1000 community centers to create wi-fi enabled so students from low-income families can get the tools they need to be ready for anything. comcast supports c-span as a public service, along with these other providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> coming up, we cover the latest headlines and take your calls live, then yahoo! news editor-in-chief daniel klaidman discusses the trump indictment and what to expect during today's arraignment and the weeks ahead. documentary director and producer martin smith on his latest film about america's twenty-year year investment in afghanistan. washington journal starts now. ♪ host: it was a first in u.s.

political history and it happens again this morning as former presidenld trump arrives at manhattan criminal court to hear charges over repy 34 counts of falsification of business records, the first former or sitting president to be indicted. these are state charges. it is one of two n york investigations and one of several looks into the former president's businesses. records removed from the white house to mar-a-lago and efforts to overturn the 2020 election. the new york case beginning with 's indictment may be the one with the most immediate effect on the 2024 presidential race. welcome to washington journal on this tuesday, april 4, 2023. the first hour, we will spend talking to you about the indictment expected this afternoon. the phone lines to use. for republicans, it is (202) 748-8001. democrats (202) 748-8000.

independent and others (202) 748-8002. you can send us a text at (202) 748-8003. we are on facebook and twitter and instagram, we will look for your posts @cspanwj. most interested in your views, your expectations of what the indictment will mean today and what a possible trial may mean for the former president and the country. if the indictment changes your view on the outlook for 2024, the presidential race at all. if you are in new york and buy the new york post on the street, here's what you will see on the front cover. a big apple circus as trump faces arrest arraignment this afternoon. if you are reading online, this is the story. trump to appear in new york city court today on unprecedented

indictment. they write the former president will make his first appearance in a manhattan courtroom tuesday on criminal charges tied stormy daniels hush money payment, marking an unprecedented moment in u.s. history. trump, 76, will face a historic booking and arraignment after he surrenders to the manhattan district attorney's office downtown in the early afternoon. he will be fingerprinted and likely have his mug shot taken for he is scheduled for a 2:15 p.m. hearing. trump became the first u.s. president to be hit with criminal charges thursday when a grand jury convened by manhattan d.a. voted to indict him in connection to a six-figure payment made to daniels in the lead up to the 2016 election. our lines, for republicans is (202) 748-8001. democrats (202) 748-8000.

independents and others (202) 748-8002. we will talk more about this later in program with yahoo! news editor-in-chief, a correspondent writing in a yahoo! exclusive trump to be charged tuesday with 34 counts but spared handcuffs and a mugshot. donald trump will be placed under arrest on tuesday and informed he has been charged with 34 felony counts for falsification of business records, according to sources been briefed on the procedures where the arraignment of the former president. trump will not be put in handcuffs, placed in a jail cell or subject to a mugshot. typical procedures, even for white-collar defendants, until a judge weighed in on pretrial conditions. the manhattan district attorney's office, which is been consulting with the secret service and new york city court

officials, concluded there was no reason to subject the former president to handcuffs or a mugshot. about the charges, the charge of falsification of business records can be prosecuted in new york state as a misdemeanor, but the prosecutor's office bumped up all of the charges to class e felonies, the lowest level of felonies in the new york state penal code on the ground's conduct was intended to conceal another underlying crime, according to a source. we will find out a lot more later on in the day about the indictment, the arraignment in new york city. we will have live simulcast coverage on this network and we will tell you about our plans this evening to hear from the former president. we go first to the democrats line, welcome. caller: thanks for taking my call. this is a serious matter, i'm

glad this is happening. nobody is above the law. my two concerns, this man is in prison, but they put him in a regular prison or will he be on house arrest? he's been getting away with so much, i'm wondering if you'd be under suicide watch. host: on to susan in massachusetts. republican line. caller: obama should be where trump is. the biden crime family. it is because they are afraid of him. they are still afraid of trump. that is all it is, election interference. they've been doing this since 2016 and i am getting sick of it. i want these republicans to start impeaching biden in the

whole biden crime family. they belong in prison, not trump. host: new jersey, democrats line. what are your expectations today? caller: thanks for taking my call. i read about watergate from the 70's, this is bigger than watergate. this is a historic time in our nations history and i want the people to understand this man is not above the law. what i expect his justice will be prevailing for the people who have been victimized by this monster who is a tyrant. he needs to be held to the highest accountability, because no one is above the law and no one should be above the law. good, honest people who fight for what is right to be heard and do what is right will always win in the end. expectations today is the da and others are stepping up and giving us a voice of justice against those who abuse power

and those who abuse the authority of higher power and higher leadership. host: onto the republican line in georgia. caller: hi. i want to say it is a very, very sad day. does not matter if the president is democrat or republican. it is sad for our democracy. host: what do you think the long-term effects of that are? more of this legislation of the process -- politicization of the criminal process? caller: i was a judge for many years in the state system. we've never seen anything like this. i hate to say it, i think it

might become tit for tat. host: put yourself in the position of the judge. if you had a potential defendant on the stature of a former president, former sitting president, how would you handle it? any different than your regular person coming before you in the courtroom? caller: he handled a trump case before, i understand. that it even got this far -- they have four years -- a couple of years when he was campaigning, than four years well he was sitting in office. now? host: here's a story on the judge, judge expected at arraignment is familiar to trump is the headline.

the new york judge tentatively assigned to preside over the arraignment is more than familiar with the players. he presided over the fraud trial of trump's namesake real estate company and the related trump payroll corporation, which ended with a conviction and 1.6 million dollars in fines. he also oversaw the former trump financial chief that may explain trump's angry reaction to his role in the case. in mississippi, where your thoughts? -- what are your thoughts? caller: i am curious to see what happens in the court. i am hoping maybe they will argue the case has to be thrown

out due to the inability for an impartial jury as well as an impartial judiciary. for the jury, they can take the c-span comments as well as episodes to show the possibility of impartial or partial jury is highly unlikely. as to the judiciary, unfortunately i will have to say either shift or schumer, they threatened the supreme court in one case. what is to hold them off from threatening lower courts? the judiciary it has now been

compromised and it will be interesting to see what happens. host: from the new york times, please do not expect repeat of january 6 but are alert -- the police do not expect a repeat of january 6, but are alert. the secret service in u.s. marshals have been correlating efforts while increasing intelligence gathering and mobilization. the police send a stand ready order to 35,000 officers. even as mr. trump's arraignment reflects a different set of circumstances, the responses informed by lessons learned from the capitol riot and the challenges posed by the nationwide protest against police violence and 2020 include the need to deploy forces quickly when threats pop up on social media, the importance of sharing intelligence among agencies in real time, officials have said. the mayor of the city held a news conference yesterday, here is some of what the mayor said.

[video clip] >> while there may be some rebel groups thinking of coming to the city, the message is clear. control yourselves. the city is our home, not a playground for your misplaced anger. we have the safest large city in america because we respect the rule of law in new york city. although we have no specific threats, people like marjorie taylor greene, who is known to spread misinformation and hate speech, stated she is coming to town. while you are in town, be on your best behavior. we will not allow violence or vandalism of any kind and, if one is caught participating in any act of violence, they will be arrested and held accountable. no matter who you are. host: that arraignment expected

it to: 15 easter this afternoon, taking your calls on the issue -- eastern this afternoon. taking your calls on the issue, (202) 748-8001 for republicans, (202) 748-8000 for democrats and independents and others (202) 748-8002. on social media, in the short term he will parlay the arraignment into a fundraising opportunity. he will portray it as people media and bloodthirsty democrats persecuting an innocent man of the people. the details of the indictment have not been disclosed and the most backward supporters may jump ship after the dirt comes out. i am trying to wrap my brain around him chasing stormie around the hotel room in his whity tightyies, let us get popcorn and sit back. we do not know the charges. we know he has worried for years his taxes would be released.

we might find out why today. this one by text, anyone else would be strip-searched and handcuffed, trump is a lifelong thief and fraud. he should have been arrested years ago. oranges his best color. rebecca on twitter says he is loving the publicity from this indictment too much. in philadelphia on the democrats line, this is dorothy. caller: good morning. i think bragg is doing his job and i am getting tired and upset that republicans and all those on fox news are saying things that are downright wrong. the district attorney in new york is doing his job. this is very disturbing to me. i do not think it is good for

the country, that they are allowed to do that over and over again. it is not right. everybody that listened to this should be disturbed by it. saying marjorie taylor greene is a terrorist, all those people on fox news, even lindsey graham when he uses profanity. they are terrorists. they're trying to bring the country down, just like they did january 6. this is not good for the country and everybody should be alarmed and upset. they should be calling fox news and letting them know. that is my message to everyone upset. call them, let them know how you feel. this is wrong in not good for the country. it is bringing the country down. that is my comment. host: in virginia, republican line. caller: good morning. to the lady from pennsylvania, she needs to know alvin bragg is

not doing this. this is done by joe biden and the democrats. they are afraid of donald trump, they know they cannot beat him. they know he is going to be reelected in 2024, they are doing everything they can to stop him. the democrats are above the law. hillary clinton can destroy her emails, she is above the law. eric swalwell can give information to a chinese spy, she is above the law. biden is going to be reelected because -- trump is going to be reelected because biden is losing popularity with the senior citizens, the women and the young people. that is all i have to say. host: donnie on the democrats line in st. louis. caller: good morning.

i think trump should be indicted , i do not think he's been good for the country. he has divided the country. any time you can start campaigning and start asking for money, you have republicans -- republican senators get on the air and cry and beg, this is supposed to be a billionaire, he should be able to afford whatever legal fees he has. he should not have to go to the republican party and beg to his people. he has not been good for the country, his policies were not good. anytime you think you are above the law is not good when you think you can take being in the

white house because you say that nixon got $18 billion for paperwork, you are ignorant. he is not good for the country. republicans need to wake up. he is not going to be president. thank you for your time. host: the former president is expected to leave trump tower late this morning, early this afternoon. what would normally be a 15 to 20 minute ride downtown, to the manhattan criminal court, the former president is not expected to stay in the city overnight. he has scheduled remarks from mar-a-lago this evening. whether that is a news conference, his speech, we will have it for you live at 8:15 p.m. eastern here on c-span. we will follow that with your phone calls after the former president's comments. find on the mobile app c-span

now and streaming at c-span.org. in new york, republican line. caller: good morning. my take on this -- i lived in new york my entire life, this has nothing to do with trump. it does, in a sense, but the fallout -- there are not going to be any big surprises about trump, he is going to run for president, he is going to win. that is a foregone conclusion. this is the end of the metropolitan area of new york city. they've been going downhill for a long time, they've had all sorts of problems. you name them. now, they will add to that. they will be the scorn of half of the country, their finances are going to be found out to be

not anywhere near where they used to be. they're going to be able to start keeping paying all of the commitments they've made in the last several years. this is going to kill them. it is amazing there is not somebody in the city that said wait a minute, what are we doing to ourselves. this is going to fall on new york and it will not help any of the people. this might turn the new yorkers to vote republican in the near future. host: this is from politico about cameras in the courtroom today, no electronics in the courtroom for trump's arraignment. there will be limited photography allowed during former president trump's highly anticipated arraignment today. the indictment involves a matter of monumental significance, it cannot be disputed. never in the history of the

united states has a sitting or past president been indicted. he declined the request to have video cameras in the room for the proceedings, banning the use of cell phones, laptops or any electronic devices in the courtroom. five reporters will be allowed to quote take still photos for several minutes and cameras can be used in the hallways outside of the courthouse. the populace rightly hungers for the most accurate and current information available. to suggest otherwise would be disingenuous. in louisiana on the democrats line, good morning. caller: good morning. can you hear me? host: we can, go ahead. caller: i am sitting back and observing. it is kind of a circus, nothing i would consider american or

really positive for the country, it is all negative. in the end -- host: independent line from virginia, go ahead. caller: good morning. i'm looking at the situation, it is a sad circus. not just in the united states, but globally. other countries are watching what is going on, everyone is piling in on the district attorneys. do their jobs and uphold the rule of law or let this thing slide. it is not just the one in new york, it is the others coming up. it is painful for all of us. what we seem to be forgetting is trump did this to us. him with his ridiculous machinations have brought us to this and it is creating so much

unpleasant chaos. it is just disgusting. when we look at the candidates, people saying this is going to get him elected, i think the opposite. doing this with all of these people rallying support reinforces the possibility he will be the nominee. for the democrats and independents, that is what we want to see. there is no way this guys going to be reelected going against biden. if biden had someone like asa hutchinson, who never did get in line and support trump solicitation -- trump's foolishness, he is someone i could give serious consideration to. not trump like desantis and other people.

my main point is, we've got to remember these district attorneys are forced into a very unpleasant situation. either uphold the law or treat this guy like he is a king and say we are not going to take any action against him, because he is donald trump. host: republican in california, hi. caller: good morning. i guess my comment today is i have been listening to c-span over the last couple of days, i've heard the democrat callers call in and they've already convicted him. it is like a mob, you had rule of law or mob rule. you have all these democrats calling in saying he is already convicted, he is a criminal, this and that. i like paying low prices for gas, i liked having the border

closed, i like being little money for eggs. i liked things the way they were. i am looking at donald trump and i have got a story to tell. my wife, i'm her third husband. her relationships with her former husband, kids -- the former spouse with their kids is horrible. i've taken over as grandpa, as father. you look at trump, his relationship with marlin vapors -- marla maples and his kids is a good relationship. the guy does not drink or smoke. i'm looking at all these people with all of this hate, this mob hate. i am looking at america, is this what america is? i have got a question for

democrats. if he is exonerated -- i just say do not vote. because biden is horrible. do not vote. if he is acquitted or let off, what are you going to do? go after him again for something else? you have to stop, not vote and -- because you are a biased voter. you have to admit at this point you are a biased voter. host: if he is exonerated, assuming he pleads not guilty and goes to trial and is found not guilty and exonerated -- if you were exonerated, do you think that would imply more people would support him? people who had not before? caller: i do not think it will, there is so much hate in the democratic party they will not ever support him. they are so entrenched but if they are proven wrong, they cannot admit they are proven wrong. they are so entrenched, i say do not vote.

do not vote for joe biden, really. the guy is a clown. do not vote for joe biden, do not vote for trump, don't vote. host: front page of the washington times, former president's legal team. former president donald trump bolstered his legal team monday with a white collar criminal defense lawyer and traveled to manhattan were heavy security precautions were erected ahead of the court arraignment and booking is the first ex-president to be charged with crimes. he hired the former new york federal prosecutor who represented a former trump campaign chairman for his unprecedented court appearance on tuesday. a judge is expected to unseal an indictment at two: 15 p.m. charging mr. trump with multiple business fraud violations related to $130,000 hush money payment in 2016 to adult film star stormy daniels. one of the former president

supporters in congress is austin scott, republican house member from georgia. he was on abc news last night. [video clip] >> it is all about a booking photo for president trump, they want to embarrass him and create problems for him and the republican party. that is what i believe the issue is. once it goes to court, i think the president's lawyers will very quickly prove these charges should have never been brought, but the democratic party will have what they wanted, which is a booking photo of donald trump will be embarrassing for him. that is all this is about. even a significant portion of democrats believe this is about politics, not the law. >> former president trump appears to be a top contender -- the top contender for the gop in 2024. are you under the impression the party is concerned about the future and nomination? >> i wish donald trump for the

president right now, i did not want him to be my nominee in 2024. i think what this has done is make him the absolute nominee for the republican party in 2024. i am republican, i like donald trump's policies. i wish she'd stayed off twitter, i think he be the president if he had. the democratic party recognizes he is a challenge in 2024 for the republican party. they are doing everything they can to help him. host: our phone lines, republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents and others (202) 748-8002. comments on social media on twitter, trump is facing something he never has, accountability. i'm struck by the willingness of people who. the quote nobody is above the law to put aside the principles

on which our law is founded. the prevailing sentiment seems to be that trump is guilty of crime, so the merits of this charge do not matter. the indictment on trump as a warning for future presidents that challenge democracy. in houston, texas on the democrats line. go ahead. >> good morning, thanks for taking my call. i will make it real short. first, i want to address the guy that says democrats are evil people, yet it is all the hateful groups that belong to the republican party. my question to the callers in america is -- it is not a question. yes, it is. why doesn't trump want this televised? why doesn't trump want the case televised?

he is against it, why doesn't he want his people to see justice being perpetrated against him? my final statement is, donald trump is a weak man image of a strongman. thank you. host: in baton rouge, from doc on the independent line, go ahead. caller: good morning. many years ago, senator mccarthy said the communists are going to infiltrate the entertainment industry and the government. as you know, that is happening now. the democratic party does not want any opposition.

they destroyed opposition. they are just like in russia and the ccp in china. they cannot stand opposition. you are seeing it right now. thank you. host: from usa today, in opinion piece by an investigative reporter. a number of legal experts i've spoken with describe the case based on what is now known publicly as far from the slamdunk for prosecutors who are used to winning the vast majority of their cases. that is why the details of the indictment, which reportedly totals more than two dozen criminal accounts, will be critical at a time when the country is treading uncharted waters, with an ex-president under criminal indictment and running again for the white house. does bragg have more than what

we've seen publicly? at least more evidence that trump knowingly paid off daniels specifically to help his bid for the white house and illegally falsified business records in the process? let us hope so, for the sake of the country. unlawful prosecution that falls apart in court would help no one except, perhaps trump and his white house bid. thomas is calling from california on the republican line. caller: thank you, i enjoy and thank you for everything you do here at c-span. the time has come -- april 3, as of yesterday -- i feel like the democrats need to get off their high horses and stop harassing president trump, who has done nothing wrong in the eyes of god. what i get is president trump is innocent of any wrongdoing

whatsoever, simply because president trump has been the greatest president ever in the history of the usa. bragg, the attorney general, they are connected. that is why everything is a mess for president trump. i want everything to be better for everybody, not just president trump everybody in the usa to be able to have a president that -- you did everything he could when he was president. host: a reminder, make sure you mute your volume when you get connected and call in. louis is next, democrats line. caller: good morning. i have a question for republicans, something i've tried to understand. a woman gets raped by someone

who has hepatitis or aids, republicans will not allow that woman to get an abortion. this does not make sense to me. it has no commonsense sense associated with it. i do not understand republicans when it comes down to this and i will never vote republican because of this. it seems to be a stupid decision. it is a health matter, not a political matter. a woman needs to have the right to choose. that is something i will never understand about republicans. thank you. host: cody on the independent line in millington, michigan. caller: good morning. i would like to point out to all the republicans and democrats the greatest president to ever live in our country was andrew

jackson, the only president -- if individuals would like to open a history book -- lastly, i am a marxist. i do not believe in gain upon anyone else's hard work. but communism and marxism are different, because communism requires a dictator and marxism gives the power to the working people. my question is this. at what point do you realize the system of borrowing money from yourself to payback yourself is going to get you in debt? the fact cannot come upon to argue any points besides joe biden initiated the crime bill. i would like to point out to republicans and democrats that at 9:37 a.m., the house voted. all of them were republicans and

democrats that voted. sure, an author is most likely responsible for the wording or verbiage. but all of them are responsible for the bill. host: we are focusing on the expected indictment, the former president expected to be about 2:15 eastern this afternoon. the former president taking to social media over the past couple of days, we showed you a number of those comments on truth social. the former president last night focusing on the 2024 presidential race with recent poll numbers, which highlight this. march 20 paul, trump 44%, desantis 30%. april 3, trump 48%, desantis 19%. a new poll from interactive poll, which of the two republicans do you think has the best chance of winning 2024 presidential election?

trump 55%, desantis 29%. the former president tweeting out those numbers. calling from wisconsin -- excuse me, virginia. go ahead. caller: i would like to say i am a trump supporter, 100%. i do not see where he has done anything wrong, any different than any other presidents have done. there is kennedy, he had someone. i will not go to the name on this, but a democratic president -- the thing about it is, he did not do in the white house. he did not have a lover in the white house and -- somewhere else. what he does on his personal

time and things is his business. it is nobody else's business. the democrats keep throwing this up at him. we have four nations against us right now, we never had that when trump was in office. people better wise up and pay attention. one of these days or nights, someone is going to bite us and it is going to be bad. i believe that biden is not the person in office right now that we can depend on. it is hard to sleep at night knowing he is president of our united states of america and the way he has done things, the money is being flushed down the commode day after day, hour after hour. i want everybody to feel -- i used to be a democrat, but after what i've seen, i completely

switched around completely. host: this washington post piece from this morning, echoes of failed case versus edwards on payments to mistress, politician hiding a dark secret. even as he sought the nation's highest job. hush money slipped to a woman to secure her silence. criminal charges filed years later. the storyline is familiar to those following the indictment of the former president in new york in a case seemingly related to trump's payoff to adult film actress stormy daniels in the waning days of the 2016 presidential campaign. in 2008, it was senator john edwards of north carolina, democrat, who arranged payments to investors to keep her quiet as he saw the democratic nomination for president. three years later, he was charged with federal campaign violations, accused of hiding

the affair in using money from donors that should have been reported to the federal election commission. after a six-week trial, north carolina journey acquitted edwards of one count and failing to come up with the verdict on five others, leading the justice department to drop the matter. while there are some key differences between the edwards and trump cases, legal experts say the fail federal prosecution in north carolina offers a note of caution for manhattan district attorney alvin bragg as he prepares to try trump on a case that appears to stem from the daniels payment. on the democrats line in maryland. caller: good morning. the man has been indicted, entrench a look at this logically. let it play out. it is important for the rule of law to be exercised.

the truth will come out, that is what happens. i would suggest all people look at facts versus feelings. my main point is let people go through it. host: we will go to west virginia and hear from the independent line. caller: thank you. i would like to say to the man from illinois, he said the republicans would not allow if a woman was raped in the man had hepatitis, aids, why they would not allow the baby to be aborted. believe in god. you cannot murder somebody. there is medicine nowadays that can help.

another thing, they are saying about the republicans going out and fighting in the streets and causing trouble. the democrats do every time with black lives matter and lgbtq and all them kind of people, they do not do a thing to them. they can burn cars, tear up stores in streets and kill police in streets and kill police and they do not do a thing. republicans say one word. god bless you america. host: on the republican line from connecticut, good morning. caller: good morning. i keep thinking back to when president trump came down the escalator. from that day forward to today has been nothing but character assassination of a man who is

not -- this is why they are going after him from day one, because they cannot by him. he brought our country so far ahead from where we were and suddenly, the bricks were put on and america starts going downhill. what are they going to come up with next? this is so ridiculous hollande the democratic party are the ones that are constant going after another human being that basically helped to build america. this is what i see, character assassination from day one. it has not stopped, when will it stop? it is unbelievable. i think barnum & bailey is coming back today to be the ringmaster of this circus in new york. that is what it seems to be.

this has got to stop, america has to come together. the parties have to stop pitting themselves against each other. caller: here is how the story is playing on the front page. trump to hear charges today in hush money cover-up case outside trump tower. helicopters buzzed overhead and the streets were packed with onlookers as mr. trump arrived in the late afternoon, pausing briefly to waive. his supporters carrying signs that said arrest biden and trump won and a large finish the wall flag. new york city officials warned of road closures and said they were deploying extra officers in manhattan during the visit. mr. trump is called on supporters to protest and forecast death and destruction, though he's not made any explicit calls since he was indicted.

at a news conference, it was said there were no credible threats against the city. they warn demonstrators that anyone being violent would be arrested. next is donna from south carolina, democrats line. caller: good morning. i am hina hard time as i watch all of this craziness ouing the former president. i would not say mr. trump did everything right. i would not say he did everything wng. as with many of our past presidents. what i will say is this. i woul like to understand, from e amican p whyhey find acceptable to have an individual wh a character that nald trump has displayed over the many, many years representing the people of the thk you.tates. host: mentioning the word

character, previous caller called what was happening character assassination. a columnist using that topic this morning, character matters is the headline. leaving aside the sometimes legitimate and sometimes illegitimate responses from defenders of the former president following his indictment by a new york grand jury, there is something that would have made all the difference for the 45th president had he focused on it as his top priority rather than himself. that is character. dictionary.com defines it as features and traits that form the individual nature of some person or thing. there are those with good and bad character. people who demonstrate good character are generally trusted and thought highly of. bad things are not said about them.

any allegations are often not believed. when allegations are made against people with bad character, one thinks if any of them might be true. this is the case with donald trump. even though alvin bragg made a campaign promise to quote get trump and the case reportedly involves hush money paid to a poor and start and testimony by terms personal attorney, who served time for facilitating the payments, it is trump's bad character displayed in many ways and over the many years that has brought him to this breaking point. brenda on the independent line in texas. caller: good morning. i woke up, i was watching this. it is kind of disturbing me a little bit. i've always been independent, my mother asked me to vote for her before she could choose on her deathbed and they made a decision to do that, i voted

democrat for her. i've always been independent, i do not like controversy. i do the next right thing and believe what is right. one thing i have to disagree with with president donald trump is the way his character on tv -- my children are in the room, he is on tv talking with customers coming out of his mouth. just the way he portrays himself is not what america is about. both of my parents served in the service, they were veterans. this is not with the united states of america is about. getting on tv, showing everyone -- we are supposed to have character. i do not see donald trump doing that. that is a shame, because he has got bright ideas.

he's not done any worse than anybody else's done. i pray that today goes in favor of what is good for the united states and that is all i have to say. host: in new york, republican line. caller: good morning. i am a republican, but i do vote outside the box. i did vote for obama. right now i am flying my american flag upside down because my country is under duress. i've never seen such political prosecution in my life. not even richard nixon was prosecuted like this. in addition to that, the democrats are so keen on putting trump's mugshot all over the place. we should have t-shirts made with his mugshot that say wanted for president. democrats have made me furious over this.

they are just trying to persecute this man and it is disgusting. host: talking about political persecution, that was written about in the washington times. former house gop leader knows trump's situation well, the manhattan district attorney who has indicted the former president as following a democratic playbook. just ask a former representative who nearly two decades ago was a trump figure at the core of the conservative movement, taking conservative ideas and forging them into election winning republican policies. that was until a crusading district attorney brought a few legal charges that knocked him out of his post. a nearly unanimous state appeals court tossed out his conviction. he'd been taken off the field, which he said was the point of this kind of prosecution.

this is a creative political strategy that has been going on a long time, he told the washington times. what they do is get you on ethics charges or they get you indicted by a rogue d.a.. they want you to be convicted. in arkansas, democratic caller. caller: hi. good morning. i would like to ask the republicans -- they act like donald trump is god, they are forgetting about the keyword jod. if you do wrong, you did wrong. talking about being assassinated, black people have been assassinated since they came out of the womb. always talk about black lives matter protesting because people got killed. not because a human being was doing illegal stuff in being wrong.

people got killed. that is why black lives matter protested. they should keep on protesting when it comes to black people getting killed for no reason. host: in michigan, independent line. caller: i just think we are getting our values mixed up. people do not understand. he raised $2 million. she only spent $1 million. my eyes are so bad. anything that you do when you run for office -- if you do not spend all of the money on your campaign, you put the rest in your pocket. the whole thing, to me, is

collectivism. democrats are people who only talked to the leaders of groups. the republicans talk to the people that are voting. host: republican line, you are on. caller: thank you. i have two points, i think. stormy daniels -- if nobody remembs -- i do not know how long itas after the payment to her was made. ended up down the road having to pay -- write a check and pay back president trump because she signed the paper stating it never happened. that he never had an affair with

her. she ended up having to pay him back, you can look it up. they talk about character, president kennedy had affairs. not in the white house, outside of the white house. with many different women. they kept it quiet, that is why it never came to newspapers and such. clinton had to pay paula $850,000 to keep her quiet. host: reportedly one of the charges will be about the $160,000 payment made to stormy daniels, she is on the front page of usa today this morning. women have whittled away at trump's power is the headline. when donald trump went to a party in hollywood to celebrate his new vodka brand in 2007, he allegedly had two dates, neither one was his wife. nearly a decade later, when the same women tried to sell their

story to tabloids before his election, his team helped to arrange to six-figure payments divide and bury their stories. the payments were illegal campaign donations, quinn to a justice department case, that had nothing to do with alleged affairs and mirrors the charges legal observers expect to come out of the new york grand jury. the two women are part of a series of professional women to take strikes at trump's altar of power. that is usa today. on the democrats line in minnesota, good morning. caller: good morning. i am just amazed at where we are now. i am african-american, i've went through many things in america. donald trump was one that brought out people who were in the dark on racism.

nobody seems to remember that before he got to be president in 2016 -- he harassed him -- obama so much she had to shove his birth certificate. people latched onto him. the old south wants to go back, that is black folks in people of color in bondage. we are not going back. he brought all of that to the surface. he told people to hurt them, throw them out, i will get you out of jail. that is not a president. that is not the kind of president we need in america. we need to have a democracy. i worked in the criminal justice system for years, i've watched a

whole lot of colored people who had to go get mug shots, stay in jail because they cannot afford fail, went to court and went to jail. what is wrong with donald trump getting the same thing? innocent until guilty, but he needs to go through the system. host: the president was touring a manufacturing plant and followed by the press, asking about today's arraignment. here is with the president briefly had to say. [video clip] >> i have faith in the new york court. host: a couple of comments on social media, a tweet that says donald trump is a felon. donald trump is a security risk. how republicans handle donald trump being indicted in dcm georgia, trumps crimes will make

nixon look like a piker once everything is laid for all to see. democrats are not prosecuting trump, the laws prosecuting trump because he committed crimes. we will go to jeremy in madison, wisconsin. go ahead. independent line. caller: good morning, it is a pleasure and honor to hear your voice this morning. i'm going to apologize, i did not hear the initial question. i am wondering about how important larry flynt first amendment case could possibly be regarding how we speak to each other. how we talk to each other today. how that affects how we will deal with political futures

altogether here. i hope my words are taken seriously. host: more of your calls coming up on the program. c daniellaydman will be with us to talk more about the trump indictment and what to expect in the weeks ahead. more of your calls and comments coming up as well on "washington journal." the docuseries on afghanistan will begin airing on pbs and that's later in the program here on "washington journal." >> be up to date in the latest in publishing with book tv's podcast " about books" with

current nonfiction books and industry news and trends through insider interviews. you can find it on c-span now, our free mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. >> the name of america which belongs to you in your national capacity >> four score and seven years ago >> asked not what your country can do for you, >> throughout american history, presidents have delivered pivotal speeches during inaugurations, times of challenges and farewells, times of challenges and farewells. . -- our 10 part series on american history tv. here the words of george washington, abraham lincoln, ronald reagan and this week, barack obama. we feature his 2012 speech consoling the residents of newtown, connecticut and the nation after mass shooting as

sandy hook elementary school and three years later, after the shooting at mother emanuel ame church in south carolina, president obama again led the country by singing amazing grace. ♪ >> amazing grace. [applause] >> how sweet the sound. >> watch our 10 part series, speeches that defined a presidency, saturday and 9:30 a.m. and p.m. on c-span2's american history tv. >>" washington journal" continues. host: we continue our conversation about the arraignment of former president donald trump. yahoo! news has the story --

it was reporting on the 34 felony counts and a picture of donald trump in handcuffs and a mugshot. do we know what might be in the indictment? guest: we strongly believe these will be 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. these are the internal business records of the trump organization that, based on what we understand, were written down as legal fees when in fact, that was an effort to cover up what we understand to be the attorney's allegations that this was hush money paid to stormy daniels who was a poor and actress -- a porn actress and that's normally a misdemeanor but in this particular case,

they were charged as felonies. that's the significant piece of the reporting that there are 34 felony counts in this indictment. host: do you think the manhattan district attorney office saw any hints and where they may be going in the success of this with the trump real estate company in the case last year that saw the cfo of that company indicted on counts of $1.6 million in fines? guest: these are two very separate cases. clearly, the manhattan d.a., alvin bragg, was successful in that case, winning a conviction of the cfo of that company and against the corporation itself. the facts in this case are completely separate. they have to stand on their own. the other issue here is who the

witnesses are in this case like michael cohen who was the trump aide who actually gave the money to stormy daniels for which he was then reimbursed. some people would consider him to be a problematic witness because he is a convicted perjurer andy plead guilty in the federal case related to the same activities. there are significant differences between these two cases. they will both be heard by the same judge, however. host: in the waning days of the investigation ahead of this news on the indictment, the return of several key witnesses to alvin bragg's office including michael cohen. remind us of his role in all of this and the charges he did time for. guest: he is central to this case.

michael cohen was a long time fixer of president trump and helped him with all sorts of things and sometimes try to deal with problems that might hurt president trump or in this particular case, candidate trump in 2016 before the election, prevent a political problem. in this particular case, stormy daniels, the porn star/actress, was threatening to go public with an alleged affair she said she had with president trump going back to 2007. he has always denied both the affair and these allegations that he paid hush money. the allegations that stormy daniels was going to go public and go to the press or a tabloid and that president trump realized to keep that information from coming out

before the election, that he needed to do what she wanted which -- which was to pay her off and it was $130,000 she was apparently asking for. the issue then became, how do you do that? how do you pay her off and make this look like it wasn't hush money to a cornstarch echo that's were michael cohen comes in made the payment himself out of his own money, $130,000, but then president trump allegedly reimbursed michael cohen while he was president with trump organization business funds in multiple checks over a period of time. the justice department would learn about this after a while and they investigated this particular case and they

concluded they could not charge president trump at the time with any of this because he was a sitting president and the justice department guidelines say that you cannot indict a sitting president but they did go after michael cohen and he pleaded guilty to campaign-finance violations and did time and then cooperated in the alvin bragg investigation. that's where we are now. host: they are saying in the sense that the bragg investigation picks up where the justice department investigation left off. guest: yes, its worth pointing out that the justice department had wanted to do this after donald trump left office and could've picked up that case again and tried to make a case against the former president but they chose not to do that. instead, alvin bragg, the d.a. in manhattan, went after president trump on these facts.

this case was sometimes known as the zombie case because it just kept coming back. now it seems to be back for good in the president will be arraigned in new york court in manhattan today. host: the reporting at yahoo! news is that there are 34 counts coming down. do we have a sense of what other areas in terms of business areas the grand jury may have been looking? guest: that's an interesting question that we do know yet. the indictment will be unsealed right around the time of the arraignment which is expected to be at 2:15 p.m. down over the grand jury looked at anything else having to do with those payments to stormy daniels and how that money was recorded. is it possible that they took

those documents and use them in efforts that would have tax implications or something to do with banks they were dealing with? instead of just having the documents internally, they use them for some external purpose? we do know that in the trump lawyers say they did not do that and therefore, what are they covering up if they only used those internal records? perhaps we will learn more in the indictment but so far, nothing has come out to sing just that the money was used for any other purpose other than hush money. host: our guest is with us until 845 a.m. we welcome your calls and comments in our conversation this morning is about the

anticipated indictment this afternoon, the arraignment of former president donald trump. here are the lines -- yahoo! news had opposed indictment pull out -- pole about the former president and no real surprise -- what's more is that he has use this opportunity to be fundraising. he is using it for fundraising, correct? guest: he is and i think within 48 hours of the indictment, his campaign it raised something like $5 million. they were creating political merch around this with t-shirts

saying i stand with donald trump and they talked about putting up t-shirts with donald trump mugshot on it if indeed there is a mugshot. our reporting is that there wont be. donald trump is extremely talented at taking advantage of any time he's in the spotlight, whether its positive or negative news, he understands that's a moment to capitalize on and he has certainly done that in this instance. host: the distance between them just bumped up? you look at the polls you have on yahoo.com, 57% of the support for donald trump and 37% for ron desantis but it seems like ron desantis is in a strange situation. they both have to support the former president while running against him in the long run.

guest: that's right. ultimately, it comes down to the fact that donald trump still has an incredibly strong hold on a very significant part of the public -- of the republican base, probably 30% of republicans have remained very loyal to him. the pole that we did a couple of days ago was really quite astonishing. the previous pole had trump up about eight points over desantis in a few weeks before, desantis was up a few points over trump. in this whole, he shot up to 26 point over desantis. that is an enormous search. it could be volatile. i think there is a kind of equivalent of a rally around the flag and it may be that there are a lot of voters among the

26% number who are open to voting for ron desantis, but when they saw the indictment, there was a kind of coming home to donald trump. that may be temporary. there were also some warning signs in this. poll. a full 54% said it donald trump is convicted of this crime, then he should not have a second term. i think only 31% said he should even if he is convicted. this is a snapshot in time and it clearly says something about the way the republican base is reacting to this indictment. we will have to see whether its more permanent or transitory. host: we've got calls waiting but i want to touch on the fact

that you and your chief investigative reporter are collaborating on a book called the multiple criminal investigations into the former president. it says trump could face three more indictments in the newspaper. you are writing on those investigations as they are happening. this could be a long timeline for completing your book. guest: yes, at a certain point, we will have to publish the book. its hard to know whether all of these cases will be resolved. we been largely focusing on the georgia case, looking at the aftermath of the 2020 election in georgia and the alleged efforts by trump and the campaign and his associates to overturn that election, the infamous call to brad ratzenberger, the secretary of state down there, where he asked

ratzenberger to find 780 votes, one more than he needed to win the election. what's unique about this book is it will be the first in-depth account of the investigation into donald trump from the perspective of the investigators themselves. most of the books that have been written so for have been trump books. this book is going to get deep inside the investigations, particularly the georgia investigation but we will wrap in the others as well. while the manhattan indictment is historic, the first time a former president has been charged with a crime, it will be interesting to see how this is viewed in the rearview mirror assuming we get indictments on

some of the other pieces. they are more grave, two of them have to do with efforts to overturn the election and the assault on congress and another one is president trump's alleged squirreling away of highly classified documents and allegedly obstructing the investigation into finding out what happened and getting them returned. it may be that six months from now, people will see the stormy daniels case is certainly a precedent set are but a little bit smaller than these other pieces. host: let's get to the calls and we will go to bill in new york on the democrats line. caller: hello? host: you are on, good morning. caller: good morning, i have one question -- i heard the d.a. in new york offered trump a zoom arraignment

and he turned it down? guest: i had not heard that. i'd own think they are doing a lot of zoom arraignment -- arraignments these days. it may have been in deference to a former president that he would've done that but that's not something i had heard. if he had, i am not surprised and i would not be surprised that donald trump would turn that down and want to show up in court and in fact, it was reported by the new york times that he was eager to do the so-called perp walk. if anybody likes a spectacle and media attention, its donald trump. whether or not he was offered a zoom arraignment, i think he would have opted for showing up in court and arriving in new york with all the fanfare that he had in the way he just did. host: what are you hoping your team focuses on today?

guest: what plays out today is going to be largely in public. we have a reporter who has been there waiting in line at the courthouse all night long so she can get a seat there. we would obviously be able to want to be able to tell the story of the arraignment and trump's reactions and the protests that will take place outside in as much detail as possible. of course, we will dig into what's been happening behind the scenes because there will have been interactions between donald trump and law enforcement and it will be interesting to see what those are like. this will be the first time we will see the indictment itself. and exactly with the charges are and how they are laid up -- laid out in any information will be

crucial to understand and provide to our audience and readers, we will be writing stories and have a live blog. i think that's already up on yahoo! news. i would encourage her audience to go and see it so they can see what's happening in real time. we will want to cover this from every possible angle we can as well as explaining what's going on. these are complicated legal issues that not everyone is always familiar with and we have a responsibility to explain it as well as possible including explaining the rights that the defendant has whether you are a president or a lowly citizen, everybody has due process rights in this country. host: ohio next on the republican line. caller: i'm in ohio and i'm a

republican. is donald trump above the law? if obama had done what donald trump has done, if he incited a right at the capitol, we would have crucified obama. donald trump is not above the law. i am a republican, proud republican and i would never vote for that man. he is a liar. thank you. guest: i think the evidence that donald trump is not above the law is going to be playing out today in public. he will be arraigned in a court of law. a lot of people will see this as a vindication of our system, that as the founders said, we are a country of laws and not men and those laws need to be

enforced in an impartial and fair way. on the other site, there are supporters from republican members of congress is that he is not above the law nor should he be a target of the law. that debate will play out over the coming weeks. ultimately, the system will play out the way it plays out and we will see if this case actually goes to trial. there will be a lot of appeals. the trump lawyers have been sharpening their knives and trying to come up with every possible argument to get this case thrown out before it ever even gets to court. that is their right. that will all be played out in public for us all to see and to assess ourselves. at the end of that process,

people can make their own judgment as to whether this is a fair process or not. host: i believe the former federal prosecutor also represented the president's former advisor paul manafort. what do you think about this late in addition to the president's legal team? guest: i think trump realizes that he needs the best possible legal team he can put together. often in these kind of cases, you have lawyers who bring a different set of strengths and you want them to complement each other. some of them are better in the courtroom and others are better on television or with the messaging part, the public relations part of the law.

i think this new addition is someone who is a very experienced former prosecutor and trial lawyer and my guess is he will be trying the case if it goes to trial. i am not surprised that he added him to his legal team. host: next up is louise in maryland on the independent line. caller: good morning, i'm a prior democrats so i am definitely independent. i am old enough to have lived through the clinton era with the multitude of ladies that came forward and all of the payments including using the state police to deliver them so what we are talking about, the actual event is not new to politicians. i am confer -- i am concerned about trump being a political target. a couple of things i'm seeing in the case and i'm wondering what

your guest will say is i think he's been probably overcharged as felonies and the two primary witnesses are so weak, michael cohen and stormy daniels, they both have said and done things they later recanted including recanting in writing. if they down to have good solid business records that would prove the case, the doan have two good witnesses that could solidify felony charges against the ex-president, thank you. guest: i think the caller made some good points. i think this is not the strongest case that will ultimately be brought against donald trump. if those other cases get indicted. for one thing, normally, these falsifying of business records cases are misdemeanors. they are generally brought his

misdemeanors and can get bumped up to felonies when there is evidence that the business records were falsified in order to conceal another crime. we believe that's what's being alleged here and that's why they are being brought as felonies. what is the other alleged crime? our understanding is that other alleged crime is campaign finance violations. the theory of the cases that donald trump paid off stormy daniels before the election to keep this information about the affair from coming up because of it did, it would hurt his chances of getting elected in 2016. there is some potential problems with the government's theory here. one is that alan bragg is a

local prosecutor. he is the manhattan prosecutor and donald trump was running for a federal office so there is a mixing of state law and federal law here that is untested by the courts. that can be a problem. i'm fairly confident that these are the underlying facts that the trump campaign, the legal team, will try to get this case thrown out or at least not back to a misdemeanor on the basis of that. campaign finance charges are hard to bring. john edwards, the former vice presidential candidate and senator was brought up on charges of paying hush money to the woman he was having an affair with and had a child with.

that case went before a jury also is a campaign-finance violation and the jury did buy it for the most part. he was acquitted on one of the counts and another one, the jury could not come to a decision in the justice department dropped to the case. they are not apples and apples but they do raise the potential concerns that people legitimately would have with this case. all that being said, we dove know what all the evidence is and have not seen the indictment yet and perhaps there are other elements to this case that are strong that we dove know about. we will have to wait and see. the point about the credibility of the witnesses is something that i think is a legitimate issue. michael cohen, convicted perjurer, will not be the strongest witness the government couldave and if stormy daniels

is a witness as well, she has credibility issues herself so we will just have to see. host: on to highland park, new jersey, democratic caller. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would like to say to the trump supporters that the republicans and some democrats and some independents, he is being indicted in new york for crimes that occurred in new york. all right? there are multiple counts in this indictment and if he

succeeds in his defense, that does not mean everything is done and over with. the more serious indictments will be coming down the road. that's what i had to say. host: let me ask you about the other indictments down the road. do the attorneys in those cases view this as a distraction from what they are doing? guest: particularly for his attorney -- if she does in -- indict trump and co-conspirators because we understand its being instigated as a conspiracy in georgia. i think she would have preferred that this case had not happened first.

this is speculation on my part. let me tell you why i think that's the case. this is not, in some sense, this is not the strongest of the cases that there could be against donald trump partly because the underlying alleged crimes have to do with sex and its a bit tawdry. these are misdemeanors that we think up to felonies but they are sort of lower level felonies. at the end of the day, they are not about anything as grave as overturning an election or essentially stealing highly sensitive classified documents. its possible and even likely that from the perspective of the georgia prosecutors, they would worry that if this case does not

-- is not perceived by the public as being strong and gives fodder to the trump campaign to say this is a political prosecution that never should have been brought in the first place, that may undermine, change the perception of how her case is viewed and people will say this is just another in a series of political prosecutions against donald trump and allowing him to play the victim. i think that's not ideal. i think the case will rest on the strength of the evidence and the allegations in the underlying activity and over time, if they have a strong case and if they can prove that donald trump engaged in serious

fraud or illegal efforts to overturn the election there, then it will be less of a problem but in the short term, the optics of this case coming first are not ideal. host: here is kimberly from a patchy junction, arizona, republican line. caller: hello, i may proud maga america, for trump 100%. this is disgusting to me that no one is talking about with mr. biden has been doing. this man has been doing everything he blames trump are doing. as much as i despise mr. biden, its the same thing happened to him that happens to trump, i would find it unfair. its unbelievable that no one sees its one thing after another. they are trying to get him out

so bad that now they are doing this. president clinton, sitting president in office had an affair with one of the girls in his office and nothing happened to him. how can anybody sit back and not see the complete unfairness of what's going on here? president trump will host: president clinton was impeached. guest: ike covered the monica lewin ski scandal and as you point out, he was impeached. in the end, in a negotiated plea with the independent counsel at the time, he lost his license for a period of time and a lot of people thought that was a fair and legitimate outcome and other people would disagree and

maybe think he should have gone on trial and done prison time for perjury which of course is a felony. that's the way it played out. in some senses, that case is a precedent for what we are going through now. obviously, because of some of the other campaign-finance issues and falsification of business records, local da is founded fit to indict donald trump and take it to trial. if he can. host: as we mentioned, your chief investigative reporter broke the story late last night about the likely 34 indictments expected to come down today so i want to get your reactioto the former president commenting on

truth social, his social media site, after the news came out saying this -- your thoughts? guest: i think its straight out of the trump playbook. you attack the prosecutor and you try to delegitimize the investigation and donald trump is not the only person who does this. its fairly typical and i reported on criminal investigations for 30 years or so. when there are stories in the paper about upcoming indictments, it is not unusual for the would be defendant and his or her lawyers to attack the prosecutor as leaking before

trying the case in the court of a look opinion. and to do anything you possibly can to undermine the legitimacy of the investigation. donald trump did it in his unique way which is to say that alvin bragg should indict himself which obviously is not going to happen and i dove think its possible to indict yourself. but that is donald trump, a classic donald trump. i've heard the new york times reporter commenting on up that cast the other day about some of donald trump's public statements and what he said on truth social. she said he may be projecting some of his own anxiety about this case and that's why he may be acting out in the way he

does. she is much more fit to psychoanalyze the former president then i am. nothing that donald trump does in these kinds of situations -- they are shocking but not surprising. i think this one falls into that category. host: on to steven calling from virginia, democratic caller. caller: hello, i appreciate this guest and i appreciate how your highlighting trump. he is all about the delay. look at the letitia james case in new york. he just wants to delay and he wears people out and he will do here and have two or three more huge problems. we are stuck on this problem,

listen to cyrus vance from sunday, they got involved and they said we will take over. that's where drops in new york. i would like to see the quotation were bragg said he was going after trump for this. we already know they have the trump organization nailed down. the ceo cannot be insulated, that's not how companies like that work. all this is proof. these maga people, i know if they hear and i know it they down here. rupert murdoch has admitted that fox wanted money in lieu of the truth. host: we will hear from our guest. guest: let's start with the first point which is that trump is all about delay in these cases.

there is ample evidence to suggest that is true. he does everything he possibly can to throw sand in the gears but this is someone who has been under investigation on and off both for his business practices before he was in public office and throughout his entire presidency and post-presidency for decades and decades. he is experienced at being under investigation. the irony is that while the manhattan d.a. is going to be first out of the gate with an indictment against donald trump, he may not be the first to actually put donald trump on trial. the laws and procedures in new york allow for a lot of fields and -- a lot of appeals and that will delay for many months

possible. if we were to get an indictment out of atlanta in the next few weeks, its certainly possible that the case would go to trial even before this case. its also possible that donald trump throughout the 2020 for republican campaign and if he becomes a nominee, the general election will be in between campaign stops, in between debates and in between rallies and he will show up at court appearances. that certainly will be a novel situation that we have never seen before. if there are a handful of republicans running against donald trump, they may have to bow to his legal schedule for

court appearances and other legal matters. that is going to be a novel situation if all of this plays out the way we think it will. host: robert is next in lynchburg, virginia on the independent line. caller: yes, my question to you, i got a couple of them idle thing donald trump will ever go to trial again because i think he has his own plane and everything. we should watch out for that. how can a fellow with a felony continue to run for the highest office in the united states? he degrades any woman and how many women in the republican

party continue to stand by a person like that? host: there are couple of things there. guest: i will take the first two in order. i do think donald trump is a flight risk. maybe its a different situation if you been convicted of a crime and you are looking at present time. he chose voluntarily, not voluntarily but he could have it try to stay in florida and not show up in court today. he is showing up. i don think there is evidence to suggest he would try to flee the country. it wont be hard for him given the scrutiny he is under and people watching him all the time and lining the streets of palm beach whenever he leaves, i

think it would be hard for him to flee the country. that's the first point. the second point is an interesting constitutional question, how can he run for president if he is under felony indictment or even convicted? there is nothing in the constitution that says you cannot run for president and you cant serve as president if you been convicted of a crime. there are certain requirements laid out in the constitution to run for president and be president. you have to be born in this country, you have to be a certain age but that's pretty much it. it is even conceivable that donald trump could win the presidency and be convicted of a crime and do prison time and be president from behind bars. crazy as that sounds, it raises

an interesting question. he would have to have secret service protection. he does now by law as a former president but clearly, if he were president, he would have secret service protection so where would they be? would they be outside the prison cell or inside the prison cell with him? donald trump has only been alleged to have committed a crime in one case. he is not going to trial and has not been convicted. legal experts and historians will be looking at these questions over the coming weeks and months, i imagine. host: time for one quick question. butler, missouri, republican caller. are you there? we will wrap it up with the

editor-in-chief of yahoo! news and you can follow the reporting in this issue and more all day long on twitter at yahoo! news. thank you for being with us this morning. guest: happy to be with you and your guests. host: still to come later, we will be joined by frontline documentary producer /director/correspondent martin smith, talking about the series of america and the taliban, examining the 20 year investment in afghanistan and how that ended in taliban victory. that series gets underway tonight on pbs. next, open forum, chance to weigh in on the topic we've been talking about, the former president being indicted or other issues in the news.

>> this year's grand prize winners in the studentcam video document contest are eighders at dr. martin luther k. mile school in germantown, maryland for their documentary. it was about data privacy. watch the documentary's at studentcam.org. >> there are a lot of places to get political information but only as c-span do you get it straight from the source. no matter where you are from or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network, unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. if it happens here or here for here or anywhere that matters, america's watching on c-span, powered by cable. if you are enjoying book tv,

sign up for our newsletter using the qr code on the screen to receive a schedule of upcoming programs, author discussions and more. book tv, every sunday on c-span2 or anytime online at book tv.org. television for serious readers. >> since 1979, in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage from the halls of congress, from house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefings and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat to have issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions and completely unfiltered. c-span, your down filtered view of government. -- your unfiltered view of government. >> " washington journal" host: host: continues.

its a chance for you to call in on open forum in one of the stories we are following this morning in the wall street journal, nasa names crew to orbit moon in 2024 and that crew was announced yesterday. bill nelson is the nasa administrator, the former administrator and former astronaut had this to say -- >> its a mission that is significant in many ways. its a demonstration of error ability to push the boundaries of human achievement. its a testament to the under -- the unwavering passion of the team that will make it possible. and it is a message to the world -- we choose to go back to the moon and then onto mars and we are going to do it together because,

in the 21st century, nasa explores the cosmos with international partners. we will unlock new knowledge and understanding. we have always dreamed about what more is ahead. why? because its in our dna. its part of us, to we are as adventurers, as explorers, at as frontier people. throughout history, humankind has gazed up at the celestial body, the moon, with wonder. host: nasa returning to the moon in 2024. open forum " here on washington journal" and first is louise, republican caller. caller: hello, i called about president trump. he must be the most honest man in the world because he's been

indicted, he's been impeached. he is not creating the chaos. the news media and the democrats hand-in-hand are creating the chaos. there is nothing chaotic about donald trump. its about the whole conglomerate of people that absolutely hate his love for the people. his respect for his country and they despise him for it. it is the globalists versus ordinary human beings. this guy is not creating the chaos, its being created by other people against him. i support president trump and i will vote for him and

republicans can walk and chew gum at the same time. host: onto her democratic line, minnesota or caller is up next, good morning. caller: yes, i want to suggest that trump lost the election and cut his fans in half. if he runs again, he will not congratulate the winner if he loses. he will be the same. he is his own worst enemy. he thinks he is jesus christ. i think, uh, the republicans who think of him, [indiscernible] host: pond to frank in fort

lauderdale, its open forum. caller: i'd like to talk about the election for state supreme court in wisconsin today. judge dan kelly is running for the state supreme court against a lady whose first name is janet but i forget her last name. she was or is a judge now in the lower court. i understand that she did not sentence a man who raved a young boy. he was convicted of the crime but she did not sentence him. that seems very strange to me. i wooden one anyone on the bench

with that kind of belief. i would urge the people of wisconsin to vote for judge dan kelly for the state supreme court. host: here is the associated press reporting on that story from their local station.

crosby, texas on the democrats line, go ahead. caller: how are you doing this morning? host: doing great thanks. caller: i have five questions for the republicans. when it comes to trump, i am a veteran and he talked about the goldstar family. he talked about mccain. he is talking about hillary. at the same time, it talks about when they found the laptop with hillary. when he talks to the christian part of republicans, he talks about repenting and he said he never has. he always wants to succor somebody and do something for him. he says the work is not at the quality so i will give you half.

if you let people cheat you out of your business, they come at you. when it comes to people that try to overturn the election, you have to deal with it out of new york city. republicans, think about what the man has done. he is facing criminal not civil charges and he has two more cases he's got to go through. biden can stay-at-home. i will vote for him one way or another. think about what trump has done and when it comes to the wall, his policy is still in place. they are keeping kids from their mama. host: next is republican line,

its open forum, go ahead. caller: how are you all doing? what i want to say is that it seems like the lady should be indicted for blackmailing and extorting money. michael cohen gave him the money and trump did not put any money in her hands. the american people need to realize that there is no guilty there, that was michael cohen. they should get her for extorting, trying to extort the president were michael collins because he gave her the money. the democrats are the ones being above the law. they impeach trump and they did

go by the law. they had a kangaroo court and got the man indicted. they impeached him, they tried to impeach him twice. they say on tv that everyone had to look at that. people need to open up their eyes whether you are a democrat or a republican or independent. they are the ones that are above the law. the democrats are. i ain't never in my lifetime, i'm 74 years old heard of anybody having a kangaroo court to indict mr. trump out of there. host: did is open forum. other news this morning from the political and legal seen in the state of maryland --

host: in washington dc, independent line. caller: i am so grateful for the indictment of -- [indiscernible] and the department of justice. if we do not indict him, that will be a deep disgrace and i am grateful that things will come through to understand -- it must be upheld regardless of who is involved. thank you for all the service you have given to the nation. host: thanks for your call. kelly is next in jacksonville, north carolina. go ahead. you are on the air. democrats line. caller: can you very? -- can you hear me?

host: yes. caller: the gentleman you had, daniel from yahoo! news, i disagree with him and he was saying the latest charge is not important. he doesn't know what is in the 30 plus charges and he doesn't have any right to say anything on what trump will be charged with because we don't know. we may have 30 families -- felonies. trump has been a crook his whole life. all of this is catching up with him. he started being a crook, him and his dad -- did not want to rent to black people and he stole from the elderly. he has done crack -- tax from. --fraud. from university was sued. he sold -- he stole from his

campaign funds. he was ok with them coming in with their weapons. he is a con artist and a sociopath. he needs to be held accountable and all these people on right wing tvp to get educated and learn the truth -- tv need to get educated and learn the truth about donald j. trump. host: he will be arraigned in manhattan criminal court. we will be due -- bring you coverage this evening and the former president is expected to speak at mar-a-lago at 8:15 eastern. we will have reaction to it. your calls and comments and it will be on c-span and on c-span now and on c-span.org. this is jerry on the republican line. caller: yes.

i had to sit and listen to the last person rambling. she needs to check her facts. the reason i called in is to say two things. one, trump, he always -- they will all have to be indicted and he did not release his taxes but he went to the supreme court to make them release his taxes and when all the facts are out, they have to release their taxes this is a test game this eight checkers --. taxes. this is a test game -- chess game. this ain't checkers. host: -- caller: he is responsible for the pandemic, over 600,000 people losing their lives and he

lied about it and said drink bleach or wait until april. it will be over with. with the derailment in ohio, trump, because of his deregulation, that is the problem. he caused a lot of the mental facilities and i would like to say this to all of the blacks calling in. you need to top -- stopping -- stop being -- host: we will switch gears and we are joined next by frontline documentary producer and director correspondent martin smith and he is with us to talk about his latest film, the docuseries beginning tonight on pbs, "america and the taliban", which examines how the american 20 year investment in -- ended

in taliban victory. that is next. ♪ >> listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio just got easier. catch washington today for a fast-paced report of the stores of the day and listen to c-span every time. just tell your smart speaker, "play c-span radio." c-span, powered by cable. >> c-spanshop.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 anytime at c-spanshop.org.

>> 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 livestreamed floor proceedings from congress, white house events, the court, campaigns, and more from the world of politics. all at your fingertips. you can also stay current with the latest episodes of "washington journal" and find scheduling information for c-span's tv network and c-span radio, plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available at the apple store and google play. download it for free today. c-span now, your front row seat to washington anytime, anywhere. >> order your copy of the 118th congress.

directory. it is your access to the federal government, with bio and contact information for every house and senate member, important information on congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies, and state governors. scan the code right to order your copy today. or go to c-span.org. it is $29.95, plus shipping and handling and every purchase helps to support our nonprofit operations. host: joining us as frontline producer and director martin smith whose new series debuts this evening, "america and the taliban", thank you for getting up early. guest: you're quite welcome. host: let me ask you, what did you set out to find in this return to afghanistan and putting together this series for pbs? guest: we consume our news in

short clips here and there and it seemed to us a good idea to take a whole big look at the last 20 years and put everything in as much context as we could. once we saw those horrific scenes in august of 2021, people rushing to the airport and people falling from the wings, we thought, let's go in and tell the story of this war and frontline gave us a big campus to do it on and the resources and the idea was to tell the story as completely as we could in three hours. host: how long did you get to spend back in the country? guest: i do remember the months will -- but we we were -- we were back there six weeks and not after the fall and we we -- fall in 2021 and we went back

there in 2022 for another six weeks. we had two long trips in afghanistan and i have been covering them for several years so we had the materials we gathered. host: from the vantage point of happening in 2021 and 2020 to come up what has changed significantly about the country since the departure of the united states, since the end of the war and the departure of the u.s.? guest: it is a good question but the first question i asked as i came in from the airport into kabul. it was, people told me, we are happy the war is over and the violence has decreased. we feel more secure. at the same time, most of them said to me they were not happy about that taliban rule, the restrictions, and it was a mixed

bag. they were happy on the one hand, but they were uncertain about their future and where they were going under the taliban. host: can i also say that your documentary, "america and the taliban", which debuts tonight on pbs, comes at a time, from my experience, the news and the reporting on the people of afghanistan, since the departure of the u.s., it becomes increasingly difficult to find out any information about what has happened in that country. pete: it is -- guest: it is and it is up riots state and has no friends -- a pariah state and has no friends. it has closed down quite a bit since we were there and after the fall of kabul, the taliban were gloating and they were happy about their victory. they have sacrificed many more lives than we did.

they emerged victorious after 20 years and they were pleased to tell us their side of the story. when we we -- went back in 2022, they were less open. they were less comfortable with the way things were going. what emerged and what was predictable was a split within the taliban. there had always been two major factions of the taliban even during the war years. so, those two factions were vying for control and had different ideas about what afghanistan should like -- look like going forward. that attention was there and it was a different country in 22 and 2021. host: one of the very moving pieces from the video in the documentaries, the visit to the pediatric ward and the children

suffering from malnutrition, along -- part of a law -- long list of ailments in that country. guest: this is a poor country and even when the u.s. and nato forces were running the show in afghanistan, there was starvation and malnutrition clinics packed with children. it is somewhat worse but it would be wrong to think that this is simply the result of the taliban takeover, although there are many signs of suffering you see around the country, as a people emerge from decades of war. host: martin smith is with us and he is the director and producer with frontline and their series tonight on pbs, "america and the taliban", along with his producer partner, reporting partner from

afghanistan and our number if you would like to join the conversation, questions for martin smith will stop (202) 748-8001 -- martin smith. (202) 748-8001 is a line for republicans, democrats, (202) 748-8000 and independents and others, (202) 748-8002. i will play out piece of video of you asking permission to cover part of the country you covered before but set this up for us because we see you in front of a group of taliban officials. what did it take to get to that point? guest: that is the governor in the mirror -- the middle that i am talking to. i have been in the province in southern afghanistan, a stronghold for the taliban through the 20 years of war and i had been with the approval of marines and we went to the furthest point south that any u.s. troops went and engaged

with numerous skirmishes with the taliban and i talked to villagers down there and i wanted to go back and find the same villagers we spoke to. i needed permission and i was told i needed to go talk to the governor. the governor walked into the room with an entourage of fellow taliban officials. i was there talking to him about -- generally talking about the state of things but also there to ask his permission to go. host: west take a look at that conversation. [video clip] >> we push onto home and province -- we push onto the prophets. -- prophets -- prophets --pro vince. ♪ >> there was heavy fighting here and much of the city was scarred.

i made an appointment to meet with the governor. i needed permission to return to the areas we have visited years earlier. the governor fought for many years to expel the foreigners. >> i would like to ask you what you believe are the reasons for your -- [speaking foreign language] >> eventually, i stared the conversation towards what i had come for, permission to have further south. we work in a town named

[speaking foreign language] i showed the governor the scene of the villagers when we were following marines. our purpose of going down there is to meet the people we met an understanding that history has to be told from two size --side s. [speaking foreign language] >> i think you --thank you. a day later, our group was granted permission. ♪ when we arrived, the local taliban were waiting for us. host: martin smith, i have to

ask, i am not sure you are a poker player but i am not sure how you state so calm in the midst of a potentially dangerous situation meeting with taliban officials. guest: at they were to arrest and hold me hostage for whatever reason, it would be -- it will bring heat on them. it is not something that i think they wanted to engage in. i felt pretty sure i was going to be left alone. you will never know if you are in the field if some younger talib doesn't know who you are and doesn't know the consequences if he messed with you but i think the officials, like the governor, don't want to get into controversy over holding an american. on the other hand, some reporters have fallen on hard

luck and have been taken. i have covered afghanistan for a long time so you get somewhat accustomed to the risk you are taking. host: the longer version of the clip, you speak with a person you had seen before, an older member who had no fear -- who had no fear of saying what he had to say even with the taliban present and their weapons. he says as he was speaking. guest: he said, " i am not afraid of the taliban. i am not afraid of you but only afraid of god. " i am here" to tell you that life is better --" i am here to tell you that life is better and the marines never helped us for the taliban hasn't helped us but we are glad the war is over." host: there are some intramural

attacks in afghanistan, my correct? -- am i correct? guest: there are, there is an isis group making trouble in the northeast of the country and there is a group of former soldiers who have come together to put up some resistance and they get down into kabul and put bombs around. there is violence going on but it is a lot less than it used to be. we were free to travel around the country for the most part. you had a scene with me asking permission but for the most part, we hired a driver and drove out of kabul and spoke with people. host: this series "america and the taliban" airing tonight at pbs at eastern -- 8 p.m. eastern. lots of calls for you.

we will go to austin, texas. page. --paige. caller: i have watched all your documentaries on frontline and i think they're great. i am looking forward to watching a documentary to might -- tonight. how do you get the access you get especially in countries like afghanistan and saudi arabia, where you have really good access to high-level people? i am wondering how you get that level of trust, especially for an american journalist. thank you. guest: thank you for your call and thank you for watching. i -- i have been at this for a long time and you make contacts. there is no one single method whereby you are able to gain access. i will say in afghanistan, we

did not get all the axes i hoped at the highest level -- access i hope that the highest level. we did meet some but there were others i wanted to get to but we you -- but you depend on the local producers you higher upon meditations you get from other journalists or people you meet in the country while you are there. you hire them and they have their own rolodex is of phone numbers -- rolodexes of phone numbers and you do what you can and it is a frustrating process and in the film, it looks like everyone we asked spoke to us but in fact, there are a lot of rejections. host: let's hear from isaac, independent line, woodbridge, virginia. caller: mi on their --am i on the air? host: yes you are.

caller: how are you doing? for 1.5 years, the taliban is in power and it is clear that they are there to say --stay. it is time -- is it time for the international community to recommend the taliban as a legitimate government? guest: that is a good question. right now, it is in prior -- it is a pariah state. they have had a lot of trains with pakistan that supported them --strains with pakistan that supported them. we have talked to them and money is going to the country but not through the government but to help humanitarian organizations in the country. the exact progress that has been made in the talks that are ongoing between u.s. representatives and the taliban

is unknown to us. so, where we are in terms of getting to any kind of deal whereby we would recognize them and return -- in return for whatever we are asking for, whether it is women's education or any other issues, is a little bit of a black box. i don't know where we are. at some point, i suppose we will recognize the taliban. perhaps it is time to examine that. host: let's hear from rahm -- ron from the democrats line. caller: back when the taliban were blowing up the statues in the 90's, i took to reading a little bit of history of afghanistan and it seemed to me that afghanistan was never really a cohesive country with a sense of nation.

it is more cooperation -- conglomeration of tribes. can you speak to the history of afghanistan over the last 200 years? that might give us a better idea of what we are dealing with. guest: what is important to understand that the taliban ever since group within that country, largely parts to --pashtun and they put together a government of them and others and their other groups and these are large ethnic groups, nationalities, that are vying for power and there has been more cohesiveness in afghanistan prior to the taliban or the russian invasion

in the 1979. there was an era before that that the country was moving along a more democratic path, where these groups were working together. now, the opposite is happening and the pashtuns are an amort -- minority group and they have control militarily. it is a good exercise to look at the history. i am not an expert on the last 200 years but in the 20th century, afghanistan has enjoyed some decades of relative cohesion amongst those various groups. host: what did you observe about the role in the rights of women

in afghanistan since the departure of the united states? guest: the islamic emirates of afghanistan is an exercise in applying a very harsh interpretation of islam. most would say it does not resemble as long to them -- islam to them. this is their experiment. it was tried in the 90's and 9/11 happened and they lost power and now they are back and they are showing no signs of any change since that first exercise in the 90's, weller -- where adulterers were stoned and people are -- had their hands chopped off for stealing and women's rights hardly existed. that is where we are now with the taliban.

in terms of women's rights, women are not -- girls are not allowed to attend school after puberty and can go to university. they said they will change that but we haven't seen that change yet and this is part of the divisions with the taliban. there are different branches in the taliban that have different views. women are not allowed to go outside without an excerpt -- escort. it is important to note the blue burqa that you see in mentor -- many pictures, but it is important to note in kabul and many cities, some of these edicts are issued and plastered on posters that you should cover in many -- cover if you are a woman but not all women obey that and not all women are arrested when they disobey. it is a mix. they can be arrested and harassed and they often are if

they don't follow the rules. the taliban based in the south, the birthplace, of the movement have a strict interpretation. they care about these restrictions more than they do about fixing roads or frisking -- opening hospitals. host: were you able to speak to women in afghanistan about their status? guest: we do that in the third hour of the series that airs on april 25. some of those were young girls, high school age. some were women activists. some have since left the country because they have had death threats against them. others are continuing bravely and defiantly to state in the country and resist. we talked to one women -- women

--woman. we could not show her face and we did not have it in be documentary but she showed -- sold all her jewelry to eat. she can't go out and she had the taliban visitor home and looking for her when she was not there. it is a grim situation and people don't know where the red lines are and where they might cross a redline and get in serious trouble. host: let's hear from caller: good morning, what's the current situation for the people in afghanistan who helped our military? did you have an opportunity to talk to them? what is it like on the ground? maybe you could give us a flavor

of what exactly like there for the people who may be in danger who helped our military. guest: that's a very unhappy situation. we talked to people who worked with u.s. agencies as well as the military. they dope fully understand often that you're a journalist in your role is to report and you are not running a relief agency. even today, we get emails throughout every week from people desperate to get out, fearing for their lives. there have been revenge killings of people who worked for the u.s. military or for any u.s. affiliated or nato affiliated agencies. that is a bad situation. if you talk to the high level

tell about officials, they say we've granted amnesty and everything's fine. that is not the case on the ground with some commanders here or there who want to take revenge. they have. i'm not sure if its the official policy at the highest level although i've had some people in a position to know say yeah it is the position of the highest level so its a confusing situation and there's good reason for people to fear and i feel very torn about my inability really to help all those people. there are tens of thousands of people who are trapped. host: we've got a little less than half an hour left with our guest martin smith. america and the taliban is the new documentary tonight at 10:00 p.m. on pbs.

we welcome your questions and comments. i wanted to go back in time because you included that news conference shortly after the u.s. invasion in afghanistan. it revealed the tell about -- tell a ban -- tell about - t aliban. [video clip] >> in late november, 2001 at a big hotel in germany, the un-sponsored a conference to determine who would rule the new afghanistan. >> we are putting the pressure on afghan delegates. >> the taliban were excluded. there were a whole slew of afghan participants invited from the northern alliance to past

students and afghans tied to iran but no taliban. >> was it ever considered for them to attend? >> not in my mind. i think the general feeling was they were defeated and they were out and we were going to try to do it as best we can with the groups you mentioned. it is customary in postwar situations to invite the vanquished to sit at the table to discuss the future. a decision is made not to invite the taliban. was that a mistake? >> it may have been too early because they had been quite defeated, there were pockets of resistance and they had gone in

as the legitimate government. for many in the u.s., it was too early. >> by the end of the conference, hamid karzai, charismatic and the speaking afghan politician with connection to the cia was chosen of afghanistan's new interim leader. some taliban leaders were looking to negotiate a deal, offered to surrender they could remain in afghanistan and live in dignity. host: they hindsight look of not including the taliban. did they use that through the years as one of their bargaining points against the united states and against the existing government of afghanistan of the time? guest: i dope know quite how they used it but i do know that they were embittered and it

strengthened the hardliners within the group. had there been an opportunity for the taliban to have a seat at the table, it might have been an opportunity to quash some of the hardliners and bring some cooperation to the postinvasion era. what's interesting is if you roll the clip further, you would get to general petraeus who is the commander of troops on the ground and before that he was at central command in a higher position. he said that's a very good question and he thinks that in his postmortem of the war, he sees the refusal to allow the taliban boys to have been a mistake.

i was quite surprised by that. i did not expect that coming from him. and others who said that if there was ever a time when we could have reduced the violence and made peace earlier, that would hit. once we refuse that, it was all war all the time in the years going forward. host: next up is ben from virginia, good morning. caller: good morning. i wanted to convey to you and all those who are listening today what great programming you have on the front line. when i hear you with research on international security and foreign affairs which is great in its just like c-span to

convey to us a message and its unbelievable reporting. i am fascinated. i watch you over the years and i follow that closely. i also wanted to add if its possible to possibly do a program on the root cause of the current conflict with china, explaining to the american people where its coming from? i believe its based on strategic companies more than all the rattling we hear from congress. then the people of this country could have a better feel for it. cute as -- kudos to you, rate programming based on your facts and findings. thank you, guys. guest: thank you very much. host: we will hear from frisco,

texas on the independent line. caller: good morning, gentlemen. i'm calling to touch on a question the earlier caller from michigan asked about afghanistan as a nation. one thing no one talks about in the media or certain circles is the current borders in asia, the colonial borders. i would like for mr. smith to look a little bit deeper. afghanistan has a 10,000 year old recorded history. there are over one million muslims over there in prison. these were all part of what was afghanistan before. pakistan did not exist.

its a colonial border the british put in place. to some degree, i think the challenges that are facing that region and today, every nation, every government and part of it is they dope learn from the mistakes of history and were doomed to repeat it. i think we should look a little bit at more layers before arriving at policies and strategies and implementing them. that is my comment and have a wonderful day. guest: thank you, i think you're absolutely correct. after 9/11, we were operating on a motion.

the events of 9/11 and new york and washington had stirred americans to support an invasion of a country we really did and understand. there was an exchange with one u.s. official and a pakistani official in the pakistani official said you have to understand our history in the u.s. official very high up in the state department answered, i'm sorry, sir, but for us, history begins today. that is one example of the sort of myopia that americans too often bring to the world stage, a sort of idealistic approach to things, thinking we can come in and turn a country around that has been unknown to us, country that has ousted the british twice in the russians once and now us3.

it behooves us to understand better the situation. you are right, the borders are disputed on the border with pakistan is disputed and most pashtuns live in pakistan. pakistan supported the pashtun taliban movement during the war and there are historical reasons for this. it behooves us to understand better the history and the context. what we tried to do in the series, we are not reaching back 200 years. i did not have 10 hours to do this. i had three so we are providing context for the last 20 years of our war. you are right, there is a lot in the history that informs this. the people there are much more conscious of their history then

we would give them credit for. conversations you have with afghans will often range into these subjects, the vendettas that go back between the various groups. host: one of the more brutally armored -- honest conversations you have in the u.s. is the conversation with one of the bomb makers responsible for the deaths of civilians, not just soldiers as you point out in the documentary. let's take a look at that. [video clip] >> i was the leader of an attack on foreigners. >> he was one of the akhani operatives. you made car bombs? >> yes. bomb vests. >> suicide vest. pete emphasized the ties to pakistan. >> you say the pakistan military was supporting the training that you received? >> it was in their international

interest. at that time, they wanted to train the local government. >> so the local pakistanis were training you. >> at that time, that was their initial interest. >> one of his biggest suicide attacks in downtown kabul in 2008. >> 40 people are dead after a car bomb tore the front off the embassy. >> they establish the pakistani spy service,the isi had helped the akhani network planned the attack. >> three civilians died. >> the americans also accuse him of the attack of the american embassy. >> the attack on the serena hotel?

and these attacks inevitably kill civilians. >> yes. don think i am not in agony. >> i have a list of all the attacks that were mounted by the telephone and the akhani network and i can share it with you. >> i done want to see that. >> a tele-band car bomb in kabul kills 10 civilians another bombing outside an afghan military base kills four afghans. in a span of a week, 24 americans are killed, 107 afghan civilians. >> but who is the target? >> if you go into a market and set up a car bomb, it will kill women and children and innocent civilians. host: martin smith, the person you're interviewing saying it

sounds like this was collateral damage to the war. guest: yeah, but it was collateral damage that they knew they would inflict. as he says, this was fighting. to the point of the first fellow , pakistan support for that taliban was key for their victory. it was basically that the pakistani spy service, the isi a very powerful branch of the military, really made the bet that americans would leave. that's a safe that, we work to stay there forever and they figured once the americans leave, they want a friendship with the tell about -- tell about - taliban who are likely to take over. they threw in their lot with the

tele-band - taliban and although they were a u.s. ally, they were assisting in the does -- a duplicitous fashion to help their friend, the united states'enemy. its a very complicated situation but it speaks to the history. the pashtun population in pakistan is quite large and they could go up against pashtun nationalism in their country or afghanistan. host: did the isi ever admit they were eating the afghans ? >> we did go to pakistan for this project but i been there in the past and officials have admitted that yes, we support the taliban. they dole like to do that on camera but they will tell you that privately. host: let's hear from angela

from west palm beach florida. caller: good morning, i have an observation and a question. my observation is based on experience of maysan who was a commander in afghanistan. a lot that i know about what was on there because i wanted to pay attention having a family member there. its been extremely painful for my sun and other military members, not to mention those injured and killed to see what happened and see how these actions went. in case people are starting to forget were not aware, what that must've been like for people like maysan -- my sun.

they tried to get the local government going and had some progress in of course, no its all disappeared. my question goes back to your comments about general petraeus stating that the television should at -- the taliban should have been at the table. as her history teacher, are we learning from history? are we doomed to repeat it? do we had the capability in our government, the experts, the information to understand nations and people and issues better? my sun had years of training before he went to afghanistan where he learned the language and a lot about the people and realized when he got there important issues had not been covered. how are we doing in educating

our nations decision-makers? host: thank you for your question and your sons service. guest: thank you very much for those points about the people that served in afghanistan, many of whom i got to know and was embedded with marines in the south and the u.s. army east of afghanistan. many of them were frustrated by the mission they were sent on. they increasingly saw it as an impossible mission that was very hard for them and many of them gave their lives for what turned out to be, i do think you can say it any other way but a disaster in terms of our investment there, trillions of dollars. i don think we are doing very well. as i said earlier, we rushed

into this war after 9/11 on an emotional binge and took out thetaliban. the u.s. military can do that kind of thing very easily. then what? i think there are people in washington, people in the u.s. who study countries like iraq and afghanistan and know a lot. i met with these people and they often have an office in the basement of some office building in washington. but they know a lot about what's going on but that's different than the people at the top that our politicians who down have a special expertise in what's going on in this country. it behooves them to listen to the resources and tap the resources they have. we were in a rush. we had the idea that we could

instill this country with western values which i think was a nation build place we understood little about and i think that is where we got lost. we wandered into this war, we rushed into this war and then we lost our sense of mission. once the initial mission was to take out al qaeda and take out bin laden and that was achieved and we kept on with the kind of nation building approach that really did have much of a chance of working in afghanistan for many different reasons. host: you pointed out the trillions of dollars spent with the ongoing story and tracking of that money is noah $2.3 trillion worth of spending between 2001 and 2021 and two billions -- and to be in dollars

of that is veterans care. we had a special inspector general for afghanistan reached read -- reconstruction and every time it was about the latest amount of money being overspent on afghanistan or misspent in afghanistan. on the money alone, why do you think the message was not perceived that we seemed to be frittering away money in afghanistan? guest: the 2.5 trillion or whatever it is is only part of the story because we borrowed money through bonds, treasury sales to pay for the war and by the time we pay off the interest of the $2 trillion, estimates are that we will be up toward seven or $8 trillion over the next several decades. its an enormous amount of money. we thought we could build a

western-style democracy there and there were many afghans who returned to the country who believed in that same mission. but it was, in my view, impossible as long as pakistan was supporting the taliban and giving them sanctuary. as long as they had a legitimacy in the countryside among people, for those afghans in the cities to really be able to ground the kind of institutions and reforms they needed to in order to establish a working government. by the time -- obama started to wind down the war and when trump comes in, he is in a rush to get a deal with the taliban, a lot in that deal, there was a lot given to the taliban for nothing

really in return from them. president biden stuck with that deal and it all leads to an extremely messy and heartbreaking scene we saw at the airport with people falling off of wings of airplanes as they tried desperately to get out of the country. host: couple of more calls, marion and chester, virginia. caller: i am a veteran. i was fortunate enough to be married to two 82nd airborne and one buffalo soldier. my question is, why did we have so much equipment in afghanistan to begin with? was it plans to leave it there for the taliban? there was enough there to supply a whole division or more.

the 82nd airborne never had that much equipment so why was it not taken out and why was it there in the first place? with all the money we spent in afghanistan, are we not doing the same thing in ukraine? we are putting money in their with and admission there is no accountability. are we covering up for another failing? this has been happening too much in our military actions and i am thoroughly convinced at this point that after 400 years, our military service in my family, i would not recommend one of my children to go into the military now. host: thanks for your comments. guest: that's a powerful comment, i appreciate your call. the idea here was that the

afghans, once we departed, the afghan government we backed with its police and military forces was to take much of that equipment and use it to provide security. they would provide that to the fledgling afghan state that was fighting the taliban. that did happen. the rush to the exits that happened in august of 21 took most people by surprise. that the taliban strength was such that they could roll in. you will see in the third hour of the series that it should not have been much of a surprise. the taliban were steadily gaining ground and we were not moving to remove all that equipment. the idea was that much of that was going to stay and be used by the afghans. it did happen that way. host: let's hear from leo in arkansas, democrats line, go ahead. caller: hello.

thank you very much. we are talking about history here and peace and war. in current history, there has been 35+ years of peace corps volunteers living in afghanistan. there has been professors in the peace corps and they learned to speak afghani for 23 years and there was hundreds of these people. some of them down thank in political levels. they think its -- they think at social levels. they talk to people and plant crops. there might be a little bit of money here and there but we do not currently [indiscernible] people that have the idea of peace, we sort of look at this armageddon thing. afghanistan probably, i'm not an

expert, lives between war and peace forever. have you spoken with any x peace corps volunteers who are knowledgeable? thank you very much. guest: i have spoken to people on provincial reconstruction teams and spoken to people who worked there. they work for various nongovernmental organizations working to help farmers and working to help install pumps in remote villages so they can have water. all of these people with a great deal of expertise working hard for peace were targets for the taliban. the taliban knew they had to pack away at these various teams

of people and it made it hard for there to be steady progress. the whole idea that was initially instituted under president obama was to send in troops and have them execute a policy of counterinsurgency was to clear areas of the taliban, hold onto them and build resources whether it be clinics, schools, farming, administration. there are various sorts of things that would make people's lives better. and then connect to a central government that we backed. that did work very well. the central government was rife with corruption and it was very hard for the u.s. soldiers or marines to hold on to these places so they could be

protected while building was going on. the whole project under the banner of counterinsurgency didn't work. host: the new docuseries america and the taliban airs tonight. it will also air on the frontline a youtube channel. martin smith, thanks so much for speaking with us and our callers on "washington journal." guest: thank you for having me. host: that will do it. we are back tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. eastern. hope you have a great day. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪

>> reportedly their way more than 30 felony counts against former president donald from hush money to actress stormy daniels. but the details of the charges remain under seal until 2:15 eastern this afternoon. this will be the first ever criminal charges against a former u.s. president. an order issued night, supreme court judge s electronic devicesludi cell phones and laptops will not allowed in the manhattan urtrm while the president -- there was petition foraigned. broadcas and devices. market watch reports the judge

grantedourtom for media observers to observe durg closed-circuit television and photos will be allowed before the hearing starts. it was denied the cameras. our coverage of former president trump and his arraignment will continue throughout the day and tonight. donald trump is expected to return to florida after his arraignment. he will speak at mar-a-lago live from palm beach florida at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. we plan to take your calls before and after his remarks. you can watch on our free mobile video app, c-span now or online at c-span.org. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government, funded by these television companies and more, including