>> c-span is your unfiltered ew of government, funded by these television companies a more, including comcast. >> you think ts is just a community center? >> it is way more than tt. >> comcast is partnering with 1,000 counity centers to crea wi-fi for students and low income families so they can get the tools they need to be ready for anything. >> comcast supports c-span as a public service alongith these other television providers, giving you a front row seat to decracy. >> coming up this morning on "washington journal, we will talk about the views of the trump indictment clifford young.

then we will discuss tax policy and the 2023 tax filing season with a senior economist, erica york. and later the historical significance of former president trump's recent indictment with jeffrey ingle, director of the center for presidential history at southern methodist university. "washington journal" is next. ♪ host: good morning. it is sunday, april 2, 2023, and this is "washington journal." former president donald trump facing criminal charges, although we don't know the details. we could learn more on tuesday when trump is expected to appear at eight manhattan courthouse for arraignment. republicans, even some who could be on the ballot against trump in 2024, say the case reflects democrats' vendetta against the

former president. democrats have denied it and said the manhattan d.a. should be allowed to proceed without the influence of elected leaders in washington and are using a common refrain, "no one is above the law." we want to hear from you, what is your reaction to former president trump's indictment. republicans, we want you to call us at (202) 748-8001 democrats dial (202) 748-8000, independents, your line is (202) 748-8002. you can also send us a text message at (202) 748-8003. please include your name and where you live here you can also find us on facebook.com/c-span, with the conversation has already begun paired we are on twitter at c-span wj and on instagram @he spent wj.

let's check out headlines from the front pages --@cspanwj. let's check out headlines from the front pages. the new york times says how the da resurrected the case against trump. it says a revamped team and a victory in court gave new life to an old threat. i also want to bring up on the ipad in article on nbc news.com that says, trump campaign says it raised more than $4 million in the 24 hours after his indictment. want to read a little bit from this article. again, this is nbc news, it says former president donald trump raised within $4 million in the

24 hours after the news of his indictment in manhattan became public, according to figures released by his campaign friday. the trump campaign said more than 25% of the donations came from first-time donors to the former president, "further solidifying president trump's status as the clear front runner in the republican primary." the trump campaign sent out more than half-dozen fundraising solicitations over email in less than 24 hours after his indictment, and he called for donations on his truth social platform as well. a campaign official told nbc news that it received 16,000 volunteer sign-ups over the past days as well. the former president faces about 30 charges in relation to document fraud stemming from hush money he allegedly paid it to cover up years old affairs, two sources familiar to the proceedings told nbc news

following the news of trump's indictment, which remains under seal until trump appears in court for his arraignment. according to trump's campaign, the indictment has led to new support, but again, we want to hear from you. i went to chat with clifford young, the u.s. public affairs president for it so's --ipsos, which is a pulling -- pulled out -- polling company. it says for trump's indictment, don't expect much movement from the public. this is based on polling that preceded the indictment news. guest: correct. it is leading up to it here but

we are in the field where we should have data later on the first impact of the indictment. it gives a good idea about where the public stands. host: what are the major conclusions from that last polling? guest: it is leading right up to the indictment and gives you about where the public and where america was before the indictment and what's does it say? it says it is a tale of two nations. we have a republican, democrat, blue, red that see the world through very different lenses. that said, about 70% of americans believe that trump

paid hush payments to stormy daniels and even 50% of republicans, but that is the only point of consensus. when you peel away the onion and asked americans what they think, they reflect a lot of what you stated about political leads. republicans see it as politically motivated, 80% or so, as an attempt to take trump out before 2024. they blame the democrats and the biden administration as being politically motivated and pushing for this agenda. on the flip side, democrats see it as nothing more than the rule of law being applied in a just way. very much a tale of two nations. two reviews on the nation. host: we have been showing charts that come from the poll.

i want to focus on the independents, because that is the best measurement. it says 77% of independents do believe that donald trump paid stormy daniels to not talk during the 2016 election. like you noted, there is broad agreement on both sides of the aisle that stormy daniels was paid off. why does there then become the divide when it comes to whether that is criminal or not? guest: i think it is the beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. yes, there is a relative consensus in america that it actually happened and eve showed the data. some difference from the partisan perspective, but whether that is criminal or not depends on what side of the fence you sit on.

democrats come and to a lesser extent independents see it as a criminal act, lawless in the best case. republicans see it as being politically motivated, not something that rises to the level of indicting a former resident, which is unprecedented as we know. it doesn't matter the question or the poll. that is the outlook, that we have two different start views on the same set of facts. host: you you think that any minds or does it look like the data is showing you that there are people, particularly in the middle, that mines can be changed? have you seen, even for a week and half, we were anticipating an indictment, so even though it

hadn't happened, people widely thought it was coming. did you see any shifts in the recent polling that indicated this could have an impact? guest: it can have an impact on the margins and it is important to emphasize that. perhaps during the primaries, some moderates might sit on the fence and be wary of trump, wondering whether he is delectable or not. and the generals, it does not help him. independents tend to be more like democrats in this particular view than republicans. we have to keep that in mind. trump's base is crystallized. we did another analysis in our weekly reflection on the data and we looked at past impeachments and scandals, watergate, the clinton impeachment, and the trump impeachments.

in terms of clinton as well as nixon, we see movement in public opinion over time. as the facts unfold, public opinion changes and views change, typically more negative toward whether it was nixon or clinton. when we look at the impeachments for trump, they are basically flat line, even though the facts come out and are interpreted, perhaps the same facts interpreted eerie differently, very little movement in public opinion. yes, there might be some change in the margins very slightly, but overall, we don't have a crystal ball, but the basic base case is there will be much movement in public opinion. host: i can show on the screen what you were referring to as far as the polling on impeachment for nixon, we see public opinion and support for

the impeachment went up in every category, republicans, democrats, independents, and same for clinton, not as steeply. but for trump, these lines are almost flat, but the one line that does go up under trump from his impeachment is that yellow independent line. does that indicate there could be a risk with independents when it comes to this criminal case and trump? guest: yes, i think that is indicative, but the question is, how does it affect him in a practical sense? i think we have to look towards the election. this chart suggests most likely in the primaries with republicans, it will have little impact. maybe in the margins with some independents, but not largely.

in the generals where the independents are the swing voters, agent can see as bad things come out about someone, they shift views. that is a great point and that is how i would interpret the data. host: thanks again, clifford young from ipsos polling. thank you for joining us. guest: thank you so much. host: we want to hear, what is your reaction to former president trump's indictment? republicans, call us at (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002. we are going to the phone lines. our first caller is june in new jersey on the republican -- jim on the republican line in new

jersey. caller: joe biden should be in jail. goodbye. host: let's go to lake elsinore, california, rudy, independent. caller: good morning. my opinion on the donald trump thing is i am not sure if he should get in trouble for the stormy daniels thing, but january 6 he should definitely suffer the consequences for that because he caused the whole thing. that publican party is just a mess right now. i don't know cable due to come back from this. host: you bring up a good point because there are under -- other investigations of president trump. do you think it is a bad idea to go with this particular issue knowing that there are perhaps more serious charges he could be

facing with other cases? caller: ultimately, i believe that they would be better served going after him for like i said, the january 6 thing and trying to steal votes from georgia. host: let's take another caller, darren in clinton -- clayton, new mexico. caller: good morning to you. i agree that trump has several more indictments coming down the line. remember the old saying, birds of a feather flock together, every person this man associates with is either in jail or -- host: i think we lost darren.

we are going to have to go to another caller, oliver in falls church, virginia on the independent line. caller: good morning. i would just like to say to the american people that it is amazing to me all of the corruption that surrounds donald trump that they will still talk about supporting this man who has been a criminal and crook. i live on the east coast and has followed his career from the days when he had the casinos in new jersey, i believe. he has been a crook and a con man the whole time. it is amazing to me the american people would think about putting him back in the white house.

it is amazing and scary. if this was barack obama, he could be in prison right now. joe biden is doing everything he can to keep this country on track after following this disaster. he to say it, most white people in this country put him in the white house. you didn't see black people packing those stadiums and following that chaos like they were listening to hitler. it is amazing they are talking about putting him back into the white house. i am telling black people he is going after hispanics and he he will go at the blacks next if he gets back in the white house. he says there would be retribution.

he wants to be the leader of the white supremacist in this country. think about what you are doing. i even see him attacking you every opportunity he gets. donald trump has unleashed it on this country. joe biden, thank god for you. host: let's go to stanford, connecticut, joe is on the republican line it. caller: good morning. how are you? host: good. caller: i feel so sad for the black people. i heard a prior caller talking to you saying thank god for joe biden. he is destroying this country in every direction. it is laughable to hear democrats say nobody is above the law. yeah, nobody is above the law if

you are a democrat but republicans will go to jail. this, is directed to you, i guess you are off of msnbc and cnn today. when i turn to c-span, i want to see an unbiased person, not some buddy who works with joy reed and wallace. i have never voted before in my life, but i will vote for trump. joe biden is destroying this country, destroying. host: our next color is jonathan in minneapolis the democratic line. you are on, jonathan. caller: i apologize for the last caller. that was very rude of him to say that, inconsiderate rant. i want to vomit and reached

through the tv and shake his head. minneapolis is a democratic city and joe biden will be here on monday, and i am very excited he is coming to between cities. i would like to invite him to go to coffee and ask him what it would be like for him as president right now. what i see happening in this world is political bias on both sides. it is breaking my heart what is going on in this country. we have white people, black people, hispanic people, all people. people need to come together again. we have all been through so much crazy. the world is falling apart. it is not joe biden's fault. this is a human conditioning problem that we have in this

country. as far as the indictment of president trump, ha ha. good luck, tia. host: our next caller is al in massachusetts on the republican line. what are your thoughts about former president trump's indictment? caller: one, statute of limitations. if they don't follow the statutes of limitations, the democrats make up new rules as they go along. have you heard of statute of limitations? it has run out. you can't be arrested. number two, aaron -- alan dershowitz, one of the best, if not the best who is a democrat, said this is absolute political

persecution and prosecution. number three, joe biden in a diary was showering with his own daughter. number four, tara reid. final statement is, we have now crossed the rubicon when it is eight democrat party only. you are not allowed to run if you are independent or republican. only a democrat is allowed to be in charge of the united states now. my final statement, i can't wait for the civil war. bring it on. host: let's go to his constant, gordon is on the republican line. caller: good morning. i think the indictment is affable. -- laughable. it doesn't surprise me because

they have been going after him forever. some of these callers are claiming he is a crook and criminal and a cheat and re-think else. how old is the guy? if he has done all of these bad things in the past before he came president, then it must be on the prosecutor. it must be on the legal system if he has never ended up in jail or prison if he is such a crook. it is not on donald trump if he is following the laws set down by congress. they keep complaining that he never paid taxes. then affix the tax code. make people who have money like that pay their pair -- fair share. don't blame donald trump because he is following the law. people call up and keep spewing off accusations all the time and you never ask them for any proof

or specifics. host: gordon, we appreciate that call. i want to bring up some comments we are receiving on facebook in response to today's question. joseph writes, it is political, nothing was done wrong again, and will be thrown out. carol writes, the most despicable thing to happen in the history of america, praying for president trump to survive this assault on a president and candidate for the presidential election. ron page rights, democrats said they were going to do thi to him back in 2015, over $1 million in investigations. gene rights, no one is allegedly above the law. we world are about to find out. a very happy day for america at large. deb beasley writes, embarrassed

for my country that it's come to this and hoping trump is smart enough to stop making foolish threats. trump is cunning but he's never been smart. our question for you today, what is your reaction to former president trump's indictment? republicans, we want you to call us at (202) 748-8001, democrats, we want you to dial (202) 748-8000, and independents, your line is (202) 748-8002. we are going back to the phone lines now. mike in ohio on the independent line. good morning, mike. caller: thanks for taking my call. you know, it's endless, this chasing trump.

there is really no value in this to the country. when will the masses of voters wake up to what is going on? it is shameful. it is disgusting. we go back to looking how this whole country is changing and the politicization and policies happening to persecute people. two all the way back to obama and his residency. he was elected and everybody hoped and prayed that would be a defining factor for our country, to improve things. it really didn't work out that way. he used the irs to try to persecute his opposition. it just continues on today. will it ever end?

somebody has to get in there that's really a strong person and straighten out this mess, because all levels of our government are corrupt. i think ever but he recognizes that. i appreciate you taking my call. you have a wonderful easter. host: you too. jan is on the democratic line from west chester, pennsylvania. caller: trump has been doing a lot of financial illegal and dishonest things for years. i was surprised he was going to run for president when he did and when. i was surprised because if he stayed in new york as a businessman, he could have continued teaching and doing the things he was doing that were illegal and getting away with it

. as president of the united states, there are certain things, like showing your income taxes and disclosing certain financial documents and third in things that presidents do. i am a democrat, but there were times when a republican got president and i didn't go crazy, let's storm the capital and threaten lives. it is ridiculous. sometimes if eight republican wins, oh well, then maybe the next time my candidate win. this has gotten sick. if a president is calling to a state and asking them to find more votes and he needs one more vote to win, what the heck does that sound like? does it sound legal? we should let this play out in

the courts and see what happens. maybe there are some things that us non-average, calm people, average people really don't know. i think all of these things should play out and see what happens. then all of us will have our answer. i would like to see decent people go into or people who love the country, care about democracy go into the office of the president, not people weaponizing and using people and having something like a cult and running up to the capitol and coming with weapons and beating up the capitol police and capitol police getting injured and causing dying. that is a disgrace. it is like the battered woman's

mother. i feel sorry she lost her daughter. it was a terrible, terrible thing. secret service was standing there with weapons and you are not supposed to enter that area, i am not going in. i am not going to go there. host: we will have to move on but we appreciate your comments. we are going to bonita springs, florida. john is on the independent line. though ahead, john. caller: good morning. as far as i feel about what is going on with the indictment, like the man said, we have crossed the rubicon. this is unprecedented where we are right now. we have a former sitting president who is going to be indicted in new york. you have alvin bragg who ran on he was going to try and get the former president. i voted for obama for hope it would change and that never

happened. then i voted for trump. then in 2020i set out because i did not feel there was a candidate i liked. this is seven years. this is harassment. we are a banana republic. we are like el salvador making fun of us, a lot of countries are making fun of us. what kind of rule of law is this when it only applies to certain people? this is outrageous at this point. i will be voting for president trump and i know a lot more of my friends that will be as well. we have had enough of this. rules for the and not for me. if you are not part of the political class, they don't want you near there and they are making an example of this man. we have seven years of russia, russia and it was proven completely false. then they tried to impeach him

and a phone call. this is just ridiculous. this is trying to teach the american voters that you will not run for office unless we approve you to run for office. this country has gone over the deep end. i am embarrassed and i am a veteran and have never seen anything like this. i lived in america at the greatest time and i feel for the grandkids of this country what is going to happen. i am horrified and disgusted by it and i am embarrassed for my country today. host: we want to bring up some video. yesterday, florida governor ron desantis weighed in on the indictment of former president trump. he criticized democrats and had -- and alvin bragg for the indictment here here are some of the comments delivered at a pennsylvania leadership conference.

governor desantis: and now you have this manhattan strict attorney who is whole that form when he got elected was that he was going to downgrade as many felonies as possible to misdemeanors, he was going to keep as many people out of jail, even habitual criminals, as possible and he was going to go light on all of these things as part of "criminal justice reform." he doesn't want to charge people with felonies. now he turns around, purely for political purposes, and indicts the former president on misdemeanor offenses that they are straining to try to convert into felonies. that is when you know that the law has been weaponized for political purposes. [applause] that is when you know that the left is using that to target their political opponents. [applause] i can tell you this, the soros

backed da's are a menace to society and the rule of all. -- of law. [applause] i am proud to say it when we had one of those da's in tampa that said he wasn't going to enforce some of our duly enacted laws in the state of florida, we let that stand. i removed him from his post and he is out. [applause] host: again, that was florida governor ron desantis speaking about the indictment of president trump, criticizing democrats. i want to bring up a headline i showed you earlier. it is this morning's new york times and the headline says, how the d.a. resurrected the case against trump. it notes that one year ago this week, manhattan district attorneys investigation appeared to be "dead in the water," to

two leaders resigned after alvin bragg decided not to charge mr. trump at that point. we to skip down a bit to this paragraph, and it says, for a time, their efforts were haphazard as they emid a wide range of mr. trump's business practices, including whether he lied about his net worth, which was the focus of the investigation when mr. brad had decided to seek an indictment. but by july, mr. bright had decided to assign additional prosecutors to pursue one particular strand that struck him as promising. a hush money payment made on mr. trump's behalf to a point star during the final days of the 2016 presidential campaign. he was indicted on that strand and is expected to surrender to the authorities in manhattan on tuesday and face arraignment on one and two dozen charges, which

will be unveiled at that time. that is the new york times talking about how the case against trump was actually resurrected. we want to get more from you, what do you think about the indictment of former president trump? republicans, your line is (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, an independents (202) 748-8002. we will talk now with tyrone in new york city on the democratic line. first of all, what do you expect that there will be big protests in your city on tuesday? caller: thanks for taking my call. because the city in certain areas is too small to be piling people in and they have barricades up. i believe we are prepared for whatever these people,

supposedly marjorie taylor greene is supposed to come down and start a ruckus. i have seen them from the trump towers before and they kept them isolated. hopefully they will keep it under control. i just hope that, what i recognize is some of the republicans don't care about the rule of law. they just want to uphold white power. as trump said, he could kill someone and still have supporters. reagan never should have become president of this country because of the thing with the iranians. bush and his brothers, there is a pattern of ruthless republicans disregarding the law and doing what they want to do and saying as long as white

power is in power, that is what matters. i am sorry that you have to deal with it and the bottomless pit of hate that call you up and disrespect you. it is not just about you, it is about themselves. they hate themselves and that is why they are so vicious towards you. sister, keep your head up. i am glad that you are able to do what you do, because there are a lot of us out here that would not be able to do the job you do. thank you very much. if trump goes to jail, which he's not, they still will fight and argue about holding people responsible for breaking the law. the man oak the law, not just once, numerous times. this is -- the man broke the law, not just once, numerous times. host: our next collar is on the

democratic line from auburn, california. john, you are on. caller: we all know that trump is guilty on all counts. his choices between prison or house arrest, that would be white house arrest. lock him up in the basement and wait for the maggots to burn it down. republicans, you are shameful. host: let's go to diane, de soto, kansas, republican line. caller: good morning. i have been listening to all the commentators and i am really sad. i have a biracial granddaughter and i would lay my life down for her. this division in our country, i just hope we can overcome it.

but from a practical viewpoint, yes, i supported donald trump in the last election. was i going to support him again? no, i was going to support ron desantis and is still in my heart i do. why? because our country can't continue on with this deep division. i hesitate to call it hatred, but i look at it from this point -- if we don't come together as a country, we are going to lose it all. it doesn't matter who is in office. i have this dream kind of, that we would have a cabinet level position that is of the citizens of this country, of all colors, all stripes, that talk to one

another, that solve problems together, so that we can get back to being the country that we were born to be. i know we are not perfect. everybody knows that. i just want people to know there are republicans out there that don't hate minorities, my goodness. i live in a wealthy county in kansas. however, i live in a town within that county that has a big hispanic population and it is growing. you know what? we all get along. i guess that is hard to believe. you are right dead in the midwest. they start businesses, they sell baked goods, they contribute to the community. but getting back to the

situation at hand, i can only appeal to people calling in. don't hate us all -- don't paint us all with the same brush. i don't to you. we are human beings, that we need to be recognized, all of us. we are born of goodness in god. host: we are going to have to leave it there but we appreciate your call this morning. i am going to lincoln park, michigan. it thomas is on the republican line. what are your thoughts? caller: i just want to say i think it is more division from the democratic party, biden administration, which they have been pushing since they got in

their -- in there. it is time to pull together. this political prosecution shouldn't be happening. we have china we should be looking at and all we are doing is dividing ourselves. there are a lot of good points made today. i am just saying, we need to pull together america, we really do. thanks for having my opinion. host: dan is in georgetown, massachusetts on the independent line. go ahead, dan. caller: thank you for having me on this morning. it is good to hear some calls from maybe people are thinking it is about time to bring things together. just a little bit of a lesson here in america, our constitution was written, in my eyes, mostly for the purpose of holding our government

responsible to its citizens. it was written this way because the smart people who put it together new world history at that point and when you put together a government and they have too much control, it always leads to the same thing. i think all of us have witnessed the same thing over these last six or seven years. forget about the personalities of the people on top. our duty as americans is to hold our government as possible, folks. look at what has happened. if they are assuming power and control and they are bringing it down on us, guys. covid, what happened? the pre-existing world health organization, safe drug, super effective, but no, our medical

system pooh-poohed it because they didn't make money. america is under attack from within we all know it and joe biden, i'm sorry to say, it is not just joe biden, this is big government and big government loves joe biden in there because they are going to do whatever they want, guys. china is coming in and big g is letting it happen because they want to be in charge just like china is of their people. hello. host: i want to bring up another video, this is former arkansas republican governor asa hutchinson, considering his own 2024 presidential bid. he called for former president trump out of the race. here is a portion of his interview on cnn. [video clip]

>> you are calling for former president trump to step aside and that is highly unlikely, as you know. white do you think he should step aside -- why do you think he should step aside? >> it is not only unlikely and there is no requirement for him to do it and nobody in macon. the reason i said it is that -- nobody can't make him. the reason i said it as the office the person seeks is more important than the person. this is going to be a distraction and he will have to focus on his legal defense. when you look at the presidency of the united states, it is just not helpful. the fact is, he is going to continue in it and what will have to be decided for the nominee on the republican look inside is the voters will have to decide in the concern is this is just a big distraction. we have to remember the

presumption of innocence continues in the case and we will have to wait for further facts. host: that was former arkansas governor asa hutchinson. before we go back to the phone lines, i want to bring up a few comments we are receiving on social media. gene rights, undecided yet. i do agree no one is above the law, which they should be some congressman not in office. let's hear the facts. representative jim mcgovern is writing in response to marjorie taylor greene, this is sick and wrong. we haven't even seen the grand jury's indictment, so those rushing to trump's defense think the law shouldn't apply to him, no matter what he did. their delusional deference to a career conman is pathetic. here is a user on twitter that says, it's a good thing.

now we arete -- await trial and presentation of evidence. another person on twitter says my reaction, history demands it. another twitter commenter says, why can't the republicans understand that nobody is above the law? this is representative claudia tenney who writes, the political and malicious persecution of president trump by the democrats and da alvin bragg proves you can indict anyone you politically disagree with these days, even a ham sandwich. it a dangerous precedent. so we are going to go back to the phone lines, but i want to remind you, if you are a republican, call (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, and independents (202) 748-8002.

up next on the republican line, pat in south carolina. what are your thoughts? caller: good morning. i have sat here and listened to the calls and the american people, matter what party you belong to, you are americans and america, we do need to get together. i have three points i want to make. one, when trump was president, my life was a whole lot better. things were cheaper and we can survive. two, if you took every elected official in washington, d.c. today, they are guilty of breaking some law. how did they get so rich based on what they are supposed to be making? i fully believe that all of them aren't guilty, at least 99% of them.

three, i want all the republicans to stay out of new york. let the democrats and protests do their thing here you stay out, because they are going to blame us for any and everything that takes place, so stay away from it. my fourth point i would like to make is i would like for trump to run for president and ask desantis to go for vice president. i would vote for that ticket in a heartbeat. thank you. host: our next caller is mike on the democratic line coming from long island, new york. good morning, mike. caller: the indictment, we don't even know what it is about yet. going to have a bunch of them after that. the reason trump hasn't done jail time for the crimes he committed is that most of them are civil penalties which he paid, whether it was the school

he started the shenanigans with the casinos in d.c. no banks would touch him after that. i have known about donald trump since he was 15, 1962. my aunt had a sit down with his father and him because his father would take him around to hotels and he would grab the waitresses and he sexually assaulted one and that is when my aunt had to step in and that is when he went off to school. this guy has been a crook forever if you know him and most in new york do. these people forget what hillary clinton went through? bill clinton, hillary clinton, she wasn't even a politician. this started with newt gingrich back in 1990 going after the clintons, saying hillary clinton

killed her associate. bill clinton's mother was rated -- saying it was a warehouse. most on fox news have worked for other stations and they is to make fun of people who watched fox news. there is no big conspiracies and no destruction going on. a pandemic and things got thrown off. just calm down and be honest with yourself. thank you. host: our next caller is kelly in california, independent line. go ahead, kelly. caller: reaction is to this indictment is long overdue and hurry up jack smith with the remainder of the more serious violations that this man has committed against this country. he and his entire family are a

litany of crime syndicates, going back to his grandfather coming over here from germany. they didn't want him back so he came through and opened a brothel. his other has used these social graces of our government where he is supposed to be developing real estate for the impoverished , and using those funds to allow rich people and keeping people of color out. he has been guilty of this. this is his father and him. and the list goes on with donald trump. he has defrauded people from their education, children with cancer, and this includes his son, eric. and ivanka with the inauguration

. i want to remind the american public that democrats didn't drink this indictment, the grand jury brought this and found that he should stand trial for this crime. i hope jack smith rings the more serious crimes and brings them soon. anyone that was alive in the united states and the world saw exactly what happened on january 6. this was months in the making, known to fox news and beside knowing the truth under oath when it really matters, you can spew whatever you want on the airwaves, when you have to take an oath to take the truth or be possibly considered a crime for perjury, the truth comes out. rupert murdoch said it himself, tucker carlsen said it himself, they all knew.

when it comes down, when the rubber hits the road, that is where you need to look. don't listen to the minutia, because it is all bs until it is in court and under oath and your butt is on the line. come on, jack smith, bring the indictments quickly, please. have a wonderful day. host: let's stay in california but santa barbara, jennifer is calling on the democratic line. you are on, jennifer. caller: actually, the previous:, mostly just expressed a lot of what i wanted to say. if the republicans think this is unfair, they don't really even know what the charges are at this point. to jump the gun and say it is a

political thing, it is not fair. and second of all, i just want to say, a while back, the guy from kansas, -- caller from kansas, i understand what she is saying. we are all americans and it would be good if we could stop this vision and talk to each other. we don't have to agree on things, but to get each other's opinion and come back to an america i remember, where we could sit down and have a political discussion and not to be angry with each other. part of the final note i want to say is that i think that, as the previous caller said, the pattern of behavior of trump, i

remember hearing about him way back in the 1990's, i always thought that she was kind of sleazy. his pattern -- thought he was kind of sleazy. his pattern of behavior, justice will play out and i think we all just need to step back, as whatever our political party is, and let the process happen. it happened was somebody who broke the law, so let that happen with cap as well. thank you for your time and i appreciate c-span taking everybody's opinion and letting us all listen to what everybody has to say. host: we have had a lot of colors mentioned republic curse -- republicans sayg the da in manhattan is politically motivated to bharges against trump. se a letter to the districtttees

attorney demanding information about the investigation, and district attorney, alvin bragg, respond. i am s a washington post headline but want to bringp an excerpt. this is from a cnn report but an expert -- an excerpt, he writes ckas you are no doubt aware, former president trump has directed harsh invective against district attorney brag and threaten on social media that his arrest or indictment in new york they unleash "death and destruction." as committee chairman, you can use the stature of your office to denounce these attacks and urged respect for the fairness of our justice system and for the work of the impartial grand jury. instead, you and many of your colleagues have chosen to collaborate with mr. trump's efforts to vilify and denigrate the integrity of the elected

state prosecutors and trial judges and made unfounded allegations that the office's investigation conducted an independent grand jury of average citizens serving new york state is politically motivated. that is how the da responded to the charges of being politically motivated. we are going to go back to the phone lines, dennis in angola, indiana, republican line. what are your thoughts, dennis? caller: talking about mr. bragg, the perfect opening because i would like to inform the american people that mr. bragg is the da in manhattan because he was backed by the money of george soros. a little bit of history on mr. soros, who is mr. soros? we know he was a nazi. now we can skip to mr. biden. we have over 100 sars report

with suspicious activities in banks leading to the biden family. now to mr. biden and his racism, his clerk was a former member of the ku klux klan. this turbine said i don't want my children -- mr. biden said, i don't want my children going to school in a jungle. even the vice president referred to him as being a racist during the debate. mr. biden is corrupt. trump was impeached because of a phone call to ukraine. host: we are running out of time this hour. i want to show up the headline, the incendiary claim george soros undid manhattan district attorney. this is the fact checker of the washington post.

it basically gives that claim three out of four pinocchio's. we are going to take a break. up next, tax day is two weeks away. tax foundation senior economist erica york is going to join us and talk about tax policy and what you should know as you file your taxes. later, jeffrey ingalls, director of the center for presidential history and southern methodist university will be discussing the historical significance of former president trump's recent indictment. we will be back after the break. ♪ >> life today, pulitzer prize -- stacy shaft will be your guest on in-depth. the latest book via the founding fathers samuel adams, one of the organizers of the boston tea partner and leader of the american revolution.

join the live conversation today at noon eastern on book tv on c-span two. ♪ >> c-span shop.org is c-span's online store. browse through our latest collection of c-span products, apparel, books, home decor and accessories. there is something for every c-span fan and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. shop now or any time at the span shop.org. ♪ >> since january the sixth 2021, more than 1000 defendants have been arrested in nearly all 50 states and the this tricked of clung to. those arrested have been charged with a lg st of felonies and misdemeanors including assaulting, resisting or impeding officers or employees of the u.s. capitol. over 518 individuals have already pled guilty to a number

of offenses. over 60 people have been found guilty and contested trials. a judge completed a trial found defendants guilty of both felonies and misdemeanors. try and understand more about the judicial trial process. we asked hr were on this recent trial to tell us her observations. >> here from a juror in the oath s trial on this episode of book notes book notes plus is available on the c-span now free mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back with erica york. she is the tax foundation's senior economist. good morning. thank you for joining us. guest: good morning. host: let's start with, give us a reminder of the tax foundation, its mission, and does it come from a particular

viewpoint? guest: tax foundation is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit. for more than 80 years, we have been studying and analyzing tax policy. we believe in four principles of tax policy. simplicity, stability, neutrality and transparency. we work towards a tax code that does not stand in the way of success. we analyze tax policy at the state, local, federal and global level. host: the deadline to file taxes is april 18 unless those who file for an extension, they can get until october 16. can you tell us about state deadlines? do they coincide, or should people be looking up separate deadlines to file their state income tax if applicable? guest: that is a great question. in some states, deadlines can differ depending on if that state has a holiday. that can be one reason the deadlines do not coincide. it is a good idea to check and

make sure you are getting your forms to the right places at the right time, depending on where you live. host: have tax brackets changed this year? are people going to see much difference in any tax policy as they file their taxes this year? guest: tax brackets have changed to reflect inflation that has occurred. every year, the irs updates tax brackets so you are not taxed for your income increasing just because the cost of living increased. you may not notice that because it tends to be a smaller change. bigger changes that people might notice our provisions that are missing when they go to file their taxes this year. we are following -- filing for things that happened in 2022, 2020 and 2020 when we saw a lot of pandemic relief. they implement it through the tax code, that was a recovery rebate, whether that was

different exclusions for things like unemployment benefits and in 2021, we saw very large expansions of the child tax credit and earned income tax credit. those things have expired. we are back to a more normal tax year this year. host: we are going to be talking with erica york most of this hour. we want you to call us with any questions you have for her about tax policies or any comments you have about existing tax policy or tax policies that have been proposed for example by president joe biden. you can start calling in now. republicans, (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. we will get to some of those calls in a moment. you mentioned that a lot of the pandemic era tax breaks or tax

changes are expiring. can you tell us, is there any chance that there could be -- is congress debating new tax breaks or tax extensions that might impact future years? guest: yes. president biden released his budget last month. in that, he called for a continuation of some of these pandemic era provisions, particularly that larger child tax credit that was sent out in monthly payments and a larger earned income tax credit for workers without qualifying children. he has proposed expanding the child tax credit through 2025 and permanently expanding the earned income tax credit. that is left up to congress. it is less certain whether any major tax policies -- changes will make it through the bite in congress this year. we could potentially see a compromise be worked out on

maybe a smaller expansion of the child tax credit. that still remains to be seen whether lawmakers take that up. host: i want to bring up -- biden has proposed his budget. he wants to raise taxes on wealthy americans in certain ways. and sunset some taxes. there is a market watch article, the headline says biden's tax hike on high earners are unlikely to it through congress. a bigger debate, the trump era tax cuts that expire in 2025. here is a little bit of an excerpt from that market watch cle byorter andrew kastne it says, the son will soon set on trump era tax rulesed to marginal rates, standard deduction amounts, the child tax credit and other pros. these rules were part of the trump era tax cuts and jobs act of 2017, a law overhauling

income tax rules for individuals , the state, small businesses and corporations. can you tell us what are the implications of those trump tax cuts going by the wayside? guest: the trump tax cuts cut taxes on average for taxpayers across the income spectrum. whether you are the bottom 20% or top 20%, on people -- on average, people sought tax cuts. it changed virtually the entire tax income system. it expanded the standard induction, increased the child tax credit, made a number of other changes. if those all expire, we would see across-the-board tax increases in 2026 because rates would be higher, the standard deduction would shrink, the tax -- child tax credit which ring. if lawmakers do nothing, we would expect to see

across-the-board tax hikes on everyone starting in 2026. it is likely that will not happen. it is likely lawmakers will work to some type of compromise to extend at least the tax cuts for lower income households, some simplifying measures are likely to be more disagreement on the tax cuts for those at the top. that will depend on the makeup of congress as expiration linens in 2025. host: let's go to the phone lines. your questions about tax policy or your comments about tax policy proposed in washington. the numbers are (202) 748-8001 for republicans. democrats, call (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. our first caller is jeffrey calling from north carolina on the republican line. what is your question or comment?

caller: good morning. thank you for taking the call. my question is, i wanted to ask your guest, what type of forms -- i just started a small business -- what forms would i be applying i believe at the end of this year for expenses in regards to what i would feel like is attached with my transportation or expenses towards materials, where i am documenting my financial investment in the small business i just started? host: go ahead, erica. guest: i cannot provide tax advice to individuals. i would recommend you contact a tax attorney or a cpa.

you do highlight a big barrier that the tax code creates particular early for small entrepreneurs. it is the complexity. we know taxpayers have to waste in total about $300 billion in compliance costs every year. working on those tax forms you mentioned rather than productive activity in their business. the tax code does create this hurdle for small businesses and entrepreneurs, either trying to start a business or grow a business, it can lead to confusing tax items that they have to work through and pulls resources away from their more productive business endeavors. host: our next caller is archie in three rivers, michigan calling on the independent line. go ahead. caller: thank you for the call. the question i wanted to ask basically was about turbotax.

we filed our taxes with turbotax. we are trying to figure out, how do you get an extension off of turbotax to be able to pay our taxes? also, why did they not inform us that you have to file married or filing single to be able to get a refund? will you not have the opportunity at our job -- my job explained to us, you filed a standard induction. i do not understand what is the difference between the two. thank you very much for the call. guest: i would recommend contacting turbotax specifically for questions on the tax return you filed with them. in regards to your filing status and the deduction you take, your filing status refers to whether you are married, if you file

jointly with your spouse or separately with your spouse, or if you are not married, you generally file as single. if you are filing as single but have dependents and you qualify as head of household, those are the four major filing status is. you can also file as a widow or widower. the standard deduction versus itemized inductions is another question that individual taxpayers have to grapple with and see what is best for their situation. the standard deduction as it sounds is a set amount you can take. it varies with that filing status. if you are married, filing jointly, you get a larger standard deduction. if you are single, you get a standard deduction that is worth half of the married, filing jointly deduction. then, you can weigh whether itemized deductions are better. that seems like the interest you pay on your mortgage, any charitable deductions -- charitable donations you make

throughout the year, state and local taxes limited to $10,000. you add those up and you would see if they are larger than your standard deduction. if they are, you know itemized. if not, you go with standard. from there, you continue filing your taxes. those are some of the complicated things people have to grapple with when they file taxes. we do tend to see that most people rely on tax prep software or going to a tax preparer because tax code is so complicated. it is a tough thing to do on your own. host: all right. let's go to the republican line now. steve is calling from north andover, massachusetts. you are on, steve. caller: yes. good morning p eight i want to know what the standard deduction is. when i google it, it gives me several different numbers. guest: you and one to search for, if you are looking for 2022, search for standard

deduction 2022 because the irs has already released the amounts for calendar year 2023 that we are in now. we are following for taxes last year. i do not know the exact amount of the top of my head, but it is going to be around $24,000 and some odd hundreds of dollars for married, filing jointly in 2022. host: our next caller is matt in ellisville, mississippi on the republican line. you are on, matt. caller: ok. thank you very much. i just wonder, what is a earned income tax credit? somebody explain that to me, how that works. then, i have a statement. guest: the earned income tax credit was created in the 1970's. it is designed to offset the effective payroll taxes for low income households. it is a credit that faces in

with your earned income, that is typically wages you get from a job. it can also be through self-employment income from a business that a person runs or owns. the idea is, by saving in with earned income, you are matching each additional dollar of income with a little bit of tax credit so it creates a work incentive both for entering the workforce and increasing your hours worked. the first idea of it was to offset the effect of those payroll taxes. now, it provides a higher rate than what the payroll tax rate is. the idea is to incentivize work and provide relief to lower income taxpayers in a way that encourages work wars participation. host: matt, you said you wanted to leave a comment after that? caller: beg your pardon? host: you said you had a comment on earned income. caller: yes.

i am a businessman. i have a woodyard in my hometown where i bought wood from -- every year, they would make sure that they didn't make such a mount -- amount, they would quit working when they got close to that and wait to get earned income tax credit. it is up to $6,000. if -- it discourages work is what it does. they do not want to get above that limit so they do not get the so-called earned income tax credit. they just cut it off when they get close to the top. i think nixon started that. i believe a democrat thing, nixon sustained it and increased it. all things like that. anyways, just wanted to ask. thank you. host: thank you, matt. guest: he brings up a good point

with the phaseout of the credit. that is something lawmakers have to be careful with when designing policies, to avoid unintended consequences. the earned income credit faces in with income. once you hit a certain threshold, it starts to phaseout. some of those phaseout scan create higher marginal tax raises on low income households. he does bring up a valid point. we need to be careful when designing these incentives, that they do not create these unintended consequences by the way we phase them out. host: our next caller is on the democratic line. joe is in, it looks like rantoul, illinois. am i pronouncing that correctly? caller: yes, ma'am. you sure are. got two questions. we had our taxes prepared with a cpa.

we filed a standard form. we have some investments and stuff we were not sure on how to do it. it also says we cannot take a charitable deduction. i second question is, the taxes that were passed by mr. trump in 2017 are to expire for the lower income people, the richer folks get to keep their tax breaks. a footnote that gentleman just called is a democratic program, i think he might want to look at who is getting the tax breaks. i believe it would be the republican party. thank you for taking my call, i will listen. guest: if you take the standard deduction, you do not get to take itemized deductions, those things for mortgage interest, state and local taxes paid and charitable giving. during the pandemic, we did see a temporary above the line

giving for charitable giving of a view 100 dollars. that allowed temporarily people who took the standard deduction to write off a little bit of their charitable giving. that has now expired. if you take the standard deduction, you do not so get a write off for charitable giving. on the second question, the tax cuts that were passed in 2017, all the individual tax cuts will expire. one example, the tax cuts reduced the top tax rate to 37%. even that top tax rate is scheduled to go back up after 2025 when those changes expire. host: in that top tax rate, what is the ballpark salary for someone who would be subject to that top tax rate? guest: it is in the $500,000's. host: let's keep on these calls.

our next caller is bill in texas on the democratic line. caller: yes. i would like to ask ms. york if she needs a vacation. she could come down here to do my taxes. i have had a stroke. please come down here and prepare my taxes out. host: bill, it sounds like you should call your local social services united way or even your local library often has tax prep. do you have any other services you want to share, erica? if people need help filling out there taxes? guest: yeah, the services you mentioned, there tends to be in each community free tax prep available if you can seek that out in your community and go, they will for no charge depending on your income, help

you completely prepare your taxes and send them in for you. host: call your local library, folks. you would be surprised at all the resources available at some public libraries. let's go now to esperanza in miami beach, florida on the independent line. you are on. caller: good morning. host: good morning. caller: i tell everybody the same thing. i am independent. i have nobody. i just love this country so much. we have to start using our institutions like obama use, the irs to organize. the difference now, they are using -- the id. to organize president trump.

we have to stop it. they use it to control the election in 2020, to hide the computer from hunter biden. the fbi hide that computer so nothing would be in the air before election day. that is using our people, the same people who pay our taxes. may i suggest the fbi, the doj, all these institutions should be brought to vote like president, like the vice president, likely vote for everything, we should be voting so we respect everybody and not just organize the people for the convenience of whoever is in charge. the party has been organized by the iras. host: can we talk a little bit

about that, erica? there has been a lot of concern from republicans about the money that democrats were able to get signed into law to boost the irs. what was that money put towards? what was its intended use? guest: last year in the inflation reduction act, that law included nearly $80 billion to go to the irs over the next decade. about $45 billion of that is going to be used for enforcement activities. about 25 billion -- $25 billion for business system modernization. about $5 billion for i.t. upgrade. about $3 billion for taxpayers services. the irs has not yet released its operational plan that treasury secretary janet yellen has

instructed it to make. we expect to see that plan released sometime this month. that is going to give us more detail on how exactly the irs plans to use those funds. we know some of the goals of that legislation were to increase enforcement, particularly with respect to higher income taxpayers and businesses that take on the form of partnerships. partnership tax returns can be very complex. increasing enforcement there, bringing the irs operations into 2023, the irs does not even widely used scanning technology which led to some of the awful backlogs we saw during the pandemic of millions of paper returns just spinning and waiting to be processed because an irs employee had to manually enter the information on those returns into a computer. hopefully, we see a large focus on i.t. upgrades and

modernization of the system the irs uses. another problem we saw during the pandemic and the last couple of years is, the irs is not answering the phone. if a taxpayer has problems, they have a very low chance, at least in the past couple of years, of getting help from the irs. the last school year, they answered 13% of phone calls, it was a slight improvement over the 11% of phone calls they answered before. the irs has hired at least 4000 new customers urban -- customer service agents. i hope to see a focus on customer service improvement with these new funds. host: this is new video from last month, house ways and means hearing on president biden's 2020 four proposed budget. this is democratic representative judy chu, she is discussing how increased irs

funding has enabled better irs compliance and efficiency in what she says are better outcomes for taxpayers. [video clip] >> contrary to the massive end -- massive misinformation by those on the others of the aisle, there has been a seachange. in fact, a washington post just did an article earlier this week saying the irs embraces for the m thinkable -- unthinkable, a normal tax season. it said the irs is massive funding boost had a gun to reach a frontline, so the tax season has bolted the agency more than a decade of deseret to a once -- of disarray to a functioning tax service. the irs is answering 90% of its phone calls, has squashed its backlog of overdue redo earns -- overdue returns. and processed 99.7 percent of

returns filed this tax season. not only that, tax professionals are saying that now, the agency will be able to keep up with phone calls and written correspondence and most importantly, disperse refunds in a timely manner. i -- also, i have to say, phone calls are getting answered with an average weight time of seven minutes. of the $850 million spent by the irs, more than half of the funds have gone directly to taxpayer services. host: that was very much along the lines of some of the points you raised, erica. since we are on the topic, the tax foundation has analyzed other provisions that president biden has proposed in his budget, which we know is a starting point for conversations in congress.

more than $4.5 trillion in tax increases, a 25% minimum tax on americans whose wealthxcds $100 million increased in the corporate tax rate to 28%, up from 21% expands medicare taxes on top earners. there is also higher taxes on u.s. companies, foreign income, it quadruples the current 1% stock buyback tax. erica, in your analysis on the bidens tax cuts, what do you think would be the overall upset on the economy and are there provisions that your organization thinks are stronger or more practical than others? guest: we analyzed president widens proposals, the major tax proposals.

--president biden's proposals. we found -- would have an economic impact. they add up to about 4.8 trillion dollars of new taxes over the next decade. we found that would reduce economic output by about 1.3% or reduce the size of the economy by that much and eliminate more than 300,000 full-time equivalent jobs. when you factor in that negative impact on the budgetary impact that president biden's tax proposals would have, they would raise less revenue because the economy would be smaller and you would have fewer workers. the actual deficit reduction that we estimate would occur under president bidens plan to about 1.9 trillion dollars. rather than the about $2.5 trillion to $3.5 trillion you would get if you assumed the tax changes would have no effect on the economy. overall, it is a negative picture in terms of what it

would do to economic growth. and wages and jobs. maybe one strong point of the budget is that it does offer permanent solutions for some tax credits. we discussed those earlier, how the child tax credit and earned income tax credit has been changed very frequently in the past several years. those changes are temporary. the president's budget does offer some permanent solutions to those. of course, one area it does not offer a permanent solution is the larger to -- larger child tax credit. it extends that through 2025. if you extended that on a permanent basis, it would eat up most of the deficit reduction that we find under the budget. there are still some uncertainties there, even in the plan that the president outlines. let's go back -- host: let's go back to the phone lines now. for republicans, (202) 748-8001.

democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. calling from tallahassee, florida, lower on the democratic line. what is your question or comment? caller: i saw where if you are 65 or older, the standard deduction is $14, (202) 748-8003 mr. heaphy: mr. heaphy: . i read an article this week if you are self-employed, you should pay the rest of your medicare premiums. i wanted to know whether if you are self-employed, do you take the standard $14,700 and can you take the deduction of the medicare premiums and what does that mean? does that mean just the $170 a month is charged to the premium, or does that also include your supplemental premium?

guest: you would need to check with cpa or a tax attorney for your specific situation. i do not provide tax prep advice to individual taxpayers. in general, when you are talking about self-employment taxes, the idea is to make the treatment similar to what it would be if you were working as an employee. your employer, when you are a regular employee, pays part of your payroll taxes. part of those fall on the employer. to get the equal tax treatment if you are self-employed, you can deduct part of -- to equalize that treatment for self-employed workers versus people who work for an employer. for your personal situation and how that works out or, i would recommend checking with a cpa. host: all right. on the line from mount cisco, new york. barry on the democratic line.

go ahead. caller: good morning. i have three things i wanted to ask about. first of all, most of the callers that of colden so far -- called in so far, whether they are explicitly saying it or not, they are all expression confusion about the ridiculous complexity of our tax code. i have to say, i think part of that complexity is as a result of the tax prep companies lobbying for tax code that requires them -- almost requires people to get help in preparing their taxes. we all know it is not necessary. the second reason i think we've got a ridiculously complex tax code is that the superrich can hide their money and get away with pulling off various scams like we are all familiar with with our experience with our former president.

i would like to know, what the tax foundation that you work for , what they are take is on the complexity of our tax code? keeping in mind, i am looking at your wikipedia page. it looks like your foundation was founded by some superrich people from standard oil and such. i imagine your overall take on things is colored by the superrich origins of the organization. the last thing was, the trump tax cuts, you are an economist. what is your take on the fact that stock buybacks reached record heights following the trump tax cuts? i am hoping that will get an unbiased answer from you about that. thank you. guest: thank you. tax foundation was founded in

1937. i have not been able to talk to our founders as such. we analyze tax policy through four pillars. one of those is simplicity. another is transparency. of course, neutrality and stability. we see the complexity of the tax code as a major issue. i mentioned earlier that we have estimated that compliance with the tax code each year costs more than $300 billion. it wastes billions of taxpayer hours as they navigate the complexity of the tax code. our federal team at tax foundation has recently written a paper with economic modeling on what it would look like to move to a simpler, federal tax system. we modeled a stony as tax system. -- estonia's tax system. it takes three minutes on average to file their taxes. they do not have the maras and

confusing maze of credits and deductions and exclusions and exemptions that we do in the u.s. one of the big challenges of moving to a simple system like that is, for every credit or deduction in the tax code, you have a group of taxpayers that benefit from that and probably do not want to give that up. there is a challenge of moving to a simple tax code when the tax code that we have now tries to do everything for everyone. on the question of stock buybacks. stock buybacks are one way that companies can return value to shareholders. they can either issue dividend payments or engage in stock buybacks. the vantage of stock buybacks over dividends is it can be a one-time tool. if you increase your dividend payment and decrease it in the next year, that can signal trouble for shareholders. whereas a stock buyback is a one time way to return value to

shareholders. what we tend to see with stock buybacks is in general, larger, older, more established firms that engage in stock buybacks, they do that when they do not have ample investment opportunities. they have more cash than they have investment opportunities to pursue. they return that surplus to shareholders who turn around and attempt to reinvest that in younger, more innovative companies. really, stock buybacks are a tool to allocate resources more efficiently in the economy, to move resources away from older, dinosaur type companies to newer, innovative companies. they help facilitate economic growth in that way. stock buybacks get a lot of bad press. really, they are a tool that can aid in economic growth. host: as we talk about simple find the tax code, one thing that house republicans in congress have gloated -- there

is a bill by house republicans to create a national sales tax, known as the fair taxpayer and house speaker kevin mccarthy has promised that legislation will get a vote, but it has not happened yet. it imposes a national sales tax in lieu of income tax, payroll taxe, the sales rate would essentially be 23% in 2025. it would defund the irs after 2027. erica, what is the tax foundations position on a national sales tax? it would provide a family consumption allowance, each household based on income so that the tax impact would vary by income. what is the tax foundations position on a fair tax? guest: as an educational nonprofit, we do not take positions on specific legislation. we do analyze the trade-offs of various proposals.

with a pair tax, it moves in the right direction generally by trying to look at a simplifying tax reform. the fair tax in practice would not be workable. it creates more challenges then it solves. one of the big challenges, the rate would be set at 23%. that is a tax inclusive rate. if we converted that to a tax exclusive -- tax exclusive rate, which is what people are familiar with when we are talking about taxes, 30%, every dollar someone paid at the checkout, $.30 would be added to the total. at that rate, the fair tax would not raise enough revenue to hold revenues constant with what they are now. it would create an even larger hole in the federal budget, it would significantly increase deficit to be revenue neutral. that 30% rate would need to be

more like 50%. you run into the issue of, people probably do not want to pay a 50% sales tax on every thing they buy, whether it is groceries, a new home, a vehicle, whether it is going for a haircut. at that high of a rate, the proposal is probably unworkable. the part about eliminating the irs is also unworkable. someone would have to enforce the sales tax, the fair tax proposed now would say state government would do that alongside their sales tax. not every state government has a sales tax. in that case, the federal government would have to administer some of these with state governments administering others. essentially, you would be in a situation with many internal revenue services instead of one centralized internal revenue service. while it is a good idea to think

big about how to reform the tax code, how to make it simpler, the fair tax is not a workable solution. host: before we go back to the phone lines, i want to bring up a question we have received on twitter. steve miller writes, if i do not file my taxes and wait for the irs to send a bill, what is the penalty? is this a good idea? guest: it is a better idea to file your taxes by the tax filing deadline so you are reporting or information to the irs and not running into any penalties or interest on a tax bill you might owe. you might also be due a refund. he would not want to wait longer to get that refund. file your taxes by the deadline for the best outcome. host: all right. our next caller is mike in laguna woods, california on the independent line. what is your next question or comment? caller: my question is an observation. i think i have seen the 19141040

form, or the equivalent. i think it is like in the order of four pages if i am not mistaken. it is a good deal smaller than the one. it seems to me the longer it is, the more to radical -- tyrannical the tax impact is. may i get your comment please? guest: the income tax dates back to 1913. it was a relatively small tax when it was first imposed, targeted primarily at wealthy individuals. it was not this broad-based tax we see today. it was during world war i and world war ii and the need for revenues to fund the war that the income tax was significantly expanded, withholding system was created and that allow the tax to apply to everyone broadly. that is where we also saw the introduction of the progressive marginal tax rate schedule. since then, almost in every

congress, we see changes to the tax code, whether it is a new tax credit, whether it is changing a deduction. now, the internal revenue code spans thousands of sections with thousands more subsections. there is a six volume set of regulations that accompanies it, in addition to the thousands and thousands of pages of the internal revenue code. we have a complex system. we have a system that tries to do every thing for everyone, rather than the tax code being the way the government raises its revenue, it is the way the government implements family policy, implements work programs, implements health care policy, education policy, green energy policy. yes, we see a stronger hand of the government through the tax code. that leads to many of these problems that the people have called in about today. host: finally, let's go to alabama.

larry is on the democratic line. caller: hello. good morning. how are y'all doing this morning? host: doing well. caller: hello to my favorite host. i have a comment to make it i would like for her may be to elaborate on it. i agree with the previous caller who said this company here is mostly to a fault of big business when president trump was president, he signed the earned income credit where -- who had children could get earned income credit making $100,000 a year. also, you have the big business like these tech companies making over billions of dollars in tax refunds. you have the working poor out here struggling to make ends meet. some of those out here are

paying taxes back. i would like or her to elaborate on that. i think is wrong. i think the president is in the right direction in trying to raise revenue by going in big business who give billions of dollars in refunds. i thank you for taking my call, my favorite host. host: all right, erica. your thoughts as we wrap up? guest: the earned income tax credit was not changed in 2017. that is still a credit available to low income households that phases and with their earned income and phases out. on the bigger picture of the effect our current tax system has, we have data from the internal revenue service from 2020 that shows average tax rates paid by taxpayers across the income spectrum. for the top 1%, they paid an average 26% tax rate, more than eight times larger the tax rate paid by the bottom half of americans at 3.1%. that 3.1% paid by the bottom

half of americans does not count the refundable portion of the earned income tax reddit or the refundable portion of the child tax credit, which takes the tax rates paid by the bottom 20% of taxpayers to negative tax rates. lower income taxpayers receive more back from the individual income tax system then they pay in in taxes. individual income tax is not the only tax. state and local governments have taxes and transfer programs. tax foundation just released a study last week looking at the entire fiscal incidents through the entire burden created by federal, state and local taxes and transfers. we found the bottom 20% of taxpayers, each dollar of income they earned is matched with a dollar and $.27 of net benefits from federal, state and local governments. the net effect of our system is more than doubled the income of lower income households. for people in the top quintile,

we saw for every dollar in income they earn, they see a net decrease of about 31 cents, meaning they are paying in much more than they benefit from government transfer programs. they are the top 20%, is funding almost the entirety of the redistribution that happens through the tax and transfer system. right now, we have a very slightly progressive, a robustly progressive tax and transfer system in the united states. host: we are going to leave it there. the tax foundation senior economist, erica york. thank you for joining us this morning. guest: thank you. host: a little later at 9:15 this morning, jeffrey ingalls, the director for the center of presidential history at southern methodist university. he will be discussing the historical signicance of former president trump's recent indictment. first, it is open forum. start calling in now. republicans, (202) 748-8001.

democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. ♪ ♪ >> all this month, watch the top 20 when winning videos from c-span's 2023 studentcam video documentary competition. every morning at 6:50 eastern before washington journal, we will air one of our winning documentaries where students were asked to share with their top priorities would be if they were a newly elected member of congress. watch the top 21 winning studentcam documentaries all eastern on c-span.a.m. head over to studentcam.org to watch all winning entries anytime online. ♪ ♪ >> since 1979, in partnership

with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress. from the house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefings and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat and how issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions, and completely unfiltered. c-span. your unfiltered view of government. ♪ ♪ >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered view of what is happening in washington, live and on-demand. keep up with the day's biggest events with live streams and floor proceedings and hearings from the u.s. congress, the courts, campaigns and more from the world of politics all at your fingertips. also stay current with the latest episodes of washington journal land find scheduling information for c-span's tv networks and c-span radio, plus

a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. downloaded for free today. c-span now, your front row seat to washington anytime, anywhere. ♪ >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back for open forum. republicans, your number is (202) 748-8001. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. first up is rhonda, she is calling from freehold, new jersey on the democratic line. go ahead, rhonda. caller: hi. good morning, america. i am calling and because i want to talk to the babies -- maga babies in the country now that

trump is going to be held accountable for what he has done to this country. the chickens have come home to roost. that is the bottom line. we may say that this district attorney had shut down this investigation on ms. stormy daniel. that is a lie. bill barr, when he became attorney general, shut down the investigations in new york. that is why trump was not held accountable. now, he is gone. now, he has to be held accountable. i want people to understand, you do not go out here and riot for donald trump. stop sending him your money. he is a billionaire. isn't that what he bragged about? he bragged to all of us how rich he was.

why are you sending him your money? number two, look at our cities. you have made trump a god in this country. he is going into your cities and he is tearing them up. he came to new jersey last night . i saw the lightning in my backyard. i had to run to my basement. he passed over us. you have to open your eyes, america. this is not a good person. he is a con man. he is going to wreck your life. why did he give those people money that are locked up in washington in jail? he could have paid for the attorneys, but he did not. they are all in jail. jared kushner, who got $1.5 billion from the saudis, they do not talk about that at all. he flew to saudi arabia two times, maybe three, when trump

lost the election. look at the money they made on it. this man is a liar. he is a con man. we here in new york and new jersey know exactly who donald trump is. host: we are going to have to leave it from there so we can move on to another caller. jay and washington, d.c. on the democratic line, you are a. caller: thank you for taking my call. thank you, c-span, for this marvelous open form. i've got two things. i was trying to get in yesterday with a lot of calls about the reaction to the current event. two things. caller called in and said donald trump loves america, that is why he gave up his perfectly perfect life to run for president, because he wanted to fix things. i think there is more indication and people inside the beltway

would understand what i am about to say more so than people not connected to politics. being that, when barack obama makes fun of him at the white house correspondents dinner, i am convinced based on what i know about trump's personality, that is what motivated him to want to get the presidency. a vendetta against obama for making fun of him at the white house correspondents dinner. now, the difference between what john edwards did comes up a lot and what trump is accused of now. trump refuses to admit he had an affair. he will not admit it. at some point, edwards admitted more or less responsibility for his actions. it is like clinton before,

earlier with the lewinsky figure. trump psychopathic. -- trump is psychopathic and he will not admit or take response ability for his actions. host: let's go to new orleans, louisiana. don is on the independent line. caller: good morning on this palm sunday. and begin a holy week, if you will. the issue of gun violence, the correlation risen in the past, people call it video games, call of duty. before there were videogames, there were boardgames that promoted racial intolerance, violence towards african-americans, antisemitic games. we have to look at the history of boardgames. for instance, the creators of

scrabble and monopoly, they had a game called ghetto-opoly that was derogative toward black people. they had a game called the channel of n-words. all these racist games created in new york city, most were created in new york city by companies like milton bradley, owned by hasbro now. these racist games and these antisemitic games in conjunction did more damage to people because it was in the quietness of their homes. middle-class immigrants and europeans had this view that it was all right to mutilate and decorate -- degrade black people because they do not feel pain, they like it. even in festivals, you had games

of that nature. for over a century, we are not talking recent history, we are talking these games were invented and promoted and designed over a century ago and promoted intolerance, violence, racism and all of the negativities that does towards humiliating a people. we have to look at the history of things such as board games, card games, even toys. we do -- for instance, the other game called black wall street, a board game. a historical game that was created centuries ago is called mccullough. it has been around for centuries, long before these racist games promoted by companies in new york -- host: we appreciate the call. we are going to have to move on to another caller.

on the republican line in east hampton, massachusetts. john is on the line. caller: i want to say trump derangement syndrome is alive and well today. you can traced everything back to racism or sexism if it is a republican. they are the only ones who can be called mag extremists, racists, sexists, all the time. i love that you quote from the liberal rags and do not quote the new york post or anyone else. he was going to kill the christians because he hated christians and was mad at them. now they do not let that come out because it does not fit the narrative of the left. people work for the liberal rag,

and you have your bias showing all the time when i see you on tv and you are talking. then you try to sit there and act like you don't have an opinion. like, what is going on? you keep hanging up on the republicans and never questioning the democrats. all the time about donald trump. people on both sides? that has been proven to be debunked. everything that has been debunked you keep pushing. you get your narrative out and everybody thinks that is the truth until it comes out weeks later. host: alright, we are in open forum. more calls ahead. clifford in oceanside, california, on the republican line. caller: yes, you have got to excuse me for the last caller. being a republican, i find you to be very fair and all, so i don't know about that. as far as the democratic m trump derangement syndrome, he was

correct about that. the previous caller about this woman calling saying how bad trump was and everything, my goodness, she says to open up their eyes, why don't they open up their eyes to joe biden? look at what he has done to this country. do you like paying more for gas? do you like having inflation at 6.9%, banks failing, so forth and so on? if that is better, then trump, i don't know what would open the eyes for these democratic people because my goodness living under joe biden has been the worst administration i have ever lived in my whole entire life. thank you, and i think you are very fair. you have a great day. host: all right, we are going to keep moving on. next, we have brenda in fort lee, new jersey, on the democratic line.

caller: good morning, america. i am just calling to voice my opinion. president joe biden, as a president, is not doing anything for us. i have always been a democrat. now, i am thinking of changing to republican. again, when they questioned president biden yesterday about what comment he had about president trump, he said i have no comment and he proceeded to get on the plane where he was going. all i am trying to say is, why can't things be different? things were different when president trump was president. i hope he gets in again. for what is going to happen tuesday, what a disgrace. what a disgrace to america that this is going on about a

president. just so horrible. thank you again for listening. host: all right, betty is on the republican line. caller: yes, good morning from new jersey. she was so right. everybody, all the democrats, if they see what president trump done when he was in office, now you look at it now, there was not know wars. there was not know people coming across the borders per gas was cheaper. there was no inflation. you look at it now. how would a democrat like to be interim's place -- in trump's place accused of nothing? they have been after him since he came in office because he would not be a democrat, i

guess. he is a great president. he is the one that can make this country better. if he gets in, i hope and pray, because i am telling you these democrat think the president is going to take care of them, they are wrong. they will see if trump don't come in and let this man do more than he has already done. thank you and you have a good day. host: all right, next, from elizabeth city, north carolina, charlie is on the republican line. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i don't understand the american people, why everybody is always so angry. the democrats are never happy.

it never makes any difference whether they have the presidency, the whole house, and nothing never gets done by them when they do that. they always blame it on the republicans. i am a person on a budget that i have to do because i only get a certain amount of money. i am retired. i was doing much better when donald trump was our president. my four-alarm -- my 401 went up. i had good savings accounts. now i have deleted a lot of my money because it costs so much for me to eat. i cannot even afford to hard to get a new vehicle because i cannot afford to make payments. that is my opinion. i don't understand the democrats are never happy about anything. thank you very much. host: ok. our next caller is crystal in

west palm beach, florida, on the democratic line. caller: you are doing a great job. i don't even see how you can keep a straight face this morning. i just want to say the biggest threats i see to the republic of america is the ignorance of the american people and their marriage to the misinformation from fox news. the reason why these people, the mean, ignorant, arrogant ones do not understand the history of donald trump is because fox news refuses to give any kind of accurate information about his 3000 lawsuits, the history, him being sued. he settles. he refuses. bill barr protected these cases from going forward.

also, i want to say i am right here in palm beach about 10 minutes from mar-a-lago. it is the same 20 people or so out there with their huge flags and trump's made in china maga hats. hang in there. you are doing a great job. host: let's now hear from eugene in portsmouth, virginia, on the democratic line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i don't have a lot to say. i think c-span should only have conversation about the things they cover in politics. you are right there and you can see and hear what is coming out of these people, elected

officials' mouths. you don't worry about people calling in and making up stories about things that did not happen. i think it is very important. i'm not one of those callers who just heard. i happen to listen to c-span from your inception. since i have been watching the show, i have been getting an education on politics. last few years, it seems you turn into a free for all and people calling and sound like trolls. i think c-span should only allow people on that will speak to whatever subject is at hand. i think you are doing a very good job. i think you are doing an exceptional job being able to sit there and get this abuse that you do.

thank you so much for taking my call. that is all i have to say. host: from port orange, 40, johnny on the democratic line -- from port orange, florida, johnny on the democratic line. caller: you look very professional. republicans are off the chain. you have republicans calling in on the democratic line. you can tell republican by the things they say. they will not vote democrat no more. we need to stop playing games. they should not even have to go down that road. if they love this country so much, it has not fallen. it is still going. we need to come together and make sure our country works better for everybody. thank you. host: we are in open forum taking your calls. republicans, 202-748-8001.

democrats, and independents. let's go to al in florida on the independent line. caller: hello. can you hear me? host: yes, go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. real quick, i want to say this. on donald trump, i think people are basically handing him the keys to the white house by attacking him. secondly, all this has done is because -- is cause, for me, i don't trust our government as far as i could throw them at this point. donald trump said it was all

about trying to doing it and nobody wanted to believe him. all this has done truly is cause more division because i hear people's hatred calling in. look it, i don't know iowa can't just stop the division. some of my neighbors will not talk to each other because one is a republican and one is a democrat. that is a sad day in america when all of this division keeps going on. some people will not even have dinner with family members because of all this. all this has done between democrats and republicans is because -- because nothing more than division across the united states today than i have ever seen in my entire life. i just want to say that i appreciate what you do. i know you cannot have a comment on it, but i think this has caused nothing more than distrust for our entire government. thank you and have a nice day. host: let's stick to florida.

john on the republican line. you are on. caller: i just want to say one thing on the democratic party. before the democratic party is to have blue dog democrats from the south. they would vote for what their people wanted, not for what the party wanted. the second item i want to say is maga really stands for make all government accountable. thank you. host: all right. sally is calling from california on the independent line. go ahead. caller: hello. thanks for taking my call. if we would implement some kind of security check on anybody running for president or congress, if you cannot pass a security check, you should not be allowed in congress.

we could have saved everybody all of this problem because trump would never have passed a security clearance. thank you for taking my call. host: thank you. that is goino it for open forum. we are going to take a break. next, jeffrey engel, director of the center for presidential history at southern methodist university will be discussing the historic significance of former president trump's recent indictment. >> this year's grand prize wiin t documentary contest are eighth-graders in germantown, maryland, for the documentary on dat privacy. watch the grand prize and all winning documentaries online.

>> order your copy of the congressional directory. is your access to the federal government -- it is your access to the federal government with important information on congressional committees, the president's cabinet, and state agencies. it i $29 90 five cents plus shipping and handling. every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. >> be up-to-date on the latest in publishing with book tv's podcast about books with nonfiction releases, bestseller lists, industry news, and trends through insider interviews. you can find it on our free mobile app or wherever you get

your podcasts. >> listening to programs on c-span radio through c-span radio just got easier. tell your smart speaker to play c-span radio and listen to "washington journal" daily, important congressional hearings and other public affairs events throughout the day. catch "washington today" and listen to c-span radio anytime. c-span, powered by cable. >> "washington journal" continues. host: joining us this morning on "washington journal" is jeffrey engel, director of the center for presidential history at southern methodist university. we are going to be discussing the historical significance of former president trump's recent indictment. good morning.

thank you for joining us. can you put the indictment against former president trump in historical context? we keep hearing it is unprecedented. what does that mean? guest: it is unprecedented. when we use the word "unprecedented," it kind of makes a historian's head explode. in school, we are taught to never use that word because there is always something to look to in the past. here we are running out of possibilities. he is the first president indicted. he is the first president impeached twice. he is breaking records. that is not to say he is the first president to ever get in trouble or the first president to ever break any laws or be guilty of some kind of malfeasance. but he is the first president who after leaving office made it

all the way through the judicial system at least to the point of being indicted. here i have to stop and pump the brakes on our discussion nationally to remind people trump like everyone else in the country is innocent until proven guilty. i know that is not a popular sentence for either side because liberals like him to be guilty already and conservatives not so much. we do have to remember this is going to play out. i think the more interesting and important historical moment will be when we change our conversation from first president indicted, if we change our conversation, to first president proven guilty. that is a different ball of wax. host: i brought up, there is an article the "wall street journal" had. the headline is "donald trump indictment sets historical

marker." it talks about legal problems other presidents have faced. we know richard nixon was an unindicted co-conspirator during the watergate scandal. president clinton was impeached. there was an independent special prosecutor that did look into the clinton scandal. even back in 1872, ulysses s. grant, president ulysses s. grant was arrested for speeding in his buggy near the capital. guest: that is my favorite. host: can you talk about what other presidents have faced and how what donald trump now faces is different? guest: yeah. first, a side note on ulysses s. grant. it is a funny and fascinating story, not least of all because he was pulled over by an african

american policeman. imagine the tension in that conversation perhaps. it is important to know grant paid a $20 fine for speeding. he never had to appear in court. other presidents have had legal problems. i think it is fundamentally a good thing for american democracy we are getting a more transparent government all the way through. everything in our social media and internet age is more open and available in terms of information. we are seeing presidents becoming less imperial, less like kings, which is how the constitution was designed. the president was a citizen temporarily elevated to the post and not someone of a different status. we have seen president johnson have trouble. we have seen president have the most trouble. one that is not talk about

nearly enough is president reagan who got involved in the iran-contra scandal. he is in the news because of a potential this scandal or old scandal revised with the october surprise with his negotiations potentially with iran about the iran hostages in 1980. reagan had to get lawyers, too. i think it is an interesting sign of the times that we see presidents who are under so much scrutiny 24/7, much more so than at any time in the 18th or 19th century. it is not surprising they find themselves in legal problems. what is significant to note is this is one of the first times we have had a president make it through the process. there is always smoke for a president's enemies to investigate. this is the first time there appears to be in a fire for a

prosecutor. i do have to remind people the same thing with bill clinton. he did not get indicted because he signed a deal before leaving office to give up his law license for five yrs and pay a fine for having perjured himself in the previous sexual misconduct investigation. this is not the first time we have had a president run afoul of the law and get caught. this is the first time we have had a president that will apparently go on trial. host: we want to get to some of your calls shortly. whether you have a comment about the historical significance of president trump's indictment or if you have a question for jeffrey engel, go ahead and start calling in now. republicans, 202-748-8001. democrats, 202-748-8000. independents 202-748-8002.

we will get to them in a moment. let's go back. there has been a lot of partisanship on the reaction to the indictment. people have said it happened seven years ago and dates the actions trump allegedly took before taking office. is there significance that what he is being held accountable for now does not necessarily have to do with actions taken as president? guest: i think there is great significance to that difference. i want to put an asterisk on that which is to say we know president trump had a series of legal problems. this is just the first. he is also under grand jury investigation for events in georgia after the 2020 election, potential election interference.

there is another prosecutor looking at him for the january 6 events. i think those are more important for him because the consequences would be greater but more important for the nation because those are about actions that took place while he was president. those are about actions that took place when he was supposedly protecting the nation and looking to put the nation first as commander-in-chief. if we find a president has broken the law against the public trust during office, that is a question of democracy. that is about how our government functions. what we are talking about in this case, the first indictment that has came down, is about something that happened before he was president. there is less significance because at that point he was private citizen trump. the asterisk is the reason i think it matters president trump has been indicted for something

he did before taking office is it does have to do with the presidential election. the theory of the case as we understand it thus far is this hush money paid was done to enhance his chances for winning the election or to hide something so he would be able to win the 2016 election. it turns out that is one thing that came up in the constitutional convention. that people at the convention, james madison and others, discussed what it would mean if they president won an election but it turns out he lied during the election. yes, they only used the word "he" at that time. their answer was that is terrible, he should be impeached and removed from office. obviously, that is not the case and we have someone who has left office. it does give significance that people who wrote the constitution were concerned not only with actions during a

presidency but actions that would take place that would mislead the public into voting for that person. they thought that would also exclude someone from being properly suited for office. host: let's go to the phone lines again. the first caller is andrea in new york on the democratic line. go ahead. caller: thank you for your thoughts regarding the situation? i do have a question about the use of "unprecedented," since this has never happened before or a president has done this. i wonder how genuine you think the use of "unprecedented" is in this case. and holding our leaders

accountable. i am glad you have pointed out that in his quest to become president he did these things. i do wonder about the use of "unprecedented" when the republicans are talking about this. how genuine is that when this is the first time this has happened, and he has done these things? thank you. guest: great question. this is a problem. this makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up because i think this is actually unprecedented in a narrow sense. it is the first time we have had a president formally indicted after leaving office. i cannot change the word. there is no president. it has never happened -- there is no precedent. it has never happened before. either presidents have been in legal -- other presidents have

been in legal trouble and had to pay consequences after they left office. if we expand to other cases, it is not unprecedented when it comes to advanced western democracies. many of our closest allies have gone through the process of holding politicians to account for what they did in office, for having broken the law, demonstrating no politician in a democracy should be above the law. no politicians are below the law. we should give him all the rights he is due. but this is unprecedented for american history. not unprecedented for the course of industrialized, western, modern democracy. host: let's go to falls church, virginia. jack on the democratic line, you are on. caller: thank you very much. i hope you can hear me all right. host: yes, we can.

go ahead. caller: thank you. jeffrey engel, very intelligent and informative. thank you, c-span. i'm trying to think of what comments i might have. if i may, please, i hope we can work together and remember the united states, the first word is "united" for good. thank you, c-span. bye-bye. guest: that is undoubtedly important. this is something brought up by democrats in this case and republicans previously, that this is divisive. this is political. when i say divisive, that does not mean the district attorney and subsequent prosecutors should not do their job. the truth of the matter is this is going to offend people, as we

have seen. we are an extraordinarily partisan country. we are also becoming a tribal country. how do you know you like or dislike trump? you know that already whether you have d or r in front of your name. you are much more likely as an american citizen to change religions than to change political parties. it does give a sense the country is thinking of themselves less as americans then blue, red, or independent americans. i would love for the country to look at a case like this and say let's all withhold judgment, let's be united withholding judgment until the legal system plays out. host: our next caller is on the

republican line. lawrence is in dallas, pennsylvania. caller: hello. hello, hello. i am a 91-year-old trump supporter, republican. 91 years old. that leaves me 70 years to be a lawyer. my first vote was for eisenhower for president. i cannot believe the way this country is going. the reason i trump supporter -- the reason i am a trump supporter, in the primary to be president, he was up against 14 or 16 other very reputable

opponents. when there was a primary vote, every state they went into, he had double figures. the third -- anyway -- here is a man that was not relying on taxpayer money to make his living. he was successful at building trump towers. he had his own airplane as big as air force one. he owned mar-a-lago. he did not rely on, like most presidents and politicians, all the senators, but anyway, when i saw how strong he was, i cannot

see anybody else. and then, as president, even with the monkeys on his back from the democrats for four years, he gave us the best country we have had in my 91 years. i don't know if you brought up, the gentleman, did you bring up about paula jones? hello? host: yes, we have talked about bi clinton, absolutely. caller: did you? host: let me pause. jeffrey, lawrence brings up a point about president trump is not just a former president, he was a candidate -- he is a candidate for president in 2024. how do you think this indictment and what we expect with a trial,

how do you think this might impact the campaign and shape the 2024 field, particularly on the republican side? guest: i think that is one of the key questions for the day. let me quickly respond and thank the caller for his comments and first vote for eisenhower, and gently remind the caller and everyone else watching that dwight eisenhower, with the exception of about 18 months of his life, only ever received a government salary. he never made his money any other way than by working for the government from the time he was in college all the way through. that should not preclude you from being a good president. eisenhower is one of my favorites. looking back at 2016, we see in all of those primaries there were a vast number of candidates which allowed president trump to win those primaries without

almost ever winning the majority until the very end when most of his competitors had dropped out. they may have also passed out. consequently, president trump was able to win and take the delegates with 25% of the vote oftentimes. that does allow a smaller part of the party to exert extraordinary influence over the party. trump was the choice of most republicans. i think we will see the same thing play out in 2024. there is great civil strife and conflict in the republican party between those who like trump and those who do not. we are seeing the latest polls tell us president trump probably has the support of about 40% of republicans.

we are setting ourselves up for a scenario where the republican nominee is someone who rarely wins a majority of the votes in a primary and yet wins the nomination. i would ask americans to think, if we are worried about our country being so driven by partisan divide, do we really want a small portion of the extreme wings of either party, and those of the people who vote in primaries, being the ones who give us our presidential nominees? i think 2024 is shaping up in many ways to be a repeat of 2016. if i could add on one additional point, i think republicans are setting themselves up for an inevitable defeat in 2024. i have made a joking argument the democrats could run a potato and win in 2024. why? because republicans are going to

split their vote. donald trump is either going to win the nomination, and we know he is widely unpopular outside of his republican support, he has negatives with independents that are very high, or donald trump will lose the nomination to desantis in which case we have to expect donald trump will be good to his word and not support the republican nominee. he has said he would not necessarily support the republican nominee. he said that in 2016 as well. if he does not give his support to the republican nominee, perhaps if he calls the election illegitimate or decides to run as a third-party candidate, he will split the republican vote and almost guarantee the democrats a victory. if i were a republican strategist, i would not be worried about the primaries. i would be worried about what happens after the primaries because i think they are facing a real conundrum. host: here is an article from

"the hill" yesterday. trump still has strong lead over desantis. it says a yahoo! news poll taken after the grand jury approved the indictment against trump county former president holding a 31-point lead over his next closest potential gop rival, 40 governor ron desantis, with 52% of the vote, desantis came in second with 21% followed nikki haley with 5% and mike pence with 3%. it shows a lot of republican voters are indicating they still support trump even with this indictment news. let's go back to the phone lines. ann in arizona on the democratic line, what is your question or comment? caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. i have to take exception.

let's do a little fact-checking. donald trump wrote a check in august of 2017 to reimburse michael cohen from the oval office. he did some of that crime when he was president. let's stop this "this was before he was president." yes, we are a divided country if you believe 250,000 dead people voted and donald trump lost the election despite failing in 60 court cases for his case to be found to be true, yeah, we are going to be divided. if you don't realize donald trump lied about having documents in his office, causing the fbi to have to raid his home to get them out of his hands, if you don't believe he said he was entitled to those documents, we are going to be divided. if you don't realize that while

rioters defecated in the capitol on january 6 erected a gallows to hang mike pence, if you don't believe donald trump said maybe mike pence deserves it, we are going to be a little bit divided. again, thank you for c-span. host: your thoughts, jeffrey? guest: i think that was less of a question than an important observation to say we are -- some americans do not think the same as other americans. i share the frustration we cannot even agree on historical moments. [indiscernible] i share the frustration with the fact [indiscernible] americans on a basic timeline. [no audio] 5, 6, 7 --

i share that frustration. [no audio] we are inherently faced in democracy is living with people with different opinions. i would encourage everyone to agree on some central facts. host: jeffrey, your internet is going out just a little bit. we are going to see if we can adjust it. in the meantime, mildred in indiana on the republican line, go ahead with your comment. caller: i am just a concerned great-grandmother, grandma. i totally believe we need to get over this vengeance in america, start putting god back into our lives. it will not be the climate changes that takes this world, young people. it will be the way people are so disrespectful of our world.

we are passing through, remember. this is god's world. remember. put god back into your life. forgive people and try to quit being so vengeance. is not for us to do that. that is god's way. please, stop and think, what have you done in your life that you are ashamed of? so quit judging people. please, god, take care of our world. we need your help. that is all i say. god bless you, trump, in your problems. you have been a strong man with what you have been through. look at all the other presidents, democrats, republicans, we have all wronged in our lives. trump has had to be a strong person in his life to be persecuted every day with all of these people after him. please, god, take care of us. watch over all of these people.

and may god bless us and make everyone make the right decision to protect our world. god bless america. host: all right, mildred. it looks like your connection is back again, jeffrey. guest: yeah, let me hop on the pro-god bandwagon. i am a big fan. i also want to remind everyone we do have a judicial system. yes, it may be only appropriate for god to ultimately judge what is in our hearts and on our complete life actions. but we do have a system in which we have set up laws. people who violate those laws are investigated and prosecuted and punished if found guilty. i would encourage everyone who wants to think about judicial reform or penal reform to take a step back and think, as the caller said, that we all make mistakes. on the other hand, if you are a

person who has found yourself the last several years that we need to follow the law, have a country of law and order, have a country that prosecutes people for breaking any number of laws, this is what is being found out. i will not say the president is guilty or innocent because that is what the trial is for. but if you believe in a country of laws, you have to respectfully allow this process to play out no matter what one thinks going into the process. host: let's go to west plains, missouri, joe is on the republican line. caller: good morning. i think trump's indictment is 80% racial. the black guy wants to get the white boy. that is what i think. i am from chicago, the inner city. kim fox will not prosecute blacks. that is racial. whatever they do to whites, that is ok.

carjacking is ok. it is racial. what i liked about trump? i hate every time i have to pay over $3 a gallon for gas. do you democrats like that? i wish those would quit calling democrats democratic as if to say republicans cannot be democratic in their thoughts. you are making a mistake. democratic is an adjective. democrat is a noun. they are democrats, not democratic. please correct yourself. host: jeffrey, any thoughts? guest: i am sympathetic. the problem goes all the way back to thomas jefferson and john adams. i am with you on the difficulty of that problem. i would also suggest, i'm trying to think of what the first part of your comment was, simply that we should remind ourselves, and this makes presidential

historians less important, we should remind ourselves most of the things that happen are not the president's fault. the president is not in control of the gas pumps, the economy, the weather. all of those things add up to whether people think a president was successful or a failure. let's remind ourselves the president is more powerful than you and i but not as omnipotent as people make him out to be. as for the racial question, i have no particular comment. i do not see it that way. respect the other opinion. host: on the line from michigan, george calling as an independent. caller: good morning. i have a question for this gentleman. [indiscernible] in new york, such a dark blue

start. do you think he got a fair shake? did you get a fair shake in nazi germany and the second world war? it is obvious from all these phone calls the so-called democrats, every of them have been co-opted. they are socialists. they have been indoctrinated for so long that the socialists have taken over and the democrats do not even realize it. the second question is, i'm sorry, i lost my second question. guest: i have got a response to your first one. i would hesitate to use the holocaust as an example in trying to compare the persecution with donald trump. let me also return to the idea

that is on the president among republican voters in this country that donald trump has been under investigation his entire time and they have been out to get him this entire time. i assure you democrats, republicans were out to bill clinton and finally did, route to get barack obama -- were out to get barack obama. every president has his critics on the others of the aisle just waiting to pounce on some little mistake. i think donald trump is no different than any other previous president in that regard. i would ask you to consider this analogy. when you are pulled over by the police for speeding because you went through a speeding trap, you could make the argument they just set me up to fail. they were trying to entrap me, literally.

that is not excuse the fact you were speeding. if you go three speeding trap under the speed limit, they do not pull you over. consequently, i would encourage people to say let's agree every president is essentially being constantly scrutinized by opponents. only those who appear to actually violate the law, and we don't know the answer to that yet because there's a trial still to happen, only those who violate the law find themselves in trouble. host: the caller brings up an important angle in that this whole case with trump, particularly because the right has criticized it so much, could further erode trust in our court system and our american democracy. are you worried about that at all? what is the remedy? guest: i am worried about that, to be honest. i just spent two hours last week

having a discussion in my history class with my students. there is no easy answer. the question really is, do you wish to pull a band-aid and cause short-term pain, which it does, this is going to be divisive and painful for the country, or do you allow invection to continue? other countries around the world have said these trials are going to be divisive. but if we do not acknowledge what happened, that will set things up for further pain down the road. i do think this is going to divide the country. i do think the country is going to go through pain. i also think in a broader sense that these are the kinds of trials that the country must go through to strengthen its democracy. i am not looking forward to the next couple of weeks. my phone will be busier than i would like.

i also think only by open air and sunlight are we ever going to get a fully transparent democracy which i think is what we all desire. host: that to the phone lines -- back to the phone lines. lewis on the republican line, go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. i understand that during the american revolution, one third of the people were in favor of secession, one third of the people were in favor of staying under the crown, and my favorite group, one third of the people did not care either way. what are your thoughts? guest: absolutely. i might want to update that a little bit. the latest historiography is numbers are even smaller on the partisan side. people say now it is maybe 25% or 20% who were in favor of staying, 25% or 20% in favor of

going, and half of the country decided they wanted to just try to make it to tuesday. consequently, i think it is import to remember most americans at the time and today are not as engaged in politics as i might like. i think it is an important distinction when we look at polls to say not that 80% of people but 80% of likely voters are thinking one thing. obviously, the revolution is a great example of the fact that small groups of people can make great changes in american society, not unlike the point i made earlier that a relatively small group of republicans by backing donald trump in the primary and 2016 helped him to win the election. there was a smaller part, more than half of the republican party when he started out, that is not half of the country,

consequently, small groups can make great change. host: our next caller is edna in chicago on the democratic line. caller: good morning, everyone. i have never seen so many educated good white people so anxious to support a crook. donald trump has always been a crook. he has never -- even never fit to be in the white house -- he was never fit to be in the white house. in my opinion, he is not fit to clean the toilets in the white house. it is a disgrace the way everybody is trying to stick up for him. this has never happened to a president. well, we have never had one like this. we must start somewhere. start with him and make him pay for the crimes he has committed. then the next president will have second thoughts. thank you. bye-bye. guest: you know, i would

encourage the caller however painful it might be to put aside the feelings of judgment and the feeling we know the answer already. we have not seen the indictment yet. we have not seen all the evidence yet. let's wait to see the evidence. part of the reason we have to go through the process, to use the caller's language, is so some people, educated white people, maybe they will only be commenced of donald trump's guilt by seeing all the evidence played out in open court. we will not commence people simple by making assertions. we need to have a trial in general for our country to air what is going on and to understand all of the evidence. that is the whole point of a trial, weighing all the different evidence. we have not seen all the evidence yet on either side. i respect everybody has an

opinion right now. god knows we all do. let's at least hope this plays out so that when there is a verdict, guilty or innocent in this case and subsequent cases, the hope is the evidence will allow some of the people who were on one side to change their minds because they are smart enough to inculcate new evidence. host: let's go to the independent line. freddie in denver, you are on. caller: professor engel, director engel, i appreciate dedication -- your dedication to history. i studied undergraduate history. i understand the rigor that comes as part of that. i am however going to bend your ear a bit and ask, how do you feel this precedent is moving

forward? if we allow this situation to continue, how do you feel there might be threats to our democracy in the future? i just feel that this is a dangerous and very powerful precedent we are facing right now. i very much appreciate your opinion on what we are looking towards moving forward. thank you. guest: great question. i would encourage everyone, we have to have faith in something. for something i think we need to put our faith in now is on the bedrock of democracy so our fellow citizens can make decisions, too. donald trump will be tried. in front of a jury of his peers, insert your own joke, a group of citizens are going to make a decision.

i think based upon hearing all of the evidence, not the 20 seconds on the nightly news, not the 15 seconds that comes across their phone, but by being forced to listen to all the evidence and arguments, i hope americans choose to respect the outcome whether they agree initially with the outcome or not. i think the only reason that works is people are concerned that we are setting a precedent by putting a former president on trial. that means future presidents will easily be put on trial. maybe they will slightly more easily be put on trial because that is what happens when you break precedence. play the opposite story. if donald trump is put on trial and found innocent, that means future presidents will be less likely to put on trial. this is a game we do not need to worry about slippery slopes or what is going to happen next. we need to worry about all we can control which is trying to understand what happened in the

past. no one is putting donald trump on trial for what he might do, what he could do, what he is thinking of doing. they are putting him on trial for what he did. it is a closed circuit of evidence. hopefully, americans will have the opportunity to see all of that evidence before this is through. host: how important do you think it will be for cameras to be in the courtroom for the public to be able to see this trial unfold, because of what you just mentioned? guest: i think it is going to be hugely important. we make our judgments because we are people, because we are humans, not just upon what we read but what we also see and hear. i think we can all intuit body language in different ways. i think seeing this trial with our eyes is going to be extraordinarily important for two reasons.

first, we are in a moment in american and global society because of chat box and other things in which it is getting more difficult to tell what real information is, what actually happened, what videos are true. i think if all americans are watching something in lifetime, that will give better credence to actually happening. the second trial is going to infuriate everyone at some point. if we can all agree we have seen the same thing, then we can have a useful argument about distinctions and judgments and not just a hyperbolic one. i'm very glad for the idea we will get those images because i think the more information the public has, the better. i'm not going to say it will be easy to digest but i think it will be what we need. host: we are going to end it right there.

we have been chatting this morning with jeffrey engel, director of the center for presidential history at southern methodist university. thank you so much for joining us, jeffrey. guest: thank you. good to talk to you. host: that is going to do it for us this morning on "washington journal." we will be back tomorrow morning at 7:00 a.m. enjoy the rest of your day. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2023] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]