resident fellow liana fixed talks about the russia-ukraine conflict. join with your facebook comments, calls, text messages and tweets. washington journal is next. ♪ host: good morning and welcome to washington journal. tensions are rising in europe as russia sits poised on the ukrainian border. troops ready for a possible invasion. joe biden and his administration have been meeting with nato allies and the ukrainian president in hopes of stopping vladimir putin but no one knows yet what russia's next move will be. president biden will meet with the national security council on the ukrainian crisis as u.s. officials try to broker some kind of solution with russia.

our question to you this morning, what should the biden administration's next steps be? we open regular lines this morning. that means republicans, you can call (202)-748-8001. democrats, your number is going to be (202)-748-8000. independents, you can call (202)-748-8002. you can always text us at (202)-748-8003 and we are always reading on social media on facebook at facebook.com/c-span, on twitter @c-spanwj and instagram @c-spanwj. the biden administration has been meeting with its european allies and ukrainian officials this last couple of days to come to some type of solution with the russia-ukraine border crisis.

earlier today in munich, germany vice president kamala harris spoke to reporters. she discussed the ongoing situation regarding the russia-ukraine border crisis and the nato alliance. here is what vice president kamala harris had to say. [video clip] vp harris: this was an important trip to be here today. we are looking at a moment that is very decisive. certainly one of the founding reasons for nato which is european security and the connection and alliance between europe and the united states. this was a productive trip in terms of the extensive meetings that we had that were further ment of collaboration with our

allies. as you know, this is a moment that is very dynamic. it is not every hour, certainly every day, there seem to be new moments of interest and intelligence. and so -- we have affirmed, however, that this alliance is strong. about as strong as it was before and that this alliance has purpose and meaning founded on shared principles that are very much at play right now. as i mentioned yesterday, if we think about those principles one of the most important is about mutual respect from sovereignty and territorial integrity. that is what is at play in terms of russia's posture as it

relates to ukraine. at stake is the nato alliance in terms of our unity, joining together through, sometimes, compromise, certainly always collaboration to be a unified voice, especially when these founding principles are being compromised if not attacked. host: let's find out what the latest is on the diplomatic efforts between the united states, ukraine and russia. we bring on alex ward, national security reporter at politico. alex, good morning. guest: thank you for having me. host: first of all, react to what vice president kamala harris said. is that any new information? did we learn anything new from her talk earlier today? guest: not really. it is the stand the administration has taken this

whole crisis. however, this is somewhat more about ukraine, european security, world order, this is about whether or not the nato alliance has weathered, if it is as strong. what she affirmed is this is how big the administration sees it. it is about european security. it is not only about ukraine but order and to affirm that the alliance is strong and stronger then when the crisis began. i think this is more signaling to put in than anything --putin more than anything that you have strengthened your enemies, or perceived enemies. host: why should we care about ukraine and russia right now? is that something we should be concerned about or solely a

european problem? guest: it depends on how far out you want to look. in the immediate term it does not look like there are going to be u.s. troops in ukraine. if that is your number one concern, you do not have to worry about it. if you're worried about refugees flooding into europe from ukraine, if you are worried about another land war in europe, the largest we might see since 1945, if you are worried about humanitarian suffering, you can care about ukraine. if that does not get you, the other thing you should think about is a more advancing russia and creating a fault line between eastern europe and western europe. or i should say, non-nato eastern europe and nato plus western europe. this looks very cold warish and you do not want a standoff -- as many countries have nuclear

weapons -- and a spiraling situation. if that does not get you, no, do not care about the situation. host: the president said last week an invasion of ukraine could happen any day now with russia. what do we know? is there more information than that now? is there a timetable we should be looking toward? guest: two things you should be looking at. today, february 20, is the day most analysts were looking at we would get a better sense of putin's intentions. it is when the military exercises and, it is the end of the munich conference, the end of the olympics, so this is about the time we will get a sense of where putin is at. it is mostly the belarus-russia exercises. they promised, at least initially, russian troops would head home. that changed yesterday when it seems they were saying, no, we

have to do inspections and only the presidents are the ones that can get them to leave. if they duly belarus, do they go back to their garrisons or elsewhere in ukraine? i cannot confirm this unless i am on the ground but if you believe in certain social media reporters have been showing indicated there is a large movement of russian military equipment on the ukraine border now. more than we have seen closer to the actual front. now that we have reached february 20 may be in the days ahead we will see an offensive but diplomacy is still open and we have not seen a large-scale invasion yet. one can hope to avoid war. host: as you mentioned earlier president biden has stressed

sanctions not american boots on the ground. are all of our allies and nato on board with sanctions instead of military action? guest: military action seems firmly off the table. you will even see republicans in the united states say we don't want that. if the u.s. is not willing to go in militarily, i doubt the europeans are. in terms of sanctions, i think we have to be careful when we talk about sanctions. i think there is agreement there will be certain actions taken against the russians. the one thing people will look for is, well, is the u.s., germany, france going in at once? that is not how that works. the u.s. can go in quickly with the first sanction. then you can expect certain european countries will do their own sets of moves which are intricate shortly after. the eu, you can think of it as a tanker. but when sanctions go on they

are hard to come off. i think you can expect a series of actions, especially when it comes to sanctions on russia, but we should be careful if you see the u.s. move first and the europeans move second and a larger eu move, do not think of that as disunity. those are technical steps that need to be taken. the short answer is i think there is unanimity that will not be uniformity in terms of the reaction. host: secretary of state antony blinken is supposed to be meeting with the russian foreign minister later on this week. what can we expect come out of this meeting and how important is this meeting? guest: it will happen only if there is not renewed larger invasion of ukraine. if it is to happen, it is another opportunity for both sides to find a deal. and more russia to make a deal because the u.s. has put options

on the table. arms control, military exercises, and are willing to discuss those. whether there is an outcome we don't know but we have been wondering, how serious are the russians? especially considering they have been offering maximalist positions. if they are willing to not invade ukraine and settle for arms control and scope of military exercises, maybe we can avoid the worst and this administration, rightly, is always leaving the door to diplomacy open. but it will shut the moment it looks like the russians have fully gone into ukraine and we heard from president biden last week and other u.s. and world leaders they feel the decision has been made already. it is a slim chance but why not keep the door open until the last moment? host: one last question. outside of an actual invasion of ukraine this week by russia what should we be watching when it

comes to the russia-ukraine border crisis? guest: you should be looking for increased fighting in the donb ass. you should be looking for where the troops line up in belarus which are supposed to be heading back to garrisons. you should look for citizen mobilization inside of kyiv. does the mayor organize his civilian movement? do you see a change in the ukrainian military's posture within the country? even before that the real telltale sign the russians are going at it is if you see a large cyber attack on ukraine, missiles flying elsewhere in the country and if you see russian war jets flying above ukraine.

it will not be tanks rolling in. it will be that initial barrage. if you see that, i think the door to diplomacy is closed and we will see, unfortunately, a large land war in europe. host: we would like to thank alex ward, national security reporter for politico, for walking us through what is going on with the russia-ukraine border crisis. thank you for your time this morning. guest: thank you for having me. host: president joe biden will be meeting with the national security council today on the issue of ukraine and the hill has a story this morning i want to bring to you. i want to remind you if you want to talk about the russia border crisis, you can call in now. republicans, (202)-748-8001. democrats, (202)-748-8000. independents, (202)-748-8002. let's go to the story from the hill.

president biden will be convening a national security council meeting on ukraine sunday, jen psaki said in a statement saturday. president biden continues to monitor the evolving situation in ukraine as being updated regularly about events on the ground by his national security team. they reaffirmed russia could launch an attack against ukraine at any time, she said. she added the president had received an update on vice president harris' meeting at the munich security conference. meanwhile, the ukrainian president tweeted earlier saturday that he had an urgent conversation with french president emmanuel macron. the shelling of politicians and international journalists, discussed the possible ways of immediate de-escalation and political diplomatic settlement. this comes as officials estimate up to 190,000 russian troops

have been amassed near the ukrainian border. earlier this week russia claimed it pulled back some of its troops but nato and u.s. officials said it appeared russia was doing the opposite. that is from the hill newspaper with president biden convening the national security council later today to talk about ukraine. we want to know what you think the border crisis. james is calling from new port richey, florida on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. we have been given the -- the ukrainian military has the missiles. i think we should give put in something to worry about and said we given the ukraine cruise missiles the ukrainian military can program to aim them where putin might be staying in

his residence or whatever and let him think about him being the casualty of this war. it would give him something to think about, a dozen or so fired at where he might be. isaac you might think twice about what he is doing -- i think he might think twice about what he is doing. host: [indiscernible] caller: i am talking about giving the ukrainian military cruise missiles. maybe they can attach them to a satellite and tell putin -- maybe a blessed -- but the ukrainians can hit him and let him be a casualty. he always has these other people

getting wounded or killed. he might be a casualty of his own doing. the cruiser missile, i do not think they can pick it up that easy on radar. if the ukrainians have a dozen or so, tell him we have a dozen, and they are aimed at him. let him really get involved with his war. host: jeremiah calling from washington, d.c. on the democrat line. good morning. caller: hi. my comment is that there is not much we can do sadly. i am a democrat. i do not like putin. i feel sorry for the ukrainians but russia is sitting on a lot of munitions. they have not been involved in many wars like the united states. they have not spent their munitions. their population is not tired of war like ours is.

we can do a lot of stuff on the economic side, freezing the oligarch's money and all that. on another point that involves a previous administration and their policy toward ukraine and russia i hope republicans are thinking about that moment when lavrov was invited into the oval office by trump and trump shared state secrets with him. i think republicans got to take a look at how treasonous and terrible that incident was. host: let's go to rob calling from to port crane, new york on the independent line. caller: i cannot believe c-span. every day you are russia, ukraine, russia, ukraine.

have a great day. host: let's go to ethel calling from new york city on the democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning. i cannot believe i am following that call. i am disturbed about the vice president's manner of speaking. i cannot say it myself, she needs elocution of speech. she drives me crazy. she is out there representing us. why doesn't someone tell her she has to speak with passion like the dull thing she is reading. if trump had been president now, we would be sunk. that is my thought for the day. thank you for taking my call, jesse. host: let's go to les calling from dodge city, kansas on the republican line.

caller: i have a message for vladimir putin. i think you need some more tanks, vladimir. those kindergartners are very tough. i heard they might even join nato. you better watch out for them kindergartners. they are pretty tough. they might whip you. host: john calling from bedford, new york on the democrat line. caller: good morning. with russia's focus on the ukrainian situation this might be a good time to amp up efforts to encourage and enable democracy in russia which is so badly beaten down. host: all right. yesterday ukrainian president volodymyr zelensky spoke at the munich security conference. he criticized the western response to the russian annexation of crimea in 2014 and

the responses of international organizations like the united nations. here is what the ukrainian president had to say. [video clip] >> how do we get to this point in the 21st century where the war is being raged and people are dying in europe? it is longer than world war ii. how did we end up in the biggest security crisis at the end of the cold war? to me, the president of the country who lost thousands of its people, surrounded by 150,00 0 with heavy machine urinary on machinery on the border, this is no longer working. they are neither catching up know i being effective in overcoming them like a cough syrup instead of a good covid vaccine.

the security system is slow and failing us time and again because of different things, arrogance, and a responsibility of countries on the global level. some countries are committing crimes while others resort to indifference. indifference that will turn them into accomplices. 15 years ago it was the russian federation that made the statement here putting the challenge to the global security. how did the world respond? appeasement. what do we have as a result? the annexation of crimea and aggression of my country at the very least. the u.n., which was called, said security cannot protect itself when its charter was being violated. the u.n. itself is ignoring the

crimean platform established to deoccupy. it was here years ago when angela merkel said, putin can pick up the pieces of the world's puzzle. only all of us together. the room stood up to applaud. unfortunately, it failed to turn into collective action. now that the world is talking of threat of a big war, is there anything left to pick up? the security architecture of europe and beyond is almost destroyed. it is too late to talk about fixing it. it is high time for a new one. host: let's see what our social you followers are saying about what the blind do next and the russia-ukraine border crisis. here is one post from facebook that says, putin plays the game of blackmailing the world with his crazy acts just like the

little rocket man in north korea. sad state of affairs. i say sanction them to know and and ignore the dictators. here's a tweet that says, putin is acting like hitler. naked aggression by russia. bloodbath in the making. here's a text that says, the president needs to arrange another call with putin, and nancy has a commitment from putin not to invade, and start to bring back deployed troops. talks can still go on but the brinkmanship can end. another that says, maybe when vice president harris gets home she can visit the southern border. a tweet that says, the most astonishing turnabout in the history of american politics is the desperate eagerness with which the dop are and neighboring --gop are enabling put in.

this after 50 years of lacerating the former ussr is what reagan called "the evil empire." this one says, russia should de-escalate and go home. ukraine is not a threat and anyone just once to be left alone. the lines are open. republicans, (202)-748-8001. democrats, (202)-748-8000. independents, (202)-748-8002. shirley is calling from goldendale, washington on the republican line. caller: good morning. hello, c-span. i want to say america needs to take care of america. we have our own situations and putin just wants control of the oil and gas out of burisma into france and germany and the european nations. the european nations need to

suck it up and start defending their own problems -- let's not forget who was involved with burisma that is in the white house. thank you. have a good day. host: john calling from lindenhurst, new york on the independent line. good morning. caller: morning. thank you for taking my call. host: go ahead. caller: i agree with the previous caller on the phone. why should we get into another bloody war and send our boys and girls over, come back with no legs or dead? let germany and france take care of it and nato -- ukraine should

not be in nato. ukraine should not be in the eu. let's just stay out of it. host: let's go to nick calling from los angeles, california on the republican line. good morning. caller: hello, sir. good morning. my name is nick and i am in california. i have a ci5 squad friend since 1989. this did not happen just now. this used to happen a long time ago he used to tell me. russia used to come into our country to visit. they might have talked to somebody else for them to attack

anybody and that is terrible. it is terrible. host: let's go to philip calling from new york on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. i am wondering, russia does not need more land. i am wondering about resources. is he looking for lithium or oil? what is underneath ukraine that he really is after? i don't see any point in him making a war. he just wants the resources to have more power over the rest of the world. if it is lithium or something like that, it is going to be a huge event for him. host: all right. lee calling from holland, michigan on the democrat line. good morning. caller: here we are again talking about russia-ukraine for, what, two weeks now?

this is a little bit out of control. even zelensky, the ukrainian president, said, hey, the american media, how about you back off a little bit? oh yes, this is what the democrats do. here we are going to another country, hey, we have a border crisis on our own border but no, let's talk about ukraine. your topics are all democrat driven. they tell us what topics to do every day. what do you think about russia-ukraine? hey, russia-ukraine. nobody cares.

the thing about republicans and trump is the policies work. democrats have the propaganda. host: didn't you dial in on the democrat line? caller: i did. host: paul calling from meridian, connecticut on the democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning, jesse. i have a different take on this entire issue. first of all, i don't believe putin is planning on invading the ukraine. i think he is doing everything he can to make it look like he is going to invade ukraine and i think his purpose is several full. one, it creates disunity in the united states. two, to weaken any investment going into the ukraine. and create disharmony within nato. i don't believe there is going

to be an invasion but i think we should have a firmer response and the response should be, relative to his aggressive action, with nato allies, begin to reinforce our borders with ukraine in both poland and romania. i think that sends a clear message you will understand and it will not happen overnight but slowly but surely we can withdraw and he will withdraw. i don't believe an invasion is going to happen. i don't believe that is his intention. he is playing the long game of disruption. host: reuters just sent out a new story that may bring light to what is going on in ukraine. russia says it was doing military drills with belarus and those drills would end today and it would remove its troops from the ukraine border. well, reuters has a flash that

says, russia and belarus are extending military drills due to end on sunday. the belarus defense minister said, in a step that further intensifies pressures on ukraine as western leaders warn of imminent invasion. that comes out of reuters. the so-called russia-belarus military exercise that was supposed to end today february 20 the belarus defense minister now says those military drills will be extended. which means the russian troops that were supposed to leave starting today will continue to stay near ukraine. let's go back to our phone lines and start talking to jim calling from claremore, oklahoma on the republican line. caller: morning. this whole thing is smoke and mirrors being pushed by the democrats in the democrat media.

the real threat is the democrat party under biden. our southern border is an invasion we should be worried about hurting our economy. china, we should not accept a single product from china after they did that with the pandemic they supposedly caused. abuse from the white house of american freedoms with the vaccine mandates. that is the invasion to every american we should be worried about not overseas that we should not even be involved in. afghanistan, the way biden left millions of dollars in military equipment and abandoned our allies, that is the invasion we should be worried about. host: let's talk to adrian calling from olstead

falls, ohio on the democrat line. caller: thank you for welcoming all these views. i have to say, we need to focus on the ukrainian people. my coworker is sending funds back to his family while their prices are rising on good. just horrible feelings about pressure. putin's strategy reflects, i think, a similar concept of the trump administration. walls and borders and boundaries we place on nationalism leads to violence. it just hurts people. host: yesterday, british prime minister boris johnson spoke at the munich security conference and he discussed the need for western europe to stand together and reduce energy and financial dependence on russia.

here is what the british prime minister had to say. [video clip] pm. johnson: britain will always stand up for freedom and democracy around the world. and when i say our commitment to european securities is immovable and unconditional, our deeds show that we mean our words. we are making the biggest contribution of nato -- to nato of any european ally because we understand the importance of collective security, and just as our european friends stood by us after the russian state used chemical weapons in salisbury, so britain will stand by you. but we must accept that these measures by the u.k. and our allies, dirty money, for our

ukrainian friends, they may not be enough to deter russian aggression. and it is vital that we learn the lessons of 2014. whatever happens in the next few days and weeks we cannot allow european countries to be blackmailed by russia. we cannot allow the threat of russian aggression to change the security architecture of europe. we cannot permit a new division of our continent into spheres of influence and we must wean ourselves off dependence of putin's oil and gas. i understand the cost and complexities of this effort and the fact it is easier said than done. i am grateful to chancellor schultz's assurances about nord stream 2. but the lessons of the last few years and of gascom's manipulation of european gas

supply cannot be ignored. we must ensure that by making full use of alternative supplies and technology we make russia's threats redundant. that will be the work of the months and years to come as well as the necessary and overdue steps we in the u.k. must do to protect our own financial system. host: let's see what some of our social media followers are saying about the russia-ukraine border crisis. here is one tweet that says, putin made a big mistake. he thought u.s., nato would hem and haw but they are unified. the ukrainian defense will make russia look like child's play. another tweet that says, russian needs the naval points and cannot allow u.s. troops and weapons on ukrainian soil. america would not allow russia to set up a base in canada or mexico. another tweet that says, if we

made a deal to support ukraine if they gave up their nuclear weapons, we should keep honoring it. nato is a support capacity and that is where it should stay. post from facebook that says, i feel for the ukrainian people. such a beautiful people and wonderful country. they have already endured so much and then this, a travesty. the u.s. and europe need to stop putin's expansion into europe, now. one last facebook post, in 1994 ukraine gave up their nuclear weapons stockpile which was ranked number three in the world. they did so with the guarantee of the world their borders would be respected. do we go back on our agreement? we want to know what you're thinking about the russia-ukraine border crisis and what you think the should do next. judy calling from

elberton, georgia on the independent line. caller: with the olympics ending today i would assume he would invade in the next couple of days. we should be giving him severe sanctions. i also have a concern about the international space station. what danger is there and him taking the international space station? i wish you would have a guest some that could discuss that. host: ryan calling from michigan on the democrat line. good morning. caller: yes, sir. i was curious as to why the president decided to pull our diplomats out of the embassy. as you know, when we have diplomats there it is considered american soil. nato does not have the right to really defend anything. host: i do not think having

diplomats in the embassy is the only thing that makes it american soil. i think the embassy itself is american soil whether there are diplomats in there or not. caller: i hope you are right but it seems like the rhetoric -- all this aggression changed after the rhetoric. i have a democratic voter but it seems like they are opening the door for them to invade. host: frank calling from silver creek, georgia on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. wow, i don't know. i don't think anyone wants a war in europe. i think a lot of this is frenzy being whipped up by the fake news media. if trump had been president, we would be at war right now. no. he would have said germany, france, great britain, it is time to tow the line and we

would not be taking the first hit. if you ever get a chance to watch "the last czars," it talks about the bolshevik revolution and war after war after war. we keep getting into wars, inflation keeps going up. in germany right now you can get a 30 year mortgage for less than 1%. yeah. why are we spending our money to protect people that will not protect themselves? host: let's go to richard calling from palmetto, florida on the democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i cannot believe how many brainwashed cult members call in with propaganda russian ideas. putin is a thug. couldn't needs to be dealt with -- putin needs to be dealt with.

to allow him to just walk in and take over ukraine would be a huge mistake economically add for the people of europe. thank you. host: joe: from charleston, south carolina on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak. i think it is important for anyone listening what success russia sees with ukraine is going to be imitated with china and taiwan. that is all i wanted to say. host: louise calling from fredericksburg, virginia on the republican line. caller: good morning. i wanted to comment on how so many people ignore what president zelensky is saying. he says he wants to talk to putin.

they need to meet. he is saying he is not afraid. he is saying all the things opposite to what president biden is saying. i am wondering, why are all the fops running the world? boris johnson was a disgrace. mr. trudeau up north is a disgrace. they dress nice and talk and they are fops. they are not people. these people are so self absorbed into their own selves -- and i'm talking about mr. biden also. he is a fop. we have fops running the world. host: yesterday vice president kamala harris was speaking at the munich security conference and she discussed russia's response to the ongoing diplomatic effort and warned of the consequences russia will

face if they actually invade ukraine. here is what vice president kamala had to say. [video clip] vp. harris: as president joe biden has made clear, the united states, our nato allies, and our partners have been and remain open to serious diplomacy. we have put concrete proposals on the table. we have encouraged and engaged russia through nato. the united nations and bilateral dialogues. we have engaged in good faith. russia continues to claim it is ready for talks while at the same time it narrows the avenues for diplomacy.

their actions simply do not match their words. and let me be clear, i can say with absolute certainty if russia further invade ukraine, the united states together with our allies and partners will impose significant and unprecedented economic costs. [applause] we have worked intensely with many of you in this room to ensure we are prepared to move forward with consequences. we have prepared together economic measures that will be swift, severe, and united. we will impose far-reaching

financial sanctions and export controls. we will target russia's financial institutions and key industries. and we will target those who are complicit and those who aid and abet this unprovoked invasion. make no mistake, the impositions of these sweeping and coordinated measures will inflict great damage on those who must be held accountable. and we will not stop with economic measures. we will further reinforce our nato allies on the eastern flank. host: let's see what some of our social media followers are saying about the russia-ukraine border crisis. here is one tweet that says, ukraine cannot fight russia.

they will just die for nothing. another tweet that says, why doesn't nato take a vote as to if they want ukraine to join them? they will vote no and russia will not invade ukraine. problem solved. a facebook post that says, if putin wants war, give it to him. he is already a threat to world peace. ukraine is a sovereign country and has every right to her diplomatic relations. another facebook post that says, if we made a deal to support ukraine, if they gave up nuclear weapons, we should keep honoring it. nato is a support capacity and that is where it should stay. one less facebook post that says, thus far everything the administration has done has been pretty much a disaster. with his track record i would stay out of it. we want to know what you think about the russia-ukraine border crisis. let's go to david calling from

ohio on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning and thank you for taking my call. first of all let me say i hope there is a peaceful, democratic resolution to the conflict. but the way -- i have been studying history on my own -- american foreign policy is not driven by protecting democracy, it is driven by wall street investment. you look at the war in iraq, the war in vietnam. the war in iraq especially. we were after the oil, let's not kid ourselves. i am a main street, working-class patriot not a wall street patriot. wall street drives american investment. it is not democracy. if we cared about democracy, we would not supporting the saudi arabian prince that murdered

that individual at the turkish embassy. both parties are run by the oligarchy and there is not just an oligarchy in the united states but in russia. there is an oligarchy in countries all around the world. for england to lecture about invading another country, england had colonial india for hundreds of years and they sent the sun never sets on the british empire. what kind of self-determination to the english promote? it as a joke. you have to see the economic side of all of this but i think there was some kind of deal made where russia was promised nato would not expand in an eastward direction but nato has been expanding toward russia. i think russia has some legitimate concerns. they have ethnic russians inside

ukraine in the eastern part of the ukraine. i am not saying russia does not have some serious problems with the way it conducts its business because they have an oligarchy, too. i just hope americans do not jump in and be hypocrites in areas where hopefully we can find a diplomatic solution. host: let's go to judalone. caller: i agree with the last caller from ohio and the lady from south carolina. i am not sure if she was calling the politicians fops or bots. i am going to call them ghetto daggers.

but these presidents, heads of states, people running these countries, governments all across the world, they are incredibly dysfunctional. they don't need to be in power. the people want peace. life is a gift. we want to live life beautifully. we are in 2022. there is so much technology, so much wealth, so many resources. when they told us there were too many people and not enough resources we have now moved to a disposable economy. host: lee calling from seattle, washington on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning a thank you to c-span. there has been many comments i agree with. i will keep it brief because i am super nervous. i think it is so important our leaders come to peaceful agreements at this time when

they are comparing this to possibly what could be -- i don't want to say the words -- but since world war ii this would be the next biggest possible world effect. i really think it has to do with the global energy flow. the disruption of that i think it leads to the ultimate power struggle over the nuclear weapons. the supply that ukraine has. iran is having nuclear talks. all these middle eastern countries, especially saudi arabia, basically vying for the world's oil supply, mainly to europe, to intervene russia's supply. i could go on but i am rambling because i'm so nervous. that is my main point.

i am hoping for peaceful results because the irony is after we just got done fighting a war saving lives we are going to be possibly killing uncountable numbers of people. host: maria calling from fort lauderdale, florida on through republican line. good morning. caller: my concern is about ignoring the history. i want to remind every single one of us the first four wars started in eastern europe. the second war started in eastern europe and now we have a third world war in eastern europe. i want us to remember we also had crisis here in the 1960's. we did not want missiles close to our country, close to our land. we wanted to defend our borders

and i am saying yes, russia is it said about that. they don't want missiles next to their border and what should i say? i think what -- what does nato do? what is their mission here? what is their mission? not peace, not prosperity. i just feel we are not seeing what is happening and i say, lord, god almighty, help us. host: joel calling from san marco's, texas on the democratic line. caller: listener, first time caller. i love your show. probably my fair political show.

i agree with the previous caller about parroting russian propaganda. i wanted to remind people of nato's history and in all the history since nato existed the treaty has only been invoked a single time and that was after 9/11 when all of these countries came to our aid to fight terrorism. when i hear people say, what are you doing with nato? why should we help them? it confuses me. i don't know. i also want to say hearing some of these things of, we should take care of our own border. but then i look at the pictures and these are women and children and not tanks and missiles and bombs. it is not fair to compare those things.

host: carol calling from georgia on the republican line. good morning. caller: i am calling in about putin and biden. putin is making money off the oil. i cannot imagine nobody cutting out all the oil and giving it to russia and then going to do something about it. he ain't going to do nothing. i don't know if united states can go three more years of him in office. he is going to put the united states under. host: steve calling from vienna, west virginia on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. the last president, only half of the audience clapped.

how are you going to help nobody? let's turn this around. let's say florida wanted to leave the united states. why should we come over and help them? it is the same thing. china is going to overcome the united states military. [indiscernible] the united states goes around starting wars. thank you very much. host: ziggy calling from brooklyn, new york on the democrat line. caller: good morning. i am calling in reference to some history.

could you get somebody that knows european history and ukrainian history? host: hang around because later on we will have someone from the german marshall fund who will be here that will talk about what is going on between russia and ukraine grade we would like to thank all of our callers for that first segment. coming up next, republican strategist brendan buck and democratic strategist rebecca piercy will join us to talk about the week in politics. later, liana fix from the german marshall fund joins us to talk again about the deepening crisis between russia and ukraine. stick with us. we will be right back. ♪ ♪ announcer: on almost all presidential rankings list you will find warren harding's name at or near the bottom. tonight on q&a in honor of president's day historian ryan

walters says while harding had his faults his accomplishments are often overlooked, including bringing the country back to normalcy after world war i and an economic plan that led to the roaring 20's. in his book mr. walters lays out his case for why president harding should rank higher. >> he has he has ranked last ine presidential surveys than any other president. harding has come up a few notches in recent years but what has been said about him is really in the realm of myth. there are a lot of myths about harding, and outright lies. when you look at his true record and what he accomplished as a president, it is quite impressive. host: historian ryan walters tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. you can listen to q&a an all of our podcasts on our new free

c-span now app. >> weekends bring you book tv, featuring leading authors discussing the latest nonfiction books. the 64 days following the 2020 president election -- president election are chronicled in the steel, the attempt to overthrow the election and those who worked to stop it. also, talking about the book, the dumbest generation grows up, from stupefied youth to radical adults -- dangerous adults. he was interviewed by the cultural editor of the federalist. watch book tv and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org. >> i can report to the nation,

america is on the move again. >> live tuesday, march 1, the state of the union. president biden addresses a joint session of congress, reflecting on his first year in office and laying out his agenda for the year ahead. live coverage begins at 8:00 p.m. eastern, followed by the republican response. the state of the union address, live tuesday, march 1 at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-span.org or the c-span now radio -- the c-span now mobile app. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with republican strategist brendan buck and democratic strategist rebecca pearcey. we will talk about what is going on in politics but before we talk about that, i want to ask both of our strategists about what is going on in russia and ukraine, and how it affects american politics.

let's start with you first, rebecca. how is the border crisis affecting american politics, or is it? rebecca: it will definitely have an impact on american politics and i was listening to the hour before about the commentary about u.s.'s place in nato and supporting our allies in ukraine, and i think what i want to reiterate and get some dialogue going on is the u.s. and their allies have made it very clear to both russia and ukraine as well as our allies in nato that we will stand with ukraine and that there will be consequences if russia continues with this invasion. i also heard you talking about the russian training exercises being continued. i know they were going to stop today and they are continuing for an unknown amount time. this is a situation we have to continue to monitor and one that is not going to go away quickly or easily.

host: brendan, your thoughts on the border crisis? brendan: as a national security matter, i've been heartened how the west has been united, and even politics in the united states, republicans and democrats have been relatively united now. what does this mean for domestic american politics? i don't know too many voters who are tuned into this and making decisions about future leaders on this but situations like this tend to dominate the news cycle and take away attention and can really threaten anything else they are trying to do. these crises that you don't see coming can define your legacy. there was a long story to be told about this, and we have a state of the union coming up, there are a lot of things going on, but you could end up in a situation where this is the dominant focus of the biden administration for a time to

come. hopefully it is not. hopefully the threat recedes but it could be one of those big moments in his presidency. host: let's turn to medically -- directly to domestic u.s. politics and the u.s. presidency. right now, 538.com has a poll that shows president biden's at 41.6% approval and 53.1% disapproval. i will stick with you, brendan. put these numbers in context for the biden administration. it is only one year into his presidency and he is at 41.6% democratic strategist put that into -- he is at 41 point 6%. put that into perspective for the audience. brendan: that is really bad. the first midterm election after a new president typically does not go well for his party. 1994, when newt gingrich came in and they wanted -- in 2010 when

i was on capitol hill first year, first midterm of barack obama, he lost 63 seats and in the first midterm after donald trump selection, the occurrence back into power. history and not -- the history is against him and that number you are talking right there, that approval rating, midterm elections tend to be referendums on the president and if the referendum shows that only about 41% of the country approves of the job he is doing, you should expect a pretty big wave of republicans taking back the house in the next election. we still have time to go but time is definitely running out and these are really poor numbers. as a referendum this is not looking good for democrats right now. host: rebecca, 41.6 percent does not look good for the president in his first year. is there time to turn this around, and what is causing these low numbers? rebecca: that 41 does not look good but there is time to turn it around.

we should all look back at where we were a year ago and since eitan took office, we have seen 6.6 million new jobs, down to 4% unemployment, we have 500 billion doses of the vaccine in peoples arms and there is time to turn this around. i think there are also republican dynamics at play, that we should take into consideration because joe biden is not the only one who will have an impact on what will happen in the midterms. i think donald trump is very much still a factor in escalating some of these republican primaries. he is elevating flawed candidates that are not electable, out of step with the mainstream republican voters. and he is engaging in these game show like primaries, where he is forcing them to choose sides and get locked in these expensive primaries that are not going to be sustainable for an eventual republican nominee and some of the toughest races up and down the ticket in november. host: let's stick with rebecca for this.

in the house, where most people think the democrats are the most vulnerable to republican takeover, so far 30 democrats have announced retirement, compared with only 13 republicans. do you think there was a chance for democrats to hold the house in the midterm election? rebecca: i do think there is a chance to hold these districts in november for house democrats. i think we are also forgetting that we are running in new districts and why -- while we are not sure what those districts will look like exactly in places like florida and ohio, we feel good about our chances in some of these districts that are new, and the dynamics are new. we will be looking for those, to make sure that democrats are being competitive, but also that they are communicating their messages and it is a new district. it is not like we can just say this is a republican district because it has been, in years now -- in years past.

we don't know how these district are going to perform. conventional wisdom is that -- i will say that i think a different era than it was in 2010 and 1994, because we've gotten so much more news and information at our fingertips, but also we have a much more engaged electorate, particularly on issues like health care, also jobs and the economy and thinking about covid. that is one of the things that i think is contributing to president biden's low approval ratings. host: brendan, what are the republican chances in the house and if republicans take the house, who is the new speaker? brendan: i'm pretty confident republicans will take back the house. they only need five seats. this isn't a typical situation where you need a blowout night win.

only a five seat swing is needed to take back the house. i think a lot of rebecca's points are right. politics our national right now. it is not a situation where people are able to run on their local issues. because they are all national and because this ends up being a referendum on the presidency and on covid and the economy and inflation, that is probably why republicans are feeling really good right now. i think kevin mccarthy is going to be speaker of the house. i think he is doing all the things he needs to do, to keep his conference in line with him. we've got two goals here, obviously win back the house but at the same time, make sure numbers of the house who typically give leadership trouble are there with him. he has established relationships with people like jim jordan and the freedom caucus, to shore up his right flank and if republicans win the house, he will have a good argument to

make that he got them here and he knows how to get republicans elected and they will end up supporting him. host: let me take a second to remind our viewers that they can take part in this conversation. we will open up our regular lines. republicans, you can call. (202)-748-8001. democrats, your line is (202)-748-8000. independents, you can call (202)-748-8002. keep in mind, you can always text us at (202)-748-8003. we are always reading on social media on twitter and on facebook. i want to stick with congress a little bit more before we go back to the presidency. brendan, in the senate, the gop is defending 20 of the 34 seats that are up for grabs in november. this includes five open seats,

with gop retirements in battleground states like pennsylvania, north carolina, ohio, missouri and alabama. what are the gop chances in the senate? do we see the gop taking over the senate after midterms? brendan: i would rather be a republican than a democrat in the senate right now. i think it is going to be a closer race than the house. a lot of seats there defending will clearly be in the republican column so you don't have to worry about too much. the biggest challenge republicans have right now is who the nominee is going to be. you have a bit of a proxy battle taking place between mitch mcconnell and donald trump over who is going to represent republicans in november. there are a lot of candidates who are running who want to be that trump like nominee, and states where potentially that could be problematic. i'm from georgia, and it seems like herschel walker has cleared the field. i don't think he is particularly

a good general election canada in a state where republicans should be able to take back that senate seat that was lost just last time, but all politics our national. if there is a big wave, a big night for republicans, which i think a lot of people are respecting, it may not matter who the nominee is as much and you may see republicans take back the senate. i would expect republicans to take back the senate, but it is not quite the slamdunk that the house is. host: rebecca, do you agree? rebecca: i agree that herschel walker is not a good general election candidate. i think he is right though. this is the year for senate republicans to worry about who their nominees are in a lot of these states, which democrats won in 2020 and our candidates are up for reelection. new hampshire, divider, arizona and georgia, places joe biden carried in 2020. we also have some challenge races where the democrats came

within one point. pennsylvania, wisconsin, north carolina. we also have opportunities to expand in places like ohio where you are seeing republican retirement and in florida. i do think it is really about who those general election nominees are, but i also think this goes back to what i said at the top, that donald trump is definitely -- he is a factor in this and there is no getting away from it for republicans, which i think will be problematic in november for them. host: let's turn back and talk about the presidency again. during the super bowl, the nrcc ran an ad attacking president biden and talking about high inflation that american voters are facing right now. i want to show you the ad and then have you react to it. [video clip] >> everything you need to kick off super bowl weekend just got more expensive.

biden and house democrats have teamed up to create skyrocketing inflation. guacamole up 100%. chicken wings up 20%. burgers up 17%. joe biden's inflation is intercepting your paycheck. host: rebecca, americans are facing high inflation right now. does the biden administration have worries about this being the key issue in the midterm election? rebecca: i don't know that i would say the administration has worries that this is going to be the main focus of the midterms. i will say it is something that the biden administration is addressing. i will also say if republicans were willing to play ball and help us out on inflation, they would have sent any of the people -- any representatives to fill those five seats on the fed

at a meeting this week and instead there were no republicans and an entire room full of democrats ready to confirm these five nominees. i don't think one president alone can help inflation or supply chain issues or any of that. i think we need republicans to help us figure out how to fix this problem going forward. host: brendan, is inflation the issue of the midterm elections? brendan: it certainly is. i know democrats are going to great lengths to say the economy is actually good, and that there is job growth. there may be job growth, but when you're purchasing power is going down, that is the whole ballgame. that affects everybody. it would be one thing if the white house had acknowledged this early on and mr. did a commitment to fighting it somewhat famously, they laughed at it early on and rolled their eyes at the idea that this was going to be a topic. i thought it was going to come and go. not only were they wrong, they were pursuing an agenda, a very

costly agenda that would have been inflationary on top of this. ,\ think they can thank joe manchin for slowing that down and not making the situation worse. they looked like they were out of touch and not paying attention to it and certainly republicans are going to have a very good argument that a lot of the spending that took place early in the biden administration did to this. i will acknowledge freely there are a lot of factors that drive inflation, certainly the trillions of dollars pumped into the economy has overheated and now americans are paying the price for it, and i think democrats are going to pay the price in november. host: how much of this is the biden demonstration going to be able to say, we are in a pandemic and it is not our policy, and we are trying to get out of it? do you think american voters will still think we are in a pandemic and it was the pandemic that caused inflation when we get around to november? brendan: i don't think voters really care whether the pandemic contributed to it.

we will be two years into a new administration and joe biden was elected to solve problems and democrats don't get to make that argument in a vacuum. republicans will point out there were trillions of dollars pumped into the economy that contributed to this, and the democrats on top of this want to spend even more. instead of focusing on this focal issue that americans are thinking about every day, they were trying to put in place a sweeping progressive agenda and it just looks like they had their eye off of the ball. they can make whatever argument they want but excuses don't matter much in an election, especially for someone like joe biden who was running on the idea of being a competent leader with a competent government. i don't think people are seeing that and that is one of the reasons why he has a lot of stash lost a lot of the independents who voted for him less than two years ago. host: back to you rebecca. how much can democrats say we are still in a pandemic economy and we are trying to work our way out of it?

do you think voters will say president biden came in, and the middle of a pandemic, let's give them a little time to get us out of it? rebecca: brendan is right on this. people are not going to care come november. we will be two years into the administration, so it is incumbent on the biden administration and democrats as a whole to start communicating more about what joe biden is doing for us, for the country and what this in administration is doing. that is job growth but brendan is also right. we need to connect job growth to buying power. that means we need to fix inflation, we need to figure it out fast so people are not feeling it in their pockets by the time november elections roll around. host: let's let some of our viewers take part in this conversation. we will start with tom calling from pittsburgh, california on the democrat line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i find it interesting that when

it comes to situations like this that the people are looking toward the president, for him to pull out a magic wand and wave it and everything is going to come back, and everything is going to be fine. the thing is that you are looking at the president. the fact of the matter is a lot of this has to do with congress, and if congress on the public inside or democrat side, they are fighting amongst themselves all the time, nothing is going to get done, and who is paying the price for it? it is the american people. my question is this. republicans, democrats, who are you working for? are you working for your party or the american people? you see where we are? i can get rude but i won't. the bottom line is this. midterm elections, where going to change seats. is anything going to get done? we still have a problem.

i don't care if it is republicans or democrats, as long as they are going to keep feuding among themselves, we are not going to get anything done. host: i will let you address that first, brendan and then rebecca. brendan: that is a frustration that a lot of people have, and i certainly agree that washington could work a lot better. as a political matter, if you have a lot of people who are that frustrated in the country right now and share that view, it tends to not work out well for the incumbent party and that is what democrats need to worry about. no matter your political persuasion, you are frustrated right now. covid is still sticking around, the economy is not bouncing back the way that you hoped and it affects the amount of money you have to spend. when there is that kind of palpable frustration two years into a new administration, that is not where you want to be and i think democrats were slow to realize there is that frustration out there.

host: rebecca? rebecca: brendan is also correct here and it is completely valid for tom to be frustrated about what is going on in washington, d.c. it is a complicated and frustrating place. it is why you are seeing some retirements both with democrats and republicans. i think elections have consequences, and that means when we are thinking about who we want to elect, we need to think about do they have my best interest at heart and that is something i think republican voters are going to need to take a close look at in november when they are thinking about who my voting for and what is going to happen in washington, d.c. if they are there? host: the administration and its allies are also taking to the airwaves to promote the build back better plan, and to rally democrats to the administration side. here is an ad that was put out

in pennsylvania, wisconsin and georgia, aimed toward african-american voters. [video clip] >> and his first year, president biden focused on fixing the big problems we face and he delivered. biden made a plan to cut child poverty and it worked. the biggest drop in child poverty ever. biden passed laws that have already lowered health-care costs for hundreds of thousands of black families and passed laws that will replace lead pipes and millions of black homes because families deserve clean drinking water. president biden, real results. host: brendan, are those types of advertisements enough to bring up president biden's approval ratings in the united states? brendan: it is a really interesting ad and you have to look at who he is targeting here and that is really interesting. in a lot of ways, democratic -- black women got him elected and

there are a lot of black americans right now who i think are frustrated with the results the administration has seen. a lot of this goes back to voting rights. the president made a bunch of noise about voting rights and then they failed to do anything about it. one of the problems the democrats have is not only have a loss the middle, their base is depressed and what i hear when i see that ad is they are trying to pump up their base, they are worried that the most important voting blocs that they have, black women and black voters in general, who swept joe biden into the white house are abandoning them, so they have to communicate to them. i don't think that ad is necessarily going to change their fortunes. i think a lot of the build back better act, we know it is sort of stuck, so i think they are grasping a little bit but it is interesting that going into an election, they feel like they need to pump up their base more than persuade the middle. host: rebecca, do you think that

was a good ad that helps the democratic cause and helps president biden? rebecca: i will say as a political operative whose been doing this for over 20 years, i think it is interesting and good that an administration wants to start communicating with the people that brought them to the dance this early in the midterms and i don't think that is a bad thing insuring them up. i think it is -- in showing them up. i think it is a respect thing. we've heard black and latino voters say i wish you would committee kate with me more than when it is just time to vote. this is explaining how we are delivering for the american people. i hope you will continue to vote for me and you can count on me. that is part of what i think these ads are designed to do. i know there is a sister latina add in some other states and from what i've heard from some of these communities, it is a

welcome communication from an administration that has not happened before. we have not seen this type of engagement. i understand brendan's point about it maybe covering our bases instead of motivating that persuadable voter but we need these bases to come up for us in the midterms too. host: let's go back to our phone lines and talked to gary, calling from -- on the republican line. caller: good morning. i've got three points i would like to make quickly. you democrats own it. you own the border crisis. it is a mess. trump had it under control. you own our energy policy. people are paying fuel bills that are out of sight, high prices to fuel their cars. this affects democrats and republicans. the third is this lgbt agenda you are trying to shove down people's throats and people that

i know don't want to agree -- don't want to agree with it. try to deny that and try to say that is not going to come up in the election on people's minds. thank you. host: rebecca, i will let you take that first. rebecca: i will take energy and fuel costs first because what we need to remember is this is not totally a national issue. this comes from states as well. a state and thinking of in particular is texas, where just over a year ago, we saw a deep-freeze and what happened is greg abbott and republicans and the republican held railroad commission, which is misnamed because the regular toilet and gas in texas, failed and did not update the grid and over 700 texans lost their lives. i will say that this is not something that one president in washington, d.c. can fix. i would also look to the states

to make sure they are putting in place good laws and updating infrastructure, which they should have the money to do, to make sure people are not freezing to death in their homes, and are feeling like there are more affordable options for oil and gas, particularly heating oil. i will say the lgbtq agenda -- i'm not sure i fully followed the question, other than that he doesn't want -- he doesn't think it will be an issue on the ballot in turning 22. i think the first law i saw signed into effect was in south dakota and i'm not aware of any other laws that may impact lgbtq people at this point, but i am interested to hear if brendan has anything on that. host: brendan? brendan: i think what that caller demonstrated in something you don't necessarily pick up through mainstream media every day is you have a motivated republican base, not just around

the main policy issues of the day, but over cultural issues and the republican party has become much more of a party that rallies around culture than it does any particular issues. whether it is immigration, they see that as a cultural issue, or certainly what is taught in schools has become a cultural issues and we have already seen in virginia, the governor's race and even out in california in san francisco, how schools are ministered can be really powerful. i think people need to appreciate that republicans are really motivated right now, and i think it is one of the reasons why you will see such a huge turnout in the midterms. host: let's talk to ruth, calling from illinois on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning everyone. interesting this morning. joe biden says he does not know how to get the gas prices down.

they were down under trump. all biden has to do is open up -- take sanctions off of gas and oil and get that pipeline going again, which we would get 30% off of that pipeline. trump had a thing going with a lot of the nato nations, that we would sell them natural gas. biden shut that off. people coming across that border , they are coming to take low-wage jobs. that's fine with democrats because they want the votes. they don't care about low-wage jobs for americans. if we have another election like

the last election, we might as well start in russia because that is what we look like. if this law is put in with everything else, that is going to be voted on, then vote on it. it just holds up for stealing an election. host: i will let you respond first, brendan. brendan: it is interesting to me, some of the same issues coming up again, immigration and gas prices. this is what people are feeling out there. whether donald trump had contributed to low gas prices, i don't know. i think covid had a lot to do with that, but there is definitely a strong argument that the current administration is much less friendly to the idea of domestic energy production. they canceled the keystone

pipeline, they are making it harder to lease oil and gas production in the country, so there is a lot to that. i think the real political issue is that gas prices are really high right now and the biden administration does not seem to have a lot of short-term answers to it. i know they are flirting with potentially limiting the gas tax temporarily. maybe that will help, but this caller just reinforces there are some issues that you don't see talked about as much on national news that republicans are really passionate about. immigration and energy prices are two of them. host: rebecca? rebecca: i will build off of some of the things brendan said. i think the gas prices, gas prices are pocketbook issues, just like talking about inflation and everything else, and it is important to remember that yes, joe biden is in charge but we do need republican help to figure out some of these larger problems that are having

a major impact on the u.s. economy. that goes from heating oil and gas prices but also inflation, lowering prescription drug prices, lowering costs for child care. some of those things that are impacting people's pocketbooks, and yes inflation is still a thing but we have to come at this from several different angles because there is knocking to be a one-size-fits-all or silver bullet or any sort of plan that is not going to be an all-inclusive because we have to take little pieces off of some of these prices all around, or else we are not going to get people to a comfortable place, when it comes to figuring out how to pay for their bills, pay for their school, pay for their child care, but also it could have an impact on democrats in november, if we don't work to bring these prices down for people throughout the country. host: let's look at a specific race going on in the senate.

senator ron johnson is considered to be one of the most vulnerable gop senators up for reelection this year, and he is airing this ad last month. i want to take a look at it and see what you have to say. here is the ad aired by ron johnson. [video clip] >> our country is in trouble. democrat policies have been disastrous for america. open borders in a flooded -- a flood of illegal immigrants. 2020 riots. lowering bail and not prosecuting criminals. the result is more crime, human and sex trafficking, record drug overdoses. kenosha set on fire. a growing number of murders in milwaukee. the waukesha christmas parade turned into a terrible tragedy. it feels like our country is being torn apart. but is not how it felt when i ran in 2016. back then i intended to serve a

second term and go home, but now with the democrats in total control, our nation is on a very dangerous path. if you are in a position to help make our country safer and stronger, would you just walk away? i decided i can't. i will stand and fight for freedom. i am ron johnson and i approve this message because i love america and wisconsin just like you. host: rebecca, what do democrats need to do, to up seat ron johnson in wisconsin? rebecca: i think it is very interesting to see that he repeat of the charge against him that he decided to buck his own term limit and run again after he said repeatedly that he wouldn't, and decided not to get back into this race until very late in january. that is one thing i will say. i think democrats have a good record of statewide success in wisconsin. president biden won the state. democrats have won tenant of the last 11 races. tammy baldwin has won by a

larger margin that she didn't when he 12. i don't think it will be as divisive as anything we are seeing out on the republican side. i think ron johnson is a flawed candidate. he may not necessarily be flirting with donald trump, but he is facing multiple corruption scandals for his backroom dealings. he has given two of his largest campaign donors $200 million in breaks in a single year. he is a politician that americans and wisconsinites in particular probably hate the most. he is looking out for himself, hurting wisconsin families. he has voted to spike health care costs and give tax breaks to companies that outsource jobs. he decided he was going to vote against the infra-structure bill before even reading it. i think that wisconsinites are going to see right through that. that is not midwestern nice. i think it is disingenuous for ron johnson to say that he is going to come in and save

freedom and save america from the democrats. i think he is doing a disservice to those voters. host: brendan, what does ron johnson need to do, to hold onto his seat in wisconsin? brendan: i appreciate rebecca bringing the opposition research book. i agree that ron johnson is a flawed candidate, for different reasons. he is definitely a much further right persona than i think wisconsin is. it is a pretty purple state, and he has been a pretty reliable trump figure over the last several years. ron johnson has also been very fortunate. he first elected in 2010, a huge night for republicans. he got reelected in 2016, and now he gets to run again in what may be a very good night for republicans again. he has been fortunate in when he runs but what is interesting about ron johnson is he is

running ads that are designed not to appeal to the middle but the turnout republicans and that is a lesson a lot of republicans have learned from donald trump is that you don't really need to appeal to the middle or swing voters, if you can control, if you can bring out republicans in huge numbers. you don't have to worry about anything else. ron johnson is a person who does not worry about anyone but republican voters. he tends to live in that bubble. i think that is why a lot of people in wisconsin were hoping he would step down and let someone else like mike gallagher, who would have much broader appeal. he will test that again and he may win. it is excited to be a really good midterm for republicans, even if he is somewhat further to the right than his state. host: let's go back to the phone lines and talk to linda, calling from mississippi on the democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. i just wanted to say that i don't know why anyone would vote

for a republican, because they are in love with authoritarian government. suppressing the vote, banning books. they are not doing anything to help the economy. they are rooted against the united states economy. ron johnson is a prime example. he has been in the senate since 2019 has not done anything. i am a democrat and i will crawl over broken glass to keep a republican out of office. thank you. host: i will let you take that one first, rebecca, and then brendan. rebecca: i appreciate her passion, one.

i do think there are and have been good republicans in office throughout our country's history, and i think what we are seeing is a fork in the road for the republican party and i am interested to hear what brendan has to say about this, knowing his background and experiences on capitol hill. i think there are mainstream republicans who are not for banning books or tanking the economy on purpose to prove a point. there are republicans of perhaps yesteryear, your john boehners of the world, more moderate and willing to work across the aisle to figure out how to problem solve for the american people, even though we've got major differences on a lot of these social issues, working with them to push forward an agenda that will put people back to work, it people back to where they were pre-pandemic and i think that is a really important point.

i can't say i would walk across broken glass but there are some good republicans out there and maybe that is part of the problem is that we are so partisan that there are no republicans we would vote for. host: brendan? brendan: we exist in a society now where we make out everybody who is on the other side to be people or our worst imagination of what a politician can be, so i appreciate that all stop i will confess i think the republican party issues. just because it may be trending toward a republican win in the midterm doesn't mean that necessarily means voters are eager to have republican governments back and that is one thing that i worry about is that we have a lot of work we need to do clean our own party, but when you add donald trump into --

into any 16 without any apologies for how he acted or his persona, and you have a big night in the midterms, i don't think republicans are going to be looking to learn any lessons. i that they're going to say that we are heading in the right direction and that concerns me but i think ultimately, as a political matter, the message the caller would like to get across is one the democrats would love to have, i think democrats would love to have a choice election. that is typically not how these things work out. politics are so national that these things in the becoming referendums and democrats will put in a lot of effort to make it a choice election and i just don't think that is really doable these days and it is a losing proposition. host: let's talk to janice who is calling from louisiana on the democrats line. caller: hello how. -- hello. i am a registered democrat, but

i consider myself a social capitalist. i don't understand why we think we have to have guns individually, and each state has to be separate like a separate country. i have traveled most of my life. i have lived in panama, japan and visited my family in norway, greece and iran. i am not a racist and have high regard for all people of different religion and cultures. when i vote, it is for the person, usually and not the party. i think it is a shame that republicans and democrats don't seem to understand they are both americans and to just get along. host: i will let you take that first, brendan. brendan: sure. maybe i will address the gun

issue. i certainly think that the politics around gun control and gun violence has been in a swirl as of late. i think you are starting to see a little softening among some republicans about what the right role of the federal government or at least state governments is, but that is still a pretty tough issue for democrats. it is one of those where you have gotten more emboldened by it and it is interesting that they have felt the room to be more emboldened to talk about these issues. i wouldn't say they are winning issues for democrats but it is notable that the shift has been that they feel more comfortable talking about them. host: rebecca? rebecca: i want to back this up. i think brendan made some good points but here is what i think. it is not necessarily what i am hearing, that democrats and publicans cannot figure this out and that is why we don't have

uniform gun legislation across the country. i think there is legitimately a lot of pushback from some of these states, to join us in what would be seen as common sense gun laws that come from the united states congress and regulate all 50 states and all of our territories. i think that is very frustrating for a lot of people, but we've also got laws that are regular by the states as they are separate countries, like our caller said. it is tough to navigate, tough to understand why we are the way we are, sort of this patchwork of different cultures and the way we do things. i think guns is one of them. i think choice is another one. i think covid mandates are another one. i think i would put the question back like, how do we get ourselves into a 50 state nation

where there is just one rule for the entire country, and i don't think that is what our founding fathers set out to do. i don't know where to square where i want to help get gun laws under control but i'm not sure how to do it from the national level and i know there are several organizations dictated to just this cause but i think there are states who have a stake in how we do this and they will have lots of opinions and president and laws -- precedent and laws on the books. host: brendan was earlier talking about democrats trying to make the midterms into a big choice election. earlier this month, the dccc released a series of campaign ads tying house republicans to representative marjorie taylor greene, january 6 and qanon. here is one of those ads targeting texas resident of beth

and dying. [video clip] >> qanon, a conspiracy theory bring online, took over the republican party, and donald trump incited a the mob that attacked the capital and murdered a cop. then trump entry publicans and congress cited with the violent you in on mob. this congresswoman should have stepped with that -- set of stood with us but she voted to protect from. she stood with q, not you. host: brendan, do you think those types of ads will be effective nationwide? brendan: i don't. i understand what they are trying to do. where republicans have been suffering our suburban voters, educated voters, suburban educated women voters. we've than bleeding in that demographic for a while now. this is the kind of stuff where we are losing them, we tend to

look like a crazy party, supporters of q and that kind of nonsense. that is what they are trying to get at. i don't think it is going to work because that stuff is not front of mind to voters. what is front of mind are the things we discussed, inflation, gas prices. when you're talking about these secondary issues, they make people in washington feel good like you got a good hit on them and you laugh at it but that is not what people vote about. people in politics make a big mistake where they look at where somebody is vulnerable or this -- on this you should -- this issue or that issue but they don't marry it up with what people care about. i don't think many people are going to be voting this midterm cycle on marjorie taylor greene in the tester district -- in the testate -- in the texas district. host: rebecca? rebecca: i don't know that i

think this is a particularly salient hit in these districts i don't think it is a laughable hit as a capitol hill resident where this insurrection took place. every republican, house, senate candidate up and down the ballot should have to answer on the record to the question, was the january 6 the tack on the capital legitimate political discourse? i think what you are seeing from the republican is what brendan mentioned. it is crazy, it is chaos, it is not in line with anything i am hearing from mainstream republican voters across the country. this is -- like i said before, it is a divided republican party at this point. you have the qanons, and the mainstream people who have been in congress and are working to get back into congress to put the congress back to work for the american people, and i think that is where these primaries collide, and it will be over real turning point for who is the new republican party.

is it the donald trump qanon party or is it the party of solutions and what it was in the years past, pre-donald trump, that is conservative but wants to make sure we're getting laws passed in this country? these january 6 hits are not going to stop coming. do i think they will motivate voters in these districts? probably not, but it is an important conversation to continue having, because it wasn't just a protest. it wasn't insurrection and an attempted coup on our country and i don't think we can let that go. even a year out, we cannot let that go. i think it may be an issue in some of these districts in november, where these are presented lives have made themselves clear up -- these representatives have made themselves clear about what are they think it was legitimate political discourse or an insurrection. brendan: i will agree with most of that. they ransacked my old office. i understand how important it is

and how shameful what took place was. my only point is that i just don't think that is what voters are thinking about right now. as a political matter, i wish people cared more about what happened that day. what we have seen already, trying to paint every republican as donald trump does not work. there was only one donald trump and they see his impact on the ballot can swing elections but we saw virginia governor's race where terry mcauliffe tries to make out glenn youngkin to be donald trump and it just failed because people don't buy that. maybe there are a few republicans out there, or it will really stick but for the most part, i think democrats should have learned by now that you can't just say the word donald trump and put a picture next to somebody and think that is enough to take someone out, especially when there are so many bigger issues, more

tangible issues that people are facing right now in their daily lives. host: let's go back to the phone lines and start with dave, calling from ohio on the independent line. good morning. caller: top of the morning to yusor. here is a tip for both of your strategists. don't attack the other party. tell us what you were going to do for the working man in this country. that is just a tip that maybe you can -- secondly, inflation. we have a 7% inflation rate in the united states. at that. the government has very little they can do about the inflation rate. the inflation rate is set by ceos and investors because they basically have lost profits during the covid thing. thirdly, china has a 1.8% inflation rate, and that is not

enough. the other thing that is bad here is 20.9% of exports out of china have been increased this year. also on the republican side, i have four or five representatives in the primary. they have all one thing in common, they are multimillionaires. i will not vote for a millionaire. we have over 50% of the congress that are millionaires. this country is in desperate need of a third party that represents the working man, because neither one of your two parties do. thank you. host: i will let you address that first, brendan because he specific he brought up the gop race in ohio. brendan: it is interesting because most of those candidates in ohio are trying to appeal to the working man and i would agree that there is a bit of a

flaw in their persona, and their background is not really match up. i don't think there is much of a chance of a third party. i think parties adapt over time, and what republicans are trying to do is try to become the party of the working man. i don't know if that is going to work but republican certainly see an opportunity there. what we are going to do on inflation is probably not going to come through congress, it'll come through the federal reserve, and it will probably be painful. there was a long way to go on that but there is an interesting perspective, particularly on the ohio race, with some of the candidates trying to be populists when it is probably not sincere. host: rebecca? rebecca: i completely agree on

the populists and not being sincere in ohio. i am not sure if brendan -- it is not something we are currently seeking. i don't know how this republican party gets put back together. they are humpty dumpty. they are broken, they are qanon, mainstream, figuring out how to get through these primaries without donald trump being a major part of how they do it. i just don't know how they get back together. i do wonder, this third-party coin is not -- point is not totally crazy at this point. you are also going to see your mainstream republicans who think the insurrection was not legitimate political discourse, who are going to try and talk to voters because they are reasonable and the mainstream will pay attention to them. i want to say one more thing on the inflation piece. i think the caller was right and

it is something i wrote down because it was interesting. these ceos are jacking up prices because they lost money during the pandemic. you are seeing people complain about the $12 burritos at chipotle, as if just the price of avocados has gone up when really it is to pulley on the record saying they are raising prices to recoup what they lost during the pandemic which is crazy because we were all eating doritos. -- all eating burritos. also what brendan said, one president cannot fix it all. we have to figure out how to get those five nominees confirmed to the fed so we can get all of this in line, and make sure we are working toward fixing inflation in this economy by the time november rolls around. not just through the midterms but for the american people. nobody wants to continue paying more just because there was an election and in november we will turn on a switch and it'll be over. we want to make sure inflation is under control as quickly as possible, and we need republican partnership in order to do that.

host: let's go to sandra calling from phoenix, arizona on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i'm calling because nobody is informing the public about the republicans having 60 days to give their opinion on what biden wants to do for the illegals, that they get all the benefits that americans do. they get section eight, they get social security, they will get health care, they get everything , so inflation is going to get higher because somebody has to pay for that, for all these illegals. they are talking about a house shortage. yes of course, because they were all of these people -- just in january in arizona, 153,000

came. nobody shows the people that are coming. cnn and msnbc, none of those show all of these people that are just crossing across the border, and that is why nobody is getting angry because they don't see it, and the social network, the media, it will not put that on youtube or to the public because they want to silence the american people. host: i will let you respond first, rebecca. rebecca: i'm not sure about her 60 day window she is referring to but i will say we are working to ensure that when immigration is done and done legally, the border crossing to my knowledge

at this point has steadied and people are crossing legally in most of these instances and also i think when people are coming into this country, we are making sure they have housing and proper access to health care and ensuring that they are becoming active members of our society. i'm not sure i fully understand the caller's charge that we are facing a shortage of housing and it's because of the immigration across the border in arizona. host: brendan? brendan: i think she is trying to make the point that this is contributing to inflation and i don't know that i agree with that. i want to back up and challenge rebecca's assertion that corporate greed is why we have inflation. we had inflation below 2% for a decade at least. was that corporate benevolence? were they keeping prices low because they were being nice to us? i think inflation right now is a

reflection of supply and demand. the federal government and the federal reserve pumped a lot of money into the economy. people had a lot of money. there were a lot of good reasons for that. at the same time, we have constrained supply of things and when you have less supply and more demand, prices go up and that is what is happening right now. i don't think it has anything to do with greed and i know that polls well or tests well but i don't think it is reality and there are bigger issues at play here and democrats should start addressing those. i just don't think that holds a lot of water. rebecca: i don't think it is the main factor. i think it is a factor. you will see some reports saying there are ceos checking up prices in order to cash in on some of the supply and demand issues you are referencing, but it doesn't mean that is not going to be an issue. you said inflation was going to

be an issue and i think it is on democrats and republicans to address this in the most responsible way and i think it is talking with ceos and economists and i think it is figuring out how do we get congress to pay attention to this and put forth some to this and put forward common sense solutions and also making sure we've got people on the fed willing to go to work and get this under control. host: unfortunately we have to stop our conversation right there. i would like to thank rebecca pearcey and brendan buck for being on with us this morning and talking us through politics in the united states and the midterms. thank you all so much for your time this morning. coming up next, we will be joined by liana fix from the german marshall fund to talk about the deepening crisis between russia and ukraine and the future of nato. stick with us. we will be right back.

♪ ♪ >> following president biden's historic pick for the next supreme court justice on c-span, c-span.org or by downloading the free c-span now app. ♪ >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what's happening in washington live and on-demand. keep up with the latest proceedings from the world of politics at your fingertips. you can keep up with the latest episodes of washington journal and find schedule information for c-span's tv networks and c-span radio. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play.

c-span now, your front row seat to washington. anytime, anywhere. >> at least six presidents recorded conversations while in office. here many of those conversations on c-span's new podcast. presidential recordings. >> season one focuses on the presidency of lyndon johnson. you will hear about the gulf of tonkin incident. the march on selma and the war on vietnam. not everyone knew they were being recorded. >> certainly johnson's secretaries new because they were tasked with transcribing many of those conversations. in fact they were the ones who made sure the conversations were taped as johnson would signal to them through an open door between his office and theirs. >> he will also hear some blunt

talk. >> i want a report of the number of people who signed to kennedy the day he died. if i can't ever go to the bathroom, i won't go. >> presidential recordings. >> the c-span shop.org is c-span's online store. browse through our latest collection of products, apparel, books, home decor and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan. washington journal continues. host: we are back with liana fix , resident fellow of the german

marshall fund. she's here this morning with us to discuss the u.s. and european responses to the russia ukraine conflict. good morning. guest: thank you for having me. good morning. host: explained to our viewers exactly what the german marshall fund is, where it gets its funding, and what is its goals and mission. guest: is dedicated to strengthening the transatlantic relationship which means to strengthen the cooperation between the united states and europe. it receives funding from funds dedicated to the united states to support germany after the marshall plan. the core mission of the institution is to make sure that europeans and americans work together, understand together

and are able to design joint policies together to make policy work. host: what's the latest on what's going on with ukraine, russia and the border crisis. tell us where nato stands on this issue. >> we are currently in a very dangerous situation. there are hopes of diplomatic talks continuing with secretary blinken next week. what we see on the ground is the military preparations from the russian side and military buildup is very far advanced. we do see in the self-declared republics in eastern ukraine controlled by separatists, we see what might be used as a pretext for further military intervention in ukraine.

nato's response so far has been no troops on the ground in ukraine. ukraine is not a nato member. but nato has communicated towards russia that there will be consequences for russian actions, there will be a sanctions response, there will be a political response if russia invades ukraine again. so nato is very much united in its response. host: should ukraine be part of nato? guest: nato declared in its 2008 bucharest communicate that at some point in the future, ukraine and georgia will become nato members. at the moment the position is

that ukraine is not ready to become a nato member because of the conflict in the east. president zelensky has argued at the munich security conference that this is what ukraine once and he demands an answer from nato members but actually at the moment this is something very unrealistic and just not on the agenda that ukraine will become a member. host: one of the things we know that should happen in the next few days is a meeting between the u.s. secretary of state and the russian foreign minister. the hill newspaper has a story that briefly summarized what's going to happen. the state department announced on thursday that secretary of state antony blinken has accepted a meeting with sergey lavrov.

blinken proposed the meeting and russia gave dates for late next week. the meeting will take place in europe provided there is no further russian invasion of ukraine. if they do invade in the coming days, it will make clear they were never serious about diplomacy, he added. do you think this meeting between antony blinken and sergey lavrov -- first of all, how important is this? guest: it is an important meeting probably not in terms of outcome, but the meeting gives the opportunity to potentially delay russian actions and makes russia weight or perhaps not consider to change its consideration until the meeting takes place because would be very difficult objects if such a meeting were announced.

this is a hope, but at the same time to be realistic, it could also be that diplomatic efforts continue while we see at the same time military actions being taken in ukraine. this is a hope, but if we look at the military situation, it is very concerning. the hope for diplomacy remains. host: we have heard earlier in the show today that people have been looking at today february 20 as a day where something may happen one way or the other with the olympics ending today. with russia's exercise with belarus supposedly going to end today, but now we know they have said they are going to extend it. do you have any timetable on where you think russia will

withdraw or convince -- commence the invasion of ukraine? guest: i think these days that were circulated basically signaled the preparedness of the russian military forces. russian military forces are so far advanced in their preparations that military action could be taken at any time. that is what these days were meant to signal. of course political events like the end of the olympics could feed into russia's calculus in when it wants to start military action. what we have not seen, those unannounced de-escalation signs by russia. this was announced by the russian president before the meeting with the german chancellor that the troops will be withdrawn. this has not been implemented.

at the moment we do not see any signs of de-escalation. more and more troops and soldiers have been sent to the border of ukraine. so unfortunately at the moment we do not see any signs of de-escalation from the russian side. host: let me remind our viewers that we can take part in this situation. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, your line is (202) 748-8002. you can always text us at (202) 748-8003. and we are always reading social media on twitter and facebook. in our first hour we showed a lot of videos that came from the

munich security conference. can you tell us exactly what the history of this conference is and who attends this annual event? guest: the munich security conference has been a conference after the end of the second world war and throughout the cold war. it was a conference that was meant to bring together a high level diplomats and military representatives from both sides of the atlantic to discuss europe's security. it has been a meeting of the transatlantic community. today and in the last years it has become meeting which is not only important in terms of speeches but it has also become important in terms of the discussions that are held on the sidelines. what is significant about the munich security conference is certainly not only the speeches

but also what kind of discussions are taking place on the sidelines and are there any diplomatic initiatives, any further steps which are discussed in person in munich. host: in europe, we know there is just about 80,000 american troops on the soil. exactly who is in command of those 80,000 troops? are they all under u.s. command? are they under nato command? who exactly is in charge over there right now? guest: it is always the united states that is in charge of its own troops, but some of them are directly under u.s. command. some of them are under nato command. it is important to notice is the recent increases in troops from the united states were not sent to ukraine. they were sent to eastern

allies. they were sent to poland to reassure those countries in the east order ukraine that they will not be left alone in case there are any spillovers from a potential war in ukraine and that is an important step to show nato allies that those countries that are bordering ukraine and that are members of nato and will be defended in any case are not left alone in this crisis. host: who is in charge of nato's military forces and what can nato bring to bear if needed? guest: in charge of the nato forces is the main commander of nato, which is usually a u.s. american and what nato is really dedicated to in europe is the defense of its allies. it is important to underline

again and again especially in this crisis right now because there are a lot of fears that nato members might be drawn into a conflict. the u.s. troops in europe under nato command are there to secure the members of the alliance. host: let's take a step back and talk about the structure of nato in europe just so our viewers can understand exactly what nato is and where it stands right now. how many countries are part of nato right now and what agreement to the countries in nato have to defend each other and countries perhaps like ukraine? guest: we have at the moment 30 members of nato and their commitment to each other is the

so-called article five commitment which is to defend each other in case of an attack, which makes nato a very successful alliance and it has been a very successful alliance in the past. whenever there was a threat to a member of nato, the other members will come to its help. that is also what happened in afghanistan when nato members came to the help of the united states. nato is based on the contributions, on the defense budgets that the members of nato have. the united states certainly by far has the biggest defense budget within nato. there is a gold by old nato members to spend 2% for defense expenditures, which is an ongoing discussion because of for nato members especially in europe there is always a

trade-off to be made for defense expenditures versus domestic expenditures. this is the goal that all nato members have committed themselves to. host: there were a lot of conversations under former president donald trump of nato members he said not paying their fair share for defense of europe. has anything changed between the united states and nato when it comes to funding? since the trump administration and during the biden administration so far. guest: this has been an issue because of the spending between the united states and the spending of some of the nato members. suddenly germany has also been a topic. so those members who do not meet the 2% goal at the moment have at least announced that they work towards that goal and that's also the commitment to

the 2% goal is that countries work toward this goal and what we might see if we really have a military action by russia and ukraine that actually russia will achieve exactly the counter results to what it wanted. what we might see in case of a military invasion is that nato members will spend more and will invest more in their own defense because of the actions taken by russia because for the first time again we have such a major scale military operation in europe. the result could be that exactly what russia did not want because they will feel the need to invest more in their security and defense. host: let's let some of our viewers take part in this conversation.

tom is calling from clinton massachusetts on the democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning. basic question that i want your viewer to ask or to hear is the current situation in the ukraine might be seen as the result of a colonial separation. in 1990, the ukraine separated from the soviet union and the people in the crimea and in the east thought that they could work together and be in harmony. that turned out not to be true. on the other hand, czechoslovakia decided to separate at that time into slovakia and the czech republic. today we are having this kind of a crisis because of border issues resulting from colonial separation. think of the disaster from

british india. and also in the 1950's, khrushchev attacked crimea from russia to the ukraine ss are and made it part of the ukraine when it wasn't previously. i wonder if nato members could have a conference with ukraine and russia to try and resolve the situation in terms of resolving a colonial separation and self-determination in these provinces of the ukraine. now in the crimea, there was a plebiscite after russia invaded. we are now in the situation we are going to be dealing with lots of real invasion. the crimean people rose up and revolted against ukrainian rule and russia came in to support them. the plebiscite showed crimea

being overwhelmingly wanting to be part of russia. and you have similar situations in the eastern provinces. could a conference be held to separate the borders in a proper way? i understand some men like war. all it would take is some commander on either side to misjudge, make a mistake and we could have an all-out war when in reality no one really wants one. guest: and thank you for this interesting point. to the point about the colonial background of this conflict. the russian president has published an article in july last year where he argued that there was a historical unity between ukraine and russia that

speaks very much to this point that ukraine is perceived as part of its fear of control and domination. the plebiscite in crimea was not held under fair and free conditions and was also held under russian military forces being in crimea surrounding the parliament and basically forcing the result that it wanted to see , namely the annexation of crimea by russia. so this is not a path that would be advisable for the future because any plebiscite's have to be free and fair and that is also one of the difficult points for the moment in eastern ukraine that he have argues, elections have to be free and

fair. the military troops have to withdraw. otherwise we will not see it for you and fair result of that. this is exactly the question discussed with -- which russia sees differently and wants to have its own means of leverage against ukraine. there certainly will have to be diplomatic efforts to resolve the conflict because there's just no other way of doing it. realtor instruments and military force to achieve its political aims is not something the international community wants to see in the future becoming the new normal in international politics. so diplomatic path is certain

whether it will be a conference or other format where these issues will be discussed is important and at the same time we have to say that in all these discussions we have to respect the borders and territorial integrity of countries. and it was russia that signed the budapest memo, an agreement which decided the nuclear weapons stationed in ukraine at the time will be transferred to russia and in return russia will respect the borders of ukraine. an agreement it also made with the paris charter. that is one of the difficult issues here, the lack of respect for ukraine's border. it makes its european partners and ukraine very concerned to

what russian promises -- to what extent russian promises will be held. host: let's go to joann in nevada. caller: i want to ask why do we have nine bases in germany when germany is causing the whole issue with their energy? and we've got to supply you with the gas. you never pay your bills. i just can't believe the crap that comes out of germany and i say get our bases out and stop this with ukraine. ukraine is a problem. russia has been there since 2014. germany get off your ass and start doing your job. host: go ahead and respond.

guest: germany has been criticized for not meeting the 2% goal. other countries who are not yet meeting the 2% goal, it is a commitment to work towards this goal. what is more difficult is the energy issue that was mentioned, the nordstrom to pipeline -- nordstrom to -- no word -- nord stream2 pipeline. it also does not have an lng terminal which would make it easier to ship lng supplies to germany and europe. so germany has a lot of homework when it comes to energy diversification.

and europe in general has to do more for its energy security so that it's not the united states that have to ensure energy so that is certainly a point and homework for the future. the revolution in ukraine in 2014 was a decision that was taken not about any nato perspective on nato agreement. ukraine wanted to sign an association agreement which would make trade easier. an agreement which has nothing to do with security policy. and under pressure from moscow, when the president of ukraine back then decided to withdraw from this agreement, we have seen protests on the street in

ukraine by the population which wanted to continue a closer association with the european union. so that is a point where we can see back then, russia has reacted to these protests by annexing crimea and destabilizing eastern ukraine when it was about a trade agreement. now we see also russian forces amassed at the border. it sums up moscow's resistance to any cooperation by ukraine with the west, with the united states and europe and basically regaining control over ukraine. this is perhaps a good summary of the last years. host: this is a good segue into what british prime minister boris johnson said at the munich

security conference where he discussed the need for western europe to stand together and reduce its energy dependence on russia. i want to get you to react to it. here is boris johnson. >> brixon will always stand up for freedom and democracy around the world and when i say that our commitment to security is immovable and unconditional, our deeds show that we mean our words. we are making the biggest contribution of nato, tech nato of any european ally because we understand the importance of collective security, just as our european friends stood by us after the state used a chemical weapon in salisbury. so britain will stand by you.

but we must accept that these measures by the u.k. and allies, the intensification of nato's defenses, fortifying our ukrainian friends, they may not be enough to deter russian aggression and it is therefore vital that we learn the lessons of 2014. whatever happens in the next few days and weeks, we cannot allow european countries to be blackmailed by russia. we cannot allow the threat of russian aggression to change the security architecture of europe. we cannot permit a new division of our continent into spheres of influence and we must now wean ourselves of dependence on putin's oil and gas. i understand the cost and complexities of this effort and the fact that it is easier said than done.

i'm grateful to the chancellor's assurances about nord stream2. we must ensure that by making full use of alternative supplies and technology, we make russia's threat redundant and that will be the work of the months and years to come as well as the necessary steps that we in the u.k. must take to protect our own financial system. host: i want you to react to that. guest: that was a very powerful speech and it also demonstrated that one issue that u.k. has been criticized for in the past that it allows too many loopholes for money laundering, especially for money from russia. it seems to be taken more serious by london.

host: let's talk to dave on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. could you fill me in on what it comes down to as far as the way putin looks at his gain of this? are all these sanctions, allegations especially from germany and their situation of energy, where does putin see an advantage with all those allegations and the sanctions we are going to put on them as being enough once he gets in there and takes whatever he figures is to his advantage?

where does it stop in his point of view of where his advantages are to germany as well as the u.n.? i will take my answer of the air. thanks. -- off the air. thanks. guest: it's an interesting point to think about the cost benefit analysis for moscow at this point. it's different from the cost-benefit analysis that many countries in europe and the united states would make that war would be very costly. there would be a high human cost and since we have those sanctions that the cost for russia's economy would also be very high. the cost-benefit analysis at least what we see on the ground seems to be different and moscow and the russian president has set himself he assumes that

sanctions will just come anyway because the west is dedicated to keeping russia down. and at the same time the russian leadership has invested in building up with reserve funds that will help buffer the impact of sanctions. there is now a shift away in germany from a belief that russia is a reliable energy supply to a more skeptic perspective given that we have seen in the last year that russia has not provided additional supplies at a time when supplies in europe were low. russia has a lot of leverage over europe, on the other hand energy is one of the main incomes for the russian budget and the most important income.

so the question is how much is a response can moscow do without hurting itself when it comes to disrupting energy supplies to europe given that those are so essential for the russian budget. this is at least a response that has been announced, a strong sanctions response as a deterrent for russia not to take military action in ukraine. host: bob is calling from eagle river, wisconsin. caller: the thing i want to comment on is russia, ukraine to germany, why is that our issue. they aren't part of nato. germany is, but russia and the

ukraine are communist countries. they aren't part of nato. wouldn't it be more productive for the united states to go back to under a trump we provided the world with oil and gas. why don't we just start supplying them and then that would take some of the pressure off of russia being the only supplier for these countries? why doesn't america simply open up its gas and oil reserves for the free world? guest: to put one issue into perspective, russia and ukraine are both not anymore communist countries after the end of the soviet union. especially ukraine is a market economy. russia is a state-controlled economy. we certainly have seen a shift in the domestic composition of russia after 1990. to your question, ukraine and

what is happening now in ukraine does not only met because of ukraine and because it is sort of the eastern neighborhood in europe. it doesn't matter because there are some principles at stake. whether we want to live in a world where borders can be changed by military force and were massive military threats are used to achieve political aims and this is a question which is most important for europe because history has taught europe and then also the united states which has become again and again engaged in europe that if they are not certain principles that you can agree upon, like the principles that border should not be touched, that military force is not acceptable, then you will always have conflicts on the european continent.

it's about how countries want to work together and live together and in the end, both the united states and europe are very much integrated in the world. they are not isolated islands. so any actions that will be taken by russia will have effect also on europe and what is happening in ukraine is also observed by other countries. especially china which is certainly very closely watching what is happening there. the last point to the energy issue, there will certainly be an energy transition on the way. which will in the long term put the challenge to russia's model of selling oil and gas to the world and thereby sustaining itself. this will be a long-term

challenge. so at the moment russia's oil and energy supplies are still highly important to the world and also especially to europe. host: dan is calling from independence, missouri. we are about to run out of time. can you give us a quick question? caller: yes. i heard that even though china did not send a representative to the munich security conference that they did phone in and supported the idea of boundaries that should not be -- the general idea that russia shouldn't ignore ukraine boundaries. i would like to get her verification of that and how important she thinks that is. thank you. guest: that's a very good question.

in the past it has always been, the mantra of the relationship has been we go along if it is helpful and if it doesn't hurt the entrance of the other side. once it creates costs, there is much more reluctance to support each other. we do not yet see a fully fledged alliance and certainly not comparable to the nato alliance. we see this interesting game and dynamic that at some point china tries to distance itself from russian actions. at the same time china has its own conflict and with taiwan, it doesn't seem plausible china's statement that it supports all these principles.

so it is very much a game and dynamic, who supports who and which costs are they willing to take in support of the other side. host: we would like to thank dr. liana fix who was a resident fellow at the german marshall fund for talking us through the u.s. nato and european response to the border crisis. thank you so much for coming on this morning. coming up next, or open forum where you can talk about your most political issue. see the numbers on screen, we are waiting on your telephone calls. we will be right back. ♪

>> on almost all presidential rankings list, you will find warren harding's name at or near the bottom. historian ryan walters says that while harding had his faults, his accomplishments are often overlooked including bringing the country back to normalcy after world war i and economic plan that led to the roaring 20's. in his book, the jazz age president, he lays out his case for why president harding should rank higher. >> he has finished last in more presidential rankings and surrogates than any president. what has been said about him is really in the realm of myth. there is a lot of falsehoods and untruths. when you look at his record and what he actually accomplished as president of the united states, it's actually quite impressive.

host: historian ryan walters, tonight on c-span's q&a. you can listen to q&a and all of our podcasts on our free c-span now app. >> weekends bring you book tv. journalist mark boughton chronicled the 64 days following the 2020 presidential election in their book, the steel. the attempts to overturn the 2020 election and the people who stopped it. mark darling talks about his book, the dumbest generation grows up. he argues that millenials jack of -- lack of general civics knowledge poses a threat to political and social institutions. watch book tv and find a full

schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at book tv.org. >> the head of the national telecommunications and information administration testified about increasing access to broadband in the u.s. watch the house sunday committee monday on c-span, online at c-span.org or full coverage on c-span now, our free video app. >> washington journal continues. host: for the end of the show today we are going to move to our open foreign segment, where you can call and talk about the most important political issue to you. once again, we are going to open up our regular lines. that means republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202)

748-8002. you can text us at (202) 748-8003 and we are always on social media. the queen of england, queen elizabeth has tested positive for covid. according to the bbc, the queen has tested positive for covid. the monarch is experiencing mild cold like symptoms but expects to continue light duties at windsor over the coming weeks. she will continue to receive medical attention and follow all the appropriate guidelines. the queen has been in contact with her eldest son who tested positive last week. it is understood a number of people have tested positive at windsor cancel -- windsor castle, where the queen resides.

the queen of england has tested positive for covid. what are the most important issues on your mind? let's start with andy. caller: good morning. i want to know why european countries, germany, why they are so far behind in their energy production. have they gone green and lost all their abilities to create their own energy that has caused us to drag into this situation? and you heard russia put missiles in cuba, didn't you? host: carrie is calling from travelers rest, south carolina on the independent line. caller: good morning. i'm sorry, i called in when the strategists were on and i got a

little bit too late to ask them my question for my comments. i am an independent and just last week at different times i was talking with a democratic friend and a republican friend and we all agreed on term limits for the house and senate, but the one discussion we had in regards to senator johnson is that it's very difficult to say i'm going to do a term limit when we know that the power and the different committees are given for the time that you are there. it seems like it's not going to make a difference unless it's a national decision we do for all of our people because those people who are honorable don't get to get in power of good committees. and then my second point also with senator johnson that really

put him into my knowledge is that he had a meeting. it was over four hours with all of the different scientists and lawyers and nurses about covid, which i think is a big issue for our country and our government and he was talking to these other views and it's funny you just said about queen elizabeth who is triple vaccinated and still got it. looking at the other scientists because as we know, science is constantly evolving. and looking at what the other scientists are saying in regards to vaccine mandates and vaccines in general. and i just really wanted to put a plug for senator johnson for being brave enough to do it. host: jamaal is calling from university park illinois on the democrat line. good morning. caller: hello.

how are you today? host: just fine. go ahead. caller: ok. this is more of a suggestion for c-span. i have been watching c-span for a long time. one thing i liked about c-span, you have a point counterpoint. the democrat and republican side. i wish you guys would go back to having two members of the opposite party on your show to discuss issues and talk with the american people instead of having members on separately. have a point counterpoint. two members on at the same time. host: you mean like we did on our previous segment on this show? caller: ok -- yeah but members of congress. i missed the previous segment of the show. host: ok. darrell is calling from michigan on the independent line. caller: good morning.

i would like to talk about the russian situation. how quickly we forget that the league of nations failed and hitler's gained support of the large portion of the european population which resulted in 60 million people dying from disease, famine, war. here comes nato. putin is testing nato. i think he has painted himself into a corner. i hope as a free speaking america -- american that putin does not try to save face and invade the ukraine. i hope he has enough common sense to put this thing in reverse and cancel this idea. he might end up like khrushchev did after the cuban missile crisis, but we do not want another war and if we continue

and put economic sanctions on him, we will crush the russian economy. host: there's a story in today's new york times talking about the reduction of mask mandates in the united states as coronavirus infections are falling. i want to read a couple paragraphs about whether you should continue to wear your mask. here's a story from the times. as masking mandates lift, there's a lot of confusion about if and when to wear a mask. this is the hardest thing of all because it's not just the risk and benefits to you, said a professor and chair of the medicine department at university of california san

francisco. one good way to frame the risk is to ask, who is the most vulnerable person in your immediate circle? if you have compromised immunity or live with someone who does, it's a good idea to continue to wear a mask and maintain social distance around strangers, especially in indoor areas withstanding air where the virus may collect. masks are also important if you are unvaccinated or spending time with others who are unvaccinated. unvaccinated people are at higher risk of hospitalization and death from covid-19. if you are otherwise healthy and have received the vaccine and booster shots, your risk of getting seriously ill with covid is extraordinarily small. it's about in line with other risks people take every day such as driving a car. this is from the new york times story, should you still wear a mask.

let's talk to john who was calling from fairmont west virginia on the democrat line. good morning. caller: hello, good morning. my subject is about something entirely different. it is about historical restrictions on buildings imposed during the late 1990's. it was imposed and it went to all levels of government down at the local level and it was imposed cheaply without proper compensation and building property owners were opposed to restrictions and i don't know how it affects the residential except a lot of people were dissatisfied. except it doesn't represent enough as a population where it reform comes about and any compensation eventually is done very cheaply and reform is

needed except it was imposed, it wasn't voluntary. host: bobby is calling from houston, texas on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. the most pressing political issue for me i think, there's no way that we should allow anyone like donald trump to ever occupy the white house. it's critical to our countries democracy that we have a person in office who has some type of moral compass. and anybody that has his attitude or beliefs, we shouldn't allow in the white house. that's my opinion. host: kenny is calling from dunlap, tennessee on the independent line. caller: yes sir.

like you for taking my call. i've got several different things i want to talk about the the people that talk about biden shutting down that pipeline, that pipeline wasn't even completed yet. they talk about it bringing our fuel process up, that didn't have nothing to do with it. they need to check their information. about the ukraine thing, we need to stay out of there and support nato like the other countries do with minimum support of troops and just furnish them with some weapons what we can but keep our troops out of there. another thing is the thing about crime, children learn nowadays there no consequences for their actions. it says in the bible spare the rod, spoil the child. i really believe that. host: frank is calling from coal

township, pennsylvania on the republican line. good morning. i'm sorry, i went to the wrong frank. in florida on the independent line. go ahead. caller: good morning. what i want to talk about this morning is there's a lot of vitriol that goes on in our society between the conservatives and liberals and in my opinion, there seems to be a confusion where progressives and liberals are kind of lumped together into one category and that's just not so. i'm older and i am an independent, have voted both sides of the aisle.

if you follow someone like a true old-school liberal, like bill marr who lately has been very critical of the democrat party, and people say bill marr is turning conservative. not exactly. bill maher is who he has always been. a true liberal. what's happening is in our own view, the democrat party is moving so far to the left that it appears that omar -- bill maher is becoming someone else. host: frank is calling from coal township, pennsylvania on the republican line. caller: i just have a comment or two here. i still see these buses dropping immigrants off with their

suitcases and i was just wondering who is paying for all these immigrants, dropping them off. and they are wondering why the crime with guns and drugs is going up like crazy. host: all right. nick is calling from wayne, pennsylvania on the democrat line. good morning. caller: i wanted to briefly talk about the issue of student debt. currently there is about 1.7 towards one point $8 trillion of student debt, which is holding back about 45 million folks throughout the country who have this debt. it's about an average of close to 40,000, somewhere in the high 30's. i myself have student loan debt. i got an undergrad degree from

the state owned university in pennsylvania and even after scholarships, awards, working multiple jobs, i've got $16,000 in student loan debt. i know that's the case for so many people in america. president biden has the executive authority to -- personally i'm calling on him to do so and i know so many people across the country are doing so. that's also why i'm a member of the debt collective. we are going to washington, d.c. to call on biden to do so and i would very much encourage folks to join us in that effort and check out the debt collective as well as other folks who are organizing around debt. we really need to make sure that people have their basic needs and don't need to have medical debt be a death sentence to people. host: we would like to thank all

of our viewers and callers. join us again tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. for another edition. everyone have a great sunday and we will see you again tomorrow morning. ♪ >> c-span's washington journal. every day, we take your calls live on the air. we discussed policy issues that impact you. coming up monday morning, historian douglas brinkley, c-span's fourth survey of presidential leadership. we will look at the evolution of presidential libraries with edward rothstein. watch "washington journal" live

on monday morning at 7:00 a.m. eastern. join the discussion with your phone calls, texts, and tweets. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including cox. >> cox is committed to providing families access to affordable internet, bridging the digital divide. cox, bringing us closer. >> cox supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> on almost all presidential rankings lists, you will find warren harding's name at or near the bottom. tonight on q&a, historian ryan

walters says that while harding had his faults, his accomplishments are often overlooked, including bringing the country back to normalcy after world war i and an economic plan that led to the warning 20's -- roaring 20's. >> he finishes last in more presidential surveys then any other president. what has been said about him is really in the realm of myth. there's a lot of myth about harding and falsehoods. when you look at his true record and what he accomplished as president, it is quite impressive. >> ryan walters tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. you can listen to q&a and all of our podcasts on our free c-span now app.