watch tonight on c-span, or anytime on demand on c-span.org. c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we are funded by these television companies and more, including buckeye broadband. ♪ buckeye broadband support c-span as a public servant, along with these other television providers, giving you a front this morning on washington journal, we will discuss the u.s. economy and president biden's economic policies with economic policy institute president heidi shierholz.

and later, richard weitz from the hudson institute, talks about the first anniversary of the tele-band's takeover of afghanistan following the u.s. troop withdrawal -- the tele-bond -- talaban's takeover of afghanistan following the u.s. troop withdrawal. ♪ host: good morning. tuesday, august 16, 2022, primary day in wyoming and alaska. on the ballot are a pair of republican incumbents who have not been afraid to defy former president trump. lisa murkowski and liz cheney wait to see with their political fits hold today. we start by speaking with republican viewers only about former president trump and his role in today's gop. we want to know if you think the former president has too much

influence, not enough, or about the right level. if republicans think it is too much, (202) 748-8000. republicans who think it is not enough, (202) 748-8001. republicans who think it is about right, (202) 748-8002. you can also text us at (202) 748-8003, and please include your name and where you are from. otherwise, catch up -- with us on social media, on twitter @cspanwj. on facebook, facebook.com/ c-span. you can start calling. some latest polling on former president trump and his standing in the republican party, this is the headline from late last week from morning consult. from's 2024 primary support reaches new heights after the fbi raid on his florida home last week -- trump's 2024 primary support reaches new

heights. the highest on record for the support of trump since his 2020 loss. the share of support up 54 percent in july and 53% in june amid the high-profile congressional january 6 hearings. that polling is probably not welcome news to liz cheney on this primary day in wyoming, as the associated press puts it in their headline, liz cheney in trouble in wyoming, the story noting that the wyoming congress omitted -- congresswoman that is seeking to expose president trump's efforts to stay in power after losing the 2020 election, his role in fermenting the january 6 insurrection at the u.s. capitol, cheney plus determination to prevent trump from ever again serving in the white house has left trump fighting to hold on to the house seat she has now held for three terms.

in her final message to wyoming voters ahead of primary day, this is what liz cheney had to say. [video clip] >> my opponents in wyoming have said that the 2020 election was rigged and stolen. no one who understands our nations laws, no one with an honest, honorable, genuine commitment to our constitution would say that. it is a cancer that threatens our great republic. if we do not condemn these lies and hold those responsible to account, we will be excusing this conduct, and it will become a feature of all elections. america will never be the same. nothing in our public life is more important that the preservation of the miracle given to us by god and our founding fathers, nothing. here is my pledge to you, i will work every day to ensure that our exceptional nation long endures.

my children and your children must grow up in an america where we have honorable and peaceful transitions of power, not violent confrontations, intimidation, where we are governed by laws and not by men, where we are led by people who love this country more than themselves. no matter how long we must fight, this is a battle we will win. millions of americans across our nation's, democrats, independents, stand united. we are stronger, more dedicated, and more determined than those trying to destroy our republic. host: part of liz cheney's final message to voters, about a two-minute ad. that message does not seem to be moving at least the polling numbers in that wyoming race. this from politico, the latest polls show that cheney is garnering just 30% support

compared to the trump-endorse cabinet with 52%, just days before the primary. cheney plus campaign has tried to recruit wyoming democrats across party lines to vote for her, but poll numbers are consistent with republican internal surveys from over the past year plus. the washington post looking at the cheney race and cheney plus political future in their front page story on election 2022 saying she is looking belonging -- beyond tuesday to a national future. the two-video appealing to voters probably served much more as a launching point to a campaign that will last for years to come. facing defeat in the primary, she could work to defeat tromp or run herself, the washington post says. taking your calls, focusing on former president donald trump and talking to republican viewers only in this first hour we would want to know if you think the former president has

too much influence on the party, not enough influence on the party, or about the right level of influence. phone numbers for all of those, again, just republican viewers are just in this first hour, but we will get to all our callers. joe, dayton, ohio, is up first. good morning. caller: good morning from beautiful, sunny dayton, ohio. donald trump is perfect for the republican party. i will give you some facts here. his primary win so far, 176, of his people that he wanted to win, just 16 losses. liz cheney will go down tonight. she will lose. yeah, he is absolutely perfect. again, what happened with the raid was a travesty not only for his family but for this country.

and it just made him stronger, is what it has done. host: when you say he is perfect, what policies specifically is he perfect on? caller: i will tell you, number one is immigration. he is a businessman. the economy was flourishing under him. regardless of what people want to -- and he worked hard on crime trying to eliminate -- not eliminate, but reduce the amount of drugs coming into this country. but the immigration right now is a travesty. we see it every single day. my other point is -- shoot, i drew a blank. i apologize. he saved my life. i had the delta variant almost a year ago, and it was operation warp speed because i was able to get the antibody and fusion,

which saved my life. people want to condemn him for a pandemic that no one ever saw in this country. and in my opinion, he did a good job. maybe the messaging was not good, but look at what happened under biden. over 600,000 have died under his tutelage, and he has had all the medications and everything. host: what do you mean when you say "maybe the messaging wasn't good"? caller: when covid first came out -- this is just my own opinion -- i think trump was trying to calm the country down. what really bothered me was he was banning flights from china, and they called him -- you know, the democrats, nancy pelosi or whatever, said he was being a

xenophobic. you know, it is just sad. he sent the navy ship, what i call the ss hope, to new york, and the medical ship, and the reserves put up medical tent. we did a lot. and then the ventilators. and people, all they did was condemn him, condemn him, condemn him. the amount of hatred for trump is what makes me love him more and more and more. host: this is jerry in kansas. good morning. republicans only. your thoughts on the former president's influence on the party? caller: good morning. how are you? host: doing well. caller: i called in on the line that would normally be the republican line, so i am going to say that this is about rights. so that is what i think as far

as my opinion on how much influence he has. i do not think it is overwhelming or underwhelming. just because he is a former president, i think he has just about the right amount of influence in different areas of our nation. host: do you like the fact that he has been so involved in republican primaries this year? are you still with us? caller: well, a lot of presidents do that, whether it be republican or democrat. so yes, i do, i think it is just about the right amount and throughout different areas of our country. i do especially like the fact he has that much -- little bit more up in -- i think it is wyoming, where liz cheney is running. i do not care for that

individual. i would like to see her out. as far as i am concerned, she should be running on the democrat ticket, not the republican ticket, because of what she has done with january 6 issue. she, herself, stated, when this all first started, she made a statement that she never liked trump even before he ran for president. so she has a personal issue with the man, so she should not be in a seat of power, when you have a personal issue with someone. so she should not even be in there. host: that was jerry in kansas this morning on the former president and his role, specifically in house primaries this year, specifically against those who voted for impeachment during his second impeachment trial. this from politico from

yesterday, liz cheney's primary on tuesday will cap buffet to mull to us your for that small band of house republicans who broke from the party to impeach a donald trump for inciting the january 6 capitol insurrection, and almost all of them will be gone when the next congress begins in january. the 10 republicans face the wrath of gop voters back home in trump plus scorched-earth revenge tour, they write, and a final scorecard ahead of cheney 's upcoming race today, four of the republican impeachment voters retired instead of running for reelection, another three lost in primaries to trump-backed opponents, and just two advanced to the general election, though one faces a tough race against a democratic opponent. we have focused a lot on wyoming , so far. alaska also featuring a primary race for lisa murkowski, one of the seven republicans who voted for impeachment during the

second impeachment trial. here is the washington times story on her in alaska. seven senate republicans, after house impeachment charges of inciting insurrection on january 6, she is the only one to face voters this year. that is because of the senate's staggered election cycles. mr. trump is backing an opponent in the 19 candidate primary battle in that senate race in alaska. ms. murkowski, who lost her primary back in 2010 before winning a writing campaign it stands to benefit from the state's new ranked choice primary system in which the top four vote-getters, regardless of party affiliation, advance to the general election. we played liz cheney's final campaign ad. here is a final campaign at from lisa murkowski and that senate race. [video clip] >> who can best deliver for alaska? that is what this race for the

u.s. senate is really about. with my seniority, i get real results for our states. every day i work across party lines to strengthen our economy, expand our energy production, take care of our veterans, and invest in critical infrastructure. i am for alaska, always. i am lisa murkowski, and i approve this message. i would be honored to earn your vote. host: lisa murkowski's campaign ad. alaska voters heading to the polls today, primary day in alaska and wyoming. getting your thoughts on former president trump, his influence on the republican party, talking to republicans only. this is diane in dalton, georgia, who says that the president does not have enough influence on the party today. why? caller: i do not know what he is doing. all he wants to do is go and have vacations every week. that is number one.

number two, everything comes out of his mouth ain't nothing but a lie, and he is destroying the united states. we need to get him out. host: but as i republican, who do you support in the republican party? caller: trump, trump. he's only one that helped the united states. for the last eight years, every who we had is destroying the united states of america. he is making people fight against each other, biden is. shows the difference between the whites and everybody else. then putting people in motels, five-star motels, that's coming in here illegal. that is the problem of it is. the homeless people, they want help. why won't they help the united states? host: that is diane in georgia. this is david in texas, says it

is about the right level of influence. go ahead. caller: hello. i think he has adequate influence on not only the republican party, but the country. first of all, he is an example of one who fulfills the american dream. why not? as successful as he is. when he was president, what did he do really wrong? 2 that is --host: that is david in texas. this is ron in florida. caller: trump is a negotiator, awesome goat. and i would have him defend me on the table for anything. if i had to talk about real estate or another country, iran or anybody else, the democrats

sensationalize what they want and they depress what they want, and it is never-ending. people have to wake up. the democrats have to wake up and try to see what is good about donald trump, and it isn't on the surface. if you can't see it, it is underneath. are you there? host: i am listening. so what is underneath the surface? caller: what is underneath is a good man with a good family, having totally great intentions for this country. although in a world of competition, things aren't always good, as we know how the democrats operate. it has been going on since obama. he has infiltrated every organization of the country.

it is supposed to be separate, and it is not separate. they have strings to everything, and they can call the shots. and biden is just sitting behind the wheel, and he does not know how to drive. trump is the man that can drive this country. he is the best guy in the world. we are so blessed to have a guy like this. like i say, again, it is not the surface, it is underneath. host: joseph thinks he former president has too much influence on the party today. out of l.a., go ahead. go ahead, joseph. caller: hello? host: go ahead. caller: are you familiar with the term -- [indiscernible] host: sure.

do you want to go over that, joseph, or do you want to make your comments? i think we might have lost joseph. this is crystal in tampa, florida. says the former president has about the right level of influence. caller: yes, good morning. i think he does have about the right amount of influence. not everybody likes every candidate he chooses. overall, i think he has had a great influence on the party. i think he has reinvigorated the whole party. i think his populism is a good thing, even though the media tries to paint it as a bad thing. i think he has given us pride in our country again and given us a lot of things to think about that we were not even aware of. so i think that his comments are debated by right and left, and

it gives us a chance to think about what we need to work on as a nation. host: why do you think dr. oz was a mistake in the pennsylvania senate race? caller: well, i think he was pushing vaccine mandates, and i do not think that is a really popular stance. i do not think that is something trump has ever been for. mainly that. host: is there any other mistakes you would point to? caller: that is enough for me regarding dr. oz. i do not think that in america we should be pushing anybody to have any kind of experimental vaccine. but any radical treatment, i think that is an individual choice. -- any medical treatment, i think that is an individual choice. host: elizabeth out of austin, texas, republican who thinks

donald trump has too much influence on the republican party. caller: yes, i feel like the former president trump had several things that he did while he was president that i was pleased, i was proud of him. but i think some things that are coming out about how he ran his government are very bad, not just bad, they are very bad. i know somebody who has worked in most areas of government in the washington, d.c., area. i would say his handling of the secret documents is just abominable, not acceptable at all for anyone to handle documents that way, but certainly not the president. his underlying dishonesty and willingness to not present himself honestly is what bothers

me the most. i do think he had some wonderful things that he could have continued to do for the country though. thank you very much. host: before you go, i do not know if you were listening at the top of the show -- were you surprised by the polling that shows that donald trump's standing in the republican party has gone up since the fbi raid? caller: i am surprised. i am very upset and surprised. i do think that there are many people that will not continue to call themselves republicans. i do. but it is pretty dreadful. but then, not everybody has had top-secret clearance, so they do not really understand what it is and do not realize to what extent we are endangering our

government. host: thanks for the call. can you say where you worked in government? were you working in d.c. or working in texas when you were working in federal government? host: in d.c., in an administration as a legislator. host: what administration? caller: a couple of them, two republicans. but i have worked for democrats also. but only on the legislative branch. host: thanks for they call from austin, texas. a little bit more from that pole we talked about showing president trump's standing in the republican party going up since the fbi raid, his improvement, they note, has come to the detriment of florida governor ron desantis, whose 2024 support among republicans

slumped five percentage points since late july, down to 16%. a record high, 71%, voters a trump should run for president in 2024. ray in elizabeth city, north carolina, good morning. you are next. ray, you are with us. caller: yes, i am here. can you hear me? host: yes, sir. caller: ok, not enough, hands down. here is the reason. people need to remember that trump is not a politician. he is a businessman. and he saw a lot what was happening, what the country was heading to, and he decided very courageously to dive in there and to run and to become president to help save this country. in my opinion, i believe so many politicians out there -- i was listening to a siren song, and their minds are being controlled by a siren song -- high taxes,

open borders, and we are heading for the rocks big-time. and we have got to turn this country away from the rocks. doesn't matter -- a lot of opinions do not matter, because once the ship hits the rocks, the ship is going to be destroyed. so we have got to turn, and trump is the person that will do that. host: talking about the polling, what are your thoughts on ron desantis or some of the other names mentioned as a republican candidate? caller: yes, of course. ron desantis is a good guy, very good guy. i do not know if he is really going to decide to run. if he does, ok, that is his decision. he is great for florida, and he would be a good president, too. again, it is not about trump,

ok. trump has the right ideas. i believe he has the right direction. and philosophy and principles. and as people, politicians, a lot of republicans need to see this and say, ok, we need to vote on principle, this is the right direction. and go with it. because again, like i said, the rocks are destruction, financial ruin or they do not care if you are republican or democrat. host: that is great in north carolina. two along the west virginia/ohio border, on the ohio river, andrea in west virginia. good morning. caller: good morning. t way for having me. -- thank you for having me. as for trump's influence, i think it is about the same, if not less than previous presidents.

previous president obama still is involved with politics and provides influence, and he was president for two periods. it seems odd to me that they are calling out trump for providing influence when, literally, every other president has done that. as for the secret documents that are brought up that were found in his florida estate, i would like to point out that the white house staff are responsible for packing up his belongings, and the secret service are responsible for inspecting the belongings that are moved out of the white house. and that all happens on inauguration day, within a six-hour period, according to the white house site. host: so you think this is all just a misunderstanding?

caller: a misunderstanding, at best, or complete negligence, incompetence. i mean, i do not like to theorize or go into that because you do not know and it is hard to say what people were thinking at the time. maybe it was the stress of the day, maybe they just overlooked it. but my point is -- host: if you think it was negligence, negligence on whose part? you do not think the former president was to blame on any of that? caller: a small part may be, because he chooses the secret service and the white house staff, but the president himself would not have packed up his belongings. so to put all the blame on president trump just seems irresponsible when there are a lot of parties and a lot of hands that are working on it. host: this is newt, forest hills, new york, says the former president has too much influence

on the party. caller: yes, i think his influence is too much. i think anyone that can convince people that the bad behavior he has engaged in is ok has too much influence. that is how he convinced so many people to a jack -- to attack the capitol on january 6, convinced people to deny the results of our election, and now there are people who are somehow making excuses for the documents that he had in his possession that he should not have had, according to the presidential records. he has that much influence that no matter what bad behavior he engages in, there are people that will go along with that behavior or make excuses for that behavior or somehow minimize that behavior. i think that is a sign he is too much influence on the party. host: who is a republican you support? caller: right now, i don't know. i am thinking seriously about switching parties, maybe to

independent. i don't know right now. i am not happy with the republican party, definitely not the party of lincoln. so i don't know right now. i am kind of on the fence. host: who was the last republican presidential candidate you voted for? caller: i did not vote for trump. i did vote for bush. host: this is peter in mckinney, texas. good morning. caller: hey, good morning. how are you guys? host: doing well. caller: i called on the line that said president trump does not have enough support or control over the gop because i wanted to give a big shout out, and this is kind of like a personal, i guess, voicemail to someone -- nobody like me, i am a nobody, i am in nobody-where l and. but where is rona mcdaniel? hello, rona.

you're the chairman of the gop. i have been monitoring your website every four hours to see when you're going to, and support the former president of the united states, and the silence has been deafening. so i firmly believe that president trump has the overwhelming support of all of us. nobody is out here in nowhere-land, but the people at the very top, like rona -- rona, you're missing in action, and we are not going to forget that. and as far as people saying that president trump has top-secret government documents in his mar-a-lago home -- look, folks, i used to work in government, we made every document top-secret. it didn't matter whether it was the daily weather forecast. everything was top-secret. so to say that a former has

documents that may be top-secret, well, that is probably true because they will over compartments alive and mark every document as such most people probably think top-secret documents are separate thing in the insect -- separate box, but they do not realize everything is top-secret in government. and my last point, i want to think about this merrick garland guy, this little man who was passed over for his supreme court position and is going after relentlessly all these trump supporters and using this power, this immense power of the state, we have to recognize the state has immense power, and it has to be used so carefully because it is such immense

power. and instead of using it carefully and judiciously, he is using it like a third world banana republic dictator would do. please bring our country back to the balance that we used to have, please. host: one question on your experience with documents and that we over classify things, i wonder what your thoughts were when the issue of hillary clinton's server was an issue that donald trump was talking a lot about in the 2016 campaign trail. did you think that if she was overblown then? caller: no, i mean, every administration -- let's go back to lyndon johnson, you are not allowed to record people, but lyndon johnson -- of course, everybody -- he records everybody he spoke to, and he had his secretaries hand transcribe all the conversations

. so what administration has not done something improper? what about president kennedy having a relationship with that 17-year-old girl? she wrote a book about it words the end of her life. so there's all these things that happen -- and yes, we were all aware that misses clinton had her private server. was it illegal, yes. was she given a court order to turn over her documents and hard drives and her iphones? yes, she was. but she still drilled holes in all of her hard drives and her iphone. she went against a court order, but nothing happened to her. so this just shows the double standard where some people -- in this case, all democrats, they get to get away with everything, but mr. trump is being held to an impossible standard. but i think the american people, they are a fair-minded people.

and they know when something feels right and know when something doesn't look right or feel right. and i think we only get to get heard every two to four years, so we patiently wait. so this november, in about 90 days, we will all get a chance, all of us nobodies are going to get a chance to be heard. until then, we just have to watch the process. and it drives me nuts, but i don't know, what about you, doesn't drive you nuts, too? host: we want to just hear from you and focus on you this morning and everyone here on the "washington journal." we are talking to republican viewers only, your thoughts about the former president, his influence on the party today, too much, not enough, about right? we have phone numbers for all of those. just republicans only in this first hour, then we will open up the phone lines as usual later in our program. stay with us, 10:00 a.m. eastern

, is when "washington journal" ends today and most days. (202) 748-8000 if you say it is too much influence. (202) 748-8001 if you say it is not enough influence. about right, (202) 748-8002. hopefully the numbers are not confusing you. sam is on that line for those who think it is about right, out of crystal springs, mississippi. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you? host: doing well, sir. caller: look, there are times i am thinking he has too much influence, but of course i voted for him the two previous times. if he gets our nomination again, i will vote for him again. what i will be honest with you, ron desantis is the guy we need to nominate as our presidential candidate, because i think he checks all the marks we need is a president.

i am a little concerned about trump and all the stuff going on with him. but i think trump -- yeah, trump would not have any kind of influence on anybody for me as far as who to vote for. i am a ronald reagan conservative, and i would vote for whoever i think is the best candidate. but trump is, again, he has been railroaded. of course, i am mad about it myself, with the democrats. adam schiff is about as shifty as anybody can be. and the party of -- the democratic party is just the party of hell, as far as i am concerned. if trump gets the nomination, i will vote for him, but i'm supporting ron desantis as my candidate. host: what is it about dissent is that you like more than you like about trump? caller: basically, he is a

conservative. i love the way he has doubled the federal government on several issues. he is really kind of trump-like when it comes to defending his own state. he is real strongly that. he is very adamant. i like what he does with that. i tell you, to me, he is trump-like, but he has more tact and is more presidential. the guy has been in the military, has a military background. i am just very, very, very impressed with him, and i am thinking he would be the right candidate for us. he checks all the marks for me as first president, and i am hoping he will be the nominee. but if trump is the nominee, i will support him 100%, like i have the two previous times here but we can't have democrats stay in office. you see what is going on right now, just a munch of whack jobs in the whole administration.

that is pretty much what i have to say, and i appreciate you letting me tell you guys. host: jonathan in columbus, ohio. good morning. caller: yes, good morning. i am a registered republican. i have never voted for donald trump. he is a criminal. if he runs again in 2023 or 2024, i will not vote for him, and i have never voted for him. he is a criminal. host: who have you voted for, jonathan? who would you like to see run in 2024? i think we lost jonathan. the story on the front page of today's usa today, trouble dogged trump like no one before your the story by david jackson, veteran usa today reporter, saying there has never been a set of presidential scandals like this one. of course, there has never been a president like donald. predecessors like richard nixon,

johnson, grant, harding, and bill clinton faced issues, but no subject had such an array of inquiries like president trump, classified material and accusations of inciting the insurrection. he was the first former president to have his home search this week, and two days later he was the first to invoke his fifth amendment right against self discrimination at a new york state inquiry on past business practices. from page of today's usa today. this is kathy, prince george, virginia, says it is not enough influence. caller: good morning. i do not feel it is enough because i feel like the republican party, quote unquote, does not support its own, like the democrat party supports their own. and donald trump has always had to run against the democrat, as

well as those in the republican party that were turned off by his brashness or his -- you know , he came in and wanted to clear the swamp, and that included those republicans who are comfortable being in washington, d.c., and not honestly serving the people who put them there. host: who are some examples of those republicans that you are talking about? caller: i mean, of course, mitt romney did not win the presidency. i voted for him, but he was the first -- he was when my eyes began to open about the republicans, because for years they cap saying, if you give us the edge ready again, we're going to do this or do that -- if you give us the majority again, we are going to do this or that.

then they had paul, the young guy, that ran with -- host: paul ryan. caller: yes. and then they got in, and they wanted to be -- the democrats are ferocious. they go after something and take no prisoners. the republicans get in there and want to be nice, and they want to -- they do not serve their constituents as a whole. they don't. that is just how i feel. and trump came in and how the game was played. he said he had contributed to both democrats and republicans. he saw how the game was played. yet, he also was speaking for a big swath of americans who felt like their voices had not been heard for years and had just been squashed and given all the

promises, campaign after campaign, and then let down every time a vote was taken in congress. host: what lesson do you think republicans in washington will take from that list of 10 house republicans who voted for impeachment and among them three have lost their primaries, four are set to retire, liz cheney facing her primary today and expected to lose at primary, only two left still standing ahead of the general election in november? caller: i would hope that they would -- again, it is not about the man, donald trump, it is about when donald trump campaigned and then when he became president, what he did. and so i hope that they would look at that and say, well, and

i would say -- they made their choice, they made their vote, and they were entitled to that vote. but then every vote has consequences. so hopefully it is the beginning of more change, is all i would say. host: a quick focus on the two left still standing among ghost and republicans in the house who defied donald trump. dan newhouse of the fourth district of washington, outlasting his trump-endorsed opponent, largely to an open primary system in the state of washington which every party candidate runs on a single qualifying conscious on the two top vote-get us advanced to the election in november. and then the unicorn of this bunch, the new york times describes him as, calling trump a driving person and what happened at the capitol. he advanced to a june 24 --

advanced on june 24 to the general election but faces a tough general election in what is considered a swing district out in california. david in california, san francisco, good morning. you are next. caller: yeah, talking about trump's shifting base, i have listened to a lot of hate radio and a lot of progressive radio, and in some ways, he is not to be feared, because he has done so many dirty deeds to even his supporters, they usually only give a half assed rally. so a lot of his so-called support right now is paid. he pays a pr company to do a thing or use extortion. don't underestimate the

extortion of trump's, you know, corporate buddies to just crush every small business that disobeys him. host: we're talking about the poll we started this segment with, and news from the does a lot of polls, this one with hundreds of republican voters taking the poll on republican party support for donald trump. for the much every few weeks over the past two years. i wonder, you don't trust those polling numbers? caller: well, if i remember right, is it true that in the election of 2016 that donald trump lost in manhattan by 86%? host: i do not know the numbers. caller: he had ripped off -- there are the five boroughs, and

if i remember right, manhattan was the one he lost by 80 6%. host: who is a republican that you do support, as a republican? caller: oh, my great grand pappy. my grandfather in 1902 was fighting the industrial age versus the small business. he was a state legislator in missouri. host: there have been a lot of elections since then. who is a recent republican you would support? caller: not too darn many. host: do you consider yourself a republican? caller: well, no, i'm green party myself. host: we're talking to republicans only, and it works better if we try to follow the rules of the conversation. it just makes the conversation flow at little better. we will talk to voters of every political party coming up in a few minutes as we continue with our program. but republicans only here.

gladys in tampa, florida. you are next. caller: good morning. i would say the first time the president came down the elevator with his wife, who happened to be a beautiful lady with many languages that would make her one of the best first ladies around because she could talk to people in many languages and she loved children, i think that is a positive thing on that end. but i would like to say that when he came down the elevator with his beautiful lady, that is when the democrats started writing stuff like -- what's her name? who hired somebody to do -- say bad things about the president --

host: bring us to 2022 and donald trump's influence on the party today. caller: oh, i think he is very good on the party today, too. he is not the one who is trying to do the country end. he is good for our country. he is pro the united states. you can listen to the democrat'' take all you want about him not being good for the country. that is because they are getting that pay from places like soros, china, and stuff like that. host: this is cornelia in cottonwood, idaho. good morning. you are next. caller: good morning. i am probably going to really flub up this call. can you hear me? host: yes, go ahead.

caller: ok, thank you very much. i today still believe that donald trump is the most persecuted candidate ever, ever, ever to run for president. that man has been nothing but good for this country. and i think it is a wonder that he is still standing at all, from the press who has been totally opposed to him, and hillary clinton -- if anybody had been investigated over and over, looking for dirt like they did for donald trump, they would have been gone long ago. and it is just amazing.

the man is a very good man at heart. he has made some mistakes in his life, like we all have. but his intentions are always for good for this country, and that is why he ran. it is never mentioned that he did not take any presidential income from the time that he was in office. and so many horrible things have been done to him, it is just amazing how this country -- the press has shorted everything he has ever done. the abraham accord, how he got so much positive things done in the middle east. i am not saying everything he has done has been perfect or everything he has said, but he speaks what is on his mind and he is not a regular politician. and that is why these other politicians, they are actually afraid of him because he exposes

corruption. and it is astonishing the corruption in our fbi, the cia, the justice department. it is amazing. that man cannot even take a breath without he is not doing something right. host: lily in gaithersburg, maryland. good morning. caller: thanks for taking my call. so i agree with a lot of callers . and the media, the left, has not been fair, and they have played dirty. i agree that a lot of the policies trump did during his administration, i think you did a great job to. but at this point, i think he has some fatal flaws in the his

temperament, personality, that is going to not be great for the country if he is elected again. i do not think any man can change at that age, and i can see from what he has been doing after he left office that he is kind of like still trying to put his own personal interest in front of the party or the country. so that is what i don't like. host: what is an example of that? caller: for instance, i just finished reading bill barr's book. i had a lot of thoughts that i already had and they were reinforced by the book. for instance, the georgia senator election after 2020.

he is constantly putting the candidates, pushing them, regardless of whether they could win in the general election. that is also one indicator which i don't like. i think he is throwing fire constantly, the constant tweeting and all that. all this racket came from -- obviously, they left would attack him, regardless. but he did constantly give them more ammo, which is something i don't like. i would hope that something that would push forward his policy, the conservative principles, and he also has a fighting spirit but knows better when to fight, how to pick a fight.

and hopefully -- i do not know that it is possible, but able to kind of like draw more support from independent voters, that would be the key. in summary, someone who is better to govern and who is better able to get more votes from the middle, from the abandoned voters, and then be able to win and then be able to govern in a more self-controlled way, i think is what i am trying to say. i do not think he is that candidate at this point, even though i fully supported most of his policies. host: you mentioned former attorney general bill barr's book, "one damn thing after another," and we covered one of

his book talks on that back in the spring on booktv. you can watch bill barr speaking about his book, available on our website, c-span.org. type in william barr at the top of the page, and it is the first even the comes up. danny in south carolina, your thoughts on former president trump's influence on the gop. caller: donald trump -- [inaudible] understand that, all this man did, giving people nicknames per they should call him porn star trump. host: ok. laura, spokane, washington. you are next. caller: good morning. my concern isn't as much at from's influence -- isn't as much on trump's influence than

the influence on our country that has come about because of these people that hate our country that are in the democratic party and probably some in the republican party. they hate our country. they hate americans, especially white americans. they get up there until everybody and then tell these people to go out and attack this person or attack that person. whatever. and we have slavery in this country now, thanks to that bordern. we -- border. we have people coming in. with president trump, he was decent. he did things that were good for people. he did not do things because he did not like this attitude or that politics or something. he did something for the whole country. and that is what is important to me. that is what is important about the man to me, that he looked outside of himself. and his influence in our interparty, i felt he is a

leader, that he has taught them how to fight back. we truly had a bunch of whimpering little puppies. you know, it is like they do not want to break their gentlemanly ways. but there's times when you have to fight like a junkyard dog, and that is just the way it is. president trump taught them how to do that with class. host: spring, texas, good morning. caller: i would like to comment that the emotional attachment that conservatives and republicans have the trump is just disgusting. today we will lose liz cheney, a woman whose voting record stands as a republican, yet she has been labeled a rhino, as the other gentleman called him, the great nickname giver of our time, donald trump, which gives enjoyment to his emotionally fueled supporters and he cannot make a single speech with one of

his catchphrases being used, because let's face it, that is what he is, a brander, a businessman. he lost money only a casino. how do you file bankruptcy on a casino. the man is a joke. host: who is the republican you support in 2024? caller: adam kinzinger needs to step up out of the shadows. that is a real man, a real republican, someone not afraid to go after the king, all these people worship. i hate to say it, most of them are overly -- elderly americans who are willing to -- anything trump says the goes against the constitution, separation of powers, getting rid of things, i could go on. the man has said he has never asked god for like i said, these people want a hero. they want the king.

we are going to save america, not any one man. host: two more hours to go this morning. next we will be joined by heidi shierholz, the president of the economic institute. we will talk about the impact of bidens economic policies. and later on we will talk to richard weitz and the taliban's takeover of afghanistan. >> over the past few months, the january 6 committee held a series of hearings reviewing the findings of their investigation. watch c-span as we look back at

the eight hearings featuring never before seen evidence. tonight, at 8:00 p.m. eastern. video testimony from donald trump's campaign manager and william barr on the presidents claims of voter fraud. watch tonight on c-span or any time on demand at c-span.org. american history tv saturdays on c-span2. exploring the people and events that tell the american story. mark clegg, professor of musicology at the university of michigan recounts the history of the star-spangled banner and how its meaning has evolved. author and professor live trees donaldson talks about how black

soldiers use their experience to further civil rights. watch american history tv on c-span2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch on time any time at c-span.org/history. c-span brings you an unfiltered view of government. our newsletter word for word recounts the day for you from the halls of congress to daily press briefings. scan the qr code to sign up for this email and stay up-to-date on everything happening in washington each day. subscribe today using the qr code or go to c-span.org/connect to join any time. "washington journal," continues. host: we returned to the topic of the u.s. economy. our guest is heidi shierholz.

your viewers may not be familiar. talk about your mission and how you carry it out? guest: the economic policy institute is a think take that focuses on middle income people. host: how are low and middle income people doing in today's economy? guest: that's a very good question. this recovery has been a remarkable recovery. when we lost 22 million jobs in march and april of 2020. it was the most sinking feeling i could imagine. that was 20 million jobs lost,

and i thought this is going to be a nightmare and particularly hit lower and middle income people. that happens when there is a slow recovery, but that is not what happen this time around. congress really stood up. did the kind of policy that was needed to spur a strong recovery. we have had this remarkable recovery. as we sit right now, the private sector has more than gained back the jobs that it lost in the worst of the covid, when covid first hit. there are some real issues with hiring back in the public sector with the need to hire back in the public sector. that lower income middle people,

the hit that they took from the recession was a numerate it as much as possible by the very quick recovery. that does not mean everything is great. we have not returned back to the february 2020 economy. there was driving any quality, structural issues. black-and-white unemployment, black-and-white wage gaps. middle and lower income people, the speed of this recovery has meant that lower and middle income people did not take the hit that they had in the aftermath of prior recessions. host: are we still in the recovery? are we in recession right now? guest: i think we are not in recession right now. there is a lot of conversations about this.

we just got the first job numbers from july that were extremely strong. we added 528,000 jobs in july. the unemployment rate dropped. those are not the kind of statistics that spark a recession. i do have some trepidation about the near future. we do know that the federal reserve has been raising interest rates to try to slow the economy. that is the point of them raising interest rates. if they have raised them too fast, they have raised them aggressively and if they have gone too fast they may have already secured a recession in coming months.

that remains to be seen. i hope that is not the case. host: why has the economy been contracting for two quarters in a row and that is one of the definitions for a recession. how do you explain that contraction at a time when we are getting such good job numbers? guest: it's a really good question. the overall gdp growth and when we dig in the broad picture of the numbers, and what they say about underlying trends. there is something going on there. we get the extra traction in the overall headline numbers. when you dig in to the numbers, i don't think the contraction in the first quarter reflects an actual contraction because it

did not reflect underlying trends. it reflected at the klein in inventory and a decline and net exports. both of those things do not signify purchasers within the u.s. holding back. they are not signifying a contraction in the way other measures do. i don't think the underlying numbers in the first quarter signal a recession. i think instead what we are seeing when you look at the gdp numbers is not two quarters of contraction, continued growth in the first quarter and a very slight contraction in the second quarter. all of that show so slow down but not yet a contraction. if you combine that with what is going on.

it is pretty clear that we are not yet in a recession. host: if you want to join this conversation, republicans it is (202) 748-8001, democrats it is (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002. go ahead and start calling in. heidi shierholz, another number, the inflation numbers. do you think we finally are on the downward trend here when it comes to inflation in this country? guest: i always have a copy yacht, one month does not make a trend. we should not get too excited but if i had to say, i would say yes. it looks like we have reached a peak and we have now come down. we actually saw zero inflation

in july. host: there has been some confusion about that. it was a .25% and then the zero number comes up. guest: there are two different numbers. from june to july there were no price increases on average. that 8.25% is year-over-year so that compares july to the prior july. those numbers are good numbers if you want to look at the longer run. 8.25 over the year. if you want to look at where we are headed right now, and how things are changing right now then you look at what it is going on in the last month or last couple of months and that is where the 0.0 comes in. i really do think we reached that peak and it is starting to come down.

the zero inflation was driven by a big decline in oil prices and gas prices. a big decline in airline fares. one of the other things is that we know gas prices have declined further. i expect that that will continue to come down with the pressure on inflation. we are also starting to see some easing on the supply chains that have been boosting inflation. we know that businesses and people bought a lot of goods in the recovery, during covid. covid is still going on. you see businesses having their inventories built up now higher

than they want to. in order to move that inventory they will have to reduce prices to start moving that. that will put downward pressure on prices. they are really seeing a lot of the dynamics, those high prices are starting to abate. inflation is still very high, but i believe it is now -- all signs that i see are that it is coming down. host: do you believe the inflation reduction act will reduce inflation? guest: the direct way it reduces inflation because the inflation reduction act, the bill that president biden is going to sign today. it will reduce inflation because

it reduces the deficit. there is a lot of spending and that bill. spending on climate, on health care. it is all paid for by taxes on corporations and the wealthy. it is actually more than paid for by taxing corporations and the wealthy. it will bring the deficit down and that will put pressure on inflation. it will have an effect on inflation and the more immediate effect on families. it will come through the health insurance subsidies for example. the caps on prescription drugs expenditures. those kinds of things will reduce costs for families, for millions of families immediately. the inflation reducing effect,

it will take somewhat longer to be felt more broadly. host: we have colors for you already. this is ron in winterhaven, florida, a republican. caller: thank you for taking my call. my question is this, i live in florida and my wife works at walmart. you say the economy is not bad, there is no inflation. i went to the store and the specific item that i buy went up at least four dollars in two weeks. i don't understand how everything is getting reduced here and you say it is coming down that prices will go lower. everyone keeps talking about how prices will go lower but they are not going lower. the president says that when one thing goes up, another thing goes down. that is the dumbest thing i ever

heard in my life. thank you for your time. i hope you get this country right because the democrats destroying it. guest: i am sorry for not explaining it as well as i could have. when i say inflation is going to come down, that means that prices will continue to rise as dramatically. most people will not see prices drop. the part of our economy seeing inflation all the time. right now, that inflation is very high. i don't think we are going to see a big deflationary. . i don't think we overall see prices come down.

what we really want to see is the pace of price growth slowing and that is what is coming down the pike. some prices will come down and some prices will go up. the broad inflation numbers that we hear in the news, those really are averages across the whole economy. individual prices can look different to what the overall average looks like. host: to the jersey shore, this is albert, a democrat. caller: yes good morning. i am a very big democrat but i am mainly -- i have mainly republican friends. they are looking at a fellow by the name of jim jones that led

everyone down to guyana for a beautiful life. that did not turn out so well. when they drank the kool-aid. host: do you want to bring us to economic policy? caller: i think mr. biden is right on the money. things are starting to turn around and during the upcoming election in november. i will be working the polls for the democrats. i wish everybody would come out, republican and democrat. god bless president biden. thank you. host: that was albert in new jersey. guest: taking it back to economic policy. one key being that you can see that is very different from mr. biden and his predecessor, is

their approach on taxes. we know that under president trump there was a massive decrease in taxes for corporations and the wealthy. the lion share of the expenditures on the tax cuts went to the wealthy. it was very lopsided and the biden administration is doing the opposite in order to pay for climate and health care. the biden administration is raising taxes on the wealthy and on corporations. making sure corporations actually pay their fair share of their taxes in this country. that is a real difference. actually ensuring that corporations pay their fair share is a way that we really get to the kind of economy that

works for everyone. that is a real difference between those two presidents. host: this is tom and portland, oregon. -- in portland, oregon. caller: i am stunned and at a loss. i am sure i am not the only one. what are you trying to talk about? everything that trump did, biden did the exact opposite out of pure arbitrariness. i don't understand -- yeah. trump cut taxes, we had low unemployment.

economic policies asking other enemy countries for oil? one after another. it is absolutely imbecilic, that miss heidi or anyone else. what are you talking about? host: i think we got your point. guest: there are very big differences between president and president biden. one of the key differences is that the policies of president biden are about a more fair economy. ensuring prosperous growth that is broadly shared. one of the big difference is there tax policy where trump cut taxes for the wealthy and corporations and biden is increasing taxes on corporations to pay for things like health

care and policies to fight climate change. that is a staunch difference between the two presidents. host: let me come back to the inflation reduction act. i want to play jason smith, the top republican on the economic committee. arguing against what is in that legislation. this is what he had to say. [video clip] >> we are debating what democrats called the inflation reduction act which everyone from the congressional budget office to 230 different economists, even senator bernie sanders said will not actually reduce inflation. when you strip away the sunset policies, this bill spends $745 billion in ads 140 6 billion to

our debt. it adds $54 billion worth of debt just in the first five years. and 80% of their budget deficit, don't even begin until after the year 2029. so lots of spending upfront, lots of debt upfront and then maybe savings eight years from now? how is that going to put the fire out of inflation. when the price of groceries is up 13.1% over the past year? senator's mansion and schumer, secretary alan and former president obama are all on record saying you don't raise taxes during a recession. but that is exactly what this bill does. it includes 599 billion in new taxes. half of the tax burden falls on

taxpayers making less than 400,000 a year. the choice this bill puts in front of families, making less than 200,000 is clear, but the government at the center of your health care decisions or face a $10 billion tax burden. it gets worse, this bill doubles the size of the irs. it doubles the size of the irs. so it can target an audit more middle-class families and snoop into their bank accounts. not sure how subjecting americans to more audits solves the inflation crisis. in my home state of missouri, this bill would quadruple the number of audits. 18,000 more audits on hard-working americans who make less than $200,000 a year. host: jason smith from the floor

of the house. there is a lot there. guest: almost all of it is wrong. i will take them one at a time. economists stated that this will not reduce inflation. that is just wrong. there is a letter signed by 120 six top economist including seven nobel laureates, two former treasury secretary, two former phis presidents of the federal reserve. all of them signing this letter saying that the inflation reduction act will bring down inflation. he is just wrong on that. the idea that this will not

bring down the deficit is dead wrong. the idea that it is frontloaded is dead wrong. he may be confusing it with the build back better act which is in earlier iteration of this. that was very much frontloaded. there was a lot of spending in the front and beginning and then deficit reduction later down the road. that is not the case for the inflation reduction act. it is not going to be a big deficit increase in the beginning. he was right on the irs. it will increase resources going to the irs. and the idea that that is bad for the american people is laughable. the irs is underfunded. people who have the money to pay

the most sophisticated accountants can get away with not paying their fair share. the money going to the irs closes loopholes that allow corporations and wealthy individuals to get away with skirting the laws, breaking the laws and not paying their fair share. so investing in the irs, means that more taxes are going to come in from wealthy and corporations who are skirting the laws because there is not enough enforcement. i know the irs might have a bad name because paying your taxes is never fun for anyone. paying your taxes can be a stressful situation. but what we do want for the irs

is to have enough resources to audit the wealthy. to audit corporation so that they pay their fair share. he is right, it will increase the irs and it is a really, really good thing for the american people that we have an irs that can actually do the kind of enforcement to make sure that people have a lot of money to skirt payments are less able to do that. host: about 20 minutes left with heidi shierholz as we talked about the economy. she is the president of the economic policy institute. easy to find on twitter at economic policy. this is gary from corpus christi. caller: thank you for taking my call.

with the spending that this bill does, i don't understand how that is going to reduce the final deficit. basically, i find it impossible to spend your way out of debt. my grandchildren are going to be paying for what we are trying to pick the money up now for. guest: i really appreciate that question. it is a very good question. the inflation reduction act increases spending and increases revenue. it does both things. it does increase spending on crucial things like health care and climate. but it increases revenue more. so that is how you get the deficit reduction.

if more than offsets the increase in revenue that we get from raising tackett's from the inflation reduction act will offset the spending. that is how you get the deficit reduction. host: to sam in rome, georgia. on the line for the democrats. caller: good morning and thank you for c-span. my question is this, so my gop comrades that are out there. with all these accolades for trump in the economy. help me understand, when trump came into office, did he not inherit a good market? bush inherited a bull market from clinton. the first few years of democrats administration is cleaning up

from republican administrations. can you talk about those transition economies and can you also talk about which economy has reduce the deficit the most since the clinton years? guest: that is a really good question. the idea of what kind of economy inherited is fascinating. obama inherited an economy and absolute freefall. he took office in january of 2009 when we lost something like 850,000 jobs. that's not an exact number but it's in that ballpark. an economy and absolute freefall. over the course of his eight years in office, congress nearly sold out on the things needed

and shadow of these things. we had a very weak recovery from the great recession. by the time trump took office, it was starting to look a lot better. trump really did inherit an economy that was growing. he was then hit by something that was not his fault. the weak response to it, you can pin the lot of that on his shoulders. that was a completely random event. it is absolutely true that biden inherited an economy was already

struggling. let me say that a little bit differently. in the last few months of the trump administration, the economy was starting to slow down again. in august of 2021, i will get the numbers wrong. we started to see the economy slowing and when biden came into office, when he passed the american recovery plan act in march of 2021, that put the economy back on a strong trajectory. the kind of economy that a president inherits is an interesting question. it is not under their control. what they do with it is the most

important thing. host: the american rescue plan, one point $9 trillion in spending in that rescue plan. what was the most important part of that plan? guest: the most important part of that plan is its size. aid to state and local governments. so they can shore up, so they can hire back. that was a key part of it. expanding the child tax credit. making the child tax credit fully refundable. those provisions have now expired. benefits for children are part

and parcel to their parents being able to find a job. one of the things that happened in the recovery act they made it fully refundable. that is a way to say that you get those credits even if you don't have a job. even if you don't have enough income to offset the size of the benefits. that alone dramatically reduced child poverty. in the middle of a pandemic, we saw a decline in child poverty because of these kinds of provisions. it was a remarkable package. host: two texas, this is david,, a republican. caller: good lord.

this current act, the inflation reduction act which is a ridiculous name. only 12% believe think it will reduce it. $400 billion for climate. $80 billion to the irs, money for health care subsidies. they know it will get extended for the tenure. if they put it out for 10 years, this plan would've been negative under any circumstance. there would've been no deficit reduction. there is nothing in this that will increase the supply of anything that will bring demand down. the idea that you can take money out of the free market economy, give it to the government and expect he will get an increase in wealth resulting in more

taxes, resulting in a decrease of the deficit is impossible. they are taking money out of the productive parts of the economy. the idea of tax bill where they will make corporations pay their fair share. the reason they get into a no tax payable scenario is because of the incentives for investment in the accelerated depreciation that lets companies increase manufacturing which is part of the plan to bring companies back. the 600,000 jobs that came back that were going to come back due to a magic wand. host: you bring up a lot of issues, i would like to give her a chance to respond. guest: the idea that the recovery act is a big spending

bill, the idea that his cause inflation is just flat wrong. one of the ways you can look at it is to look at what is going on around the rest of the globe. what you see is that inflation is high everywhere. if you look at the relationship between how much country spent on their recoveries and how much their inflation accelerated, there is no relationship. inflation grew dramatically no matter what countries did as far as relief and recovery from the covid recession. the global rise in inflation is not the fault of the u.s. relief recovery package,. . that is just not what is driving our inflation.

that is an important myth to put to bed. there is another point that the caller made that these taxes will hurt because taxes on wealthy and the corporations because it will hurt the corporations and they will not make investments in the economy. this is totally false. we can look to very recent experience to show that it is indeed false. we know that during the trump administration there was a massive tax cut to the wealthy and corporations. if it were true that the tax increases going to hurt investments, you would expect that the tax decrease unleashed investment. it 100 not.

you look back on investments during the trump tax cuts, there is no break in those. it had zero effect on investments. this idea that if we raise taxes on the wealthy and corporations it will hurt our broader economy. that is a myth to keep the wealthy and corporations from having to pay their fair share. host: is the best way to deal with inflation by raising interest rates? guest: it depends on the situation. raising interest rates it slows the economy down. it reduces job openings and so

workers have less bargaining power. wages grow more slowly, any feeding into higher wages get stopped. it is the appropriate thing to do right now, and when i look at the data they should really think hard about doing more increases in interest rates because what we see if you look over a longer. . there was a bit of an increase in july and wages but over the longer. r period, wages are declining with growth. wage growth is still high but it

is coming down. the idea that the fed would raise interest rates to further slow wage growth but then run the risk of causing a recession or deepening a recession that they may have already caused. i hope they really think hard before doing that again. what we see is that inflation is moderating because of reduction and gas prices as businesses start reducing their inventories to try to get inventories to move. we are seeing inflation, which is terrible on families. it is causing a lot of hardship, but it is coming down as those forces abate. i think the fed should really

think hard before they raise rates again. host: time for maybe just one or two more phone calls. heidi shierholz is here. we have ronnie from houston, texas. caller: i understand why, with all these people from texas calling in. it's because they get it. there is only one reason for raising inflation and how they print money. they just printed half $1 billion for this new deal. the gentleman from texas is absolutely right. i can't believe that heidi can look into the camera and say what she is saying. the only way to raise inflation is to print money and that is exactly what we are doing.

thank you. host: heidi shierholz you talk about worldwide inflation. what you think is causing worldwide inflation? what are point to? guest: it was covid and the lasting effects of covid and the war in ukraine which is increased energy prices, the war in ukraine. covid really causing supply chain issues. they are starting to alleviate now. another phenomenon that is starting to alleviate now, is that during covid, people slowed their spending patterns. they no longer engaged in services. they let go of their gym membership and bought a gym equipment.

they slowed on services and started buying goods. that extreme demand for goods at the same time we were seeing supply chain snarls around the world. all of that ratcheted up prices. all of that is starting to abate. now, we are starting to see it naturally come down as covid is getting more under control. it is not that the government is printing money. that is decidedly not, at all, what has caused inflation. host: we will stop there for today but we will have you on later down the road. heidi shierholz, the president of the economic policy institute. guest: thank you very much. host: coming up we will be joined by richard weitz from the hudson institute.

we will talk about the anniversary of the taliban's takeover of afghanistan. >> nobody really thought that this was really going to happen that paris would succumb to the nazis. it was unthinkable when it finally happened. the city of lights was supposed to be this bastion for enlightenment and freethinking. it was an open society. and when the nazis got into poland, and warsaw, they had mass executions. they executed liberals. they executed freethinkers. everyone was scared as they came towards paris that it would happen in paris as well. >> author of the book "taking paris." 's liberation by american and french forces in 1944. watch on q&a, sunday night, at

8:00 p.m. eastern. you can listen to it on our c-span now app. >> at least six presidents recorded conversations while in office. here many of those conversations during season two of c-span's podcasts presidential recordings. the nixon tapes, they are part private conversations, and 100% unfiltered. well let me say the main thing is, it will pass. my heart goes out to those people who with the best of intention are overzealous. as i am you know, i tell you, if i could've spent a little more time being a politician and less time being president i would've kicked their boats out but i didn't know what they were doing. >> currently on c-span2 or

wherever you get your podcast. "washington journal," continues. richard weitz joins us now. he serves at the hudson institute talking about the first anniversary of the taliban taking over the afghanistan. but first, could you talk about the hudson institute? guest: it is one of several independent research organizations located primarily in washington focusing on international policy questions and how to include the u.s. response. it was set up after world war ii and the initial question of interest was we have now seen use of nuclear weapons for the first time, will they be used again? what does that mean for international politics. what questions do we need to

address? it is evolved over time with different focuses. sometimes domestic politics, sometimes foreign policy. we have been focused a lot on china. hudson is divided into several centers. my center focuses a lot on the great power relations, i've a book coming out on the russia /china relations. the iran negotiations, korean nuclear weapons. other centers focus on different areas of policy. host: hudson.org. and a recent piece on the one-year anniversary of the taliban taking control of afghanistan you describe that country as a country adrift. what you mean by that? guest: i meant that there are

still open questions about the futures of afghanistan internally and even more so, its relationship with the outside world. internally, there was some hope and initial indication that the taliban would behave differently than the first time it was in power from 1996-2001. there was an openness for media engagement initially, not immediately requiring changes from women and other groups. but we have seen during this past year a tightening of control and increased repression. internationally, it is up in the air what their relationship will

be between the taliban and other countries. no foreign government has recognized the taliban. it is unique. they are a transitional government but even when they were in power before they had three other countries recognize them. this time, none. there have been efforts to reach out and engage at various levels, particularly humanitarian relief. to change their policies towards women. but they have all been transient. it still remains to be seen what the role of afghanistan will be in the world and how the u.s. and other countries will deal with it. host: before he was killed in that recent drone strike, what did the president in kabul will tell us about the taliban and how different the taliban of

today is from the taliban of 21 years ago? guest: that was an alarming development. when the taliban was first in power, they gave sanctuary to terrorist organizations like al qaeda. these groups take advantage of the sanctuary of the taliban regime to try and attack other countries outside of afghanistan. many of them were neighboring countries. pakistan, uzbekistan, but most famously the attack on the u.s..

now they are back into power in one of the questions people have is will they give harbor again to international terrorist and what kind of freedom will they allow them. it is clear that there are some international terrorist but unlike the taliban, who say they are trying to change their country inside. the head of al qaeda, it is not clear how many people are there. there has not been an attack organized in afghanistan like they were when they were first in power. some people think the taliban

will give harbor to some of these people but not engage in international terrorist activities. the answers we have gotten or not reassuring. they have lied to us and they knowingly harbored international terrorist. they didn't know what the other factions are doing and that leads us to wonder if most of the taliban is trying to restrain international terrorism. host: let me offer up the phone numbers for other viewers to join the conversation. we have special lines for veterans for the war of afghanistan. (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, an independents (202) 748-8002.

go ahead and call in with your comments and questions. the story from today's wall street journal. the biden administration has decided it will not release any of the $700 billion held by afghanistan central bank on u.s. soil and has suspended talks with the taliban over those funds after the killing of eyman al swahiri. guest: they were quoting people from the island administration, but that is not quite accurate. what happened with the afghan economy since the year of taliban control has been disastrous.

there are different words you could use that are just as good. afghanistan has suffered from long standing problems like drought. they have been dependent on foreign aid. with the end of the civil war, you see a decline in violence and safety in some areas but you have also seen a substantial decline in international aid. what has happened that during the 20 years of fighting with the taliban, their leaders in the group itself was put under international sanctions. now that they have seize control of the government, any of the government bodies are also on those list. the international community, the u.n., the u.s. has been struggling to find a mechanism

to provide assistance to the afghan people who are now suffering in addition from the long-standing drought, last of cash, underemployment, the collapse in public services and so on. the united states and other countries as well have been trying to work with the united nations and through nongovernmental organizations to get the money and aid to the people. that has only been partially successful. even if it is, it has not solve the problem entirely. we have moved away from the provisions of emergency to a longer-term development that would help the country wean itself off from our aid. until we work out a better arrangement with the taliban which could include a return of some of the $700 billion that is being held in new york. i think there is 2 billion in

other countries. this will remain a problem. host: this is tim out of wisconsin. on the line for democrats. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. i would like to ask this gentleman, afghanistan has been a tough situation for 2000 years. we thought we could change it but my biggest question is, why did president trump hand over the country to the taliban? i know that biden claimed it was messy, he should have done better. at the time we bailed out, from what i understand, the taliban had every provincial capital in the country surrounded. they were just biding their time because we had signed off on getting out. they were over here at camp david with negotiations with the

taliban. what possessed trump to turn the country over to the taliban? thank you. guest: we have an interesting phenomenon in the parts of the war, it was purported by many of the defense experts, the people in washington that over time, the popularity of the american public to continue this engagement declined. at some point, president trump and president biden had the decision that staying in afghanistan and keeping thousands of u.s. troops there was counterproductive. there was some hope that the taliban had been reformed.

there was more hope that the afghan public institutions were stronger after all of those years of age. there were some other arguments about well, afghanistan was a unique problem in the 1990's and early 2000, but now there are other threats from terrorists based in libya, yemen. the u.s. has other challenges with taiwan and ukraine. president trump and president biden decided that to curtail the u.s. military presence after having to leverage that to the afghan institutions is much as possible and get the taliban to moderate its policy. to moderate its policies.

it didn't work. there are a lot of problems in the execution of the withdrawal. many in d.c. wanted to keep a small force there, a couple thousand troops in hopes that could sustain counterinsurgency, and president biden argued that would not work. president trump had the same thinking. in a way, it hasn't been too much of a partisan issue. it has been trans partisan, what republicans and democrats want for the mission in both parties as well as critical leaders with president trump and president biden, who felt the persistent gap between american commitments and american resources, it was better to focus on other areas. they are still studying

execution, the misperceptions. we underestimated the strength of the taliban, we overestimated the strength of the afghan government, and have seen similar failures in the ukraine war. that's all being analyzed, but there was a lot of uncertainty and unfortunately, they all went against staying in. there were a lot more negatives than we had hoped. host: lucy in new york, republican. good morning. caller: ok, the afghans keep saying they were helping the americans, but they were fighting for their country. why couldn't they be brave like ukrainians instead of all the men jumping on the jet, getting out of there, probably leaving their families? i think we should forget about afghanistan, and why are we looking at china?

it doesn't make sense why the leaders would do this. and why can't they take out putin? he has practically declared a nuclear war, with all the nato countries and american countries. couldn't they just use a drone to take him out? host: a couple of different places around the world. where would you like to start? guest: afghanistan is interesting in the sense that there was some debate as the u.s. was withdrawing by both, and this was discussed by people in the trump administration and the biden administration, the u.s. is getting in a difficult situation with russia and china. we are looking for means to keep them from uniting against us. if we were to withdraw from afghanistan, perhaps that would force them to stop pre-

riding on our efforts there. troops, native support, extra money with support from russia and china -- we could put the burden onto them, they would have to pay for the lead of securing the country -- so far that hasn't occurred. there is also thinking we could maybe get them into competition for the area, but this is a factor that is thinking about, how do we keep russia and china divided, how do we deal with the threats from russia and china, maybe cooperate with them? this is an area where there has been some progression, at least diplomatically. afghanistan is interesting because it is in a -- an example of a world of great powers rivaling the united

states, russia and china. host: this is joe in biddeford, maine, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i want to ask a couple quick questions before i forget. you seem to imply that the trump and biden administrations had some kind of agreement, they had a policy that they agreed on. i don't think that happened. my second point i would like you to clarify, they asked why there was an afghanistan represented --. i would like you to go further, they release 1000 taliban from the prison. taliban released in the prison, i don't know what town it was in, but obama released 13

americans, which everyone is crying about. it was pompeo that released the taliban prisoners, not obama. can you focus on that? guest: i don't rightly know the answer to the last question. what i would say, with respect -- the biden and trump presidencies, you saw this issue was debated and discussed within both. it has long been debated, how long can we keep the troops there, what would be the risk if we withdrew them? maybe keep a small amount, on number, as we had been doing for a while. maybe we could have a sur ge, as we did under the obama administration. what happened over time with presidents who made the decisions and negotiations that secured the withdrawal

agreement, then, president biden continued and executed that. some people say that they would have done it differently, some biden people say if there had been a different aspect of the deal they would have gone in a different course. but they wanted to focus on other areas, russia, china, and so on. that is where i see a lot of continuity, but some of the other questions you mentioned, i think they are now looking very closely into action reviews, why we underestimated the threat, why the government fell so quickly, why were the prisoners released? i am sure these are being discussed. we are waiting for the answers on those as the reviews continue. host: i want to go back to the

united states being the largest donor to afghanistan over the past year. some $775 million in aid efforts over the year. can you explain how that works? how the united states moves money to those groups operating in afghanistan? how did they ensure that some or most of that money does not fall into the hands of the taliban? how does that process work? guest: sure. with a caveat, i know the military and political execution is a bit better than economic, so i might be incorrect in some of my answer, but the u.s. has, through the treasury department and through the un security council granted very extensive

exemptions to the sanctions regime to allow for the flow of humanitarian aid to afghan beneficiaries. there is a trust fund by the u.n. established to provide help for the needy afghans, elderly and disabled, to help public infrastructure, public funding, and basically the idea is that the u.s. and u.n. are allowing the funding from their own courses as well as other americans and other ngos, to go into afghanistan as long as it circumvents the afghan public institutions under taliban control. thus far, the taliban has generally permitted this. there have been reports that they are trying to divert the aid to beneficiaries they favor,

but it is not widespread. it's unclear how long that can continue, and as we mentioned, there is still a problem, this does provide short-term relief. a lot of food aid and so on to keep people from starving, so we did not have a disastrous winter as many people feared, but it really does not transition the country to move away from this dependence, to be able to stand more on its own feet. this is the dilemma, as the taliban heightens up, some of that aid may slow down, but even if it continues, there's got to be a mechanism to help restart the economy, which is suffering from intense inflation, a lack of cash, because even though there have been extensive sanction waivers, they have been mostly noncommercial entities

that have been engaged. some banks hesitate to deal with afghan entities because of the sanctions. host: heading down to texas, lake jackson, texas. tom, line for republicans. good morning. caller: good morning. host: good morning, sir. you are on with richard weitz. caller: i would like to say, i am a trump supporter, and bob woodward did a good job in his book. he spent two years researching -- i don't agree with his opinion, but he put down 19 things that trump did for the country, and i will just say three of the top things. he controlled immigration. he reduced taxes. and he improved our standing in the world. i think he would be the right man to run again because people have seen what the democrats are doing, and i think the majority of americans think we are on the wrong path. host: got your point, tom.

richard weitz, bringing it back to afghanistan, there was a lot of concern to your ago today and in the week -- concern a year ago today and in the weeks that followed among the united states and allies. what the pullout from afghanistan, the damage it might have done to that standing. what is your assessment? guest: that was my concern. i will say that the damage, at least in my assessment, has been less. one, this is not a new phenomenon. i grew up during the vietnam war and there was a lot of concern about how the u.s. defeat in vietnam, the withdrawal and collapse of the government is something similar to what we have seen an afghanistan, negatively affecting the u.s.' role in the world. but we -- but reagan came

in, we had a response on policy, and that has had less of an impact then we feared. maybe we could find some historical pattern that in some cases, countries can survive these kinds of setbacks due to their inherent strength, as we know from the united states' strong economy, strong military, healthy society and so on. something that has helped negate some of the negative impacts of global protection of the afghan setbacks has been the ukraine war. in a way, the u.s. has managed to overcome a lot of the doubts that arose in afghanistan. in ukraine, the u.s., with a lot of help from allies, have actually been able to build a strong foreign military, the ukrainian armed forces is a lot

better than we expected. nato didn't collapse, there was some thoughts that if nato failed in afghanistan, it is going to fail everywhere. nato has held firm in the case of ukraine, so i think that the u.s. successes in ukraine have negated many of the peer perceptions and negatives in afghanistan. at least in the case of china, when the leader was pondering whether to attack taiwan or not, they will probably look at how the u.s. is responding to the attack on ukraine rather than how the u.s. responded in afghanistan. host: and another thing, a year ago, all the equipment that got left behind, concerns about handing that over to the taliban. how much of the equipment has the taliban been able to put to use? what is their arsenal right now,

as it were? what does their military look like? guest: yes, we left an enormous amount of equipment there. most of it was small arms, light weapons, planes were disabled or flew off with their pilots to neighboring countries, uzbekistan, could you stand -- kajikastan, and they are well equipped with american small arms and so on, but they don't have much of the systems. when there was an earthquake in afghanistan last month, they only had a few helicopters they could use to reach the area. i would say, it has not enhanced the ability of the taliban too,

for example, attack foreign countries. it has given them better weapons, but similar to the weapons they already had. they already have a lot of weapons from the afghan government. but more concerning, there is such a large drawing of these weapons, some of them have probably been sold on open markets. so they're probably flowing into conflict zones throughout the region -- syria, yemen, who knows where? this is adding to the flow of uncontrolled weapons. there is nothing like stingers, and higher missiles, thing -- anti-air missles -- missiles, things that would be unique. host: richard weitz of the

hudson institute. if you want to join the line and call in, like mary did in san francisco, independent. caller: yes, i have a question for your guest. i get so frustrated with the first c-span, because a couple of colors ago, indicated, which what prompted my call, people are so -- as trump said himself -- poorly educated and ill-informed. can you please talk about the history of afghanistan and how westernized it was prior to the mujahedin taking over? women were allowed to wear miniskirts in those days. what happened was a reaction from the fundamentalist religious nuts, and is happening in this country, to westernization. the same thing happened in iran. iran was westernized. but when people say on the

afghanistan topic how that country has been in turmoil or the middle east has been in turmoil for thousands and thousands -- they are so ill-informed. not even three, 4, 5 decades ago, they were as western as california. thank you. host: richard weitz on the history of afghanistan? guest: afghanistan has had a turbulent history, in the midst of several empires, but is also somewhat distant and landlocked. we have also seen a series of wars occurring in governments and dynasties. there was a liberalization period after world war ii and the caller is right. if you look at photos from the 1950's, 1960's and even 1970's, you can see women in kabul dressing in modern clothing, not

just miniskirts, but also standard dresses and so on, same with the men. they were wearing ties and so on. as things started to go downhill, when the soviet union tried to impose a communist government. marxist-leninism had a really negative response, the efforts by socialism in the soviet garb, force modernization, secularization and so on triggered a reaction, particularly in the provinces. as the government that was trying to impose the marxist values aligned with the soviet union weakened, they sent in their own forces to try and save it. we ended up with an eight year occupation and that is when the

radicalization became more hostile to globalization and modernization. those in power rejected not only the soviet communist version of modernization, but also the western one. that's the group that's in power, the one that formed the taliban leadership. they defeated the soviets, they defeated us, and they have a traditional view of the role of women in society and other questions, which is alien not only to modern western practice, apparent practice everywhere in the world, including in muslim countries. host: cheryl out of florida, good morning. you are next. caller: thank you for taking my call. it is heartbreaking to see the pictures coming out of afghanistan. democrat or republican, it

should break your heart. they have a humanitarian crisis. millions are starving, even their babies. i do think the withdrawal was a debacle. i think it was one of the worst military withdrawals ever and as a military veteran myself, i feel horrible for the soldiers who have shed their blood, given their lives in defense of these people. i would have seen nothing wrong with carrying a small troop level there, like we do around, in areas around the world. the girls losing their ability to go to school is the worst thing in the world that can happen, to take that education away from those girls. but that just breaks my heart. i don't care what party you are, what race you are, what religion , these people are starving. my heart goes out to them in my prayers go out to them. thank you for taking my call. have a good day. guest: i really don't have

anything for the caller -- i think we all share her grief. host: pictures of the humanitarian crisis in afghanistan -- this is from today's "washington post," babies receiving treatment for malnutrition saturday at a hospital in kabul. the economic collapse after the taliban takeover creating that humanitarian crisis. in terms of food shortages in afghanistan, how much has the country been able to grow their own food? how much did they need supplies from outside their borders? what is the food situation like? guest: there has been a long-standing problem of malnutrition and the lack of food and agricultural issues. this has been exacerbated by a couple years of drought and now the curtailment of public services, so their ability of the afghans to feed themselves

has declined. again, we thought there would be a more massive famine this past winter, but there was a massive effort by humanitarian organizations to bring in aid and that has limited somewhat the malnutrition, but it is still a long-term problem. they still need to get in, the foreign ngos and other groups need to go in and improve your vacation -- irrigation and agricultural efforts destructed by the war. we will need to keep providing emergency assistance on end. host: larry in houston, texas, democrat. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. as a combat soldier, i am glad everybody came back safe. they did come back. we need to stop fighting these illegal wars. you know, we are looking for al

qaeda and bin laden -- not the whole of afghanistan. i had a father who fought in vietnam. [inaudible] it's true -- we cannot make these people be democrats or make them a democratic country if they don't want that. host: richard weitz? guest: the caller's views are apparently those of a view shared by many americans. there was a sense after vietnam that the u.s. was trying to impose its own values on a society that did not want them, and that was partly true. i think many women, many groups in kabul were attracted by western models, and the u.s. has

not had that much success in some of these modernization efforts. we were in the case of world war ii, with germany and japan for example, but not necessarily iraq or afghanistan. you have seen in both the cases of president trump and president biden, a reluctance to spend a lot of efforts on areas where conditions are unfavorable. in ukraine, there is a lot of hope that this will become a strong front for a democratic country, similar to other european countries, but in the case, in other cases, they do not seem to be very favorable. we are reluctant to engage in this kind of civil society building, at least with military force in the future. host: is there an active

military force resistance to the taliban inside of kabul right now? guest: yes. there are at least two large groups, some local groups. on the one hand, there is a group associated with a former government that is based in the penn cherry valley -- penn shear valley north -- the valley north of kabul. it has some limited areas, but its ability to expand beyond that is much more limited compared to let's say, the 1990's, when those kinds of resistance groups were able to control much of the country to keep the taliban from exercising its control. host: another threat is less geographically based, but more

violent. this is the islamic state affiliate in afghanistan. the taliban worked closely with al qaeda and some other international terrorist groups. the islamic state was competing with the taliban for control. they accuse the taliban of selling out to the americans, not fully implement in islam, so on. they have been waging a bombing campaign for years, and it is continuing under the taliban, in which they will kill large groups of often civilians, often ethnic minority groups or religious minority groups. the campaign has not gone beyond what it was when it was kept in check by the previous afghan government. they don't control any particular part of the country, they dispersed.

the taliban has been able to keep it in check but not defeat it yet. this has been an ongoing challenge, and a bit of one for us too, because the islamic state does not consider their leadership, the taliban, islamic leave rigorous, it will pressure the leadership to take a harder line. host: what happened to the group that we called the northern alliance? is there anything like that still in existence in afghanistan? guest: nope. great question. this is something that was organized primarily by the central asian countries, so to g can stand -- tajikistan help

support the ethnic minority, setting up a barrier, a group in the north that was able to interpose themselves, keep the taliban away. they were able to retain strong control over much of the north, letting the taliban consolidate control and eventually provided an important partner when the u.s. intervened in september 2001. but on this occasion, the government, the asian governments have not supported an insurgency against the taliban. the thaad -- tajik government is still -- when it comes to the taliban.

but in any case, none of them, nor the russians or chinese, have been supporting armed opposition to the taliban, meaning they are going to be in control for a while unless they have an internal split, or something happens. host: several more calls. david has been waiting in virginia, independent. go ahead. caller: thank you, c-span, for taking my call. i have a couple of questions for mr. weitz. number one, how long was it after the u.s. intervened in afghanistan until al qaeda was defeated, and was not the taliban at a very weak point at that time? secondly, why did we wait so long to leave after osama bin laden was killed, to wait another 10 years and the taliban

got stronger, the afghan government not seemed to ever get their act together. finally, on the withdrawal, how much of the withdrawal was based on recommendations of the state department to defend the embassy and withdrawal troops from the bagram airbase, and not have sufficient amounts of troops to use bagram to exit people as well as the airport? just wanted to see what you think about blinken versus the department -- host: i worry we may not be able to get to all of those questions, but mr. weitz, a final couple minutes to take on as many as you can. guest: the caller raises an important issue. the setbacks in afghanistan, the mistakes and failures have been

a common feature of the war for the past 20 years. when we invaded the country, we did that with a small footprint and worked a lot with local partners who were able to secure control of kabul again and drive the taliban and their al qaeda allies out of the country, into pakistan, but we weren't able to destroy them. they were able to escape somewhat intact. the taliban, as the caller said, was substantially weakened, but those efforts failed for whatever reason. they resumed their insurgency and al qaeda was able to take control of support and pakistan to establish its main center

there. in the end, the u.s. had to go in and kill bin laden on pakistani soil. by that time, the insurgency, the taliban had resumed, and the u.s. decided rather to withdraw forces under president obama, we added supplemental forces. in a way, the caller raises some really important questions we need to look into -- why did the initial invasion fail? what mistakes were made that allowed the taliban to regenerate? why, not even after the large number of u.s. forces, we were able to push the taliban insurgency back down to low enough levels that the afghan government forces could deal with and so on, but these are important questions historians will be struggling with in years to come. host: richard weitz taking on a lot of these questions in his

work at the hudson institute. hudson.org, if you want to check them out. you can follow him on twitter at richardweitzdc. thank you for joining us. guest: thank you for hosting me. host: 25 minutes left in our program and at this time, we will turn the phone lines over to you. our open forum -- whatever topic you want to talk about, state issue, political, foreign, go ahead. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents and others, (202) 748-8002. we will get to your calls after the break. ♪ >> live on sunday, september 4, uc berkeley industrial studies scott -- scholar will join us, the author of several books, including two books in

the "age of reagan" series, about the scholars that changed the course of america. join us with your calls, facebook comments, texts and tweets with steven hayward, live on book tv, on c-span two. now available in the c-span shop, c-span's 2022 congressional directory. go there today to order a copy of the congressional directory. this compact, spiral-bound book is your guide to the federal government, with contact information for any member of congress. also, contact information for state governors and the biden administration cabinet. shop today at c-span.org, or scan the code with your smart phone. every purchase helps support c-span's nonprofit operation.

>> c-span has unfiltered coverage of the house january 6 committee hearing, investigating the attack on the capital. go to c-span.org/january6, our web resource page, to watch the latest videos of the hearings, briefings, and all of the coverage on the attack and subsequent investigations since january 6, 2021. we will also have members of congress and the white house, as well as journalists and authors, talking about investigations. go to c-span.org/january6 for an easy way to watch when you can't see it live. "washington journal" continues. host: here's where we stand with 25 minutes left in our program today. we will have open forum, letting you lead the discussion with any public policy or political issues you want to talk about. we will focus on your calls, phone lines for republicans,

democrats, and independents, we will put the numbers up on the screen for you. we will also get a look at today's wyoming congressional race, featuring liz cheney, the at large district that the race has been so closely watched, liz cheney the vice chair of the january 6 select committee, one of the house republicans who voted to impeach donald trump during his second impeachment. we will take a look at that race, coming up in five minutes or so, but mostly in this segment, focusing on your phone calls. ed in baltimore, maryland, a democrat. good morning. what is on your mind? caller: good morning, thank you for c-span. i was listening to the first segment of republicans call in and think of trump's influence. first of all, he was a one term president. a twice impeached one term president, but there is still so much support for him.

it is not his geniusness, i can only boil it down to his white nationalist support. there are people defending him, saying that even the documents in his house were because the cia took them out. one guy said he worked for the government and all documents are top-secret -- it doesn't matter what he does or what he says, and he has said it before -- he could shoot somebody on fifth avenue, but would still get support. and it's from educated people. some people are mildly or highly educated when it comes to his white nationalist agenda, and that's how he has his base and they can make any excuse that they want, but basically that's it. host: joseph, tallahassee, florida, republican. you are next. good morning. caller: good morning.

thank you, sir, for taking my call. i wanted to make a simple statement. many people do not like donald trump because they said he does not act like a presidential or political figure. but most people don't realize, he is not a politician. he is a businessman. he has a national and international ability to deal with business, companies in our own country, overseas governments, so on and so forth. so i think it is wrong to say donald trump does this and donald trump does that. if we go back to the kennedy administration, people thought kennedy was too soft on communism. host: after four years in the white house, you still don't consider donald trump a politician? guest: any man who goes into the white -- caller: any man who goes into the white house has to learn how to be a president. you could go to the university

and graduate with honors, but when you get hired by a firm, you have to learn the ins and outs of the firm and what the company represents. it's just a question that many of the things that took place could have happened with any individual who was in the white house. i am not throwing rose petals at his feet, but i don't want to get a rope to hang him outside the white house. host: joseph in florida. robert, out of randolph, mass. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i just want to say that our country is so divided, but the thing is, to see intelligent people are calling and saying trump needs to run again -- i would just like to say, like a family who was always in financial distress, the die is all about money. to play victim and raise money out of it.

to distract anything that he does where he should be responsible. how could a person like that run the world? this is what it comes down to, people have to open their eyes and realize it. the liberal right wing loses their minds because they have become anti-democracy, people cannot vote for president anymore, they just want to choose whoever they want and rule by force. i think that's unfortunate, that people are so sick that this is how you want to run a world. thank you. host: robert in massachusetts. in terms of people making their choice, the voters in the grit state, wyoming, are headed to the polls today. the primary today, that president trump is very interested in and national media is interested in as well.

liz cheney trying to hold onto her at large seat in the only district in wyoming. a headline just last week asked this question -- does liz cheney have a path to victory? we are joined by a state politics reporter with wild file -- considering the reporting you have seen in recent days, how would you answer that question? does liz cheney have a path to victory? guest: there are some analysts who have tried to cut up the numbers in no way that suggests it is possible, but the more ordinary polling, there have been three statewide polls that suggest she is behind 20 to 30 points in rural wyoming, which is most of wyoming. she will certainly lose a pretty wide margin. larger cities, which are

only 50,000 to 60,000 people, might be more of a mixed bag, but most polls show she is quite a ways behind. host: much of the focus in the national media is on liz cheney, but explain who the expected next member of congress from the at large district is. who is harriman hagemann -- harriet hagemann? guest: she is a natural resources attorney that has made a name for herself suing agencies standing up for private property rights in wyoming, big state private property rights. she comes from a political pedigree, like liz cheney. her father was a member of the wyoming legislature. she had a previous go at politics herself last election here, she ran for governor and came in third, and probably

would not have been a candidate here except for donald trump coming in and handpicking her to run against cheney, which is one of his many sworn enemies. host: we mentioned former president trump's interest in this race. what national republican headliners have been in wyoming and focused on this race? who has been there recently? guest: you know, at one point rand paul came through to stump for harriet. i am drawing a blank on people other than rand paul, though, who are known it nationally who have come. donald trump has come and donald junior have come to support harriet hagemann. on liz cheney's side of the coin, her father has come out with advertisements supporting his daughter, and dick cheney

previously had not gotten involved at all, so that was meaningful for the people of wyoming, to see their longtime representative and vice president of the united dates, -- united states come out. host: what role could wyoming democratic voters play in this primary? guest: yes, democrats can go to any polling station and change their registration day of. some of the analyses have showed liz cheney does have a chance to suggest that she needs about 30,000 democrats to crossover, or independents to register as republicans in the days leading up to today, so that's the big wildcard. there is not real time data tracking those crossover voters,

so yeah. they will keep it exciting, to see how many people actually do that. host: finally, on when polls open, when they close, and when you expect this race to be called, for folks looking at the news tonight? guest: polls open at 7:00 a.m., 45 minutes ago here in mountain time zone, close at 7:00 and it is hard to say when it will be called. that is tough to say when it will be, but it is a small state, 550,000 people, and our election system is pretty dialed. it usually happens within an hour or two of the polls closing, the results of the state. host: and a new site that makes a big impact in a small state, wild file, wildfile.com.

about 15 minutes left in our program. it's our open forum and you are leading the discussion. this is betty in waukegan, illinois, democrat. good morning. caller: good morning. i am 83 years old, born and raised in greenville, south carolina during segregation, but i am scared for america now. people talk about civil wars -- i have great grandkids that i want to see grow up, and i hope they have grandchildren and great-grandchildren that they want to see grow up. this is very, very scary. like the first man said, trump said he could shoot down the street and nothing would happen. and if you listen to trump's niece, she told us how

trump was going to act. we always say god bless america, but i say have mercy on the america, because i am so scared for my children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren when people talk about having a civil war. thank you so much. have a good day. host: betty in illinois. larry in pennsylvania, independent. good morning. larry, are you with us? to francisco, california, republican. good morning. caller: how are you doing today? host: i am doing well, francisco. caller: people try to turn trump into the evil 1 -- she is not. he is a regular man who worked his way up and got to be president. get off this.

they should go after biden with his laptop -- they haven't touched him. i haven't heard a peep out of them to stop messing with trump. god praise the man. that's all i've got to say. thank you. host: brooklyn, new york, democrat line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for being there and taking my call. what i have to say is a different perspective on trump and on democracy. we kept hearing from the media that our democracy is fragile, it is so fragile, and maybe betty in illinois, that is part of her fear. fear not, betty. one thing that all americans, most of us have in common, we all believe in god, no matter what religion we have.

we follow a supreme being. his hand is over all other hands, and whatever harm comes to a believer, the lord will turn to a good. look at trump. people think he is of great harm, people are on both sides of the coin. i am on the edge of the coin. our democracy has faulted, has fissures in it, has things that need to be fixed to survive in a healthy way. it should not be fragile. it should be strong and vibrant and healthy, like most of us americans are. how can we see it that way? you have to look at what trump has done for us in a sense. he has enlightened us on where the problems are. he sacrificed himself -- i don't know if he has done it consciously, maybe not, but his days are not all white supremacists, fascists, and

people with un-american, -- undemocratic agendas who have been propagandized and believe what trump is saying. i am a democrat. i consider myself patriotic. i don't like a lot of the stuff that trump is doing. i don't like the lies and anything else, but he is showing you, maybe not deliberately, but he is showing you where the weaknesses are. we have to look at it, have to deal with it, and make america better. make it great again, yeah, make it green again too. we have to be conscious. host: you mentioned god and faith. you are there in brooklyn, new york. "the new york times" op-ed pages have a piece by a priest in the

anglican church in north america, arguing that faith often enters the conversation in this country only in political arguments. i wonder your thoughts about that? caller: well, i don't think so. i think those of us that have consciousness of a supreme being are conscious of him in certain situations. maybe in the public forum it does not enter the conversation, but when things get tough, the tough get going. that is when they will bring god in, because they feel they really need him. we need more of that in our life and morality, caring about each other, including those outside of the political spectrum.

i even care about --, because they have been misled somewhere in their life and they are all human beings. that's why so many of them are in jail or going to court for what they did. i just pray that all is well that ends well, that it will end well, and i thank you for being there, c-span. i hope that answers your question. host: thanks for the call. this is lenny in arizona, independent line. caller: good morning. good morning. that last call -- i just want to say when i came on your show earlier, you were talking about the afghanistan pullout. i remember the pull out of vietnam also -- people were hanging on the bottom of helicopters, throwing their babies over the fence in cambodia.

even the british when they pulled out of india were horrible. there is no good exit out of a 20 year war, and i just think this country is in some trouble. i live in maricopa county, i am originally from california, so i am in a completely different environment in arizona, which is far right. i think corruption will overthrow any system, any system that evolves, corruption will sooner or later bring it down. that's just my take. host: to michael in highland, new york, you are next. republican. go ahead. caller: yes, i would like to make a comment. -- lives matter, thank you. host: our next caller, good

morning. caller: good morning, i would like to share and i would like you to give me your time -- people, first of all, hunter biden is not the president, he is not the candidate. if you want to attack his father, attack his father, believe hunter out of it. that is a separate problem. and the people supporting donald trump go back and remember how he kicked off his campaign. it was all negative, built on building a wall that he said mexico would pay for. that never happened. yet he attacked everyone who opposed him. he attacked them personally, members of their family. it seems like they have forgotten all about it and turned around and supported him because it was a popular thing to do. he attacked president obama's

citizenship. those were lies and proven to be lies. he's been attacking people since he was elected, and has never released his taxes, if you want to talk about them. all the facts have been presented against him, about adultery, three wives, infidelity, grabbing women's private parts, from the departments in the white house, the qualifications, there might be jokes -- jeff sessions is one i will bring up. donald trump said putin was innocent of everything he is doing -- host: i think we got your point. we are running short on time and there are a lot of folks waiting. robert and paul harbor, florida, independent. good morning. caller: good morning. i am calling to compare the trump situation with a fellow named edward snowden, who has

been sitting now over in moscow, stateless for over four years because the nsa or cia, he worked for both of them at one time, wrote documents, and it turns out these documents showed that these agencies were domestically spying on u.s. citizens. it's something for a person to walk away like that being called a spy, when he is a whistleblower, you could say. host: are you saying former president trump was trying to be a whistleblower with the documents in his possession? caller: no, i don't think so. he was trying to show he could do that and get away with it. i am saying edward snowden, for instance, was turning out to give information to a british newspaper about that kind of thing going on. here he is, he has been sitting in russia now all this time, and

he can't make a deal with the u.s. because when he comes back, they want to try him for espionage. they could probably try him at least for theft of government property. that is a situation that i think is scary, because it shows you how powerful place can get. host: robert. this is bonnie, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. host: good morning morning, go ahead. caller: good morning. it seems like everyone attacked tromp, but they don't elaborate on what they are attacking him or. if it is just over how he talks to people and stuff -- that's why we like trump, because he doesn't let people step on him. that's what's wrong with our country. we have been stepped on so much and they are stealing our money

to go to ukraine when they should be building our nation. they took our money that we the people raised to close our borders and they have stolen it. we can't secure our country. we can't keep giving foreign aid to other countries when we are destroying our own nation. i don't understand why our government isn't working for the people instead of trying to enrich themselves. host: you bring up the border. one headline on border patrol, -- arrests this fiscal year. the number beats the record set last fiscal year, 1.6 6 million apprehensions with about two months left in the agencies fiscal year. arrests are expected to break the 2 million mark for the first

time, according to some analysts. two more calls, this is johnny in palestine, texas. democrat, good morning. johnny was listening to music, so we will go to ruth in south carolina, independent. last call of the day. caller: yes, good morning. it is so frustrating and disheartening to hear people say trump loved his country. he never served in the military, he did not even want his sons to serve in the military. he never, ever paid taxes. what kind of american that won't support their country -- you know, trump was a democrat all his life. he supported all the candidates, but when he decided to be president, he knew he could run under the republican banner, because the democrats are too smart for him.

they knew if they went under the republican banner, how vulnerable they were and how weak they were. all we had to do is mention abortion. the only time he went to church -- host: we are out of time this morning, but we will have more open phones, more questions for you tomorrow, of course, on the washington journal at 7:00 a.m. eastern. it is 4:00 a.m. pacific tomorrow if you want to join in tomorrow or any day. in the meantime, have a great tuesday. ♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

announcer: coming up at noon today, a panel of foreign policy expert gathered to discuss the taliban and its control on afghanistan. that is live at noon eastern on c-span. 2:00 p.m., white house covid-19 response team coordinator participates in a virtual discussion on the current federal response to the pandemic. that is hosted by the u.s. chamber of commerce. c-span is your unfiltered view of government. funded by television companies and more including fast. >> now more than ever, it all starts with great internet.

announcer: wow supports c-span as a public service. giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> over the past few months, the january 6 committee held a series of hearings reviewing the findings from the investigation. all week, watch c-span as we look back at the hearing featuring never before seen evidence and witness testimony on the attack on the u.s. capital. tonight, video testimony from president trump's campaign manager and from former attorney general william barr on the president's claims of voter fraud. watch tonight on c-span, or anytime on demand at c-span.org. >> of next, catherine cortez masto speaks at a ribbon-cutting ceremony in las vegas.