host: florida will be the focus of the political world is the trunk becomes the first president to be indicted on

federal crimes. in the arraignment today, the former president will hear the accounts he faces in official presidential documents kept in his mar-a-lago resort. it is the second of three possible cases fmr. trump. how will he handle campaigning and appearg in court proceedings? how will the republican party react? welcome to "washington journal." we will spend the first hour talking about the federal charges facing the former president and to get your thoughts on that. to do that, you can call us at 202-748-8002, -- at 202-748-8001 , that is the republican line. democrats can use 202-748-8000. all others, 202-748-8002. we welcome your texts as well, 202-748-8003. tell us your name and where you

are texting from. we are on facebook and on twitter and instagram at @cspanwj. we will hear from republicans and democrats in and out of the house and senate. we will hear from the miami mayor about preparations they are making and we will hear from you from phone and social media. the miami herald front page says this, "we have had some sensational cases. trump's case will be historic, even by miami standards." first to the 37 counts facing the former president, the charges he will hear today in the mining courtroom. there are seven areas of charges. the first cnts deal with woeful retention of defense informion. it applies to the former president only and is allegedly

for storing 31 documents at mar-a-lago. also, conspiracy to obstruct juicapplies to him and his aid, withholding document or record also applied to the president and walt mata. also correctlyeiling a document. this comes to attempts to hide box the documents from attorneys. concealing a document in federal investigation. they are accused of the continued documents at mar-a-lago and charging that the former president created a scheme to hide the continued possession of materials from the fbi and from the grand jury. of the 37 counts, the last one deals with false statements and mr. presentations. -- and misrepresentations. is expected in a courtroom shortly after 3:00 p.m. this is from politico, "trump

heads to miami for his arraignment. what story will follow? trump and his aides are ready for a show of -- documents and efforts to obstruct justice. they are stressing big don't wanted to get out of hand. the former president spent monday morning at his clubhouse in new jersey where he spoke with aides and met with an congressional ally. his advisers and attorneys planned to spend monday night preparing for his court appearance and trying to bolster his legal team. they were aware of pro-trump rallies around his courthouse and amplified calls for supporters to protest peacefully. the mayor of miami held a news conference history about preparations the city is making for the arraignment today.

[video clip] >> we have already begun preparations for tomorrow. we are joined by the deputy chief and we will talk about what our plan for security is to make sure everyone has a right to express themselves and exercise constitutional rights and do it in a peaceful manner. in our city, we believe in the constitution and the rights that people have the right to express themselves but we also believe in line order. we hope -- we believe in law and order. we encourage people to be peaceful in demonstrating how they feel. we will have the adequate forces necessary to ensure that. there may be some road closures so people who live in the downtown area should expect additional traffic. it is not in our initial plan.

we are going to take it step-by-step. i will let the chief explain what roads will be closed and when they will be closed but the commuters should expect the possibility of some disruption. we are prepared for a variety of dissent -- a variety of different sized clouds -- sized crowds. we have the ability to increase our capacity if necessary. our fire chief, we spoke to him before this press conference and he has assured me they will be an increase of rescue preparedness including ems services and what he would consider a number of on-duty personnel that are both at the task and command level. we are happy to be joined by our partners from miami-dade county.

we have at some level overlapping jurisdiction. we are working not with them, but it is safe to say we are working with partners at all levels to make sure we are communicating, to make sure we are prepared, to make sure we are sharing information and ultimately to ensure that tomorrow goes off without any hitch. host: spending this first hour to hear from you about the charges facing former president trump today. the front page, one of two stories of the chief washington correspondent, "trump gathers new legal team to fight felonies. the former president plans to plead not guilty. he huddled with his legal team at his resort ahead of his tuesday afternoon arraignment on more than three dozen federal charges related to unlawful possession of classified documents. he landed in miami on monday afternoon and headed to the nearby resort where he interviewed lawyers to represent

him at what he calls the greatest witchhunt of all time. mr. trump is the first president to face felony federal charges. legal experts warn if he is convicted of one of the 37 counts, the 76-year-old could be sentenced up to 20 years. mr. trump announced he was parting ways with jim trusty and john rally who were not admitted to the fore of our florida -- to the florida barr. the former president has little time to secure a legal team. he must report to the courthouse at 3:00 p.m. today. u.s. marshals are expected to take him into custody and fingerprinted. fingerprint him -- and fingerprint him. let's get your calls. in texas, bruce. go ahead. caller: thank you for taking michael -- taking my call. host: go ahead.

caller: when i was working, now retired, i was minted with top-secret clearances. they want to know everything about my entire left. to my mom and dad were, we just don't talk about it. we don't bring any paper in, any flash drives in or out. if you lose a package, they are going to hold you until they find the package. extreme prejudice. if i was to do something like this, they would throw me in a hole and throw away the key. you might as well throw him out the door. the kind of stuff i worked on,

we just don't talk about. host: during your work experience, did you ever know anyone to be charged with taking incidentally or accidentally documents they were not supposed to take? caller: i have seen a man go to jail for 25 years. if you steal where i'm coming from. the laws -- the law is the law. politics is politics, i get it. they all feel they are right, but just because they feel they are right, does not make it right. host: we will go to our republican line. pete is in appleton. caller: i know this isn't going to go over well, but i don't

think the president or anybody ought to be able to take documents like that. i don't think they need to take him home. i don't think they need to take them to any kind of library. that is u.s. government property. it is for their eyes only. that stuff are tuesday in washington, d.c., locked up somewhere. nobody should get access to it but that is just my opinion. i know all of these presidents, they take them and do whatever, but i don't know. i think donald trump or anybody would be smart enough to know something like this could happen. it is what it is. i don't think they ought to be allowed to take those things everywhere. that is my opinion. host: on to ricky in philadelphia, democrats line.

caller: good morning. my call is about, trump having to turn himself in in florida. it is a day -- pretty much a sad day. one thing i know is no one is above the law. there are a whole bottle of people -- a whole lot of people who can locked up because they took top-secret documents. it is a sad day. in my opinion, nobody is above the law. trump did broke the law. they have evidence on him taking documents, withholding

information from the federal government. hopefully the republican party realizes that and they go a different direction instead of trump. host: a quick update here, a story in the washington post about the huge collapse of 95 which will affect commuters up and down the east coast from washington, new york, and boston, "i-95 drivers face months of delays after that portion fell from a huge fire and the death of a driver. the bridge carried around 160,000 vehicles a day. signs of the collapse were visible as far as columbia and maryland where messages warned of the closure ahead. that is from the washington post. getting your views on the

arraignment coming up today on the 37 counts against former president donald trump. he will be arraigned in a miami courtroom sometime today. the lines to use our dish -- use are 202-748-8001, that is the republicans line. 202-748-8000 the republic -- is the democrats line. 202-748-8002 is the line for independents and others. john bolton was on fox and talked about the nature of the documents concerned in this case. here is. -- here he is. [video clip] >> i do know the kinds of documents that were put in front of the president during my time. that they did go to the most important secrets the united states has come affecting national security and lives and

safety of our servicemembers and our civilian population. if he has anything like what the indictment alleges, he is committed -- he has committed very serious crimes. this is a devastating indictment. not only is it powerful, it is a very narrowly terror -- very narrowly tailored. this is a rifle shot and it should be the end of donald trump's political career. host: some comments on twitter, lynn says this. "i wonder how many republicans knew trump had his national security documents, including our nuclear secrets, and never said a word." this one says "when lawmakers break the law, there is no line order." rebecca says, "why does --

believe every lie?" "what if someone needed the information contained in them? did trump have a system? what about the people, could they foia trump" -- trump?" caller: for the first color, the word is vetted, not invented. you would -- not vented. it is interesting to hear the talking points, donald trump broke the law and no one is above the law. the problem is what is c-span

fails to understand is tha there are legal president -- presendents that seem to make it that donald trump did not do anything wrong because there are other ads of state that have done this. it is teresting this has come out on the same day congressional leadership was given a memo that the fbi did not want to turn over detailing whistleblower allegations against joe biden, hunter biden, jill biden, and other members of the biden family taking kickbacks and bribes for policy decisions. it is funny how c-span does not comment on that. c-span does not question that. c-span does not look into that.

may be a good question for c-span2 have is -- for c-span to have on their program is a year ago when the fbi was at mar-a-lago before the raid end they went in and looked at the documents and all they said was to me a favor, put a padlock on the doors even though secret service is at mar-a-lago. why didn't the fbi make a big stink about the documents that? if this got to the point where they were demanding the documents back and trump and his organization refused to give the documents back, why can't we see the email chain or the communication chain showing that justice was demanding the documents back and the trump

administration and maybe president trump himself were not giving the documents back? since joe biden is president and he is owned by china and the sea in c-span stands for china, we are probably not going to be answered those questions. you think one day we might get back to that? host: talking about the arraignment today of the former president. go ahead. caller: the gentleman that just spoke a little while ago, this republicans have so much grievances. they hire -- they are such angry people. they hop on joe biden's family with china but they don't trump on trump -- they don't jump on

trump's family and the saudi arabia family and how much money they are getting from them. i believe trump gave information to the king of saudi arabia because he is still getting money with liv golf. trump is a quick. -- is a crook. that is the way he has always been. he is like a child with grievances. here don't own up to anything -- he don't own up to anything. there is a consequence behind each action we do. it is taught to us as children and growing up as adults but trump don't seem to get that because he just doesn't care. he is a man who thinks he is above the law. he is all about himself. the republicans hop on china with the biden, let's hop on

trump with saudi arabia and russia. host: chuck schumer was on the floor of the senate yesterday and spoke about the indictments against the former president. [video clip] >> last friday the department of justice announced donald trump had been indicted on 37 counts related to his mishandling of classified documents. one only has to listen to the statements of john bolton and trump's former attorney general to know how serious this indictment is. as i have said before, no one is above the law, including donald trump. this case must be allowed to play out through the legal process without outside political or ideological interference. i encourage supporters and critics of donald trump to maintain the peace and let the justice system to its work.

host: the daily beast, "trump advisors quietly worry trump house -- courthouse protests could be a disaster. 's advisers are quietly expressing some concern the protesters already assembling in front of the courthouse are not helping the former president's case. those closest to the former president pointed to a rally around morgan and supported by roger stone as in the event that could go very wrong. there is going to be a disaster, a trump confidant told "the daily beast -- told the daily beast. all the things that are wrong with maga our going to show up. you get lunatics coming out. a trump supporter also expressed reservations. this trump advisor told the daily beast i have never heard of anyone wanting to protest." from california, don is on the

republican line. caller: this thing with president trump is unprecedented. a former president being indicted on charges like these. you know what else is unprecedented? the fbi getting warrants to spy on the presidential campaign of donald trump using a phony dossier. you know what else is unprecedented? impeaching a president over a telephone call. you know what else is unprecedented? impeaching him again when he is two weeks away from going out of office. these people running around saying nobody is above the law, these people are not above abusing the law to their ends. chuck schumer standing in the senate and talking as if he was an anchor on cnn was disgusting.

how dare he talk like that in the well of the senate. it is sickening what has been going on for years and years. all of these people in the news coming clean c-span, lick their lips and say we got him now. you guys look like fools. we are out here in america staring at you and saying oh my god they are doing it again. have they no shame? this is what is going on. you guys have got to stop this. trump puts out it is a witchhunt, it is worse than a witchhunt. i have never in my life seen anything as disgusting as what you guys have been doing to donald trump. i am not alone. i am not saying that tom trump is this or that, i am saying what happened to him is wrong,

is disgusting -- it is disgusting. you have taken the justice system of the united states and turned it into a club to hit you and me over the head with. host: pennsylvania, democrats line, harold. caller: i was thinking that donald trump should have been -- already. i was thinking about what he would do if he loses the election. would he attack the capital again? host: hello to michael. caller: good morning. the presidential records, don't they give the president the right to take whatever he wants? the department of justice argued that for president clinton a million use ago -- a million

years ago. what is going on here? are the democrats afraid to that trump be a candidate again so they are going to do something? i am curious, who is asking these questions. are the vice presidents allowed to keep records after their president is gone? host: this is the headline in usa today, "trump is indicted -- with mata. the navy veteran, 40 years old, had risen quickly literally trump ranks to become one of the closest to him. he always stayed below the radar while the spotlight fell on

others. no longer. when the justice department unsealed the 37 cap indictment against the men, his future is intertwined with that of his boss. so is the glare of the spotlight now on trump. both men face potentially long prison terms if convicted of what jack smith and his team have accused him of doing. the justice department indictment unsealed friday charges -- corruptly concealing a documentdera litigation, seem to -- scheme to conceal, and false statements. getting your thoughts on the arraignment lid today against him on trump -- on the arraignment later today for donald trump.

202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8002 for independents and others. let's hear from troy calling from pittsburgh. caller: i was going to say any prosecutor can get in and entered against somebody because the defense has evidence. a ham sandwich could get him indicted. now we are talking about the president, a former president. last night i was watching one of the news stations and they were saying there was enough stuff to go into one box. you just showed hundreds of boxes. it was not that much stuff. what you are doing is helping to

try to indict a man through the media. i am tried to grasp -- i am trying to grasphat these people dere washington that are against a for president, what they do. if you have anotr president who has stuff in his garage when he was a senator and a vice presidt. vi president is not the president. he does not get to take stuff home. if they are not going to jail, then you have somebody destroying stuff, like hillary clinton, and she did not go to jail. this needs to be thrown out. lawyers are not allowed to give up information. this stuff is between the client

and the attorney. that is all i have to say. i am so distraught by this. host: brenda is on the land, democrats line in south carolina. caller: the problem i have is we need to stick to the conversation. a lot of people spent time talking about stuff irrelevant to the subject. he said one box. that is not true. they asked him to return it, he returned to some. he did not return at all. they had to get a subpoena. it is almost like they are not believing. i don't understand some of these colors trying to justify what he did. what he did was wrong. all he had to do was take the boxes back, give him the documents back.

any person in their right mind if there subpoena will return whatever they need. i don't understand it. marjorie taylor greene will not stop jack smith from his job. what this meant it was wrong. it was me or anyone else, we would have been in jail a long time ago. i think it took too long. you are talking about information no one should know about. when you have these documents and mar-a-lago, who knows how many people went in and out of that place while they were there. i have the numbers -- i have family members in the military

who sacrificed their lives for our country and you have a party try to justify what he did. what he did was wrong. no one is above the law. host: this is another story in the washington timeshost: by their chief washington correspondent, "identity scheme id's biden as the big guy. -- bribed or divided with a $5 million payment in between 16 and referred to him as the big cat has audio recordings of conversations with mr. biden according to a secret fbi memo involving a paid informant. the nickname mirrors a claim by a former biden family associate who in 2020 described apl scheme for a business deal with a chinese energy company in which 10% of the profits would be held for the big guy.

the big guy, the associate said, was mr. biden. a source confirmed to the washington times executive identified mr. biden as the big guy and in the bribery scheme. senator chuck grassley said it reveals ukraine energy company executive has recordings of conversations with mr. biden. he said in a floor speech that the fbi document contained reductions that the site mr. biden's audio recordings. here is some of what chuck grassley had to say on the senate floor yesterday. [video clip] sen. grassley: the national who bribed hunter biden allegedly has recordings of his conversation with him. 17 such recordings.

according to the 1023, the foreign national possesses audio recordings of phone calls between him and hunter biden. according to the 1023, the foreign national possesses two audio recordings of phone calls between him and then vice president joe biden. 's recordings were allegedly kept as an insurance policy for the foreign national in case he got into a tight spot. 1023 indicates that then vice president joe biden may have been involved in employing hunter biden. based on the facts known to congress and the public, it is clear the justice department, the fbi have not nearly had the same laser focus on the biden family.

special counsel jack smith has used a recording against former president trump. what is u.s. attorney weiss doing with these alleged joe and hunter biden recordings that are apparently relevant to the high-stakes bribery scheme? host: some reaction on social media this morning on our opening question about the arraignment today of former president donald trump at 3:00 p.m. phil says, "what kind national security we have, storing secrets in boxes is the transportable?" one of the impeachment attorneys, "while critics speak of trump fatigue, prosecutors are dealing with injustice fatigue.

a new poll shows a majority of citizens believe trump was correctly charged." marianne says, don't expect much today. all today is potential maga violence." richard in minneapolis, go ahead. caller: good morning. the press is in the bag for the democrats. you have a bc not combining the whole sentence when trump said let's go down to the capitol and cut out the part where he says peacefully protest. why don't you have somebody look into the presidential records act. get somebody to look at that. adam schiff and nadler, impeach

them for lying on the house floor. let's get some fairness in here. host: next up is a call from georgia on the independent line. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. this president trump indictment is i had a secret clearance and i would be in prison if i did any of this. president does have a right to declassify. that many boxes of stuff, there is no way he read all of those. i believe it even has to be recorded when they do it. on the other hand, they have joe biden who was a senator who took stuff that was top-secret which to me is even more damaging than that.

society between gop and the democrats is so -- if you want to look at corruption, how did the president leave the white house and by a $12 million house? how did mitch mcconnell who has been in the senate make multimillion dollars? nancy pelosi is worth over $2 million with a job that pays less than $192,000 a year. the american people need to look at who they are voting for. adam schiff trying to do the russian hoax saying he had it in plain sight for all of those years was a total liar to america. all of those can stand in front of the public and say this is what we have, this is the problem.

going, we have got information but we cannot give it to you. i cannot speak for all of us. people really need to start looking at who they are going for. we need term limits in this place so that we don't have people that have been there 50 and 60 years. the ai stuff has come up and economic security you less than 5% -- and i, security you that lesbian -- than 5% care about what ai is. host: we have congressional coverage coming up today. the house is coming in at 10:00 a.m. eastern. just to let you know about some of our other coverage, the treasury secretary janet yellen will testify on the outlook for international financial system. the house financial services committee will hold a hearing at 10:00 a.m. eastern.

you cancer treatment you can stream it -- you can stream it on our app or at c-span.org. former president donald trump heads back to new jersey. he will speak at a fundraiser tonight at the trump national golf club. we expect those remarks around 8:15 eastern. we will have them live here on c-span. you can follow them on c-span now and on c-span.org. about 20 more minutes of your calls and comments on the arraignment of the president. 202-748-8001 is the line for republicans. 202-748-8000 for democrats. independents and others, 202-748-8002. let's hear from donald in new jersey, democrats line. caller: i am calling to ask

everybody, republicans, democrats, independents to read the indictment. nobody has the story in the indictment. basically what happened is that a staffer was moving boxes around for trump and he talked -- a top-secret document fell out and he caught the fbi. the fbi asked trump for all his documents. he gave what he could find. trump kept moving the boxes around so that the lawyer could not find them. because of that, that is why the fbi had to go in and do a search so they could find all of these documents. trump was having much with a staffer and with a book publisher. he shared top-secret information within. those talking about hillary and joe biden, did he share or did

she share nuclear documents with anyone like that? in addition to that, the documents be moved -- documents being moved, when the grand jury was asked for the paperwork, they would not get it. a group of trump's peers were the ones who said he needed this indictment because he heard from all of the witnesses, they read all of the paperwork. is not like this is all some sort of deep state thing. where the fbi was there, they also took pictures of boxes in bathroom. they took pictures of boxes in ballroom. they took pictures in a storage room that was not locked. the staffers were moving all of the boxes all over the place.

a lot of people are saying the president can do whatever he wants. that is not true. the president can take with him his personal momentum's -- personal memos. he can take newspaper clippings. even kim jong-un's love letters, he can't take that stuff but he cannot take top-secret nuclear information and documents. host: donald suggested raising the -- donald suggested reading the indictment. we made a link on the front page of our homepage, c-span.org. there is a link in the top right corner, you can go directly to the indictment against former president donald trump and his aide, walt model -- walt nauta.

ruthven is calling from michigan. caller: i am calling about the documents all over the floor. i think the fbi did that when th took the pictures. trump is going to be president. host: rose is in minnesota on the democr line. caller: good morning. amust going to say it is something, the hypocrisy cing out from the maga republicans. if they could focus on this like working on the train system, we would have good entrance. we don't have good entrance but we have republicans focused on silly things. you know who is a criminal? henry kissinger did were crimes -- did were crimes and we did nothing. other war criminals like obama,

we did not charge him because we are only focusing on truck. trump is bad, i hate trump. but if he wins, he will be able to pardon himself from prison. except one. host: if that were to happen, you think the former president, a newly elected president should be able to pardon himself? caller: i don't think you should but he could. we are in the age of fascism. host: to maine, next is joe on the independent line. caller: thanks for taking my call. i am just flabbergasted by people calling in saying joe biden, the democrats, media,

they are all causing this problem. donald trump did the crime. he is being tried. this is the american justice system. he has the ability to bring a defense. you don't see lawyers running to help him now. you don't see john turley leaving fox news to come down and be a lawyer and improve this witchhunt -- and prove this witchhunt. if it was a witchhunt, he should be running to court, which he is able to do today. he could stop all of this and show his proof, who is framing him, who did this. that and going to happen. he is -- that ain't going to happen. he is going to string it out as long as he can.

he destroyed the republican party like lindsey graham said. this is political hacks. guy bless america -- god bless america. you guys can vote for donald trump all you want, no one is stopping you. there is no law saying a criminal cannot be president of the united states. is all monarchy. -- malarkey. you hear both sides going after each other. you heard the clips. that is not democrats, that is not major media, that is not george soros, that is nikki haley calling donald trump a criminal who stole classified information and refused to give it back. host: we appreciated the call.

this is from efp. "trump indictment, missing link, why did he do it? donald trump is full of evidence of any apparent crime but it lacks emotive. trump was charged with removing documents from the white house and refusing to give them back. he could have avoided charges if he had allowed the national archives officials to retrieve all of the records last year. pressed by archives, trump headed over 15 boxes of documents, including favorite keepsakes like letters from kim jong-un. those boxes contained 197 defense and intelligence documents, sparking a subpoena to get other super files trump may have taken. trump's attorney found 38 more classified documents from a

search of 30 boxes and turned them over to the fbi on june the third. on august 8, the fbi raided mar-a-lago and found another 102 classified files, including 27 in trump's office. the indictment only charged trump for documents he kept after the first 15 boxes were handed over, underscoring the view he could have avoided prosecution. why he did it is unclear. this entire thing came about because of reckless conduct by the president, bill barr told fox news. every other person in the country would have turned over the files. ." highland park, new jersey. jim, welcome to the program. host: paid you for taking my phone call.

-- thank you for taking my phone call. it seems the republicans saw donald j. trump as a guard -- as a god. he has done criminal acts and in the process he is obstructing justice and the law. i believe that the republicans should come to their senses, as some have who are running against him. that is all i have to say. host: next up, republican line, shirley is calling from north carolina. caller: good morning. how do we know what is in all of those boxes? it could be national geographic, who knows.

why don't they show the public what is in the boxes? when it comese trl, the jury, are theyoingo see the documents? are they going to know which is which? the jury is going to be contaminat. accusing biden of all kinds of things, show it. let the public know. we want to know what is going on in washington. may be trump -- maybe trump can get back in there and finish cleaning the swamp. host: this is the washington post, "trump scrambles to find a lawyer on the eve of his first federal court appearance. donald trump spent the day

scrambling to find a qualified florida lawyer willing to join his defense team as he faces the justice department's first prosecution of a former president. after touching down in miami, trump spent the afternoon interviewing prospective lawyers and meeting with his legal team to discuss the case in which he is accused of mishandling classified documents and obstructing the government's efforts to retrieve them. several attorneys declined to take a trip on it as a client after two of his key lawyers resigned last week. ." . he's in south carolina on the independent line -- kurt is in south carolina on independent line. caller: i have a comment in regard to the documents.

on january 6, the day of the insurrection, when i don't mow trump got in -- when donald trump got in the limousine and want to go to the capitol building, the secret service refused to take him there and insisted he go back to the white house. when he went to remove all of these documents, hundreds of boxes of classified military documents from the white house, how is he allowed her to do that -- how is he allowed to do that? is there no control over these important documents? i think there should be asserted in arms or someone in charge of the amount of legal documents taken from the white house by anyone. the documents belong to the people of the country, they don't belong to any particular individual such as donald trump.

i think there are to be some major revamping of the control of those documents when it comes to the end oan administration where a president wants to remove tho. thank you very much. host: looking at capitol hill news, this is the headline at bloomberg.com, a story by eric larson, "rebel republicans seeking spending power concessions from mccarthy. dissidents lifted a blockade temporarily. members met with mccarthy. eric larson addresses this morning. thanks came to a stalemate, so tell us how they broke it. guest: the conservative from

montana said in the house would be functioning this week. they are holding at the possibility that next week or whenever the gop tries to bring a partisan bill that is republicans on the rule, they can hold it hostage again. matt gaetz and other conservatives what a coalition agreement with mccarthy they guarantees that the speaker will side with them. we are already seeing this play out on the appropriations bill. there is a question about why the house would seek to implement bills that -- the debt ceiling deal. we heard from the appropriations committee chair and she said that mccarthy and all of them agreed they're going to cut another $20 billion. that is a key element of this

deal emerging between mccarthy and the freedom caucus. host: it does seem like the strategy of the speaker is to keep on talking with them. guest: that is right. kevin mccarthy and the head of the committee said we are going to take this day by day. you can only lose four votes and pass a bipartisan bill. this is really going to become a problem in the fall with the appropriations bill. mccarthy came out several times and set every morning he wakes up and prays for the patience of job, he realizes this is going to be a process. host: the way the whole speaker

elections were handled back in january, the idea of a power-sharing agreement, is the speaker receptive to that idea? guest: as far as committee assignments, he says no, we are not going to give these 11 committee assignments because any members can hold up the house floor. it is a slippery slope. he says he is willing to follow the spending level suggestions and go after these panels that continue year after year without any examination. a speaker is very receptive to it. as far as appointing a co-majority leader or giving some additional power, he is

regifting that. i am not sure the freedom caucus will be able to all that. they say they have a personal demand, both they would not specify what position they are seeking. host: what has the roll of the majority whip, steve scalise, not just in terms of this incident but the ongoing relations between the speaker and this group of 11? guest: steve scalise has distanced himself from mccarthy. he was not part of the debt ceiling in negotiations. he was on the sidelines there. be careful that led -- what led to the breakout was this bill from andrew clyde. there was some finger-pointing between mccarthy and steve scalise about why he was being punished and why that bill was being withheld from the floor. that bill is being brought to the floor this week.

the freedom caucus members said that is -- [indiscernible] steve scalise's and mccarthy's relationship seems to become more fraught and steve scalise could be arrival, but for now mccarthy seems to have a good grip on his job. host: eric is a contributor to bloomberg.com, thank you for joining us this morning. a head here on "washington journal," we will continue conversation about the arraignment today in miami of former president donald trump. will we be -- joined by renato mariotti. later in the program, matthew kroenig talks about negotiations with nato partners and their

support for ukraine's war against russia. host: morehead here on "washington journal" continuing the conversation of the arraignment of former president donald trump we will be joined by a former federal prosecutor to talk about former president appearance later today. the atlantic cancels matthew craig discusses relations with nato partners. ♪ >> on august 24, 195514-year-old emmett till visited bryant's market. emmett till's 16-year-old cousin was with them when the incident

happened and also later when he was abducted. reverend parker co-author of a few days full of trouble recounts the events that led to emmett till's murder in his effort to get justice for his late cousin. >> i left him in the store. shortly after, i was 16 he was 14. nothing happened while they were in the store. they came out of the store and a short time later i don't know how long. emmett is -- he loved to make people laugh. so he whistles. and when he did that, i mean, you had to have understood the atmosphere in 1955 in mississippi.

a black man whistng at a white woman. that was bad in itself. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's q&a. you can listen to q&a and all of our podcasts on our free c-span now at. --app. watch video on demand anytime online at c-span.org and try our points of interest feature. an online feature that guides you to interesting highlights of our interesting coverage. >> "washington journal" continues. host: seven hours from now former president donald trump will be in a miami courtroom to hear the 37 counts against him in the documents case. we are joined by a former federal prosecutor for the

northern district of illinois with this this morning thanks for joining us on the program.

it seems like they're are doing

things by the book, the way things they ordinarily would. for example, the former president was told before charges were made public that he would be charged. that is a courtesy that is typically afforded to defendants, and smith and his team, for example, did not decide not to grant that courtesy to the former president simply because they suspected that he would go out and talk to the public about it. they treated him like they would treat anyone else. he is expected to be let out on bond. expect a fight over that. i expect them to work with the defense team to ensure they receive the discovery they need in an expedited matter. host: you mentioned every word will be scrutinized in the former president obviously is the leading candidate on the republican side. he's holding an event tonight at

mar-a-lago. we are going to cover that. he has a very powerful platform on social media. how does the judge, how do his attorneys, what did they say to him in terms of the words being scrutinized that could guest: well judge cannon is going to admonish him the same way every defendant is admonished. their words can be used against them but i think it's a trait if they are able to have anything over him. it's an open question. they are going to try to convince him to keep his mouth shut. and the problem from them is he has already asked them in, in certain respects. if you read the indictment carefully one thing i think that jumps out and it certainly

jumped out at me as there was no hesitation using his words against him. they took words from the time in the presidency related information. they also felt and indictment sections that i think were focused on some of the potential defenses the former president had. those are defenses the only know about because president trump his mouth and revealed. in other words there was this focus on declassification defense. obviously, smith and his team might have considered that issue. but the focus on it was due to the fact that the former president had already opened his mouth and said things about it. and made that his central

defense. you know, frankly, that has always been bad news. i left the government seven years ago defending cases across the country ever since. one of the hardest things to deal with is a client that makes statements that boxes in the defense. host: joining us from chicago he is the former assistant u.s. district attorney talking about the arraignment later today of former president donald trump. we welcome your calls and comments (202) 748-8001 for the republican line. democrats (202) 748-8000. independents and others. (202) 748-8002. if you want to read the indictment we have links to it on our web page at c-span.org. just to go through the top line of counts, areas of the 37

counts against the former president and his aide, his so-called body man. they include conspiracy to obstruct justice, withholding document or written record, correctly concealing a record, concealing a document in a federal investigation, creating a scheme to conceal and aching false statements for representations before attorneys for the fbi. what are they trying to build here? what are prosecutors trying to build with these different areas of charges? guest: all the accounts that you talked about are related to the obstruction of justice. the first 31 counts are related to the willful retention of classified material. the statute which is called the espionage act.

in this case it doesn't have anything to do with espionage. the statute was actually created before the modern classification system. it does not refer to classified information versus national defense. nonetheless, in this context it's basically the same thing. the willful retention of classified material is the first 31 counts. the rest of the counts, as you pointed out, are all related to obstruction. there is a real focus there on showing the former president's reaction to the government tried to get the documents back. the first 31 counts are willful retention. what's willful retention? that is when you have classified material and you keep it. even when you know you're supposed to return it to the government, you know it's not your material, you want to keep

that and take steps to ensure you keep it nonetheless. in this case, even after the government asked very nicely, repeatedly made requests with the material, issued a grand jury subpoena, there was a personal visit by the doj to the former president's estate. even before there was any search warrant. even despite all of that, the former president's reaction was to try to, as you pointed out, hide the documents. made false statements related to the documents, encouraged his attorneys to obstruct justice. all of that, all of that was done in reaction to the government trying to take the documents. it's not only powerful evidence, it's not only standalone crimes

but the evidence also bolsters the government 31 counts. host: and analysis in the washington post by eric glick about the criticism that came by lindsey graham, senator lindsey graham. the amazing spin that trump isn't a spy. he said on abc's this week that espionage charges are absolutely ridiculous whether you like trump or not, he did not commit espionage. he did not disseminate or provide information to a foreign power. the first rates is a former judge knows being charged under the espionage act does not mean you are accused of spying or even eating spies. your thoughts on that? guest: mr. blake is absolutely

correct. it has nothing to do with, i mean there is components but this part has nothing to do with espionage or spying. i think lindsey graham knows that. he's a very intelligent person. at times he's incredibly engaging and commands detail under the law. the reality is this is a challenging set of charges and behavior to defend. obviously, the government bears the burden of proof. trump is purdue -- presumed innocent. that's the way our system works legally. the behavior itself is challenging to defend. senator graham was trying to defend the former president. there's a bit of a misleading nature to his comments. he was saying, hey, trump didn't

commit espionage. no one is saying he committed espionage. there is no evidence of that. the issue here is as i mentioned before the willful retention of national defense information. anyone can dispute the fact that our nuclear secret and our military vulnerabilities were attacked planes, all of that is national defense information. it belongs to the united states government. they do not belong to donald trump and ultimately you know, possessing that information, particularly after the government is telling you that it's not your information and it needs it back you know that's very highly problematic. it will result in charges. host: let's get to our callers. there are several on the line. we are talking about the trump arraignment later today.

sally, first up calling from washington state on the democratic line. caller: thank you very much. it's the democratic line i believe. anyway. question that i have, understanding that you are a defense lawyer at this time. where are the talk lawyers? that defendant mr. trump. host: she may be referring to the fact that we read the story earlier, one of the headlines said the former president and is scrambling to find a lawyer on the eve of his appearance today. his two previous attorneys resigned about the same time the indictment came out last thursday. guest: that's right. so first of all regarding the

fact that his former attorneys resigned, i believe there were some reports he was unhappy with them. i don't think that was necessary ily voluntary. regarding why top attorneys are not flocking to represent donald trump i do find that remarkable. this is the most important criminal case of my lifetime. at the very least. and it's a substantial matter. typically, vista say donald trump wasn't the president of the united states, he was just a very wealthy man. typically if there was somebody reporting to be a billionaire was charged with the crime lawyers would be lining up to represent the individual. it's also typically, the former president of the united states is trust, even then people would

line up to take the case. what you have here is a unique set of circumstances. in which first of all the former president puts his lawyers in situations that could jeopardize their own careers. if you read this indictment he allegedly asked his lawyers to live. asked his lawyers to destroy evidence. things that can create problems for those lawyers. can create charges against those lawyers. another issue is the former president trump often will be very critical and attack is on lawyers at times. you know, he likes people one moment at the next he doesn't. that perhaps has something to do with it. there have been some statements that he doesn't fully pay his legal bill. i don't know the truth of all of that.

that's something between him and his lawyers. what i'll say is former president certainly is a challenging client. we talked a little moment ago he doesn't operate within any kind of playbook that i understand. and i handle very significant criminal matters throughout the country. i would be very upset if my client acted in that fashion. and i'm sure that has something to do with that but it is rather remarkable. host: given the last-minute reassembling of a legal team indicates the former president is the one calling the shots in terms of how the the proceeding might go today. guest: i always tell my clients in her to provide you with an option. i'm not here to make the decisions for your lives for clients that are in the situation this is their life.

these are the biggest decisions there going to be making in their life or one of the biggest decisions. ultimately, it is the clients call. typically clients are going to follow the recommendation of a trained professional. for example, the decisions you make about how you're going to handle cancer treatment. maybe one of the most important decisions in your life typically people follow the instructions of their doctor. they don't look to see what their surgeon says. or go against recommendations. the former president has shown that he will do things that are contrary to what any lawyer would advise him to do. host: let's go to john calling from virginia, republican line. caller: good morning. couple questions.

under the presidential records act the way i understand it, they have two years to go through the records, to separate it and then return them. trump didn't get the two years. and they knew that there was top-secret nuclear documents missing, why didn't the subpoena just try to subpoena the top-secret nuclear documents? why general subpoena like there was? my second question is everybody i've ever talked to the head top-secret clearance they all say the same thing. if they took a top-secret document out of the government, but they weren't president, they'd be in jail no questions asked. apparently the fear of god didn't take the top-secret document. how did biden get the top-secret

documents and then when they said he gave them back. that's like saying he's robbing a bank and saying here's the money back. host: john, several things there. guest: first off, presidential records act is a statute back in the 70's. it was not meant to give more control to the president it was actually meant to do the opposite. after the nixon experience and essentially with the presidential records act does, it says the records of a president are owned and controlled by the united it's government. it does give access to those materials to the president and or their designated representatives. during a period of time. but in this case, the government

never got control of this records. that is what this was all about. this started as a dispute before between the former president and the national archives he was trying to get possession of those materials. these records are in the possession of the national archives. they are in a secure location and they have the records there and there are representatives going through this. that never happened here. the former president took the records and brought them to mar-a-lago. that's the first thing. secondly, you have someone like joe biden or donald trump or mike pence or any of these people that have access to top-secret information. they are president and vice president of the united states.

not a complete surprise that they have access to these materials. donald trump, he was the president. he has access to the information. donald trump had a very strong defense on day one. if, for example, if he was charged shortly after he left office with willfully retaining defense materials his defense would be i don't know what's in those boxes. i didn't pay attention to what's in those boxes. a lot of people had boxes. if he returned those records at that time, there would have been no harm no foul. that's what happened to mike pence. that's probably what will happen with the current president, joe biden. ultimately, they came forward and said they had this material

that they inadvertently had. that's not will for retention. that means they didn't want the stuff. they inadvertently had it and they returned it when they found it. in the case of donald trump what happened was when he knew he had the information and when the government tried to get the information as was detailed earlier he allegedly willfully we retained the material. until he was -- until it was seized by the government against his will. host: let's go to erin. caller: thank you, folks. one of the things i want to point out. i always vote -- there is one think that a lot of people don't realize. you know when a person has been stepped multiple times we call

them crimes of rage. we have a gentleman being charged with multiple counts of breaking the law. they can go back and find were a man, the head of the director was fired makes a statement in front of the cameras saying you don't know who you're messing with. those words came out of the second in command's mouth. that shows a rage because they were after him. our government conducting an operation in south america. using the media to overthrow because they provided their own media. our people know how to use the

press. for a long time, our enemies have gloated about getting us to fight over our differences. i look at the current house and i see democrats on one side, republicans on the other. if you sit on the wrong side of the tracks, you're inferior. they proceeded among everyone in the house. which meant they had to talk to other. . host: you kind of getting to the political nature of this case. guest: obviously, apart was related to the former president. i'm not a psychiatrist or psychologist. i can't say anything about his mental state. what's interesting to know is he

was fixated on keeping these documents. it's not clear to me why that was. he may have been angry as the caller suggested but he was very fixated on that despite very good reason not to do that. i'm sure the advice of the attorneys was to return the documents and put this behind them so that's the first thing. i think also regarding the political nature of the charges i do think it is notable and it is something that we should be concerned about that the current justice department, in this case the special counsel is charged with crimes he's also the leading candidate for president for the republican party.

that is remarkable. the former president's actions are also unusual. they put the justice department in a very difficult position. i think that many people, including for example former president's attorney general bill barr said he almost forced their hand. i think that in many ways the former president brought these charges on himself. he took actions that were reckless, beyond reckless. they were the sort of action that someone would take if they wanted to invite charges from the justice department. host: attorneysn slight magazines writing, previous rulings about donald trump demand recusal. we will get to that in a little bit.

i want to ask with the challenge is facing judge cannon as these proceedings begin. judge cannon or any judge in this case. guest: any judge would have challenges facing them. because they are standing in judgment of a very significant political figure. past president of the united states. a leading candidate for president of the united states for this upcoming election. and i think it's fair to say a figure who has a cultivated a following that is supportive of people. and attacked the capital wilting because they support -- building because they support him so prominently. there are security concerns you remember what happened on january 6. and there are concerns about potential threats and things

like that. individuals have been threatened and have lost loved ones. courtroom security and the security of the judges and jurors are going to be an issue. for example in a recent civil trial in new york, the judge that was brought by -- carol -- i think there will be an effort made by the judge to try to ensure the jurors are secure. and there's also dealing with highly classified information. there is tension between our constitutional guarantees with the defendant and that the defendant can get witnesses against him. in the public -- is entitled to know what is going on. we have a public trial according

to the constitution of the united states. there is tension between that and the government of keeping national security information secret. that is always a challenging balance to make or strike. that will be a challenge to the judge. there will also be scheduling challenges here. the president, the former president has a speedy trial. all the defendants are and they typically do not exercise that right. they essentially waive that by asking for more time and setting deadlines that delay the matter to get themselves time to prepare for visit for an -- defense. but this is significant because there is an upcoming election. they will not set the trial close to the election date. you will not sell the trial in

the middle of a republican convention. practically speaking, i do nothing this trial will be after the election. there's also another criminal case pending against the former president. and he will not take the trial of this case around that time and he will give them time to prepare for that trial. there are issues there. but in the particular set of challenges, because he presided over a prior matter that was initiated by former president trump i would say ill-advised strategy on his part to file a civil lawsuit and try to challenge the search of his mar-a-lago estate early in a civil context. i will tell you, i've never seen something like that before in my career and i've certainly never seen it be successful.

that would be thrown out early on. you have to have a right to obtain information beyond very limited rights that are warranted to you. former president was reported. and judge cannon made a number of rulings. they were later determined to wrongfully satisfy by the court of the peers -- court of appeals for the judge that was appointed by former president trump. beyond that, they are really far outside of any norm that we would ever see in every -- unique criminal case. she undeservedly has a reputation of being impartial toward president trump. it will be a particular challenge for her to convince the public that she is fair,

that she is someone that deserves a neutral judge in the case. host: and assuming for a second that fulton county comes in and the indictment comes down -- three potential cases. which one gets priority in terms of what goes first? would that be the federal case in miami? guest: there is no priority system so to speak. there are different judges and jurisdictions who have supplications. i would expect the judges -- to some extent that happens when defendants are charged with multiple jurisdictions. the judges will communicate with one another to figure out scheduling issues. in this case, if judge cannon is looking at her schedule, i think she should know for example there is a man hannah --

manhattan trial and she would work around the trial schedule. in other words she would not get to that trial date. in the fulton county case in georgia, whether one case would be set first or not depends on a number of things. one thing would be is at one point -- what point in each of those in the federal county matters -- is the case proceeding more quickly because of the nature of the case or something along those lines. secondly the party is pulled back. but it is not as if the former president gave pass. they would have to take what comes to them. there are other active participants in with cases. they could slow one case down and try to speed up another case.

one gambit or strategy that they have and they are facing criminal cases of multiple jurisdictions is they are trying to slow down the cases that are bad for them and they speed up the less problematic case. but i would say facing criminal charges in multiple jurisdictions at the same time is very challenging. it is like doing criminal defense on -- because of the prosecutor in this case jack smith will be laser focused on getting a conviction in this case. but if former president trump is dealing with this case, his lawyers afterplay three deep stress -- 3d chests. the movant they -- 3d chess.

they have other cases that they have to balance. host: on to milwaukee we hear from vi on the democrat line. caller: good morning america. i just wanted to say that trump is exhausting and embarrassing. he has been known for not paying his bills. that is why he is having a hard time getting legal representation now. he needs to go off into the sunset. but he is hanging around for, i don't know. let it go and go. he knows. he had no business taking his stocks. host: all right early on the republican line in indiana. caller: yeah you are saying the national archives are charged with these documents that the

country -- that they have? host: yes they said the -- those documents. caller: they are doing everything they can to get trump. they do not want him as president. in seven years, he is back and why he wants to run for president i have no idea. but he has not done his job. he will still do his job when he gets in there. thanks to trump we had something going and jill biden came in and destroyed everything. you lawyers are just or an attorney or whatever the help you are [indiscernible] illinois, california, new york are the communist states in this country. host: a little bit you mentioned your time earlier prosecuting

the former governor of illinois. guest: that is right. i was not trial aware on those cases but my office did in my former office prosecuted many political figures they had thrown away. i am very proud of my home state. i've lived here almost my entire life. it is a wonderful place to live just like many other places in america. i do not think we should take any place in the broad brush but there are political figures in illinois and there are corrupt political figures in other states. that is in part with the charges served out. i understand, let me say, i understand why the caller is frustrated with donald trump, he is always facing a lot of challenges and problems. some of that comes as being president of united states. joe biden is facing a lot of criticism.

there's a lot of people that have strong feelings about him because he is the president. that is part of the territory. barack obama before donald trump -- there were people who hated him and said very negative things about him. in terms of legal process, i will say the former president runs into legal problems because he does a lot of things that are outside of the normal. it is not a typical thing when you're under investigation and you have a prior prosecutor who is investigating you. that caused him a lot of problems during the investigation. it is not a typical thing for example when you have access to classified material to be so strongly desired. keeping that material when you are not close. and trying to lie to the government about whether you have it.

those are self-inflicted wounds. i do not doubt there are not a lot of people who want to go after donald trump and pay him and want to take him down. the former president has made it easier for his opponent by taking steps that would lead to many prosecutors to prosecute him. i think any prosecutor looking at the fact of the recharges -- host: let's hear from dale in annapolis, maryland. independent line. caller: good morning. i have a few questions. first of all, the republicans and the democrats, you have to ask yourself why would a former president try to hide certain things about nuclear weapons.

if i had a son or a daughter right now that worked for the cia overseas, i would be worried sick. i don't know who former president trump has shown these documents to. i know he is just like any other person but right now this country is so divided it makes me wonder why in the world people would still try to defend him. i look at something lindsey graham set the other day and he's probably gonna have to ask her when it comes down to think her name is -- willis in georgia. when you hear trump's words ask the republican i think secretary of state -- i need to find 11,000 votes. all he wanted to do was to stay in power. let lindsey graham a

try to go over there and actually change the republican mind, but he did not do it. luckily he stuck by the constitution. and if we are not careful we are going to lose our democratic establishment in the world. thank you very much i will wait for your answer. host: thank you, dale. caller: i would say -- guest: i would say the following. there are a lot of interesting comments by the collar. someone who has thought very carefully about democracy. it is fair to say that donald trump is the putting the republican party in a challenging position. he is the leading candidate for the nomination and it is fair to say he has the majority of republican base lined up. in terms of air support. his activity which is very

problematic and highly questionable and allegedly criminal activity, as i set up top, it is hard to defend. i think he is put in a position where a lot of politicians like lindsey graham are trying to defend that. i do think politicians need to be guided not just by their political interests but what is in the best interest of the united states of america. i do think regardless of what one thinks about donald trump, we should all be in agreement that when the government is trying to negotiate with you and discuss things with you, when there is government property demands, we should all tell the truth. to law enforcement. one thing that's troubling to me as somebody who spent many years in law enforcement, we work closely with the fbi and other agencies like the irs, dea, many

others. i find it problematic that there are attacks on law enforcement and defund the fbi and things of that nature. what is going on here is a long-haul investigation. frankly, the prior caller in illinois, one of the good things that we have is federal law enforcement that keeps our election -- for goes after corrupt politicians. both sides of the republican or democrat scan feel good about law enforcement cleaning up the act of correct politicians in both parts. i think we keep that nationally as well. host: yell law school graduate and former district attorney renato mariotti. thank you for being a washington journal this morning.

coming up next, president biden will be meeting today with nato secretary-general at the white house to talk about specifically about ukraine and the related issues. the atlantic councils matthew chronic will -- matthew kroenig will be joining us next to discuss that. your calls and comments will be welcome as well. ♪ announcer: c-spanshop.org is c-span's online store. we have our latest collection of the c-span apparel, books, home to cory, and accessories. there's something for every c-span fan. and every purchase supports our nonprofit operation. shop anytime at c-span shop.org. ♪ announcer: c-span campaigns 2024

coverage gives you the front rows seat to the presidential election. watch a campaigns on the campaign trail with announcement, meet and greet, speeches, and events. to make up your own mind. campaign 2024 on the c-span network. c-span our free video mobile app. or anytime on c-span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of all it takes. nash of politics -- of politics. announcer: c-span now is a free mobile app featuring an unfiltered view of what is happening in washington live and on-demand area keep up with live events, for hearings, and proceedings of u.s. congress, campaigns, and more from the world's top leaders. and all at your fingertips. and you can stay up-to-date with the latest episode of washington journal and have information for c-span tv network and c-span

radio less a variety of compelling podcasts. download it for free for -- for free today. c-span now your front row seat to washington anytime anywhere. ♪ announcer: listening to programs on c-span for c-span radio got easier. tell your smart speaker play c-span radio and listen to washington journal daily at 7 a.m. east. -- eastern. public hearings and congressional events throughout the day. catch washington today for a fast-paced report. listen to c-span anytime just tell your smart speaker play c-span radio. c-span powered by cable. announcer: washington journal continues. host: we have the vice president and senior director at the atlantic -- atlantic council and

a professor at georgetown university. the topic this morning our conversation about nato and the continuous support of ukraine. with secretary-general coming to the white house today. a delayed appearance by the secretary-general. broadly, in general, for nato, has -- how has the support for ukraine held up? host: i think the support has held up better than many people expected. joe biden said the united states will support ukraine as long as it takes. the united states has been the leader of the alliance and we have a strong support from allies when it comes to military assistance and its epting refugees from ukraine and elsewhere. i think this will be one of the top items on the agenda between the president and the nato secretary-general. host: how is the ukraine conflict helped countries take a look at their defense spending and their contributions to the nato force?

guest: it is remarkable the reaction to russia's invasion of ukraine. -- they think there were many people in the nato alliance that thought a major war in europe was possible. of course, russia's further invasion in 2022 shattered those illusions. many countries have responded with increased defense spending; germany, romania, poland, and others. and we see sweden and -- to countries that have been neutral. sweeten joined -- sweden joined nato. and it is stronger than any time since the end of the cold war. host: with some regulatory, ukrainian president zelenskyy has been criticized in asking for more defense capability from the united states and dado -- and nato. how do you think the u.s. has

answered the call? guest: i understand zelenskyy's frustration. his country is fighting for survival. he obviously wants as much support as he can get to get -- to push the russians out. i think the united states and nato has been indecisive when it comes to military support. at first we said we would not provide long-range missiles and then we decided we would. we said we would not provide tanks and then we would. we said we would not provide aircraft and then we would. though i think the approach happened incrementally. there is a reason the white house is trying to avoid escalation with russia. if we provided too much assistance to early russia might attack by attacking a nato member. i think that understands -- explains the incremental approach. host: in the u.s. providing training for the aircraft and to other nato countries around it. guest: yet in addition to the

aircraft we will be training ukrainian pilots which is important. that is one of the individuals said they did not want to provide aircraft because they said by the time to get it there and get the ukrainian pilots trained it would take too long. they wanted to focus their assistance on artillery shells and things that could have a more immediate effect on the battlefield. host: our other nato countries concerned about a possible retaliatory attack from russia based on the increasing amount of armor rent and support we are giving ukraine? guest: with more than 30 countries in the nato alliance now, they do not fully agree. i think the northern and the eastern countries and the baltic states, poland, romania, they tend to be more aggressive in their support for ukraine. they understand the russia's threatening for a long time. it is more certain european countries german and the french been -- and the white house that

it bit more cautious. nato works by consensus so we see these play out over the past year and a half. host: you have covered and written about and researched about nato international relations. some seven books you have been part of the defense and the security administrations with the obama administration and with the trump administration as well. in your view, how it is made of different today than what it was at the starter ukraine -- start of the ukraine more? guest: it is more united for sure. that is one thing that is surprising. it was able to come back together after the invasion. i think it is strong because of the increased defense spending and the two, new capable allies sweden and finland entering the alliance. and it is increasingly global area we have seen is not just european countries japan, south korea, australia, other less

allies supporting sanctions against russia. announcing that nato will be opening an office in japan. i think this is a new era for the alliance. host: our guest is matthew kroenig senior director at the atlantic council. the are at something your calls. here are the lines, republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002, text us at (202) 748-8003. and make sure you include where you are texting from. back to the sanctions and other things like that, there was a story this morning in the new york times about south africa. u.s. lawmakers asked white house to punish south africa for supporting russia.

a bipartisan group of american lawmakers have asked the biden administration to punish south africa as the country supports russia's war in ukraine by moving major train conference said to be held in africa this year to another country. -- the administration is pressing their case. guest: that is right. if you look globally what is surprising about the reaction tour ukraine is the free world with nato and the u.s. democratic allies are more united than many people understood. we are seeing these revisionist autocracies he russia and china are working together to support russia's wargames. but they have -- hedging states that are unwilling to take aside. that includes india, indonesia, south africa, brazil. this is a big challenge with the

united states and its allies to say how do we get these countries in the global south on our side? there is no strategy but we are feeling get out. are there incentives or punishment? in the case of south africa it would be a punishment to say stop helping russia. host: in your view what is the best possible outcome of the war? guest: i think the best possible outcome is ukraine succeeds in claiming all of it territory and it seems unlikely now, but ukrainians are engaged in a counteroffensive. you never know motion -- russian morale could collapse. russian forces could turn and run. when the u.s. withdraw from afghanistan a few years ago the afghan military collapsed more than we expected. i think that could happen with ukraine winning and i think that would be the best outcome. host: the russians must have

their 1979 withdraw from afghanistan and their memories. guest: that is right and russia is 10 feet tall. that is what is surprising with the russian military. they are less aggressive on the battlefield than expected. and they have lost wars in the past with their afghan invasion and subsequent withdrawal. host: where you supplies -- surprised of the russian failures? guest: overall, yes. i did publish a book on 20 -- in 2020 on democracies versus autocracies. in one of the arguments in the book is that they do have a problem in the military. i wrote a book about this. even still, i was surprised without early russia can for -- perform. i assumed that everyone wanted to invade and conquer ukraine they could do so quickly. here we are 1.5 years later they are having real albums.

-- real problems. host: the nato leader meets with secretary -- comes to washington with some regularity. what is the purpose of the meeting? what is the message between the secretary-general and the president? guest: guest: they have a few items to discuss. one is who will be the next nato chief. sultan berg has been in the position about 10 years. he said he is ready to leave when his term is up in september. some are calling for him to stay on. you do not usually want to change leaders and a time of war, but he said he is leaving. there are other potential successors that may be one of the topics. another topic would be the upcoming summit in fill me up. nato has an annual summit the next one will be july 11 and 12. they will probably want to discuss that issue. in particular, one of the comments on the e -- on the agenda would be what is the future of ukrainian security?

will they join nato? if not are there other memberships that would provide ukraine to defend themselves. they will have plenty to discuss. host: and among nato countries, having ukraine. -- helping ukraine to new members finland and sweden. what about ukraine russian mark guest: -- what about ukraine? . guest: the alliance as ukraine will join nato someday. they will become a member of the alliance. at a minimum, the allies need to repeat that statement. many believe we should do more. after the invasion of ukraine, some have repeated language fro -- from 2008 and asked if that is too weak. i think where they are going to

try to do is find that space in the middle. what is on the path we can take to move ukraine further tornado membership without getting directly involved in a war with russia. host: back to jan stoltenberg, his term is wrapping up. he is a former military leader from norway. the leader will be a military leader chosen from among the nato nations. how is that done? guest: is also a head of state from a european primary. it is technically by consensus, but in practice, often the u.s. president can have an important influence. some of the candidates under consideration are ben wallace, british defense secretary, and also the danish prime minister, two at the top candidates. host: that decision will be made

by when? guest: it would be nice to announce it at the summit. stoltenberg's term ends in september. you would want time to plan between now and then. host: carol calling from georgia, republican line. caller: eitan coming because i have always wondered -- i am calling because i have always wondered that with our country looking weak, i wonder if that helps to motivate the war. i cannot get in my mind how we -- -- get out of my mind how we left afghanistan the way we did we were looking weak. our borders, we are looking weak. i wonder does that give the world an idea that we are weakened, our country. i wanted to know if the russian

war came about because of us looking so we at the time. and us looking weak like that, they thought it was a good time to go to war. this work has gone on for months. i cannot believe it. we have helped ukraine to do better by giving them a lot of money and equipment. we are evolving with war. they still have not succeeded. i want to know is it in part our fault? host: thanks, carolyn. guest: there are many reasons why putin may have wanted to invade ukraine. but i think you are right, is not just mean who said this, but general walters, biden's supreme commander for europe did say he thinks the withdraw from afghanistan was one factor in

boot -- in putin's calculation. it made him think that the u.s. was retreating from the world stage and that military actions to topple government would be easy. that was a factor. in terms of providing support to ukraine and are we feeling the war? let's remember what has happened in ukraine. the independent state was violently attacked by russia and they are fighting for their freedom. it is up to the ukrainians with when they want to stop fighting, if they want to stop fighting. if russia attacked florida, i do not think americans would say let's just give up florida. we would fight to defend the country. that is what ukrainians are doing good we are doing this not just to help ukraine but it is in the u.s.'s interest. after china and russia, that after -- after china, russia is our biggest threat. i think it is in the interest of the u.s. host: lawrence is in atlanta,

democrats line. laura in atlanta, georgia. go ahead. you're on the air. go ahead. caller: i wanted your guest to tell me how he takes ukraine is going to win -- thanks ukraine is going to win this war when russia keeps destroying ukraine. it is a matter of time for everywhere in ukraine to be destroyed. ukraine does not have the chance to also bump russia so that russia -- against involvement so that putin can think twice and stop this war. i see it like the west is trying to dump all their war equipment

in ukraine and replace it. host: help will ukraine when this? guest: i said my ideal outcome to the war would be ukraine winning, but i do not know that that is the most likely outcome. i fear we will be a stalemate on the battlefield and that russia will be left occupying parts of eastern ukraine. i did not think western ukraine would be foolish enough to say, putin, congratulations, you get half of ukraine. but i could see a long-term stalemate like on the korean peninsula. we do not have a peace agreement to end the korean war. but the lines of been locked in place. i could see something similar happening in ukraine. host: looking at a potential long-term stalemate situation, it goes again being a nato

problem and becomes a world problem in the sense every building ukraine. made from any of this in countries, i presume, the u.n. has this been talked about, what does ukraine need in the likely event that this war ends and some sort of stalemate? how do we rebuild the country? guest: great point. they will need a lot of assistance to rebuild. there is some planning going on. the focus is on the military effort, but there is some planning about rebuilding. when it comes to aid, there is transatlantic tension with some americans asking why the u.s. is providing so much aid, why don't europeans do more? this is been identified as a compromise with the u.s. providing the lead when it comes to military assistance but europeans taking the lead when it comes to postwar reconstruction. host: next is ali, virginia,

independent line. caller: a comment and a question. just think the u.s. in tough times -- saddam to keep him busy. the destruction of this was brutal and long-term. unfortunately, ukraine was pushed -- to manage him. and like the health care system in the u.s., people are making money off this war and they will keep making money. unfortunately, an assistant to both iraq, afghanistan -- billions if not hundreds of billions of u.s. tax money went to iraq to rebuild.

that is what ukraine taste. -- faced. why do you think the u.s. is in a position to identify the good side and the bedside -- bad side? history said we did it as well. we put the united states in that position when we did that. i appreciated -- human rights and all that speech, just fewer interests. in your talk about why the you that united states is doing this. host: thanks for the question. i think you are right that the u.s. has made mistakes in its foreign policy in iraq and

elsewhere, but look at the bigger sweep of history, the u.s. has done a good job of identifying the good guys and the bad guys, coming into the defense of europe in world war i, coming to the defense of europe in world war ii to defeat hitler's fighting back against japan after they attacked pearl harbor. there are a lot of great areas in international politics, that this area is pretty rock and white. -- black and white. it is clear that putin was the aggressor, invaded because of his dream of rebuilding the russian empire, committed human rights abuses. it does make sense for the u.s. and nato allies to resist this aggression and help ukraine. it is good for ukraine, but i also think it advances u.s. interests by helping us to defend europe, an important geopolitical region, and to

weaken a great adversary. host: florida, nelson, republican line. caller: good morning. before i asked my question, i went to make it clear -- want to make it clear that i am in favor of supporting ukraine and i believe we are doing the right thing in helping them. having said that, tight would like to ask what your opinion -- i would like to ask what your opinion is as to the continued expansion of nato. nato was initially put together in order to hold back the soviet union. it has continued to do so, to hold back what is today russia. i am wondering if the expansion of nato inadvertently has caused

the situation of somebody like putin being able to get into power and your thoughts on that? guest: what i that i think you are right in the sense that putin does not like nato expansion. he was influenced in eastern europe, wants to dominate his neighbors. to see them joining the eu and nato is not what putin wants. but it is in the interest of the u.s. and europe, remarkable after the end of the cold war you had all these countries that had been locked behind the iron curtain rushing to join the west, adopting free markets, democracy. europe is wealthier and freer today than during the cold war. this is opened opportunities for the u.s., markets, and other things. in terms of nato causing the war, if you look at patterns of

russian military aggression, they have used military force against the non-nato country in the neighborhood, used force against georgia, ukraine twice. they intervened in belarus and in the war between the armenians. putin ghostwritten flexes military muscles, but he has that -- feels free to flex his military muscles, but he has not yet attacked the estate. part of the product -- attacked a native state. part of the problem with ukraine was this gray zone. if we had said in 2008, ukraine will join nato, it is unlikely we would be having this work. host: on ukraine membership, one at -- c-span covered an event at the heston that hudson institute. a member of the estonian parliament was at that event and spoke about his support for

ukraine joining nato, being admitted. get your thoughts. [video put] -- video clip] >> we are not only strong in our words when we say nita lowey is protected, that when we say nato territory is protected, but we also show that this is to be taken seriously. it is important what leaders of nato give out, that there should be very specific wording and a message for ukraine. in terms of their membership in nato, we have to move on from what we agreed in 2008 and we have to get a pop to ukraine --

a path to ukraine to understand what, when, how they can be accepted as full members of nato. host: that number of estonian parliament yesterday in washington. what do you think of his suggestions in terms of getting ukraine admitted to nato? guest: i am not surprised by the statement. i've been talking to many allies leaders. countries in the east and nordic process are more supportive of ukraine joining nato. they seat that is enhancing their security. in terms of the process, this is what the lens is going to need to figure out. there are a number of options. when would be a membership action plan, which is what we have given to other allies in the past, a clear plan for how they would join nato. the ukrainians inside they do not want a plan like finland and sweden where they joined

immediately. another possibility that has been sorted is the so-called israel model. if the states do not have a formal treaty with israel, rather, they have a member -- and understanding. we provide weapons. some have said maybe in israel model would be the solution to helping ukraine. i am more in favor with what the estonian -- the fruit -- the estonian official there has a more aggressive timeline. host: finland and sweden had their own hurdles. and with turkiye, that took some time. guest: ken still has not been fully resolved. turkiye still has to approve sweden joining. i was in sweden a couple weeks ago. they are optimistic that remains

to be seen when erdogan will approve. now that he is any his election, he could -- now that he has won his election, he could use that as leverage. host: concord, new hampshire, nancy, democrats line. caller: is a retired prison, i had a lot of time to spend watching -- retired person, i had a lot of time to spend watching c-span. these are just observations, things i watched on c-span and read and listened to the dod. in the last year of donald trump's presidency, one of the things he did was shut down our open skies treaty. there were two planes that used to fly on the border of russia. if you are doing with any activity, they shared the information with other european countries. he checked that down and had the plane shredded.

-- shut that down and had the plane shredded right before ukraine. the other issue was leaving afghanistan in the way we did. it was a dereliction of duty on the part of trump. what he did in the left year after he lost the election but he drew down the troops. afghanistan is the size of texas. there were 10,000 troops there. when jill biden was going in, there were only 20 500 -- when jill biden was sworn in, there were only 2500 troops left fairly after trump left office, he went to a cpac rally and brag about what he had done and that president biden could not stop it. to me come if i had had a chance or spouse in the military who was one of those 2500 who was abandoned by the government to secure that country and get personnel out safely, and the

young woman who died there, sheep came from the city i grew up in, lawrence, massachusetts. it is an abomination the people were not outraged that donald trump left put 500 soldiers to do the dirty work. i am outraged. my father was a first generation american. during the war, he and his brothers and sisters joined the military. he was a submariner, went to midway, and survive. three of my mother's brothers, same thing. in this cowardly man, and what he did to our soldiers. c-span.org first --guest: first, open skies was a treaty between the u.s. and russia were the two countries would overfly each other's territory and take images and the idea we could see any kind of buildup of forces

and it would be a transparency measure that created security and stability. what happened, the, is it was increasingly not relevant for the u.s. we had other means of corrupting intelligence from russia, satellites. we discovered russians were using these to collect intelligence on the u.s. to map our critical infrastructure to plan cyber attacks. given that, the u.s. decided this was no longer in our interest, that russia was abusing it to its advantage and the u.s. would hold out. i think that was the right decision. and you will notice that trump got out and joe biden had not gotten back in. there was bipartisan consensus. on afghanistan, i agree. there is a lot of bipartisan blame. we did not have 120 year strategy. -- one 20-year strategy.

we had 20 one-year strategies. many presidents deserve blame. others, including the supreme allied commander of europe, did assess that the withdrawal is one of the things that motivated putin. host: a question about what russia has been doing since the invasion in ukraine, comment from freddie in north carolina, what do your guests think about china working with russia on a cuban spy base? guest: this is the biggest challenge the u.s. faces -- how can we deal with russia and china at the same time when they are increasingly working together? china is clearly supporting russia's war effort. they have a no limits partnership. even though china is not providing direct military aid to russia, they are providing diplomatic and economic support that is feeling russia's war efforts. china increasingly has global

ambitions. conducting military exercises with russia, iran, and now news of this spy base in cuba. this is concerning. i think that while russia is the acute threat, china is the long-term challenge the country will face. host: next avenue, johnson city, tennessee, frank, independent line. caller: it seems impossible to talk about ukraine without mentioning the year 2014, victoria nuland, antony blinken. what they did to twist the government in ukraine to lean more toward the west, when ukraine had voted to lean more toward russia. that only that, nathan lane -- recently, within the last year, zelenskyy has said his goal is

to make ukraine a big israel. you never talk about how the west cited ukraine was -- sid e of ukraine was killing people in the east because they were russian-speaking. is this a war in the u.s. wants? peace could have been a chief now, a cease-fire -- achieved by now, cease fire at least. but no. the u.s. once this war. -- wants this war. guest: i disagree. i think the u.s. wants ukraine to be free and independent and once they were -- wants the war to end. you mention the history back to 2014, when russia made its first invasion.

but it is my understanding that is a little different than what you portray. the ukrainians did want to join the european union. the u.s. won of ukraine to join the eu, to be able to look west of become democratic, fight corruption. i do think that that is when putin saw his opportunity to invade for the first time. it has been going on ever since. but i think the u.s. wants peace, not war. host: folks of the council on foreign relations are keeping track of the aid the u.s. is provided to ukraine since january 2022. $77 billion, nearly $4 billion in humanitarian aid, $26.4 billion in financial aid.

weapons is almost $47 billion since january of 2022. each time additional aid is requested, it heightens the political debate at home. entering into a lyrical, presidential year, reelection year 2024, what challenge does this present ukraine in getting additional funding? guest: a couple of things -- one, the aid comes to about 5% and u.s. defense budget. is it a good deal? i would say 5% of the defense budget to begin our greatest adversary is good value. there are mostly republicans in congress who objected to the aid. i talked to some of their staff. what they said is not that they are opposed, but that they have questions about president biden's strategy. does he know what he is doing?

c4 against weapon systems? he says he will do this as long as it takes but what is his plan? i think that if joe biden were you make a clear case, he could win over some skeptical republicans. host: one lesson learned from afghanistan is the accountability and how that money should be spent. do you think we are doing a better job with ukraine? guest: it is not an issue i have tracked closely. it is isaiah challenge when you are spending this amount -- it is always a challenge when you're spending this amount of money. some of that, you just have to factor in is the cost of doing business, but i have not tracked it closely. host: steve, webster, massachusetts, republican line. caller: thank you for allowing nancy spent today. a little history -- my opinion and war crimes.

history, the area was conquered by catherine the great in the late 18th century. 10 years after the crimean war in the 1860's, the russians commissioned the english, particularly the welsh, to take advantage of the region to develop a steel mill. my bottom line is that this is all about oil for the russians. it is in the national interest to export oil to the world. they want that leverage to prime have. my solution would be russia is dug in right now. they are fighting a defensive war. my solution would be a compromise. bring ukraine into nato. they keep odessa. you have a large russian diaspora.

you have that area as well as crimea. as for war crimes, this is a moving mess. i meant is that mesh and when actually in. -- i never thought russia would actually in may. as far as work comes, what putin is awful. if this goes to court, putin's defense would be legitimate or illegitimate. he went to defendant russians in the donetsk region. how many americans did bush save when she killed 70,000? how many americans were in iraq when went in. it is a mass. host: a couple of minutes left

as our guest, but math, you want to respond? guest: you are right that russia does one access to the port and would like to export energy, but i do not think the war was necessary for that. there was a naval base in crimea. i think the war was motivated by something else, this imperial dream that putin had to restore the russian empire. you laid out a possible plan for a compromise. that or something else might work. the only challenges russia has not shown an interest in negotiating yet. he is going to need to get russia to the table. the best way to do that in the near term is to help ukraine on the battlefield. it puts them in a strong position. that is the only thing that will convince putin to negotiate. host: you said it was a

offensive war in terms of the as obscene, the body of water between western ukraine and mainland russia. is that what it has become for the russians? are they no longer able to make gains in other parts of ukraine nearby? guest: you repeat? host: is that what it has become for the russians, a defensive war for this section that they control? guest: no. i think it is mostly an offensive war. they still want to take all of ukraine. i do not think putin has given up that goal. reporting suggests he is still getting happy stories from some of his generals. things are going poorly now, but we have got a plan. temporary setback. we will take all of ukraine. this is another reason why it is important to support ukraine. most think russia will not succeed now, but things can

change. host: this heat still have manpower challenges at home in terms of military military? guest: definitely. he is pulling up poorly trained conscripts, pushing them to the front lines. but russia is a big country. there are more young men, unfortunately, that will probably be sent to their deaths. host: wilhelm, missouri, democrats' line. caller: good morning. china in ukraine -- we are already supporting china in ukraine. that was our number one policy. and do away with russia. that is all i have to say, because we do not go back in world war ii. host: last question on russian's

the expansion of native. -- nto. guest: residence not like it. it gets in the way of putin's dreams of reestablishing the empire, dominating his neighbors. we cannot trouble concerned about what putin wants. we do not live in a day when dictators can establish empires over their neighbors. expanding nato has been good for europe and the u.s. bringing ukraine into nato someday would strengthen european security architecture. host: matthew kroenig is the vice president and senior director at the atlantic council and is also on twitter. thanks for being with us. still ahead -- open forum and a chance for you to call in with others raising may this morning.

you can talk about what we have talked about so far but also other issues. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. ♪ >> looked to be every sunday on c-span two teachers with leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. at 9:51 p.m. eastern, mary ever staff toxic about the legacy of the best talks about the legacy of the actual revolution in america and the overturning of roe v. wade. her book is adam and eve after the pill revisited. then, michael waldman examines the impact of the supreme court's 2021-2022 rulings with

a book about how the supreme court divided america. watch book tv every sunday on c-span two and followed the full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at book tv.org. fridays at 8:00 p.m. eastern, c-span rings you a program where nonfiction offers are intervwed -- authors are interviewed. this week, michaelaldman examines the impact of the supreme court's 2021-2022 rulings with his book about how the supreme court divided america. once afterwards every friday at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span.

>> nonfiction book lovers, c-span has the number of podcasts for you. listen to the best-selling nonfiction authors and intellectual interviews on the afterwards podcast and on q&a, hear wide-ranging conversations with nonfiction authors and others making things happen. and our weekly hour-long conversations regularly feature authors of nonfiction books on a wide variety of topics. the about books topic takes you behind the scenes in the publishing industry. find all of our podcast by downloading the free c-span now cap or wherever you get your podcast or on our website, c-span.org/podcast. >> washington journal continues. host: it is open forum. until 10:00 eastern when the u.s. house comes in.

your calls on any public policy or political issue --guest: --(202) 748-8000, republican line. democratic line, (202) 748-8000. independent line, (202) 748-8002 . inflation close again as cpi data fell -- shows grocery prices fell. americans struggling with inflation continue to get relief from grocery stores and at the gas company. but rent is still climbing. brenda is in south carolina. what are you thinking? caller: i wanted to talk with matt, but i would like to the party. with putin in ukraine,

originally i think some people that the war was to get back to fertile land that ukraine had, because my understanding is that ukraine produces a love the grain that comes through to europe and effort -- a lot of the grain that comes through to europe and africa. putin now has set his sights on africa. he cannot have world dominance through ukraine and the food lines, then he will get it to the resources they now have. there's basically all i wanted to say. host: thanks for staying on the line. pennsylvania, jeremiah, republican line. caller: click -- quick comment for the professor who is on earth i missed him as well.

i wondering about the ukraine situation. what a reaction supporting? is it really freedom? he is banning other political parties? is it really for democracy? one comment -- washington said we should beware of foreign entitlements. host: this is from the hill this morning. gop allies and mcconnell steer clear of defending trump on indictments. mitch mcconnell and his deputies are steering clear of defending former president trump from felony charges brought by the justice department, signaling the deep split within the gop over how to handle the former president's legal problems, while house republicans and leading republican candidates

for president have rallied behind trump and said the justice department has targeted him unfairly. he republicans are hesitant to defend the president on charges he risked national security. we have cameras covering outside the resort in florida, just outside miami. look look there as the former president prepares his motorcade for later today. we have sent he would drive the 12 miles or so to the courthouse in downtown miami. cameras will be tracking that. former president trump do in court at 3:00 p.m. eastern. cleveland, basil is on the independent line. caller: it is basil, light sweet basil. i am very sweet. i would like to make a comment

about what is happening. what is happening with donald trump today will be catalystic. here's the reason why -- hello? host: you are on. go ahead. guest: the biden administration was taking millions of dollars from china and they are going to keep their mouth shut if china becomes aggressive with taiwan, which is going to happen. china also sold horrendous missiles to iran and iraq. they will use those for the middle east and israel. there will be a nuclear war that does occur. the other thing is russia will become emboldened to go into ukraine. they have already threatened them with nuclear war. none of this would have happened if donald trump was still president. thank you for your time. host: (202) 748-8001, line for republicans.

democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. open forum here in washington journal. any political or public policy issue is fair game. north carolina, lori, democrat'' line. caller: good morning. a couple of comments -- i really appreciated the earlier guest, the assistant prosecutor. i wanted to urge my republican friends to look at the indictment and the law. there is no doubt that there were laws broken here. the presidential records act, i get annoyed when i hear former presidents -- defer -- the

former president sang the about him to do what he did. no. those records belong to the u.s., not him. he had no right to head them and should have given them back. there's had to say. but look at the law and the indictment. host: beverly, wyoming. welcome. caller: good morning, america. we love you. his trunk -- is a trump going to get more indictments if something horrible happened? if these people cannot stand back, they have got to defend trump. another thing -- i wanted to wish donald trump a happy birthday. host: the arraignment happening

today, one day before the former president's birthday. s, the washington post's headline -- georgia the likely next legal battleground for the trump team. donald trump may have been the start of the georgia gop convention over the weekend, but the runner-up was david schaefer, outgoing state party chairman and a top target like trump of an atlanta investigation in efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. his -- schaefer's legal jeopardy stems from a meeting of electors who convened in december 2022 cast votes for trump. litigation was contesting joe biden's victory in the state, and asked that he and other convention speakers proudly referenced. mike, kenosha, wisconsin, independent line. let me see.

like in kenosha, are you there? caller: i am here. thanks for taking my call. there are a lot of subjects i can talk about here. your guests this morning were both narrow in their opinions regarding both the indictment of donald j. trump, as well as ukraine. on donald trump, my position is if the laws are broken, we cannot have this unilateral prosecution. we know laws were broken with hillary and joe but returned a blind eye. you do not keep classified information in your garage with their corvette. you do not keep it in some center waiting for an government sponsors your international policy formation. with hillary clinton, everybody in the government knows you do

not give a private server in your home and you do not have it unsecured. there is a lot of finger-pointing, but not a lot of equity when it comes to application of the law for alleged application of the law. some people are getting ahead, others are not. thegards to ukraine, you have to look at the policy of the u.s. government under joe biden and whether or not, your previous caller said there would not be a were in ukraine if donald trump or president. i do not know that to be true but the fact of the matter is there has been an ongoing corruption scandal in ukraine and russia for many years. it seems that we are trying to do is exchange one set of corruption for our own set of corruption. whether that means george soros's open society and his friends or putin's oligarchs.

then we have the russia-china thing. this is going to be the next thing where the u.s. is going to be confronted and it will turn into a global mess. we have taiwan. everybody figures china will take over taiwan. what is the u.s. going to do? i do not think we have the balls to do anything. we are going to roll our ships around the island but the fact of the matter is we do not have anyone in the office not paid off by china to stop the invasion. no one in government in europe is going to stop china. india certainly is not going to stop china. they are there neighbor. nora's russia. debt nor is russia. we have already created this globe of russia-china influence. half of it is nato-u.s.

influence. then we have south america and africa, wildcards, much influenced by china. the date is going to come soon and china will leverage everything they have. cannot look at what is right in front of us. a lot of things are happening in the last 30-40 years that have led us to where we are. host: linda in ohio, republican line. caller: good morning. i watch you all the time. i've had in the event that in regards to the democrats. everything democrats have tried to do were all goofed up. including, i do not con the president. he is not a president to meet. all he does is give things away, damage things. we have never had at this back.

when he was in congress, he cannot even pass a bill. then he has got his son he is protecting. other people need their children protected. president trump was the best president. my son and i even went to see a lawyer to put our hands on the bible. we saw were fighting did. -- what joe biden did. we both watched him saying there is no corruption. get your eyes out of the water. underneath the table, we saw what happened when the boxes were put in an when they took them out. all of a sudden, we see -- i turned to my son, what happened? he said i could swear i sent 30,000 from president trump. they are saying he is lying. put him in the hotseat. host: tighten the evidence against donald trump were photos from the fbi -- part of the evidence against donald trump

were photos from the fbi of boxes, supposedly of documents. one of those photos used by a congressman on the floor of the u.s. house yesterday with his comments in favor of the indictments against the former president. [video clip] >> no one is above the law, no one is entitled to keep top-secret nationals pretty documents. the documents in this case are most the most secret in this country -- new player secrets for we need to know -- nuclear secrets. we need to know how much this cavalier storage has compromised national security. i came to congress to get things done for people in my district. i have been like to build relationships on both sides of the aisle. we can work in a bipartisan way when we can. if we are going to heal as a country, we need to hold people

accountable. as a lawyer, i know allowing this process to play out in a court of law and injuring a fair and impartial trial escaping part however, this is already a somber moment in our nation's history. democracy should never be taken for granted. we must be vigilant and proactive to protect it. imposing, -- in closing, history will remember those who defend this lawless behavior. it will not be kind. host: more of your calls as the house comes in in about 10 minutes. northampton, pennsylvania, stephen, independent line. caller: what is going on with donald trump and his indictment trial? they show all the boxes sitting around, some empty, some in the bathroom. but they are not willy-nilly like the other presints had.

he has a constitutional right to enter the whe lot -- after the words declassified. people handled the dos before he left the white hou, packing them up. do they do it legitimately or mix things and with others just to get the job done in a lazy manner? it lot of people say donald trump has been one of our best presidents since reagan. i voted for reagan when i was 18. currently country around, straightened -- turned the country around, straighten things out, got the world in order. everything was in line before joe biden came into office for the first time he thought of running for president, years previously, when he announced it. it is time democrats at their

head out of there you know where, because what is happening in this country right now on a streetscape bases and a person-to-person basis is leading to a civil war, which this country has never seen. people are gathering and talking about what is going on with this ex-president. in pennsylvania, they know that these machines that they had here from voting, four years previously, have so many mistakes. nothing was done. it was hidden by the media and hidden again. we waited two hours in line to vote in my town and other towns. it was because president trump was running again. i cannot see how many people voted for biden, probably from their basement, let alone federman.

pennsylvania's election that night, i went to bed, woke up 20 minutes later. all of a sudden, they had all these votes. the guy from harrisburg that ran a shuttle to new jersey, who legitimately told him his trailer was not available and they hid that truck trailer. host: chicago, carl, independent line. caller: i have been listening to the republican caller. they seem to think that everything is great -- was great when president trump -- they can go back -- so many problems.

it states that in 20 years, fighting a war that we had no reason to fight and where we were fighting the work -- while we were fighting the war, trident was gaining influence in africa and south america -- china was gaining influence in africa and south america. we always had the 8-ball.no we are same trump is the best president -- now we are saying trump is the best president. [indiscernible] when they say they have less money, remember when biden came in coming you got extra money. nobody return the money. are you speaking out of both sides of your mouth? host: on the documents case, wall street journal, darling

keeps distance from trump case. marjorie taylor greene had this to say about the special counsel's investigation. [video clip] >> i am writing an appropriations rider to defend that special counsel. this is a weaponized government attempt to take down the top political enemy and a leading presidential candidate of the u.s., donald j. trump. we cannot allow the government to be weaponized for political purposes. i would also like to ask my colleagues to join me in this effort. we have to use the power of appropriations to stop the weaponization of government, especially in light that we know that there are others who are guilty of true crime. never forget that everything had -- that hillary clinton had classified documents on anthony

weiner's laptop, who was convicted of sexting a minor inappropriate pictures. there should have been an investigation into that. do not forget joe biden's documents are sitting in his garage, next to his corvette where the door opens and closes. america sees this for exactly what it is and we will not allow it to stand. host: u.s. house community session in under five minutes. live coverage here in c-sp. our coverage includes also janet yellen testifying before the house financial services committee on the international financial system live at 10:00 on c-span3, c-span.org and streaming on the mobile app. tonight at 8:15 eastern on c-span, we will hear from donald trump, back into new jersey at

bedminster, trump national golf club. republican line next, mary in california. caller: thank you for having me. i want to ask, everybody says that nobody is above the law. is biden about the law? there is so much corruption. corruption has been existing for decades from the democratic party, and probably the republican party, but they are charging come of it with the same thing they should have charged hillary clinton with. this car for people who died, were dragged in the streets, have they done anything? thank you for having me. host: next is mike in rockford,

illinois, independent line. caller: a couple of things -- china has a deep-sea port in mexican waters. they are also building a canal just a few hundred miles from our border. that gives unfettered access to our country. breathtaking, what our politicians do. not only that, but there are large to build should factories now with our diamond. -- dime. thursday, representative from rockford was going on about how he believes any kid should be allowed to have a sex change at any age. he was also saying he believes

that trans players should play grosskreutz. i called and hung up after one ring. then i watched the news, wrex. another one had anything about this. i called them. i asked. tuesday, -- to this day, no reports. it has been blacked out. i find -- then the voters who voted for him believe anything he said on national tv. it is not being reported on the look on his. -- on the local news. host: three, georgia, where did you want to say? caller: i am a pastor. my prisoners share information with me that i could put in a category of classified information.

i will take that information to my grave. if this deafness were thousand, he -- if those documents were classified, either he had a right to have those or he did not. in any event, the situation should be resolved immediately so that the american people will know what the bottom line is. host: you get the last word on this program. thanks for all your calls and comments this morning. washington journal back tomorrow morning at 7:00 eastern. next, live to the house floor from the u.s. capitol. that is next here on c-span. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c.,