For mayor in the hopes that he weighed pay and promised the job in exchange for this during the election. Regulators soon discover that much of the story was true. They also uncovered a deeper seeker, the shadow campaign. You had a campaign that was the regular one you see and then another set of folks who were in an office right next the gray campaign. There is so much going on during the campaign, you have several theers complaining about other workers. They felt they were getting paid more. There was a lot of confusion as to who was paying them, etc. It was not until a year later folks started putting things together. They realize the folks who were next door, we cannot find any record of them in the campaign enhance records. How did those folks get paid . Who was in charge . Dcnikita stewart looks at politics tonight at 8 00 on c span q and a. Newsmakers our guest on newsmakers is our guest dana rohrabacher. He has responsibilities for issues involving russia and also looks at emerging threats. After the Big Decisions about u. S. russian relations in the summit, we thought it important to speak to him. Let me introduce our reporters. Lake town show is the deputy s. Itor of their mea my first question is about what seems to be topic a this week. Subject you are deeply interested in and know a lot about. I am sure you are aware of the news that the white house decided to cancel this upcoming summit meeting between president obama and vladimir putin. I wanted to get your take. I know you have a different view than some in your caucus. Think our relation with vital to our own National Security. I would say the peace of the world. We have two major threats that we have to deal with if our people are to be safe. One is radical islamic terrorism, which is at our throat right now and murders our old. They wish they could murder as many of us as they could. The other threat is an emerging china that is an incredibly totalitarian powers still. We were promised that they would moderate the rate they still have this horrible dictatorship. They would still make some a threat. We have these threats to deal with. We have this administration. We have many republicans as well pushing russia away, still thinking about russia as it was during the cold war. For the caused of peace or for as. Is a possible you are being a little naive . Russia is hosting Edward Snowden. Most damaging history leaker in american history. This is what he did by alerting the American People to over surveillance on the part of our own government, of our population to call him a , he was being loyal to the rest of us by letting the American People know their government was getting out of hand. When our government suggest that it has to keep a record of every phone call every citizen makes in order to protect does, it has gone too far. Gave himthat russia i think is very symbolic. Russia, a country which we wascked, and by the way i Ronald Reagans speech writer for seven years and worked with of hismost if not many very hardcore speeches concerning the soviet union. Inorked with the mujahedin afghanistan fighting the soviet union. During those days, we were against the soviet union because i had too much control and surveillance over its own people. Now many of the same people are claiming what the soviet union was evil about we can see in our own society. Snowden was just alerting us to our government getting out of hand. Russia accepting him for asylum i think was not as hostile and act as it is being portrayed. How would you have responded . Would you have responded at all . I do not think mr. Snowden should have had to basically seek asylum in other countries. He booked a contract with his employer to keep his mouth shut your it that he needs to be held accountable. Mouth shut. That he needs to be held accountable. People would have to decide whether or not his alerting the american will to and over surveillance and reaching way able washat is reason something he should be punished for. What i would have done in that situation, i would not have attacked president putin himself and treated him like the enemy for granting asylum when we needed his help. Look. Radical Islamic Forces are bit asng russians every much as they are murdering americans and people in the west. Chinese threatened russia just as much as they are threatening the rest of the world. Foreed russia on our side us to punch him in the nose right now. It was not the right thing to do. A bit remisse be to ignore the fact that this has been on and on democratic undemocratic push, kicking out u. S. Ngos. Failing every attendee regions of the peaceful Resolution Resolution to the civil war in syria. It sounds like you are a bit of an apologist for the putin government. I think that you can be a patriot and want peace in the world and recognize that its with russia and partnership with russia is essential to our National Security. I think you have to be realistic. , theing that russia litany you just went down they have not filed attempts to lead a peaceful resolution to the war in syria. Let me put it this way. We have no business in syria. It is not an attack on the United States for russia to be involved in supporting a particular side in the syrian war. If they want to dissipate their resources by getting involved, they can do so. That is not an attack on the United States. We should not be involved there. The fact that we are trying to that not as next abuse as an excuse against radical islam is nonsense. I do not consider myself an apologist at all. I have strong credentials to suggest that i would not let russia off when it is doing the wrong thing. But let me just note back to your question. It was predicated on the idea that putin is taking russia and direction. Cratic it is this cold war mentality, i do not long know how much it has been sent to ben and russia, but the churches are full since you have been to russia, but the churches are full. Engaged inople activities that were totally illegal during the communist time. Oldave those stuck in the warm and talented that they cannot understand that russia is essential to our security and peace if we are going to protect ourselves against radical islam and china. I just want to jump in on this story about syria. The New York Times reported today that al qaeda leader has been in touch with the front that is by all accounts al qaedas branch in syria. Doesnt that concern you . Should that not be something the white house should be worried about and engaged on . Whose side are they on . The guys who are fighting beside that russia supported . What you wills find. I am not sure. The names i do not know, i do not know every name associated with every group. You will find that the al qaeda connections now are with those forces that are opposing assad and russia is supporting assad. Were supposed to be concerned about that. Stay out of that. We do not need to get involved in another iraqi or syria. E have had enough of this the American People are war weary. That does not go to our National Security interests. Does that mean we should be happy to leave assad in power . No. It means we do not have any business determining who is in power and who is not in power in every country of the world spirit if we do, we are going to break our banks. I that our president when he sent our troops into iraq. Worstsaid it was the mistake i ever made. We are now weaker because we are so engaged in so many distant countries. We should protect our interest when they are at stake. In syria, they are not at stake. I askedall due respect, hard questions of you. Calling me an apologist is not a tough question. It is a pejorative description. I appreciate the libertarian flavor of your box with regard to this. Remarks with regard to this. Are you confident that the Obama Administration has a coherent plan to intervene in syria if it become obvious that a large amount of chemical weapons are being used by either side . No. Even if there are chemical weapons that are introduced, engage should not b ourselves in military operations in syria. I am afraid people kill and murder each other by the tens of thousands all over the world. We do not need to intervene everywhere. We are not the worlds policeman. The fact is we need to maintain a very Strong Military force so our own security interests are takinen care of. One of our Main Elements is to develop Loews Corporation with countries like russia with those who used to be develop relationships with countries like russia who used to be our enemies that can help us combat threats to both of our days incidenthese trying to look back on what it was like under communism. We are halfway through. Lets talk about al qaeda a little bit more. We saw this week that the administration had decided to shut down embassies and consulates in about two dozen countries because there was this al qaeda. Threat from we were not sure where they might attack your there was some strong intelligence indicating yemen branch had decided to launch some sort of attack against u. S. Interests. Coming nearly a year after september 11 in the attack in benghazi, do you think the administration got spooked and went too far and closing these indices . Do you think that was showing weakness to al qaeda . This. Ould have to suggest i was not briefed on that particular alarm. I cannot say whether it was totally justified or not. During 9 11 i was that guy that stood up in the middle and said do not close the capital, that is a sign of weakness. When youre dealing with terrorist, you do not want to give them sign of weak to make them feel so proud that they have made us cowards in the face of their terrorist activity. I am not sure what they were trying to avert. It might have been better for us to the up security rather than securityn beef up rather than close down operations in other countries. I have not been briefed on that threat yet. , speaking of this new evolving al qaeda terrorism threat. Articulated that this new threat are al qaeda offshoots. It was revealed this week that there are federal charges, sealed federal charges against a fellow in libya who is suspected of involvement in last that killedattack Jake Christopher stevens in benghazi. Some are saying this demonstrates the administrations desire to use something other than drones, specifically the use of u. S. Courts to pursue this evolving id against these localized threat. Is that realistic in your mind . How is the United States going oxmanest someone like akama mutola . I do not have anything against drone strikes. I think the administration has not been doing a bad job when it comes to using drones to single out and to kill the terrorist who would harm our own people. I have no problem with that. If you cannot send a drone, maybe you could send some kind team into a place like libya or cut a deal with the Libyan Government or pay off the Libyan Government to eliminate this are absolutely sure this person was engaged in. Terrorist act why not . If we know this person was engaged with assassinating assassinations be made illegal by federal law quite a while ago. ]crosstalk sending a drone is legal but highg a guy with a hyp powered rifle is illegal. It is that type of nonsense we have got to get over were going to confront the radical islamic threat that will murder thousands of our people, even hundreds of thousands of our people if they get a chance. We are facing that type of threat. Youcan send a drone but cannot send a sniper. Are you concerned about the fulcedent that the most power in regard to using drone strikes to kill people in other countries . I will have to say that i think we should use every technology we can to target s who arerorist murdering innocent, unarmed people in order to terrorize the populations. To the rest of the world understands this. , they are our enemies. With every type of brutal authoritarian force in the world, we have to confront force with force. People say how horrible it is that you killed this guy with a drone and it just happens that this person was murdering women in his own area for not wearing burke as. I am just asking the question 25 years inture of the future. Im wondering if you see any problems with say if the russians wanted to decide if they went to to use drones in the republic to go after people they said were terrorists. S maybe russia has terrorist and their part of the world as well. Maybe the people i went to el recently with stevenson golf. Most people do not even know that 120 children were blown up during a terrorist attack in a school. Radical islamic terrorists. Associated with russia because russia has a number of muslim republics with in its jurisdiction. T we not bother me to know that russians are using drones to kill the people who murdered tookren, those people who over theaters in russia and have time and again actually gone out and killed innocent unarmed people to terrorize a population. I am going to jump in. We have only six minutes left. The administration has insisted that it needs the nsa and its spying programs to counter the terrorists. We need to be able to look at few indications and sometimes that means scooping up matt said. My email subject lines and dates. The leaks. Ay include arent you concerned that if you dial back too far on those kind of programs that the terrorist groups youre talking about going to be able to plan freely and perhaps attack the united r its interests . It is baloney. We have approved the following of terrorist communications from overseas, even those communications that go into the United States. When it comes to phone calls of every single american, they do not need to keep tabs on everyone of us us and what we are doing in order to support a terrorist attack, toward a terrorist attack that has an overseas connection. If we want to be 100 safe from criminals we could just get the police to give us the power to tell us everything of what we do and to come up to every house at any time. That is not the way our freedom works. Into this type of threat, i would rather see drones overseas than get the rights to our own government to snoopon everything on everything. You aremestic issues, pushing legislation that creates a federal bill that would reflect state laws that basically legalized medical marijuana and push toward the legalization of marijuana. Do you feel like theres quite a bit of support on the other side of the aisle . Where are we at with that . Was last sessions bill. The bill that i am offering year would say that any state that legalizes marijuana use, the federal government should not then send our federal authorities in to enforce laws of the people of the state do not want. I do not knowat how much luck we are going to have and not. I would think this is an appropriate approach to the fact have a deficit we have to deal with, spending billions of dollars to try to prevent people from smoking a we they can grow in their backyard. It is absolutely absurd. It is a waste of our resources. A limited amount of money we can spend on protecting our citizens from criminals. We have a judicial system, and carson ration system. To spend those valid resources incident of murderers and peopleand sent them on who smoke marijuana is a waste of resources. I would hope that my colleagues on the republican side can open up their eyes and understand. Hat that is money we should be bringing down the deficit rather than spending it on things like this. S and. His comprehensive Immigration Reform going to Pass Congress this year . I do not know. We have to question whether our cut a deal with the democrats and the liberals on this issue. Has listened to those of us who are concerned about it. The fact is this Immigration Reform is not reforming our immigration system. We have the most generous immigration system in the world. We bring in more immigrants into our country legally than all of the rest of the countries of the world combined. That are millions more come every year and flood into our country, whether those people who come here illegally should have their steeds is have their status legalized. The American People are speaking with a loud voice. Legalizee we owing to 20 million new all and the study shows that if we do that within 10 years we are talking inut 50 million new people the United States who are all poor and uneducated. Will totally change the political dynamics. It will bring down our economy. It will hurt ordinary americans. Let ourto rise up and representatives know that were not going to put up with this type of the trail of the American People. One little note. The betrayal of American People. One little note. The u. S. Is composed of people from every race, religion, ethnic group. We are proud of that. We are proud of the Legal Immigration system. For us to spend huge amount of our resources on people who come which wouldly encourage more people to come here illegally is a betrayal of our american family. We should be concerned about our own americans rather than spending our limited resources on people who have come here illegally and thumbing their nose at us by breaking our law to be here. Thanks so much. We are a little overtime. Thank you for joining us. Dana rohrabacher who is the chair of the subcommittee that oversees your and others. Thank you. Thank you. Let me start with our first topic, russia. The congressman called rush of vital to our National Security. He emphasized how strategically important the relationship. What is the reality of russias ability to influence our interest globally . Think it was very important to during obamas errs term. s firstded obama term. Volume ofd this huge traffic, material and the nation, going into afghanistan to support the war effort. We needed them there. It was important to regulations medyedevmcafee of administration. President obama made huge promises about ridding nuclear weapons. One of his priorities was to get that agree to. Now i think the reality is theres really not much that we can accomplish with russi