money are being appropriated for the future for that purpose. and there clearly is no work on the part of the russians at this stage. that is potentially difficult for the world. i don't criticize anybody involved in i understand the national prospects in both countries. but at the same time, it is important that we continue to work at the margins, and i'm attempting to do this with my former partners at the nuclear threat initiative, to try and find whatever materials -- wherever materials are located 25 countries, from the nuclear age. we may get some cooperation from the russians in doing that. we may get some cooperation from the russians in doing that. it is in their interest, as well as ours. but it is very important that we not be surprised from terrorists who sweep in and find materials that are not fully developed. but nevertheless can create havoc. host: senator lugar, what is

your thoughts on these negotiations of trying to stop iran from getting to that point? you will -- of having nuclear weapons. guest: well, that is the best prospect we have of slowing the iranian prospect down. i don't claim it is the end of the trail because even under the best of circumstances, iran will have the ability, as most admit within a year of time to gear up again and really get into the weapons grade situation. but at the same time, it is diplomacy at work that i hope will be successful because it does bring really a different relationship between the united states and iran. we are finally talking to people there. people in iran who may have at least something to go on temper -- temporarily. but it is a dicey business. it is not really clear at this point whether by june 30, the parties will reach an agreement,

but i hope that they will. host: do you trust iran? guest: no, i don't have their trust when it comes to nuclear relations with anybody. as a matter of fact, i think there has to be a verification procedure. host: the supreme leader said just recently, there won't be -- that his country will not allow inspectors to come to his country. guest: there are parts of iran that will be inspected, as i understand, by the international atomic energy association. and maybe by others, depending on how the negotiations go. but i appreciate what you have said it -- and others are drawing lines. which is unfortunate, in terms of the negotiation procedure. host: in warsaw, indiana. an independent. you are on with your former senator. go ahead. tricia, are you there? caller: hello?

host: you are on the air. caller: ok, thank you. mr. lugar, it is really great to see you. and i just want you to know i appreciated everything you have done in representing our state over the years and i totally agree with you. i am glad you are making, you know bringing this to the forefront at we need more cooperation in the congress and in the senate to lead the country in the right direction. i have always felt that, you know, there is good things on both sides of the aisle and there is bad things on both sides of the aisle. and the animosity that has been going on over the last two sessions, like you said, is just -- you know -- i don't understand. and i don't think it is a good thing. it's very harmful to the country. our enemies in other countries are sitting and watching this and rubbing their hands with glee because they see how

divided and how much animosity is in our country. and it makes us look weak to other countries. guest: tricia, i really appreciate some good hoosier common sense this morning. let me just say that with regards to the way the rest of the world looks at us, i remember opportunities i had to serve as the chairman of the senate foreign relations committee or as ranking member with the joe biden, who was chairman at one point. john kerry, what have you. we finally came to take a look at how the rest of the world looked at what we were doing. and we found that when we were dealing with foreign policy and questions of national security having an 8-7 vote is not really reassuring. we needed to really strive for not a unanimous vote, but something pretty close to that. so when we had something to say and our legislation passed, the rest of the world would take notice and have confident. -- confidence.

i think that is true not only in foreign policy, but the method -- diplomacy also. and this is why we have fashioned, along with the school at georgetown university, and i want to pay tribute to dan of our staff, -- we really want to have a constructive situation. we still have our partisan feelings and strong views, but we do listen to somebody else, as well as the rest of the world. host: st. paul, minnesota. mark, a republican. caller: hi, greta. senator lugar, it is nice to hear that the democrats love you so. i have three quick questions. i notice that it says that you are with something called the lugar center. i am wondering, number one, what is the source of funding for the lugar center? number two, what is the budget and donations for the lugar center?

and number three, how much do you pay yourselves to be president of your center? thank you. guest: well, the first question i will answer is that i pay myself nothing. i have no salary from the lugar center. essentially, the moneys we have received have been from foundations. specifically the gates foundation as being a major factor in the food security work that we are doing. there have been other arms control groups, supporting our work in that area. and i have mentioned the sponsorships with georgetown university on the bipartisan index. that was very important support. it wasn't financial, but they came from very gifted people. we have asked gifts from friends of the lugar center, and they would be people who formerly made contributions to my

campaigns or at least believe in the things we are doing. these are very modest gifts. we have a very modest budget. we really don't need very much money. as we work along the way, we seek foundation report -- support. host: do you receive money from foreign countries? guest: no. no money from foreign countries. host: ohio, mike. an independent. caller: hi, good morning. host: morning. caller: since you study bipartisanship, exactly how many of the representatives and senators have never introduced a bill at all while they have been serving the american people supposedly? i will take my answer off-line. guest: well, i cannot really cite the exact number. i know that a few did not introduce at least three bills. that was the requirement for being in the list this time. but most have gotten at least

three bills. the point is that even if the introduced three bills, if it were merely statements of the senator or member of the house feelings and strong passions then this was not really a constructive legislative situation. it indicated where the member stood, but did not advance the cause. so we are trying to offer an incentive by publishing the activities of members. so it is very clear how much they are doing. and this is as compared with the baseline, as i mentioned earlier, of the past 20 years. 10 congresses. even if this is a very partisan congress, we have some basis on which to take a look and give ratings. host: we will go next to david in texas. an independent. hi, david. caller: hello. -- [indiscernible]

host: david, you are on the air. caller: ok, yes. what i am calling about his -- [indiscernible] -- they don't have much of a chance, but some of them have ideas that help everybody in the united states almost. and one thing is mike huckabee. i like him because he is a good human being. he is an honest person. and he is for putting the constitution on the top shelf. the problem with the fair tax is nobody knows about it. i have talked to some people, and not one of them knows what the fair tax is. the fair tax eliminates the irs. -- [indiscernible] i'm sure that senator lugar knows what it is.

everybody would love that because everybody would benefit from it. it is a national sales tax with -- [indiscernible] things that are necessary to life, there is no tax on it. everything else would have a tax on it. there is no income tax. only a sales tax. in other words, everybody would have to pay sales tax, including people that are here illegally and people that don't like the government. i like the sales tax because everybody benefits from it. host: ok, david. guest: david, i appreciate your question and let me admit my bias in your direction. when i was a candidate for the republican nomination for president back in 1995, 1996, i advocated the fair tax. or as you say, the national sales tax. i felt for some of the reasons

you just stated that it would be much more easy to administer. it would not require all the problems of the irs and thousands of pages of tax law. and, as a matter of fact, you could make an exemption for people of very, very low income. but at the same time, it does touch all transactions of a -- all caps actions very fairly. -- all transactions very fairly. unfortunately, my campaign, as well as the idea of the fair tax, do not progress. but i am pleased that at least it is having another hearing with mike huckabee, and i thank you for raising the issue. host: we are talking with former senator lugar. their bipartisan index, you can take a look at their website if you want to see who scored the highest, who scored the lowest in the 113th congress. they also went back into previous congresses as well. you can see here the top five lawmakers listed.

also talking about other issues with the former senator. the former chairman of the senate foreign relations committee. we will go to amanda next in oregon. a democrat. caller: hi. i actually grew up in michigan and i was a republican. but i felt living where i live in oregon, getting out things -- getting things done that i wanted to get done was not going to happen if i were a republican. so i basically pick people that i believe in. and i had to kind of throughout -- kind of throw out the idea of

sticking with parties, which i kind of grew up with. the thing that i have really been struggling with, and this is my main question is, i think that the -- the people nowadays really feel like congress, the house, and the senate are totally and completely out of touch with what people go through in real life. like, the things that they deal with, the bills they pay, the things that matter on a daily basis. host: amanda, we will take your point for the former senator. go ahead. senator lugar, go ahead. guest: let me say that i believe she is right on track. essentially, the problem is that many people don't have a great deal of confidence in the congress presently and their ability to reach decisions that

are critical for the progress of our country. domestically or on foreign policy. so, we are offering an incentive for members really to offer more constructive legislation that would gain support. they will have to get a lot of support on many occasions. 60 votes, as opposed to 51, as a matter of fact. that requires cosponsorship from somebody of the opposite side. so it will attract that support. i believe that is a confidence builder, and we believe our index offers incentives for members really to do a much better job. host: a look at the score for the 113th congress in the senate, the top five -- susan collins of maine, joe of west virginia, lisa murkowski of alaska, and mark pryor of arkansas. can bipartisanship be a

detriment to reelection? guest: there is a possibility, unfortunately, that bipartisanship could be difficult, in terms of the election. that constituents in the primary election may vote with more extreme elements, either on the democratic or the republican side. so, i -- i don't suggest as a political strategy of survival necessarily, but at the same time in the same -- in terms of doing your duty for the country, and for the best of the congress, it seems to me that there is likely to be a growing group of people who are going to support people who are constructive trade -- constructive. and i believe the appeal, you mentioned susan collins in maine, i know that she sent out immediately press releases indicating her standing in the bipartisan prole -- poll. they felt that their constituents would appreciate that rating.

and this would be a plus factor for them. host: we will go next to john. charleston south carolina. , a democrat. caller: good morning. host: morning. caller: senator, -- host: john, please go ahead with your question or comment. caller: mr. lugar, i wanted to bring your attention -- the health situation of your former chief of staff. he has gotten into a -- alzheimer's situation. he is in a nursing home in maryland. his wife died a year ago and she -- he had a memorial service organized by his son. back in october of last year.

and he is -- has been so supportive of you and said such great things about you always. and i wanted to bring that to your attention. you may know it already. so i pass that along to you. [indiscernible] -- back in the 1960's and early 1970's. so, and where he is writing his book on nonproliferation issues, and his work on the treaty -- host: i am going to jump in at that point. that is john in south carolina talking about your former chief of staff, is that right?

guest: right. i do remember the gentleman. i appreciate his comments. i was not really aware of all the circumstances that he mentioned, so i am grateful that he took time today to call us and be a part of this conversation. host: senator richard lugar here, served from 1977 to 2013. some of those years as the chairman of the foreign relations committee. sir, i want to get your thoughts on iraq and this fight against isis. first, i want to show you what the defense secretary had to say on sunday. [video clip] >> iraqi forces just showed no will to fight. they vastly outnumbered the opposing force, and yet they failed to fight. they withdrew from the site. and that says to me, and i think

to most of us, that we have an issue with the will of the rockies -- the iraq he -- iraqis to fight isil and defend themselves. we can give them equipment. we obviously cannot give them the will to fight. but if we give them training, equipment, and support, i hope they will develop the will to fight because only if they fight can isil remain defeated. >> a lot of people in washington that you deal with on the other side of the aisle are saying, look, put in ground troops, put in airstrikes -- airstrikes are not working. what do you foresee? what is your view on this echo>> airstrikes -- view on this? >> airstrikes are effective, but nothing we can do can substitute for the rocky -- for the iraqi

forces will to fight. host: senator lugar, what do you make of the strategy against isis? you heard there from the defense secretary about the iraqi soldiers and the baghdad government. guest: i agree with the comments carter made on the sunday show. it is unfortunate that there is not a government in iraq that has been able to unify sufficiently that shiites and the sunnis and the kurds. it is true they are not putting together. as he points out, despite training efforts or the occasional airstrike on our part, this is no substitute for a government that really has a cord and aided armed force that is able to absorb the training and be a unified in defense of whatever they are up to, quite apart from retaking territory from isis. this is a fundamental question

of how that unity is to occur. how the iraq government can be strengthened. that requires a ratio of diplomacy and counsel on our part. host: are you seeing it? guest: not yet. and there's not really any overall strategy now to have to deal with isis in iraq, but syria likewise. the government that is still in syria, and all of the other elements -- the feelings of the iranians or the saudi's or other elements of other nations in that area. host: does the u.s. need to have more of a presence in iraq? >> [applause] >> mr. vice president, on behalf of all of us here, particularly the international advisory council, the brookings institution, we welcome you here to brookings today. we know you will be addressing

us on one of the most consequential issues of our time , the russia-ukraine conflict. the vice president has been a friend of this institution for many years. welcome back, mr. vice president. vice president biden: thank you. folks, let me begin by -- as i walked through the room here, reminding me of a story they tell about calvin coolidge. he was at a whistle stop tour coming back home, and every time they would get in, he would step in the caboose, how are you, man? step back in his caboose and make a speech. this one-stop they made somewhere in ohio, he walked out, stood in the back of the caboose, the flag draped spares, and he walked back in and they said, what is the matter? and he said, well, the audience is too big for conversation and too small for oration. i think we are in that place. i will try to do neither. [laughter]

i will try to find something in between here. let me begin by thanking you not only for your friendship but your advice over all these years, particularly on the subject. i have tried to keep close contact with strobe because i find him to be one of the most knowledgeable people in the world on issues that i have a great interest in and unfortunately, are very much center stage these days. i want to thank you especially when you and steve came over to my home to do a deep dive with me to be my reality check on the issue i am going to speak about today in ukraine. and martin, it is always good to see you, man. i am not sure you should have accepted the vice presidency but -- [laughter] -- but you have been a great great asset. i hope you have as much asset -- access as i do. >> [laughter] vice president biden: [laughter]

sometimes i wish you didn't have all the access. you know, it has been 14 months since russian aggression against ukraine. and it has literally transformed the landscape of european security. everybody wants this conflict to end as soon as possible. the question is, on whose terms and how will it end? because it is not a remote conflict between neighbors are going over who gets what. what is happening in ukraine is much, much much more than that. it is about the rights of nation to choose their own futures. it is about the future of nato, our collective self-defense, and our unity, our strength, our ability to deter aggression together. i think it is that basic. it is about the future of russia itself, i would argue, because if the kremlin is able to establish its own fiefdom in eastern ukraine, it will only flam -- fan the flames.

believe me, helping ukraine in its defense and deterrence against russian aggression is critical critical to checking further aggression down the road. i keep saying, and the president reminds me, it is either pay me now or pay me later, but there is a price take your. what happen in ukraine and how the world responded has, i think, consequential in locations -- implications for their international order. in particular, the bedrock principles of security, territorial integrity, and the and volatility of borders. china and many other nations are watching very closely how the world response. they will learn from this conflict, regardless of how it plays out, in my view. before i turn to today's crisis, i want to take a moment to speak about our broader policy, the

obama-biden administration policy with regard to russia. i don't think anyone can legitimately accuse our administration of failing to explore in good faith, in good faith the progress -- prospect of establishing a constructive relationship with russia. six years ago in the first speech of our administration, i believe you there mr. secretary at the munich security contest -- conference, i announce you did are pernicious -- announced our position. to review many areas where we can and should be working together with russia and where russia indicated that they wanted to work with us as well. but even then, i made clear, i made it crystal clear, that quote, "we will not recognize any nation having influence could will remain argue that sovereign states have the right to make their own decisions and choose their own alliances."

i meant it then, and we mean it now. in 2009, when we came to office, president mandela -- was in power. and he talked about the need to combat russia's -- what he called nihilism to strengthen the rule of law. without being naive, we decided to test the process that russia would strengthen the rule of law and gradually embrace the path of modern -- economic modernization and patterns which could help integrate russia into the world of responsible nations. and it was -- it was in that same spirit over several administrations, the united states supported russia's membership in countless internode -- international organizations.

we also welcome his political reforms, like the direct election of governors in russia and decriminalization of -- from 2009 2 2012, we achieved a great deal together. a great deal of cooperation with russia to advance our mutual interests, russian and ours. a new treaty that reduced strategic nuclear arsenals by one third. a vital supply route for coalition troops in afghanistan. at the un security council resolutions that pressured both north korea as well as iran, and brought the world within reach of an historic deal with toronto -- tehran. yet to be determined, but we are optimistic. but when prime minister putin return to the kremlin in 2012 as president putin, he said russia on a very different course almost immediately.

re-criminalizing liable, calling off direct elections for governors, and making it harder for political parties to register. aggressive repression at home, including silencing of the mothers of soldiers deployed in ukraine. contempt, contempt for the integrity of russia's neighbor, but also in georgia and moldova. disregard for russia's own commitment made in helsinki, paris, and budapest. and so, the world looks different today than it did before he became -- we assumed the presidency. and president putin must understand, as he has changed so has our focus. that is why at this years security conference in munich, i spoke to reassert the fundamental, bedrock principles of a europe whole and free.

of influence. and sovereign right to choose our own allies. in particularly, with volatile borders. at the center of russia's fundamental choice over what type of path it will pursue, is the conflict in ukraine, in my view. i have not visited ukraine three times since the current conflict began. and it is hard to fathom, unless you go there, and many of you have, how much they have accomplished for themselves under enormous pressure. correlating people power to rally against corruption, defending their country against brutal russian aggression with the odds against them, staying unified, putting patriotism before personal ambition, and holding in the fairest and freest and most widely monitored

elections in ukrainian history. of course, painstaking work lies ahead. transitions are hard, as you all know, this international group under any circumstances. it is even harder when a powerful neighbor is actively undermining everything you do. president poroshenko's right to speak about the necessity and urgency to ukraine to act on the four d's -- the regularization, d bureaucratic as asian -- it is hard to even say the phrase -- the oligarch as asian -- de oligarchization, and decentralization. 268, ukraine needs use the new loss in the books to combat corruption on all levels. i speak with them on average once a week. if you're ever did out over the

last year. -- if you average it out over the last year. to pass laws, not have to in fact implement the laws that the past. ukraine needs to use all the tools at its disposal to limit the ability of oligarchs to abuse their market position or exert pressure on government officials. by the way, there is a long history of that. we all know since the revolution, it has never been on the level in terms of the influence of oligarchs and corruption. but they are trying. they need to keep working towards decentralization to ensure the local government is really representative and accountable. and above all, it needs to keep listening to its people and to ukraine civil society. every time i have met, i have spent's -- spent significant

time with civil society. so long as ukraine leaders keep faith, the united states will continue to stand with them. in total, we have provided over $470 million in economic assistance. in addition, a $1 billion loan guarantee last year. another $1 billion loan guarantee signed this month. any potential further $1 billion this year if ukraine continues on the path of reform. that $470 million includes nearly $200 million to the armed forces, national guard, and border services. te has been focused on whether we should provide additional defense of lethal weapons to ukraine. that is debate with having and it continues. my views are somewhat known on that. but let me not -- let us not lose sight of the fact that ukraine also needs basic military agreement and training, which we are also providing on the ground.

and our allies, our nato allies, have contributed to the ukraine trust fund. but more is needed to be done. and the president and i spoke about this yesterday with the nato secretary general. and it is on nato's agenda in warsaw. finally, our assistance has been and will continue to be directly addressing the humanitarian tragedy created by russian aggression. it is profoundly in our self interest, and i would argue the self-interest of the world, that this new ukraine emerges a prosperous, democratic independent reform oriented country that cannot be bribed, coerced, or intimidated. that is what the ukrainian people are devoting their lives to. giving their lives for. and one day, it will serve as an example for russians across the border who will see what is possible when a country embarks

on real reform. the conflict over ukraine, i think, is a test for the west. a test for the eu. a test for nato. a test for us. president putin is wagering that he has greater staying power than all the parties i just mentioned have. and ukraine, he is betting that he can outlast the current reformist pro-european government and undermine it economically. president putin is also trying to scare allies and partners with the threat of new and aggressive russia. terms we haven't heard in a long time. in terms relating to nuclear power, nuclear arms. as it tries to rattle the cage, the kremlin is working hard to buy off and corrupt european political forces, funding both right-wing and left-wing anti-systemic parties throughout europe. president putin sees such

political force as -- as -- as useful tools to be manipulated to create cracks in the european body of politics, which you can then exploit. i remember working with -- which i will speak to and a moment about -- european energy security. i found it fascinating that russia is funding the green party. [laughter] their newfound environmental concern has really impressed me. but these actions are embedded by hyper aggressive state-sponsored russian propaganda machine that actively spreads misinformation, and does it very well, i might add. but on the whole, european unity is held. europe is hung together. european leaders last met on march 25, and they spoke clearly. and we have also made our position clear. the united states' sanctions on

russia must remain in place until the negotiations are fully implemented. it is my hope and expectation that when european leaders meet again at the end of june, they renew existing sanctions until it is fully implemented. there is no way to know that until the end of the year. and we will continue to expose the truth about russia's actions to the world, and coordinate closely with our partners and allies to ensure that further aggression on russia's part is met with further costs. if russia again moves beyond the line of contact. this is essential to our strategy. taken together, it is clear. russia is taking actions we can undermine as european neighbors. and reassert its -- hegemonic ambitions. we need to be able to respond.

it is not just ukraine. critical of this effort is an affirmative vision to strengthen the transatlantic cooperation and europe itself to be able to resist russian coercion and leave no daylight and the tactics of divide and conquer. ukraine is integral to that. but the acts of russian opportunism and aggression requires us to also address more broadly and systematically european point of vulnerability. reinvigorating and we tooling nato to be able to respond to new hybrid warfare threats that we are seeing today. finally getting serious about europe's energy security, so we take away russia's ability to use energy as a political weapon. and promoting europe's economic growth and economic security. it starts with nato, though. reinforcing our alliance and honing the tools at our disposal.

the steps we are taking to make clear that our allies in article five of the nato chili -- treaty represent a sacred commitment on our part and every other nato member. nato's readiness action plan is an important start, allowing us to step up our military presence in the air and the sea and the land, from the baltics and poland to romania and bulgaria. and we are pleased that some of our nato allies have made similar contributions. but at this time of crisis, too many of our allies are still failing to meet mayor -- their commitment they made at the wheel summit -- wales summit. the situation is not sustainable. collective defense must be shared, a shared responsibility. not just in rhetoric, but in resources as well. when it comes to energy, we need

to work across the atlantic to deny russia the ability to use resources as a political weapon against their neighbors. as i said on several occasions before, it is time to make energy security the next chapter in the european project of integration and market expansion. it is time to replace country by country strategies with a coherent, collective effort. focused on diversifying fuel types, supply sources, and routes. improving efficiency, making investments and market reforms, including greater flexibility of infrastructure to transport national gas. -- natural gas. we have already made some significant progress. in the face of russian cutoff of gas supplies to ukraine last year, we supported a gas deal.

we worked with ukraine's neighbors to increase rivers flows of gas shipments to ukraine. -- rivers -- flows of reverse. -- -- -- -- rivers -- riverse flows of gas shipments to ukraine. that will help foster competition in europe, rather than dominance of one supplier. we applaud and encourage europe's efforts to take more regional approach is because a more stable european supply of energy means a more secure world. and we are ready to do our part as our european friends know. and finally, we need to rebuild and in some places bill for the first time the economic foundations of european security. in that spirit, we support european initiatives to respond, as we have, from the great

depression that began in the last decade. the good news is that we now know the types of policies that efficiently spur economic growth and boost employment. investing in infrastructure and human capital. lowering barriers to trade and investment. making reforms to improve the business climate and a regulatory process. we are pursuing the transatlantic partnership to create growth and jobs and strengthen the global trading system. and we have especially focused on fighting corruption. corruption is the new tool to foreign policy. it has never been as handy and is useful at the hands of nations that want to disrupt and oligarchs that respond to them. it is like the kryptonite of a functioning democracy. it siphon's away resources, it destroys -- siphons away resources, it destroys -- and

confront people's dignity. and the stakes are strategic, as well as economic, because russia and others are using corruption and oligarchs as tools of coercion. we need to help some of the newer eu nations and those aspiring to join them to shore up their institutions, put in place the mechanisms required to avoid becoming vulnerable to this new -- excuse me -- to this new foreign-policy weapon. we take these developments together, and it is clear, in my view, that we have reached another moment in the history of the transatlantic relationship that calls out for leadership. the kind our parents and grandparents delivered. i think it is that basic. i think it is similar. i believe the terrain though, is fundamentally in our favor. not because of the inevitability of any kind of trajectory

towards unification or integration with democratic freedoms, every generation has its demagogues and revisions and transitions are full of parol -- peril. what makes me optimistic is president clinton's vision -- has very little -- president putin's vision offers very little other than myths and illusions. the false promise of returning to a past when that passed was not too good of a past. the sleight-of-hand that presents the bullying of civil societies, dissidents engaged as substitutes for strong leadership. the propaganda that conflates aggression. it is that easy for governments -- it is not easy for governments to provide for people in the 20% three. but -- in the 21st century.

it is like physics these days. you need political and economic openness, respect for law strong functioning institution and markets. without all those in place economic growth does not occur and will not occur. and together, we, the united states and europe, can reassert and stick to our principles, deliver on our commitments, and help make ukraine and europe keep doing what works. then i have every confidence that we will leave the transatlantic relationship stronger, and europe even more secure and free. i think you for indulgence of listening to me. and it has been a great pleasure to be with you. thank you. >> [applause]

vice president biden: thank you. >> [applause] vice president biden: i have been instructed by stroke to make -- storbe to make myself -- strobe to make myself available for questions. i'm sure the president will understand if i spend a little bit of time, taking a few questions. if you have any. >> [indiscernible] vice president biden: good to see you javier. great to be here with you, man. come to the microphone. >> [indiscernible] -- what i think is that we are in the same boat, the europeans and the americans. in particular, what you have said and underlined very much, the agreements have to be respected.

it is true, we will not know if they are respected until the end of the year. and i think we can keep on working together and we win this battle. vice president biden: i think so too. and the other thing i think, by the way, is that i have spent so much time with ukrainian leadership. they are prepared to make genuine concessions on decentralization. they are prepared to make genuine commitments to local control in the east and -- and so -- but it is -- it is kind of difficult to do this. the one thing about -- it is awful hard to hold free elections on the other side of the line of control we don't control the border. and that is something that i'm hoping that us and our european

colleagues are going to be able to work out because there has to be -- part of the deal is free elections. in the east and that's going to be difficult. >> mr. vice president, thank you for coming to brookings. why isn't it obvious that the united states should be exporting energy to europe? vice president biden: well, it is obvious. and we are supportive of that. the problem is, under our system, the way it works is that -- that companies contract to get these opportunities to -- to have access to the natural gas that is exportable. and under our law, we cannot direct a particular company to send the gas to a particular place. now, there has been some discussion in many corners probably here at brookings

about whether or not there should be some exception made as to being able to directly direct it but under our system, all the countries in question are able to contact with the folks -- i forget how many contracts, i think 13 or something -- anyway, all the contracts that have been made for access to that natural gas. but what happens is, you know, it is at market prices. and -- and -- but it is the thing i have the hardest time explaining in europe. because under their system, most of them come with it says, well, the president decides. we wrote a policy, we are going to export x trillions, you know, units of gas to such and such a country. it is not -- legally, we cannot do that.

>> i don't want you to get in trouble with the president -- vice president biden: i am happy to take another one, if you want. >> ok. i would be in trouble with your staff, which is really serious. [laughter] vice president biden: don't worry about it. >> -- how worried are you about the republics of the large russian minorities? vice president biden: well, i am worried -- oh, i have to get back to the microphone. [laughter] sorry, sorry. i am used to being too familiar with this crowd. and i apologize. that is what i was referencing by the asymmetry i'm talking about. and that is something that is going to be a major topic at -- in warsaw at the next nato meeting. but it is already entrained in some of the actions we have

taken, relative to the rotation of forces and so on. but it is a concern. it is a concern using the false assertion that, you know, there is a russian minority, or in some places, close to a color reality -- close to a plurality that is being persecuted. it is -- it is a difficult situation, but we are resolved to stand with the baltic states as that occurs. but that planning is entrained and has been as we speak. but it is a concern. i would be lying to you if i said it wasn't. martin, did you have a question? i cannot leave -- >> i cannot leave without taking the vice president's question. [laughter] >> [indiscernible]

>> [laughter] vice president biden: go ahead. >> the -- speech that you just gave was a very tough one. admirably tough. at the same time, with the u.s. standing up to mr. putin in a way that you have described, we are also cooperating with him on what you call global issues -- nonproliferation terrorism even in a place like syria. how do you handle that kind of tension between cooperation and competition? vice president biden: look, human nature is human nature. it doesn't change based upon whether or not you are reading the motives and actions of a head of state, or your brother or your partner in your enterprise. and that is life.

the cooperation -- the one thing i'm counting on with -- with president putin -- i have had an occasion to spend a significant amount time with -- is that at his core, he is practical. at his core, he will push as far as he can, in my view, until he reaches a resistance that, in fact, says there is a big price to pay. and he may make a mistake and continue, but is a calculation, i believe, he will assume. i think if you look at his behavior over his career, he is a practical guide. -- guy. and it seems to me, and it has been the history of successful american policy going back 100 years, that it makes sense to cooperate, whether there is a career -- mutual interest,

matters of principle that matter to the security and well-being of your country and your allies and your friend. quite frankly, i see it's being overwhelmingly in our interest to continue to cooperate in iran. i would argue that -- let me choose my words a little bit here -- there has been a lot written by some very bright people here and in other think tanks around the world that putin would like very much to respond in a negative way and cost us -- raise the costs for the united states for being the leader of imposing sanctions on him. and there are a lot of speculation that one of the things that he would do right off the bat would be pullout of the negotiations with iran. which overwhelmingly is in his interest not to do that. it is overwhelmingly in his interest, and would be

increasingly obvious to both the and i ron, -- iran that absent some kind of negotiated settlement, they are reaping a whirlwind as we are. so i always count on self interest. being a motivating factor for my personal relationships, you have heard me say, martin, all politics is personal. and i mean that. you have to be able to understand what the other guy is looking for, or the other woman is looking for, what they perceive to be their interests. it is clearly in the interests of the united states, as well as russia, that -- to exaggerate the point -- that you don't end up with isil controlling all of syria. it is clearly within the

interests of russia, and i would argue china, that iran not become a nuclear power. and there are other things that are of mutual interest. so it seems to me that if you are national and tough, -- rational and tough, you would look to those things which are clearly in your benefit, as long as you do not have to make a concession on something that is a matter of principle and value to you. and thus far, we have not reached that point. there has been no discussion of we will not stay -- this ishypothetical -- there has been no discussion of we will continue to be part of the p5 plus one, only if you do the following. so these are two mature nations two top leaders who know what

interests are for their country. and i would argue, martin, that there is no -- that president putin did not start off with a broad strategy, as to how he was going to respond or deal with -- with russia or eastern european states. i think he started off with a strategy that he was determined to build up the russian military from the place he found it. but i think it was more opportunism then any strategy. -- than any strategy. and we continue to look for, what we say, off ramps for president putin. we are not looking to repair same. we are not for regime change. we are not looking for any fundamental alteration of the circumstances inside of russia. we are looking for him to, and argue, act more rationally -- -- -- in our view, act more

rationally. thank you also much for listening. >> [applause] >> [indistinct chatter] >> thank you very much. -- [indiscernible] >> [laughter] >> [indistinct chatter] >> thank you. thank you all very, very much. >> [applause] >> [indistinct chatter] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> you will be able to see the entire event -- see the vice president's comment in their entirety shortly on c-span.org.

the hill writes, quote, he has asked the president to start over in draft another authorization because it is quote, the presidents responsibility to wage this battle. -- that explicitly delegates war powers to congress. a letter from walter jones and massachusetts democrat james -- we have road to the white house coverage coming up. in about 45 minutes, we are in south carolina. hillary clinton is there. her first visit there as a candidate. she will be speaking to the women's democratic caucus and the women's democratic council. later this afternoon at habakkuk p.m. eastern, it is rick santorum. the "washington post" reporting

that he will be announcing his candidacy at a manufacturing plant in a town where he grew up north of pittsburgh. we will have that live at 5:00 and followed that with your calls and comments afterwards. back to capitol hill and the issue of extending provisions of the patriot act, the hill writing that mitch mcconnell is running out of time to save sections of the patriot act that the white house deems crucial. on that issue, the attorney general loretta lynch today urged the senate to pass the usa you met before the deadline of june 1. she said without action from the senate, it would put a lapse in our ability to protect the american people. the attorney general made these remarks at a briefing this morning on the indictment of nine fee for fifa officials on

corruption charges. loretta lynch: good morning, everyone. before we begin with today's's announcement, i have a brief comment to make on the situation regarding fifa. i am committed to ensuring this nation attests civil liberties of every american while keeping our country safe and secure. some of the vital and noncontroversial tools we used combat terrorism and crime are scheduled to shut down on sunday. making this not an ordinary weekend. the house of representatives passed a bipartisan bill, the usa freedom act, that would extend these tools while addressing important and valid concerns about other aspects of the government's's ability to protect that appeared without

action from the senate, we will experience a serious slap and not -- lapse in our ability to protect the american people. i joined the senate today in order to make sure we can continue to appropriately safeguard the country and protect citizens. for today's's announcement, i am honored to be joined today by the director of the fbi, kelly, and the chief investigative weber of the criminal investigation division. we are here to announce the feeling of charges and arrests of individuals as part of our long-running investigation into bribery and corruption in the world of organized soccer. they held important responsibilities at every level, from children in developing countries to organizing the world cup.

they were expected to uphold the rules that keeps soccer honest and intent -- protects the integrity of the game. instead, they corrected the business of worldwide soccer to preserve their interest and enrich themselves. this department of justice is determined to end the practices and root out corruption and bring wrongdoers to justice. of the 14 defendants charged today, high-ranking officials of fifa the international organization responsible for regulating and promoted soccer. other governing bodies under the umbrella, and sports executives who, according to the indictment, paid millions of dollars in bribes and kick ax to obtain lucrative media and marketing rights to international soccer tournaments. the 47 indictment includes charges of racketeering and money laundering conspiracies standing two decades. fifa make money in part by

selling commercial rights to their soccer tournaments, to sports marketing companies. a multiyear contract covering multiple determinants. in turn, sports marketing sell the rights downstream, two other tv and broadcast networks, to corporate sponsors, and other entities for significant sums of money. beginning in 1990 1, 2 generations of officials including the then president of two regional soccer confederations under fifa, one being the confederation of caribbean association football which includes the u.s. and south american football confederation, which represents south america, used their positions of trust within their respective organizations to solicit bribes from sports

marketers in exchange for commercial rights to the soccer tournament. they did it over and over. year after year, term after tournament. in just one example, in 2016, here in the united states, we were scheduled to host the centennial edition of america the first time that term it will be held in cities outside america. our investigation reveals what should have been an expression of international sportsmanship was used as a vehicle in the broader scheme to align pockets with bribes totaling $110 million. nearly one third of legitimate costs to the rights involved. the activity with enough i did not involve marketing. around 2004, the opportunity to host the 2010 world cup come ultimately awarded to south africa. the first time the tournament would be held on the african continent.

even for this historic event executives and others corrected the process by using bribes to influence the hosting decision. the indictment alleges corruption and bribery extended to the 2011 presidential fifa election and agreements regarding the sponsorship of the brazilian international soccer team by a major sportswear company. these individuals through these organizations engaged in bribery who would televise games, where those games would be held, and who would run the organization overseeing organized soccer worldwide. one of the most popular sports around the globe. while at least one executive served as the president without pay, there was little altruism involved. he alone is alleged to have taken more than $10 million in bribes over 19 years and amass a personal fortune from his ill-gotten game.

the defendants and co-conspirators planned aspects of this long-running scheme during meetings held here in the united states. they used to the banking and wire facilities in the u.s. to distribute their payments and they planned to profit from their scheme through promotional efforts. in addition to the indictment, we are also feeling today that four individual and two corporate defendants who have already pleaded guilty to their involvement in racketeering, and other criminal conduct. u.s. sports marketing company, a brazilian marketing executive, and a u.s. citizen who, in addition to being the former general secretary and a member of the executive committee, was a beneficiary of the 2010 world cup bribery scheme. all told, they have agreed to forfeit over $150 million in

illegal profits they have made from these crimes. finally, we are announcing that agents this morning have begun executing a search warrant at headquarters in miami, florida. plainly an organization in crisis. we have artie reached out to representatives this morning to ensure the people of integrity who work there know that we stand ready to work with them to inform in the wake of the actions we are taking today. earlier today, swiss authorities arrested seven of the defendants charged in the indictment, including the current president -- we are in the process of seeking the apprehension of additional defendants. all of these abused the u.s. financial system and violated u.s. law, and we intend to hold them accountable. we welcome the opportunity to welcome our partners around the world to bring additional co-conspirators and other corrupt individuals to justice. today's's action is a testament

to the tireless action of federal prosecutors here in new york, as well as the new york field office of the fbi, and los angeles field office of the irs criminal investigation. i want to thank all of the prosecutors, analysts who contributed time and talents to this extensive investigation and i also want to recognize kelly for leadership of the u.s. attorney's office here and i want to express my appreciation for the cooperation and the assistance we have received from our international partners. i want to make clear those arrested in zurich this morning have a right to a fair and impartial process, and they will receive a fair trial. i would like to issues the current u.s. attorney in new york, who will provide additional detail on today's's announcement. kelly: good morning.

the 14 defendants charged in this indictment held a variety of rules in the world soccer organization. the soccer officials charged were responsible for developing and promoting international soccer and the marketing executives hired to promote that sport, what they did, have in common was greed. greed that drove them to exploit their provisions for cash. you'll see year on t does of the exhibits, the enterprise charged here. you will see fifa at the top and confederations underneath, including the regional federations that are considered -- constituent members, and national confederations. there are 209 national

associations, including the united states and other members of fifa. also, the sports marketing company. as the current need general said -- the attorney general said folks who work together for a religion them it purpose regulating and promoting international soccer, as alleged, what the defendants did was, they corrected the process and the enterprise. some officials charged in the indictment today held many roles in the organizations. jeffrey webb is a vice president and on the executive committee. he also holds the role as president of copy cast. he is also on the executive committee of the football union and president of the cayman islands football association one of the national associations. he used his position in the

various roles, his position of trust, his duties, to solicit and collect bribes from sports executives who needed his support to get contracts. the second chart you have as part of your materials exemplify many of the skin swift charged. of the 12 different schemes we have charged in the indictment nine are sports marketing teams involving soccer tournaments. to walk you through the board the business relationships representing how they are supposed to work are represented by the clear era. organizers like fee for like fifa, so rise to a marketing company who in turn sell those rights to broadcasters and corporate sponsors. what you see depicted there in

the role of the corrupt official is that the corrupt official solicited bribes to support bids by the sports marketing company and, in exchange, the sports marketing company has received invaluable contract. sports marketing companies often cleared tens of millions of dollars in profit from promoting a single soccer tournament. bribes are also funneled through intermediaries, individuals who assisted them often using the u.s. banking system and transferring funds to the night date. as i mentioned going back to the enterprise, those at the core of our indictment are continental confederations, but other parts of fifa are indicated as well. the world cup 2010 bribery

screen -- bribery scheme alleges that in connection with south africa, to host the 2010 world cup, brides were paid in connection with that scheme and south africa is one of the members of the african confederation. in addition, the 2011 scheme to influence and -- influence the presidency of fifa, high-ranking official involved in that skin was involved in paying brides as part of that presidential election. this sort of bribery and corruption has been going on for two decades. our investigation, the hard work at led to charges today that appears and the prosecutors who brought the case today led by evan north, and also amanda hector, darren laverne, brian morris with their partners at

the fbi and the irs criminal investigations their work resulted in the indictment. it is a significant step, but i want to be clear. this is the beginning, not the end. we look forward to continuing our work with any others willing to work with us. as we continue in our efforts to be successful in ridding local soccer from this type of corruption. i will turn the podium over to the director of the federal bureau of investigations. >> good morning, ladies and gentlemen. it is an honor to join the attorney general to announce this important case, which damaged -- demonstrates, i believe, that if you touch our shores with your corrupt enterprise, through meetings or through using world-class financial system, you will be held accountable for that correction.

-- corruption. nobody is above or beyond the law. these cases require a hard amount of work and the hard work in our view is worth it. there is a danger of cynicism and folks struggle is -- shrug and say that is the way things are, it may be but that is not the way things have to be. one of the important things in this case is we will not stop until we send messages that it is not the way things should be and that they must eat different. soccer, football, is a beautiful game because the pitch is. it is available to anyone and everyone a matter where you come from rich or poor, boy or girl, you could enjoy the beautiful game. it has lifted butte -- billions and is an incredibly popular and fast-growing sport around the united states. but the game in this indictment was hijacked. the field so famously flat was

made tilted in favor of those looking to gain in the expense of kids enjoying a game of soccer. the hijacking is being met with an aggressive response to change behavior. this investigation has been long and painstaking and is not over. the work will continue until all of the corruption is uncovered and a message is sent around the world that this conduct will not be tolerated. i want to especially thank prosecutors in the states, but also, investigators who joined us around the world, especially our colleagues in switzerland here and i would like to choose the irs investigation division. >> good morning. great to be batting cleanup here today. let me start by saying i am

honored to stand here with the attorney general of the united days, the u.s. attorney, and the fbi director to announce the charges today in this important case. i'm incredibly proud of the tremendous work of my asians at the irs criminal investigation commission. years of hard work, and the work is not done. today's a good day for soccer fans and a great day for the global fight against corruption, money laundering, and international tax evasion whether you call it soccer or football, fans, players, and sponsors around the world who love this game should not have to worry about officials correcting the sport. this case is not about soccer. it is about fairness and following the law.

the official slogan of fifa is for the game for the world. in this case, the game was corrected for the sole purpose of personal gain, not for the game and certainly not for the world. their actions were for themselves for their own greed. standing over several continents and dozens of countries, the investigation conducted by the irs, special agents, and the fbi, was complex and thorough. indictments and guilty pleas announced this morning highly what could happen when those in positions of power abuse the trust. and engage in undisclosed and misappropriated funds. one in the investigation decided early on he would use his

position as an official for personal gain. the general secretary and a fee for executive committee member received bribes and kickbacks in exchange for votes. additionally, for the years 2005 through 2010, he failed to accurately report his income to the irs, amassing more than 11 million in unreported income. in addition to charges announced today, the government is also seeking the forfeiture of all property obtained from the proceeds of various outlined, the attorney general. today, more than $151 million have been identified. the best financial investigators in the world, special agents

exposed complex money laundering schemes, uncovered millions of dollars in untapped income, and discovered tens of millions of dollars hidden away in offshore accounts in countries like hong kong, the cayman islands, and switzerland. this really is the world cup of fraud. today, we're issuing fifa in red card. [laughter] this investigation is not over. special agents will work with our partners at the f ei and the u.s. attorney's office. we will work with our international partners around the world to bring justice to those who would she the financial system and was played by a different set of rules. today's indictment and our criminal investigation will root out those who seek to corrupt

the beautiful game. thank you. >> he have indicted the current vice president -- [inaudible] you have not indicted the current president. are you giving a clean bill of health? the radel lynch: i will not comment on the status of any visual because that would be unfair to them in many ways. i can say the investigation is ongoing and continuing, but the announcement today is about the charges involving just these individuals. i am not able to comment further. >> [inaudible] from argentina. [no audio] [inaudible] a fair trial [inaudible]

we express our great thanks and appreciation to the swiss authorities who asked you did several arrests this morning in connection with the charges here today in the u.s. the next step in the process is for defendants to come to the u.s. and face the charges. that is the process where we will request from the swift authority, essentially in order transferring them to our company so the process can begin here. it is the next procedural step, the exposition of those. [inaudible] loretta lynch: we are trying to apprehend the remaining defendants paired affair on u.s. shores, they will be brought here and start the case immediately. if they are not, a similar process. >> it is being said that [inaudible]

is your investigation going able to provide data [inaudible] to understand what has happened in south africa? the retina lynch: i will not comment on the specifics of the investigation, but solicit parties have begun an investigation into the world cup designations for those years and we have worked operatively with them in the past and we look forward to doing that in the future. >> [inaudible] for those accessed by the fbi purely [inaudible] and was that at the request of the fbi? loretta lynch: i will not

comment on the specific investigative techniques we use in this case. we do not go into those kinds of specific details. our investigations have been separate but we have been cooperative with each other. they are succeeding on several tracks. >> scheduled to hold an election [inaudible] are we concerned about the timing? loretta lynch: we basically resolve case when the evidence comes together when their ready for a resolution. fifa has had issues run elections in the past, hopefully not for years to come. we were not able to take that into consideration in the timing of our arrest. >> how do you have any influence

on the organization? loretta lynch: we look forward to working with these organizations in the future as they worked to reform their own internal processes and we look ready for that. >> the fbi director talked about the increasing use of your to peer communication between terrorists and what we're looking at. does this complicate that? [inaudible] loretta lynch: with respect to 215, many people folks on it because it relates to our ability to search telephone records. the reforms proposed by the administration so far codified in the freedom act would

essentially take the government out of the data collection and storage process, let it remain in the hands of the private companies, and we would go to court. in addition to that particular provision, what we also worry about is the ability to maintain wiretaps on national security subjects. in any investigation i have done, be it criminal or national security, the targets of that investigation routinely drop -- electronic communication devices to employ law enforcement surveillance chair we have the ability to go to the court now and obtain an order to probable cause to attract terrorists to do that. we also have the ability to go to the court and obtain general business records such as bank records and other documents. similar to the way we use

criminal investigative authority , that is part of what is animating my concern over 215. with respect to the peer-to-peer transitions you are talking about, we see many more people involved in terrorism investigations using peer to peer communications, specific encrypted medications designed to disappear once we are spent. it gives us great concern to have our eyes on people whose sworn duty is to harm people here and abroad. jim, do you want to comment? >> can you talk about the mo here between marketing officials and the responsibility? was this an understanding that a bride had occurred, or how did this work? loretta lynch: i will have the u.s. attorney give you more specific but i think you will see from the instruments that they were pretty clear.

there were discussions about brides, then there were documents created to cover up those payments. kelly, do you want to? kelly: the only thing i would add is not only were these discussions open among the parties, but the marketing companies were also handing out brides to protect their contracts from competing marketing companies who might want to come in and bid higher. the marketing companies themselves notoriously among co-conspirators were paying bribes to keep contracts they had and extend those. what we saw with a lot of the marketing contracts is many extended over years. as the value of these increased we also saw those bribes increase. >> can you confirm -- [inaudible]

>> i did not hear your question. >> [inaudible] >> i will not comment about anyone not mentioned in our indictment. >> regarding the individuals are you able to discern if they are cooperating? >> i am not able to confirm that. >> [inaudible] >> part of our investigation will look at the conduct of financial is missions to see if they were cognizant of the that they were helping to launder these payments. it is too early to say whether there is any problematic behavior but it will be part of the investigation. >> [inaudible]

what are we expected to see? [inaudible] >> lack can say about our ongoing investigation is we and his a we will continue to work with international partners and all the schools will work with us. today and he going forward, we will provide additional information to those countries and asking for their help in our investigation as well. >> [inaudible] >> 2014? no conduct relating to that 2014 process is part of our charged conduct in this indictment. >> to reform yourself or you will be coming after them?

>> our message to all organized soccer is that our investigation will continue. what fifa does internally is a matter for members but i think the message is clear law enforcement authority in the united states and other countries will not tolerate this corrupt conduct going forward. when will the investigation start? quite i cannot comment on specifics other than to say through a variety of sorted -- of sources going back to number of years, our investigation gathered momentum. >> [inaudible] [laughter]

[inaudible] >> it is an extraordinarily difficult task to find and assess those who may be on a journey from talking to doing and to find and assess an environment where the attorney general has said their communications are not available to us even in court orders. it is incredibly difficult that we are enlisting our state and local and federal partisan jeff partners in but i cannot stand here in high confidence when i confront a world that is increasingly dark to me, and tell you we have got it all covered. it is an enormous task. >> you described it as the world cup [inaudible] [laughter]

classify have thought of it, i would have said it. >> [inaudible] i think the question is also this. you had known it has been widely rumored there has been corruption on an endemic scale for two decades. why has it taken so long to get to this point, even given the complexity of the global investigation at this time? >> i have investigated many complex cases and they'll take different lengths of time with the complexity and international component. it makes all investigations particularly lengthy appeared it is hard to do right. you do not want to bring a case until you have the goods and that takes time. it is impossible to set a timer on a particular case. >> [inaudible]

>> the most serious charges are the racketeering charges, the charges these descendents took and turned it into a criminal enterprise. the sentence for that is a 20 year sentence. every sentence depends on a range of individual factors. every defendant is different. >> [inaudible] loretta lynch: i cannot comment on the specifics. i would say the investigation is continuing and it covers all aspects of the game. i cannot comment on that either, sorry. >> [inaudible] loretta lynch: i think fifa has

a lot of soul-searching to do as it tries to monitor itself and improve the way it does business. decisions on how those gains are awarded, it is really up to that particular body and we do not have an impact on that position we are not looking to either. >> [inaudible] >> that chance initiative is not part of the conduct and i cannot comment on whether it is part of the investigation or not. yes? classes there any evidence that any other american interests were harmed? things like that?

could we have seen in the indictment that certain marketing companies at corporate and have taken guilty pleas. the impact is part of the financial institution, to further their corruption. i cannot comment on other specific and cetaceans but i think the attorney pointed out regarding some of the victims in this crime, there is reiteration . a lot of the developing countries depend upon for the youth develop program grants for fifa and the bride money that comes out of the pot for the value of these marketing rights takes money away from soccer fields and soccer balls for kids. >> can you assure all this money forfeited would go back to soccer in some form? we're talking about hundreds of millions of dollars. >> to date, for those who pled

guilty, the funds they are forfeiting are going to be satisfied and reserved for what would be court-ordered restitution for the victims here. we can anticipate as we go forward in our investigation that is the lands we will view through all of the other defendants and properties in funds that we are attempting to obtain. >> who are the ultimate victims? >> soccer large. it is the fans and the organization. the reason these people were able to make so much money corruptly goes to the love people have for this word. so it is taking that love and skimming off the marketing rights that allow these people to enrich themselves and line their pockets. >> who gets restitution then?

>> ultimately, it will be a decision for the courts. i imagine it will be a lot of factors as you could imagine as we described the indictment, that could be victims in various places. >> [inaudible] that is one question. i have another one. latin american countries can operate on how death -- >> the entities were corrected. in that sense, they are victims. regarding america lead prosecutor will comment on that. >> the indictment is very detailed and there is a table of

contents in the second page and i refer you to the american skimpy or there are two dozen indictments, one that stands in the early 1990's until 2011, and a second scheme that details the indictment, and that is 2015 up until the next decade. >> we will not comment on who we will interview or have interviewed in our going toward. quite most individuals in the segment, have you received any from the new government, and are there any other individuals? >> i can say we're looking into individuals in a variety of countries and we will seek cooperation of another -- a number of our counterparts and providing them information as well should they want to pursue our -- their own investigation.

collects can you give more details on that? >> i cannot give more details about that particular corruption scheme about identifying fake -- particular people involved. i cannot go beyond what we say in the indictment. >> [inaudible] collects i am not here to comment on culture. we are here to comment on the charges in the facts before us spirit i cannot comment on that. i cannot comment on that information beyond what is stated in the indictment. i cannot name institutions.

>> [inaudible] >> ultimately that will be a decision for fifa, not the department of justice. classic couple more questions. classic you without the possibility that a lot going on here as far as risk [inaudible] >> there is no information in our indictment regarding that any gains or tournaments themselves were in lost by the corruption charges here. >> are you concerned since it is an american-led prosecution, that the end -- was somehow take it by correction, and the follow-up would be, what is the interest in the u.s. policing global soccer? >> to your first question about the united states did about the games, what i can say is our investigation will look at a

broad area of conduct and as the attorney general stated, we will not going to's civics about what that will or will not cover up a what was the second part of your question? >> as we indicated -- this enterprise impacted the united states in a variety of ways. headquarters have been in the united states, first in new york and then in florida, for the entire time charged. a lot of the banking institutions in the way the moneys were funneled passed through the united states. many of the people charged in this indictment either resided in the united states during some of the time, they conducted meetings regarding their scheme in the united states. there is a large righty of impact on the united states. it is a global investigation and we live in a global marketplace. the world is not insular to a

particular country any longer. virtually any international transaction crosses the border's. it is no different. >> are you considering reform self reform? >> it is too early to say whether we would consider that. >> thank you. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> is a reporting today over the streams, wetlands, and smaller waterways. it was one of the most controversial environmental regulations in recent years. the epa engineer said they are making their proposed waters and united states rules.

some republicans say many have considered it a massive federal overreach. and reaction from house speaker john boehner, the statement says in part house members or both parties have joined more than 30 government leaders to reject the epa's disastrous rule. the leaders know firsthand every role being shoved down the throats of hard-working people with no input and places land owners and small businesses and manufacturers on the road to a regulatory and economic hill. the words of john boehner. on the road to the white house shortly here, we will take you live to columbia and south carolina. hillary clinton was be to the women's house democratic caucus and the women's democratic council. it is her first trip to south carolina since announcing her candidacy. later on more as they 2012 presidential candidate is expected to announce he is running for the republican nomination in 2016. his announcement is in

pennsylvania, his home town just north of pittsburgh or we will have that live and we will follow with your comments and calls all live here on c-span appeared as we wait for hillary clinton and south carolina, part of today's "washington journal." host: and we are back. president and ceo of better markets inc., talking about wall street seven years after the financial crisis. tell us what is better markets? guest: it is an independent, nonprofit organization where we have 12 south, two in brussels one in london. basically, we are a wall street watchdog and a government watchdog, promoting and pushing the public interest against primarily the lobby power of wall street and washington. host: so why did you get started, and when? guest: the financial cross, as you mentioned, happened about seven years ago in 2008. in 2010, the president and

congress signed historic legislation, known as the dodd frank financial reform lawful stop i was a senior staffer for about six years or seven years at that time, decided to leave. two of the biggest towns is facing this country is both income inequality and unrestrained recklessness on wall street. there's not a single organization and wall street the seed that promoted the -- in washington, d.c. that promoted the public interest. something your viewers know all too well, i hear pushing their agenda, usually in narrow economic agenda, that enriches them often ethicsat the expense of everyone else. we thought there should be a professional organization that is nothing but try to promote the public interest in the financial markets and push back against the deregulation agenda of wall street and others in the financial sector.it is perfectly fine for them to promote their economic interest,

but there are two sides to every story, and too often the public interest gets left out of the entire discussion, so better markets was created to solely promote the public interest in the financial markets, whether to securities, derivatives international markets. so the public voice and the public interest gets to be heard in all of washington, d.c. host: seven years after the financial crisis, here is near neil erwin's headline in the "new york times," wall street is back on us as big as ever the jobs are there, and he salaries are increasing. guest: neil is great. i'm not even on his payroll, but i think he is a brilliant writer. he put his finger on what is happening anyway that is very troubling, which is after the great depression and the great crash of 1929 and 1930, the united states and acted all sorts of laws and rules of

different types to create layers of protection between the financial sector on wall street and the people who are working every day on main street. those protections for put in place and lasted about 70 years, they were what effective, so before the great crash of 1929 about every 10 years or so there was what they used to call financial panics, which were real crashes. they were really bad because unemployment was all over the place, largely due to speculation and recklessness on wall street. the great crash of 1929 was so bad, the government can together under the leadership of franklin delano roosevelt, and said enough is enough. we have got to stop this 10-year period every 10-year crash. they put in place massive regulation for the financial industry, the most regulation in the history of the world in the financial industry. why did i get the united states? not only did i get about 70 years of no financial crash, but also the united states created the largest middle class in the history of the world. it created broad-based prosperity. it reduced income and wealth

inequality in unprecedented ways and the most remarkable thing of all is under the heaviest regulation of the financial sector, the financial sector thrived along with the country and along with the creation of a massive middle-class. what happens? that stays in place for about 70 years. it does not mean there were not ups and downs -- there are always ups and downs but that is different from a crash. in 2008, we have the worst financial crisis since 1929, and he delivered us the worst economy since the great depression of the 1930's. and the government put this law into place called the dodd frank, and wall street allies have fought tooth and nail, day after day, spending hundreds of millions of dollars to prevent that law from being enacted. better markets is on the other side of wall street across this town from congress, the executive branch the sec pushing back against wall street

to try to get the rules in place to protect main street from recklessness on wall street. what neil's story highlights is notwithstanding those efforts wall street, not only employment, but it really interestingly their profits are at an all-time high yet again and that means that finance is once again sucking too much from the real economy. what finance is supposed to do is support of the real economy by providing financing to create jobs and growth, and unfortunately what it has become is a parasite on the real economy, and that is really the story that underlines neil's analysis. host: take a look at the opinion page of "usa today." the opposing view is written by the associate director at cato. thaya knight. she writes -- at its core, this

is what wall street does guest: that is an interesting story, it is in part true, but it is in part not true. most of what one the biggest banks do, the ones that crash the financial system in 2008 the ones that almost caused the second great depression, with a largely due is trading in speculation and what is called ficc, which is fixed income, currency and commodities full stop that is gambling on wall street. it is true that banks are supposed to pool money from savers and put them to their best use by lending to good

companies, creating good companies, and that is what i mean by finance as opposed to serve the real economy. if you think about this, there are only seven days in this country that are larger than $500 billion. the only banks or institution not only this country, but in this world, that actually threaten the financial system and the economy of the country. take anything else. if airlines failed, that would be bad, but it would not actually take down the country and cause the second great depression. they got any number of things. they would not crash the global economy. only this handful of too big to fail banks -- about 6500 banks in the united states, and we have got seven bigger than $500 billion. if you think about it, we have got 30 larger in asset size than $50 billion. we are talking about a very small percentage of our overall banking and finance community. and it is true -- a large part of that actually does provide funding and finance for the real economy, but too much of what the too big to fail banks do on

wall street and what the financial reform law is targeted to regulating and reining in is speculation, gambling, and recklessness, and that is what caused the 2008 crisis, the too big to fail banks. what enabled them to do that was deregulation right? wall street and its allies covered of the laws, the rules and even the cops on the wall street eat. that all reached a crescendo in about 2000. it took them 70 years -- think about it, this country knows how to control the finance sector and grow the real economy and grow the middle class or we did it for 70 years. about seven years later, we had the largest crash in almost 80 years. host: on the banks paying? you've seen the headlines over the years, they have accepted guilt and some circumstances

just last week, you had five banks admitting guilty to manipulating currency exchanges, and together were find $2.5 billion. here is what the attorney general had to say, loretta lynch -- the penalty these banks will now pays fitting considering the long running an egregious nature of their anti-competitive conduct. it is commensurate with the pervasive harm done, and it should deter competitors in the future from chasing profits without regard to fairness, to the law or the public welfare. guest: loretta lynch is the new attorney general, and we hope she will not continue the distributable -- distributable -- this was all done before she got there. she did the press conference. let's talk about what happened. you have citigroup, which was fined last week $925 million by the department of justice. and every one of your viewers

and you and i think that is a lot of money. the first three months of this quarter, they made $17 billion. they are going to make over $60 billion this year. they just got find not hundred 20 59 -- $925 million. that is not going to get their attention. they got find for massive global criminal conspiracy, and yet they -- they structured the deal such that the criminal please had no consequences. when everyone of your viewers or uri, if we pled guilty to a crime -- or you or i, if we played guilty to a crime, we would go to jail in handcuffs. there would be also to consequences. did any of that happened to these banks? none of that happened to these banks. there is actually more important point. people like to talk about since the financial crisis happened, the banks paid a lot of money. oh, my gosh.

let's shed a lot of tears for these banks. because regulation is costing them a lot of money. yes, those regulations cost money. but what is so remarkable to me is that no one ever talks about the cost of the crisis to the american people. better markets did a study and it is on our website. this that he is -- we did this actually several years ago. we looked at what lost gdp was. and it showed that the crisis cost this country at least $12.8 trillion. the dallas fed did a study of the crisis. their estimate is somewhere between numeral eight and $14 trillion. another study updated it to show about $20 trillion. so let's talk about the cost to the country of that crisis and

not shed a lot of tears worrying about the too big to fail banks and what penalties they are paying for their crimes. nobody sits here today and worries about how bad it is our people in prison who mugged people and robbed banks because they get a punishment for what they did to but banks on wall street0 what they did. -- what today did. but banks on wall street got a slap on the wrist. there is something else that is interesting, touches on the cost of the crisis. in january 2010, the unemployment rate -- i did talk about the numbers here all the time. think about this. and generate 2010 the unemployed and underemployed the rate was almost 18%. that was 23 million americans were out of work about a year after the financial crash. that is the cost of the crisis

and that is what we should be worrying about. host: let's get our viewers involved in this conversation. we are talking to dennis kelleher. maria in new jersey, and independent. caller: good morning, greta. and i think it is time to give them the law. i would like him to comment on the fact that the federal reserve, -- [indiscernible] is, in essence, a national group of avid banks. host: let's take that up, maria. guest: you know, the fed is a lightning rod for many different things and i believe they deserve a fair amount of criticism. i don't think they are being controlled by international interests. they -- their large interests coincide with the financial industry and wall street. however, you have to give credit where credit is due. the fed, precrisis, was an

enabler and failed miserably as a regulator. when the crisis happened, they led in a way that was quite remarkable and, in many ways, helped prevent a second great depression. we have been very critical of the terms and conditions under which they did that. but the fact that they did that was incredibly helpful to the country. since then, you kind of get phase three of this, where you have qe and zero interest rates. they have tried to provide some support to can prepare the damage done. our view is they haven't done their job well on the regulatory side. they need to be much tougher with the too big to fail banks. host: how so? guest: for example, one of the key parts of the financial reform law that is assigned to the fed is for them to put in place what are called capital liquidity counterparty exposure