senate in a bipartisan way and is now pending in the house, that republicans in the house and industry will say no. look, if the chairman of the fcc has the courage of his donections that what he is is right for america and will stand up to a vote in the congress, he ought to pick up the phone, call speaker ryan and say "schedule it for a vote in the house and let's see what the representatives of the american people safe." >> this morning, a reporters roundtable on the week ahead in bowlngton with early super a mikeene superville

debonis. we take a call when you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. "washington journal" is next. host: good morning, everyone. it is monday, june 11. president trump is on the ground in singapore preparing for tomorrow' historic meeting with north korean leader kim jon g-un. we want to get your thoughts on this gathering. are you pessimistic or optimistic? join us on twitter as well at facebook.com/cspan.

start dialing and, we want to hear from you. mike pompeo briefed reporters today in singapore a this is what he had to say. trumpwith the administration hopes to accomplish. >> president trump believes that kim jong-un has enough opportunity to change their trajectory of our relationship and bring peace and prosperity to this country. we are hopeful this summit will have set the conditions for future productive talks. president willes

ensure that no potential agreement will fail to adequately address the north korean threat. the ultimate objective we seek from diplomacy with north korea has not changed. andcomplete and verifiable irreversible denuclearization of the korean peninsula is the only outcome that the u.s. will except. sanctions will remain until north korea completely and verifiably eliminates its weapons of mass destruction programs. if diplomacy does not move in the right direction, and we are hopeful it will continue to do so, those measures will increase. president trump recognizes chairman kim's desire for security. the president has also expressed his openness to expanding access to foreign investment and other economic opportunities for north korea if they take the right steps. that was the secretary of state mike pompeo earlier this morning.

the headlines ahead of this historic meeting. all parties in place for the historic summit. questions persist about dialogue after trump and kim arrived in singapore. joining us on the phone is the sole bureau chief for the "wall street journal." let's begin with the move on the ground in singapore and what happened today. guest: we didn't have anything official happening today. donald trump and kim jong-un arriving separately on sunday. today is kind of the calm before the storm. there were wki lel talks between the u.s. and north korean delegations at the ritz-carlton. we are not sure what happened behind closed doors. to meeting went on for most of the day except for a lunch break. alsohile, donald trump was

at the koreaprime minister's for lunch and a bilateral meeting. host: it is evening time there in singapore. as the two sides get ready for tomorrow, how will it all play out? plan is for the two sides to meet at 9:00. they are actually sleeping not too far apart from one another at different hotels. this will be the first time they meet. are going to have, we understand at least two hours, one-on-one with just their interpreters before they are joined by their aides of both sides. host: what is the u.s. saying about the expectations of this summit? what could come out of it and what is the u.s. hoping for in north korea hoping for? guest: the two sides come from

pretty dramatically different starting points. they both use the word denuclearization. the u.s. talks about it being complete, verifiable and irreversible. those are strong words that basilly means get rid of everything, whereas north korea's have been using denuclearization of the korean peninsula, which sounds similar. experts will point out is quite different. what we have seen for mike pompeo, he said on several that the u.s. is not backing down from its strong demand. what they want is that complete, the verifiable irreversible denuclearization. whether or not they're going to get that from the north koreans and whether or not they're going to walk away, that is something

we just know. summit?o is not at the who is not in the room as far as other countries and what interest they have? parties. have six this is a two-party talk here. the south koreans have played a big role in keeping this whole diplomatic talk rolling in the last couple of months. the president of south korea has said one of the members of his , whonal security council is keeping a relatively low profile. the chinese and japanese are presumably watching this very closely. none of them have a seat at the table. all of them have their areas interests in this. the chinese and russians want to see these talks continue. the japanese have been pretty skeptical about this whole

process. host: how long do you expect the gathering to last? guest: that is something we just don't know yet. tore were reports yesterday confirm that the north koreans have a plane leaving at 2:00 p.m. local time on tuesday. that would just be five hours after donald trump and kim jong-un meet for the first time. that is not a whole other time for the two sides to get deep into the talks. thatve since learned you're going to have another north korean plane leaving wednesday morning. we're not sure exactly what is going on. the u.s. is also trying to figure things out as well. we know that donald trump is planning to leave at 11:00 in the morning on wednesday. mind, that the g7 in canada, donald trump had said i'm going to be leaving this summer early.

they may be a little bit of that jockeying and negotiating owing on here as well. -- going on here as well. host: tell our viewers what it is like to be a reporter on the ground during this meeting. you have got very tight security with 5000 police officers and emergency responders in singapore. describe how does to move around and what it is like to try to cover this. guest: sure. mike pompeo said there are 5000 reporters. this is quite a big scene. keep in mind, i just come from covering the korean summit in late april. this one i think is a very different beef. people in south korea are used to seeing things happening at the dmz. whereas been a place

talks have happened between the two koreas. certainly there was excitement and uncertainty there. is the neutral host to the talks here. it --blic here that didn't really expect the talks to land in their city. i think most people here are pretty surprised by it all. cit iy and people are fun seeing the impersonators going around, specialnts preparing trump and kim dishes. one of the main commercial districts has basically been on lock down as that is where both top and kim are staying. -- trump and kim are staying. the island where the summit is being held is, from what i

understand quite tight as well. it certainly is a real sense of anticipation here about what might happen. we have two of the world's most recognizable and unpredictable leaders here in the same room, potentially tomorrow. i think a lot of people are holding their breath to see what happens tomorrow. sir. thank you, appreciate it. guest: my pleasure. host: now, we turn to all of you. what is your take on all of this? play optimistic or pessimistic about the outcome of this summit? we want to hear from you this morning. ed.s go to optimistic this morning. caller: the reason i am so optimistic is president trump has got over 400 sanctions to put on them.

like going to squeeze them rag.n horse he is going to squeeze a tight if they don't cooperate. there is no need for them no need for them to have nuclear weapons and gas, and other weapons that are mass destruction. he is going to have to come across or president trump is just going to squeeze him. host: what gives you that confidence? caller: because he is in a really bad position right now. he doesn't have any money coming in that is going to support. he could do so much better i just cooperating with the u.s. and making it safer for the whole world. host: ok. is optimistic about this summit between president trump and kim jong-un. front page of the wall street

north korean-u.s. leader sets stage for summit. a little bit more from the secretary of state mike pompeo from this morning. he was asked by reporters about the president's preparation for today's summit. the washington post notes that that he will said rely on his intuition to size up the north korean leader. here is the quote in the wall street journal. within the first minute, i will know. here is the secretary of state mike pompeo responding to a question about the president. >> these are obviously very complex issues that have tens of millions of civilians in the crosshairs. is it wise for the president to be going and have you established any specific

criteria for the conditions that will lead to them to the walkout tomorrow? >> the president is fully prepared for the meeting tomorrow. at personally had a chance to make sure he has had a lot of different voices. we have put these two leaders in the right place. as i said, president trump has truly laid out a process here that is fundamentally different than the ones we have gone through before. i expect that the process from tomorrow forward will also be fundamentally different, with a resolved america working to provide an outcome that benefit both countries that is different than what we have done before. host: mike pompeo early this morning in singapore. we turn to all of you this morning for a discussion. what are your expectations for this summit? let's go to new jersey. john, your pessimistic. by? -- why? caller: i think commentators

have overestimated trump's influence in this whole affair china'srestimated influence. my basic fear is that there will bluster,be a lot of but in the end, the americans will demand too much in the north koreans would not be able to achieve any meaningful agreement. host: why do you have those thoughts about china and their influence? caller: i think the basic facts to all the people who are most northis -- obviously korea has great trade with china and they have great influence. they are the most important geopolitical, immediate geopolitical factor on the ground there. host: you might be interested in

others in this new york times article. on the outside looking in, china grows weary of north korea's aim. if you look at history, north korea is not sure of china and has a kind of revenge mentality says it prominent chinese korea.an on north the worst outcome is that the u.s., south korea and north koa get together and china gets knocked out. analysts say that cha is worried the u.s. could use the form a united korean peninsula. for china, that raises uncomfortable specter of u.s. troops on china's doorstep. there is even the remote possibility that north korea could flip allegiances.

some analysts ask whether the u.s. now flip north korea to its side away from china. it goes on to say expertsay the more preferable outcome for china would be mr. trump and mr. kim to sign a peace treaty formally endthe korean and paves the way for the eventual withdrawal of american troops in south korea. that would have the entire peninsula open to china's influence while eroding the confidence of american allies in asia regarding washington's commitment to the region. let's go to new york. you are optimistic. caller: i have lived through a second world war, a korean war. the meeting of these two leaders, especially since there are atomic weapons of great

, i have very little confidence that president trump -- in president trump as a negotiator and even as a president in many ways. at least he has come off of his high horse and threatening a very unstable society. i hope they can see some breakthroughs and eventually enter the nations of reasonableness. this is a concrete step, a first step. we have to invite china and russia. i think thison ermous good ste. no weapons have been threatened and used. this is peaceful. may it still continue.

in many ways. host: patricia is in libertyville, illinois. pessimistic. worried iod morning am holy pessimistic -- wholly pessimistic. i do not think president trump is stable enough emotionally. this is further evidenced by his conduct. and is a man who is wholly it totally mentally unstable and conducts himself as though he is a -- i am appalled that our whole world is now in the clutches of a man who is obviously ready for a size 38 or 40 straitjacket. perhaps something in black. patricia's opinion.

the article she was referring to. the president tweeting he would the treaty all seven leaders had agreed to. the president leaving the g-7 summit upset with what trudeau hatoay. if you missed justin trudeau's news conference, you can go to our website and watch it there. lucy in virginia. share your thoughts with us. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. i am very optimistic. i really would like to hope that the people who are always pessimistic about president think this would go to

the original sources of every speech or everything rather than how it is cut and edited d spun by the various partisan media. it is ridiculous. justin trudeau was very insulting. have sometrump does very legitimate problems with the trade arrangements with all of the different countries. it really was a backstabbing thing. more than that, i think north korea has probably realized it is at the end of its rope and there is no future in becoming a great big bomb for the rest of the world. what good could ever bring anyone, including himself? perhaps, what i really think is perhaps he is becoming intrigued.

maybe capitalism? who knows? the life that anything else would offer him is dismal. behave, will start to and then it would just be glorious for his country and the and the threat to the world for no reason other than just being crazy. anyway, thank you. north korea leader traveled 3000 miles. three planes took off. plane thelear which leader was on. plane, taken the second the air china plane.

he arrived in singapore and it was unclear. the commentator there speculated that it was an effort to bring a decoy so that no one knew which plane the north korean leader was traveling on. a little bit more from the washington post, the leader went straight to the saint regis hotel, the place his older brother was known to frequt. he lived in the island and was killed in a chemical weapon attack in the malaysian capital last year in an assassination to be believed orchestrated by kim jong-un to eliminate a possible rival for power. regis goeshis same for about $8,000 a night. it is not clear who his picking up the tabs for his stay.

the prime minister of singapore said they are spending about $15 million in total on hosting the summit, but he did not say whether that included accommodations for the north korean leader. jd for pessimistic. caller: absolutely pessimistic. and earlier caller mentioned trump's obvious emotional, psychological stability. the man is a lunatic who has displayed on a myriad of occasions that he is psychologically and a certainly emotionally imbalanced. no one is talking about the woolly mammoth of the room, that is china. time and time again, we a seeing china is this shadow force in virtually everything that is ppening around the world now. what is appalling is these guys , haveere supposed to be

such bravery like mike pompeo and bolton, no one is coming out and talking about the reality of china stealing virtually everything. intellectual property. we saw a case the other day with a busted into a navy contractor's office and took valuable secrets of america. it was just dusted under the rug. reevesnumerous dusting the south china sea. they have armed them to the teeth and we are seeing trump cowering. he claimed before, it was great hope with pete navarro being appointed as a trade representative to head up fair trade with china. suddenly, navarro is put on the sideline. they take bolton, the only thing he is able to do show a little

gut and emasculate him and mike -- i should say peter navarro. trump is cowering and cap tailing to china. someeeds to hold his feet to the fire. host: who is that somebody? congress? caller: thank you. where is anybody? where is schumer? we need to see some leader from the democrats. where are they? they are cowering. i suppose you could look a little deeper and say that corporate america is behind this. the walton family, walmart corporation, bezos, amazon. look at the human rights violation in china. i really wish you would get some talk withe who forthrightness about what china,

how they are just runnir the world with human rights violations, stealing of land. they are only biding their time. i lived in asia foree years. i got to know china in a very dark way. they are biding their time until they are going to basically war. there is no doubt. andy in texas. good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say i'm totally optimistic. i think this is an answer to a lot of people's prayers. a lot of people were terrified and hawaii when they have the false alarm because they didn't have any planning or anything whatsoever, where to go or what to say or anything. it was just a big mistake. needsroved that the world a little more love more than

hate. there are so many haters running around. it is just crazy. that last guy that was on their is just full of hate. don't people understand that the only way this world is going to survive is if we get along. that is what i think trump is trying to do. chance?ou give him a host: ok. we go to georgia. caller: good morning. interesting topic it reminds me of whenas i i w high school and you always have that bully. he would find the littlest can on the block, punch him and all the rest of the kids would be scared of him. north korea doesn't even have a bean shooter.

the united states has enough people to kill every man woman and child several times. all caps has to do is kiss his ring and tell them how great he is and play the kanye west card and he has him in his back pocket. host: let me be your response to this because the washington post kim, theor inheritor of a communist dynasty that has been isolated from the world's democracies for more than a half-century, protecting north korean security is paramount. kim is also eager to bring his ry the proceeds an investment that would come with newfound cooperation with the u.s. 2011.4 took office in he has had scant exposure to foreign dignitaries.

believe toasts learn what he was in for was a direct encounter with president trump. what is your reaction to hearing that? are you underestimating kim jong-un? caller: all you have to do is play the kanye west card. he got trump in his back pocket. big, all yous so have to do is tell them how great he is and you could build a trump tower in pyongyang and it is over. thank you. host: let's get more from the reporters on the ground in singapore. out, president trump accepted an invitation into a state visit in singapore in november as part of a summit. white house readout of the trump'lee meeting didn't include that detail. nos is from fox news,

sitting president has ev met with a north korean leader. kim is the first north korean leader to fire brought in over 30 years. singapore is the furthest kim has traveled since taking power. in april, kim became the first north korean leader to set foot in south korea. here is an evil from thomas, who writes for usa today. he tweeted out this picture, a few no nose in singapore -- no- no's in singapore. you can see the bottle of water there was the picture of the two leaders. let's go to bruce in michigan. caller: how are you doing today? i will make it quick.

i think it is just great that he has actually got the meeting. i think we have to give him credit for that. the thing i wanted to mention was the 800 pound gorilla in the room is that any country that launches a nuclear missile over country could wipe out our entire electronic infrastructure through an electronic magnetic poles. i just can't understand, we have known this for many decades, and yet we are not protecting our infrastructure. discussion, even if we do get ri of these nuclear weapons, this is terrible. this could send us back to the dark ages. i just want to make a point, basically that our government really needs to -- host: we lost bruce great we will -- bruce.

we will go on to milton. caller: i am very pessimistic. i think trump is irrational. i think kim jong-un is going to play up to trump's you and give him everything he wants from cap. is whatrms me the most he said before he left for the summit. he said that russia should be brought back into the g8. why would you say that? that came out of left field. he keeps saying there is no collusion between him and the russians, but he keeps doing putin's bidding. pressure is the enemy of our country. every time you turn around, trump goes out of his way to please russia. but there is no collusion, nothing between me and plutin. -- putin.

i just don't understand. and then the way he treated the canadian prime minister is embarrassing. we are americans and we are supposed to be looking f us and our friends. he seems to be more in love with putin them he is with our own people. i don't get it. host: let me add to what you said. the new york times this morning has this headline. putin says he would meet with as soon as the american side is ready, but insisted russia was in no hurry to win readmission to the group of seven nations because i already belongs to a chinese like grouping he describes as more important. mr. putin says the group of seven represented fewer people and has less economic heft than

the shanghai organization. organization, which beijing began in 2001 as an alternative to the american dominated diplomatic group includes china, russia, india, pakistan, and the nations of central asia. when the president left canada on saturday, after it was over, justin trudeau held a news conference and he said the all sides had agreed to this communicate on trade. he also said canada would not be pushed around and that they would retaliate on july 1 for the terrorists put in place by ffs put in place by the administration. president this out, prime

minister justin trudeau of canada acted so make an mild during our g7 meetings only to give a news conference after i fsft saying that u.s. tarif were kind of insulting and he will not be pushed around. >> he is not going to permit any tow of weakness on the trip negotiate with north korea, nor should he. >> this was about north korea? >> of course it was, in large part. in quebec.n our work we did our work, we worked with the western alliance. pleased to do so. we get on a plane and then this guy starts blasting. kim must not see american weakness. cnn'slarry kudlow on

state of the union. peter navarre he over on fox news had this to say. >> there is a special place in hell for any foreign leader that engages in bad diplomacy was donald j. trump and tries to stop him in the back on the way out the door. that is what bad faith justin trudeau did with that bad news conference. that comes right from air force one. i will to you this, to my friends in canada, that was one of the worst political miscalculate and's of the canadian leader in modern canadian history. all the had to do was take the win. president trump that the courtesy to justin trudeau to travel up to kobach for that -- summit.or that he had bigger things on his plate. he did him a favor and was even willing to sign the socialist

communique, and what the trudeau do? as soon as the plane took off, the trudeau stuck our resident in the back. that will not stand. as far as his retaliation goes, the american presseeds to do a much better job about what the canadians are about to do. it is nothing short of an aack on our political system and nothing short of canada trying to raise its high protectionist barriers even higher on things like maple syrup and other goods. >> i have a lot to talk to you about, but i do have to press this. you use there he strong words. you said that gave from air force one. are those the words of the president? >> my words, but they are the sentiment that was on air force one. this was just wrong what trudeau was doing. the canadians are totally bungling our trade relationships

and it is due to their leadership. take nafta, we would have a great deal with nafta by now if the canadians would spend more time at the bargaining table and less time lobbying capitol hill and our price and state governments here. peter navarro, u.s. trader presented is on fox yesterday. that was followed up by a tweet from president trump, sorry, he said, we cannot let our friends or enemies take advantage of us on trade anymore. we must put the american worker first. all of this led to this snubs leavesmp closest allies in turmoil.

you can to the picture there with the aids and the president sitting down. the forerunner of the grouping was established in 1973 to coordinate the west's response to an embargo. g7 finance ministers and central bankers also provided the decisive moment in the global financial crisis when they ripped up a prepared communique in october 2008. they doubt instead to provide markets with unlimited liquidity.

let's go to glory in north california. you are optimistic as we go back to our conversation with all of you about tomorrow's historic meeting between the united states president and the leader of north korea. go ahead. caller: i am optimistic. if anybody can do it, it is president trump. he has done so much already. thatbody keeps saying russia colluded. they have been doing that for 50 years already and nothing has been done. won since president trump the election, all of a sudden it is a big deal. i don't understand why it wasn't a big deal before. why was it not a big deal when obama was elected? i am pretty sure they were interfering back then, too.

one more thing. comenot understand how people on the left, democrats and liberals, they want our president to fail. they hate him more than they love the united states. ohr said was incomprehensible. they want our country to fail so that we will not elect president trump anymore. that is unbelievably stupid and a reprehensible. i hope you didn't mean it, and he just said it. this is un-american. devon in greensboro, north carolina. caller: i am very optimistic. one thing with mr. trudeau's theline, that is just like

lucky redline. nothing is quite to happen. the negotiations are taking place really hard and i think negotiations are going to lead in the americans way. at the end of the day, it is for the american people and for the world. we are showing how to do these correctly. it is not that hard to understand. he is not a racist. he may be a billionaire glo that does billionaire thinks because he has an edgy attitude because of the money he has. because of them 30 plus years he has been in new york. at the end of the day, people who have been around him as he , we understand.

his work ethic is for the american people. i'm african-american, and i tell my people, it is what he is doing for me. there are 6 million plus jobs out here and people unemployed. there are jobs out here for everybody. you need to get off your butts and go get them. i tell people, don't look at president trump as somebody you should dislike because there is negative press. as, ae to look at it positive toward nature and know america and in things are here that you can go do because of the leadership on r federal, state and local levels. we have to get out there and vote. host: i will leave it there. melanie in ventura, california. caller: i'm really upset. hearnly 54 years old and i

from a lot of older people that went to work, and what i am seeing today is appalling. this guy is claiming to be the jail maker. he is doing all these great things. he is a failure. bankruptcy. what is going to stop them from doing this to this country? he is not a leader of the free world. he is not even a leader of any other world. he is more into dictators. what is he going to prove? what is he going to get done? i need to know. i'm scared. my friends are scared. we don't know what is next. host: yesterday, the washington ofrnal former director intelligence during the obama administration was our gue and

this is what he had to say about the intricacies of this eating in singapore. about president commented the importance of attitude. he has a point. that is unimportant dimension if you enter into negotiations with the foreign head of state, particularly this one. attitude is important. obviously, if you have preparation that helps. i think president trump has had a lot of preparation. we began the brief when he was candidate trump on north korea even then. deanna coates and mike pompeo spent a lot of time ucating mr. trump about north korea. i do think he understands the nature of the regime.

it is a brutal regime, no question about it. i do think that we are in a much negotia and nth so ago when we weresay exchanging very vocal threats. this is better. i hope that this summit doesn't get into the nitty-gritty details of negotiating denuclearization, which is a very complex subject. that theould be president might secure an answer to the very important question of kim jong-un, what is it that north korea needs to feel sufficiently secure that they don't need nuclear weapons? if president trump can listen an answer, that would be a good thing. clapper on yesterday's "washington journal.

you can watch the entire interview there on c-span.com. mike pompeo spoke earlier this morning at a news conference in singapore and he talked about the expertise within the trump administration and how they have been preparing for tomorrow's historic meeting. >> the president said on saturday, this is truly a mission of peace. this afternoon, the president called the south korean president.n japanese the talks continue this afternoon, even as we sit here now, they are in fact moving quite rapidly. we anticipate they will come to

their logical conclusion even more quickly than we had anticipated. summit, icussing the want to address a report in the new york times that suggested that the u.s. team lacks the technical expertise on dismantling north korea's weapons program. i want to address that report directly. for over three months, an interagency working group of over 100 experts met the multiple times a week to address technical images to go issues associated with dismantling north korea pass weapons. members of the military and officials from the intelligence community. those the experts also cover north korea's nuclear, biological and missile programs. these experts include dozens of phd's who have expertise in nuclear weapons, chemical and biological weapons and advanced degrees in nuclear engineering,

physics, aerospace, biology and other relevant fields. on the ground in singapore, we have team that includes the president's seniormost expert in weapons of mass destruction who can cover any technical need that the meeting may present. he suggested that the u.s. somehow lacks the technical expertise across government or the ground here in singapore is mistaken. state miketary of pompeo earlier this morning around 5:30 eastern time. it was 5:30 p.m. in singapore. it is approaching 8:00 at night there. the president and his staff getting ready for tomorrow's historic meeting which will take place around 9 p.m. singapore , excuse me, 9:00 a.m. singapore time, which would be 9:00 p.m. here in washington.

we will have coverage of that historic meeting. you can go to our website to follow that. let's go to john and louisiana. are you optimistic or pessimistic? caller: psimistic. things thatll the have gone on over 100 years. they are saying kim jong-un would not keep his promises, have the u.s. ever kept their promises? if you go back to slavery days, do you know i'm saying? the u.s. needs to realize that no one is scared of anybody these days. if you want kim jong-un to get rid of his nuclear weapons, why not get rid of our nuclear weapons? thank you. host: floyd in jonesville. i am optimistic. i believe the bible and what it

says. they ask you what will be the signs of the end times, and one of them is wars and rumors of wars. the very last things he said his money go to harbor peace and destruction. the angels will take say out and he will fall to earth and see -- deceive people. he will deceive everybody who doesn't know that this is going to happen. if you think christ is coming first, you are wrong. jesus comes back on 777. they are going to put on the big show. i just want to warn people. ok, floyd. some reaction on twitter.

unprepared for bankruptcy and no substance to our president. tilman says the mainstream media heading to nuclear war and now we are talking. bill king says i'm not expecting much. this is a mission for two experienced diplomats, not fly-by-night egos. ohio.go to lucy in caller: hi. good morning. aboutast comment you made that jerk saying they needed to professionals talking about nukes. he is the jerk. that is the reason people have not gotten through to this person down there. they are jerks.

is used to talking to people. he sat down with them all his life and made deals with them. that doesn't mean he is a stupid person by any means. theirk they just have shirts so stuffed full of bread that they can't do anything else but sit and feed their face and complain about somebody else's work. let them get out and work sometimes. he has worked constantly since he has been in their. i am very impressed with him. host: ok. tony and santa fe. caller: i am pessimistic. host: tony, i apologize but it

is very difficult to hear you. robert in virginia. caller: i want to mention, will c-span has something on the translators? in the dialogue of the translator. host: what about them? caller: i think they are going to be very important, the north translator. maybe if they can get an expert and say what the language is about. north korea is like a family of a bunch of teenagers that move in. maybe they move into the neighborhood and are out of , mayol and their parents the chinese would be the foster parents. they can't control these kids and mr. trump says i'm going to try to talk to these kids.

he is going to try the best he and offer these kids education or things you can buy or a better world stage, you can act little bit better. kind of like a walk your dog, carry a doggie bag. i really have optimism that mr. trump want to talk to them. maybe the north koreans are thinking maybe we can. we have been mistreated by the chinese all our lives. i will to you one thing else. i fought in vietnam. i also went to the dmz, i did some time in south korea. i was more scared in south korea than i was in vietnam, and i did fighting in nam but i was more scared there. i am optimistic with this president. niro was onde

television, we don't need that kind of rhetoric. best for ourhe country and president and i hope our liberal friends quit being so pessimistic. thank you. the president will sit down with kim jong-un at 9:00 p.m. eastern time this evening. that will be 9:00 a.m. in singapore. the two will meet with translators first behind closed and then the aides and staff and delegations will be brought in after that. as we learned earlier, and it is on the front page of the wall street journal this morning as planethat kim jong-un's p.m.,dy to go at 2:00 five hours after the summit begins. he is slated to leave singapore to return to north korea. let's go to george in new york.

you are pessimistic. caller: yes. i am not too fond of this whole summit because the whole premise of the summit's human rights and peace. americans are not about that. the first thing pompeo discussed was for north korea to give up their nuclear program. the economic and corporate america would take over. 200 tilman of in north korea. natural minerals in north korea. host: as we showed our viewers

earlier, this tweet from nbc news, the u.s. has decided not to bring up human rights at the singapore summit with north korea. don in henderson, nevada. i am very optimistic because president trump is confronting a communist country. he is trying to talk to all of them, china, russia, and north korea. happened in the previous administration? kerry dropped $4 million in the .hilippines when syria crossed the red line, nothing was done. the previman in administration said we have to

get used to a nuclear north korea. ukraine was told, he told putin, our military posture has been changed. all of the people that think delusional, they better look in the mirror. at peace in the washington post this morning notes that a motivating force for president trump's former president barack obama who told trump before his inauguration that north korea was the greatest political challenge he would face in office. agent said the fact that obama recognize thgravity of the threat and could not extinction only heightened trump's interest in finding a way to get north korea to abandon its nuclear program. caller: good morning.

once the summit is over, i am optimistic about it. not only do i think north korea is going to be north korea anymore, but it is going to be one korea after he is done jong-un.to kim everything that he has done so him with everything against , he manages to go through it through the grace of god working through him. to these other people. time wheree into the you hear a lot of stuff about god and that type of thing. that is what is happening right now. people need to wake up to the god is coming here

sooner than you think. leave it going to there. if you did not get a chance to call in or make it through you can continue to dial in. we will continue this conversation about tomorrow's summit and the week ahead. later on a recent government report says americans -- america's effort to stabilize afghanistan is a failure. we will speak to the man who wrote that report. we will be right back. ♪

>> tonight, former fcc chair tom wheeler talks about the end of net neutrality. he is interviewed by david mccabe. >> the conversation has shifted to legislation. do you think it is possible to legislate? something congress ought to decide. now when congress has an opportunity to decide with the congressional review act that has passed the senate in a bipartisan way and is now pending in the house that republicans in the house and industry say congress should not say.

of the fcc has the courage of his convictions that what he has done is right up america, and will stand to a vote in the congress he ought to pick up the phone mccall speaker ryan in say schedule it for a vote in the house and let's see what the representatives and american people say. >> watch the communicators. >> this week, live coverage from the north korea summit between president donald trump and north korean leader kim jong-il starting tomorrow night. watch live or listen using the free c-span radio app. >> c-span2 where history unfolds

daily. created as an was blic service by america's cable television companies. today we bring you unfiltered of thee of congress white house, the supreme court and public policy events in washington and around the country. to you by yourht cable or satellite provider. >> washington journal continues. host: we are back. at our table, the white house reporter for the associated press, and mike madden covers capitol hill. this historic meeting in singapore will be taking place at 9:00 eastern time, today, tonight in d.c.. what is the white house saying about expectations?

the president has been trying to lower expectations. he made it seven he was going to walk into the meeting and shake jong-un, andm magically kim jong-un would immediately agree to give up his entire nuclear weapons arsenal. now the president and the white house are talking about this as a process. they're looking at follow-up meetings to strike some kind of a deal with the leader of north korea on what to do with the nuclear arsenal. heart from mike pompeo. he took issue with the new york times piece that said they didn't have the technical expertise to negotiate denuclearization. he went through a list of how they have been preparing, the staff they have, and people on the ground with them now. what has the white house told reporters about what work they

have been doing for tonight? thet: they have said president has been getting briefings. it is prior position as cia director her, -- director, they would have some sort of discussion about north korea. so they are trying to portray it as the president is very prepared and ready to go into thisigh-stakes meeting. how is this playing out on capitol hill? committee,ervices the leadership of the republican party. how are they reacting to this? guest: there are some differing views on one of the foreign affairs committee's. thatally speaking i think

the rank-and-file are not quite sure what to make of what is going to happen here and they are in wait and see mode. rooting for the success of the president, for there to be some sort of agreement, or some sort of agreement to keep talking come perhaps deliver -- talking, perhaps deliver and into the nuclear threat. depending on who you talk to, there is more skepticism something can be developed. that would be lasting and meaningful. people have some experience with the foreign affairs space, the leading chairs know that the history of diplomacy with north korea has been fraught. there has been a lot of false starts and dead ends. i think there is proof in the pudding attitude. that is going to remain so as

this plays out through the week. is made willal lawmakers see the pudding? will they see the details? will they sign off on denuclearization? guest: it's a huge question. republicans criticized it for not being submitted formally as a remark -- formally. the president made a remark, determined to be submitted as a treaty. that is in the closely divided senate like this one. one that is fraught with partisan differences. tocould be a difficult thing put forth, especially with the bad blood through republicans and democrats with what happened

on iran and how the trip administration has dismantled the obama administration signature policy achievement. that is something that would have to be overcome if an agreement is reached and sent to the senate. host: and you have the midterms looming as well. guest: absolutely. ,ou know, typically treaties ratifying a treaty has never been a speedy endeavor. that is something that could be -- there is little expectation to begin with that something was going to come quickly out of this process. congressionalthe the would happen immediately after that is not realistic given the way congress works in the way that politically, having a looming midterm is going to influence the process. host: before the president lands in singapore, his gathering in

canada with the other g-7 -- tensions to be seem to have intermittent -- diminished. did yea? >> the whole meeting seemed to be going to be going merrily along. everyone was smiling for taking photographs. the tension reporters had written about before the meeting did not seem apparent on the surface. afterward president trump left early. justin trudeau came out with his closing news conference. he got a couple of questions about the tariffs the u.s. is imposing on canada. he answered the questions in a way that seemed to upset the president of the united states who tweeted from air force one that justin trudeau was weak, and the differences over

tariffs. it was extraordinary. in all the summits like this, that i have been around and helped cover, i have never seen it ending like this one. host: what happens next? what is the white house saying about this communiqué? that he has advised his staff to reject it? guest: they have not said much about how this -- whether the united states will change course. the focus is shifting to singapore. yesterday you did hear some strong language from larry , the trade advisers against justin trudeau. that language was pretty extraordinary. calling him a backstab or. -- backstabber. see if it remains the

g-7, how isolated the u.s. will become in that group of western allies as a result of what happened. host: how is congress reacted to these tariffs the administration put on canada? bipartisans been dismay with them among democrats , and many republicans who simply are of a free trade outlook, and also are disturbed that the u.s. seems to be headed towards for lack of a better term a trade war with its closest allies including canada. , hundreds oflly billions of dollars in trade with them every year. nervousnessensef

and anxiety among lawmakers of that this thing is headed off the rails. you have the top leaders basically attacking each other on personal terms with no easy solution in sight. that is causing a lot of concern on the hill. week,at the end of the the white house has the deadline for publishing the list of goods from china tha the administration is preparing to leadhe -- levy. there'll be another round of this trade war talks at the end of this week. guest: on the hill there is a sort of qualitative difference between the reaction to the dealings with china and other allies.

on the boate dismay -- public and side with the tensions with ourllies. china, there seems to be more bipartisan understanding that there is room to play hardball with the chinese on many issues. re, it is complicated. host: with the president on the world stage ahead of what will be tomorrow in singapore's historic meeting with the president of the united states and the north korean leader, we want to get your commentary and questions. darlene with the associated press joining us. your thoughts and how congress should be reacting to all of this. we will give you a breakdown of what will happen here in washington this week as well.

on trade, watch or will congress do something in reaction to these tariffs on our allies? guest: it is complicated, again. i think the thing that has the most attention on the hill recently is an effort in the , with a big push from pat and roll back the .nilateral trade they want to give congress and approval ve, approval or disapproval vote with the president is going to use these authorities. holds all powers regarding foreign trade.

,hat has happened over decades congress has delegated almost all of those authorities to the president whereby more or less in the 1960's they gave the ability to apply these national security tariffs. if there is a national security interest of the united states, the president has been granted fast-track authority to engage in trade negotiation's whereby congress takes a backseat until the last moment, where they give an up-and-down vote. perhaps congress has given way too much power and it is time to bring it to act. that is what we are going to see play out. there is a chance that measure to get a vote on the defense authorization bill in the senate. let's hear from victoria. you are first.

question or comment? caller: i have a comment. thank you for taking my call. people do not -- i don't know. irish koreans from italian koreans, we have that in this country. great about this country. we have a mixture of cultural and religis, and political. not so in korea. korea is homogeneous. i think kim jong-un wants a united korea. what i think is going to happen? i don't know. too hard to tell. i do think people -- i have to take into account china is not korea. china is china. korea is all koreans. i think the united states is

multicultural. are americans certainly from different multi-cultures. people don't understand that. same with afghanistan. a different makes of people, religion, believes. many different groups. the united states, no matter how much, is american. thank you. i want to give more details to you and other viewers. the white house sent out a statement from the press secretary about the meeting tomorrow with some details following the initial meeting. chairman kimmp and will participate in a one-on-one meeting at a working lunch. the delegation says it will kelly, mike pompeo, john and bolton, sarah sanders,,

the senior director for asia will also be joining the working lunch. president trump will participate in a media availability at 8:00 a.m.. after that the president will be talking to reporters. -- he may have an update may have an update on whether or not he struck a deal. host: hello perry. meler:uldn it w't surprise that the only reason he is doing this is to validate that stupid coin so they don't have to give people money back on coin that says the people's republic of china north korea. the only thing i believe about trump is that after this meeting

he will be as honest about the meeting is everything else he has done. sadie in silver springs. caller: hello? host: youree ai good morning. father fought in korea. he was in the u.s. army. i was wondering why american reporters don't talk about the history of korea. host: in what way? it is a country that has been there for a wild. we know nothing about korea. my father fought in the u.s. army. i know very little myself. my question was why is no one talking about one korea? i think that is what the leader

of north korea is interested in. host: that is an angle in the new york times this morning. it is one of the stories they have. china's fear is this becomes one korea. another historical part of this is perhaps there is an official ending to the korean war. there was a when the cease-fire was initiated in the 1950's. host: that is something the president has mentioned. bringing ality of formal end to the korean war. which as you mentioned, we are still technically at war with them. there was not a former peace treaty was signed. that is a possibility. a united korea is something the president has talked about. have families from the north

separated from families in the south. they would like to be reunited with their loved ones if that can be part of the outcome of this process. when the0 tonight is summit takes place. you can go to c-span.org and watch coverage of the summit. they go behind closed doors. the president stays in singapore until 8:00 a.m. our time. tuesday morning. what is on his agenda when he gets back? guest: it is unclear. do not know exactly when he is going to return to washinon. one of the big things on his birthdayming up is his thursday. in conjunction with that the justice department announced they will be releasing the ig

report into the hillary in mel investigation thursday. we can expect to hear a lot on the president on that as we have heard already through the tweets he has sent about the russia investigation. the report is somewhat negative against james comey. the president feels about james comey. so that is on the schedule this week. i mentioned the tariff details. those should be released on friday if the deadline is it pushed back for some reason. that is about all that we know about this point. host: capitol hill? guest: think that authorization bill is on the floor. the true debate is going to be interesting to watch. on the house of the will have a number of bills related to the crisis the republican leadership is moving through.

the attention of the house is going to be on immigration and whether republicans can come to an agreement among themselves to put a bill on the floor, or whether this discharge petition is going to be completed, forcing a debate later this month. that is going to be occupying a lot of opinions. host: explain what that is. will they stick to tuesday's deadline that they said will trigger them to get the signatures they need and force a vote? guest: it is what it sounds like. it discharges april the leadership is not bringing to the floor. it is a tool in the house rules for when the majority is frustrated by the majority leadership. you have a group of several dozen moderate republicans who are simply too frustrated.

paul ryan and the rest of the leadership have not taken action to fix the problem created when the president canceled. they want a bill on the floor that addresses it. they are on the cusp of doing so. they need three more signatures to get to the requisite. there is one democratic holdout who hinted he will be signing this week. say it is likely that come tuesday those signatures will come across. that sets up a debate for later this month. another option, they could keep talking, and do this in july. some of the proponents have left .pen that is a possibility

there are negotiations underway. there are some question marks that will be resolved if we will know more about how this is going to proceed. host: do we know who the republicans are? guest: a number of members have said they are considering it. dennis ross from florida, dan newhouse of washington state on the rules committee. a few more names are out there. guest: the white house legislative director, the white house is opposed to the discharge petition. it is not clear they are doing

much to stand in the way of that. if the discharge petition is successful, ths tantamount to turning over the house floor to nancy. the immigration priorities the president is interested in becoming law will not become law. host: but ultimately gets passed of these moderate republicans win out? the -- not to get in the weeds but in the way the discharge petition is set up, it sets up a vote on a number of bills. the dream act, which has been alive in some form for 15 years, which basically would grant them withoutto

doing things on border security. i think it would be widely seen as a brush to the trauma ministration to press the dream it -- the dream act. go as far as the trump administration would like. they want to cut back the number of these is available under the legal immigration programs. they want to build border wall, something that is against most democrats. they want to see if there is a sweet spot between the moderate republicans and giving a permanent solution to the dreamers and what conservatives

want in terms of securing the border, building the wall, increasing the enforcement and dealing with those legal immigration programs. ho keep calling in. caller: good morning. you cover congress. i would like to know if you can --, if you have a feeling how does the congress feel about the president on a personal level? guest: that is an interesting question. there are 535 members of congress. 535 opinions. is there a difference between the way members asked publicly in the way they feel privately?

for a number of members there is. i speak to them on a discrete basis routinely who question the president's temperent. but also have some level of policy agreement with him. black he is doing on the republican side. struggle forrly them to show support for a president who is popular among voters of their party and also deal with their own personal reservations about the way he does the job. that is certainly the case. we have seen a player out at the highest levels. contortions he is had to make our certainly

reflected in the rank-and-file as well. about the white house effort to have good relations? >> well, it goes back and forth. again. it i remember the episode last year when he was going after senator corker and there was the time when he was going against mitch mcconnell over the senate failing to pass the obama care bill. like the president and senator mcconnell on the same page. they are working hand-in-hand to keep the gop majority in the senate expanded. the relationship between the white house and congress ebb and flow just like any other relationship. republican. caller: i wanted to make a

comment and ask of your guests, understandseem to where the president is coming from. this has been 30 years in the making. europe is restrictive. they are isolationist. they have a ton of tariffs against us. we cannot import chicken to them. there is a lot of different things this -- your guests are not advocating for. president trump ran on this trade situation. this is imbalanced forever. china has been doing this for the long time with intellectual property and also restricting companies from going in there for putting tariffs against us. guests need to give a list of the articles

europe is not importing and the president is complaining about. we do not care what he says. like what he does. host: let's start with darlene. guest: thank you for your question. i don't have that list in front of me. you are right when you say that this issue is an issue that has admitted the president for some became president. he had been talking about trade and trade imbalances between the u.s. and other countries. he is getting a lot for trying to do something about it. the wayuibble about that he may be going about trying to take care of the matter. but he is trying to do something about it. the respect to canada and g7, and relationships with u.s. allies, there are always going

to be disagreements between world leaders, the u.s., canada, so on and so forth. it is just the way that one goes about expressing those differences or dealing with them. as i said earlier in the program, what happened was extrrdinary and unusual for an american president to use -- not only the incident. languagegainst the leader of a country that has been an ally for aong time. host: thank you for the comment. guest: republic -- if you not always do a good job of explaining -- reporters do not always do the good job of expanding the trade has done for the country. what is important to understand is the nation over 50, 60 years since the end of the second world war has played a role

establishing the global trade system. it has played the leading role. the thrust has been to make trade more open under the attitude and the theory that free trade benefits all parties. , certainly,u.s. these trade agreements have helped create new markets for exports and agriculture, and manufacturing. other industries, they have contributed to a better standard of living in our own country as we import lower-priced goods manufactured more cheaply abroad. that has contributed to the betterment of the american people. now what president trump has done is question that framework.

the backlash now is coming from folks elsewhere. , they of his own party have increased exponentially due to free-trade agreements struck over the past decades. the american agricultural industry is reliant on foreign trade for its well-being. you look at different sectors. high-tech, etc.. when the bullet -- we may look , those seem to get a disproportionate amount of attention. i speak as someone who grew up , a placeest indiana built on the steel industry. --ave watched as my family my grandfather worked in a steel mill at a time when there were

tens of thousands of people working in it now. now with fraction automation and trade pressures that have come to bear on that industry. factor. one it is not the only factor in the decline of employment in these industries. we need to do a better job of showing with the larger picture is why these trade agreements , whatveloped over decades the other pressures are in terms of automation and competition that have been responsible for the trends the president is responding to. host: john in columbus, ohio. caller: good morning, panel. i just got back from starbucks. there was one lady that called and she said she didn't know the

history about korea. my granddad lives with me. he fought in that war. we have newspapers a win that war broke out. korea used to be one country. then the crazy chinese came up with the communist party, and the communists were like the sky is pink. in south korea was like we are not going for that. killed a bunch of chinese. people need to read more about it. it used to be one whole country. host: got the point. hello, jeff. to these are listening congressmen and senators on

their way out. john mccain. big deal. he is on his way out. corker. all the people you are listening to do not like trump. if they did not want trump to do this, they should have never put him in office. our trade system is screwed up against us. the countries that have these , they iran and korea should have never had that. it has fallen on trump's shoulders. all these problems are because people before him, now they want to whine and cry. , cnn, theying msnbc are all against trump in this country. they want him to fail. what about retiring members of congress?

many in leadership positions. guest: there is certainly something to it. amonge more courage retiring members. jeff flake in the senate. if you look at the district petition on immigration a good number of the republican signers are retiring this year. it does give you a certain amount of freedom to speak your mind and not cross the president of your own party when you don't have to stand for reelection. another dynamic is the special counsel investigation into rations -- russia's interference in the campaign. .esterday we had ken starr i want to play for our viewers what he had to say about rod rosenstein. then we will come back and talk about how this is playing out. guest: rod rosenstein is a card-carrying republican.

out thes his politics door. he is a person of rectitude. it does not mean i agree with every judgment. but i do not havehe basis for assessing the judgment. if i don't have all the facts i'm not one to jump to any conclusions. the control mechanism that should provide assurance to the american people is the duly appointed by the president official is ultimately in charge. can go to c-span.org if you missed that interview. he talked about the special counsel investigation. with what is happening on capitol hill, at the same time robert mueller is doing in this investigation, what are some ande republicans demanding asking of the justice department? guest: they want more information and internal documents, testimony regarding

the stice department behavior in 2016 during the time in which they are investigating hillary clinton and her emails whole take and they start to look at what is happening with the trump campaign. they are focused on this notion that there was some illicit surveillance, some have called it spying of the campaign, in which an intelligence asset reached out to campaign figures to see if there was some sort of oroward communications dealings with the russian government. thatheory of the case is there may have been this effort by the obama administration to

get into the trump campaign and undermine it in some way. the facts as known do not support that can illusion. thought,ms to be some records, more access to tohese establish they can this was a witch hunt, to use the president's terminology. you alluded to this earlier. will be issued. that report will only deal with the roll call me play. what was happening in the investigation of hillary clinton. will that answer some questions? them, unlikely all of certainly in this realm of the spying allegations.

the inspector general said he's going to do a separate review of that. we don't expect thursday to settle these questions. perhaps not even half. bet: michael horvitz will testifying on this report. he will certainly be asked by republicans and democrats alike many questions dealing with the role of the former fbi director and what the justice department did during the 2016 campaign, how they conducted themselves. let's go to harold. korea: in 1950 north invaded south korea. they wanted south korea. they still do. we are under a cease-fire, basically. that is the agreement that stands today. thatdder at the thought

trump is going to go negotiate for us. if he behaves like you did this -- if he behaves like you did this weekend, i would shudder even more. this is not the apprentice. this is serious. under -- unified korea suppose kim was to prevail here. with the economic sources south korea has, coupled with what north korea has, we will have a bigger danger. this is not to be taken lightly and this unhinged man scares the hell out of me. host: as you have been at the white house and this day has approached, this summit that begins tonight, what are you saying -- thing about the

comings and goings of our allies and the staff, the foreign ouage of this president?the what have you seen on the effort . not be so that plays out in front of the cameras but what have you learned and seen? guest: there is an effort by allies in the region to work with the president, to make sure that the summit that will take place tonight will be as successful as it can. the president had conversations within yesterday. he spoke with the leaders of south korea and he spoke with someone else. there has been a lot of effort by south korea, even china to a degree.

in the japanese prime minister made a stop in washington last week to talk to the president and make sure that japan's interests are part of what ever comes out of this meeting tonight. tore is an effort to try ask in tandem, to make it good an outcome as possible. it is one of those things where we have to wait and see exactly what is going to come out of it and win -- anwhen something will come out of it. host: a lot of anticipation. the in singapore when president and leader of north korea go behind closed doors and staff and experts will be working together. the north korean leader, his .lan is set to depart singapore

you are looking at a five hour window. then the president will talk to reporters before he leaves. let's go to robert in pennsylvania. theer: my comments about export and importisparaging -- disparity. most don't realize that europe doesn't import anything genetically modified. they warned the united states in the 1970's when i was stationed in europe they would not accept genetically modified foods, food with war of -- growth hormones. it came to pass in the early 1980's they started rejecting american produce. even two or three years ago they that wasrain

genetically modified and they returned it. they warned the united states this was coming. with the steel industry, nobody told the truth. the unions are partly responsible for the steel going abroad. the wages they were having to pay in the 1970's and 1980's. 25ave cousins who were paid or $35 an hour in 1975. they are partly responsible. host: do you have any thoughts? guest: the points about trade a barrier for american exports is correct in many cases. it differs from good to good. certainly something the president has seized on. the things the president has said, he is uncertain products,

certain things that seem to excite him. with europe it is automobiles. mercedes, german cars. he thingthe's too many german cars. with canada its dairy exports. the u.s. dairy industry can't get into canada. it is those things that are driving the president's feelings on this. ceasing theee is larger picture of what does get in and what is the risk down the road of retaliating for these barriers, i think with , let's look at the auto industry. you have seed -- seen an incredible amount of cooperation and cross-border agreements to

basically have foreign manufacturers come in the u.s. and sell them to americans. part of that is due to american barriers. there is something called the basicallyx, which was the remnant of an earlier trade war. there is a 25% tariff on pickup trucks. anytime you see a japanese branded pickup truck driving down the street it is almost certainly assembled in the united states to get around the import barrier. there are probably folks in japan wondering if you don't like some of these trade barriers we have, we will stop trucks in thekup u.s.. a lot of these are made in sunbelt states. tens of thousands of jobs at

stake. host: democrat. caller: if north and south korea were united, trump would take the side of kim, and have kim and charred -- in charge of the whole country, and pull american troops out of north or south korea? advance that a sickly -- wouldn't that basically advance communism? host: we don't know. guest: it is too early in the process to think about that. secretary pompeo said he got a question about the u.s. troop issue and whether or not removing them would be part of any deal. he would not go there. troops still50,000

there for security. host: that is in the new york times this morning. guest: removing those troops is something kim jong-un, north korea has wanted for a long time. it is too early to speculate. pompeo not giving any details, refusing to give details. let's go to hurt. caller: a week ahead in washington, there is so much. the fbi will get you seven ways to sunday. i think trey gowdy is going out hearing they are behind. as far as modern-day slavery goes, immigration fits that

bill. as far as bringing jobs back to america, i think that is clear. , goinglem is the press after the first lady. i hate to see our president allowing this. i see a double standard. that is my comment. host: let's take up this comment about trey gowdy. trumpin the 2016 presidential campaign. guest: he was briefed directly by the justice department. ,n what happened regarding that trey gowdy left the meetings several days later and declared he felt the fbi handled it by

the book. he didn't feel there was an abuse of power. he made that comment. he made that, to speaker paul ryan. there is no there there. will be getting of eight, the leadership on the house side, and the senate side, they get another briefing this week? >> i am not sure about that. i'm not aware there was going to be any further briefing on that matter. host: but the requests continue. document requests. we have document we want to see.

there is obviously -- host: we will go to anderson. caller: i don't get this. why are we doing this? where we constantly going after the president? irand a president going to and made secret deals. you couldn't say anything. congress would look at anything. nobody wanted to know anything. now we have a president who is reaching out to what i believe the last president called the biggest problem, how to denuclearize these guys we have people who looked very sad sitting on tv badmouthing our president.

day in and day out. unfortunately most unfortunately c-span has become one of the cheerleaders instead of one of the fact reporters. i am tired of it? i will take any comment that you have. guest: i would just ask the caller who is going after the president? it wasn't clear to me in your question who you were referring to. point,.r what do you see? are some people that clearly do not like the president. number ofave an equal people who do. they elected him. he is in the white house. you are always going to get that. you have people that disagree with what the president is doing.

what is happening now, it is not that different from what barack obama went through. therwas a lot of disagreement with many things he did. president trump is highlighting pulng the u.s. out of the climate agreement. pulling out of the iran nuclear deal. it should have been left for him to deal with. my observation. host: charles. caller: how are you doing? morning. i want to know what people don't realize that trump is not asking for the moon and the sun. he wants a level playing field.

like trumphether you or dislike trump, trump is getting the job done. he is making a great effort. to accomplishg his goal. at least he is trying. host: putting you on the spot a little bit, what have -- what in thepublicans president accomplished legislatively? legislation.ing what are they going to point to in the midterm caller: the tax bill that passed late last year is certainly front and center. they're going to run on what statistics show and

improving economy by many measures. great employment numbers. good economic growth numbers. the president is going to look around and point to north korea and say he is making progress in , sittingffairs down and trying to work out what of the biggest threats to national security. he is going to point to trade and say he is making good on his agenda of moving toward an policy.first certainly, he will make the case that he has tried to make progress on health care, was obstructed by democrats. all these different things. i think there is a case that republicans can make and are going to make ahead of these midterms, the problems are going , more suburban voters, who

are just dismayed by the tone of the administration, the common sense feeling of crisis. there is a huge question about health care and what role that is why to play in the elections, especially as people are going to be seeing insurance premiums rise over the next five or six months who are in the individual market. those are the risks, but there is definitely strengthen opportunity for the president that he is were to try to take advantage of. host: whae you tcnghi week? guest: obviously, tonight. i will be working when the handshake happens that might -- at 9:00 p.m. the body language and what comes out of it, i will be eager to hear what the president has to say at the news conference and

whether he will talk about .uture meetings the other thing is the igreporto be pretty big. certainly the president will not go without commenting on it. those are two big things to watch. house, ourink in the republicans quick to be able to do the seemingly impossible in the house and come up with a consens republican immigration bill. aade, are you going to see snowball effect with republicans speaking up to say the president's trade moves are unproductive. are the upset with how the g7 and it up? -- ended up? perhaps it will and perhaps north korea were overshadowed -- will overshadow everything. host: we thank you both.

break. take a short when they come back, we will turn our attention to a recent government report that says america's efforts to stabilize afghanistan over the past 15 years has failed. we will ta tn o wrote that report, john sopko. >> tonight on the communicators, former fcc chair talks about the end of net neutrality. he is interviewed by a technology reporter for axis. there is someone on the hill who would like it to shift to legislation. do think it is possible to legislate this issue? >> it's fascinating that the

republican position was that this was something congress had to decide. anw, when congress has o , thetunity to decide republicans in the house will n't no, congress should decide. cc the chairman of the f has his convictions and what he has done is right for america and will stand up for a vote in the congress, he ought to pick up the phone and call speaker ryan and say schedule us for a vote in the house and let's see what the representatives of the american people say. watch the communicators tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span2. this week, live coverage from

the u.s.-north korea summit starting tonight. join washington journal tuesday and wednesday morning for analysis and,. watch live on c-span in c-span.org. c-span, where history unfolds daily. 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. today, we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington, d.c. and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. washington journal continues. our table this morning, the special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction.

always nice to have the and learn more about your reports. remind our viewers of your work and mission. guest: it has been about six years. our office oversees the $126 billion we have spent over the last 17 years on reconstruction in afghanistan. we are and inspector general's office, we have criminal restriction, we can investigate and bring people to prosecution for theft and misconduct, as well as we do audits and issue lessons learned reports which try to bring out best practices from the experience over the last 17 years. host: your latest report is that the efforts to stabilize afghanistan over the past 15 years have failed. why? guest: we underestimated the difficulty. we overestimated our capability. districtscused on

that were extremely difficult to stabilize. i should explain what is stabilization, it is actually a technical word of ours. it's not reconstruction, it is not the entire $126 billion. it is about $5 billion that was very important and spent on that period after you have cleared the taliban and terrorist from the district, you bring in the to tryvernment officials to stabilize that area, to try to make it safe for the afghan government to come in and get support from the afghan people for the hostovernment. and to make sure the taliban don't come back. what we did was focused on the most dangerous districts. we gave unrealistic timelines to do the stabilization.

those are two of the reasons why a failed. host: the key findings, the u.s. overestimated the abity change government institutions and attempt to secure dangerous districts proved to be a problem. when did this stabilization effort begin, under what administration? or the different approaches and any other network? guest: some of it worked in certain areas. the main focus of our report was 2014.me between 2009 and that is when most of the money was spent during the obama administration. orknew we were getting out, at least there was the hope that we were getting out, so there was a surgeon troops. there was also a surge in development. that is one wayward applying this doctrine of once we clear the taliban out, we wanted to stabilize it, bring the afghan

government in as a substitute. as a host government should be providing some services. the that we spent too much money and too fast in these districts, and as some of the afghans who were brought in, the government officials, the police officials were just as bad as the taliban. the afghan people really preferred the taliban sometimes to the officials that we brought in for the government and that was a serious problem. host: what was the taliban offering and what could they do successfully that the united states and afghans couldn't? guest: that is interesting because we try to reinvent a lot of these districts, try to turn them into little americans are little norway's. the taliban offers, as much as we don't like them, they offered a service to these peasants,

these afghan farmers and their families. aat was that they gave them model of security from other terrorist groups. they offered dispute resolution. we may not like their justice, but to the afghan people, they actually got justice from the taliban. you didn't have to offer, you didn't have to reinvent the you didn't have to do major programs in these districts to win the hearts and minds of the afghan people. that is the unfortunate thing, too. we spent so much money on programs that the people didn't need. just won tooue that of security and a little bit of justice. they weren't getting it from the warlords and corrupt officials that we brought in with the stabilization program. host: instead, the u.s. try to offer what? what were some of these services

they were offering and why couldn't they do them successfully? is as i classic example said, the taliban offered some protection and security. some ability to protect the citizens from criminality. what did we do? we brought in corrupt police, corrupt officials who were the real reason before that the afghan people went to the taliban. they wanted a little bit of justice. what do we do? we build courthouses. j would hire correct udges, and corrupt officials. we spent money on sending them to schools, all they want is a modicum of justice and we didn't offer that. why did we make this mistake? reasons.of number one, we didn't understand the environment. we didn't understand the afghan countryside and what they needed.

secondly, we were under this tremendous time constraint. our military knew they had 18 months to stabilize. they focused on that. the rest of our government agencies knew they had 18 months to do it and they just poured the money and with very little oversight. host: was impossible to do in 18 months? guest: the timeline in and of itself isn't wrong, but then you have to determine what you can do in the 18 months. it was a combination of the timeline with totally unrealistic goals. then, we are doing it in the wrong districts. we are doing and the most difficult areas of afghanistan, rather than focusing on those districts where there was a modicum of honest governance where you could focus on that. it is sort of like a tipping point. this districts could have tipped over to the government support. the afghan people could then rely upon the government, and

you could use it as an ink blot. drop in some ink and a gradually goes out. what we did was we kept going into districts we had to keep sending troops back in because the security was so bad. host: how is it that after all of these years, we don't understand yet the culture and what is happening in afghanistan? would you say right now, we still don't understand? guest: i think we have a better ing,ut we didn't understand. congress,sked me from can you describe what you have learned in afghanistan in one word? . said no, i can give you two over us and mendacity. a sanity we had that we somehow believed we knew what best for the afghan people and we can do all.

the mendacity was that we oversold it. many officials oversold what we could do to congress and the american people. we joke in my office about kites and balloons. fromme you see a report afghanistan and you see kites and balloons, don't trust it. they are selling you something. should have been honest the american people and to ourselves that this is a very difficult country. it has been very difficult to roll it for years and understand it and work accordingly. i think we still have a little bit of that hubris. that is why we issue these lessons learned reports. you don't see kites and balloons when you look our reports. the hard facts are it is a difficult job. we will be issuing a lessons learned rept next week on counter narcotics which is

another difficult issue where i think we oversold what we could do in the time we had in afghanistan. host: where can viewers find that report? guest: this report is all of our reports can be found online at www.sigar.mil. next week's report will be coming out on june 14 at the new america foundation right here in washington, d.c. narcotics is another area we have spent a billion dollars and have very little to show for our efforts. host: and issue our viewers have certainly followed over the years. we want to invite you all to call in with your comments and questions on what has been happening in afghanistan. the latest report from john sopko and his team is the stability factor and he says their findings is that it has years, $5r the past billion spent.

also, a special line this morning for afghanistan war veterans. we want to hear fr you. john sopko, how many times have you been to afghanistan? guest: i hate to count. i go about every three months. 20 something times. i took off sometimes because i had an incident coming in off of a helicopter, so i wasn't able to travel for a couple of months, but it has been about 20 times. host: give us a story or an example of this stabilization effort in one community and what happened. guest: i can give you a good news is story. and everybody criticizes us because we are always negative and dr. doom here. we did the right thing in tune

kunar province. we have the right military leader on the ground who had his civilian compatriot who knew the region who also worked very closely with the afghan government and the leaders in that community. they all worked together, they didn't overpromise. they did small projects, projects that they worked with the afghans before hand to see what they wanted, what they needed and it worked. for the time that they were there and there was a strong u.s. military and afghan presence, and you had a good afghan police officer who ran the police, he was honest, he wasn't a terrorist in himself, they worked. for the time that we were there during that 3, 4, 5 year. , it worked.

they fixed some canals and build some bridges, they provided with the local citizens needed. the citizens felt that the central government is good, it cares about us, we then support them. unfortunately, the drawdown comes in, power forces are removed, and the latest we have heard is that whole area is under taliban control again. that is the other lesson we have learned from this is it takes a long time. going slow sometimes is better than going fast. in this case, you still need that military presence to keep the bad guys from coming back. host: what is our military presence right now? guest: about 14,000 u.s. troops. it increased a bit under the new strategy. we have coalition from our nato

allies, so that increases it by a couple more thousand. it may be over 16,000 or 18,000. next week's report, can you tell us with the major findings are? guest: briefly, we spent about $8 billion in fighting counter narcotics. the finding is that it failed. no significant success in fighting drugs in afghanistan. afghanistan is now the largest producer of opium in the world. it doesn't impact the united states directly, because we get unfortunately most of our opium from nearby, from mexico and latin america. it does affect europe, and effects asia, and actually canada. ironically, the canadian

government tells us 60% or 70% of their opium comes from afghanistan. why are we interested in fighting narcotics? because narcotics fuels the insurgency. narcotics fuels the corruption. afghanistan is also one of the most corrupt countries. therefore, hurts us in building or helping to build an afghan government that the afghan people support bause ee t narcoaffickers, they see the money they give, they see their local police officials living in mansions or sending their kids out of the country, avoiding serving in the military. it is a significant problem. it is also significant because if we ever do this again and some other country, that country will probably have a drug problem also worried if you look around the world, and other hotspots, there is usually a correction problem, i rule of law program, a governance problem, of the stabilization

problem. these lessons learned reports we are producing are not only useful, but also if we have to do it again. our threat is less from former soviet union and nuclear power from a state threat, our threat is mostly from a destabilized state. estate where there is terrorism running around, where you have all these other problems. host: let's hear what our viewers have to say. let's go to marry. -- mary. caller: you said there were justice many times. after 9/11, ink, report,elevision a news and there were films of women being dragged onto a soccer fid, women in burqas who

couldn't see what was going on because of their burqas. they were young women. they dragged them on and they shot them dead. as they were people in the stands, what seem to be ordinary citizens, were enjoying this spectacle. taliban probably was more in charge then, i don't know. justice, butwant when i see the way females are dragged around in burqas and confined inurqas and can't leave their home, and especially when they dragged young women onto a soccer field and shoot them dead, and i don't even think they knew why they were being murdered. host: ok mary your time is up. guest: i don't want the collar and listeners to think that i support taliban rule of law.

i don't. what i'm describing is the reality of the situation in afghanistan. when you talk to afghan citizens, when you talk to the farmers, when you do surveys, when our troops get out, even sometimes when i travel and i afghanso well educated who are working for their own government, they say that their family who still lives out in the provinces will go to the taliban for spute revolution toresolution before they go the afghan government. the most depressing time i had in those twentysomething trips , over one trip i met bright, very young

educated afghans who both told me that story that they had disputes, the family did who lived out in the provinces, and they would prefer taliban dispute resolution because the taliban will make a decision. it will be based on facts, at least the facts as they see it, and it will be correct. -- corrupt. the afghan government, you have to buy your justice, and whoever pays the better price it's the justice. that, to me was depressing. as much as -- and this is where it comes in with the hubris, we have to deal with the facts on the ground. facts.t impose our i think it was churchill who said you have to face the facts because they face you.

the fact on the ground is as bad as the taliban is, those afghan peasants, those afghan citizens preferred it to the kabul government. preferred it to the warlords, preferred it to the people that we sidled up to and were identified with. aslong as they view us siding with the people who raped their children, stole their land, stole their property, just destroyed their country, we have a problem. stabilization, that is what this whole report is about was trying to win the hearts and minds back from a government, the local government, i'm not talking about the leadership in kabul, they are trying to change it. i meet with the president a lot. they are trying to change it. a lot of those local officials

out there were predatory. how large is the taliban presence in afghanistan? guest: i don't have the exact numbers. everywhere. i think our latest quarterly report was talking about the areas under taliban control, i will be honest with you, i forget the exact number. the amount of territory under government control, i believe has fallen over the last few years. that is the problem we are facing. host: john from florida. caller: yes, hello. host: go ahead. caller: with all the money we're spending, taxpayers money, -- the $5 billion and $8 billion for the narcotics and

control over in afghanistan, what is our exit strategy? i think the money would be much better well spent here in the u.s., where our current issues -- for our current issues, than afghanistan. over i've never understood why we and i don'tnam understand why we are in afghanistan. it is important for people to understand with the government getting more expensive, we are just dumping our money, the people and citizenry, we are dumping our money into these different voids. i am looking for a net that strategy. just get out. host: ok. guest: it is a very good question. i don't mean to sound like i am dodging it, but specter's

general, in my office, we don't do policy. whether we should be in afghanistan or not, how long we should stay is a policy decision that the president and the congress determines. our job is once there is a stated policy, and there are programs to support the policy, our job is to look at those programs, see if they are supporting the policy, furthered the policy and are handled properly. , good question what is our exit strategy. good question, how long should we be there, should we even be there at all, those are all good questions. again, i apologize to caller, but it is not my job to answer that. my job is once they have decided -- all of the

president has said we are there to kick the bad guys out and ensure that there is a strong enough government in afghanistan so that the terrorists will not come back and use it as a launching pad to attack the u.s. or our allies. pose is the stated pur for why we are in afghanistan. what is our exit strategy and purpose, those are questions you should ask congress. caller: i saw you last time you were on c-span, and quite frankly, i don't envy your job. point,to the larger the taliban lives there, that is their country. they have been fighting each other in tribal elements for millennia. be.t is the way they will al the military-industrial complex

of this country makes billions of dollars by feeding war. they feed our young men and women in thisndeavor. they are disabled, they are killed, and when they come back they are used as props in a sympathy industry for $20 a month. this will never end because the politicians in this country become wealthy by being rewarded with contractors jobs in the military conference when they leave office. their children are educated in elite schools, their children military, asin the the president has showed that. that is the way america will always be. it will be drained of its treasures and we americans will continue to slug it out here. -- theyjustice system

need a taliban overhead here that will simply issue what you just called some kind of justice. this is the way it will always be. guest: i am sorry you feel that way. i n't. don't, and some people may think i am too optimistic, i am optimistic li you. of you and of calle i think an educated public, whether it is in the u.s. afghanistan or anywhere else in the worlds the st defense against problems in our own country. actually, it builds the basis for changes, whatever the changes may be. that is i come here to c-span. i've been a strong supporter of

c-span since i first came to washington in 1982. it is an opportunity to educate the american people as to what is going on. it is nonpartisan, it is factual. we give you the facts. is up to you as a citizen of the united states do something with the facts. nd, i am sorry you feel that way, on the other hand i am glad you watch and glad you called. ha an end date?d you is based on the amount of money spent. when it goes to $250 million a year, we start to shut down. where we are right now is, there is about $9 billion has already

been authorized, appropriated and not yet spent. so there's quite a way to go to that 250 million. i will say this. i think at some point, our little agency should go on a business. i like temporary agencies. i think that approach to the problem is great, and i think congress was smart to do that. as long as they're spending the money and it is over the $250 million, we will be here to do our job to try to protect it. host: $9 billion authorized for what? guest: i believe dollars for reconstruction has already been authorized. congress authorizes us to spend the money and that appropriate to. when that amount falls below $250 million, we go out of existence six months later. right now, that pipeline of authorized and appropriated is

at $9 billion. host: what is that money used for? gu it can be used for training afghan civil servants, training the afghan military, providing equipment, boots, food. it also es to supporting voting roads, clinics etc. taxpayer, we, the u.s. and the coalition, but i haven't talked about how much money they have spent, we are basically supporting the afghan government. think the president and others have said that without the support of the coalition and particularly the united states, the afghan government would collapse. host: john in virginia. caller: thinks r taking my call. spent $5nt to ask, we billion. as far as i'm concerned right

now, i think the problem is not only afghanistan, the problem is this gentleman. i don't know how the world that he has a job. he is just laughing and thinking this thing is like nothing happened and we just spent money for afghanistan for nothing. afghanistan is a divided country, we knew that in the beginning. the problem is there are a lot of contractors who abuse the syem. the previous color he does call before me said exactly what it is. people in afghanistan don't get this money. the only people who get this money are contractors hired by the pentagon, contractors hired by government of afghanistan, and the leaders that we need -- -- we don'tupport follow the money. this gentleman is telling us little things happening in a village and he thinks that we have done something for those people. most of the afghan people are still struggling.

everything that goes there comes back to hear. host: we heard your point, let's have john respond, because this is obviously something you work with. guest: i don't view it in a joking manner. i take it very seriously. that is why i do what i did, do. more importantly, if the caller has specific information, please contact us. i think we have a hotline for you to call. it is one thing to say everybody is correct in afghanistan, but it is my job to prove specific orple still specific money moved of that money or did specific things, because i am required by courts of law to do that. we have put in jail over 100 people. these are u.s. citizens, these are afghan citizens, these are

u.s. military and contractors. that is based upon rule of law. give me fax. or any of thects many people listening and or watching on tv have specific allegations, then contact us. we will follow up. we do that based upon people in afghanistan giving us information and people here in the united states. just saying boldly that everybody in afghanistan is corrupt is ok. it makes you feel good, but it doesn't help us do our job. now, we have saved the taxpayers over $2 billion. that is $2 billion that we made cases on and recover that money for the u.s. taxpayer. umbrage with somebody thinking that we view this as a humorous will exercise.

2400 americans have died in afghanistan. we're the best insurance policy for the 2400 and the almost trillion dollars we have spent in afghanistan because of we will track you down if you still money from us and we will put you in jail. individualsou 100 who are now serving time in federal prisons for what they did in afghanistan. we are serious. if you are serious, call this number. host: we will show that number again. you can see it there, email. there is an international line as well. what is your budget? guest: about $56 million. we have a staff of about 200. 33 or 34 of them are in

afghanistan permanently. .s.have the enforcement and auditing presence in afghanistan. couldwhich type of person try to get rich off of the money that the u.s. is putting into the country? how does it happen? guest: a lot of contractors. , the u.s.tion occurs government gives a prime contract to somebody. they then subcontract to somebody else. there was a policy in the u.s. government to buy afghans, so he wanted to use afghan contractors. the contractor pays a bribe to a u.s. official, pays a bribe to an afghan official to get the contract to build a highway, etc. that is one way you get it.

the big issue has to be with fuel. fuel is like liquid gold. we were involved in a contract investigation where we identified -- instead of paying $700 million for this fuel, it actually cost closer to $1 billion. that was increasing the price so they shared the proceeds. we turned that over to the afghan president, they canceled the contract, he fired all the people involved, and a set of a new procurement system. the other way people make money is they are no-shows. we pay and we have been harping on this. we pay the salaries for the police, teachers, they don't exist. some commanding officer makes them up and they don't exist. he just collects the salaries. we have been harping on this

with the u.s. military, department of defense. we just issued an audit with the world bank because we give money to the world bank to pay salaries and we said you're not doing the right job. there are many ways. the ways of theft and bribery and corruption are only limited by the minds of the individual who wants to do it. host: we will go to john in massachusetts. you are from afghanistan? caller: know, i am an american. host: you fought in afghanistan? caller: yes. i just wanted to say that i am hearing there is all kinds of corruption there, this thing about you are paying teachers that don't exist and some who takes the money.

you're covered to billion dollars and put 100 people in jail, not good enoug the reason why people win in this country and it is the greatest nation is the world -- in the world is because we do tter. we do better, we try harder, we look for the truth. please just do better. this is america. we are the greatest nation in the world. we can do better. we can show the entire world that we can do better. host: who are you saying needs to be better? caller: i am saying everybody in the government including that gentleman you have on the show today. somebody called earlier and said, you are laughing at it. he is not laughing at it, he is ghing at it at all i am looking at his face, but he has got to be concerned.

be a man, you sure heart, this is america. please do better. . that is all i have to say guest: i appreciate that and we try to do better. again, we can only do so much unless we have the support of people such as yourself. people who may have seen something when they served in afghanistan. be were offered or saw people hitting bribes. again, call our hotline. again, i have to follow the rule of law. my staff have to follow certain rules and regulations that we as americans have to abide by. we are always looking for better ways to do our job. we have set up a lot of procedures and done some new things, doing financial audits to try to save money. we have a whole team looking at

money laundering. we have brought in some of the best experts on trying to follow the money, but it is extremely difficult. these crimes are extremely difficult to uncover. we are doing it in a war zone. it is not like, in my baground, i used to be a former federal prosecutor with the organized crime and racketeering section. it is not as if you can bring fbi agents or my cigar agents out and do surveillance. it is so dangerous there. it is very rarely do they get outside the green zone or protected area of the embassy. these are difficult times and difficult places to do audits and investigations, but we are trying hard. i will exhort my people to do even better if they can. caller: good morning.

c-span, i really appreciate what you do for the country. to quick questions. if we were a monarchy and you are a king, and you are able to change the situation yourself, whauld you do? second, i am an amateur military historian. i have seen some of the past wars have really been about resources, for example, vietnam and rubber and the middle east and oil. i've come to see in my studies that there is a very significant amount of lithium and afghanistan that runs through the mountains. we need it for batteries, etc. are we there for the lithium and to keep the chinese and russians out and to get our fair share? i'm sure some of this is classified, but anything you could say on the subject would really be important. thank you so much. guest: the color is correct that there is lithium in afghanistan,

there may be large quantities of it. i don't believe that is the reason we are there. that is not the stated reason we are there, nor has there been much in development of lithium for the 17 years we have been there. as for if i working for the day there are a do, number of things i would do. i think the first thing is, before we do something like this -- p, let's laws, let's ause, let's talk to the experts who know something about the country we are going into, let's also consider what we can actually accomplish while we are there. i think we should all ask a question that one of the other callers did, what is our exit strategy? we actually developed seven questions. any policymaker or

anybody running a program in afghanistan should ask before they do it. i don't think we have time for me to go through all the seven questions, but one of the first things you ask is to the afghans want the program? do they need the program? will they use the program? that is a basic question. we weren't even asking those basic questions when we started this reconstruction in afghanistan. missouri,t in afghanistan teran as well. caller: i just wanted to make a comment. everybody is concerned about the money, but it isn't the money that is the problem. if we pull out of their, dislike we pulled out of iraq, we are going to have more terrorists coming in there, they are not freedom fighters, they are damn terrorists, and they are going to be in there and take over

again and then we will have to go in there and push them back out. host: let's take that point. guest: that is a very good point and that is one of the justifications for why we are there. host: melania new orleans. caller: hello. i was calling because of the amount of money we're spending in afghanistan. when we have so much that has to be done in these united states. we have had 22 school shootings in this year alone, they think it would cost too much to secure the schools. we have white policeman killing unarmed black man here. we have an opioid crisis. we have crumbling infrastructure. we have great disparity and wages between blacks and whites. there are too many problems here in the united states that needs there is an old saying. don't tell me i need to n up my yard when yours is dirty.

the other thing is, character begins at home. host: wwill leave it at that int. sal jump in and then we will have john respond. caller: i heard you mentioned education. if you are an educated person, you will look back in history and realize that it has been the from 700,000 years ago -- afghanistan, just get the hell out. that as it.is a dead end . for us to stay in there just keeps feeding this war machine

that this country is building up all the time, imperialistic. trump and saudi arabia being buddy buddy, and that is where we are going. guest: again, these are all good srom an educated audience. these are questions i can't answer, policy questions, why we are in afghanistan, i can say the reason, but that is a decision made by somebody else, not by me. protect the money that we spend and try to convince the government to do it wisely by recommendations. good points, but i can't really respond. caller: good morning. i would just like to say, japan,

germany, world war ii ended how long ago and we are just now letting japan stand up with an army. there is a reason we are over there and tell a ban is time to take over pakistan with nukes. there is a reason we are in afghanistan and thank god for president trump trying to tell people we get to percent obligation. % obligation. we are going to be there a long time so everybody get used to it. go watch the movie "lone survivor." they were with each other. one has more strength them the next one may take out the next one. this is why we are there. we have a foothold there in the money, it does stink that we spent $6 trillion on all these wars, but if we don't do that, believe me, mark my words, the

world and us will be in worse shape. maybe there is a reason we colonized places back in the day, because the second you pull back, they take all the hard-fought ground that we gained. host: is that what you have seen as you have conducted your oversight over this money? as soon as we leave in different pockets, the taliban moves in? guest: unfortunately, it is. i think everydy recognizes that we provide the glue that holds basically the afghan government together. if we do leave, even the afghan resident says the funding stops, the government will collapse. the concerns that are expressed by the viewers in the questions are real. can i just put one thing in context?

as much as 126 but in dollars on reconstruction is a lot, we spend a lot more on the war fighting, up to almost $700 million on that. the reconstruction side in development and foreign aid is extremely small in the overall american budget. i don't know the exact percentage, but i think it is less than 1% of our overall budget goes to foreign assisted -- assistance. my job is to try to make certain it is not stolen and it is done well and done efficiently. not so much money that you think it is going to fix, if we and all reconstruction tomorrow and all development aid tomorrow all of the people starving and

dying arou the world, humanitarian assistance, it is not going to patch every pothole, it is not going to rebuild every school, and it is not going to be enough money to end the opioidpidec or inis infinitesimalchool. comparison to the amount of money we spend overall in the united states. morning.ood i realized that russia tried to do the same thing we did with the -- but the economy wasn't strong enough. i know we provide the u.s. taxpayers a single-payer health system for iraq, are we doing the same with afghanistan, providing health care and education? are we the taxpayers paying for that also? guest: we are actually supporting their health care .ystem

in response, yes, we are. good morning. think john isi going to do a great job in helping the economy guide of .his money i don't know much about john, but i think he is going to do a very good job. you can follow his work if website, you can find their reports there as well. we have time for a few more phone calls. what's go to rich in illinois --

let's go to rich in illinois. wel: my question is if have approximately 42,000 troops ,n the ground in afghanistan why aren't there equal amount of troops from the u.n.? thank you. guest: it's not troops from the u.n., its troops from nato and our nato allies. that is a problem. i have spoken to our commanding generals in the field and they wish they had gotten and will get more troops and more commitments from nato. know, from again talking to our military officials, they viewed the number of u.s. troops and nato allies and other allies -- because some of them are not even nato allies who have provided some troops.

it is a complicated situation getting the other governments to commit. host: going to thomas in yonkers. caller: i was wondering if after russia got out of afghanistan and seemed to settle down, there were no problems. why all of a sudden now we have to stay there? i don't understand it and it doesn't make sense. actually, once russia did leave there were problems,. there was fighting between certain political groups, there was fighting between the former -- who we supported. the country really collapsed. what little economy there was was destroyed by the internal fighting. that is when the serious problems arose, eventually, that

is where the taliban comes from, because the taliban came up as a response to the total mayhem and anarchy that there was in afghanistan. why we ended up coming in as you remember, the member this goes back to 911, this goes back to the taliban when they took over, they permitted al qaeda and the terrorists who eventually attacked us to settle and be trained in afghanistan. let's not forget why we got in. we didn't go in just for humanitarian reasons. we went in for national security reasons. that is where the taliban, that is where al qaeda was training and getting ready to launch their attack on the u.s. host: last call here. i just wanted to know

how much our allies are contributing to the stabilization of afghanistan? guest: i don't have the exact number, but they are all providing money. not as much as the u.s., but with contributions from all of our allies, japan, germany, the u.k., all the various countries. we are providing the bulk of the assistance, both militarily and for reconstruction. as always, we appreciate the conversation with you this morning. viewers can follow along on the work that john sopko and his team are doing. mil and you can find all of the reports there. that does it for today's "washington journal."

as we have been telling you all morning, president trump and the north korean leader kim jong-un are on the ground in singapore. it is 10:00 p.m. eastern 10:00 p.m. singapore time, and they are preparing for tomorrow for the historical summit that will take place at 9:00 p.m. eastern time tonight. go to www.c-span.org for more details. that will be 9:00 a.m. in singapore when they meet behind closed doors. earlier this morning, mike pompeo briefed reporters about thearations in advance of summit. here's what he had to say. >> good afternoon. thank you for your patience. certainly worth the wait.