♪ host: and our conversation continues this morning on the "washington journal," regarding

the federal indictment of former president trump. we want you to participate in this conversation, and here is how you can do so. republicans, (202) 748-8001 is the number for you to call. immigrants, -- democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. if you cannot get through, try the text number, (202) 748-8003. these includes you -- include your first name and city. you can see the social media sites and how to participate there as well. just remember, c-span or c-spanwj. end of the dawn, trump indictment unsealed. he had classified documents in thehower, attack plans, 37 unts, faces 100 years. breitbart.com, trump indictment unseed. 38 counts, including the one

against walt nada, and charged with espionage act violations. the new york times, their front page is full of this as well. chump put u.s. at risk, indictment says, is the banner headline. some of the articles include evidence the president's actions were more overt than known, and case lands in hands of judge who earlier ruled for trump. we believe a -- we will read that later. and the wall street journal this morning. trump indictment unsealed, and there is a picture of a bathroom at mar-a-lago where a lot of the boxes are stored. this is from the department of justice. campaign trail runs through courts is the side article. and the washington post this morning. indictment paint scheme to keep files. they have chosen to highlight

article three, or charge number three. "the classified documents chum stored including information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both u.s. and foreign countries, united states nuclear programs, potential vulnerabilities of the u.s. and its allies to military attack, and plans for possible retaliation in response to a foreign attack." three side articles in the washington post. number one, the indictment of longtime president trump aide walt nada. below that, an analysis, after a career of flattering standards, now comes trump's greatest peril . finally, electability concerns slowly begin to pierce the gop's united front. that is how it is playing this morning in some of the publications.

now we want to get your view in just a minute. but yesterday at 3:00 p.m., special counsel jack smith made a statement. there is what he had to say. >> today an indictment was unsealed, charging donald j. trump with felony violations of our national security laws, as well as participating in a conspiracy to obstruct justice. this indictment was voted by a grand jury of citizens in the southern district of florida. i invite everyone to read it in full to understand the scope and gravity of the crimes charged. the men and women of the united states intelligence community and our armed forces dedicate their lives to protecting our nation and its people. our laws that protect national defense information are critical to the safety and security of the united states, and they must be enforced. violations of those laws put our

country asterisk. -- our country at risk. adherence to the law is a bedrock principle of justice and our nation's commitment to the rule of law sets an example for the world. we have one set of laws in this country, and they apply to everyone. applying those laws, collecting facts -- that is what determines the outcome of an investigation. nothing more, and nothing less. the prosecutors in my office are among the most talented and experienced in the department of justice. they have investigated this case, he went to the highest ethical standards, and they will continue to do so as this case proceeds. it is important for me to note that the defendants in this case must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

to that end, my office will seek a speedy trial in this matter, consistent with the public interest and the rights of the accused. we very much look forward to presenting our case to a jury of citizens in the southern district of florida. in conclusion, i would like to thank the dedicated public servants of the federal bureau of investigation, with whom i office is conducting this investigation and worked tirelessly every day, upholding the rule of law in our country. i am deeply proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with them. host: that was jack smith's full statement yesterday at 3:00 p.m. the new york times this morning, an unflinching special counsel familiar with old cases. from 2010 to 2015 during the obama administration mr. smith led the justice department's public integrity unit, which

investigates politicians and other public figures accused of corruption. it goes on to say that among his more notable corruption cases was a conviction of robert mcdonald, the republican former governor of virginia, that was later overturned by the supreme court, and a conviction of rick renzi, a republican of arizona who mr. trump pardoned during his final hours as president. this to trump's team seized on his spotty record of success in high-stakes cases to cast doubt on his indictment of the former. the trump campaign sent out a fact sheet on mr. smith when news of the indictment broke on thursday, accusing him of trying to target conservatives during the obama era, even though he also investigated democrats, including senator robert menendez of new jersey. in 2015 mr. smith left washington to accept a post in the prosecutors office in nashville, in part to be closer to family members.

he was appointed as acting u.s. attorney when mr. trump fired obama-appointed attorneys, but left for a job at a private health care company after being passed over for a permanent employment in the post, according to law enforcement officials who worked with him in tennessee. james sebring, florida, what is your reaction to the indictment of former president trump? caller: well, good morning. i would say this. nobody is above the law. i'm not surprised. once biden was sworn in as president of the united states the former president should not have any classified documents at his home, or anywhere. let the legal system work.

the law of the land is what it is. host: saying that, what do you think about the fact that there were documents found in president's delaware home? caller: yes, that is true. and then that is going to the process as well. also vice president mike pence had documents at his home too. so, if it is going around right now, mr. pence says mistakes were made, and i'm sure mr. biden made a mistake too. trump, when he has hundreds of documents and said he had turned it all over, and the fbi came in his home and there were still more documents, shame on him. host: that is james in sebring, florida. this is a republican in massachusetts.

bill, what is your reaction? caller: now that we do not have a democracy or republic anymore, what should my reaction be? it is now we are told by the government who we can and can't vote for? the only guy who has been persecuted more than donald trump was jesus h. christ. he is the only guy who has been persecuted more. what is next more -- what is next? spitting on the sidewalk? 50 indictments? satan or charles manson, we are supposed to -- host: duke is an independent in maine. caller: good morning, c-span. i've been thinking that if donald trump is as innocent as he claims he is, why isn't he out there trying to prove his innocence? i cannot see where he is trying to prove anything, and i'm

getting so sick and tired of hearing him cry like a baby. give that fool a cry towel. i am sick and tired of it. biden and pence had those documents and stuff? i don't understand, why would you take any of that stuff with you? i don't care if you are a democrat, or what. i don't understand why the two would take anything with you. host: that is duke in maine. 7:30 p.m. eastern time thursday night the news came from donald trump's truth social that he was going to be indicted. within half an hour he had a statement out on video. here it is. >> sadly, we are a nation in decline, and yet they go after a popular president, a president who got more votes than any

sitting president in the history of our country, by far, and did much better the second time in the election than the first. and they go after him on a hoax. just like the russia, russia, russia hoax and all of the others. they cannot stop because it is election interference of the highest level. there has never been anything like what has happened. i am an innocent man. i am an innocent person. they had the mueller report. that came out. no collusion after 2.5 years. that was set up by hillary clinton and democrats. but this is what they do. this is what they do so well. there would devote that -- if they would devote their energies to integrity it would be a lot better for our country. they could do a lot of great things. but when you look at what has happened to our country in the last three years, we are energy independent, we had a strong military that wasn't woke.

we were doing so well. we were respected all over the world. we had the biggest tax cuts in history. and what do you do? you have a president where an election was taken, got more votes than any sitting president in history by far. never anything even close, and they come after me. because now we are leading in the polls again by a lot against biden. and against the republicans, by a lot. and we went up to a level that they figured the way they are going to stop us is by using what is called warfare. that is what it is, warfare for the law. we cannot let it happen. our country is going to hell, and they come after donald trump, weaponizing the justice department, weaponizing the fbi. we cannot let this continue to go on, because it is ripping our

country to shreds. we have such big problems, and this should not be one of them. it is a hoax. the whole thing is a hoax, just like russia, russia, russia, just like the fake dossier. he saw the mueller report. it was all a big hoax. you had two impeachments, and they lost, and we won. and we had tremendous support. but that was a hoax and a scam. and now they are doing it again. it is just a continuation. seven years, even after i am out. but it is called election interference. they are trying to destroy a reputation so they can win an election. that is just as bad as doing any of the other things that have been done over the last number of years, and especially during the 2020 election. i just want to tell you i am an innocent man, i did nothing wrong, and we will fight this just like we have been fighting for seven years. it would be wonderful if we could -- if we could devote our

full-time to making america great in, and that's exactly what we did, but now our country is in decline. we are a failing nation. and this is what they do. i am an innocent man. we will prove that again. seven years of proving it, and here we go again. very unfair, but that is the way it is. i just want to thank everybody. we are doing something very special for our country. we are putting america first. i always put america first. that is why we were in a position, unfortunately that position is no longer valid because they have done such a poor job. but we are in a position where we are going to make america great again. i am innocent and we will prove that very sound like, and hopefully very quickly. thank you very much. host: that was at about 8:00 p.m. on thursday evening. new york times, inside trump's club when the call came.

former president donald trump was gathered with his core political advisers in the office near his poolside cottage at his club in bedminster, new jersey, when his phone rang on thursday. on the line, according to two people, was one of his lawyers informing him he had been indicted for the second time in less than three months. it goes on to say that mr. trump was surrounded by his political and communication circle, and not by most of his lawyers. it reflected both the uncertainty of when charges might come and how mr. trump has consistently approached his legal challenges. his political advisors have been preparing to exploit the federal indictment for full effect. this team has come to view federal law-enforcement actions against him as a core part of its fundraising strategy. online fundraising, which has long been the lifeblood of mr. trump's political operation, because high and republican

donors shun him, has dried up for all of the republican candidates over the last several years, including mr. trump. gop donors are exhausted, the new york time rights, by constant hysterical appeals to mr. trump to stop democrats from destroying the nation. it takes a lot these days to grab the attention of such contributors. indictments are among the few events in life and the grassroots enough to dip into their pockets. earl in redding, california. what is your reaction? caller: good morning. my reaction is, the more they go after him the more convinced i am that he is the man for the job. and i'm going to renew my donation that i made every month during his first campaign. i have two stories i would like to hear on c-span, "washington journal." one of them, well, we beat this

horse yesterday for three hours. i'm starting to think i'm on msnbc instead of c-span, but two of the stories i would like to hear is the $10 million payoff they found the biden family gone again. another one. or the story of the 60,000 illegals in new york, 5000 of them in times square in a hotel that is about ready to blow up the whole deal. so, this whole biden crime family is going to blow up before this selection never comes. host: that is earl in redding, california. kathleen is in chicago, a democrat. caller: good morning, how are you doing? host: how are you? caller: could you do me a favor before i make my statement? could you place some clips where trump stood up -- i think it was 2016 -- telling the world how he

was going to uphold the law when it comes to classified documents and he was going to beat the drum major? and the stuff he is dragging about when he took over? he was handed that president obama. through 2000 nine, until we had the pandemic this was president obama's economy. trump was supposed to build the wall. he didn't do that. he was supposed to give people good insurance. he didn't do that. big tax cuts. yeah, for the rich. some of these republicans don't watch anything. and also play the part where jack smith said, read the 49 pages. i don't understand, like the man said before, if trump is so innocent, why don't he just stop this hollering and coming to court and prove he is innocent? host: kathleen in chicago.

either way, those 49 pages, go to c-span.org. right at the top of our website you will see the entire indictment. max, summerville, south carolina, independent line. caller: i would like to say that a tiger never changes his stripes, and mr. trump demonstrated who he was when he had an opportunity to put a uniform on and serve his country like all of us did during the vietnam war. he did not show up. i think, though, we should cut him a little bit of slack before he is jailed he needs to go into a men still in -- a mental institution. this man needs help. that was a gut wrenching feeling for every veteran who served this nation --served this nation. and ron desantis is governor george wallace's nephew. thank you so much. host: ben is in bellefonte,

pennsylvania. ben is a republican. go ahead. caller: hi, good morning. i agree with the first caller on one point. i am a firm believer in the fact that nobody is above the law. even if former president. but with that being said i think it goes without saying that this whole situation could be viewed as -- to quote the former president -- a witch hunt. my biggest question is, are they going to seek a gag order for this one? i remember they tried that when he was indicted in new york city, but the judge had the good sense to deny that request from the prosecution. so, say jack smith and company try that with this one. that would prevent the former president from talking about the case, and most importantly defending himself. while the doj and their friends such as abc, nbc, cnn, etc., they can get on tv and make whatever accusations they want.

but he has not allowed to defend himself. that is my biggest concern. host: that is been in pennsylvania. "wall street journal" this morning. legal actions involving donald trump and when they began. they are the brown line or green line is criminal, and the aqua line is simple. you can see that the stormy daniels payment case began the earliest. here is where president trump's presidency ends. and it goes on, and in this case he was indicted. the new york evaluation of real estate assets began in 2019, and is still ongoing. that is a civil case. e. jean carroll began in late 2019 and was found liable this year. january 6 violence began on his

last day of office, and it is ongoing still. the georgia 2020 election interference began after his presidency, and ongoing. that is a criminal case. handling of mar-a-lago documents began in august 2022, and he has been indicted as of this next tuesday will be the official indictment. now, one other case, another criminal case, post-2020 election actions and january 6. this is another case, and it is still not resolved at this point. robert, chicago, democrat. you are on the "washington journal." caller: how are you doing this morning? host: please go ahead. caller: how are you doing this morning? host: fine, how are you? caller: this is a sad time for this country. trump is finally getting what he deserves. he is a liar.

he is a crook. i think he is a communist. he don't care nothing about the country, and he don't care about the constitution. but the saddest thing of all, he don't care nothing about these sorry, lowlife people that support him. and they can't see it. and c-span, you will have changed so much. i have been watching you since the 1980's, and you just let people live now -- lie now. use to check people's feet to the fire. i don't know what is wrong. maybe brian lamb set i don't want this anymore or what, you know what i mean? host: thank you, robert, we appreciate it. dave is an independent in ohio. caller: hi, my call is on the

news you see where they want to say, is this going to help his chances of winning? he should not even be running. he should have been indicted right after january 6. that is all i've got to say. host: richard is next in savannah, georgia. richard, you are on the "washington journal." richard is a republican. caller: good morning. i just find it ironic that the day the house of representatives came out with information that christopher wray tried to keep from them, but because of contempt of court he decided to bring out the burisma problems with the bidens, where joe biden received $5 million and hunter biden received $5 million. a pay to play scheme from burisma in ukraine, and the same day that happened, here comes

the indictment on trump. which, immediately the mainstream media runs cover. if you ask anybody from the democrats and doj, and then headlines everywhere, it is the indictment. the bidens and what they have done, it is really sad to see what this country is going through. all i know is i have seen sta lin, putin, and hitler's arrest political opponents. they have been after this man for seven years. i will end with this. let the people -- 74 million people -- decide if they want him. they are not going after trump, they are going after 80 million people who voted for this idea. not trump, but the idea. host: richard, do you think, in your view does this make you more supportive of president trump and his new bid for the presidency, or does it make you

look at other republicans? caller: no, sir, i am more supportive of trump, because the more they go after him the more over the target he is, and they have something to hide. he wants to clean up the swamp, if you want to call at that, and i firmly believe he can do it. he is a businessman and we need something like him. host: that is richard in savannah. richard also mentioned the fact that the committee in the house of representatives was allowed access to the fbi document thursday, the same day the indictment came down. the washington times is the only publication i can find this morning that has this story. biden, accused of pocketing $5 million bribe while vice president. a paid informant told the fbi that an executive from the ukrainian energy company burisma has documents proving he bribed president biden with $5 million while he was the vice president.

details of the fbi's -- fbi informant's previously undisclosed allegations were revealed after the committee was granted access to the fbi memo in a secure room in the basement of the capitol on june 8, which was thursday. jason is a democrat in st. cloud, minnesota. jason, good morning to you. what is your take on the indictment? caller: good morning, america. good morning, c-span. it is a sad day. it is a sad day when you have to put up a graph showing how many crimes an ex-president. burisma, whatever. you know what a real crime is? donald trump. you bet they have been going after him for seven years. because for seven years this man twisted the law, and the rules, did everything for him. people are saying, he wants to drain the swamp. no, he doesn't.

he didn't want this job. he didn't think people were going to be stupid enough to vote for him. but people are stupid, and they voted for him. and you know what? he came out and said, when he was quoting bible scripture one time he said something about, you know, i am the snake that you guys voted for. well, he is the snake. and in his little video, honesty and integrity? give me a break. folks -- hoax? covid was a hoax too. they killed one million people on his watch. people laughed at us when he was up there because he said such stupid stuff. america first? not america first, my boxes. this is my stuff. now he is running for president again? he is on the revenge to her. he has already said that. he wants to go and everybody else. these guys are talking about the

weaponization of the doj? do you know why they are talking that way? because he weaponized the doj. biden is not going to do that. obama did not do that. bush did not do that. trump is going to get everything he deserves. remember the rallies? he is the one that started the lock him up to chance. host: paul in chesapeake virginia on our independent line. go ahead. caller: here is my issue. not so much on the indictment. they came down the way they came down. my question is this. there was a special counsel appointed for the the budens -- bidens just a few days after they appointed one for donald trump.

now, i need the media, we are seeing where boxes were stored. we are seeing photos laid out on the floor. we are seeing issues and policies and depts. where all these documents with donald tre. they moved with such speed on donald trump, where are all these photos and boxes and storage now? again, i don't know how true it is for different sources about where joe biden had different boxes and things stored. whether it be in chinatown or d.c. i do know about the center and other places in that was stored. evidently, what you are hearing about is all the boxes in the

storage at mar-a-lago. host: thank you for calling. marshall, nashville, republican line. caller: i want to address all voters. you had one caller save you do not listen to fax or fax check. please check my facts. right now you had a president who told the american people that's if you do not get vaccines, you will not be able to go to work or go to a funeral. he recently told the american people, parents, who are concerned about their children being taught about sexual content in third or fourth grade -- these are not your children. they don't belong -- they belong to all of us. host: what is your take?

caller: all voters bank need to stop flying under a particular -- all voters need to stop flying under a particular flag. we need to all fly under the american flag. host: tony in maryland. caller: this indictment is more evidence, even though none was needed, of how morally bankrupt and criminally corrupt donald trump is. this is a guy who wanted to use the military to seize voting machines. he has made the united states a bad country. his own lifelong republican and the republican party. his economic advisor said he was an idiot.

i just do not understand how people can be so broken and empty to support someone like this. it is unfathomable. he should go to jail and die in prison hopefully. host: michael in darwin, maryland on the independent line. caller: thanks for taking my call. the indictment is very well-deserved. i want to add this. we heard from many supporters of donald trump who call your program and say donald trump is so president. he fulfilled all his promises. i will say, i don't know what they mean by promises but if he

fulfilled his promises, i would say all but one. on january 6, he promised the crowd who later bawled to the congress that he would be there with them. many of those people are now in jail. now, to paraphrase donald trump's words, unfortunately for him, or fortunately for the whole country, he will be imprisoned together with them. host: michael in maryland. the current polling average in the gop contest for the presidential not a ration -- nomination, before what happened on thursday at the last couple days. president trump at 53%.

ron desantis at 22%. nikki haley at 4%. the event ramaswamy 2.3%. those are the averages. you can find that on the real clear politics. mary, virginia, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. . i would like to make several comments. our president when he was in office did a good job. he helped close the border and stopped a lot of immigrants coming in that were not what you. you do not be more people coming in when you cannot take care of our own. host: let's go back to the federal indictment itself. the are not talking about the other broad issues. what you think of the indictment of former president trump? caller: i am not happy about it.

i think there are issues that were sent out like exa boxes of documents. i think president bideneeds to be charged also. he had boxes stored everhe that were not secure. host: thank you for calling in. david, north carolina, democra what you think? caller: i am glad you took my call. this should not have happened. they should not have indicted him. it is playing politics. also i hate people saying they are african-american or cuban-american. come to this nation, we are american. i defended this nation. host: you are calling on the democrat line and you think it was a bad idea to indict him? caller: i have to go back.

i will be 77 years old and i have watched these democrats say a lot of things they do not live. barack obama? you can keep your insurance. the biggest lie ever heard in my life. host: we are going to leave it there. we are trying to stick to the topic of the indictment. the first time a former president been indicted. michael, connecticut, independent line. caller: good morning. it is stamford, connecticut. donald trump is a buffoon. the whole thing he put out last night, all he did was repeat himself over and over. every one of you out there, replace him with hilary. what if this was hillary and all the stuff donald trump was up to, hillary was doing, where

were the republicans be? where would coburn be? or would trump be? this is insane. the guy is a psychopath. he wants everybody to give him their money and go to hell. host: do you think that hillary clinton's server situation is similar to the situation and do you think they were treated the same? caller: where is the server? where is the laptop? where are the boxes of files? they are at mar-a-lago. where is this stuff people were talking about? it is not there. these stolen files are at mar-a-lago in florida because "they are mine." this guy is a fool. host: that is michael. if you cannot get through on the

phone lines and want to make a comment, call our -- try our text number, (202) 748-8003. include your first name and city if you would. several other republican candidates have been making comments about this indictment on the campaign trail. here is florida governor ron desantis. [video clip] >> when there is no constitutional accountability, our founding fathers would have predicted the weaponization we have seen with these agencies like the doj and fbi. when you do not have accountability, human nature is such that they will abuse their power. that is what happened. nobody will hold them accountable. what i was in congress, hillary clinton had those emails. i was thinking, what i was a

naval officer, if i would have taken those documents, i would have been court-martialed in a minute. i think there needs to be one standard of justice in this country. let's enforce it on everybody and make sure we all know the rules. you cannot have one faction of society weaponizing their power against factions they don't like. there are high-profile examples but there are examples of ordinary people who may not get the same headline. a pro-life advocate they have 20 fbi storming their house at 2:00 in the morning. you may have pairs going to a school board meeting in virginia that are being surveilled by the fbi area this is not just affecting people at the top but is affecting people throughout our country. host: in wall street journal this morning, the campaign trail

runs through courts. how long this could drag out is unclear. special counsel jack smith said he will seek a speedy trial. donald trump's legal team is expected to fight on many fronts, pushing the timeline well into next year. ron, irving, texas. the extra reaction to the federal indictment of trump? caller: thank you for taking my call. i would like to say that this indictment is ridiculous. there is no founding on it. throughout history, every president has taken many documents. they have stored them in places where no security was there. number one, there is no case for this indictment. absolutely none. that is all i want to say.

on a legal standing, there is no case. bill clinton had documents stuffed in his sock drawer and he was arrested, went to court and all of this, and the court said it was his document. it belonged to him. because he was the president. host: when you hear the readouts of some of the indictments and they say president trump was supposedly presenting these documents to people who were not cleared for them, what is your take on that? caller: i don't believe it. anyone that believes the press, nowadays, after so many years of having congress in and use people even waiting -- news people even waiting pulitzer prizes for coming out and spreading your lies. anything that comes out in the

press is total fabrication. you will have to prove it to me by hitting me over the head with it. i don't believe the press anymore. host: in the republican primary, are you supporting donald trump or another candidate at the -- candidate? caller: i will support whoever the winner of the primary is. i am totally against whatever the democrats have done. it is incredible to me that any american is ok with what is going on in our legal system reagan it is incredible anybody can back anything the democrats are doing host: what do you think of the actions that the republican house of representatives in texas took against attorney general ken paxton? caller: that is another issue

that is coming out of houston, texas where houston is absolutely -- has absolutely done some really beyond the pale things. it will all come out. i am a supporter of ken paxton. i always have been. the guy won a large victory. to do this to him is incredible. i do not believe it. we will see what happens. host: thank you. ron mentioned this. this is a front-page article in the new york times this morning. "evidence of president's actions were more overt than known[video clip] -- nona."

caller: the president of united states is one of the most important positions in the world . you need integrity. donald trump does not have the right temperament. the name, the viciousness. i have nothing against republican policies because -- i am listening to whoever the candidates of the debate. i would like to hear what they have to say. but the gop behavior during speaker mccarthys vote was abominable. the way they handle themselves -- handled themselves, how can i have any respect for them? joe biden has been calm, rational, and listens to advice of staff. that is way president does.

i will not even get started on ron desantis in florida. we all need to get on the same page. host: thank you for calling in. tim, ohio, republican line. caller: thank you so much for taking my call. i am looking at the front page of the wall street journal. i have read the article and i am looking at this picture. i have to hand it to donald trump. i don't think he should be indicted at all. i am incredibly jealous. the reason i am jealous is because there is so much for him to read in the bathroom. host: we will leave it there. john, wisconsin, independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call.

i don't know how i feel about it to be honest. i missed the first 10 minutes or so. i think it is almost apples to apples. all the photos you are showing with all the boxes. i think if he was only found with 300 documents in mar-a-lago , there were 5000 documents in those boxes so what were they all holding? i think this is politicizing. is derangement syndrome. i don't understand. don't agree wi lot of things mr. trump said by the democrats are throwing a whole bowl of spaghetti at the wall, hoping one stranwill stick.

there may be one or two charges he may have to be held accountable for. lastly, it is very possible we have two people running for president in 2024 that may be wearing ankle bracelets. once more information comes out about the bind family issues -- biden family issues. host: walter, republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for having me. i think donald trump should be indicted. you are a country. rule of law. for the gentleman that was listening since the 80's, checking fax -- fax, he should ask why joe biden was not

indicted? why vice president pence was not indicted? we have to get together on the same page as everyone has been saying and unite ourselves and go forward. host: thank you for calling in, walter. ruben, democrat. caller: i heard you say on your c-span show that people need to know what donald trump is actually being charged with, what he has been caught doing, and what he has been lying about. he has actually shown people. he said i am not supposed to show you this, but look at the file. who else has he shown these two? there are war documents and all this stuff. like people with the mueller report. there were people that went to jail bond -- beyond that.

one of his right-hand man was indicted by that. he was caught on a tape. get the speaker of the house of george's life was being threatened because he was being asked for votes. i wish you guys would point this out and show this is what donald trump got caught doing. this is what joe biden did not get caught doing. this is what hillary clinton did not get caught doing but this is what donald trump got caught doing. host: thank you. noris, arizona, republican. caller: good morning, john. host: go ahead. caller: yes, i am a republican, but i am starting to believe that where there is smoke, there

is fire. this has nothing to do with him taking the documents. it has more to do with him keeping the documents and not listening to the archives. over the course of two years, they try to get the documents back. the fact of the matter is they cannot get the back. the flooding of the swimming pool and documents being moved from one place to another. there was a lot going on. i was a supporter of donald trump but there is just beginning to be way too much. i don't think he will be able to win and died concerned about that. host: that said, are you still supporting a republican in the primary and the general? caller: i like nikki haley. i would like to see a woman in that position. i wish the former governor of ohio, kasich, would get into the

race. i used to like that guy a lot. it will not be donald trump. i think there is way too much. i know a lot of my -- republicans talk about 74 million votes. they seem to forget there were 80 million on the other side. there were 80 million people that disagreed. ask yourself, going forward with all these different hits these guys have taken, most people on the independent side, are they going to be more likely to believe stuff or not believe stuff? host: thank you. mark, indiana, independent line. caller: i am mark clock, i am 77 years old. i think you need to face the truth of what has really happened. obama placed in so many people,

communist people, into the fbi and doj and it has become a tyrannical, communist organization that wants to come against anybody who's out and is conservative -- who speaks out and is conservative. secondly, the documents belong to donald trump. in the clinton case, the court ruled he had a right to what he took from the white house. donald trump has the same rights as clinton. ms. clinton said all her information over the internet into computer files the russians could pick up. she would have just about destroyed this country with what she was doing yet they overlook that. plus, she got uranium sent into russia from canada.

so they would have a supply of nuclear weapons. . host: you got the point. front page of the new york times. "case lands in hands of judge who earlier ruled for trump." they have said new cases are randomly delegated to its judges, even if they are related to previous wives. it was not immediately clear whether donald trump lucked out or an exception was made. legal specialists said judge eileen cannon's return was significant. joe, connecticut, republican. hello. caller: good morning. how are you? host: how are you? caller: i am good. you made a great point when you say to the washington times is

the only news station carrying the charisma and bribes. that says it all. all these democrats do not know anything about what is going on in this country. they don't know anything. the other thing i want to save most of these black people that call in probably cannot even --. host: you know what? no. in a couple text messages. stephen from michigan. the difference between trump and joe biden in the documents case is when joe biden without them, he voluntarily gave them back. donald trump did the exact opposite. again, stephen from gladstone, michigan. another text. russia, stormy daniels, double impeachments, it's now this latest effort. donald trump keeps rolling with the charges.

finally, not to be a conspiracy theorist but this indictment hits the trifecta. it distracts from joe biden's woes and use trump with his base, and weakens support among suburban women -- boosts trump with his base and we can support among suburban women. monique, washington, d.c., democrat caller: -- democrat. caller: this is a country of laws. i commented last summei lled last year that we as a society will let certain things go. when it gets to be boiling point, action takes place. i am confused because this is the united states of america but i don't think a law of callers

are really comprehending the information that is coming from the fbi and doj. what they are not understanding -- they keep saying, what about joe biden's papers and mike pence's papers? it is a big difference. when they requested the documents from joe biden and mike pence, they have the go in and look through their homes to see if they had any classified documents. they immediately turned them over. it took donald trump several years to get them declassified information. it is as simple as that. it has nothing to do with republican or democrat. this is a nation of laws. they are not weaponizing -- the

doj and fbi are not weaponizing the republican party. they are doing their job. i was wondering, wherever all of these callers when martin luther king and malcolm x were under scrutiny from the fbi and doj? i did not hear these calls coming in so rapidly. as i said before, this is a country of laws. host: alright, thank you for calling in. a lead editorial this morning in the wall street journal. a destructive trump indictment. whether you love or hate donald trump, his indictment by joe biden's administration is fraught for democracy. it says it is striking that the indictment never mentions the presidential records act that allows presidents access to documents, both classified and

unclassified, once he leaves office. it allows for good faith negotiation with the national archives, yet the indictment seems donald trump had no right to take any classified documents . this is not with the spirit or lot of the presidential records act which was written to recognize such documents had previously been the property of former president's. if the espionage act means presidents cannot retain any classified documents, and is meaningless. this would be part of mr. donald trump's defense. the other cows is whether he turned over the documents or obstructed attempts by the justice department and fbi to attain that. what allegation is during a meeting with the writers and three others, none who had security clearance, he showed documents. saying "as president, i could

have de-classified, but now i can't, but this is a secret." they also say he tried to cover up his classifieds -- by suggesting he high documents and telling an aide to remove documents to conceal them from his lawyer and the fbi. donald trump is his own worst enemy. "this would have gone nowhere had the president just returned the documents but he jerked them around for a year and a half", said by attorney bill barr. this is destructive to the 2024 election and a potential trial will hate the race. it makes it more likely the election will be a referendum on donald trump rather than on mr. biden's referendum.

republicans deserve a more competent shipping with better character than mr. trump, the wall street journal rights, but the indictment might make gop voters less inclined to provide. although the political impact is uncertain, republicans who are tired of donald trump i rally to his side because they see the prosecution is another unfair democratic plot prosecute him. carl, republican what is your te this indictment? caller: i don't believe you should be indicted. people do not have respect for trump. he was the president. biden was a senator. biden should have been indicted already. nobody ever mentions that biden was a senator. host: norwalk, ohio, independent

line, hello. caller: the democrat party has done such an excellent job as far as separating us and creating chaos. let's talk about biden sitting on the boxes he volunteered. he only volunteered them because we found out that he had boxes from the time when he was a senator. let's talk about the indictment. it is strange that all of a sudden we find out that biden broke the law, but when you have a doj that is your right hand man, it is hard to prosecute anybody. nothing will be done, people, unless we do something ourselves. voting people out is ridiculous. he jailed his rival. we are pumping billions into ukraine. biden said if you -- that is on

tape! what more information do you need as far as prosecuting anybody? host: that is tom in norwalk, or ohio, and this is jean. caller: first time caller. everybody knows, and you do too, that this is all political to keep trump from running. they know trump can beat biden. you democrats call us republicans who support trump all kind of names, and give them all kind of time, but when a republican gets on, and they start saying something that you don't like, your hand goes over to the button and cuts them off. you need to be more fair. everybody knows it is political. host: the next call is dan in

bridgetown, tennessee. caller: good morning. bear with me. i had a little bit of lip surgery yesterday. these first two indictments will pale in comparison to the next 2 indictments, which will be a lot more serious. i will make a comment that will italian to the fellow -- will tie into the fellow yo who calle in from tex, -- from texas regarding ken paxton. they just released statistics for the education level here in tennessee, and i guess here in pickett county, our math proficiency is 31% of students

can pass the mouth test, and only 31% can pass the reading proficiency test. 31% and 27% respectively. host: where are we going with this, dan? caller: if you are poorly or undereducated, you are ripe for brainwashing. when you are brainwashed, you going to do nihilism. you might branch off into delusionality. host: let's put a period on this. caller: i appreciate you. host: jim, independent line. caller: i was disappointed in the lack of transparency on the issue. he didn't take questions yesterday, released to the

indictment, and walked away after a brief statement. i when did some details about potential unindicted co-conspirators. i wonder whether mr. trump had effective counsel. he refused to abide by his own counsel's advisement. it should not matter the political party, but a fair judicial process. it is too premature for me to make any more detailed commentary with the evidence we have available at this time, but i appreciate the opportunity to expound on these viewpoints. host: you sound a little like a lawyer. caller: paralegal, sir. host: the new indictment might

not be the last case of significance against trump. the justice department is continuing to investigate his role in the january 6, 2021 attack on the u.s. capitol. another judge in georgia is looking into whether trump broke the law in his efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election in that state. good morning, thomas. caller: let me talk about mr. smith first. he charged john edwards here in north carolina and lost. he charged another senator and the supreme court ruled 8-0 against him. host: john mcdonald of virginia. caller: joe took those documents as low -- joe biden took those

documents as late as 1974. how did he get them out of there? the fbi has had biden's laptop since 2015, and they haven't looked -- joe biden took documents. they were in his corvette. anyone had access to them. he needs to be charged just like trump. there was thomas in north carolina. this is dave in lynchburg, virginia. caller: the wall street journal, chris christie, there are so many places that people are pointing to. how can people still continue to support him? the wall street journal, rupert

murdoch, isn't that fox news? you fox news people have been brainwashed by fox news. maybe you should start reading, instead of listening. it is unbelievable that donald trump still a candidate after all these years of lying on and on, how can he still be in the running? host: dave in lynchburg, virginia. chris christie was on the campaign trail. here is what he had to say. [video clip] >> i chose in 2016 not to challenge donald trump early. so much of what he said was baloney. "i am going to build a wall across the entire mexican border, and mexico is going to pay for it." i knew that that was complete bull, but i thought people are not going to believe that.

mistake! guess what, you have no excuse now. he was therefore 4 years, 2 of them with a republican congress, mexico has not given us a single peso. we paid for all of it. when you see immigration pouring over the southern border, do not wonder whose fault it is. he did not change a single law. mexico is laughing at us at the idea that they were going to pay for a wall on their border. h he wil tell you "i completely succeeded." biden made it worse, but if the wall was there like you promised us, he would not be able to do

this. he would not be in office if it were not for trump. joe biden never beat anyone outside the state of delaware in 45 years except for one guy. donald j. trump! i cannot guarantee you success and what i am about to do, but i guarantee you that at the end of it, you will have no doubt in your mind who i am, what i stand for, and whether i deserve it. that is why i came back to saint anselm's, manchester, new hampshire, to tell all of you, that i intend to seek the republican nomination for president of the united states in 2024. [applause] host: we are continug e conversation this morning on the federal indictment of former president trump on 37 counts

count. we want to hear your views and your thoughts. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8002 for independents. next call -- brian. caller: i want to complement c-span for having the opportunity for callers to call in, and we can all hear the consciousness of so many different viewpoints in this country. i think that is healthy for everybody to listen what is on people's minds. me personally, i have faith albeit imperfect in our legal

system. the old saying applies here. "fool me once, shame on you, f ool me twice, shame on me." one after the other, the bending of the law, it stocks up and up. we have to look rationally at what he represents versus emotionally. host: bill is next in farmington, new york. what is your take on the indictment of former president trump? caller: coming at it from a perspective of having been involved with documents, he has the ability to declassify them, there is a process. he is not the originator of those documents. somebody else wrote them.

if he declassified them the person who wrote them has to know that. the other aspect between the comparison of these documents and biden documents, accidents do happen. they agreed that those documents should be returned. the issue that president trump had, tried to hide them, is rt of the issue of him getting indicted, because he was trying robert hanson has recently died in prison who had been found guilty of having many -- guilty of having sold many documents to the russians. trump may have been keeping them to himself but if that information gets out it is just as damaging to the american government because of the

sensitivity of that information. host: what is your background in document management? caller: i was just involved in that world. i understand what you have to do to maintain sensitivity and how those documents need to be maintained. host: were you involved on a federal level? caller: i don't really want to get into that. it is a big issue when documents get out, even to the public because that information is so sensitive. host: thank you. vicki, sussex,, delaware independent line. caller: i am quite surprised that only a couple of people have even mentioned the indictment itself.

i seemst like they are more interested in the personalities of the party. i said, have you read the document? my sister with a masters degree says, "i will not read that." i said to skip to page 28 and read the actual indictment. host: what was it about page 28 that caught your attention? caller: staff meeting and courts, the one that really grabbed my attention, item number nine, january 2021 to august 8 2022, top-secret,/redacted/redacted. even the coding is redacted! they called it "document

concerning military attacks by a foreign country." host: the entire 49 page indictment is available on c-span.org. at the top you will see it, and you can read it for yourself. thinking about it, that is probably something we should have read on this morning's washington journal. , randy please go ahead. caller: i would like to start by thanking you along with all of the other men and women it takes to bring us this program. you are doing a great service for this nation. in my opinion the former president's actions shows how smart the 82 million americans were who voted him out. that is the silent majority i will stay with. host: that is randy in

millington, michigan. mark is next in salem. caller: i have a different take on this. i think it was a set up. when the government agency that handled the documents that brought the complaint initially, every president prior to donald trump a secure facility, transported all of the documents of the president to that facility, and over a two-year period they sort through them. they provide the staff to do this. the only president they did not do it for was president trump. get the documents all at donald trump's location. people keep saying that he had these classified documents. the president of the united states can declassify documents, hold classified documents

anytime he wants as long as he is president. the court case with bill clinton justifies that. they said any a president takes a document, it is his personal property. unless there is some law i am unaware of that over sheets that, which i don't think there is, he had every right to have those documents. there is a dispute -- they turned it into a criminal case because the guy who did not do his job right is trying to say there was a problem. they're trying to use all these legal cases. host: you seem to have spend a lot of time looking at this. are you a lawyer? caller: no. it is just a hobby of mine. i like to look at court cases. that is where you get the truth. i like to look into all the different aspectss of it.

technically, as far as i can see the case should have never been brought, or even investigated. host: we even investigated. i appreciate your time this morning. here is their banner headline -- "end of hte don. 37 counts. he faces 100 years." on breitbart, " charged with espionage act violations." peers -- here is the banner headline in the new york times this morning, showing a photograph of some documents in the bathroom. the washington post, "indictment

paints scheme to keep files." they choose to highlight article 3 which, is the classified documents that trump stored regarded the weapon capabilities of the united states and foreign countries, nuclear programs, potential vulnerabilities of the u.s. and its allies to attack, and plans for possible retaliation in response to foreign attack." karen in sanford, maine. caller: hi. i definitely think he should be indicted. he has committed so many crimes in the past. he definitely should be. he has been a criminal for a long time. can you hear me? host: we are listening. caller: he lies about

everything. last primary i had to fact check everything. i was going to vote for him. he said mexico was going to pay for the wall, and we ended up paying for it. the insurrection on january 6 was horrific. that was catastrophic. i'm waiting for that to come up. everything else -- he just gets away with everything! and he lies. he should not run again. he held responsible for the crimes he has committed. host: we got the point. manuel, democrat in brighton, colorado. caller: good morning. i am really happy that trump has

been indicted. i cannot believe that given notice that the federal government needed those documents back, gave him a year and a half to give them back, there were attorneys who wrote affidavits indicating that there were no further documents, and then further documents were found. he needs to not only be indicted, but convicted. it was him who brought this on his back. it has nothing to do with biden and all of the attempts to deflect attention from these criminal activities that trump has been in. trump has jeopardized people who

believed in him, who worked for him, to represented him in thousands upon thousands of cases. host: thank you, sir. we are going to leave and talk to deborah in st. george, california. deborah is gone. let's try mark in o'fallon, missouri. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. sayinga true independent, by an do not care for donald trump. i don't care for joe biden at on the indictment, i thi indictment is just another way to tak trump. as a true independent, have seen the democratic party go after him nonstop for th seven years. it is truly unbelievable.

part of the problem, and please d't cut me off, but part of the problem is the mainstream media. it seems like n,, cnn,snbc, they have become politic arms of the democratic party. even c-span has lied and cheated the american people. people need wake up and stop so much taking what the mainstream media says as truth, but really most of it is to omote the political agenda of the democratic party. if you would allow me, i would like to tell you the way that c-span has lied and cheated the american people. that is back when hillary was running against donald trump in

2016. it seemed like c-span had an employee who is meant to moderate one of the debates. i forget his name. apparently, he had gone on his email, or twitter or something like that. he made some extremely negative comments about donald trump, and said some things that were not at all right, and when confronted about it he lied to the american people and said "my twitter feed was hacked." host: the mainstream media and c-span -- caller: if you let me finish my point, when they asked him whether he did it, he lied to the american people. host: will understand that. where do you get your information? caller: a lot of different places.

i tried to listen to the news media, and take out it's in pieces that i feel are truth based on my own -- bits and pieces that i feel are truth based on my own experiences. i read a lot of through the internet on different sites tryyo -- sites to and get different points of view. host: next caller. caller: my take is that hopefully, the united states learns that we need to be able to prepare to deal with narcissists when they get elected, because that is how they will behave in the future when they get elected. we need to create checks and balances for human nature.

president trump obviously is the worst case ever experienced, but we need to change the systems with the documents, allowing them to leave washington. there is a system that is failing and contributed to this wholeness. we need to learn from having a narcissist is a president, and prepare for that in the future. i kind of what also hope that they cut a deal with president trump, and allow him to plead so that he doesn't run again for office, and hopefully this will help heal the country because it is very divided. host: chris in newtown, pennsylvania. this is lewis in arkansas, republican line. caller: i'm republican, but i voted for joe biden last time. he promised us he would legalize

marijuana. i haven't seen him talk about it. he has been hiding in the basement. host: we are talking about the federal indictment of former president trump this morning. if you would like to make a comment on that, you can see phone lines shortly on the screen. if you still want to make a comment, try the text number --(202) 748-8003. that is for text messages only. , if you send a message include your city and your first name as well. missy is in kalamazoo, michigan. caller: it looks like the smoke has cleared where you are! host: i hear you have it in the midwest now. caller: yeah. host: we had it bad though year. i am glad you mentioned -- you

pointed that out. caller: it looks like a nice day. host: it is! caller: i listen a lot, and when you live in a place where people get news from a lot of different sources, you have to make it personal. if you had someone you loved and served in the military, order works in any agencies, or risk to their life for our country, they put their lives on the line to protect us. their body of work they spent their life on. it is on those pieces of paper. we get lost in the weeds a lot, when at the heart of the matter is the content on these documents. that was on the desk of the president at the end of the day, and when he leaves the presidency and takes those, they

are. not his -- those, they are not his. he had his a security clearing taken away at the end of his term. foreign nations know that as a . if -- know that is a vulnerability. host: you for calling in. gail in new york. caller: the reason i wanted to call in his that i was glad that trump was indicted, that i was concerned about who would operate the judicial part, and yesterday when jack smith walked

into that room and he spoke -- he didn't speak long -- i felt so relieved because that man looks like he has got a lot of integrity. to do this right, we will need to have somebody who has a lot of integrity. he said we have to assume that the president is innocent until proven guilty. i thought that was important. he gave kudos to the fbi, which i think needs some support. that is part of our judicial system. i liked the way the man carried himself. i like the fact that he has a detailed indictment, which i'm going to read today, and thank you for posting it. i just feel-good. i feel good about the fact that we will come out of this ok. host: bill is in mobile,

alabama. caller: i hope you will pay attention to this legal point, because it really needs to be addressed. everyone seems concerned about the exposure of these documents to people who did not have a qualified security clearance. it is my understanding that the fbi agents who were sent into donald trump's home together these documents do not have top security clearance. they opened the boxes, they read it, they spread it out on the floor and took pictures, which proves without any question that they have read those documents. if they did get there without top security clearance, the persons who are responsible for sending them there, including merrick garland have clearly violated the law, and those who believe that no one is above the law are right now getting

garland. i hope james comer will get the names of all the fbi agents who went to mar-a-lago, will put them under oath and get them to testify when they received, if they received a top security clearance prior to going into mar-a-lago. host: that is bill in mobile, alabama. christopher is next. caller: let me make a statement. barack obama assassinated a guy named alwar -- host: catherine, new jersey, we're talking about the presidents indictment. cathinin inglewood, new jersey. ca goodorning, peter. he should be convicted.

he should be indicted. he should go to jail. my questiono the republicans is what s going to do with these documents? we bringp hunter biden. what about trump's son-in-law jared kushner who took $2 billion from the saudi's? i am so glad that you are asking people where they get, their information because a lot of this information is made up. have a great day. host: carol in new york, republican. caller: i am a news junkie. i read everything. i watch cnn. i watch fox news. i go from one to the next to the next. as for our president losing his

security clearance, e does not -- he does not lose his security clearance. trump has been attacked since the day he and his wife came down the escalator. there has been one situation after another. our president is allowed to take home certain things. they should be monitoring what is taken if they want only certain things, but no senator, no vice president is allowed to take anything. i have been a democrat. biden's hatred, and the democrats' hatred of this president -- i'm sorry, i'm very upset about it. when clinton went through his situation of being indicted, i became a democrat because i was

angry about what had occurred, but what is going on right now is unbelievable. it is no more than the democrats attacking. and now you have people who are running for president who are purposely running for president only to harass. i appreciate you allowing me to speak. host: carol, are you oh supporter of president trump in this 2024 primary? caller: i certainly am. host: does the indictment make you support him more? caller: yes, it does. host: who is your second choice? caller: i'm not sure. i have been hearing something about this north dakota -- doug? i heard him yesterday. he was wonderful. he sounded wonderful. i can't stand people like pens who sat there and ridiculed the president.

no that he has taken everything from the president, he is going to trash him. christie -- half of these people have got in publicity from trump, and now they are going to trash him! it is a -- as far as everyone calling him a narcissist -- host: sue is in west lebanon, new hampshire, independent line. good morning. caller: thank you for taking the call. it is a very, very sad day for america. we all need to think about how we got here. i too am college-educated, have taken psychology. i take my sources no fromt --

sources not from tv or talking heads, i read. i that half the people don't even know what the federal register is. there are a lot of people in government who should not be taking these records home. we need to take a look at everyone. the biggest thing we need to be focusing on today is people were seeing documents -- maybe i should say allegedly -- but let's let this play out and see for a fact where the facts are. i don't believe this has been fully weaponized. i voted for trump the first time. i did not vote for him the second time. i was really disappointed at what he had done, and i watched

actions. words are one thing, actions are something else. certainly, i hope people take notice to watch actions. if anybody wants to look up fox news under the ftc, it is not listed as news. it is listed as entertainment. door still watch fox news? yes, everything with a grain of salt. this is a very sad day. i have friends in the cia, fbi, friends in the military who being put at risk. think about it. host: that was sue. mike is calling from los angeles, democrat. caller: i think you're doing an amazing job of hosting, by the

way. i think trump needed to be indicted. it this funny that all of the republicans calling in are talking about hunter biden and hillary clinton, but none of them are talking about what is in those documents as far as the indictment. maybe they should read it before jumping to conclusions. biden is trying to take trump out but by the same token, biden is pulling -- polling the best against trump. why would he want to eliminate the candidate that is the easiest to beat? the idea that he is doing this just to get him out of the race is ridiculous. nobody is above the law in america. like the lady just said who voted for trump, peoples lives are put at risk.

this is serious business. this is not democrat-republican. i'm a democrat, but there are republicans i could get behind. trump is a problem. he divided the country. i understand there are a lot of anger among democrats, but trump is not the answer. host: text message fr g. brown in both shores, alabama -- gulf shores, alabama. " republican who never vod for trump, as everyone is saying we are truly divided." another text, "i do believe president trump is being peecuted, but he left himself open to these charges. i think he needs to own his, mistake and then people could rally around him more effectively."

that is wayne in ticonderoga, new york. john is in virginia right across the river. caller: they try to go after trump in so many different ways. the impeachment failed. to the credit of these people they went to florida and they have what looks to be a pretty good case. people are bothered by the fact that they didn't really get after hillary clinton because of her home -- which she kept her records on. that should have been looked into better. it wasn't. this is serious stuff. for me, however, why trump is

really in trouble, it was nothing he did that was illegal. it was the 87 minutes he sat in the white house and watched what was going on, on january 6. you can't have a guy like that in the white house who may face a nuclear crisis. we do not have the time. it was not illegal but it is qualified him from the presidency -- but it disqualified him from the presidency. host: this is a chart from the wall street journal this morning, looking at the open and

close cases involving former president trump. the darker shades are the criminal cases. the lighter shades are the civil cases. there are civil2, 2 criminal still open. next call is rert in chesterfield, virginia independent line. caller: good morning. these people who are bringing up the stuff about hunter biden and joe biden, if they broke the nd maybe they did, i hope they get convicted. i he they are just like donald trump. it is a great day! it assures us that no one is above the law. i tell you the truth, es people who support him stay together -- who support him

crooks stay together. joe manchinould join a third party and become president, and it would be good for the country. host: thank you. former vice president pence is out on the campaign trail. he spoke recently at a cnn town hall about this case. [video clip] >> that kind of action by the department of justice would only fuel further division in the country. i also think it would send a terrible message to the wider world. we are the emblem of democracy. we are the symbol of justice in the world, and the serious matter, which is already happened once in new york of indicting a former president of the united states sends a terrible message to the world. i think the doj resolves these issues without an indictment. >> if they believe he committed

a crime, they should not go forward with an indictment? >> no one is above the law. >> ok. >> but with regard to the unique circumstances here -- look, i had no business having classified documents in my residence, and i took full responsibility for it. president biden had no business having them in his residence from when, he was vice president as well and the same with president trump. i would hope there could be a way for them to move forward without eight it dramatic and divisive step of indicting a former president of the united states. we have to restore confidence equal treatment dethe law. host: president pence be -- vice president pez ll be at the republican convention in greensboro.

you will hr him live on c-span that 12:30. former president trump will be in columbus, georgia today at a rally. act your coals on the federal indictment -- back to your xal calls on the federal indictment of president trump. caller: all of these documents he did not -- documents that he took, he did not have the right to take. he was a former president at the time. like trump used to say when he was going after hillary clinton, why does she need a lawyer if she is in this and -- is innocent? host: we will go to john in

turtle creek, pennsylvania. caller: they you for taking my call. where to begin? i tired of the shiny object, and if you do not know what i mean, it is our media bringing up stories that take your mind off the important stories. i'm not saying what is going on with trump and these documents is not important -- it will all get worked out in court -- but it is amazing to me that the day that, that broke it was to cover up the story of culver getting the papers he needed from the fbi -- comer getting the papers he needed from the fbi. it was the same day that they released this indictment against

trump and the reason they did that, the timing is to take your mind off if the real story -- off of the real story. he is not in charge anymore. he is not in control. they will try to go after him and do what they can do. the real story was the papers that were released. you guys are not bringing it up. our sitting president took money from a foreign country. host: we brought that up earlier. the only place i founded this morning was in the washington times. we well show it again. "biden accused of pocketing a $5 million bribe while vice president. a paid informant said burisma

has documents proving that he bribed biden with $5 million while he was president. the previously disclosed allegations were revealed after the house oversight and accountability committee was granted access to the fbi memo in a secure room in the capito l on thursday, the day the news broke about president trump's indictment. robert, good morning. caller: -- host: -- caller: i'm surprised you pronounced the name of my town right. host: there is a pronounce onr the screen -- pronouncer on the

screen. caller: i have been listening since 4:00 this morning my time. i am impressed at how many defense attorneys have been calling in. there is no law. some people don't totally understand the law. host: do you have a law background, robert? caller: my father was a defense attorney, and my brother was a prosecuting attorney for the state of washington. host: what is your take on this indictment? caller: my take is donald trump was donald trump. he did things. the law catches up with everyone. host: robert in washington.

next up is don, harmony, pennsylvania, another democrat. caller: merrick garland did not indict trump. 12 voters indicted trump. that is all i have to say. host: referring to the grand jury. tuesday in miami, 3:00 p.m. according to all sources is when president trump will appear at the miami courtroom. angie, another republican from franklin square, new york. caller: i have been on a grand jury, and personally, i find that people vote the way the prosecutor wants you to vote on a grand jury. that to me does not mean much. it is a sad day with regard to trump, but i also believe that he wasn't -- he is very

abrasive. his policies are what i like, but i am upset because i feel like there is a one-sided attack against the republicans and conservatives by the media, by democrats, by liberals, with regard to some of our policies and beliefs. it is a shame that it is affecting us from this perspective. donald trump is just a lightning rod. there is to me the same disparity between the democrats -- they don't have great politicians on their side. i believe they are guilty on both parties, and in particular it is training more on trump because trump's hated so much. i don't appreciate his manner sometimes, but his policy is what i do approach --

appreciate. i would like for someone else to be our 2024 president. host: who would you like? caller: i like desantis. he is not antagonistic. trump, if he did not have his ego, he would not be standing still because they have been going after him since the beginning of his presidency. it is sad. i feel like he is the wizard of oz. he opened the curtain and showed there is corruption out there. i'm not saying he is the best, but there is corruption on both sides. he pointed out more. host: this is kevin in windsor, connecticut. caller: good morning. it was not the deep state.

it was 12 american citizens who said yes to indict him. that is our system. we are a democracy. let the court system play out. we have to do this for future presidents. if future president try this agains, this is what happens to you. that is the way our democracy works. this is the only system we have got, and we have to trust it and let it move forward. that is all i have to say. host: thanks for calling in. renée is in florida, democrat. caller: good morning. first of all, i want to thank you and i went to thank c-span for all of the information you give everybody. i really appreciate the hearings, a appreciate everything. i called in to ask questions

about that chinese lady they caught at mar-a-lago with those thumb drives. i sit here and i listen to all of these people calling in, all of the conspiracy theories with hunter biden, and i know exactly where they got it from. bill barr had a special counsel for that with i think his name was durham. john durham, i think his name was. he took a couple of cases to trial, and it went nowhere. host: what do you think of the indictment of former president trump? caller: they have done their work. have you showed the documents that were at mar-a-lago or wherever they were? oh my gosh! in the bathroom? before this indictment they

showed some on the floor, laid out on the floor, not boxes and boxes in the bathroom and the ballroom, and the storage room! it is just ridiculous! host: thank you for calling in this morning and sharing your point of view. she mentioned the boxes that were in the bathroom. again, we have no idea what is inside these boxes, but all major newspapers this morning, wall street journal, new york times, and the washington post, put this picture on their front page. mike in covington, indiana, good morning. caller: i have been watching your program for quite some years. i enjoy it. i have seen a lot of people on tv confused about this. i see the graph on the bottom of the tv about all of his indictments.

considering china started all of this division, i wonder which party when they take over who they will work with, marjorie taylor greene or bernie sanders? host: we have spent the last two hours talking about the indictment of former president donald trump. we are now changing our topic for the last hour of the washington journal. we will be talking with clay rison, author of the bill of the century. it was 60 years ago tomorrow that president john kennedy gave his his civil rights address we will talk about that in a minute with clay risen. we want to show you some video of that speech. />> i hope every american

regardless of where he lives will stop and examine his conscience about this and other related incidents. this nation was founded of many men of nations of backgrounds. it was founded on the principle that all men are created equal and the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened. today, we have committed to the worldwide struggle to promote and protect the rights of all who wish to be free. when americans are sent to vietnam or west berlin, we do not ask for whites only. it ought to be possible therefore for american students of any color to attend any public institution they select without having to be backed up by troops. it ought to be possible for american consumers of any color to receive equal service in

facing public accommodation such as hotels, restaurants, theaters and retail stores without being forced to resort to demonstrations in the street. it ought to be possible for american citizens of any color to register and vote in a free election without interference or fear of reprisal. it ought to be possible, in short, for every american to enjoy the privileges of being american without regard to race or color. in short, every american ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated. one would wish his children to be treated. this is not the case. a neat baby born in america today, regardless of the section or state in which he is born, has about as much chance of completing high school as a white baby born in the same place on the same day. one third as much chance of

completing college. one third as much chance of becoming a professional man. twice as much chance of becoming unemployed. about 1/7 as much chance of earning $10,000 a year. life expectancy, which is seven years shorter, and the prospects of earning only half as much. this is not a sectional issue. discrimination -- exists in every city and every state of the union. the rising tide of this contempt that threatens the public safety. >> "washington journal". host: we want to introduce you to author clay risen, here is his book. it was 60 years ago, june 11,

1963 when jfk gave his noted civil rights address. what was happening in the country then? guest: a couple of things had happened in the weeks before hand. that summer, that spring, you had the birmingham protests led by martin luther king trying to integrate retail and lunch counters in birmingham, alabama. most people have probably seen the videos of police officers and firemen turning hoses and dogs on children. this is in everyone's mind. they are copycat protests around the country. just that morning in alabama and test colusa -- tuscaloosa, the governor had made his famous stand in a schoolhouse door where he tried to prevent black applicants were black students

from entering the law school at the university of alabama. the deputy attorney general went down there withedal soldiers to confront george wallacend force him to stand aside. civil rights was not ju a issue people cared about, it was an issue on the front pages, and issue people thought could easily turn to violence. host: reading your book, i am going to use a word here and you have got to tell me if i am wrong. this was almost an accidental speech? guest: that was right. kennedy was never big on civil rights. it was an issue he understood was there. it was something he thought would stay on a slow summer, maybe be addressed by a few small pieces of legislation. kennedy was a foreign policy guy. he wanted to focus on things going on in the cold war, policies in europe and asia.

he looked at civil rights as a distraction. it was his brother, bobby kennedy, and the people around him, as well as lots of republicans and democrats in congress, who were pushing him to do something more. it was only the last minute kennedy said, well, in response to everything going on, we've got to do not just legislation but i am going to have to give a national address to talk about this issue. host: robert drew a documentary anchor at that time was given access to the oval office as the president was talking with his brother, the attorney general, about whether and when to do this speech. we have video from that meeting. here it is. [video clip] [indiscernible] >> i did not think so.

it depends on whether we have something for the university. i did not think we would at this point. >> i think he -- talk about education. do it for 15 minutes, would alleviate a lot of problems. >> i suppose he could do it. >> i think it would take a way a lot of problems. >> hopeful to legislate. [indiscernible] >> you are going to come across reasonable and understanding. [indiscernible] >> i think if, we say that we will have difficulty and describe --making this kind of effort at the federal level and

knee grows -- negros understand the responsibility. >> that is not going to be september, october, november. >> getting direction on having this for the president. [indiscernible] >> this is something to work with. host: that was courtesy of drew associates. robert drew was a documentary filmmaker. that is how we got access to that. clay, how much politics went into the decision of this speech to push this issue? guest: immense politics.

so much of the pressure to do something big on civil rights came from the republicans. back then, there was a pretty good split between conservative republicans who tended to align with the segregationist democrats. with the liberal republicans,, and even many moderate republicans who saw civil rights as a legacy issue for the party. they were the party of lincoln, the party of reconstruction amendments. they were the party that still claimed a large part of the black electorate, especially outside of the south. they were pressing all through 1963 four civil rights legislation as a way to pressure kennedy and hopefully get a leg up on it. kennedy was responding not just to what was going on in the country, but also to this pressure and the need to essentially get a leg up in reverse on the republicans. host: we want to hear your

comments as we talk about jfk's civil rights speech june 11, 1963. it is the 60th anniversary. our, guest is clay risen who is the author of this book. (202) 748-8000 for those of you who live in the central and eastern time zones. (202) 748-8001 if you live in mountain and pacific time zones. you can send a text if you cannot get through and want to talk about this history and movement, (202) 748-8003. please include your first name and city if you would. mr. risen, was this the first major -- first time that jfk addressed this issue in a major way? guest: it was. he had talked about civil rights in some of his speeches before, but this was not something he prioritized. it was something he was sensitive about. a lot of democrats, certainly

southern democrats, which he considered an important part of the democratic coalition, but even some northern democrats were wary about going too far on civil rights. a lot of the things that ended up not being in the bill, housing, education, desegregation, were not southern issues. they were national issues. there was real concned about going too far from the national democrats. kennedy was sitting there throughout his administration trying to weave between the urgency to do something and the fear of doing too much. this was not something he prioritized in the first place. the result was that he essentially without planning on it, waited until the issue forced his hand. host: you write in your book that he walked into the oval office without a complete speech. guest: that is right. they had not prepared the speech.

as you saw in the film, they were still debating when to do the speech, how to do the speech. kennedy was unhappy with the drafts they gave him and ultimately, he weaned a lot of that speech. it is not his best speech in terms of rhetoric. kennedy was a great speaker when prepared. this time, it was not his issue. it was not something he had given a norma's amounts of thought to -- enormous. amounts of from the topic. the important thing is the content. that is why the speech is so historic. the speech is still a pretty good speech. what he says in content is dramatic. he essentially says, from now on the force of the federal government is going to be behind civil rights legislation. up until then for decades, it

had been an open question. was the federal government and ally of the civil rights movement? it is run in large part by southern democrats. was the federal government going to get behind the equal rights of people of color in the united states? with this speech, kennedy changed that completely and said, from now on, we will. host: let's watch a little of that speech from june 11, 1963. [video clip] >> we are confronted primarily by a moral issue. half of the question is whether all americans ought to be supported, equal rights and equal opportunities. whether we are going to treat our federal -- fellow americans as we want to be treated. if an american because his skin is dark cannot eat lunch in a restaurant open to the public,

if he cannot send his children to the best public school available, if you cannot vote for the public official to represent him. if he cannot enjoy the full and free life which all of us want, who among us will be content to have the color of his skin changed and stand in his place? who among us would then be content with the council of patients and delay? 100 years of delays have passed since president lincoln freed the slaves, yet their grandsons are not fully freed. they are not yet freed from the bonds of injustice. they are not yet freed from social and economic oppression. this nation, for all its hopes and all of its -- will not be bully free until all of its citizens are free. host: clay risen, 8:00 p.m. on

june 11, 1963, about 15 minutes in length. did all three carry it and what was the reaction? guest: the reaction was for right -- forthright. back then, everyone watched the news when they tuned in when there was something to watch. you cannot watch it online. this was where you saw it. the country was enthused. this was a call to arms by the president. i would not say the southern democrats were particularly happy, but this was a statement, a flag in the ground. at the same time, a lot of people on the left, liberal democrats and republicans and many in the civil rights movement heard his words and wanted to see the actual work.

they wanted to see the legislation and what would happen. until then, kennedy had paid lip service to civil rights. this was an adamant statement. they wanted to see actual action. host:, two months after this the march on washington. three months after that, the death of jfk. guest: yeah, this was one of those runs a month. a pretty short time in american history changed and it is hard to imagine all of those events happening so quickly one after the other. i think part of what made the civil rights act so successful was the fact it came amid so much change, so much hope and tragedy. all of that gave energy to this sort of magnum opus bill. host: when you look back at the eisenhower administration and little rock and brown, does the

battle for civil rights start even earlier then john f. kennedy and lbj? guest: the battle for civil rights has been going on a long time. it was not always in the national focus in the sense of outside the south and the sense of being in the minds of many white americans. certainly, if you were a politically aware black person or a liberal activist, this was an issue long and coming and people had fought over their employment during the -- administration during world war ii. they fought for it during the run up during the montgomery bus boycott. these are episodes we think of happening, in one time but they had president. the brown versus board of education decision in 1954 had been in the works for years. earl warren was the chief justice oversaw the decision. it had come in under his

predecessor. there had been concern under fred benson, his predecessor, there would have been a much different decision. there is all this history. you had mentioned eisenhower, there were multiple small pieces of small legislation under eisenhower. by the time kennedy got it, there was both a feeling civil rights had been around as an issue for a long time and also a certain wariness on all sides. was this an issue that was ever going to be solved? it wasn't going to be one of those contractile problems politicians flopped off and try to pay lip service to and try to pass a small piece of incremental adulation, but never do anything about. host: remind us, what was the bill introduced in congress after the speech? when, and what was the role of everett dirksen?

guest: the bill came a few weeks after kennedy's speech. it focused on the issue that had been raised by martin luther king in the birmingham protests, which was equal access to public facilities. here, we mean retail stores, lunch counters, public accommodations. this was an issue that focused directly on the jim crow south. there were other items in the bill. the bill expanded greatly. one of the things that made that happen was that it had early support from everett dirksen, the senate minority leader. he was a airily conservative republican from illinois. he had been an ally, a strong ally of joe mccarthy in the 1950's. he was someone who felt civil rights was certainly a party issue, something the republicans had to stand by.

i think dirksen had a moral energy behind him. he often play politics with the bill. people from the democrats and other republicans did not know exactly where he was all the time. in the end, it was everett dirksen who makes her the bill had strong support from the very beginning among republicans and carried through up through the historic filibuster the next year. host: before we move on, let's take calls from our audience and hear from terry in tennessee. you are on with author and historian clay risen. go ahead, terry. caller: yes. in 1921, there was the black wall street massacre. you showed a picture of the government and white people, i mean black people in the school. what about the hp you schools who only want like kids in the school today? is that the same thing? host: do you have anything you

would like to say to that? what was happening at the hbcus? guest: i should say at the front, the hbcus do allow white people to attend. i know friends of mine have gone to howard, white friends of mine have attended white -- have attended howard university. there are schools by their history and i would say by their appeal, they tend to attract black students. during segregation, these were schools that only black people could go to. it was not that white people could not go there, it was that by the culture of the south at the time, it was culturally forbidden. it was not illegal. i think that is an important distinction. so much of what we think about when we talk about jim crow, these were laws. a lot of it was the absence of laws, it was a culture that existed that allowed people,

private individuals to bar black people from eating at a restaurant or shopping at their store. it was not in most cases a law that prevented that. that is why this bill was so important. it did not overturn laws, it created new laws that banned, that affected private action. back to your question as far as hbcus, they were important see the beds for the civil rights movement. when we think about howard university back then, so many young activists who came out of howard university went into the civil rights movement right down to mississippi and alabama. i think the civil rights movement would have looked very different had it not been for the strength of the hbcus at the time. host: philip, baltimore, good morning to you. caller: i was a child during this time. i remember what it was like, the apartheid in america. i remember what it was like in

the greater school attacked and beingol african americans doneothing for history. i remember the kennedy speech. i remember my father to the watch on washington. s then to where america is now, it is a lot different. imagine if your family were a veteran. you come home and you cannot go to college. you cannot buy a house. kennedy was right about the different america. george wallace standing in the door, this is totally crazy. like a junior desantis. it is good. to change -- america still need to change.

-- america had apartheid. just to see the difference now. i hope american people are for it. i see the reaction. desantis is like a baby george waller. host: what are you doing in baltimore? caller: i am getting ready to open a business. host: mr. risen? guest: i think he is absolutely right. we have so many racial problems today. it is easy for people to say nothing has changed. you look at what happened in 1963. fire hoses, dogs on children, george wallace standing in the schoolhouse door to try to prevent qualified, brilliant, black students from attending a public university. it is night and day.

so much of it was because of the civil rights act, not only because of the specifics of the act, but the moral position that all of washington, both congress and the white house and a bunch of the supreme court took in backing this legislation, saying from now on, the federal government is behind the equality of the races. we can debate whether the bill went far enough, whether anything went far enough. the amount of change that happened because of it is astounding. host: clay risen, the night of that speech, june 11, 1963, there was also an assassination. guest: that is right. that evening, matt, grabbers the director of the mississippi chapter of the naacp was coming home. he had been working on his own

civil rights activism, trying to pick up from the energy from birmingham and re-create it in jackson. as he was carrying a box of t-shirts into his front door, man hiding in bushes, a white racist, shot evers right ahe was going through the door. his wife heard the shot, came out, saw her husband dying on the front steps. that night, there was almost violence in jackson. everest was a very popular figure. he was not as well-known as king, but in mississippi, he was well respected and someone in the future might have become a national leader of the naacp. it was only because of the federal intervention, specifically john door, an assistant attorney general who

worked in the civil rights division, he happened to be there. he helped calm the people that were out in the streets. the next day, this was on national television. as tragic as it was and horrible as it was, it helped put an exclamation point on what kennedy was saying. this was not just a legal issue. this was a emotional issue. this was an issue of life or death. host: you write in your book that mrs. evers was watching the speech at home when, while waiting for her husband. guest: that is right. you think about moments where the entire country is on the same page, so to speak. that is a great example of it. host: ralph in men what, -- ralph in new york. you are on with clay risen. we are talking about the 60th

anniversary of john f. kennedy's civil rights speech. caller: i am a you wa worker from upstate. when i was in grade school, we were insulated from what was going on in the south. the reason i learned about the civil rights movement, through my union, the uaw, taught me that. the interesting point of all of this was a member of the house, his name is william. he was a congressman in the house. he added a poison pill during the closing day. he added gender in order to defeat the bill. it backfired on him. that was a lot of people, a lot of people do not know the extra category was added to defeat it. the credit goes to president lincoln johnson that got this bill passed. 1970 -- vote cloture in the senate. if kennedy was still president,

i do not think this bill would have passed. i want to listen to your host and what he think about that. guest: first of all, the uaw was absolutely critical in this bill. walter reuther was the president of the uaw. he is probably the most influential union leader in the country, very progressive. early on, he had been an ally of martin luther king, of kennedy and johnson. he pushed not just for political support, but mass support. uaw came out in strength, not just to events like the march on washington, but came to lobby politicians. locals went to their representatives offices. they were very well-informed. they knew exactly what they wanted. reuther believed in integrated workplaces. he believed this was the future

of the american workforce, integrated, equal between the races in the workforce. he also felt it was a moral issue. union strong, this was very important. to the question, you referred to the amendment regarding sex. this is an important point, it changed the entire bill. the representative you referred to was howard smith from virginia. he is a curious figure. on the one hand, it was a poison pill. there were a number of categories that the civil rights act was supposed to apply to. race, obviously, but also political ideology, national origin, religion, these kinds of things. smith said we need to add sex. here is not coming from purely a cynical point of view. smith had a long relationship with what we would call then the

women's rights movement, we call them feminists today. he was a very close friend with ellen pollack, the head of the women's party. he had been a strong supporter of the people rights amendment, which had been -- equal rights amendment, smith with a -- was a strong advocate of it. a lot of that energy came from this idea that, if we pass civil rights legislation, it is going to help black men. white women -- women, white women, will be left behind. we need to push for women's rights as well to make sure the very least they are all moving in tandem. this was smith's points of view. why did smith introduce this amendment? it is complicated, it is both. i think he really thought this

was a way to embarrass supporters of the bill, create tension among supporters, maybe kill the bill. if the bill passes, it will at least create a level playing field for women, or help promote a level playing field. that is going to be something else i want. it ended up, depends on how you read what he was doing, it either backfired or worked perfectly. so many of the advances made in the workplace by women was rooted in this change, this revision to sex and the civil rights act. to your point of kennedy and johnson, it is impossible to say. i do think that, had kennedy been around, had he not been assassinated, the bill probably would have looked different and not have been as expansive as it was. i think johnson did an amazing job and taking not just his own

beliefs and the need for civil rights legislation, but also using kennedy's assassination and essentially transitioning, trance modifying the meeting of th into a mandate to pass an exnse civil rights act. his speech after kne's assassination to join a speci congress where this was the topic of conversation, where he said we must continu is next to the speech we are discussing, the june 11 speech by kennedy. is the other really important address during the peer bank -- period. host: let's hear a little bit of this speech by president johnson late november 1963. [video clip] >> we must not approach the observance of this law in a vengeful spirit. this purpose is not to punish.

this purpose is not to divide but in divisions. divisions which have lasted all too long. this purchase --purpose is national, not regional. this civil rights act is a challenge to all of us to go to work in our communities and states, in our homes and hearts, to eliminate the last vestiges of injustice in our 11 country -- beloved country. i urge every public official, every religious leader, every business and professional man, every working man, every housewife, i urge every american to join in this effort to bring justice and hope to all our people and to bring peace to our

land. host: clay risen, that obviously was july of 1964 at the signing, the bill signing. what happened between the bill introduction, june, and the bill signing a year later? how did the bill change? guest: one of the things remarkable about this bill, normally legislation gets introduced and amended and watered down. often, the vision there in the bill, you hope the basic idea remains and everything else is compromised. with the civil rights act, it actually strengthened. there were changes, but not a lot, not significant changes. those changes that did exist were made to ultimately improve the bill. it was a democratic bill with the support of the administration. one of the things the managers

of the bill through the house and into the senate, one thing they made sure to keep going was bipartisan support. not just the rank and file support, but bringing in republican legislators to negotiate and help write amendments to the bill. remember, this was not necessarily a fight between immigrants and republicans. this was a fight between liberal members and moderate members of the house and senate on both sides, and conservatives, particularly southern democrats were adamantly opposed to anything in this bill. every word in this bill, they wanted to destroy. up until then, they had been effective walking things we think should be no-brainers. anti-lynching legislation, they had whittled that down. civil rights acts passed in the

1950's were nubs when they were introduced. that is what they were up against going into 1964. that is what supporters on both sides of the aisle were up against. one of the exciting things about the story is how until the very end, it was not clear the bill was going to pass. host: k in michigan. thanks for holding. you are on with author clay risen, talking about the civil rights act in 1963. caller: thanks for taking my call. this is one of the reasons i subscribe to the times. they have such excellent coverage and research beyond everything they put on in print. much of what i wanted to ask was already answered. the question of the new york caller.

i noticed johnson was not in on, when they were preparing for the speech in discussing what they would speak, what kennedy would address. he was not there, johnson. was he left out of all of these relations? i mean, all of these important meetings? host: thank you. let's get an answer from clay risen. guest: that is perceptive of you. he was not included in a lot of those conversations. johnson was never a close ally of john kennedy. they were rivals going into the 1960 election and into the primary. it was kennedy's decision to bring johnson on as a way to bring in ensure up support in the south.

it was not because he thought johnson was a close friend or someone he wanted to work closely with. bobby kennedy hated johnson. they really disliked each other. a lot of people around kennedy thought johnson was uncouth, a little too abrasive. going into this speech, the june 11 speech, he was not consulted. he had pretty strong ideas of what should be in the civil rights bill. he wanted a much bigger bill. the bill that ultimately passed was closer to what johnson had originally called for in the conversations he did have with kennedy then what kennedy wanted to pass. at the same time, johnson was always of the believe that as much as these things in the civil rights act needed to happen, there needed to be a ban on employment discrimination,

there needed to be a ban on discrimination in lunch counters and commercial venues, his emphasis was voting rights. as soon as the civil rights act past, he started working on the voting rights act. that passed a year later. that was his goal. host: how involved was john kennedy in the march on washington in august, two months after this speech? guest: kennedy was not really involved at all. he was worried. a lot of people in washington, a lot of white leaders, were worried about what would happen. they had seen birmingham, which a lot of people had misconstrued to be at least partially the result of martin luther king's activism, the violence was his fault. they worried about what would happen. there were federal troops stationed around washington ready to come in if there was a riot. we know that is not what

happened. kennedy kept his distance. he did not want to be involved in something that might devolve into violence. he did not meet with martin luther king and -- he did meet with martin luther king and other leaders in the time before the march. notably, one of the things he brought king to ll him was in no uncertain terms, we are watching you. the fbi is watching you. we think there are communists advising you and you better take care of that. king, much as king wanted to influence what was going on in the white house, federal policy, kennedy was always wary of king. he was always unsure either he was someone he should get close to. host: next call for clay risen comes from margaret in culpeper, virginia. caller: good morning, great

conversation. in respect to the civil rights law, civil rights activists for a better term, one need array said the civil rights act was -- to necessarily give black americans the right to do things. those rights were already there per the initial constitution. it was more or less a discrimination thing, where it advised that white americans who were perpetrating these heinous acts, they were telling them this is illegal. you cannot do that. you brought up a great example when you said the anti-lynching

bill. always looked at civil rights as civil rights, yes, but it is the rights we already should have had. the laws put in place were to advise white americans who were preventing blacks from exercising these rights that this was a legal. was there any perspective given like that during this time? host: thank you. guest: that is an important point. it is one that was an undercurrent of the legislation. as i said earlier, so much of what we think of was jim crow, a lot of it was not legislation. it was not that there was a law preventing black people from eating at lunch counters in the south, it was that there was no law preventing white people from discriminating against black people eating at a lunch counter. the government's and states and towns and cities in the south

simply said, we are going to look the other way. we are not going to protect the rights of black people to do these things. voting rights is a different thing, there were laws that discriminated against black people trying to exercise their right to vote. so much of what the caller pointed out his right. this legislation was to secure the civil rights that already existed. i think one of the things that carmichael to ray pointed out was something that probably should have been emphasized more clearly in the rhetoric around the civil rights act, that this is -- this was not giving rights to anybody. this was protecting rights that existed. that is something that often got lost. host: when he wrote this book, when it came out in 2014, were

you with the new york times or are you still with the new york times? guest: i was an editor back then, i am now a reporter. host: william, tucson, good morning. we are listening, go ahead. caller: this is a good conversation, i have enjoyed this. there is always a backside of this. the intent is, by the media to pick up on this and run with this and i hope you sell books. i am not trying to stop that. the fact of the matter is, people get riled up about this. i went through these times. i saw on tv, i do not know the fellow up in the north that said he was shielded from it and never look at the tv because i saw it on black-and-white tv every night in front of the dinner room table. you know, i am going to quote

one of my friends. his name is morgan freeman. he says the best way for us to move forward on racism and these racial inequities is to stop talking about them. please, media, stop talking about this. you are killing america. thank you. host: any response to that caller? guest: my first response would be that this is a work of history and it is an important point in our history. whatever you think about the way that we talk about race today, we need to know this history. i would also take issue with the idea that we should not talk about race. it is relatively easy to say that depending on what your background is, and depending on what your class background is, your race background is, a lot of people cannot avoid talking about this. it is not an issue people choose

to take up. it is an issue that is already there, it was always already there. we are not going to have this conversation now, but i would love to -- ideally, the caller and i would talk this out. what is the right way to talk about it? how do you find a way to be constructive? i agree that constructive conversation is better than people getting up on high horses and attacking each other on twitter or whatever and not getting anywhere. host: you mentioned the uaw and its activity during this period. a lot of the conversation we are having today is about corporations and their political activity. what about in 1963? was the waldorf company involved in politics, etc.? guest: generally speaking, no. there was not much involvement

from the corporate world. the lobbying world was different at the time. one of the stories i try to relate in the bill was the evolution of lobbying, especially on the social side, nonprofits, unions,.churches the civil rights act was watershed for them in terms of organizing political activism at a federal level. a lot of the things we see happening at that time are familiar to us because that is how it works today, but it was new to a lot of those groups. on the corporate side, there was not much going on. corporations were more concerned with their bread and butter issues, taxes, regulations. some were worried about whether the bill would open the door to affirmative action. affirmative action was already an idea out there. it is not in the bill. there are hints of it that did open the door. there was some concern there.

most companies did not want to get involved in an issue that was so morally charged. they did not have the lobbying position to do that. it was very different from today. host: philip, mississippi, thanks for holding. go ahead with your question or comment. caller: thank you. i was born in alexandria, before that i was in florida. my whole pursuit spiritually and intellectually has been coming up with a solution toward how we can create more positive -- of race relations. i wrote a book, it is run in my shoes which identifies a black person in america trying to understand how race can affect

progress in a person's individual pursuit. all of that to say, we have got a movement now trying to take us even further in a divisive way, trying not to highlight black history, afro-american history when afro american history is simply american history. we helped forge the development of this country, economics system. yet, there are people who still do not understand it. not only was i trying to do something intellectually, but i think nothing going to happen in this country unless it goes through a spiritual cleansing. then, i am hoping to utilize sports as a meeting to bring people together naturally. rhetoric sometimes offend so many people they cannot get past first base, second base in understanding and analyzing how

an individual going through what black people had been through as white people have could go through, would easily understand what it is black people are generally now. host: ok. the name of your book, run in my shoes, is that correct? caller: yes. host: it is available on amazon? caller: i have four editions. i keep upgrading it. host: tell us a little bit about yourself professionally. what do you do besides write books? caller: ok. i was born in alexandria, integrated with the safe stevens after school. i became an educator, although a lot of people thought i was going to become a preacher or like my dad, who worked in the funeral industry. education, mentoring, coaching,

i have dedicated my entire life to try and steer the younger generation in a more positive direction. host: thank you. philip, run in my shoes is the name of his books in case you want to look it up on amazon. clay, your reaction to that call? guest: it reminds me why i wrote that book. i grew up in nashville in the 1980's and 1990's. i was never exposed to any history of civil rights. i had no idea that nashville itself played a important role in the civil rights movement. i understand things have changed a little bit in tennessee now, there is more awareness. i did not know any of that growing up. a lot of what i wanted to do with the book was take my understanding of american history and personally try to understand how that changed when i looked at it from the

perspective of civil rights history. as philip said, black history is american history. for me, the book is as much a history book i hope people will read and learn from as much as it was the writing of it was a personal journey for me. host: there was a college student in tennessee during this period named john lewis. does he play a role in your book? guest: he does, a small role. he was a keynote, one of the keynote speakers at the march on washington. one of the fiery leaders of the nonviolent coordinating committee, a group of mostly college students or young people in the civil rights movement. he was an important voice and some of those conversations on the side of the civil rights movement, not so much in congress or the white house. in the civil rights movement,

trying to figure out what do we want out of this legislation? host: mike in leland, mississippi. good morning. caller: i want to say it is a shame that the civil rights act took us a long way. it is a shame after 100 years we have had -- we have gotten that far. you gave thousands of -- to immigrants and have not given black people and inch. after we tried to rebuild this country, the american revolution was fueled by tobacco. this would be no country if the slaves did not fuel it. we built america and europe and basically the world. african-american should basically have -- live in gold. host:.

thank you. was there talk about reparations in this act? guest: not so much in congress and the white house, but certainly in the civil rights movement. whitney young had a plan to do a marshall plan for black america, which when you read the text, it is a form of reparations, the way he talked about the need to spend the kind of money we did to rebuild europe, to rebuild black america or black america to give black america what it deserved. the bill itself had none of that. a lot of its most famous progressive, most adamant supporters in and out of federal government saw it as a first step. johnson was one of them. johnson believes we need to do the civil rights act and we need to do the voting rights act. after that, we need to bring the

benefits of the federal government, the new deal and all of the programs that he created to black americans. he did not use the kinds of terms we do today about reparations, but that was a lot of this view. it shaped his belief system that we as a country, we as the federal government, oh it to black america to bring them these benefits because we put them down, suppressed them for so long. host: mary is in louisiana. good morning. caller: good morning. host: we are listening. caller:, oh ok. i am 77 years old. i wish you would give me time to tell mr. clay about, a lot of stuff about slavery is not being told. ok.

i am a democrat from the time i was 18 up to 2008. i started hearing things i ain't ever heard before. i like to seek the truth. i keep a library card. ok. i went to the library and i started checking out books, went all the way back tonight -- 1619. host: we are running out of time. i would love to hear this long history, but what do you remember about jfk's speech in the passage of the civil rights bill in 1964? caller: the civil rights bill was good. that was good. like i said, there is a lot about slavery not being told.

did you cut me off? host: i'm going to have to. i apologize, we are tight on time. clay risen, who was lbj's president johnson's strongest opponent in congress and his strongest advocate for the passage of this bill? guest: the answer on the opponent site is easy, it was richard russell. host: democrat georgia senator. guest: that is right, and johnson's mentor. the white man of the southern democrats, essentially the leader. johnson told him i am going to pass this bill. russell said you are going to have to roll over me to do it. he said that is exactly what i am going to do. russell ran filibuster, the effort to block the bill. in the end, russell never came

around but understood the bill was going to happen. i will give him credit. he made sure through whatever power he had that the bill was accepted peacefully in the south. he was both the opponent and in an odd way, something of an ally. you asked who was his greatest ally in congress? there are so many. hubert humphrey was essentially russell's opponent in the senate. humphrey ran the bill in the senate during the filibuster and it was one of the reasons why johnson ended up choosing humphrey's as his running mate. he was impressed with humphrey's performance. mike mansfield was the senate majority leader. he did an amazing job organizing the house, the senate, making sure it was fair. everett dirksen, not someone anyone expected to become such

an adamant supporter of the bill. dirksen was the guy that brought the republicans, particular midwest republicans, he was the guy that brought them around. when you look at the margins of how the bill passed, the 71 senators who ended up supporting it, that margin would have been tighter if not for everett dirksen. host: building the first senate building is named after richard russell, the russell senate office building. our guest for the past hour has been clay risen, the bill of the century, the epic battle for the civil rights act is the name of his we appreciate your time. guest: thank you for having me. host: we appreciate you being with us. for a live look of events happening today, go to c-span.org for the full schedule. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. vi