from the chicago council -- elizabeth shackelford from the chicago council on global affairs talks about challenges to democracy is worldwide and what it means for u.s. foreign policy. later, garrett grant joins us to discuss his new book about watergate. ♪ host: in a stark report issued in december and reiterated yesterday at a senate hearing, u.s. surgeon general vivek murthy said there is a mental health crisis among american youth. issues already a problem are now exacerbated by the covid pandemic. the senate finance committee held hearings not just to hear about the crisis but to figure out what to do about it. it is february 16, 2022. we are going to ask you what to do about america's mental health

crisis. the lines for you to use our, if you are in the eastern or central time zone, (202) 748-8000. mountain and pacific, (202) 748-8001. if you are under the age of 21, we invite you to use (202) 748-8002. we particularly appreciate your perspective on this. for texting that line (202) 748-8003. tell us your name and where you are texting from. we are on facebook, so you can poster there. send us comments on twitter and instagram at @cspanwj. we will be interested to hear how to fix your family and what to do about america's youth mental health crisis. we will get your calls and comments. we mentioned a report from the surgeon general came out in december. he talked about it yesterday -- last week before the senate finance committee.

that committee held another hearing about it which just aired prior to this program on c-span. pandemic's impact on youth mental health devastating according to the surgeon general. in that report released in december, this is some of what they say. the prevalence of mental health challenges varies across subpopulations. girls are more likely to be diagnosed with anxiety, depression, or an eating disorder, while boys are more likely to die by suicide or be diagnosed with a behavior disorder such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. suicide rates among black children below the age of 13 have increased rapidly, with black children nearly twice as likely to die by suicide as white children. our opening topic, what to do about america's youth mental health crisis. (202) 748-8000, the line for

those of you in the eastern and central time zones. it is (202) 748-8001, the mountain and pacific region. for those of you under the age of 21, (202) 748-8002. let's hear from the surgeon general last week at the senate finance testimony. >> i am deeply concerned as a parent and dr. that the obstacles this generation of young people face are unprecedented and uniquely hard to navigate. the impact that is having on their mental health is devastating. there are a number of long-standing factors driving the crisis. the recent ubiquity of technology platforms, especially social media platforms, has had harmful effects on children, although undoubtedly they serve as a benefit to the lives of many in important ways. these platforms have exacerbated feelings of loneliness and low self-esteem for some youth.

they have contributed to a bombardment of messages that undermine the generation's sense of self-worth, messages that tell our kids with greater frequency and volume than before that they are not good-looking enough, not popular enough, not smart enough. simply not enough. while bullying has always been a problem, cyber bullying has expanded the playing field. anyone anywhere can be tormented or be a torment or. progress on the issues that will determine the world the generation -- this generation will inherit, like climate change, the open road epidemic, and gun violence is undercutting the fundamental american promise for many children, their hope in the possibility of a better future. all of these factors affecting

youth mental health were true before the covid-19 pandemic, but the last two years have changed experiences at home and in their communities. it is not just the number of deaths or instability. it is also the sense of uncertainty and the sense of fear. isolation from loved ones, from friends, and from communities in a moment when human support systems are irreplaceable and more needed than ever before. at the heart of our youth mental health crisis is a pervasive stigma that tells young people they should be embarrassed if they are struggling with depression, anxiety, stress, or loneliness. it makes a human condition feel inhuman. host: we welcome your ideas and thoughts on how to address america's youth mental health crisis. the lines are (202) 748-8000 if you're in the eastern or central time zone. (202) 748-8001, mountain and pacific. under the age of 21, the line is

(202) 748-8002. this is from a health website. how states are addressing the youth mental health crisis. states face a growing youth mental health crisis. they have relied on the american rescue plan act to support initiatives that broaden access to care according to a report. the american rescue plan act, which the administration introduced in january 2021, put about 12 billion dollars toward mental health care and substance abuse. states received 10 percentage points of federal funding matching h cbs programs which they can use through march 31, 2024. states may receive a varying support through the act. wyoming received $19 million.

california has received the highest amount of funding, $2 billion. some of the pandemic mental health programs from that package include this from the biden administration. a $190 million increase in access to behavioral health services for youth. $80 million for pediatric mental health access programs and $30 million for project aware, a project that increases mental health awareness, access, and training for behavior health professionals. that is from the and ministration. from colorado's koaa they are looking at how the state's handling that crisis. the headline, conversations about youth mental health happening at the state and national level. they write, there is a mental health crisis among youth nationwide and the covid-19

pandemic has played a role in that. lawmakers from the national and state level are working to address the crisis. further down in the article, they say the problem is so concerned that the american academy of pediatrics declared youth mental health issues a national emergency. right now, they write the colorado legislature is discussing several ways to tackle the issues in our state. the vice president of population health and advocacy at childers hospital in colorado says that includes more resources for mental health programs in schools, more community-based services, and more residential treatment centers. those conversations have gotten support from children's hospital in colorado. we welcome your calls, comments as well. let's go first to lancaster, california. we will hear from wanda.

caller: i am sick and tired of you people saying we have the highest rate of everything. we do not have the highest rate of mental illness and suicide. we do not have the highest rate of covid. we do not have the highest rate of anything. you people need to quit lying talking about we have the highest rate of anything. host: let's hear from dr. murthy and testimony last week. he answered a question from a senator on how best to identify youth mental health issues. [video clip] >> could you speak to the importance and benefits of reaching children in school-based settings? how can we use them to expand what we need to do in behavioral health? >> thank you for that question and for your leadership on this issue, for all of your work to support health centers across

the country. one general principle in health care that i believe applies here is your are better off if you bring care to people where they are. our kids are in school. the better we are able to bring care to schools through counselors, school nurses, school psychologists, the more easily we will be able to identify mental health struggles early and get kids the care they need. that is why i think school-based clinics are important. it is why the investments made through the american rescue plan to give billions of dollars to schools and parts to help them hire more mental health providers and counselors in schools was so important. we have to sustain those investments over time. i mentioned it is 11 years typically between the onset of symptoms and when a child ultimately gets treatment. we have to shorten the time

frame. we cannot let kids and their families struggle for 11 years. getting care to them is one important way to do that. host: they held a hearing on the mental health crisis among youth yesterday as well. we are hearing from you this morning. let's hear from ohio. caller: an underreported cause of teen depression in the u.s. is diet. animals terrified of the slaughterhouse secrete massive amounts of adrenaline. some of which remains after cooking and can cause -- re-create the fright and terror of the animal. there are 12,000 vegan petitions that can save more about this.

host: for those of you and -- in the east and central time zones, (202) 748-8000. mountain and pacific, (202) 748-8001. if you are under the age of 21, (202) 748-8002. on twitter, the education system needs reform. children are graduating with poor grades and self-esteem, living in safe zones and no realistic idea of the real world. i see 18-year-olds today changing their names like that will change everything. a text from cleveland says it all starts from home. children are experiencing things learned from their environment. fix their environment and you will fix the kids. joyce and clinton township in pennsylvania says, how about some parenting? chores, respect, and a spanking.

tom is in philadelphia. go ahead. >> a couple points i wanted to make. the lady if you ago about the minorities or african-americans having the most problems can etc., i think some of that is brought upon by blacks themselves saying that they have the most cases of covid and things like that but it is exploited by politicians as well . i do not know why. i have to go. host: the cases of covid are high among african-americans as a population. caller: they are, but i do not think they are different than any other population.

that has not been proven. host: here is a report on the number of excessive deaths in the pandemic. the cdc reports excess deaths during the pandemic topped one million. they write to the united states has reported more than one million excess deaths since the start of the pandemic. mortality statistics show a total that exceeds the officially documented lethality of the coronavirus and captures the broad consequences of the health crisis has entered its third year. the access death figures -- excess death figures reached over one million according to robert anderson of the cdc. the center updates is estimate weekly -- its estimate weekly. although the majority of excess deaths are due to the virus, the cdc mortality records exposed swollen numbers of deaths from heart disease hypertension,

dementia, and other elements across two years of pandemic misery. we have never seen anything like it, anderson said. in 2019, before the pandemic, the cdc recorded 2.8 million deaths. in 2020 and 2021, as the virus spread through the population, the country reported roughly 500,000 deaths each year in excess of the norm. the senate finance committee had testimony from a young man who graduated -- who is a recent high school graduate. he talked about ways the issue can be resolved. >> due to being overworked and overloaded. this has been an especially difficult challenge for teens who rely on mental help professionals for crisis care. we have to address the staffing crisis. we must create -- an approach to mental health referrals.

four of every five referrals to external resources are not carried out at my school. 80% of referrals go nowhere. someone who needs help should receive help. we need a standardized mental health curriculum. all students should learn about developing systems of celtic -- self-care and supporting our friend struggles because statistics show we turn to each other before anyone else. we need to address the challenges young people continue to face. i am someone with a lived experience. i know what it is like to be a team today struggling -- teen today struggling with mental health. the most common struggles i see our financial, transportation, the lack of mental health professionals, and the stigma around mental health. these issues are incredibly real.

my friends are struggle because it is too expensive for their families or inaccessible because of unreliable internet access. we need to bring care to where people are. for teens, that is in schools were at home. the lack of mental health professionals in the united states prevents teens from receiving the help they need. we can approach this issue by funding a national youth line. we know peer-to-peer support works and there is a need for it. you need to be able to call and have the opportunity to be connected with another teen. host: our opening question for you this morning's how to address america's youth mental health crisis. the lines are (202) 748-8000 for the eastern and central time zones. (202) 748-8001, mountain and pacific. and connors villa, indiana, good morning. -- in connorsville,

indiana, good morning. caller: this takes me back to when i was younger. they would give people rejection complexes and all that. people would be cruel and throw insults and everything. it comes back to people who seem to think it is their world only. it really has a psychological effect on people. i know a guy who was so depressed he would create his own utopia in his mind and make up imaginary friends. that is how badly affected he was. this takes me to the 1960's. they created their own little colonies because they were rejected all the time. when i hear about what you're talking about now, it takes me back to that period. host: it sounds like it is still

affecting you just taking about it and talking about the issue. >> it does. this is a dog eat dog world we are living in. see it for how it really is. people out there, be the best you can be and do not worry about what other people think. that is all i have to say. host: this is from the wall street journal. sandy hook dunn settlement reached. a remington arms company will pay $73 million to families who lost loved ones in the sandy hook elementary school shooting. it could open the door to more lawsuits seeking to hold a gun company is mass shootings. the settlement of the largest of its kind, providing gun makers

-- and the unlawful use of their weapons. gun manufacturers have faced settlements in the past 17 years over alleged product defects but not to victims of gun violence. the settlement, they write, will be evenly divided among nine families who lost loved ones in the shooting that left 20 children and six staff members dead. remington did not admit liability in the settlement according to a spokesman. just a bit more from that article in terms of how the families sued remington and what made that possible in light of that federal law. they write that the families sued remington under confetti get -- connecticut's unfair trade practices act, a law that prohibits unfair or deceptive acts and commerce. they say remington violated that

law. next up is brittany, talking about america's youth mental health crisis. go ahead. >> thank you for taking my call. i think we have to look at the root and certain testimony and things about social media have just shown we may not be addicting our is to cigarettes as much anymore but we are addicting them to something else and that is social media. when kids say, i know it is bad for me but i cannot stop and if i stop i will be ostracized from my peers, i feel like we have a problem. looking at those sort of addictive things and how negative social media can impact kids and also setting up parents for success. i have had parents -- my brother suffered from mental health issues. i had parents who were not sure where and how to start

supporting him. that became a family effort to help get him to where he is now, doing well and very successful. it required my parents to learn and for all of us as a family to learn as well. host: henrietta in florida. caller: i noticed in grammar school kids are given drugs to make them behave. i do not think this is helpful to children. in high school, they are taught to be confused about their sexuality. that is not helpful in terms of a mental state. we should not be talking to children under 18 about their sexual proclivities. if they want to be gay, they can

be gay after they are 18. we should not be talking to them in school. no wonder they have mental problems. this is not helping our children. host: on her point about medication, the headline come after the fda issued warnings about antidepressants, youth suicides rose and mental health care dropped. depression in young people is undertreated. about two thirds of depressed youth do not receive mental health care at all. of those who do come a proportion rely on antidepressant medications. since 2003, the u.s. food and drug administration has warned that young people might experience suicidal thinking and behavior during the first months of treatment with antidepressants. the fbi issued -- fda issued this morning to urge clinicians to monitor suicidal thoughts at the start of treatment. these warnings appear everywhere .

the most strongly worded warnings appear on medication containers. they write, we are professors and researchers at harvard medical school and the university of buffalo. for over 30 years, we have been studying the intended and unintended effects of health policies on patient safety. we have found fda drug warnings can prevent life-threatening and adverse effects but that unattended -- unintended consequences of these warnings are also common. working for the fda, we published a review of the efforts of previous fda warnings on a variety of medications. we found about a third backfired, resulting in underuse of needed care and other adverse effects. sean on the line from massachusetts, good morning. caller: good morning. one of the things that made me:

is i'm in my 30's. i have watched over the past 10 years this drive for climate change and the push for it is hey, kids, and 12 years your world is going to be turned down here and there will be no oxygen there will be nothing left for you to look for. even if it is not being pushed in schools, it is being pushed online come on tv. it is pure pressure. at -- peer pressure. everyone wants to push this narrative that if we do not do something now everyone is going to die. that is the wrong message. if you tell kids come at are going to die they are -- if you tell kids they are going to die, they are going to be depressed. host: looking at a story this morning about the rise of u.s. sea by 2050 -- see levels --

sea levels by 2050 by as much as a foot. how do not report stories like that? caller: do not tell kids they are going to die. realistically, how often are these things right? i'm not denying climate change. maybe it does happen. i have not looked into it. enough to be an expert on it. i can do my own research. if i had a kid in that situation where they were freaking out about something that was going to happen in 2050, i would look through the actual research and explain. back in 2006, they said this was going to happen by this point. and they grossly overestimated it by this much. it is not a thing where we need to sit there and tell our kids

you are going to die if you do not start driving an electric car. host: this is the story i mentioned, usc level to rise by 2050. here is the report. see levels around the united states will rise up to a foot over the next 30 years due to climate change. as much as they have risen in the previous century according to the national oceanic and atmospheric and ministration in a report that came out yesterday. here is mark in westwood, new jersey. go ahead. caller: thanks for c-span. i have been thinking about this for a long time, wondering why there are more kids shooting up their schools and why there is so much depression these days. the gentleman before was saying

they know they are going to die from climate change. i do not know that they know they are going to die, but the -- they know the world they're going to inherit is going to be terrible, with terrible weather meant the economy is awful. i think one of the main problems with youth mental health is they are always on the internet. i think that someday we are going to find out the constant using of computers, cell phones come any kind of screens is detrimental to developing brains. we have not discovered that yet, but that is my theory. host: up next, it is open forum, your chance to weigh in on topics in the news that you are reading about, public policy and political issues including what we have been talking about so far this morning, the russia-ukraine crisis, and more.

the lines are (202) 748-8000, democrats. independent, (202) 748-8002. russia eyes negotiations as troops pull back. they writes that war felt a little less in evitable tuesday as russia announced it was pulling back troops from their positions near the ukrainian border. u.s. and nato leaders said they cannot verify those claims and president biden warned the kremlin of severe consequences if war started without a cause. first, presence from president biden. -- comments from president biden. [video clip] >> and invasion remains possible. that is why i have asked several times that americans in ukraine leave now, before it is too late to leave safely. it is why we have temporarily relocated our embassy from kyiv

to western ukraine approaching the polish border. we have been transparent with the american people and the world about russia's plans and the seriousness of the situation so everyone can see for themselves what is happening. we have shared what we know and what we are doing about it. let me be equally clear about what we are not doing. the united states and nato are not a threat to russia. ukraine is not threatening russia. the -- neither the u.s. nor nato have missiles in ukraine. we do not have plans to put them there. we are not targeting the people of russia. we do not seek to destabilize russia. citizens of russia, you are not our enemy. i do not believe you want a bloody, destructive war against ukraine, a country and people with whom you share such deep

ties and families, history, and culture. host: it is open forum here on washington journal, your chance to weigh in on political and public policy issues of the day. (202) 748-8001, the line to republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. for independents and others, (202) 748-8002. sad to report the death of a man who has been on this network probably several dozen times. this is the headline from politico. p jail rourke -- pj over rourke dies at 74. they write that the author refashioned the irreverence and gonzo journalism into a distinctive brand of conservative and libertarian commentary. he died tuesday morning according to a book publisher. they did not cite a specific

cause, but he had been ill in recent months. i want to read a brief tribute to pj overworked -- o'rourke. this writes that pj o'rourke once hosted a small new year's party in washington. he had just returned from germany, where he had covered the fall of the berlin wall. he went into his bedroom and put a shard of the wall inside of it. happy new year, he said. he writes, that was pj. he liked each other -- we liked each other quite yet he gave me something of value just because he could. p.j. o'rourke was the nicest person i have ever known, an

interesting thing to say about a man who made his name as a take no prisoners observer of political foibles. let's hear from you. first to ron on the independent line in new jersey. caller: good morning. i appreciate c-span. there is already an answer for climate change, the gas, the oil, and legal industries are blocking it. it is fusion. they have fusion reactors working in new york for a small amount of garbage. in japan and in france. they are working on it to get it going. if fusion would work, we could burn all our garbage and recycle all our raw elements, iron or

aluminum or whatever. we could distill all the water we need and make all the electric we need and probably give the planet time to recoup itself and get back to normal climate. host: you mentioned francis moving ahead on fusion. why do you think the united states has been slow to do so? caller: because we have so much oil. fracking has produced a surplus of oil. there is no reason for oil prices to go up. we have an over residual amount of oil. unfortunately, there is a lot of corruption and money seems to rule. independent lens had a nice program on called the unrepresented on pbs and they

are not representing the people. they are representing special interests and we have to get away from that because it is destroying life for everybody. in other situations, too, and the military and a lot of things. so we have to find a way to get ahead of the corruption in this country. host: to brooklyn next, democrats line. caller: i wanted to say my concern is the federal pretrial detention. i have noted this on many texts to c-span and i'm not hearing anybody on federal pretrial detention, which i think is abusive. my sun has been -- son has been

in pretrial detention for 48 months and counting. they are saying it is the covid virus going on so all pretrial is suspended. this is going on in the eastern district of new york. i think it is unconstitutional that my son has been in pretrial detention for 48 months. host: what has he been charged with? caller: the charge has been something that is false, so i will not even go on that. the thing is, the prosecutors have been charging people with false information and we are not getting any type of representative cetacean from the federal defenders, so this has

been going on for months. host: does he have a trial date set? caller: we have not gotten any trial or anything. we have tried to put in a motion to discuss -- dismiss the case because the case has no merit. he was arrested at a private home without a warrant. when we questioned the so-called federal agents, they did not identify themselves as who they were. they assaulted him. host: he has been in jail four years now? caller: since the 28th of this month, it will be four years. no trial. they have not listened to our motion to dismiss. the case is nonmeritorious. you cannot come into a private home if you do not have a warrant. federal agents have done this, assaulted him. we do not even have a mug shot of how he looked for a record. it says from the federal

defenders. he had marks on his face and his hands. and we saw no warrant. my son said he saw no warrant. host: i appreciate you calling in. good luck resolving that as well. judy and delaware, it is open forum on washington journal. go ahead. caller: i wanted to comment on the depression of children and with the lockdowns, the isolation, and even before that. i am a retired psychiatric nurse. what we would teach our children is coping skills. we always involved the family because the family also did not realize there were coping skills that can help you through difficult thoughts. when you are a teenager or young child or a preteen, you have not

really solidified your identity, so we taught them coping skills before we went to medications and win vaults the family and made sure they had support -- involved the family and made sure they had support. it was a last resort to go to medications. even then you had to be closely monitored. one of the things that really isolates children these days other than the pandemic is the internet. there is a lot of negativity that these kids just absorb and it isolates them more. i agree social media should not even be in their life. always face-to-face or person-to-person. as for telling our children they are going to die in 2050, the noaa also said the only thing

that changes climate is the sun. unless you can control the sun, you're not going to control climate. actually climate change -- this world does not stop changing. it is always moving, always changing. we have very little to do with it. it is always, costly changing. the world is not meant to be static. if it did not change, then we would die. that is why they changed it from climate warming to climate change, because we apparent we are not warming. that is basically what i have to say on those issues. host: on the youth mental health crisis, a couple more comments on social media. joanne kentucky says mental illness in adults is the problem. children will never be mentally stable unless there parents are pure the election of donald

trump shows there is a real case of mental illness. america will not survive without educating these people. a tweet says not just a kid's mental health crisis but an adult one, too. we live in a country were being healthy is only for the rich. the only way you can, things like alcohol and drugs. one more from craig caplan who says that senator schumer filed closure on the motion to proceed on the continuing resolution, the short-term spending measure. the house is out this week. they were done at least temporarily on that and the senate is in. here is reporting on what may be ahead in the next couple days with that deadline and passage of that continuing resolution. republicans push for concessions in funding bill. the washington times writes the short-term government funding bill is facing trouble in the

senate from a contingent of republican lawmakers eager to extract concessions from democrats in exchange for averting a shutdown. democratic leaders say there is not enough time to jump all the legislative hurdles needed before friday. the deadline for the government to pass a funding measure or risk a shutdown. let's hear from eric in california. democrats line. caller: good morning, america. i want to talk about this thing called black history. you look back in the past, it is bitter, angry. you get stuck in the past. what i am discussing with my grandchild is to look at new black history and knowing the truth. if you do things not in the will of god quite can find yourself in an authoritarian state in the criminal system.

everybody knows this. today as we talk about black history we have to come to the understanding when we look back in the past it is bitter, it is angry. it can make you upset. how do we show kids that we can go forward? it is love. we have to be able to show love to kids. people called in. nobody spoke about love. how do you show love to these kids? the biggest problem comes route of these churches. where is our pastors at? the rich young ruler's in america, everybody knows who they are. they are all walking around with guns in their pockets ready to shoot each other. god is calling for them to put away their weapons. pastors are not telling them this because they know if they tell them to put away their

weapons they are not going to pay their tithes. host: this is fairhope, alabama. hello. >> -- caller: i was interested in this discussion topic of youthful suicide. it is implicit that this has been happening for several decades. i hear people trying to find causality or what they call root causes. one that has not been mentioned today is astounding because society is awash in it. it is the insatiable beast of pornography. the fact that anybody with any life experience can see the rise in the so-called normalizing of pornography and the most vile forms of pornography at that.

they are running parallel to the rise in youth suicides. society cannot have it both ways. to say that sexuality is a trifling matter that can be handled simply on the one hand and on the other hand everybody touting it as the most important -- one of the most important things in human reality, cannot have it both ways. it is obviously a huge factor in the development of prepubescent children, teens, adults, everybody. i think all can agree on that. 93% of boys before they are 18 are exposed now to pornography. 62% of girls before they are 18 are exposed to pornography. it segues into sex trafficking, the dopamine surges that are found from use of pornography. youth disengage from their families. they withdraw into sullen this. they become depressed.

these are big, bad, real-world topics that children and adolescents are not prepared to deal with. when they are bombarded with their smartphones that parents are putting in their hands with readily available, professionally produced with performance-enhancing drugs, grotesque and vile sexual visions that they see, this is affecting their mental health unquestionably. host: more about that from larry in new jersey, a text saying, the line between fantasy and reality has become more and more difficult to discern. the internet and use of cell phones beyond the capability of parents and guardians to control. when i was young, my parents could pull the plug on the tv and coming off from distractions. steve says depression comes from suppression -- suppressed, unconscious content.

early childhood trauma needs to be talked about. this one says a contributing factor is to acknowledge that mental health is real. we have all experienced trauma from the pandemic. high stress situations create a physical response of fight or flight. we are all experiencing compassion fatigue from fighting each other, says michelle in illinois. a little less than 15 minutes left in our open forum on washington journal, a chance to weigh in on any topic in the news on politics or public policy. the lines are (202) 748-8001 for republicans. it is (202) 748-8000 for democrats. for all others, (202) 748-8002. wall street journal piece this morning, the headline, monitoring of trump internet traffic sparks dispute. legal memos filed in recent days in the case against the former lawyer for the 2016 campaign

reignited disputes over special counsel john durham's continuing probe into the origins of the fbi investigation into ties between the trump campaign and russia. late friday, mr. trump said in a filing that his office would show that people affiliated with donald trump's democratic opponent worked to exploit nonpublic internet traffic data they had access to, including from the white house, to establish a narrative time mr. trump to russia. the philo suggested that included the early days of the -- filing suggested the data included the early days of the trump presidency. a lawyer called to the allegations misleading and said the white house data predated mr. trump's inauguration. that is from the wall street journal. next, vicki on the democrats line. caller: good morning. i wanted to address the big lie

in this country. it is from mental illness. i have said it before. host: you got through want earlier this morning and made your point. 30 days. you can call us again in 30 days. wayne is on the republican line in georgia. go ahead. caller: i was going to talk about the john durham probe and the charges he has brought up and how everybody seems to have been ignoring the fact that this has been proven to be one of the dirtiest political tricks in history from the clinton campaign spying on a sitting president of the united states. and how complicit a lot of people were in this. how do we trust anybody anymore? how do we trust reporters when

they cannot even honestly report? i remember a lot commentaries done by a lot of people and what they did with president trump at the time. i remember senators and a speaker of the house try to do a coup on a sitting president of united states that was duly elected. host: what would you like to see the ultimate outcome of this report by the special prosecutor ? caller: it should be released as is so the american people can see what is entailed. what is in it. host: to new york city next. we will hear from rob on the democrats line. caller: i was not going to

originally comment on this, but that phone call from alabama two or three calls behind me, i think he made the perfect case for the legalization of prostitution. i think this -- there should be a kinder name for it, may be leisure women. look at the societies in northern europe where they have more relaxed standards on these things. the young people are quite well-adjusted. you should replay that men's -- man's enthusiasm from alabama. host: based on his call, how would legalizing prostitution -- he was pointing out the proliferation of pornography in relation to the youth mental

health crisis. how legalization of prostitution improve that? caller: i am no psychologist. i just think a more relaxed approach. what i calls to mention, to comment on, was what it takes to be a public figure and to look into a camera and tell falsehoods, to tell intentionally, to knowingly steer into a camera and know what you are saying is not true, know what you're are saying is meant to manipulate the minds of other people, so that they think what is not true is true and what is true is not true. they turned the truth into lies and then they turn lies into the

truth. it boggles the mind. it confuses the mind. it messes up the mind. it takes -- i guess there is an expression. if you believe it, it is not a lie. there has been leaders of our country. some have made it to the top, who have trained themselves in former tv shows to act. they trained themselves to say things that they do not believe themselves. and they have gotten good at it. they have trained themselves to be able to make others believe that they believe it. and they come to believe it. so the whole trying to wind down and deconstruct what it means for a person to not tell the

truth, i think it is this sort of thing that has to be broken down and discussed to begin to dismantle not only the big lie but the illness inside a human being, the sickness to wants to dominate someone else's thoughts in such a way as to make them believe something that is not true. host: a national story out of new york this morning reported here by the hill. the headline, new york times found not like -- found not liable and palin defamation case. a jury found the new york times not liable after they were sued over an editorial published linking her to a mass shooting in 2011. the jury decision tuesday was unanimous a day after the judge

in the case indicated he would dismiss the lawsuit against the newspaper, saying that palin's attorneys produced a lack of evidence to suggest that the news organization after recklessly or knowingly published false material about her. i think this was an example of unfortunate editorializing on the part of the times come a said the district judge monday. the law here sets a high standard for malice. the court finds that the standard has not been met. on the republican line, catherine. corona delmar, california. you are on the air. catherine, are you there? all right. we will go to kelly -- catherine, go ahead. you are on the air. caller: thank you so much and good morning, america. it is wonderful to hear alabama speak so passionately about

pornography and then new york speak so eloquently and articulate. where do you start? america the beautiful. we have so many things that have taken place. i am 71 and i grew up raised in california, beautiful place to be raised with a beautiful family. there is a lot to talk about and i think it is a combination of a lot of things. i worked through communication workers of america and i knew something was up in my 20's and the union had better buildings than we did and the union said it was mandatory that we take it out of our check. i was hearing are governors paying over $500 for a hammer 50 years ago. the point is, people became powerful and found a great ticket to ride in big government. what also evolved was big pharma and big banks and now big tech.

it is a combination of all of those things over the decades that have come to take control over taxpayers' lives. we have given and given. we are a generous country and we want to help others, but now we find we do not even count anymore. we have illegal aliens that can come in here and get midnight rides to new york and california and we are supposed to pay for their education. again, we are loving people, but we found out the government has taken over. what we really stand for. that is not the latest, shiniest new thing in the sky. we really are a family that wants to help each other out. as to one thing you mentioned, 2050, what the coastline is going to be another foot, you

just move back and build higher buildings. you can prepare. you have 30 years. i see the good with the future. what do we take out? of helping our youth -- out of hoping our youth? i contribute my time to children. i help them get caught up in reading. so the young gentleman earlier who is 18 and we have teen suicides, he is right. teens tend to look at each other. if you start earlier at three to four to five, i'm watching a three-year-old and he is loving and nurturing, all things good. we are not going to let him get corrupt. host: we appreciate your call. we are trying to get a couple more here. we will go to kelly in georgia. caller: thank you for taking my call. today has been one of the best days i have ever seen on c-span

with washington journal. thank you for allowing people to speak openly and allow them to do their points. i have enjoyed very much hearing both sides. i think there always is both sides. i believe -- it is crazy. one of the things i heard him say was, can we find a way as americans to disagree without hating each other? there is always going to be left and right and there is somewhere in the middle the truth. what i wish is that americans could realize we are a lot more common than we think. in order to have a truly democratic republic society, you have to be able to hear both

sides and judge for yourself, not what cnn tells you, not what fox news tells you, but just take the truth and figure out how you feel and i think we will find as americans we are a lot more in common. we just have to learn how to disagree agreeably without hating each other. host: i am glad you got through this morning, thank you for that. more ahead. next, the american responsibility to help struggling democracies worldwide . we will talk about that with elizabeth shackelford, now with the chicago council on global affairs. and later, aircraft talks about his new book, -- eric graft talks about his new book. that's ahead. announcer: put tv every sunday,

featuring authors and their nonfiction books. chronicling the 2020 presidential election in the book "the steal." and at 10:00 p.m. on afterwords, mark powerline talks about his book. in it, he argues millennials' lack of civil knowledge poses a threat to our civil institutions. he is interviewed by the culture editor of the federalist. watch book tv every sunday on c-span2. and find a full schedule on your program guide. or watch online anytime a book tv.org.

six presidents recorded conversations while in office. here them on c-span's new podcast, presidential recordings. >> season one focuses on lyndon johnson. you will hear about the civil rights act, the presidential campaign, the gulf of tonkin incident, the march on selma and the war in vietnam. not everyone knew that they were being recorded. >> certainly his secretaries knew because they were tasked with transcribing the conversations. they were the ones that major the conversations were taped, as johnson would signal to them through an open door between his office and their office. >> you will also hear blunt talk. >> i want a report of the number of people who were assigned to kennedy and me the day he died. and i want it right click. -- quick.

if i have to go to the bathroom, i will not go. i will not go anywhere. announcer: on the c-span now mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. ♪ announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: joining us is elizabeth shackelford, a former career diplomat with the united states and now a senior fellow with the chicago council on global affairs. here with us to talk about the u.s.'s role in assisting democracies worldwide. good morning. welcome. guest: good morning. host: a recent piece in the chicago tribune talked about coups happening worldwide, "coups are happening where democracy is failing." why are the numbers of coups growing worldwide? guest: he has been an interesting phenomenon.

coups were common and the postcolonial period. over the past 20 years they had been in decline until recently. in the last 18 months, there have been more than in the prior five years combined. there's a couple reasons why. first, to understand what a coup is. it's generally the military seizing power. and what we have seen in miramar a year ago, we saw it in sudan and you whole rash across south africa. you have weak democracies failing to provide services to their people. and this is leaving an opening for public support for military takeovers. but the other issue is a lack of international pushback to coups.

a failure of what we saw a few years ago, when there was a uniform sense across the globe that this was inappropriate behavior. host: we will get into your departure from the state department and a little bit, but you served in sudan, the horn of east africa, so you had an on the ground experience with those countries. why are they more prevalent in that part of the world? guest: interesting question because i believe that coups, we are susceptible to them and places where we have had long-standing authoritarian governments. in sudan, there was a military overtake of what had been an authoritarian government. west africa, the military takeover was of a fledgling democratic government. any number of governments will be susceptible. one of the problems,

particularly in the west african countries, where we have seen it in guinea and mali, has been the international partnership in supporting the fledgling democracies have been reinforcing the leadership of security services over democratic institutions. while we have been trying to help build stability and security, what we have been inadvertently doing is creating a security stake. and that has been in response to the update in insurgencies and terrorist activities. host: yesterday we spent an hour talking about the report from the economist intelligence unit, the annual report on the state of democracies worldwide, the democracy index they call it. the headline this year as the china -- is the china challenge. is it the case that countries like russia and china are having more influence in places like africa and elsewhere, so u.s. efforts are blunted in terms of

supporting democracies there? guest: i think it is less about blunting u.s. influence, it is more in terms of how are we choosing to use our influence. one of the challenges i see in have the u.s. and much of the west, the european union included, is using their influence is rather than promoting democracy, we have been actually promoting security cooperation. and that sounds benign, like it would be something positive, but we have been pushing security sector activities instead of democratic activities as well. that is where we are losing credibility as a promoter of democracy because we are supporting strong people in different countries, more military driven solutions when what we are failing to address is underlying causes to instability. so we are not addressing it differently than those countries

like china and russia. we would be promoting democracy more if we came in with democracy leading the charge in our partnerships. host: you left your position at the state department as a career diplomat in 2017, the secretary of state was rex tillerson at that time, and in your letter you invited him to leave with you. resigning from the state department was part of your concern and what you are seeing now, the u.s. with a lessened role worldwide in supporting democracies? guest: it was. at the time, and i said it before, when i departed it was during the trump administration. and my view was that i did not feel the decisions we were making in our foreign policy were promoting the u.s. national

security interest, and that is promoting democracy, not through military power but by leading -- but through leading by example into supporting strong institutions with respect for human rights. i saw these problems in the prior administration. the u.s. has a tendency to talk well about democracy and human rights, but not always act to fulfill those values. i see this as a long-standing problem and my hope is now, as you see the biden administration talking up democracy, that we will follow through with our actions. host: your book is called "the dissent channel, american diplomacy in a dishonest age." why is it a dishonest age? guest: what i have seen in my experience inside the state department under different administrations, i have seen is talk a lot about our values and

i have seen actions that do not support that. i go back to coups, you really see that pattern. we talk about the need to promote strong democracies, but leading with counterterrorism efforts across west africa, so our actions are not reinforcing democracy, they are reinforcing military leadership in the government. they are reinforcing weak institutions on the democratic side and strong security sectors. the are noty -- they are not promoting inclusivity in these governments or real democracy. host: lines are open if you have a question or comment. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents and others, 202-748-8002. you are with the chicago council on global affairs, what does

that organization do? guest: it is one of a number of organizations that was established about 100 years ago in response to isolationism in the u.s. the chicago council on global affairs pushes for the idea of greater american public engagement in what we are doing around the world, ensuring that we are finding ways to communicate to the american people why we need engagement across the world. host: there is a story this morning saying that the eu is trying to tempt africa away from chinese influence and has pledged $150 billion for major products -- projects in africa. white is it important -- why is it important that the european union be part of this as well, t o partner with american diplomacy? guest: it is interesting to look at this, either through the lens

of great power competition, which is what you are referring to -- we should be competing with china across africa. i feel like that is a distraction. we should be partnering with countries or organizations like the european union, working in places like africa to laid the groundwork for a better democracy and more stability. but not because it is competing with china, we should do so because it is in our national interest and in the interest of other democracies around the world to have more places that we can work with, places where we can have a place to trade with. the european union, which shares our values and interests, should be working with us. i fear we should be doing less of the competition with china and more focusing on wet these countries need in order to be thriving democracies and be good partners with us on the international stage. host: as a diplomat, you served

in poland. we asked of yours yesterday about how should the u.s. support democracy in ukraine? obviously, poland is a site where a lot of troops are going to, part of the nato deployment. what is your view of the potential diplomatic solution in this controversy or crisis? guest: i have been interested to watch the way that the biden administration and eu allies have been working together to prevent war and an invasion of ukraine. it's been a testament to the foreign policy approach of this administration that they have, president biden said at the beginning of his administration that he would reinvigorate our partnership with allies, he would lead with diplomacy and use military intervention as a tool of last resort and only in the interest of our critical

national security interests. i think that this crisis is being exemplary at that. look at what we have done, heavy diplomatic lifting with our partners and allies. and i will not make predictions, but it seems to have delayed what we might have seen in terms of an invasion. hopefully by sending troops to nato countries, but going short of sending them into ukraine, we are able to walk that fine line of sticking with our allies and standing up for democracy but without getting into a war. host: we have calls, but first a question from matt on twitter, who brings it home -- "what does she believe american citizens can do to strengthen democracy in the u.s.?" guest: wonderful question. democracy is not a spectator sport. in the united states, part of the due trend -- part of the

trend of declining democracy, we are not above it. everybody has a role to play. so the informed citizens, know what your representatives at the local, state and national level are supporting, and make sure that they hear from you. i worked in offices where we get questions that come through congressional lines, constituents calling representatives and asking questions, and at do with foreign policy. so be an active member of this democracy. call your representatives and question if they are doing things that are democratic. host: one click article from the new york times about another part of the world, "far from ukraine, putin steps up russia's wooing of latin america." they write that putin in recent

weeks has also been trying to expand russia's influence thousands of miles away in latin america. he spoke to david ortega, nicaragua's president, for the first time since 2014. he hosted the president of jin tina -- of argentina and about t -- vowed to reduce the country's reliance on the united states. guest: it is telling the arrivals and the world are reaching out to have strong influence around the world. we are looking at this from an american perspective and you see putin is trying to influence places you would consider is in our hemisphere and a sphere of influence, but to me that is a reminder for anyone who things the united states were be stronger by focusing just internally that are arrivals, including china, are looking at diplomatic engagements. and a reminder to me that we

need to make sure that we are out there building relationships and reinforcing relationships around the world. people may not understand what relationships with smaller countries that might not have a direct impact on the u.s. have to do with them, but this goes to everything inside the united nations, to simply who are trading partners and countries we can rely on. especially if there is an american citizen and trouble in a different country. other countries understand the need to build relationships and have strong partnerships across the world. host: we will hear first from nikki in new jersey on the independent line. caller: actually, that's new york. host: my fault. caller: you are a bad guy now. [laughter] listen, i have a question about mike pompeo, his support for maria eve on of it, the former

ukraine ambassador who was sorely lacking. the question i have for you, do you believe that there was the first bloodless american coup attempted by donald trump and his cronies? the evidence seems to me that it's point being that way, and you cannot have a coup by just donald trump, there are many that the truth will show have been involved in trying to overthrew this government. i would like to hear your comments on those two things. guest: i think you raised a good point, which is in a thriving democracy, a social democracy with the rule of law, individuals cannot overthrew the government. it would require the support of a a lot of different people. it also requires oversight, not just from the government, but

also from our own citizenry that we push back on anything that undermines our democracy. it is not just a matter of what we saw with the insurrection, but also looking at legal changes making it harder to vote across the country. there are different people and institutions involved right now in trying to change the nature of our democracy and it is important to stand up and pushback. it takes a long time to build a healthy democracy, but it does not take a very long time, if we are not vigilant, to tear one down. it is important we understand the threat to democracy is worldwide and we need to make sure that we are calling out our representatives on things that help our healthy democracy thrive and be an active participant for democracy. host: irene from houston on the republican line. good morning. caller: yes, good morning. i just have some -- from, well

for the guest is active in chicago and at the state department. i was having some thoughts, after i heard the former secretary of state mike pompeo on his response to president biden's speech on the russia-ukraine matter. and i thought, i felt so sad. almost to tears. i began to think, who are these people who voted for president biden? he is such a weak man.

surely, all these 85 million voters are so weak and confused to not elect a man who is intelligent who can lead america, especially when we have so many americans who are truly intelligent, truthful and devoted. that cannot be the best of the best to lead. host: focusing on the ukraine crisis, how do you think the president is leading? guest: sometimes it's harder to see or understand the importance of taking these slower, quieter steps. diplomacy is a tool that the prior administration did not use particularly effectively. i'm not just talking about setting up a meeting with a counterpart you do not know, diplomacy is the long game. and what we are doing now, what

the u.s. government has been working on with our nato allies, it may not be gratifying to see because we are not plunging noses or dropping bombs, but what we are doing with our allies is taking a multifaceted approach. it is harder to see from the outside how much work is being done to address the crisis, but i feel like one thing we have seen over the past 20 years with the war on terror is we cannot bomb our way through, we cannot use hard powered tools to get what we want, so i believe that the approach of by the biden administration and allies has been deliberate, thoughtful. and i think it has been the right approach so far, and we are reinforcing our nato allies, we have been, you know, signaling that we will use other tools, economic tools, which are very powerful. and we have been continuing

diplomatic talks. it may not be as fulfilling to see, as gratifying because it does not seem tough, but the truth is this is the better path to trying to achieve what we are trying to do in the ukraine crisis. host: john in columbus ohio -- in columbus, ohio. caller: good morning. i want to go back to what she said earlier in the conversation about the african nations. as an american, as an african-american, i work around a lot of africans. the eu is a: eyes asian company, ok? africans -- is a colonization company, ok? in africa, what are we going to do their? african governments are corrupt. they do not care about none of those people. we are going to go over there and do the same thing china is doing. china is building way more stuff

over there, hi rails, roads, everything. i'm thinking, what are we going to do? they already have lock and barrel over there. you cannot deal with corrupt people who do not care about their own. they live in the worst conditions. while the cops live in the richest places. the go to europe to their masters, and they are like, we do not care about those blows on those we keep getting our money. host: his assessment of what is happening in africa, what are your thoughts? guest: my initial reaction is to say that the continent of africa has many countries, some of them far more functional than others and at some have greater protection of human rights than others do, but i certainly see the point. when you look at china's engagement on the continent, for

example, you see a complete lack of interest in how they are treating the populations, but an interest in buying support in organizations like the un and able to have a footprint on the continent. the u.s. has influence on the continent as well, but the question is how are we engaging and are we engaging in a way to create more stable and just countries, or are we engaging in a way that undermines that progress. i have to add, yes, it is a generational change in terms of the type of governments you can have there, you cannot build a democracy overnight, we have learned that. but what the u.s. can do, and what we should be doing more of in africa, is finding ways to reinforce good actors. finding ways to help human rights defenders and civil society organizations. in sudan, you have an inspiring

civilian pushback against the military government there. these are people that want democracy and who are giving their lives for democracy and we need to find ways to support them, rather than supporting a strong man in part because it might give us a short-term stability. we have a complicated relationship with different countries on the continent and my hope is we will be shifting more towards questioning the strongmen who are hurting their people, and really trying to reinforce democratic progress there.but it is not something we can do overnight. it will take a long time and we will have to accept the limitations of our influence. host: kent and wisconsin, good morning. caller: i'm taking elizabeth's advice and writing letters to editors. in order for diplomacy tort america, must see itself as -- we could be looked at as a

country that sees itself as god's gift to the universe. a country controlling 7000 places around the world, that spends more on its military than the next 10 countries combined. and the world was held hostage by a nuclear arms race, not by a country that concludes diplomacy by a threat of using any means necessary. the u.s. dropped an atomic bomb and has 4000 warheads on a hair trigger. it is controlled by a short-term, dysfunctional political system and is unpredictable and a self-serving with a history of by any means necessary. what if russia made a deal with mexico to install military bases and nuclear weapons, how would we react? not to say there are not bad players out there, but diplomacy can work with more insight. the military-industrial complex is driving our foreign policy,

military solutions are not working and are a recent to the bottom -- race to the bottom. host: elizabeth? guest: thank you for your bringing up the hundreds of bases we have around the world in the military-industrial complex. i would like to reinforce your point that diplomacy has a lot less likelihood that accidentally create havoc. it's less costly, less costly to other countries, and i support the idea we should be leading without more and reigning in our decision to lead with the military. this administration has said that they will leave it to diplomacy and we all need to do our part to hold them to that, if you agree with that perspective. host: two questions, first from joseph who asks "why were you so reluctant to share all of your insight with the new president trump?" lee asks, "under the trump

administration the state department was decimated. how long will it take to restore it?" guest: both are good questions. i lasted about a year under the trump administration and did everything i could to influence what we were doing. what i found then, which was different from my experience under the prior administration, was i did not feel as though the leadership or the white house was listening to our career diplomats and folks out in the field, leading our diplomacy from countries around the world. that was different. i will be honest, i spent a lot of time under the obama administration sharing my views that were rejected frequently. it is not just a matter of leaving when you feel like your views are not being accepted. for me it was more a matter of i felt we did not have the same, my views of what we should be

doing in the world to support national security was different from what i felt the leadership at the state department, at the time, was pursuing. so that was the challenge for me, and why i decided to leave at the time i felt i was no longer able to do more good than harm in my position, which was the time that we send a u.s. mission to somalia. the state department took a lot of hits under the trump administration. right now we are watching efforts to rebuild it. you had a lot of career personnel who stayed the course, and i am very grateful for that and we all should be because they were ready to forge ahead with important diplomacy during this administration. that said, we still need a much more robust state department than we have. our military budget out prices are state department by many zeros. in fact, the budget for lockheed

martin alone exceeds the size of our state department and development budget, so how are we supposed to lead with the things that are not military power if we are not empowering the ones who have those other tools at their disposal? now we have had some improvements, some improvements in morale, but it has not gone far enough yet. if you care about these issues, again, reach out to elected officials. host: her book is called "the dissent channel, american diplomacy in a dishonest age." we are talking about the u.s.'s role in assisting democracies worldwide. 202-748-8001 for republicans. democrats, 202-748-8000. all others, 202-748-8002. on the independent line, monty in georgia. caller: thank you for allowing me to speak. and i had to hold for a a while. how are you today? guest: very

well. caller: my comment is that -- americans call in every day, we listen to c-span, and it is a blessing to be able to make comments like these. i agree with the guy about the military industrial complex. the u.s. military is pretty much the arm of the elite. people who are more educated to the true things going on in the world, they know when we speak of africa or bringing democracy to these different countries, we shake our fist at china and talk about china in the media so bad, but when you look at any product that's bought in walmart

or any store, look at it and it is made by china. so, where's the leverage that the united states and this democracy that we bring -- the military and democracy, they work together. anybody that has any type of sense of true events going on the way that you use socialism and communism and democracy, those things all work together. and anybody who has a brain, they will realize that even in the situation with russia, we have talked about russia and they are doing military exercises on their own border and we have -- like the gentleman said about mexico, if china tries to put weapons in mexico, the american people

would have a fit. but now we are worried about what is going on with russians. the people that this debate or agreement is about in trying to make this country a part of nato, which is on the border of russia. so that is my comment. host: go ahead. guest: he brings applicable interesting points. i will try to hit a couple. you mentioned the military is working together with all of the other tools in our efforts to bill democracy, and you are right -- build democracy, and you are right. i worked with them when i was in the state department and we are grateful to have a very powerful and exemplary military around the world. when i talk about the need to lead with diplomacy, it is not

about saying that the state department is better or these tools are better, it's to say to respect the service of our military members we should really seek to use them only when we need to, only put them in harm's way when it is essential for national security. in somalia, when i served, because we could not go out and do our job as diplomats, military colleagues were stuck picking up the slack there. i would speak to them and they wished we had the security we needed to go out and do diplomacy because when we could not do that, they were stuck answering thsoe questions across the country. these are essential for our foreign policy. and they need to be appropriately out there. getting to ukraine and russia. i understand the comparisons to , well, what about the spheres of influence. to start with, ukraine is not on

the verge of joining nato by any stretch. that's been talked about by the leadership in the eu. the challenge is we do not want to appease the russians by saying, ok, since you do not want ukraine to join nato we will not do that. i do not think that russia is thinking that ukraine will join nato anytime soon, the challenge is ukraine is a thriving democracy right now. the people of ukraine have chosen that. in 2014, this was evident when there was a decision point for ukraine to go more in lay direction of russia or to western europe. it is not that the u.s. thinks ukraine should be a democracy, it is the u.s. wants to defend the choice of the ukrainian people to have a say in their government and it checks on their leadership. it is in our interest, this goes back to what i said, we will not

develop democracies by guns and bombs. we will not kill our way to democracy. but when you have a country like ukraine that has made such dramatic steps towards becoming a thriving democracy, it is in our national security interest to help them maintain that independence and ability to have a government that is responsive to their people. that interest of ours and of the eu is tempered by the fact it is not in our interest to get into a war over ukraine with russia. so that is where you have to see the layers in how we engage to promote that democracy. this falls short of us moving troops into ukraine, but it does mean we will use the tools we have to prevent a war. host: do you miss serving overseas? can you see yourself in a diplomatic role in the future? guest: i miss the service of it.

there is nothing like representing the u.s. and achieving good things overseas. i am not sure what the future holds, but right now i am enjoying the opportunity to speak to americans about how important it is. host: on the independent line, a caller from new york. go ahead. caller: good morning. hi, good morning. i apologize for not listening for the last hour. i came at the top of this hour. i was quite taken by the caption there, u.s. helping democracies around the world. here in america, we are at a crossroads right now. and i do believe that the republican party, that they do

not believe or abide by democracy. the constitution over the rule of law. if a republican becomes president, i believe that democracy will in fact die here in america. we have a president and a lot of republicans that tried to, on january 6 at the capitol, tried to overturn a free and fair election. and i hope americans understand the relevance of what may occur here in the near future. but i am getting way too far away. i want to hear your stance on democracy here in america. there are different types of democracies, but we will never have a democracy if we are divided.

and we are divided by the republican party not abiding by -- a big dereliction of duty on their part to defend the constitution and rule of law. host: we touched on that earlier. if you want to say more, go ahead. guest: democracy is necessarily nothing, there will always be divisions in the people having a voice. that's not to say that democracy is not the best form of government. i believe it is. but here in the united states we still have to make the case for that. right now, you have countries like china who are looking out, trying to use the january six events and the messiness of our political system to say, look at that, democracy is not reliable or functional. it is up to us to demonstrate that it is because the alternative, autocracy, is

cannot a place where any of us want to live under. i said it before, democracy is not a spectator sport. we need to make sure not only that we are talking to a representatives, but talk to your friends and family about it. have these discussions into make sure that people around you understand the stakes and that we are not immune to the undermining of democracy that we are seeing around the world right now. it is essential that we continue to work for democracy here at home. host: in maryland, caller on the democrats line. caller: good morning. i will ask you about the previous caller, as he rightly said we cannot have democracy with division. there needs to be -- we need some kind of understanding or agreement between different parties, and there still needs

to be a common ground for us to have democracy. the same thing with other countries, also. i wanted to make a couple comments. the first will be a,, the second a question -- comment, the second question. either in european nations or in the united states, when we talk about other countries in africa or asian countries to have democracy, what we always do is trying to impose the western model of democracy into values on those indigenous societies. instead, we should empower them and they should decide what values they want to live by in their indigenous culture, and not the imposing of the western values on them.

and the second point, this is kind of a question, that we have seen -- you earlier talked about civil society. i'm from india. i was born there, then i came to the united states as a kid. but what i have seen is that the framework of a civil society, we've seen tons of money being sent from europe or the u.s. to those nations, like india. we send billions of dollars from here to u.s. aid or to many other organizations, but they engage in lose nations with those parties that have disagreements with values. and instead of supporting the cause, they are always opposing

the civilization of those indigenous societies, and then they break the nation. what do you say about that? guest: i think you bring up an interesting point about the different types of democracies or different ranges of democracy we can have. when i was in somalia, i worked with counterparts in that government talking about how to rewrite their constitution. and i remember people saying, we will adopt a form like the united states, and i was like, are you sure? every country needs to look, and every civil society needs to look at the particulars of their place. you have ethnic divisions that have to be addressed when you are building up a representative democracy that will ensure the rights of everyone. it is important to look at the different scenarios and tailor what you are doing in building a

healthy democracy to the reality of that situation. in terms of support around the world in different manners, it is absolutely right that we need to find a way to have the support we provide through usaid and other efforts to other countries to not undermine civilians in those countries and the people who are fighting for rights, particularly for minority groups and others who are underrepresented. i think these are important things to factor in, both as we work towards helping democracies around the world and even here at home. host: one more call. roger in north carolina. good morning. caller: having watched the foreign policy of the past seven years, i've noticed that in some cases it seems at the state department and the intelligence community, at least on the

surface, need to be working with one another. the state department being more idealistic. and the intelligence community more pragmatic, you deal with what you have. considering that and how in some countries our policies have failed, like iran, and in his eye year -- what do you think is a practical way to deal with the area but dominated countries where the strongman is the primary mode of thinking? guest: it is a good question. i think we have proven in the past at that we have managed these situations poorly. the first thing we need to do in our foreign policy is reassess what our national security interests are in these places, and then determine what realistic goals do we have. we are not going to turn all these countries into democracies

overnight, and that is neither in our interest to do are really feasible. managing our expectations and focusing on not doing harm to our national interests. ensuring our short-term concerns , like stability in the middle east, do not undermine our long-term interest in promoting greater rule of law around the world. sometimes that means we will need to accept instability in places because the alternative, as we have shown in the past, particular with the war on terror, i when we try to force stability it can backfire on us. the war on terror is a great example because if you look at the number of terrorist organizations and active terrorist movements. 20 years ago, they were dramatically fewer than today, so i do not think we have had success in that matter. but what we need to focus on is looking at long-term views of

how we push our national security interests. because we are a democracy and we work on four year administrations, that is really hard to do. getting back to the state department being ideal -- i think the state department is a lot less idealistic than people think on the outside and is much more driven by inertia and what we have done in the past. so to be able to question our assumptions and go and time back what we are deciding based on what our national security interests are. and we need to be doing that on the intelligence side as well. but i think there is a different nature with the state apartment, intelligent and the military and of the tug-of-war you get between the different perspectives is a healthy thing. we just need to make sure that the balance is invested for our interests.

right now, i feel like we are still in a stage where the military kind of outweighs a lot of the other tools that we have. i think that that is changing a little bit under this administration, the. it is hard -- though. it is hard. it is bringing those decisions back to how is this surveying the american people. host: we have been speaking with former diplomat elizabeth shackelford, now with the chicago council on global affairs. thanks for being with us. guest: thank you. host: still ahead here on "washington journal," we'll speak with garrett graff who has a new book about watergate, about watergate, a new history. and coming up next, open forum where you get to weigh in on political and public policy issues you are following. for republicans, 202-748-8001.

democrats, 202-748-8000. and for independents and others, 202-748-8002. start dialing and we will be back with ♪ your phone calls momentarily. ♪ announcer: american history tv, saturdays on c-span2, exploring the people and events that tell the american story. at 2:00 p.m. eastern, how did george washington's experience with farming influence his views on farming. we talk about the question of slavery. at 2:55 p.m., coverage of the international conference on world war ii in new orleans with discussions on women reporting on one or two and navigating the war's history. the american story, watch american history tv on saturday on c-span2.

and find a full schedule on your program guide. watch online anytime at c-span.org/history. >> i can report to the nation, america is on the move again. announcer: on tuesday, march 1, the state of the union. president biden addresses a joint session of congress reflecting on his first year in office and it laying out his agenda for the year ahead. the president will speak at 9:00, followed by the republican response. we will take your phone calls and a social media reaction. the state of the union address, live on march 1, on c-span, c-span.org on the c-span radio app. announcer: "washington journal" continues. host: up until 9:15 a.m. it will be open forum, a chance for you to weigh in on public policy or any political issue you are

following. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. and for independents and others, 202-748-8002. the latest on ukraine and russia, at least the reporting from the hill, russia says it is returning more troops to bases. the defense ministry on wednesday said some would be making their way back to their bases and will release footage it claims shows tanks departing crimea amid skepticism from the west about moscow is pulling forces back "the military personnel will be delivered by military trains to permit deployment points. upon arrival, the equipment will be serviced and prepared for carrying out the next phase of combat training. footage and a statement followed, saying the troops near

the ukrainian border were being pulled back." in terms of sanctions, in terms of a congressional sanctions package that seems to be stalled right now, reporting this morning from the wall street journal disagreement on how to treat a natural gas pipeline has helped them to cut a deal on sanctions legislation targeting russia, days before officials say an invasion is possible. senators from both parties had hoped to agree on was a vision. the chairman of the foreign relations committee says part of an effort to deter putin from invading ukraine by ensuring moscow would face painful economic measures. the journal writes that at the center of the dispute are disagreements about the timing and a certainty of sanctions aimed at stopping gas from flowing in the north dream -- north dream pipeline that

connects germany and russia, bypassing ukraine. this senate impasse raises the risk the white house and capitol hill may not have a unified message if an invasion occurs. people following the talk say it is one more indication of the lack of intention and strength on the part of the west, said john hurts, a former ambassador to ukraine and analyst at the atlantic council. what are you thinking about and following in the news? we'll go first in michigan, michael on the independent line. caller: good morning. yes, i am calling in regard to spreading our influence around the world b building -- by building money. i do not think we should be helping anywhere financially in the world until we get our financial house in order. we have large debts that will go

onto our children, and grandchildren, and nobody will be able to pay off this debt. seniors on a fixed income will be pretty poor after a while with everything shrinking in value. i think we should stick with ideas like rand paul had said, that we should not help other countries until we get our own house in financial order. and that is my comment for today. everyone have a good day. host: arlington, virginia, richard. caller: i am old enough to remember when germany -- after the war, they were divided. that's a different situation. lincoln said a house divided itself cannot stand. but here in america, republicans believe that they are americans.

democrats believe they are americans. we have a cultural continuity between us. and ukraine, there's people on the east side of ukraine that speak russian, have a different cultural beginnings than people in the west. why can't people who want to go with russia, let them go with russia. the 10 wanting to go to the west, head towards the west and a drawer down the middle and have two countries -- draw a line down the middle and have two countries? why is it necessary to force them to be united? that is my point. host: axios reporting, biden orders release of trunk visitor logs to the january 6 committee. he has urged the national archives to hand over logs from

the trump administration to the elect committee. in a letter dated tuesday, bi den rejected the claim that he could exert privilege to get the logs released. biden has determined that executive privilege is not in the best interest of the united states, and therefore is not justified. and in a letter obtained by axis. now tom on the republican line. good morning. caller: i'm curious, they keep talking about trump wanting to be a dictator and pushing on that really hard, and here we are with biden in there for 40 some years. is there a difference? host: you mean the time that joe biden has been in public office? caller: right.

basically, that is the same thing, he's just been working in a long time to get where he is at now, but he has still been controlling things. host: michael on the democrats line in new jersey. hi. caller: good morning. i want to talk about th vaccinee -- the vaccine a little bit. i was reading where agrees was -- greece was going to fine you if you were over 65 and did not get vaccinated. i thought, let me see what vaccines and they offer. and they accepted novavax. i have been waiting for them to accept it here. i would be the first in line. i do not trust the mrna stuff. i do not know why people are not talking about novavax. it is a traditional vaccine. host: anne on the independent

line in texas. caller: i was calling to see if he could possibly have ronny jackson, a physician from texas, on to talk about joe biden needing to take a cognitive test to see if he is mentally fit to be the president. i do not know if you will consider that. i do not know why you wouldn't. i think there are a lot of people who have serious questions about mental, about his mental state. host: dr. jackson has been on the program, i believe. i think late last fall he was on. i am pretty sure about that. but that is a good suggestion. thank you. we will look into getting him back on the program. salem, pennsylvania on the republican line. this is mark. caller: i want to talk about the

dorm report. the term report. there has been some stuff that has not been talked about. none of the mainstream media has reported on this besides your show talking about it occasionally and a couple shows on fox news. what has not been reported is that the national security director is implicated in this also because he worked in the hillary clinton campaign. he is fingered as the mastermind behind the spying on the trump campaign. his wife works for the department of justice under merrick garland. the company used to do the surveillance of the trump campaign and white house also worked for the biden campaign so this is just the tip of the iceberg. it is really unbelievable how little coverage this has gotten, plus we already hear the democrats been machine saying it is just minor and so on.

it is interesting. if you could have -- he is going to have this new movie come out about the election hacking and how they stole the election by stuffing the ballot boxes. they have actual video from the states. host: who is producing the movie? caller: disaster souza -- desouza. he has videos and putting the ballots in the box in the middle of the night. he has videos of people going from box to box all night stuffing ballots into these drop boxes. you will see how they just stuff tens of thousands of ballots in. it was ballot harvesting at the least and potentially illegal ballots they were putting in because of the fact that they are doing it at the middle of the night and taking selfies and they get paid for doing it. it is a big conspiracy.

they already had investigated in georgia that there is a big investigation. host: dinesh d'souza has been on this program as well. chances are good that we will interview him as well. a couple comments about looking ahead to our programming schedule on the c-span networks. coming up at 10:00 eastern on c-span, we will take you to a hearing on russian aggression in eastern europe. it is the house oversight and reform subcommittee. that is cuyama at 10:00 eastern. and at noon eastern on c-span3 the head of the national telecommunications and information administration testifies about increasing access to broadband in the u.s. on c-span3. on c-span at 2:00 eastern, it is a hearing looking at digital privacy and protecting consumer data. all of those hearings are available streaming online at c-span.org and you can watch

them on the go on our mobile app , c-span now. it is open forum, your chance to weigh in on news items. (202) 748-8001, the line for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. for independents and others, (202) 748-8002. westminster, colorado, it is the independent line. rick, go ahead. caller: i called in -- i believe that putin is basically saber rattling. i do not think it would be to his advantage to attack ukraine. with the price of fuel, he is making basically a billion dollars a day. i do not think he wants to mess that up. the more he rattles his saber, it seems that he gets the world excited and prices go up, which

helps him. why would he ruin that income? that is my opinion. guest: -- host: here's reporting on usa today's front page. president joe biden said the united states could not trust russia's claims tuesday that the country is pulling back troops from ukraine's border, warning an invasion remains possible in a fast changing situation. in his first televised comments to the american people directly addressing the situation in ukraine, biden mixed optimism for a diplomatic solution with admonitions to russia about the price it would pay for invading its neighbor. let's hear from charles on the republican line in louisville -- in charlotte, north carolina. go ahead. caller: c-span talks about being unfiltered and they say they look at both sides. you are the place to go for unbiased news, but this john

durham thing blows my mind. i am a former journalist. to see a special counsel come out with a report that hillary clinton hey jake sullivan going under shows lying about from's relation -- trump's relationship with russia -- the clinton campaign hired a special ops firm to spy on the trump campaign in new york and also the white house and they are feeding information to the fbi that is later used for the whole basis for the mueller investigation, which cost us several years of investigation that just covers the airwaves and took up all of our time for three years. for c-span not to lead with that story today tells me a lot about c-span. i do not know how you guys could bury this, but you are all in washington and this came out from john durham's special

counsel and you guys are ignoring it. that is the one thing i can say that shows your bias of trying to bury news like that because it shows clinton -- all the underhanded things she did against trump. that is my comment. host: we have read stories every day about the germ report come about the filing that have -- has happened. likely we will have more is more news comes out about it. certainly there will be segments or more. we are waiting for the report itself to come out to have a more in-depth perspective on what he finds out in the report, but thank you for the criticism. it is passing on the democrats line. go ahead. make sure you mute your volume and go ahead with your comment. caller: ok.

i want to talk about the stately country is in. i am 68 years old. i love this country. lately, i am disappointed in the leadership in the country on both sides. i am more disappointed in the american people. i think we are the country we are because we have, for the most part, stood together. the division in the country right now is just something i never thought i would live to see. i know there are differences. the fact that our congress cannot even work together any longer if the person you wanted

to be president is not president, you hate them, i am not defending biden. i'm not defending trump. i'm just saying the country as a whole. i think when joe biden stepped into office he stepped into what i'm considering the biggest mess i have ever seen in my lifetime. although some things have not been taking care of, i do feel the man has done a lot. if you look at where we are now to where we were when he took office, i think the country was in such bad shape that no one could have fixed it this quickly. i do not think it is going to be able to be fixed in a decade

because of the polarization and i think the american people really need to look around at what is happening as far as crime, as far as hatred. we need to come together regardless of who is in the white house, who is in congress. the voting, things that are going on with the voting right now in georgia, this is just not except about -- acceptable. host: funny concerns over polarization, a news outlet reporting on bipartisan success on capitol hill. why there has been a surge on --

in congress. the past few weeks, congress has been doing something that feels surprising, weighing a number of bipartisan bills on issues including sexual-harassment and stock trading. given republicans' willingness to block priorities, this influx of bipartisan activity seems unexpected. in reality, it follows long-standing patterns. one of the reasons lawmakers have turned to bipartisan bills is more partisan measures that have been unable to pass in recent months. previously, the pritam -- freedom to vote act blocked -- was blocked by senate republicans. the build back better act is currently on pause as lawmakers scramble to figure out what senator joe manchin will accept. in the interim, lawmakers have focused on legislation that could potentially get 60 votes in the senate since there are 50 democrats in the senate they

need at least 10 republicans to vote with them to overcome a filibuster on most bills in the upper chamber. we go to mike in fort lauderdale, florida, republican line. caller: i'm a republican, but i am disgusted with a lot of republicans that have been calling up and even certain talk show hosts like tucker carlsen on fox who make outrageous comments about ukraine. they are saying that ukraine is a dictatorship. funny thing, they have had more change of presidents that russia has had in the last 20 years. they are calling ukraine neo-nazi run when their current president is jewish and the

person who called from virginia a little while ago said there are a lot of russian speakers, they should go with russia. these people making comments like that have never been to ukraine. i have been there six times. i have cousins there. my mother was from ukraine. i have traveled mostly in eastern ukraine and you would hear russian spoken all the time. whenever you talked to these people, they would say, i speak russian, but i am a ukrainian. my own cousin is married to a woman named larissa. she would speak russian to me and apologize for speaking russian but she says, i feel more comfortable speaking russian but i am ukrainian. i go, it is ok. i understand. if i do not understand you, i will ask you. i am bilingual ukrainian. i grew up that way. it is such a fallacy just because they speak russian that

these people want to be with russia. that is the biggest lie that putin -- that is how putin is fooling the world. these people who call in and say things like this, they are ignorant of the history, ignorant of the situation in ukraine. they probably could not even locate ukraine until this happened on a map. if they want to know what is going on in ukraine, start following what is really going on in ukraine. i have been following ukraine all my life. especially more fervently since independence. i have read their constitution. i go on ukrainian online television. i watch their programs. you have people speaking both

languages on the same program and it is no big deal. they just do not understand the situation in ukraine. i am tired of people listening to rt news, the russian propaganda station, and getting opinions from them. host: to margaret in cooper, texas, go ahead. caller: good morning, c-span. i have not called in and about a year but i have been sitting back watching. one of the things -- he started to show off about suicide and the first thing you said was the highest risk of suicide is among black kids that are killing themselves. i have a huge family. i have many friends. i do not know any child i'm around that has even considered suicide. i do not know why we are always at the bottom of every list. even if it was true, if your child has to wake up every day and hear some thing negative about themselves, any child

might be tempted to say, what is it all about? and might want to end their life. but i do not know anybody that i know of that are even considering suicide. the next thing is people are always calling talking about they stuffed the ballot boxes. if that is true and they think that wins the election, sit -- shouldn't hillary clinton have been president? whatever she did in the past does not matter. she did not make it to the white house. donald trump did. they still run around here talking about spreading democracy. where? who would want what we have right now? democracy is good unless it is our dictators that we want and then it is bad. guest: appreciate your call this

morning -- host: appreciate your call this morning. author garrett graff will join us next. he has a new book about watergate ahead of the 50th anniversary. his book is called "watergate: a new history." that is next. >> weekends on c-span two are an intellectual feast. you will find events on american history tv. on sundays, book tv brings you the latest in nonfiction books and authors. it is television for serious readers. learn, discover, explore. weekends on c-span two. c-span offers a variety of podcasts that have something for every listener. weekdays, washington d-day --

today gives you the latest from the nation's capital. the weekly uses audio from our archive to look at how issues of the day developed over years. an occasional series features conversations with historians about their lives and work. many of our television programs are also available as podcasts. you can find them all on the c-span now mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. ♪

>> washington journal continues. host: we are joined by author garrett graff, who has a new book out called watergate: a new history. we mentioned before you came on this is the 50th anniversary this year of watergate. why now a new history for watergate? guest: the story we have long remembered from watergate, passed down through the robert redford movie, actually turns out to not be really what happened. my goal with this book was to come ahead of the 50th anniversary of the break in this year, try to pull together all of the things we have learned over the last 50 years about what really happened in that

story. watergate is something that has been sliced in a thousand ways by all sorts of authors, but no one has set down to write a start to finish narrative history like this in a quarter-century. since then, we have learned all sorts of new facts that are pertinent and changed the way that we believe the story actually unfolded. the revelation of the identity of deep throat, and fbi director -- deputy director, the release of the nixon tapes, the release of papers around the chennault affair, which i'm sure we will talk about over the course of this conversation. one of the key, triggering events of the scandal and one that until recently most people did not know was linked to watergate at all.

the declassification of all narrative documents. we think of watergate as this one moment, this burglary at the democratic national committee offices in june of 1972, but when you dive into it, when you fully understand the history, what watergate turns out to be is a mindset, a criminal abusive power mindset that permeates the nixon white house, his inner and outer circles of a bunch of strange characters who populate the white house during his time and lead to what is a dozen interrelated but distinct scandals to the will producers donations, the invesco donation.

at the end of watergate, 69 people will have been indicted, including the new york yankees owner, a figure most people do not realize was associated with the scandal at all. host: let's make sure we open our phone lines to hear from viewers on this new book from garrett graff on watergate. (202) 748-8001, the line for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8002 for independents and others. let me ask our director to bring the cover of the book on the screen again. what is that on the front page of that book? why did you put it on the cover? guest: this is the centerpiece of the scandal. this is one of the recording machines that helps capture all of the conversations that took place in richard nixon's oval office, in camp david, in part

of the residence, his telephone lines, his hideaway office in the old exec of office building, and it is the revelation of those tapes in the summer of 1973, a year into the scandal, that changes the trajectory of the entire scandal. and that final year of the scandal from basically july 1973 through nixon's resignation is the battle for those tapes, to learn what parts of the crime and criminality and abuses of power were captured on those recordings. host: how much time did you spend listening to the tapes or reading the transcript? guest: the tapes have come out over the years. it has been the subject of a

running battle between a historian who helped force the first set of tapes out in the late 1990's and then more so -- more volume have come out. two successive volumes of the tapes were published in the last couple years, a huge benefit to historians because the tapes are a mess. it is noteworthy that the nixon library and national archives have never put out finitude transcripts of their own. they have left this to historians to interpret because the tapes are such an audio mess . they are relatively primitive recording technology, so some of the voices are hard to hear.

the recording devices were set in the president's desk surface. the secret service drilled holes from the bottom of the president's desk so the microphone sat just below the surface of the table. anything that happens on the table sounds like an explosion. someone sets down a coffee cup and it sounds like a car crash. nixon likes to put his feet on the table and when he does that it sounds like a bomb going off. the tapes are hard to listen to and historians have done an incredible benefit to our country to decipher these over the years. host: president nixon basically expanded on what president johnson had. why did president nixon want everything recorded in the oval office? guest: this begins to teach you

something about the psychology of richard nixon. he is this fascinating character cannot really and some ways the man on which the entire hinge of america and the 20th century turns. you have a turn from the new deal great society politics that preceded him to the age of reagan that followed him. richard nixon sees himself as a trans formative president and was as a palooka figure. he was on the republicans' national ticket five times in the course of the 20th century, a record tied only by fdr. he was on time magazine's cover 55 times, more than a full year of time magazine covers featured

richard nixon over the course of his career. he comes into office. the first thing he does is tear out the recording system that lyndon johnson had in place. he wants nothing to do with it. as his presidency begins to unfold, what effectively happens is that he fears that he is not going to get credit for his great achievements and that aids like kerry kissinger are going to -- henry kissinger are going to steal all the credit for his big decisions. he begins to feel this as he sees someone like kerry kissinger say one thing in the oval office and then whisper something else at the cocktail parties in georgetown. henry kissinger is the hawk inside the oval office and a

dove cocktail parties, so nixon gets frustrated. he feels like the true history of his presidency is not being captured. he has the secret service install this secret recording system known to virtually no one inside his own administration, so all these figures come through his oval office come through his hideaway, never understanding they are being recorded. it is not until one of the oval office aids -- eight -- aides says this system exists that everyone now understands that all these conversations they have had with nixon have been captured. then the battle begins about whether those tapes should be turned over to investigators. host: we welcome your calls and

comments. (202) 748-8000 for republicans. (202) 748-8001 for democrats. all others, (202) 748-8002. just a sample from that book, you touch on what you said about president nixon. you wrote, at its simplest, watergate is the story of two separate criminal conspiracies, the nixon world's dirty tricks that led to the burglary and the subsequent cover-up. the first conspiracy was deliberate to subvert the 1972 election. the second was reactive and seems to happen simile because no one said no. richard nixon did not suffer any legal consequences from watergate. he was pardoned by gerald ford after he came into office. what could have happened to richard nixon legally?

guest: it is a great question and one that looms a lot over our modern discourse. part of what makes this story so relevant to us 50 years later is the way that we have watched the scandal of the trump administration unfold over the last five years. and think about the consequences to some of those high-level officials. in some ways, the entire battle that we have seen between donald trump and joe biden over the last couple weeks and months over executive privilege traces directly back to watergate. it was watergate that established for the first time the idea and codified the existence of executive privilege in the first place. nixon asserted executive privilege over those tapes that we have been discussing. that was turned aside by the

supreme court. tapes were released. the so-called smoking pistol conversation helps to lead to richard nixon's resignation in august 1974 ahead of what were expected to be two articles of impeachment that the house was going to bring to a vote and then pass on to the senate for trial. nixon resigned ahead of all of that and then gerald ford pardons him just a few weeks later, basically making the calculation that even though ford understands it might cost him the election in 1976 that he is not going to be able to govern as president if the former president's legal troubles are continuing to unfold.

the full scope of richard nixon's crimes and his and ministration's crime -- administration's crimes took a long time for us to learn. part of the mythology that i take on in this book is washington has learned this maxim, the cover-up is always worse than the crime, which is to many people the lesson of watergate. if richard nixon had just come clean and hung a couple officials out to dry, maybe his presidency would have survived. the truth is richard nixon's crimes were bad. there were many of them. they unfolded across a wide range of outright criminality

and presidential abuses of power, including abuse of civil liberties and privacy of american citizens. host: i way to touch on more about g gordon liddy and how a man like that got involved in the nixon campaign, but we have calls waiting for you. but go first to william in west virginia. caller: i had a question with the 50th anniversary here, what irrelevancy of the nixon administration compared to the clinton administration as spying on a sitting u.s. president and then candidates and how that would factor in and the similarities of it and just a comment from you on that.

guest: this is a story that has been unfolding this last week, this idea that john durham, who is investigating the early stages of the trump russia investigation has put out this idea that there was some sort of spy efforts against the trump white house. that is not what john durham the special prosecutor has said. this has gotten twisted up, amplified in right-wing media incorrectly and conflated a bunch of things and conflated a bunch of timelines. when you untangle it, what it actually looks like is that this was -- there was sort of a longer standing effort during the obama administration, to

study russian malware and russian focus internet traffic that was unfolding in washington around the white house in the executive office of the presidency, which is sort of a formal governmental structure in which the presidency unfolded. host: do you think since washing -- watergate that americans pretty much expect scandal? in other words, they expect scandal police being around the corner and government. guest: absolutely. this is where in many ways the legacy of watergate has changed washington, which is when you look at how journalism now treats large institutions, this moment of the vietnam war, of the pentagon papers, of watergate in the 1970's really heralds a change in the way that

america views its government current views as president, and the way that the press treats covering government. you add to this tradition of scribes before nixon and the investigative journalist who tackled watergate ushered in this new style of much more aggressive, much more questioning investigative reporting that we have seen against the presidency and all manner of other government institutions. in many ways, it creates the minor structure of the freedom of information act and privacy laws and oversight of the intelligence agencies whose abuses of power were caught in the watergate story as well. much of what we now know about what goes wrong in government we can trace back to the legacy of

richard nixon and watergate. host: tom is in florida, republican line. caller: i was born and raised in d.c., born in 1972. my question is concerning g. gordon liddy. i used to listen to his radio show years ago and he would purport that john dean had something to do with the break-in because he was trying to retrieve damaging information , trying to get damaging information on john dean's wife. is there any truth to that or can you elaborate on that? guest: this is part of one of the great mysteries of the watergate story. for all the attention that we have paid to watergate, for all the investigations that unfolded

, for all the 69 separate sets of indictments that i mentioned out of the story, no one has ever been prosecuted or charged with ordering the break-in. there are a swirl of different theories and stories that have grown up over the last 50 years about what the burglars were actually doing inside the democratic national committee offices on the morning of june 17, 1972. some of that has to do with plans that unfolded before then. most americans do not realize the burglary that night was the second burglary of watergate. burglars had been in a couple weeks earlier and were coming back to try to fix at least some of the problems that unfolded in

that first burglary. so there is this official theory that it was this third rate burglary, which is what nixon's press secretary because the events a few days later and then there is a swirl of other stories about -- and theories about other people who may have had reason to order the burglary is -- burglars and that night, the potential role, maybe even the cia attempting to sabotage the burglary and that there are a lot of still very open questions about what transpired that night, in part because it could be true that there are multiple things unfolding at once meant there is reason to believe that there were multiple motives among the burglars

unknown to each other. host: so it could have been g. gordon liddy and howard hunt were freelancing? you write about this complete set of plans, all kinds of other activities. they have said this is part of that. they hired the burglars. guest: this becomes -- america has this idea that because the burglary is when we learned of these dirty tricks that that was the beginning of the events, but the truth of the matter is this was really like america walking into the second or third act of a play with no knowledge that it had been going on for months earlier. what you saw with richard nixon and g. gordon liddy is those dirty tricks had been unfolding for more than a year before the

burglary that night and sort of trying to understand all the different motives, all the different players has consumed historians for half a century. host: let's hear from high point, north carolina. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i have been over the last few years going back trying to find out about watergate and looking at a lot of the testimony and things online. what i was really concerned about was the way that martha mitchell was treated by john mitchell. she had minders and was drugged. do you deal with any of that in your book? guest: this becomes a big part of the book as we look back on it 50 years later with a clear set of eyes. martha mitchell, the incredibly outspoken and wildly famous wife

of then attorney general john mitchell, the campaign chief for nixon in 1968, then becomes attorney general, then leaves attorney general to become the campaign chief for 1972, forced out after the burglary. the relationship of john and martha mitchell becomes one of the seminal threads of the watergate scandal. martha mitchell was in many ways the first famous conservative pungent in american history. -- pandit -- pundit in american history. this wildly outspoken woman with a habit of calling up reporters late at night and dishing about what was going on inside the dixon nash -- nixon administration.

she was the most in demand speaker in the country for republicans other than richard nixon himself. she was this key figure in part because she is a deeply tragic figure. she becomes depressed. she has a problem with alcohol. she is deeply unhappy in her life in washington as john mitchell's spouse. their relationship unravels dramatically in the weeks after watergate in part because john mitchell tries to hide the truth of what had happened from martha mitchell because he fears that she will speak to the press. as the caller mentioned, she was actually drugged against her

will in california a few days after the burglary. she ends up in new york state and hiding. she and john mitchell never speak again and end up separating and ultimately divorcing. she dies soon after richard nixon's resignation. host: let's hear from glenn in california. caller: we are not using our common sense. we have a very corrupt government for all these years and hillary clinton played a part in the watergate thing. we watched as a duly elected president, donald trump, was sabotaged his whole presidency, through impeachment and we were

not being represented by our constitutional republic. we keep screaming our democracy. it is these corrupt people that have been in place for 50 years taking our freedoms away, not representing the people, representing themselves through the fbi, through the mueller report and through c-span. we should have a direct line to a representative and we should be representative as a free country. guest: one of the most amazing parts of the watergate story is realizing the role of all these players who are still with us today. the caller mentioned hiller rodham, actually a young

attorney, part of the investigating team for the house impeachment committee alongside john doerr. this is sort of in some ways where she gets her start in politics. she was already dating bill clinton and he had tried to be recruited onto the committee. he said, i'm going to go back to arkansas and try to run for governor but you should hire my girlfriend. she ends up being part of this committee. another figure from modern-day politics ends up a big part of the watergate dirty tricks operation. as the caller mentioned, you see these institutions, the fbi and cia, coming into play in this story. that is one of the ways that this book helps rewrite the story of what we understood took

place in watergate because no one until this book has tried to put in context what it means that deep throat was the fbi deputy director. that is a single fact that radically rewrites our understanding of what was taking place in washington because what we see is the way that mark felt's leaks were aimed not at richard nixon but at trying to think the acting fbi director and this idea that deep throat was this anti-nixon insider trying to fight for good government actually does not hold up because what we see is that mark felt is doing some

self-serving bureaucratic knife fighting to try to get the top job at the fbi himself and this becomes one of the key storylines that we are only now understanding with a full sweep of history. host: moving to 1973 and the watergate committee hearings, what you view as the long-term -- what was the effect of those hearings? the long-term effect on how that hearing, that committee shaped the future congressional investigations. >> it is a great question and one that is super relevant to c-span and its mission and our view of the work that congress does because sam ervin's committee as it comes together over the course of the spring of 1973, the watergate select committee is stepping into at

the time territory. there is almost no history until that point of meaningful congressional oversight, congressional mastication's of the executive branch. when james hamilton, one of the members of the team, goes back to look through the history for the analogs of what congress was trying to do, what the committee was trying to do, he points to congress's investigation at the battle of bull run in 1861 110 years earlier. there is not that many examples for him to pull from. that committee really establishes for the first time aggressive congressional oversight of the executive branch and also a moment of must-see tv in american history.

that summer of 1973, if you talk to almost anyone who was alive at that time, they will talk about what a big deal those wall-to-wall tv coverage of those hearings turned out to be in that moment. the average american household over the course of the summer of 1973 watches almost 40 hours of the committee, basically a full work week of committee hearings aired live on abc, cbs, and public television in the evenings and that becomes -- it makes stars out of the committee come out of people like john dean and his blockbuster testimony early in the hearings and helps to begin to change perception of watergate. host: next, larry on the

independent line. caller: you do not mention that two of the burglars were e. howard hunt and sturgis. there was an operative for the cia told to assassinate nixon but he said he would not do it. he had a codename. ford pardoned nixon. nixon was going to reveal what happened in dallas because nixon was there. he was at a council with pepsi. that is something you should check on. host: this because part of the question over whether the cia had a role in watergate, either knowledge of or an attempt to sabotage the burglary, perhaps trying to get the burglars arrested.

there is evidence to believe that the cia had much deeper knowledge of nixon's dirty tricks than they let on. e. howard hunt, the former c.i.a. officer, one of the burglars cone of the other burglars came out of the cuban immigrant population linked to the bay of pigs and was actively on the cia payroll on the night of the burglary and reported back to his handlers through the whole time he was working on the sort of dirty tricks team that g. gordon liddy and e. howard hunt pulled together. there are weird moments were g. gordon liddy in his role as part of the plumbers working in the nixon white house turns to the cia for help. the cia provides him with a disguise further burglary of a

psychiatrist office in the fall of 1971 after the pentagon papers are released. the cia develops film that gordon liddy has taken during one of his takeouts of a psychiatrist office and g. gordon liddy current when he comes up with his grand operation -- g. gordon liddy when he comes up with his grand operation plan for the reelection dirty tricks, the million-dollar operation that involves hiring prostitutes to seduce democratic officials, spy planes, burglaries like what we see in watergate at the dnc

offices -- he turns to the cia to have them make up the charts of these highly illegal plans, so that almost every step the cia is more deeply aware of what is taking place amid the crime and criminality of richard nixon then we understood at the time. host: next to samantha on the independent line. caller: as a lifelong red sox fan, what was george steinberger? -- george steinberger's involvement? guest: one of the big things the because part of the watergate scandal of these interlocking scandals that unfold is this rush of illegal campaign finance

of the nixon campaign, these illegal donations, many of them in cash, funneled to the nixon campaign in the spring of 1972 i made some changing campaign finance laws. george steinbrenner and his company end up being caught up in making some of those illegal donations. these records have only come out at the last couple years at the fbi files were released. we have for the first time a good understanding of george steinbrenner's role in all this. this was a case where there were dozens of american corporations caught in this illegal financing scheme from american airlines to goodyear tires, many of them -- many corporate executives facing criminal charges as well, all part of the total of 69 people

eventually indicted for charges stemming from watergate and all the associated scandals. host: we will hear from bill in illinois, republican line. caller: i have a question. are you familiar with jeff sheppard's new book, the nixon conspiracy? guest: i am. caller: i have not read the book yet. the author worked in the nixon white house. he claims documents that he has seen and uncovered indicate nixon was set up by a variety of people within the government, including the prosecutor's office. guest: this becomes part of how the watergate story has shifted and unfolded over the last 50 years. there has been a lot of recent

scholarship in the last 20 or 30 years trying to reimagine richard nixon as the victim of watergate rather than the perpetrator. and this idea that he -- that figures like his chief of staff helped force him from office in the end and there are reasons to believe parts of that story but, as i said earlier, richard nixon's paranoid mindset and his pervasive criminality is clear and predates the burglary and cover-up itself, so i think there is a way to look at this that is the question of what transpires before the night of

june 1972 when the burglars are arrested and what transpires after. it is clear that at least before 19 -- before that night in june 1972 nixon was the perpetrator of the mindset and crimes and abuses of power that led to that night and those arrests. host: how helpful in your research was the nixon library in california? guest: the nixon library has a complicated relationship with watergate. it has been a long running battle between the president, when he was alive. he wanted to get his tapes and burn them after his presidency. the national archives has fought for decades to try to preserve the whole story of the nixon

impeachment, watergate, the nixon presidency. it has only been relatively recently under the leadership of the nixon library director that we have seen those keepers of the next legacy russell with nixon's true legacy. now the watergate story is the single largest exhibit at the next library, but there are still a lot of uncomfortableness about how to confront and tell the story of watergate among nixon loyalists. host: a couple more calls. first is kevin in texas. caller: what i want the guest to explain is how complex politics

is. nixon was a politician. nixon did a lot of good things, a lot of bad things. just explain to people how politicians are and they do the same thing today. >> this is one of the things that makes watergate fascinating to us half a century later, richard nixon fascinating to us, this mix of the light and dark, the idea that in many ways, had watergate never happened, richard nixon would be among the most consequential presidents of the 20th century. he was the first president to visit a communist country coming to visit moscow coming to visit china. -- communist country, to visit moscow, to visit china. he wound down the vietnam war. he created the environmental protection agency. he signed title ix legislation. in many ways, he really changed

the face of the country. yet all of that is now shorthanded with this scandal that has come to define all other scandals as watergate. host: in72 was george mcgovern? he wins reelection in 72 by the largest landslide in american presidential history. and, that is part of the deep irony and tragedy of watergate, all of these dirty tricks that he launched to try to shape the 72 election were probably not needed at all and he could have coasted to reelection, even without any of that. host: let us hear from joe on the independent line. caller: good morning, thank you so much for what you do. mr. graff, may i ask a very

personal question? what year were you born? guest: 1981. caller: ok, let me say this, what was your purpose in writing this book other than, i am no -- i know it is always good to make some money but i cannot figure out where you are coming from. i see a lot of parallels between the trump administration and the nixon administration, and i would just like to know where are you coming from and what is the purpose of the book? will it help us at this time when our democracy is being threatened? where you at that? host, -- host: let us hear from our guest. guest: this is an important part of the story that i as a journalist have spent the last five to six years covering russia's attack on the 2016

election and the muller investigation and everything that unfolded because of that. what we have seen is this paralysis in our politics, the polarization and partisan nature of our politics. what i wanted to do was to take this question of presidential abuses of power and go back to a moment when washington worked. because watergate, as i say in the book is in many ways the greatest story ever told of how power unfolds in washington. and, it is a moment where you see all of the institutions of american government, the press, the justice department, the executive branch, special prosecutors, courts, and senate come together to force this criminal and corrupt president from office. so, washington worked from 1972 to 1974.

you see all of the ways that the checks and balances of our constitution comes together, the way that article one works with article two, and three to achieve this larger goal of protecting our democracy and protecting our government. for me, telling this story today is about looking back at a moment in washington's history when our government worked and succeeded. and so, i wanted to tell that story using this lens of presidential abuses of power as a way to reflect the events that we have lived through over the last five years. as i said to someone, donald trump's name only appears once in the text of this book. but, he looms and his presidency looms almost almost -- almost over every page. rep. what is the cut -- host: what is the context? guest: that he has mentioned in the context of change that

richard nixon brings to the republican party. that richard nixon's southern strategy begets this turn towards racialized nationalist, anti-immigrant politics that really finds its natural conclusion in 2016 with the nomination and election of donald trump. host: randall in louisiana. caller: hello. i have a few reflections on what the author is saying. i was in college when this happened. and, i remember seeing the televised hearings, i think that they should be doing that yesterday with the former president. but i would say that a lot of the acolytes and offenders of

trump have been on over the years, particularly william dormant who i called in when you had him on c-span many years ago. and, he was talking about how richard nixon should have never been prosecuted, and i had a simple question for him, the people of the united states knew about richard nixon in 1972, what they found out about him in 1973, what they have voted for him? host: i believe it there. any comments or final thoughts? guest: this is a big part of looking back at this story is what it can teach us in this moment. and i think the urban committee really has a lot of lessons for the january 6 committee as it unfolds and works to try and bring to light the truth of what transpired on january 6.

and the contested election in 2020. this to me is a book that uses this lens of history to tell us a lot about what our modern times in politics can be and should be, and what we should be looking to our leaders to be doing at the moment. host: it is the new book on watergate, "watergate: a new history." great to have you with us. guest: thank you for having me. host: that will do it for this morning's program. we are back tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern. we hope you are too. enjoy the rest of your day. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2022] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪

>> coming up shortly we will have live coverage of a house oversight subcommittee hearing on protecting eastern europe from russian aggression. right now a portion of " washington we will be interested to hear how to fix your family and what to do about america's youth mental health crisis. we will get your calls and comments. we mentioned a report from the surgeon general came out in december. he talked about it yesterday -- last week before the senate finance committee. that committee held another hearing about it which just aired prior to this program on >> you can watch the rest of the segment if you go to our website, c-span.org. we will take you live to a house oversight subcommittee hearing