branch, the u.s. space force. also live at 245 time, the atlantic hold a discussion about how allies can best support the ukraine. he can want all of these events live on our -- you can watch all of these events live on our black. at. pp. >> c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word, if it happens here, or anywhere that matters, america is watching by c-span, powered by cable. >> coming up this morning on "washington journal" dakota

would talks about the one-year anniversary from afghanistan. eugene o'donnell on president biden's plan to reduce crime and gun violence. you can join the conversation with your calls, texts, tweets. >> when it comes to public safety in this situation. it's not defund the police it's fund the police. fund the police. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy visit ncicap.org] host: president biden yesterday in pennsylvania, a speech delayed from july due to covid. still a high priority for the president's party. time winding down before the november elections. the president not only laid out his crime and gun violence proposal, criticized republican political rhetoric against the f.b.i. good morning, it's wednesday, last day of august, 202t welcome

to "washington journal." we'll talk about your thoughts and views on president biden's crime and gun proposal. here are the lines for republicans use 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents and others, 202-748-8002. if you are a current or former law enforcement official, we wecome your views at 202-748-8003. use that line to text us your thoughts. include your name and where you are texting from. we are on facebook. we are also on twitter and instagram. you can use @cspanwj. we'll get to further comments from the president. we'll hear some republican response to the president's proposal. and hear from you as well as we open the morning with the president proposal. the proposal's called the america safer plan. he laid it out officially yesterday. and it includes, $14 billion for

hiring and training an additional 100,000 police officers over the next five years. $20 billion for crime prevention programs. and $1.7 billion for the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, and firearms and explosives, including hiring more agents and investigators. it would push congress to pass universal background checks for all gun sales and advocate for banning assault weapons and high capacity magazines. the president's proposal laid out yesterday in pennsylvania. one of those policy speeches that often evolves into or changes into political stumping. especially this time of year. that's reflected in some of the headlines we'll see this morning. this one from the washington dimes this morning. biden rips g.o.p., anti-f.b.i. talk and seeks police funding. president biden during a trip tuesday to the swing state of pennsylvania sought to blunt criticism he's soft on crime by

calling for increases to police funding and depicting republicans as anti-cop for their anti-f.b.i. rhetoric. the centerpiece of the proposal calls for $13 billion in spending over the next five years for local police to hire 14u7bd,000 new police officers. the times further writes the proposal has faced intense criticism from racial justice activists who say the proposal is just a repeat of his 1994 crime bill that he led as a senator which has been blamed for the mass incarceration of black people. both the american civil liberties union and naacp have criticized the proposal to put more copses on the nation's street. called the safer america plan. your thoughts and comments. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. for independents and others 202-748-8002. as we mentioned we welcome

comments of current and former law enforcement officials. that line is 202-748-8003. this is the coverage of the "washington post." their piece, headline of their piece says, biden urges assault weapons ban. hits g.o.p. over january 6. in that piece that the post writes the spirited address was the first of biden's three visits in the next week to pennsylvania where democrats face crucial race force governor and u.s. senate. biden plans to deliver his prime time address in philadelphia on thursday and visit pittsburgh on monday to recognize labor day. hear from michael sterling, virginia, independent line. good morning. caller: hello. i'm very concerned -- host: you are on the air. caller: hello. host: you are on the air. go ahead. caller: ok.

why don't we target the perpetrators of so many of these crimes of the stimulus cost from entertainment violence and we have to talk directly with the -- repeating history. appreciate the time. thank you. host: michael in virginia. the president yesterday praised law enforcement officials in his speech and repeated his call for 100,000 new cops over the next five years. he also criticized republicans for their voting against these measures previously. here's what he said. president biden: i'm old enough to remember when cops used to walk the beat in wilmington and scranton because they knew everybody. they knew the kid. they knew whose house to knock on the door and say mom your son just did. i'm not being facetious. they knew the neighborhoods.

as part of the american rescue plan i signed into law last year which they voted for, we setaside $350 billion, with a b, billion dollars for state and local governments all across america. and urged them to do like your governor did to make communities safer. here in pennsylvania governor wolf was using $250 million of that money to reduce crime and violence across this state. and mayor brown just described how it's helping fund community policing here. guess what? every single republican member of congress, every single one in this state, every single one voted against the support for law enforcement. they talk about how much they love it. they voted against the funding. flat out. flat out.

every republican in the house. every republican in the senate. every single one. i know we expect so much more law enforcement officers, so we need to support them. that's why my crime plan to help communities recruit, hire, and train nationwide more than 100,000 additional officers accountable officers for community policing. and i mean it. folks, when it comes to fighting crime, we know it works. officers on the street who know the neighborhood. not a joke, who know the neighborhood. who know the families they are protecting. who get the training they need to be able to do their jobs well. who work to earn the community's trust. as we hire more police officers, there should be more training, more help, and more accountability.

without public trust, law enforcement can't do its job serving and protecting all the communities. host: president biden yesterday in wilkes-barre, pennsylvania, on twitter. senator ted cruz regarding the criticism of the president of f.b.i. -- of g.o.p. criticism of the f.b.i. agents and the search of mar-a-lago. here's what he said. lefty twitter is going to lie. it's what they do. every word i said is true. the f.b.i. raid was horrific abuse of power, there needs to be a complete house cleaning of f.b.i. real oversight from congress. all absolutely true. congressman eric swalwell, democrat from california, threats against law enforcement are at an all time high. as lawmakers we can can either support law enforcement and condemn the threats or what ted cruz just did double down about lies of law enforcement and ensure there will be more threats. this is what cruz wants. headline this morning in terms of that story and a filing of,

federal filing late yesterday in washington. feds cite efforts to obstruct probe of documents at trump estate with pictures allegedly from the search at mar-a-lago. the justice department they write, associated press, said classified documents were likely concealed and removed from former president donald trump's mar-a-lago estate as part of an effort to obstruct investigation into the discovery of government records. they also seized 33 boxes containing more than 100 classified records during its august 8 search of mar-a-lago and found classified documents stashed in trump's office. according to a filing that lays out the most detailed chronology today of months of strained interactions between justice department officials and trump representatives over the discovery of government secrets. our conversation with you this first hour is on the president's proposal on crime. and gun control. 202-748-8000. for republicans -- for

republicans, 202-748-8001. 202-748-8000, for democrats. independents and others, 202-748-8002. in madison, illinois, we hear from glenn on the democrats line, good morning. caller: good morning. it's time for the republicans to buck up and get rid of this 45. we went 44 other presidents that's never taken nothing out of the white house. and this one has loaded his office in florida. it's time for lindsey graham and the rest of them to get on the stick and get rid of him. thank you. host: paducah, kentucky, next up. all on the independent line, paul. caller: first of all joe biden is a bald face liar. he's so cold -- murderers and

rioters. they are talking out both sides of the mouth. which they always do. the media won't call them on it. the only reason we got second amendment is protect from people like joe biden and his f.b.i. who has illegally raided another president. only time it's ever happened in history. if another country had done that, you would see the state department and everybody else rattling chains about it. no. this is the most corrupt and vial, evil administration we have ever had. i want to make one more thing. what c-span should do. call yourself d-span because you take the democrats' side on everything. host: delray beach, florida, is up next. nick's on the republican line. go ahead. caller: yes. good morning. first thing i'd like to say is why doesn't c-span ever mention the fact when they talk about law enforcement and f.b.i. and things like that, why don't they ever mention the fact that it is a fact that the f.b.i. created

with the democratic party the russia collusion hoax. it was a lie from start to finish. the f.b.i. doctored documents from the c.i.a. indicating that carter page was a c.i.a. asset and they changed it to carter page was not a c.i.a. asset. i know the people at c-span will believe the ridiculous story that some low-level lawyer at the f.b.i. decided on his own to change it, but when you have people like eric swalwell who is sleeping with a chinese spy and talking about the dangers to law enforcement, i have a question about that. if people are really out there threatening f.b.i. agents online, why don't they just track down the i.p. addresses of these people that are doing this and go and arrest them. or is this just something else

that the f.b.i. is pretending and making up? host: tony on our republican line, bedford, texas is next. caller: hey. really love c-span. just still can't get it in hd in texas. first thing, little off topic. i'm sorry to do this but people need to stick to the topic at hand and not just vent. we are trying to have a discussion. anyway, back to the assault weapons. i think you have a loot more cases -- a lot more cases of assault weapons killing innocent people than assault weapons protecting people's freedom when it comes to the populace of the u.s. i hate to say it, but biden might be right on target. because down here that -- really all i need is my shotgun. somebody come into my house i can shoot through a wall. i don't think i need an ar-15. the temperature's got to come

down. and the republican party is not doing the best job right now in bringing the temperature down. i don't think that a couple of ar-15's is going to prevent the evil federal government from taking over our lives and putting us into slavery. we would have no match against the united states military. the whole thing is mute. if you are like a gun enthusiast and you get a permit and you can have -- let's say you select guns, ok. that's one thing. but you can't be letting 20-year-olds running around this country with ar-15's. host: how old do they have to be to buy an ar-15-type weapon in texas, do you know? caller: i guess it's 18 down here. i think when you are 18, i don't think everybody's really --

host: we'll hear another call from texas. independent line this time. this is kelly. go ahead. caller: how are you this morning, sir? host: i'm doing well, kelly, you're on the air. caller: i'm fine. ok. i got the tv turned down. one thing i want to say about biden, ok, as far as guns go, now he's all about the police. well, let me tell you what. he had to announce -- he's going in the opposite direction because he knows mid terms are coming up. he's looking at his -- the biggest thing in this country right now the american people besides inflation are worried about is guns, ok. i live in the state of texas. just like that gentleman before we talked, ok. there is a lot of guns in this state. but what i will say is that it's

not the person that owns the gun it's the person that pulls the trigger. we have had had massive gun shootings in this country for years, ok. so you can't go around and blame the republicans for it, ok. it's the person behind the gun. number two, i know i shouldn't bring this up, but you want to talk about national security, he has yet to come down to the border. the border is in chaos. all the drugs, the fentanyl killing all these people. i'm so disgusted with it all. i'm done. i will not vote for president biden. he's not my president. as far as trump goes they did him wrong. ok. but i'm not getting into all that. that's for the f.b.i. i'm not against the f.b.i. they are here to protect us. i never threatened anybody. i don't even own a gun, ok. but when i can't walk down my street at night and feel safe, it's getting bad. in texas it's getting very bad because of all the open immigration.

host: kelly mentioned the border and the problem with fentanyl smuggling across the border. the subject of a front page story from the "wall street journal" this morning. inside the mexican cartels, the rural fentanyl smuggling. a half built house in a barrio, an employee use add shovel to mixed chemicals in a simmering oil barrel. his concox was an illegal form of fentanyl which mexican criminal organizations are churning out in high volume in laboratories and smuggling across the border. in the sakes day workweek he can make enough fentanyl for hundreds of thousands of doses. with busy savvy and growing power in mexico, the cartels dominate the market for supplying fentanyl to the u.s. they cornered the market after china cracked down on fentanyl production several years ago and now churning out bootlegged versions of the highly potent synthetic opioid in its legal form is used under prescription

for pain. it's inexpensive and easy to replicate has boosted the appeal to criminal networks it's fueling an overdose crieses that claimed more than 800,000 lives in the u.s. last year. if 2 were an athlete people would call it the greatest of all time, says jim, who served as deputy chief of staff at the drug enforcement administration from 2019 to 22021. it is the most pernicious, devastating drug that we have ever seen. that is from the "wall street journal." sever hills, florida, next. your thoughts, bonnie, on the president's crime and gun proposal. caller: yes. the biggest crime is 45 selling the documents, secret documents to saudis at the golf course. when he had that big golf event that's where he dumped a bunch of that top secret stuff to pay off his debt. number two, what make him so

special where he can't be prosecuted? if you don't call that white privilege, i don't know what white privilege is, this man and lindsey graham, he will ride us -- he don't want no president prosecuted. the russians in july when trump was first elected, he took all the republican senators over there to meet with putin. what did putin have on them when they left why they was sleeping in the motels. that same dossier that barr, he lied about in the dossier. host: we are focusing on the president's proposal released yesterday. announced yesterday. the police plan called safer america. the president in his comments called for more increased trust in law enforcement. here's what he said. president biden: you got to know people. you got to know and you got to

be able to trust the police. the police have to be able to trust the community. we slipped away from that. we have a hell of a lot fewer cops today than we did when i wrote that initial crime bill. but now we got to get back to it. by the way, i'm not make ago case there aren't bad cops. there are some really lousy cops. there are some really lousy doctors. there are really lousy lawyers. i mean it. but here's the point. as i have seen too often, public trust is frayed and broken. and it undermines public safety when it gets frayed. it literally undermines safety. families across the country have to ask, why in this nation, for example so many black americans wake up knowing they could lose their life just by living their lives, come from neighborhoods like i come from down in delaware, if you have a 16 or 17-year-old son you get your driver's license, you say, look, if you get stopped, put your hands on the wheel.

don't do anything. i'm being serious. i'm being serious. but here's the point. simply jogging, sleeping in their homes. they made headlines or not, there are a lot of lost souls. increased trust makes policing more effective. it strengthens public safety. communities by wait that want the police more than any other community, are are the tough poor communities. black, white, immigrants. they need the help. they want the help. it's not that they don't want it. they want the help. without that, victims don't call for help. witnesses don't step forward. crimes go unsolved. justice isn't served. i took executive action, which i'm allowed to do as president, i always admired governors could take executive action, with all kidding aside, to make some of

these reforms for federal officers. i couldn't do it for state officers. no federal officer is allowed to use a chokehold. no federal officer can restrict no-knock warrants. create a national database for officers who have misbehaved and been held accountable so they can't hide. my plan will help make sure the state and local governments adopt these same reforms. host: some comments on social media on the president's safer america plan. this is congressman brian higgins of new york. tweeting yesterday, the assault weapons ban of 2022 passed the house in july. let's bring this across the finish line for buffalo. uvalde, and many other communities that have experienced the tragic mass shooting. elliott says, the only reason bideon yen wants to increase funding for law enforcement so they could prosecute law-abiding gun owners. not go after street criminals. it ain't going to happen. democrats ain't reducing nothing. they are increasing everything. gun violence, gas prices, more poverty, more wars, etc. deborah says i agree with the

goal to ban assault weapons and its bullets. the gun violence archive is an organization that's been active since 2013 tracking on a daily and yearly basis gun violence of all kinds across the country, and they do this daily gun violence, at gun violence archive.org, a look at their map of gun violence across the country. to date the total number of gun violence death, 29.626. of that homicide, murder, or unintentional gun deaths, 13,588. the number of suicides by gun in this country to date, 2022, is over 16,000. in wake forest, north carolina, roy is on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. my dad used to walk to school and shoot squirrels on the way and put his gun -- that was

quite a while back. that's our second amendment right. it not be infringed on. black folks, or whoever, biden spoke about how black folks shouldn't have to die like they do with gun violence. you know where that happens? that happens in dark deep blue cities. that's where they get killed. in that they vote democrat and those cities being corrupt because democrats are corrupt. the party is. at least. not all the voters. the voters, they don't even know what the hell they are voting for. they don't know what their party stands for. it would reduce crime if we put hunter biden in prison for all the kids and young folks that he was messing with wherever he goes and hires these hookers and

stuff. it's all over his laptop. democrats don't even know the laptop is real because you guys don't talk about it. and the f.b.i. got a hold of mark zuckerberg and told him not to show this information before the election? what kind of a crime is that. host: appalachia, new york, david on the independent line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. host: good morning, david. caller: i want to talk about i think that as an independent this isn't -- this bill isn't enough. of course i think that also we need to be focusing on the more pressing economic issues in this country. because of the war we have had a huge energy crisis that is affecting my city. we are starting to have huge power outages throughout my entire city. we have an energy crisis. we have people that aren't paying their energy bills

because they are in this -- for example, i have the power outages when i'm performing important tasks. i'm starting to have power outages -- host: to dan in santa barbara, california. dan on the independent line as well. go ahead. caller: first off. very quick. i'd like to send a message to all the anti-government, timothy mcveigh right wingers who keep calling in saying we need guns so we can attack our own government. that's not why the second amendment was written. please lose that fallacy. what i want to bring up is an idea i think could pass on both sides. it's really hard to argue against. it's an act we should put through congress called the well regulated maliciousa act. straight out of the second amendment. here's the deal. if you have a gun, you are in your state militia. you will be registered in the state database.

not the federal database, but with your state. and you have to have physical, obviously. and a psychological background check. you cannot have the history of any sort of violent crime. and member of any sort of extremist organization far left or far right. for all the people who keep screaming liberty, freedom, constitution, and patriot, and 1776, put your money where your pho*eut is. you are a member of the militia. as long as you are are not crazy, as long as are you not extremist group, as long as you are not violent, can you have your gun, you have to go to training every few months. you have to sign up. put your gun in the database. and, hey, you are a member of the militia. that's it. well regulated militia. thank you for listening. host: this is from the reload, it's authored editor, guest on this program, several weeks back, the reload.cog.

a bad trend for gun rights advocates. he writes there was a significant poll released this week, written as of late friday, the associated press asked americans a number of gun related questions. it found further evidence that millions more of them own guns since the onset of the epidemic and 2020 riots. it also found americans are more supportive than ever of tightening gun laws in the wake of the uvalde massacre. hear from steve in hapbover, maryland, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning, mr. scanlon, thank you for taking my call. my first reaction to this of course is there must be an election coming up. the last time i looked at the numbers on gun deaths, i looked at the 2018 numbers. these numbers are pretty consistent. i mentioned cars and i'm going to pivot to that a little bit. roughly 40,000 gun deaths were recorded in 2018.

3/5 of these were suicides. incidentally 70% of these are white men. 2/5 of these deaths are homicides. always this is gun violence is an issue. but i look at cars we have the same numbers for car deaths. 40,000. nobody talks about these. i really wonder where the secretary of transportation is. he's just talking about green energy all the time. are we going to call these assault cars, etc. this is a big problem we don't talk about. two, i'll be brief on this as well, too. when we had the george floyd riots in 2020, fox news generally spoke a lot about these on a daily basis. i had a discussion with one of my democratic friends and i said, president biden is not saying anything about this.

nor is at the time candidate biden. he sent me back an article, tpabg check saying, well, yes he did. he did on june so and so he said this. i'm happy for president biden. he seems to be suddenly woke about crime and everything. but he certainly wasn't woke, and this wasn't democratic position in 2020. and this did hurt then president trump. we have problems in this country. personally regarding gun violence, i think it's an inner city issue. it's the lack of jobs. if we had more jobs and john creation -- job creation in the cities because the welfare system i think has been destroying the cities, unfortunately. we can't keep giving money -- throwing money at a problem. we need to create jobs. our cities used to be manufacturing hubs. we have lost that. yes, there's pollution with

manufacturing, but there are other countries going to pollute anyhow. we can do manufacturing bert. bring these jobs back -- better. bring these jobs back to the skwreufplt vocational and technical education. bring magnet schools into the cities. have the cities, have these people, train them in plumbing, electricity, and etc. welding and build the cities in the neighborhoods from within. host: steve. we'll go to shelby next, independent line. in bluff city, tennessee. talking about the president's proposal the safer america act. good morning, shelby. caller: good morning. thank you. yes, i totally believe on banning assault weapons. no matter what the reason. the ones that collect the guns or get the guns. want to hold on to them.

someone that really wants to get their hands on one, they are going to get their hands on one. americans should understand if it was someone that was killed in their family and got their gun, which they could, no matter how secure they think they have their gun stored, how would they feel? they should be banned. they don't need to be here. turn them over the collection of them to the military or whoever that really need them or should have them. they don't belong in the public's hands. no matter what. on immigration, i do -- would like to see a law passed that no one's allowed to become u.s. citizens because of the changing

of the times. and have their paperwork ready. have it -- they are working on their own paperwork and their own country before they are even considered to be u.s. citizens. there are limits to everything. and this one is very much needed. i think biden is doing the best he can because all these -- there are so many issues that they have -- congress has neglected for decades. host: shelby intown t-fpblt more of your calls and comments in just a moment. other news this morning, the headline here, the front page of the "new york times," visionary, soviet leader who lifted the iron curtain, gorbachev, whose rise to power in the soviet union set in motion a series of revolutionary changes that transformed the map of europe

and ended the cold war that threatened the world with nuclear annihilation died in moscow. he was 91. few leaders in 20th century, any century, have had such a profound effect on their time. in little more than six tumultuous years, he lifted the iron curtain decisively a*ltering the political climate of the world. at home he promised aefr delivered greater openness as he set out to restructure his country's society. it was not his intention to liquidate the soviet empire. within five years he presided over the dissolution of soviet socialist republicans. and ended the debacle in afghanistan. in an extraordinary five months in 1989 stood by as the communist system imploded from the baltics in countries already weakened by widespread corruption. for this he was hounded from off his hardline communist plotters and disappointed liberals alike. the first group fearing would he

detroit old system. and the other worried he would not. it was abroad he hailed -- was hailed as heroic. the distinguished american diplomat mr. gorbachev was a miracle, a man who saw the world as it was. unblinkered by soviet ideology. the former soviet leader a guest on this network back in 1996 in a conversation with c-span founder brian lamb. here's what he had to say. caller: now we have an opportunity after the cold war, at the end of the cold war, to build a very diverse world with all the multiplicity. even though there are still dangers after the end of the cold war, i hope we will avoid the new division of the world. i hope we'll take advantage of the opportunities because this is why we did what we did. in working together. in overcoming surmounting barriers that we had overcome.

not only the mountains of weapons, but mountains of lies about each other that we had to setaside. stereotypes. what people met then they saw all of us are the same and we want to live, we want to enjoy life. i'm very glad i recently on this visit i have seen -- i have been to eight states of the united states. and i have some very private meetings and i once talked to 20,000 people. to a group of 20,000 people. there was enormous interest. many questions. people are very open. open-minded. they applaud the fact that they can now breath after this sort of -- this had been averted. people again are also worried because we see someone --

started on this question but of course i went on to contemporary politics. of course my book is more about past. you cannot divide the past and present. host: former soviet leader, the last soviet premiere gorbachev dead at the age of 91 after a long illness. more of that interview is available on our website at c-span.org. back to our conversation with you on the president's proposal on crime and guns. 202-748-8001. is the line for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. and independents and others, 202-748-8002. we welcome the comments of current and former law enforcement officials. that line 202-748-8003. it's called the safer america plan unveiled by the president yesterday. it includes $14 billion for hiring and training an

additional 100,000 police officers over the next five years. it includes also $20 billion for crime prevention programs across the country. $1.7 billion for the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and explosive to hiring more agents and investigators. it would push congress, the senate, to pass universal background checks in -- on all gun sales. the house has passed the measure saying that. and would also advocate for a ban on assault weapons and high capacity magazines. the house passing a measure on that as well. back to your calls. let's hear from alex in the nation's capital. democrats' line. caller: good morning. something somebody said a few callers back about car deaths being similar to gun deaths. i would love to see the statistics on how many of those car deaths are -- i think he

mentioned 3/5 of the deaths were by suicide and 2/5 by homicide. were 2/5 of those car deaths also homicide? i would be interested to see that statistic. the other thing i called in to talk about i really hope that cities use the money in the grant program that's in biden's safer america plan to have anti-racist training for cops. let me tell you what i mean. there have been many studies done that show that cops' impulses when they are interacting with black folks and brown folks as opposed to encountering white folks, black cops no matter their race or ethnicity, will pull the trigger, react vie rently, quote-unquote, in self-defense exponentially more often than when they are interacting with white folks. that's what we talk about when we talk about implicit bias and how that leads to more black and brown deaths at the hands of the police. i hope that cities and states

use the grant money in this proposal should it get passed, fingers crossed, about time we do something about crime, and agree with everybody that's calling in saying there must be an election coming up because biden is finally doing something. host: let me ask you. on that point you said the implicit bias. you cited the study that said that cops would be quicker to pull the trigger for folks of color, black and brown people than white people. does that study say why? what's behind that? why is that? caller: well, it's difficult to get at that. the psychology behind it is still nacent. we can all deduce that it's because we live in a racist society. we live in a majority white country where black and brown folks historically have been demonized and -- through the media and through our school systems. we have been taught that black and brown folks are violent.

are dangerous. are lower education. of lower abilities. all of which are untrue. the messaging and things we have been taught growing up lead us to believe that that's what leads in those quick thinking moments police have to do -- find themselves in. almost daily. it's those what are called in psychology those short cuts that people take in those fight or flight moments to make a quick decision. that's why what we can assume is why cops are more likely to pull the trigger when they are interacting with people of color. host: i appreciate that more information on what you had to say. maple heights, ohio. tom, on the republican line. good morning. caller: hi. host: hi, tom. caller: since joe biden's taken over, the country's went downhill.

crimes -- crime's out of control. everything's out of control. afghanistan. and hunter biden is just smoking crack. host: grand blank, michigan. democrats line. don, good morning. caller: it amazes me to listen to some callers when they call in. they have got to be -- i don't know what they are on. you need to remind these guys that joe biden's son is not the president. we are a country of laws. if you're not going to follow the laws, you need to be arrested. it's time for merrick garland to arrest trump and crush this

party because they are a bunch of traitors to the country. host: as a senator joe biden was involved in the passage of the 1994 assault weapons ban. he called for it again in comments yesterday in wilkes-barre, pennsylvania. president biden: i'm determined to ban assault weapons in this country. determined. i did it once before. and i'll do it again. for many of you home, i want to be clear, it's not about taking away anybody's guns. in fact, we should be treating responsible gun owners as examples how every gun owner should behave. i have two shotguns at home. long story. i support the second amendment. but the second amendment has one of the most conservative justices in history, justice scalia once wrote, quote, like

most rights, the rights grant the by the second amendment are not unlimited. they are not unlimited. right now you can't go out and buy an automatic weapon. you can't go out and buy a cannon. for those brave right-wing americans who say it's all about keeping america's independent and safe, if you want to fight against the country, f-15, you need something a little more than a gun. i'm not joking. think about this. think about the rationale we use, that's used to provide this. who are they shooting at? shooting at these guys behind me. folks, look. i went to every major school shooting in the country since i was chairman of the judiciary committee all the way through vice president and president. over 48,000 people died from gunshot wounds in 2021.

in the united states of america. over 26,000 by suicide. when guns are the number one killer, guns are the number one killer of children in america. of children. number one. more children die from guns than active duty police and active duty military personnel combined. hear that again. more children in america die from guns than active duty police and active duty military in the united states combined. we have to act. we have to act for those families in buffalo, uvalde, new town, charleston, las vegas, orlando. i have been to every one of those sites. host: on gun violence, perhaps not unrelated story, this from stat news, u.s. life expectancy dropped sharply the second consecutive decline. they write that americans born

in 2021 can expect to live just 76.1 years. the lowies life expectancy has been since 1996 according to a new government analysis published wednesday. this is the largest, biggest, two-year decline.7 years in total in almost 100 years. that from statnews.com. comments on twitter on the president's safer america plan. this one says, defund the police garbage that came out in 2020 protest are not refuted by the democratic leadership was one of the dumbest moments in political history. they are still paying for t talk about what republicans are doing in service to trump, not even close. democrats want to take your guns what they call assault weapons are not even equal to police and military weapons. why do you think there is a second amendment? muskets were the main weapon for civilian and military when it was made. now civilian guns are interior. this one says, biden has been in some capacity of higher office for 50 years but acts as if he's

had zero responsibility for the state of our country. if anyone is to be blamed, it's him. he's been there longer than anyone other democrat. in manhattan, sofia is on the independent line in new york city, good morning. caller: good morning. how are you. being a conservative republican most of my life i changed to independent two months ago. what president biden came out of his mouth yesterday was absolutely excellent. january 6, those terrorists when they hit this young man on his neck, that's still with me. i'm 72 years old. that's one. the second one, george floyd, these are bad cops. left hand in the pocket.

that stays with me until now. i can't get it out. ok. so those people that one america news is out. 2340u it's news max. if they can stop watching them they will understand, they will be impeached. thank you for listening. the listeners i enjoy and the guy calling from washington, d.c. he is absolutely right. we been told which one to be scared. host: to dave, alexandria, louisiana, republican line. caller: no. this is dave from auburn, new york. am i on? host: you are. dave from auburn, new york. caller: yeah. host: got your name right. go ahead. caller: thanks.

the president said the threats were young man with his hands on the steering wheel. young black man. it was the police. most of the violence is gang related violence. these young black men are killing other young black men. a city 25 miles away from me and every day there are shootings. it's mostly gang related violence. if you look in chicago or any other place they have their problems there. it's gang related violence. if you want to address this problem, you are are going to have to get a better system. bob woodson, woodson center, he advocates for intercession in these young men's lives.

again, people are discovering and the answer is really, it goes beyond the gun. it goes to a culture. it goes to an education system. i don't have any answer for it. i'm just wanting to point that out that the shootings are more -- are gang related. if you could get that problem under control, which that's a tall order i'm sure, but that would be a step that i think -- host: the city of atlanta recognized a problem with gangs in that city. this is an nbc report. haven't street gang broke into atlanta homes of celebrities, athletes, and influencers, prosecutors say. monday, prosecutor announced a sprawling indictment targeting members of what she said is a haven't street gang that has

been targeting the atlanta area homes of famous athletes, entertainers, and others who flaunt expestive possessions on social media. singer mariah carey, marleau hampton of the real housewives of atlanta, atlanta united player brad guzman, and the falcons' calvin ridley. the 220 count indictment was filed october 22nd and charges 26 people, most accused of violating george's anti- georgia's anti-gang and racketeering laws. ellicott city, maryland. roland on the democrats land, go ahead. i'm sorry. helps if i push the button. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i got a few questions for the republicans. i come to find that fate is stronger than love. fate is what makes you why you on may fight on somebody who needs extra help on medicaid.

i got mine, don't care about yours kind of attitude. all right. the one thing about republican -- trump, he knew -- he knows how to rally to exaggerate a lot. before him no other president holds rallies every other week just to spew hate. all those folks, retireds, those who got time waiting -- to go see him at the rally. and listen to the pure hate. have you listened to biden? it's always about the hope. what he intends to do. you listen to republicans, trump at his rallies, it's all this assaulting democrats and everything that he has done. back to this, the folks in west virginia that voted for trump,

what trump make in those four years? host: president biden speaking yesterday in wilkes-barre, pennsylvania, the headline here from "the new york times" reporting, it's sickening, biden calls out republicans over attacks on the f.b.i. the president criticizing what he called maga republicans. here's what he had to say. president biden: think about what the world saw. not what we saw, the world saw. did you ever think the united states that would happen? what i find even more incredible is the sense of it. cops attacked and assaulted. speared with flag poles. sprayed with mace, stomped on. dragged. brute amized. police lost their lives as a result of that day. police lost their lives. one of the officers said, it was worse than anything he experienced in war in iraq.

let me say this to my maga republican friends in congress, don't tell me support law enforcement if you won't condemn what happened on the 6th. don't tell me. can't do it. for god's sake, whose side are you on? whose side are you on? look, you are on the side of the mob or side of the police? you can't be pro-law enforcement and pro-insurrection. you can't be a party of law and order and call the people who attacked the police on january 6 patriots. you can't do it.

what are we teaching our children? it's just that simple. now it's sickening to see the new attacks on the f.b.i. threatening life of law enforcement agents and their families for simply carrying out the law and doing their job. look, i want to say this clear as i can. there's no place in this country, no place for endangering the lives of law enforcement. no place. none. never. period. i'm opposed to defunding the police. i'm also opposed to defunding the f.b.i. host: president biden yesterday. here's the reporting this morning of the "wall street journal." biden urges police funding, tighter gun laws. they write in there, many democrats have pushed for increasing police accountability

since may 2020 when george floyd was killed by a police officer in minneapolis, setting off nationwide protests over the use of force against black americans. during the protest some progressives and activists called for defunding police departments. a stands that -- stance that many democrats blame in their part for the loss of house seats in the 2020 election. a few more calls here on our opening topic. to dee in washington, d.c. the independent line. go ahead. caller: good morning. thank you, c-span. i'm calling to compliment the caller who inserted implicit bias into the conversation. with respect to police officers who are more apartment to enact violence against innocent suspects and/or to overreact when it comes to violence against black and brown bodies. i would also like to condemn the caller who declared that black

people are being shot in areas by gang violence. for example. buffalo as well as charleston massacre by dylan roof were outstanding examples of why the biden-harris administration is leading to continue to press the agenda for not only responsible gun ownership but a ban to access for predominantly white males who have been the perpetrators in enacting mass shooting and violence against black and brown bodies or white bodies that are not subscribing to christianity. host: these are the numbers on the mass shootings. the gun violence we showed you earlier. the mass shootings as of now in 2022, 450. you see the spike, we talked about this before in the program, between 2019 and 2020, 611 mass shootings in 2020.

692 mass shootings by the gun violence archive is defined as four victims killed or injured in that shooting. not including the shooter. in richmond, indiana, republican line, jerry. good morning. caller: good morning. yes. during 2020 riots, which destroyed more property and killed more people than january 6, you never heard democrats carrying on about supporting law enforcement then. investigations into the biden family, hunter biden. you never hear support from him or democrats about supporting law enforcement in any of that. as he puts it, look, man, you can't be on the side of law enforcement unless they are investigating me and my family. thank you.

host: to wesley in capital heights, maryland. on the democrats line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i just want to make a statement. two statements. the first one is, i think the former president should be charged with involuntary manslaughter. the reason why i say this is when he told those people go up to the capitol and fight like hell, but be peaceful, you can't do both at the same time. but anyway, if he had stopped those people when they got up there to the capitol steps and breaks those windows, he should have stopped it then. that woman wouldn't have been tp*eubd killed by that f.b.i. agent. host: that wraps it up for the first hour of your phone calls. more ahead. on "washington journal" up next, two retired lieutenant colonels will join us, both of whom served in afghanistan. daniel davis from the group defense priorities. and dakota wood of the heritage foundation join us to talk about

the taliban's formal takeover of afghanistan one year ago today. later, john jay college criminal justice lecturer, former nypd, eugene aou donnell joins us talking about president♪ >> hello, everyone. >> over the past 21 years book tv has provided in-depth uninterrupted coverage of the national book festival featuring hundreds of nonfiction authors and guests. on saturday book tv returns live

and in person to the national book festival. you will hear from and interact with authors. the library of congress national book festival live saturday beginning at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span2. now available in the c-span shop, 2022 congressional directory. this compact spiral-bound book is your guide to the federal government with contact information for every member of congress. order your copy today at c-spanshop.org or scan the code with your smartphone. every c-span shop purchase helps support the nonprofit operation.

>> in 2019 been raynes discovered the remains of a slave ship outside alabama. as we showcase some of the best q&a he talks about his book the last slave ship and how and why it transported 100 slaves to alabama in 1860 more than 50 years of the transatlantic slave trade was outlawed. >> this is for everyone whose family arrived in the hull of the ship. many of those people we know nothing about because their histories were never recorded. that is really what is so unique about it. it is the cold story of slavery

all encapsulated in one piece and we know everything about these people and what happened. >> the last slave ship sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. you can listen to q&a on our new c-span now at. --app. >> "washington journal" continues. host: our next two guests both served in the military and in afghanistan. danny davis retired lieutenant colonel is not with defense priority and is a military expert. and former lieutenant colonel dakota wood senior fellow for defense programs joining us to talk about the one-year anniversary for the completion of the u.s. withdrawal from

afghanistan. let me start with you, colonel davis at ascii about this question before the withdrawal happened what was your view on the accelerated timeline of withdrawal from afghanistan? guest: i was for president trump's decision to end the war and set a timeline for the withdrawal to happen. i was absolutely disappointed that toward the end of president trump's term that they didn't take any proactive action. the timeline that had been set in place and the lack of action that the pentagon had taken to implement those changes, dr. -- president trump was distracted. they didn't take the action necessary to have the means necessary. when it did come to, when biden

came into office they were not prepared for it. biden waited a long time to make his decision and added six more months to it. i think that was one of the biggest problems. i was for the decision, i was for biden following through with that i just wish they did it on the original schedule. >> it was always supposed to be conditions based. it was not in the afghan government involved. supposedly they are governing the country so having this discussion with the taliban are they going to go take over it was condition based. the taliban never met those conditions so at a strategic level it is always good for the u.s. to have ability to know what is going on on the ground. a much more realist perspective, if things are not going our way and we can't change things do we

need to change m' mark the biden administration was not obligated to follow through. they could have withdrawn sooner, if they wanted to stay there 10 years they could have done that as well. the execution is always the difficult part. you can have great ideas to stay or to go but how it was carried out was atrocious. if you are going to do that, you need to set in place and the military follows orders. one is the force cap? they were not allowed to have sufficient number of people for an orderly withdrawal of u.s. citizens. host: do either of you think the biden administration came in with the timeline in mind. ? guest: i don't they were that organized. getting out as quickly as

possible if you are serious about doing that you talk to the people you have in the region managing this effort. military leaders, they discarded every rational plan that the pentagon brought forward about how to do this in a very measured way. there were also warnings that the government will collapse and the taliban will take over. they wanted to get out, the biden team did it and it was horrible. guest: if there was a timeline other than these timelines. i think despite what president biden might have campaigned on i don't think it was second or third tier general dongle line. really they waited all the way until almost may to make the call. that should've been something from the time biden won. that should have been front and center because there was a timeline on there. i think they just punted on that

and didn't worry about it until it was too late. host: the one-year anniversary of the withdrawal from afghanistan we are joined by two veterans lieutenant colonel danny davis and former marine lieutenant colonel dakota wood. we welcome your calls and comments. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. democrats (202) 748-8000. and her independent -- and for independents (202) 748-8002. on that topic you were both in afghanistan. guest: central command planned to go in and due to tours. host: tell us about your experience. guest: my first tour was in 2005.

i was a liaison officer. i was responsible for tracking all the significant activity between the two commands. i had a front row seat, literally, on the strategic site about everything that was happening here on a daily basis. in the second one, i had probably the best seat of anybody on the ground in afghanistan from 2010 to 2011. it was designed to bring equipment to the troops. i traveled all around on the ground from patrol to division commands. i really had a good seat. host: where did it start to go wrong in afghanistan? guest: unequivocally it happened when president bush changed it from a military mission to a

nationbuilding mission and obama settled -- doubled down on that. now they're trying to achieve the and attainable with military forces. host: same set of questions from your vantage point at what point do you think the u.s. made strategically some of the wrong moves? guest 2: in order to get at al qaeda and you ship to nationbuilding that is when it went off the rails. counterinsurgency, working with allies in the region it was a culture. good people on the ground but no culture of maintenance, power grids, higher education and we tried to create that within a span of just a few years. i think the hurdle was too high. you were not going to accomplish

it in under a century. there was a rosy picture about we were about to turn the corner every year. host: about the service member'' lives lost a year ago, where do you think, was the an impossible mission for the military? guest: are you talking about the evacuation? 120 4000 people were evacuated and a span of two weeks. that there is testimony to the adaptability. 24, 20 eight-year-olds that we put on the ground many times they were deployed. one of the remarkable things they did, the horror is why did we put them in that situation? it was because the biden administration capped the number of trips to several hundred

general mckenzie requested 2500 or more. you can see what was coming at you, multiple runways. to put u.s. service members, men and women in that situation it field from a security perspective. it was just a ridiculous notion that these tragic deaths were almost inevitable. host: and your views on the biggest mistake in that final week? guest: i think on the operational level what the troops stood was amazing under the circumstances because we had a plan in place to get out by august 31 with the expectation and understanding that there would be an afghan government and an afghan military still existing. two weeks before even the

timeline it just went into complete chaos. i think troops did a magnificent job under the circumstances. but i am with the senior leaders who did not see this coming. just days before the whole government collapsed you had the joint chief of staff say i think the government is going to continue to provide security for its people. i think all the signs were there. they should have seen it coming they should have taken more proactive measures to account for this. guest: i agree with that completely. such low levels of numbers we had crossed the line in 18 months. it was airpower the contractors were not going to stay there if the u.s. was not providing security. it was a gut punch to the morale. we far and away lost more lives than any other country

supporting the efforts of the afghan military was really doing some good work. everybody knew that the afghan government was corrupt but at least it was something we could work with. it was keeping things in check. the whole system collapsed and i think the biden team was kind of bedding that it would --betting that they would pull out. general mckenzie and everybody said this will last week's, if not days. >> in my view the new when the agreement was signed. they should have been involved with the decision-making. i think it was vital they weren't. they knew there wasn't and date coming. they had every opportunity in 20 years to get their house in order. they didn't do that so the fact

that we went through those numbers and tell people we were going to i think the majority of the responsibility for the collapse because they didn't get the job done when they had the chance and all the loaves we gave to their support, all the money we gave, years of time that we give them to do that. i don't take the responsibility that the american withdrawal precipitated it. i think it was 20 years was exposed by the withdrawal. host: we are talking about the one-year withdrawal from afghanistan we have the line for afghanistan veterans (202) 748-8002. caller: good morning. i served in vietnam from 69 to 71. i also served in afghanistan in 05 down in kandahar. what really upsets me is that

they compare the departure with the vietnam and it's not comparable. i don't remember any soldiers being lost during the exit from vietnam. i think the public needs to know we left a lot of equipment back in vietnam as wealth or be had vietnamese train on that equipment and went vietnam failed it was the same reason the afghans failed they could not support their country. host: ok. let's talk about the equipment. a big deal was made about that. how much beer did we actually leave? guest: these are just realities of war. whether it's vehicles or aircraft, over 20 years you bring in a lot of stuff. and if you are helping the afghan forces to modernize that's going to happen. if you decide to pull out in six-month you're not going to

take 20 years worth of gear with you. that is one of the realities that occur on the ground. whatever advances they had you're not going to get rid of all that stuff. you can't go and gather up cessna's and machine guns and all that. it tells us that when we do decide to get involved in another region you really have to think about what you are trying to do. the ship from defeating military threat to nationbuilding i think the inaccurate reporting that occurred over the 20 year building set up his condition. so 20 years you're not going to withdraw that in six months. >> with all the money we spent training the troops there it was pretty widely reported that the troops were not ready, many of the afghan troops were not

capable of fending off the taliban. guest: if you want to train them to fix a tank, plane or radar system you have to have some basic level of education to be able to do that. all of our training efforts were hand signals and pictographs and those sorts of things. you couldn't get them into a classroom to study a manual. i bring that up as a metaphor for this larger problem that you're not going to transform our country in a few years. host: were either of you surprised at how quickly the afghan army dissipated? >> when i was there in 2011i remember it was reported on that even at that time you had the afghan military making private deals with the taliban in certain areas. that's part of the culture there that has gone for centuries. that really is what happened. i think the effect the taliban

had before we did withdraw that is exactly what was going on over the country. they were making deals especially in kandahar for wholesale, surrendering basically of the afghan military that is what they think was a big part. they may deals just to stay alive. guest: that was going on but there were also some afghan units that just performed term are likely. it was never clearly one or the other it was a mixture of both. the government was corrupt, it's a country that doesn't have a culture doing all the things we expected them to do. white spots, dark spots when the u.s. announced withdrawal everyone is going to see to their own interest. that is why a lot of these deals occurred. you would we make this into a

representative democratic your european disorder country. i think that is when things went wrong. the larger question is did the u.s. have security interest in being present in the region and we can't forget about that aspect either. >> i think one of the biggest examples of that is the two major elections that afghan has had it was rigged with all kinds of corruption and instead of holding people accountable the u.s. put a band-aid on it and came up with the ceo version. they created this new thing that didn't even exist in the constitution without talking about the millions of votes that were corrupt on either side of that. they just said haber going to do whatever it takes. there was no plan in place it

was doing what we can to get by but that is all we ever did. host: let's hear from pearl in california. caller: yes, good morning. first i want to thank both of these offers -- officers for their candor. as a voluntary vietnam that i would have proud to have served under either of these gentlemen. one thing to make very clear is joe biden, the whole biden administration, they had complete control over the timeline. a lot of things were going to happen here and they botched it. so if you want to know when received by an up on the stage and sing he's going to do this, you know, i don't have too much faith in this administration to do anything correct. basically i am terrified of the

leadership we have. host: ok, earl. guest: we were there for 20 years so is started under george w. then went to obama. you had a number of offramp opportunities of people saying we want to bring this to an end we are losing people in countries, there is a lot of money being spent every year and yet there was a driving rationale in the background. a security interest do we arm pakistan? what is our wrongdoing --iran doing? you didn't want to see it returned to terrorists. it was always heady you do that? talking about the mistakes made in execution trying to do things with the military force that is

really not structured to do that. i do think there were missed opportunities. i think the honesty that should have been reported was not there. everyone is going to put the best face on things and yet you are dealing with soldiers and marines and airmen from our country that has no basis in cultural literacy or languages or tribal politics or any of those things. so be were asking them to do things that it is not structured to do. we were not realistic about what was accomplishable in that timeframe. host: let's hear from javier in virginia. caller: good morning. i appreciate listening to these gentlemen especially how the military obeys orders. i have an afghan gentleman living in my basement.

he is the first afghan man i have spoken to in my life. the conversation, i asked him what he thought about the withdrawal and his thoughts are there is no way to have done it with other planning but no matter what happen he is got the americans left because he emigrated as a refugee and he says all them many americans expect was a waste because it all went into the hands of the corrupt people. as the officer mentioned the corruption, this gentleman said all the money went to jihad. think accounts, property that belonged to the men who were supposed to represent the people.

i'm just glad it's over. i'm not going to criticize how it went or how it didn't go. you have people saying it went great, i don't think anybody responsible could do it any differently. host: do you think the u.s. should have held the former leaders that did leave more accountable? >> i think everybody should have been held accountable from the beginning. we should have said hey this is not acceptable. we are sending american money and american troops to fight for your country and we have standards that go with it. i don't think there is anything wrong with that. i will this is armor on independent country, obviously is not your we did in some ways but in the kiwis we didn't do anything. a lot of that has been in the

reports. they talked about that kind of failure and is obese at the standard for the failure all the way through and i don't think we ever held anybody accountable. host: let me ask about an article you wrote a couple of years ago the headlight of the pieces the men of endless wars we hear this term on the debate. were you getting at about the method of endless wars. guest: i think the topic was being overplayed. it's at this high intensity combat, we're just wasting lives for not affect whatsoever. you want to be present, you want to have trading partners and allies that are not on your competitors side you want to know what is going on and you can't do that remotely. you can't use satellite sensors

or video feed. you have to be on the ground. this point that we have not lost anybody in 18 months in afghanistan so what or was going on in that sense? it wasn't taking a lot of u.s. lives for very -- anytime we have u.s. members anywhere in the world there is a risk. it is a commitment of money and resources. that is one of the costs of being a global power that has economic and political intelligence around the world. i was saying it is not an and less war we are engaged in many places around the globe where u.s. national security and economics and diplomatic interests. how you do that really matters. the fact that we are engaged in so many places cannot be

dismissed. host: it shows our plan to be put over the horizon in terms of our president such as it is in afghanistan is working. >> is that a workable plan? no it's not. guest: is difficult conducting air operations where the nearest airbases hundreds and hundreds of miles away taking multiple tankers to refuel going in and out. the fact al qaeda has set up shop in the heart of afghanistan in kabul that tells you this was an overnight stop. this -- al qaeda has reconstituted their headquarters proved that went on for a year. you could have 24/7 drawn coverage with a limited window

of opportunity, right? the intel that went into this strike was developed over months. so this that they talked about the worry we are getting out of your country, be able to respond to any emerging threat it is a facetious argument. >> i have a very different view on that. i think it absolutely demonstrates that we do have the capacity to take out a direct threat to the united states whatever they occur in the world. we took out involvement in pakistan will be had no troops on the ground. and others on here, bin laden back in 1997i think her 1998 we had him in our crosshairs and it was a political decision not to pull the trigger. we have the capacity all over the place to take out direct threats to the united states. when i was in afghanistan, when

we had 140,000 troops there was still things out of our control. we took tactical action that we call terrorists there were no direct threat to the united states. we have a really robust post 9/11 world and ability to take them out. if we had john that we can do that i almost wish we had. host: let's hear from the democrats line in connecticut. caller: thank you for taking my call. i'm calling in reference to the withdrawal from afghanistan. the transfer of power from one president to the other was not

like a usual transfer of power. it was the amount of time so we have to take that into consideration. the transfer of power and the pullout, the information that was relayed from one president to the other, i want to hear the comments on that. guest: i think the underlying structures in the intelligence community, military establishment, state department personnel all of those things stay in place. it is the key principle advisors to the president and the appointed officials that change hands. and there are all these meetings echo on where the outgoing team and incoming team exchange notes. you would hope they would have some kind of expertise in the area to which they will be assigned so you can have a very

disruptive transfer that occurred when trump came into office, obama's team was going out and it also occur when trump was going out. these things happen but we have a couple hundred of years at making these transitions so all of the underlying infrastructure stays in place. when the political agenda is vastly different and you want to accelerate or speed up or slow down an action that might be taken, is an action taken on executive order as opposed to a law, it is easier to put the on or off switch to make these quick changes. there is a lot involved in this transition from one administration to another. it can be genetically different between those administrations. >> i pretty much agree with the way he said it. there was a pot of issues with the transfer of power this time, as there normally is, it is the

underlying institutions which were already there. president biden, i mean, his people were not worried about this all transfer of power. they were worried about transitioning and. is not like people didn't now. they had plenty of time to make a decision. there was no bubble. host: next is rate in north carolina --ray in north carolina. caller: thank you. i tell you only in america are we so bamboozled by the military. you blame everyone but yourselves for everything you do. the withdrawal from afghanistan, that was a military operation. yeah, you had 20 years to figure it out. the military does nothing anymore. you an even quicker on food, you don't clean your close, you do nothing. we spend more than the rest of

the world. $1.4 trillion that we spend that magically disappears to do nothing. this is a decade thing. every 20 years -- every 10 years. every 10 years, especially every 20 years there is a massive military spending. it is built into the cycle. now we have the ukraine we are sending tens or hundreds of billion dollars or is the american public just so, so forgiving of the military doing nothing? they blame it all on biden. host: we will let you both respond. >> i am not sure at all about pointing out military failures. there certainly have been allowed to go around.

but at the same time there is also a lot of good things to talk about. the way the troops conducted this mission, even us through the very end the troops in hout while i was there they were just doing magnificent work on the technical level despite the mission being given to them that was unobtainable. you have to look at the whole thing combined so it's not just the military is flawless because part of this country and just like all of us there is good things about things. host: when you talk to colleagues that served what is there take away from their service there and how we left? guest: every once in a while something earth shattering does happen like world war ii or the soviet union pushing across europe to spread global communism.

when china decides to really push out and seize territory in our region that is so critically important, there are them -- occasions where the military is needed. we keep a standing military force for a great variety of reasons. so few countries have nuclear weapons, we have guaranteed their security. i know that's kind of big picture to your point but the point is you have these military professionals who are serving their country and they always on the ready to be called and deployed. it is always a political decision. the military does something, the go where ever they want to go and do these things it is funded by congress. it is funded by elected representatives and people put into office. if not he wanted this to occur cut off funding and bring everybody home. it's not that we have this

entity in the military they have served interest. i think my colleagues that we talk to and served with appreciate that. they appreciate the impact of the united states can have. also keeping at bay bad actors around the world and is just a remarkable thing to see them in action. one of the marines that was killed in kabul, we saw her picture. she was cradling an afghan baby, this is america humanitarian emotion forward, the best of what we can bring to bear at the same time help provide security to leave a disastrous situation. host: he is senior fellow defense program former army lieutenant colonel for 21 years

deployed in afghanistan he is with the defense priority is senior fellow and a literary expert we have a little over 20 minutes look for your calls and comments. remember the line for afghan vets is (202) 748-8002. caller: good morning. i served in afghanistan. once during operations and once as a contractor in kabul as an advisor to the street of defense. less of a question but to put things in context, as a trainer advisor i had to go through the equipment lists of the things that we were buying and supplying. marching band supplies, ceremonial savers and eggs of the like. again this is the larger point that we were trying to build a military in, on likeness and

what not what was needed and that is why things folded. on my last they there i set up a meeting with the national agency and members of the ministry of defense and lt. col. person, my mentor he -- mentoree is giggling the whole time and i had never seen the guy kirk a smile in the many months that i had been there. i pull him out of the room and i say what's the matter? he told me, the last time i had this meeting the soviets were sitting on the other set of the table. so i would like to hear your comments on that. host: ok, brad. thank you for your call. guest: when i was first going into afghanistan and all the way through, i heard so much

ridicule of the soviet experience there. we learned lessons from them and restudied of what, i think it was called a bear went over the mountain. a bout of lessons learned just like we didn't seem to learn any of them. it took us 20 years to get to the same position and we didn't do a very good job of how we ended it. but the irony was not lost on me either. host: leon democrats line, go ahead. caller: good morning, as a former lt. col. i want to commend you for your service but i also want to look at the timeline because we had, like 20 your wars. vietnam was different. here we are now with this 20 year war and vietnam and talk

about and close for -- and close word. it took close to 100 years before we got to 1776. 86 years after that we have the civil war. not 20 years is not going to turn around the country. the united states military can go and get in any country it wants by force but the rest of the country apparatus needs to come in and train these guys. the same people who are in charge now with the taliban was probably in charge back then. we changed nothing. when the roman army went inland a state 300 years. i think we got a timeline set on the united states military which is we have enough sustaining

power for 20 years and we come out. we are not in that business. when they said we are nationbuilding that we need to stay out of these countries because i really believe that once we go into a country we need to stay there 100 years and change the culture. because right now, the people that is minding this government is not 20 years old. " interesting point there. guest: americans are eternally optimistic. seeing a problem, and wanting to fix it right away and move onto to the next issue. we take the perspective and we apply it to problems, the problems that can't be solved in short periods of time. we just want to do good.

diplomacy, economic relationships who come down to people. so he wants to be the president that comes in office and be blamed for losing afghanistan or losing vietnam? they don't want to do that. they know this is requiring political capital, a lot of bad news headlines if somebody gets killed. so how do you swear that circle? how do you do what you want to do, reducing threats to the united states, taking away some kind of region that could be used by terrorist groups to build up to abilities? is there a gathering aspect to it? what is the perception of the u.s.? bush had to go into afghanistan because he would have been summarily ran out of washington, d.c. following 9/11 if we had not gone to get al qaeda and the

perpetrators of 9/11. but then it comes how long do you stay and what do you droid -- try to do while you are there? there is this very optimistic, rosy color view that america has of itself and what we can do for good. you would like to think that you can take a country where the kids are not being educated or women have the opportunities for a life spent as measured in just a few decades, all of these things can we help them make a better life? we are going against centuries of tradition and culture so we don't often appreciate that but we think we can overcome it in weeks or months. so our expectations are very lofty and they run up against the brutal reality of actually doing that. host: danny davis, you had a piece just recently this month the headline of which is david

pretorius is wrong the aft in world was never winnable. you were responding to an article he wrote. a mistake he made was the lack of commitment. we never got the approach or within the individual administration. >> that ties in with the question that just came in here. it all gets down interest. if it is in america's interest and we have to stay someplace, we can stay 50 years, we can stay 100 years of that is what is required. it was necessary for our security. after about the summer of 2002 it was not necessary for american security. all the years we stayed after was basically to say we are trying to help.

all of those are fine and good as far as they go but they are not necessary for american national security. to try to accomplish that with military means is an absolute utility to the highest degree because you are not going to. when other generals so we should have maintained the status quo he is basically saying we will stay there forever even though there is not objective for the united states and need. that's what i was saying, this should have ended a long time ago. if we continue to stay, there would have been no value. the american casualties in the last 18 months because -- wasn't because the taliban was unsuccessful. there was a deal that the taliban would have stopped targeting americans. had that -- henry stayed the

world would have gotten hot and we would have had to send more troops because 2500 would not have been enough. that was always my biggest problem with this, american men and women were dying for something that wasn't even an interest to america. host: karl from south carolina, independent line. caller: yes, sir. i want to thank your guests for sharing everything. there is one big mess from the beginning. when we went to iraq to take out , i forgot his name not it was so long ago. then we end up over in afghanistan, a total mess. it never worked, it never will. there were so many people, so

many guys. i was in the horse and i just hate to see guys that volunteer and released it -- we stood --wasted. a picture was shown that will tell you everything you need to know. when you look at that c-17 taking off and all you see out there is men running behind the plane i don't see any women, i don't see any children, just men. nobody in the united states would ever run from anything without taking the women and children first. it shows you there was nothing we could do. we were not going to win. it was a catastrophe. twentysomething years, come on.

host: with those images it was to remind people, those of the engine does images from the 1975 departure. guest: it's the execution, how do you actually do this and there are parallels to vietnam. corrupt government a system that wasn't going to stay on it's on without being on the united states was it winnable? are we going to stay there for 100 years? as we look at afghanistan, to get us back to the point it is the essential necessity for truthfulness and overseeing recording from the fields every commander wants to say i got this, boss. we are seeing glimmers of success i just need a little bit more time to fix some of these problems because nobody wants to go in and say it is completely unattainable. it is not the military way to do

that. host: it also sounds like a clear definition of what our national interests are. guest: absolutely. and you can cost american use or desire to help a democracy get started. iraq remember it was the purple ink on the finger when they voted and they had to get their finger to show they voted. expansion of free-market enterprise, democracies, education and opportunities for all. we want the rest of the world to be like that and we have a hard time accepting that there are many regions of the world that part like that and won't be like that for centuries. host: the withdrawal reminds us of the price tag of american lives. guest: the deployment of these young men and women across all the services is a political decision. and what a testimony to the

service of these young folks that they actually salute and try to deal with things for which they are not well-equipped. it is just a remarkable story about the honor and ability of the service. the voter, elected officials, numbers of congress if it's not going to work out we need to get them out as soon as possible. if we think it's working out they need to be sourced appropriately to do that job. host: catherine is in st. joseph. good morning, republican line. caller: good morning, gentlemen. colonel davis answered my question which was going to be do you both think it was necessary that we go in to help these people? and colonel davis, you know, he explained it pretty well.

once we got in there and he saw that we couldn't really do anything we should have got out. but 20 years, 20 years in a country even if you took a young child and trained them, 20 years we will could have trained them quite well so i just can't figure why and how we didn't stay in a country that long and put that much money into people who, they didn't want our help. my comment this morning as we really need to look at the united states of america and our democracy. i think that is where our focus should be now is getting our democracy back here. i grew up, i am 72 years old, we had more communists in this country the and we do in other countries. and i think that is where our

emphasis should be now is trying to help our country. host: we will let you go there. >> i wouldn't say the afghan people didn't want our help because i saw many of them throughout my tour and still have friends to this day in afghanistan. they definitely wanted our help. i think many, one of the core foundations is the government the afghan government was so corrupt and predatory against its people and it never earned the support and trust of its people. even with the pakistan sanctuary and a lot of the mistakes we made if the afghan government, even culturally acceptable levels of corrupt i think they could have earned the trust. if they could have earned the trust of the people they could have turned the force of the taliban. host: duties in the u.s.

>> there are cultural norms of corruption. it helped get things done. but with all this money, that is even by their own standards way outside the norm. host: the caller mentioned disappointing things we are hearing is the return to sharia law. >> it's horrible. guest: you talk about a peaceful city in kabul is because everybody is walking in fear of getting on the wrong side. it is a horrible situation. the television are in charge of it. many people would love to leave the country. all of these stories are great in your gun americans get on the ground, they want to help feed and educate.

it is a culture and the political structures are supportive of that. there is only so much that you can actually do. we shouldn't be trying to fix the problems of the world. as the trump administration was wanting to suit what is in the united states interest? engage in trade or military action, it is all good in the long term but we need to use that argument in these larger sorts of debates on how to go about it. we had teams going over to sit down and talk about the evolution of modern art theory. or you have a tent in the middle of a village talking about abstract paintings and the sorts of things. why are we spending money doing these ridiculous notions? and this town would have had a reliable electrical power we

paid to how giant generators brought in to take care of a region but with the culture of maintenance or terrorist actions to blow things up. we have to temper our expectations and stop leading with our hearts of so much and be smart about the sorts of things. host: few more minutes with our guests. caller: good morning, thank you c-span. you are doing an awesome job. i appreciate the platform. we all do, thank you. over my lifetime these things seem to be more financial economic business ventures funded by the dollars of american citizens the government does not understand or respect the sociology of these countries we wage war against. the structures do not have the same national interest as our

american national interests. it is really our corporate goal about our government, republicans, democrats, and dependents all of our citizens we should expect -- except responsibilities. our goals are determined by the natural interest. the national interest is determined by the lobbyist. the lobbyist represent business corporations in the countries we war with. manipulation of the media is used. now the global citizen with the advent of the internet, americans need to learn to think for ourselves. host: ok, danny davis you want

to go first? >> national interest ought to drive our policies. if the military is used or if there is better means to do it some things are just beyond our ability to do. they can be done in a timeframe that is neutral and that we can afford. i think we need to start applying that more broadly to a lot more places because there are plenty of places we have allies. the troops in baghdad help they are not helping -- baghdad stay in power. that should drive all the things that we do anywhere. not how it may benefit and group somewhere else. guest: i would like to talk about the national interest. often times when we talk about

that we talk about security interests. someone is going to attack but the large part of national interest, we want to how good paying jobs here at home, we want to have a vibrant economy and a lot of that has to do with trade. can you get access to materials? do you have access to foreign markets? so we have to be engaged in the world. part of that is securing situation which is supported by military forces. so there could be an economic interest to help you kind of a region and check. if it has to do with the long-term economic liability, that is not to say business interests might not be how in something because they want to make profit. that happens in peacetime as

well. look at what goes on with china for china is involved on a scale that is almost unimaginable thea scale unimaginable. and yet a billion person market is hard to ignore for wanting to sell 10 issues and t-shirts. it is a complex world, you have interests in competition with each other and there are various mechanisms of power, one of which is the military. anytime we decide to deploy military forces we are trying to decide what we want to do, is accomplishable especially at the expense of american lives and be circumspect and popular support to that. host: this has been a quick but enlightening our, we appreciate you both, lieutenant colonel dakota would and danny davis. thank you for being here. more of the program ahead. coming up we will talk to john

jay college of criminal justice lecturer and former nypd officer eugene o'donnell to talk about this safer america's policy and the gun legislation proposed by the president yesterday. we will take your phone calls as well. there is more ahead. ♪ >> live sunday on "in-depth" steven hayward will be our guest to talk about leadership, ronald reagan's political career in the american conservative movement and is the author of two books including two volumes in the age of reagan series about the scholars who change the course of politics in america. joining the conversation with your phone calls, text, facebook

comments and tweets. live sunday at noon eastern on booktv on c-span2. if you are enjoying booktv sign up for our newsletter by using the qr code on our screen to figure out off of -- author interviews, festivals, or more. visit any time on booktv.com or on c-span2. at least six presidents recorded conversations while in office. hear many of those conversations during the podcast presidential recordings. >> the nixon tapes, part private conversations, deliberations and 100% unfiltered. >> let me say that the main thing is that it will pass in my

heart goes out to those people who with the best of intentions are overzealous, but as i'm sure you know and i will tell you if i could have bent a little more time being a politician last year and less time being president i would've kicked thereabouts out, but i did not know what they were doing. >> find it wherever you get your podcasts are on the c-span mobile app. >> there are a lot of places to get political information, but only at c-span do you get it straight from the source. no matter where you are from or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. it is whether it is here, here, or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span, powered by cable. >> "washington journal"

continues. host: eugene o'donnell is next and he brings experience to the issue of criminal justice as a police officer with the nypd in the early 80's as a prosecutor in the queens' da office and now as a lecturer at john jay college of criminal justice. welcome to washington journal, welcome back. guest: thank you, good morning. now talking about the safer america plan that he unveiled, some of which eat -- we knew ahead of time, the elements of his crime reduction and gun violence reduction plan and the key parts are $14 billion for training and 100 dish -- additional officers. $20 billion over five years, $1.7 billion for more agents, and also to emphasize to congress the passage of

legislation pushing for universal background checks and assault weapons bands, some of which the elements have been passed. we will start with the comments from president biden yesterday and his proposal, what are your thoughts? caller: -- guest: the important issue with the policing and more important to the money is that he is saying that police and will not be defunded, the institution has to be defended and i believe mayors and public officials are responsible for the lives and safety of the people must have breathed a sigh of relief hearing the president using his pulpit to finally once and for all pushback against one has -- what has basically been the social media at abbott in -- evelyn's -- avalanche not commuting -- avalanche not connected to communities. he was showing it should be a community driven conversation not by slogans.

these are complex issues, and i think the mayors today will be very happy because it is to -- time to restore sanity and balance to the conversation about policing. host: the big piece of that is money for training and additional 100,000 officers across the next five years. tie that in directly to how the presence of officers might help to reduce the increase in violent crime, particularly in cities across this country. guest: the big obstacle is that we have thousands of funded positions that cannot be filled, so the big question is where do the police come from? but one step at a time and this is an important step that he is taking. the police are a popular institution, they want to see them more and it comes back in every pole. people are willing to pay to

have the police out there. the important point that has been overlooked in this avalanche of attacking and social media campaign is that most of what the police do is profoundly unobjectionable. their enforcement and conflict work is a small part of what they do. they do a lot of service functions that almost everyone would agree are laudatory. what has been happening with the shortage of police and the collapse of recruiting and people leaving the job in massive numbers is response times, which has not gotten any attention at all relative to what it should get, they have absolutely got off the charts, our to two hours long. rape victims calling, they get sent to a non-emergency numbers and the police get there when they get there. police are getting out of the business of peacekeeping and traffic accidents. a lot of functions that are not

controversial that got swept up in this media avalanche and social media avalanche that was a lack of data and contemplation of what these things would mean as this slogan took over the conversation and has caused, hopefully not irreparable damage. the only thing i want to say is that the president did not say this. one of the things that the administration is doing is getting the justice department out of the discussion -- destructive business of consent degrees. the justice department needs to tell people -- police departments how to tell people what to do over several years places like -- places like baltimore and new orleans have been crippled, absolutely paralyzed by zealots who believe that the best policing is no policing at all. maybe the president and pride in administration can recognize that it is not just funding the

police, it is what they do and helping them affirmatively. everyone can tell them what not to do. at 2:00 in the morning when citizens call in crisis it is individual cops who go to the calls and have to improvise and they can use all the help in the world and the best parts of the country the doj can hopefully canvas best practices, but plenty of places have division where policing goes on and lots of high quality interactions, that is the affirmative plan that we need to see. host: let me go back to the personnel issue. why has it been difficult to recruit? why are officers leaving the force? what is behind that? guest: this is a tough job, it is policing in america, it is the western world's most violent society with half -- have a

billion guns and mass shootings practically every day. we have incredible levels of violence in some communities. it is a hard sell. this is one of the things i got swept away in this conversation, just getting anybody to do the job was a big ask. before you turned it into a potential where people could be criminalized and demonized and the oppressive level of discipline and threatening environments in the agencies. that is a big challenge, to find the money is one thing, and to find humans that you would want in a police uniform in the most difficult places in the country will be enormous. a single journey starts with one step and it is important. the police were generally undefended and orphaned for five or six years and this conversation just went out of control. there was no deliberation so things like taking away police officers' protections if they

get sued. those things were just swept away, so we see all over the country not just in the big city, we see that the police who take the job shying away from the kind of work that people might want them to do like road safety, domestic violence enforcement, investigative work. a lot of people are committing serious crimes with a high assurance they will not be apprehended and nobody will be looked at them and it will be discussed on c-span and the chances are in the bigger cities prosecutors will go for the defender over the victim. host: we are talking about policing in america and particularly the proposals unveiled yesterday. we welcome the calls and comments. 202-748-8000 is for those of you in the eastern and central time zones. 202-748-8001 four the mountain and facet -- for the

mountain and pacific region. i want to play the comments from president biden talking about the need for increased public trust in law enforcement, and for further support of law enforcement reform. here is president biden. [video clip] pres. biden: that strengthens public safety, and that -- and there are communities that want police more than any communities which are the tough poor communities, lack, white, -- black, white and immigrants. they want to help, without that victims do not call for help and witnesses do not step forward. crimes go unsolved and justice is not served. i took executive action, which i am allowed to do as president. i always admire that governors can take executive action. all kidding aside, to make some of these reforms for federal

officers and i could not do that first aid officers. no federal officer is allowed to use a chokehold or unrestricted no-knock warrants. we created an international database for officers who have been misbehaving and held accountable so they cannot hide. my plan will make sure that state and local governments adopt these reforms. [end video clip] host: your thoughts on what the president had to say. guest: more no's and not enough yeses. what we need the president to do is to tell police affirmatively what we want them to do is -- is becoming a carnival of people impeding police work and all of that is coming at a cost of greater insecurity. we will wait and see, but it is not to be understated, it is an

important today because the president took the conversation back into the community, and now you have a reset about what law enforcement should look like. we will have, all of this, comes with challenges. you are going to take law enforcement people and disqualify them on the face of it that makes sense but you have a recruiting crisis, so what will the standard be? the details remain to be worked out, but the pressing question that has been going on for a decade that the president did not address and has ignored in the last several administration is who is going to put on a police uniform? give us the details. the reality is that the president and -- the more people know about police work the less people are likely to go into it. you get a pool of people who do not know what they are getting themselves into and you have driven away a generation of

young, idealistic people. the president said that people he went to high school with they wanted to help people and those were the people in school. we need to say that more. what he said yesterday is helpful, and it doesn't matter that the president is defending the institution. by the way as we said before, the police are not the only institution that needs to be defended. if you do not defend institutions they are always going to be -- there is an assumption that they will always be there. the police is a dying profession, so whether it is under the fbi or national institutes of health, a lot of government agencies do important work. the irs get trashed and cheap shotted by people. you need to have elected officials courageously defending government officers doing the work we ask them to do. tell the police what you asked

them to do and they will do it. we have seen that cities have said we do not want the police to be involved, they have followed those orders at great cost. host: we have calls waiting for you. we will go first to -- to california. go ahead. good morning. caller: good morning bill and eugene. i agree with eugene about slogans as a liberal black man, defund the police had to be one of the dumbest sayings that i heard. but i would also like to say that i appreciate the police when they are doing their jobs. unlike the arkansas cops that did what they did, feeding the poor man. so, do you think that body cameras and the -- people filming the police are helpful along with policing? thank you.

guest: it is inevitable bill -- i do not -- it is an inevitability and i do not think it will be reversed. i think it is unhelpful because the idea here and the nuance here is that police in order to do their work and when they have to use force sometimes they have to do that. there is no special protection for them one minute it could escalate and they could find themselves criminalized. that was always the case that there was always reasonable interaction. now that this has become politicized police officers are very afraid just to defend themselves much less to intervene on behalf of their colleagues. host: upper marlboro, maryland, me. good morning. caller: i have a few questions

and comments. i am really just so distraught that every time you bring somebody on-air that has a police background it is the same narrative over and over. so he said something about why -- that the president should be defending the police, and about other institutions needed to be defended. here is the thing, why does the police force need to be defended when police forces are defending officers doing wrong in the field? you know there is a saying from spider-man that we all laugh at, with great power comes great responsibility. when you a police you hold somebody's life in their hands and our forces have been getting out of hand for decades and there is no accountability where accountability is needed when someone's life is taken. the police officer's life is supposed to be ahead of the citizens. somebody is running away from

you and the police officer is shooting the person and you are talking about that police officers, people do not want them to have protection when they are getting sued. no. why are my tax dollars paying for a police officer's crime of killing a citizen? ok? when he is the one who committed the crime while he is working and when his job is to protect and defend? we are sick of the narrative where the police officer is the victim when you have a responsibility to be the protector in our society. you talk about body cameras and you are saying that you are against police body cameras. that is the craziest thing i have heard. you need to have accountability when you are in the field. and those body cameras can either defend the actions or they can go against the police officer's actions so if we have a police officer that is a criminal he is in jail with the rest of the criminals. host: we will get a response for

our guest. guest: the storyline that the caller refers to really needs to be updated. over the last five years police have gone missing in action everywhere, the idea that they are proactively stopping people, that is not the case and that is a current issue that we have to confront. gun violence and shootings escalating, communities melting down and it is do you and do you want the police to be involved and how do you do that. in terms of defending the institution it is eight institution dying before our lives. she speaks through wanting to have the very best and brightest people go in and this conversation has taken us in a totally different direction. you have to balance your beliefs with reality, and you have to see the reality as it is right now. host: douglas, arizona. you are on. caller: good morning. let me actually -- i am not in

douglas. i am much closer to tucson, but it is all arizona. thank you for everything, thank you for having this guy on. i have taken so many notes. so, let us start with lack of data. as you well know there is no federal reporting on gun violence. so, that argument fails. qualified immunity fails. the police -- -- the police are starting to face law -- lack of protections in the qualified immunity cases that they are required to be defendants. i would like to hear your thoughts on how qualified immunity failure, that judge are finding that qualified immunity does not quite apply in the cases where it used to apply, particularly when we find

egregious violations of citizens' rights. i like your argument about protecting institutions. one of them that is going to be very important this november is the secretary of state in the races and as i am sure that you are a trump supporter, these people start climbing defenses like zombies, especially in arizona. i know you do not like photography and that is tough but too bad. host: eugene o'donnell, if you have a response to his comments on the qualified immunity in particular regarding our topic. guest: it is a necessary topic. allow recognizes the police every time i get a call it is a new call and a call that somebody has never responded to before. they are fashioning responses in real time in danger and asis -- in a society that has guns and it is a way to recognize when

they are not acting in egregious bad faith that you have to cut them slack. again measuring that against reality, the current state of our play in a country is that police are in absentia thousands of times a day, hundreds of thousands of time a day or a week you have people who want to the police and want to engage who are not engaging. these statements on the face that they are image scents and the potential that a police officer beat civilly liable to responding to a domestic violence call, if you wrote those kinds of protections you are making police people say to each other why are we doing this job and saying to their children that where recruiting started, people are running the other way. when we talk about defending institutions that will not be automatic pools of people that want to go into the work. if the work is not explained, if people like the president do not

tell people, like he did yesterday, the police mostly do a decent job there are some abuses. if you do not do that the police institution will collapse. we are not speculating, it has collapsed, and if there was reporting that was honest we could see the extent and the depth of that damage that the collapse has caused. host: dave. atlanta. good morning, you are on. caller: good morning. every time mr. o'donnell comes on i try to make it a point to call. the reason for that is that mr. o'donnell seems to be unconditionally in -- on the side of the police, even when things are not on the up and up. we are talking about an industry where i agree with you mr. o'donnell, it is a dying industry, an industry that has failed to evolve and there are a

bunch of services rolled into police work that could be disaggregated. will -- while i do not agree with your view on cameras, i do agree that police officers are killing people at a rate of three people per day in the united states. for whatever reason, you can call them minorities or criminals, it does not matter, we are funding our own deaths and it is playing the lottery except that you do not have to enter. what part of policing can we fix and make evolve in a way that is prosocial for humans and people because there seems to be a lack of humanity in modern day policing and when someone is killed it is almost like we need to circle the wagons for the police officer. so, mr. o'donnell, tell me something you would like to change about modern day policing that has the lowest efficacy and

payoff rate and has so many services and they are spending their money on pr efforts such as the one you are on this morning? guest: i will just say you are entitled to your opinion. opinions like that get a lot of attention. what the president was pointing out by his words is that your opinion is an exceptional opinion. the vast majority of people want to see the police more, they are willing to pay for them. that shows up in poll after poll, and there is one in philadelphia that show that 70 percent of african-americans want to see the police more. one of the realities is that a certain number people are energized and local, and have gotten -- vocal and have gotten attention and they are funded by billionaire campaigns against the police and ordinary citizens have been silenced. if you're going into a community i would say certainly anybody telling you, and i am not aware

of any city where the police are not in retreat and an standdown mode. you might live in a city where that is not happening but that is pretty much happening in every city. anyone telling stories about the police aggressively pulling up on streets and being aggressive would be very exceptional. and the commonplace event would be one hour waiting times for the police and the police not on the street at all and visible, police shorthanded and working double shifts. police retiring and investigations of serious crimes going unsolved. that would be the standard of 2022. host: we will get your thoughts on reforms proposed in this tweet by grant to said that reforms need to happen for communities to begin trusting law enforcement more. he says "end civil asset forfeiture, drug schedule policy reform, no more access to military surplus gear, and make it easier to remove bad actors." any of those reforms strike you

as reasonable? guest: remember the military conversation that people cheap shoted and grandstand it on and then you saw uvalde texas. you said that police should not be warriors where 10-year-old kids that were being killed and we had police acting as guardians and you needed the police to be stepping up and to be tactically engaged and people saying you do not need swat teams small towns, what could happen? newtown and columbine and uvalde. so there is a balance that you have to strike, there is a necessary and hard conversation to have that is logan eyes, -- localized but logan -- sloganeering and hashtags is a problem. we have cities that cannot respond in a time of crisis. irony of ironies we had

lawmakers call the military and. as soon as the capital was attacked there was the military for people who had bashed the police on the idea why are they using military equipment? if you do not have the police able to take on who bring war into a school that killed 10-year-olds that will be the next step. i think two years ago we had the largest numbers of national guard employment so that is what we have to look at the backdrop of not having well-funded, well-trained police legitimized by elected officials not cheap shot in them is either anarchy in the military, those are the possible alternatives. host: let us hear from henry calling from port huron, michigan. caller: good morning. i think that one of the tragedies of the defund the police mischaracterization was that it was intended to start a

conversation about reimagining policing. like the gentleman said, the disaggregation of police having to come in contact with the public. meaning things like cameras, taking the place of doing speeding tickets and those kinds of things to cuts down on contact between police and human beings and the public except for dangerous individuals. but i have two questions for you , and they both relates to the george floyd protests, and the insurrection of january 6. i would like mr. o'donnell to please clarify for the public the difference between these two events, one being for social justice and the other being for trying to implement a coup against our government. and mr. o'donnell, also as a final point.

if you could explain to me why president trump and all of the participants of the insurrection should not be charged also as accessories to murder because of the deaths of the people in the police officers and the young lady, ms. babbet, and the commission of felonies, can you tell me why judges are not adding on those charges? host: eugene o'donnell. guest: i cannot. the larger point worth noting, again the idea and a few times ago we did this on c-span, i said we were running the risk of political violence. political violence can make -- can break out in many different directions. one of the things to consider and one of the things that elective officials should consider is having a well-equipped, well established police force where you are

getting good people into the job as an insurance policy. in my lifetime i had never seen more different types of crisis whether it is energy, food, political, violence, supply chain issues, terrorism, we are going into uncharted territories and it benefits us to come together and trying get a consensus and get policing as good as it can possibly be and vetting the politics out of it and trying to have policing responding to the greatest number of things they can and get them out of the political arena that it is something we need to be aiming at. police need to be depoliticize and taken out of the middle of this very divided country where consent is so elusive. we seem to be arguing about anything. host: washington, d.c., ken.

caller: did you want to give mr. o'donnell an opportunity to answer the question? i think you missed the answer to the previous caller's question. guest: about donald trump? caller: i do not know what he asked but i did not hear you answer. guest: to be honest, it is beyond my knowledge why donald trump is not being charged with murder, is that the question? caller: i gather. outstanding. i have been a police officer for three decades and up until now one of the biggest problems and what happened and one of the reasons i used trump as an example is because trump used a term that you are using is defund the police. what i do or what a lot of police do nowadays is do a lot of social services that we do not have the necessary abilities to do. you need other services to do that. if you want to defund the police department to move the money

into social services that i do not have to respond to or that i am not best suited to handle, that is fine. that does not mean i am losing my job. it is when someone takes a term and uses it for political gain to emotionally touch somebody and make them do something based on their emotions, not on how they think. with that said, you off to you a member who is saying what, you also mentioned about 70% of african-americans in philadelphia want something. what are your sources. outside of what african-americans, what do white and poor people need? poor people's -- poor people need more resources and access because poor people do not cause problems in this nation. it is a capitalist society based on wealth and power so whoever has that has to do everything they mean -- they can to maintain that.

you cannot be on something and not be completely honest. if you are going to be on that show and speak, just be honest but you have a lack of that. host: give a chance for our guest to respond. guest: very briefly that was a poll and poles receipt -- repeatedly show that data. people want safety and the well-to-do can buy safety. this conversation focuses on the poor and their inability to access safety and communities continue to be impacted where you have flight from the cities because people do not feel safe. that is a consistent issue and the president by going into the community and the community gets to pick, they get to prioritize. it is up to them to decide what they want and in polls and some of them have driven the agenda at the white house there is an interest in seeing more police. needless to say we need to focus

on all of the needs at the communities have that are not addressed. host: in addition to the policing elements of the safer america plan, what are the thoughts on the proposals for background checks and elimination of automatic weapons? guest: removing guns from america, that is helpful, but i -- i stray away from that because it can get technical in terms of constitutionality. traditionally police deploy organizations on the issue of assault weapons that have been pretty robust in saying that they support bills that will -- there are assault weapons, but also the communities at risk, but crucially the lives of the police. they have been very emphatic in supporting that legislation. host: let us that -- let's get one more call, ralph in the nation's capital. caller: i hear about the police

and all of the riff that it takes, but the garbageman have a better chance of dying than police and the line of duty. the problem is that we have a gang mentality in the police department. if you commit a crime then they will cover up for you, the prosecutor will cover up for you. i am a reporter in chicago, and i remember the torture chamber on the south side where they would take people and beat them until they confessed. the problem is is that we have a percentage of the police that are really violence and really corrupt. i have seen time and time again when they have been caught doing the violence and transfer to another department. and then when i see something like i think it was in the southwest are one of the texas cities, a policeman came in and a guy had a rifle.

he had it on him and he said get down and put your hands behind your head now crawl forward. when he did not do something exactly right because it was a game of chance he took three bullets in the back while he was lying on the ground. you know what? the policeman was not convicted. it was murder and that man probably went off to get another police job. you are not warriors, if you are going to fight a war and you want military weapons take your ass to iraq and iran and i want to see what kind of man that you are. when you beat somebody in handcuffs and you say a police camera should not be there recording that or when you kick somebody who is down or shoot somebody in the back, i am sorry but you are way far from what the law intended, you become vigilantes and gang members. host: the response. guest: again very briefly, chicago has had in the last 10

years 20,000 shootings. almost none of those, virtually 0% of shootings have been officer involved. whatever you have heard and think about whatever policing was 10 years ago, i think at the present it is recognizing that policing is now is in absentia is nowhere to be found. we are talking about police wrongdoing there is a complete collapse of rightdoing. we will have to reckon with that issue. officer-involved shooting should be going down with this disengagement you have factors such as a mental health crisis and deincarceration. and now the police cannot avoid deadly force situations. but you have again a country where you have shootings, weekends in chicago you can have 30 to 50 shootings.

the politics in chicago is as long as the police is not involved that appears to be acceptable. host: our guest, a lecturer at the john jay college of criminal justice, eugene o'donnell, thank you for being with us. guest: good day. host: there is still more ahead and it is open forum next. your chance to call in with your thoughts on public policy issues, political issues and items that you are watching the news. 202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8001 for republicans. independents and others, 202-748-8002. ♪ >> middle and high school students, it is your time to shine, you are invited to participate in the studentcam documentary competition. in light of the upcoming midterm election, feature yourself as a newly elected member of congress and we asked competitors what

are your top priorities and why. make a five to six minute video that shows the importance of your issue from opposing and supporting perspectives. do not be afraid to take risks. among the $100,000 in cash prizes is a $5,000 grand prize. videos must be submitted by january 20, 2023. visit studentcam.org for competition rules, and a step-by-step guide. ♪ be up-to-date in the latest in public sitting -- publishing with about books with current nonfiction book releases plus bestseller lists as well as industry news and trends through insider interviews. you can find it on c-span now, our free mobile app or wherever you got your podcasts.

>> c-span brings u.n. and filtered of government. word for word recaps the day from the halls of congress to daily press briefings to remarks from the president. scan the qr code at the right bottom to sign up and stay up-to-date. subscribe today using the qr code or visit c-span.org/connect to subscribe any time. >> "washington journal" continues. host: it is open forum until the end of the program. 202-748-8001 the line for republicans. democrats, 202-748-8000. s independent -- independents and others, 202-748-8002. -- 202-748-8002. when the house returns there will be one fewer democrat in the house, charlie crist has

announced his resignation. here is the headline, not unexpected as his florida governor race ramps up. "charlie crist is resigning from congress to focus on his race for governor and is expected to have a huge victory over nikki friede. the seat will remain vacant until the november election." a story we touched on earlier from "the washington post" about the late filing from the justice department and the headline justice department says that trump team may have hidden moved classified papers. "former president donald trump and his advisors repeatedly failed to turn over highly classified government documents even after receiving a subpoena and pledging "a diligent search had been conducted" leading to a rate of his home that found 100 additional classified items. according to a blistering court filing late tuesday. the filing traces the

extraordinary saga of governor -- government officials's efforts to recover sensitive national security papers from the mar-a-lago residence and club, centered on the storage room that came to suspect that " government records were concealed and removed and that efforts were likely taken to obstruct the government's investigation." let us go first to the democrat's line and vincent is in philadelphia. caller: hello. i would like to say the gentleman was just on and he mentioned that policing is becoming a nonexisting job, he is absolutely right and it is starting at the top from the white house and this mess that we are going through with the trump stuff. anybody in their right mind knows right from wrong and can see what is going on. and that attitude from the white house is trickling down through the nation. thank you. host: lawrenceville, georgia. ed on the republican line.

caller: good morning i would like my comments to be focused at the democrats themselves. the democrats keep talking about trying to protect democracy. now if you look in the two most important documents we have, the bill of rights and constitution, democracy is not in any way in the constitution or the bill of rights. the democrats, a lot of them suffer from a psychosis. it is a condition of the mind where you cannot tell what is real and not real. and they keep suffering from it. we are not a democracy, we are a republic. thank you. host: richfield, wisconsin is next up. greg is on the republican line, go ahead. caller: good morning. interesting guests that you have on today. as a follow-up to the most recent guest, the police

lecturer. it seems to me that there is a direct correlation, and i am not a historian, that a direct correlation between out of wedlock births and the welfare society that is prevalent among much of the country, not just the inner cities or speaking of certain demographics. it is rampant across the country. and i think in large part this contributes to the crime, all you have to do is look at chicago and philadelphia, these big cities that have numerous shootings daily, how can that be? what is the cause of this? i think it is the moral decay of the nuclear family. that is my comments. host: jenny in stowe, ohio, good morning. caller: good morning. i was watching and trying to get

through to the previous representative, ok? anyway my son is a police officer, ok? he has been a police officer and i will try to make it as fast as i can. he has been a police officer for 17 years, ok? he has never used his gun to shoot anyone. he says he can do it, but he will do things in a -- in the right way. he said that one of the main things right now is we do not have enough police on -- out there, ok? which i believe, ok? a lot of policeman are retiring. he has never been hurt or never shot anyone, but the guy that robbed a store, he could have shot him in the back.

ok? he did not, he chased him five blocks. but, my son's face had to be reconstructed because the guy had two pipes in front of him where my son could not see them, ok? we do have good police officers out there. host: where does your son serve? where is he an officer? caller: he serves in cincinnati, cincinnati ohio. host: how was he doing now, recovering from that? caller: he is still not well, ok? he has been two months but he has had the whole side of his left face and he has had at cat scan on the side of his upper side of his face. but, i think he has seen so much, and they do not have

enough police officers and then, it bothers him because of the gangs killing gangs. he says that -- he has biracial -- he says the blacks are killing the blacks and he has had to save children's lives and will not take off the next day saying he has found. host: we will go to west bridgewater, massachusetts. amelia on the line. independent line. caller: i just wanted to talk about donald trump and the fact that everything he does, he is either lying or crying. that is what i have noticed and i live with a trump supporter and i have asked him several times, nobody is perfect, what is donald trump done that is wrong? he cannot answer it. nothing that donald trump has done is wrong in his eyes, and

could he actually murder someone on fifth avenue and not lose any support? that is what i see in my circle of friends and the person with -- that i live with. i think he needs to be held accountable. i mean all the documents that he had at mar-a-lago in his desk, he cannot say that he did not know. the documents were in his desk. that is a severe threat to our national security and it does not matter if you are a republican, independent, or democrat, that should scare the heck out of anybody and i wonder what he could do to lose support if anyone out there could answer that question, i would love to hear it. host: the city of jackson, mississippi, the capital of the state is still without water, drinkable and usable. this is a headline from "the hill," "biden declares emergency over water crisis in mississippi capital. president biden declared an

emergency on tuesday freeing up federal resources to assist local and state officials and responding to a water crisis in the state's capital. the water system in jackson, mississippi failed leaving residents with little or no drinking water, officials have blamed flooding and previous issues that have plagued local water treatment plants operations." in washington, d.c., helen on the democrats line. caller: first of all, i think that the gentleman that was on before, mr. o'donnell, nobody -- i do not want to see the police defunded. we need the police. all of these people who are talking about how they lecture the police and whatnot. i remember back in the day we used to call our police officer officer freely.

and why are you going to shoot somebody in the back when they are running away? well when you look at some of the officers, their physique and physical appearances. they are fats, they cannot run and that is why they draw the gun. now common sense tells me that if i am going to take down a criminal you would stop them. you do not kill them. host: kimberly, arizona. it is open for them. go ahead. caller: i cannot wrap my head around what people blaine trump four. he might be braggadocio's, but the main -- demanded better for the country. everything that biden accused trump of, biden is doing. why is nobody investigating hillary clinton or hunter biden? it is mind-boggling. the man has put up with so much crab and did not have to take

this job, gave up his salary. he led this country, period. he just wants to do better for his people. biden is giving away things to other countries and it has been other countries first and it is disgusting that nobody sees this. the democrats have to open their eyes up. host: bill in tennessee. good morning, go ahead. caller: the democrats are the ones defunding the police, kamala harris is defunding the police, not the republicans. we are proud to be republicans and trump supporters. he did a great job. thank you. host: leslie on the democrats line in abington, pennsylvania. go ahead. caller: good morning and thank you for c-span. number one, to the guy who talked about the inner and out of wedlock birth causing violence, when a white guy went up and murdered black people in

the church, was his daddy in his life? the white guy who just went into buffalo and murdered people at the supermarket, was his father in his life? hello? thank you. host: this from "the new york times" about the postponed national launch, the headline is that weather permitting nasa intends to try the launch on saturday. "nasa will press ahead with a second attempt of its new moon rocket. mission managers have come up with a plan that they hope will work around an engine problem with the rocket -- that the rocket encountered during the first launch attempt. the space launch system rocket is the modern equivalent of the saturn v that took space astronauts to the moon. and it is a centerpiece of the artemis program that aims to

send astronauts back to the moon. artemis i will not have people on board but it is a critical test of the rocket and of the orion crew capsule where astronauts will ride during later missions. during the journey orion will go into orbit around the moon and then return to earth." pennsylvania, on the line is irene. republican caller. good morning. caller: good morning. it is humanly impossible to create -- to correct the world's situation as it is. god is in control, he is not dead, he is taking action. with all of these situations, whether it be the pandemic, the war in ukraine, climate change, gun violence, crime reduction, god has sent the blessed virgin

mary to a religious sister in japan in 1973 with endin -- an important message that chastisement to worse than the day lose, that is the flow -- deluge, and that is a flood and noah's time. the only armament that will help us is the holy rosary. so, stick to your guns and your police officers if you think they will help you. host: moving on to lawrence in jacksonville, florida. you are on the air. caller: yes, sir. i spend 22 years in the military and when i retired i became a corrections officer for 22 years. one of the things that i saw is that they hired inmates to be

correction officers. and some of those inmates that they hired, they were not violent crime or nothing, they would turn out to be very good correction officers. i am saying what if they got some of these low class inmates to be correction officers and police officers, but they had to pay everything back that they did when they were locked up? those people could communicate with gangs, and people that the regular corrections officers or the regular police officers could not do because they do not know what the other side of the aisle is. and, i am not talking about getting murderers, rapists and getting them.

i am talking about people who do low-level crimes, and you can turn around and come around a lot of that stuff in the streets. host: another caller from florida. kathy on the republican line. caller: i wanted to remind everyone that remember who was in office when black lives mat ter was marching in the streets like they were not destroying the police. biden was in office and he invited them to the white house it was totally unsafe. -- insane. if you believe anything in his speech at all, with his back turned to people constantly, it is all in alive. why don't you talk about where he touched a nine-year-old. pervert for president. host: kansas, we will hear from joyce.

democrats line. sorry, joyce. there you go. you are on the air. caller: hello. host: you are on the air, go ahead. caller: ok, i was calling in support on the ban of the automatic weapons. i saw on cnn this morning that you can make a small clip on a printer that will turn any gun into a machine gun. and the instructions were on youtube, and they did not take it down until cnn called about it. and an officer in texas was killed with 12 shots in his body from one of those automatic machine guns. thank you. host: thank you for all of your calls this morning. that is it for "washington journal."

we are bought -- we are back tomorrow morning september 1 and we hope that you are too. ♪ [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2022] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> here is what's coming up live on the c-span network. at 12:00 p.m. eastern, representative scott peters discusses the impact of climate change on national security. that conversation will be hosted by the american security project. at 1:00 p.m., chief of space operations general john raymond talks about innovation in the nation's newest military branch, the u.s. space force. at 2:45 p.m., the atlantic council holds a discussion on

how allies around the world can best support ukraine as russia continues its aggression in that country. you can watch all of these events live on our free mobile video app c-span now. >> former senators tom harkin wrote and cosponsored the americans with disabilities act. the 1990 civil rights law prohibits discrimination against individuals disabilities in all areas of public life, at work, school, and in transportation. the iowa democrat talked with us about the landmark, -- the landmark legislation here on c-span, part of our "washington journal" series airing in primetime. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government, funded by these television companies and more, including buckeye broadband. ♪

buckeye broadband supports c-span as a public service, along with these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy.