgeting and into something a little bigger.
Person who probably knows -- Steve Womack he is a congressman from the great state of Arkansas congressman welcome to the big show.
Be with you.
Been bracing ourselves.
Starting with the reelection of President Obama.
Certainly through his inaugural address and certainly through everything that he'd been doing December January and February.
Intractable battle with house Republicans over.
Spending and taxes.
But now the president seems to be signaling that he might be open to a bigger -- do you think that's true.
Well I think it's ironic that.
All of a sudden this.
His willingness to work with the Republicans.
Is the same guy that today as you indicated.
Just a few weeks ago so.
Hammering us pretty good in his inaugural address in his State of the Union Address about a lot of the issues that.
That he stands very firm on it now all of a sudden.
-- I I think it's a bit ironic that on the heels of some approval rating numbers and I'm sure he and his people pay attention to.
Signals maybe that that tactic is not working.
And it goes -- plans as -- -- -- we're not necessarily what the public head on his mind maybe a little bit.
The mandate that they felt they had in his reelection in -- twelve so I hope it's genuine.
And I'd like to believe that the president is genuine -- when he reaches out to Republicans but.
Look at the end of the day it's going to be what what it all resolves and whether or not it's just optics.
Well now and -- the president does have other things he would like to talk about other than.
Debt deficit and spending.
To get there though he needs.
Two trillion dollars maybe in authorize spending.
Which you guys have said means two trillion dollars less in deficit spending in the years to come.
To get there everybody agrees including it sounds like president that entitlements.
Will have to be changed things like Medicare and Social Security modifications will be fired.
Do you think the president can sell his own party on that.
Think it's going to be very difficult Chris.
Because a lot of the Democrat party has -- moved -- very far to the left you know at least on the Republican side even though we have.
Of quite a large segment of our conference and -- come to congress and Tony -- and -- twelve in those elections that are.
A little sharper for the right to it is still a very good percentage of Republicans it.
That I consider to be Centre right Republican so there's a lot of balance in our party and that's one of the real problems that speaker Boehner has just how -- -- -- conflict -- some of the divides that we -- -- own party while at the same time.
Trying to deal with them.
With Democrats in the house.
So I think it's going to be very difficult on the president.
To go after some of the third -- politics as we know them to be.
But look at as I've said many times and I'm an appropriate period and it was an appropriate -- -- see the discretionary side of spending and and we've done over the -- what we've done over the last two years in cutting discretionary spending I think his.
Been a good signal for what we stand for.
But look you can.
You can -- -- it all -- you can take discretionary spending to zero you still can't balance the books of the federal government particularly the out years.
Because of -- -- drivers the principal drivers of our deficit and debt and everybody knows those to be Medicare Medicaid Social Security.
On the net interest on the debt if we ever had normalize interest rates we're in real trouble so we have to.
Go after the two thirds of spending.
That is the principal driver of -- what we're facing today.
Congressman last thing the president needs just a handful of senate Republicans.
The kind of folks that he had dinner with last night moderates.
And conservatives from Blue States who may be feeling the electoral -- And if he can do that if he can put together sixty votes in the senate he could dramatically increase the pressure on you guys couldn't.
But -- let you know.
On math on basic arithmetic I think what you say is truth but Chris we also have to understand that there are a handful of senate Democrats who are sitting in very vulnerable positions as we approach that's when he fourteen elections so the president has to be very careful.
What is he setting.
Some of these vulnerable senate Democrats up for.
And is in fact the potential balance of power in the senate.
At risk and -- -- fourteen and I think it's a very difficult balancing act that the president has to -- -- it -- again as I said I -- these genuine.
And a we'd like for the president to acknowledge that we have a serious problem on the mandatory side of spending.
And -- our fiscal house is going to be put in order we will have to address those issues.
If you were from Rogers Arkansas you know -- already but that was Steve Womack congressman from Arkansas thank you sir.
Chris my pleasure thank you.
As you should -- is coming up next but before you get there -- -- out some power points wanna well we're doing it.
-- our -- -- saying that the filibuster.
Fixing the filibuster now Rand Paul made big headlines yesterday by doing what was.
Always been called always had been called filibuster until about thirty years ago which is holding the floor and talking.
Here's your first PowerPoint.
Fractious factions when the rules for the senate when the founding fathers conceived of the senate when the original rules for the senate were written.
The idea wasn't about having two parties.
Because they're but instead that there would be mostly regional -- factions.
That would be constantly warring with each other so they built into the process.
One absolute safeguard for the minority for the whoever was in the minority.
Which was you could talk as long as you could keep talking.
That you could hold the floor and prevent the body from moving on to that you could at least be heard over the dead.
So here's your second -- point.
Gentlemen's club that's what the United States and it turned into.
During most of the twentieth century after some upheaval following the direct election of senators.
During the progress -- here at the beginning of the twentieth century.
By the time you've got to the 1970s.
Senators who had lots of money to play with.
Turned into -- exclusive men's club 100 dudes.
Who got along with each other very well.
And what they decided to do was that all that filibustering all that talking.
And having to go -- not being able to go potty from the senate floor and all of those things we're not cool and it was win against the way that they did business which was always remained quietly in the back -- -- -- senate majority leader Robert -- and others came up the idea automatic filibuster if you say.
-- you have.
If you don't have enough votes to break a filibuster -- a filibuster can be constituted and everybody can go home and make their tee times well great that's fine but that's not.
How it works anymore because they don't have money to spread around and do deals they're broke everybody's broke so things are harder to get done.
And in a two party system where the two parties are ideologically miles apart.
Without that money to lubricate things it's gotten very hard to do so filibuster filibuster filibuster filibuster.
And nothing happens okay fine leadership their -- you want reform for the United States senate.
Make them talk.
Talk it out Graham poll showed what it's supposed to be which is something that you cared deeply about that you digging your heels and make people listen to you is to filibuster you really had talked.
Then you might actually see fewer filibusters and you might see the ones that were acts -- more consequential instead of just a bunch of employee.
Networks for both parties and it's true and it would be good things I promise to those your power points.
On the hunt Jonathan Hunt is up next and now as we like to do every day we want to leave you with the word from our French are.
-- historical political genius he will be remembered this raises his image and he's completely sincere about -- and it's.
I I -- I think he will be.
There's only a moment that people who will say -- launched him as a national figure.
Filter by section