host: president trump spoke to attendees at the new jersey golf club. after appearing in miami, florida earlier in the day.

he has a plea that he is not guilty in response to 37 in died by the council jack smith. this is for him keeping classified documents at his home in our lago. it is june 14. call and let us know your thoughts about the not lt plea yesterday. republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002. you can post on our facebook at facebook.com/c-span and that as -- and available on twitter as well. you can text us at (202) 748-8003. and you can follow the show on instagram. several reactions after the speech yesterday. to show you sampling of that

here is the headline -- fear he trump lies to a country club crowd. they say he posts an arrangement speech with the rest of his campaign folwed by the word of god. vel headlines. pleads not guilty, psecutor donated to biden. it goes from there. and then the pages of the washington examiner they arrested former president knox biden -- it was the former president yesterday at his country club not only talking about his events in the not guilty plea but he also mentioned the current president, joe biden. you can see that on c-span now, our app. here is a portion of that speech yesterday.

>> they said they would watch a corrupt president and have his political opponent arrested on charges which end numerous other presidents would be guilty. and he was losing very badly. this is called election interference and yet another attempt to stealing a presidential election. mom would say a political persecution like something out of a fascist or communist nation. this day will go down in and joe biden will not only be remembered as the most corrupt president in our country, but perhaps, more importantly -- marxist tried to destroy american democracy.

they will fail and we will win bigger and better. host: a portion of the president's speech. you can find that on our website and our app. if you want to listen to the whole thing during the course of this morning the experts -- we will speak with congress throughout the day but we will hear from as well on the not guilty plea yesterday and his speech in new jersey. again, republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002. that speech yesterday highlighted a lot of people. -- former white house aide elected conspiracy theorists mike mindel, former senator

candidate of ohio, former senator of connecticut, and nevada. and a potential seven candidate jeffrey gunther of nevada amongst others at that event yesterday. we start with george. he joins us from illinois starting us off. this is jerry actually. jerry republican line about the events yesterday concerning the former president. go ahead. are you there? caller: yes, i am. can you hear me? host: yes, you are on. go ahead. caller: i think it is disgusting what they have done to trump. since he came down the elevator by never left the man alone. he ran our country well. and with biden everything has gone terrible in this country.

everything. we need trump back in office and i hope all of this ends all of this divisiveness between the parties. we need to get along and this is our country. it is going to a handbasket. everything with the bull -- with the whole biden administration -- they did not do anything -- the biden family corruption he did not hear anything about that. the fbi and the justice department did nothing about that. you don't hear any about that on mainstream media. host: ok don in st. louis missouri. democrat mine. hello. -- democrat lying. -- line. hello. caller: good morning.

i am disappointed with president trump he took documents after he was president but nobody called or said anything about that. they always blamed the democrats for everything this is trump's problem. he's a criminal. he took from the american people when he was in the white house his family provident. they all made money off of the american people and he was not the best president for be united states. he did not do what he promised to do when he walked in that office. him to constantly biden and the democrats in front of his plan, it is about him it is not about vilma. he committed -- it is about him it is not about them.

he committed a crime. he needs to pay for them. host: again we are taking calls about the not guilty plea from the former president. -- his lawyer did not sign every line needed. third time is the charge -- charm the judge said. -- they set the stage for the high-stakes trial which prosecutors will elect go 40 for president where he had documents in the bathroom, ballroom, among other leases that he took from the -- other places that he took from the white house. this is george. -- line. caller: there's three things that people are experts on.

-- trump has never been elected to anything before which is a big mistake that people made when they voted for him. his character will show that anybody who his family -- his children with the bullseye on their back. if he has no respect for his children, why would he have respect for anything? host: what do you think about the event yesterday specifically? caller: if you do what he did, you would be in jail yesterday. what i think is that they are too late getting a hold of this guy. he's been breaking the law for years. he had a casino he probably washed billions of dollars for prudent through his -- through president putin -- through his

casino. he should have been investigated years ago. host: ok, thank you. caller: good morning. he appears the level of attorney client privilege. never done before. i am sick of hearing about his character when our sitting president does not acknowledge a biological granddaughter. let's not talk about character anymore and let's talk about policy. were you better off then then you are now? i think we all know the answer to that. host: how does that relate specifically to the charges yesterday of not guilty by the resident? caller: i think he has the right to do it. but when they show the documents in his bathroom with all of the boxes only 38 papers were marked classified.

the media makes it looks like -- look like all of those boxes had classified material. the place in mar-a-lo tremendous. if things were equal, we would be a lot better off. but we know that biden took papers from a senator. it is totally illegal. it is not about him it is the big picture. host: ok maryland, democrat line. go ahead. caller: good morning to you i have an article of february 3, 2020, it says to few outlets have when it out that in every senate trial trump has showered -- contributions -- according to richard paynter the chief white house ethical lawyer -- that is why we do not see this with the

republicans standing up and saying what he is all about. this article is nation magazine february 3, 2020. i did not understand why they would not ring up -- about donald trump when he took the lie out about the connection with -- when it was fraudulent. they told the whole nation that that was bs. that was number one and recently he told the whole nation that -- i don't understand. of course he will say he is not guilty. he always tries to make himself look like he is the victim and perpetrate all kinds of crimes against the government. but you know of the bloated bash because of the money he gave them they have to be quiet. he knew he would be impeached. host: that is john in maryland. to the previous caller as far as the amount of the classified

materials this is a headline of august 22 last year with the new york times. more than hundred cost died -- 300 classified documents at the time -- you can read more about in the new york times if you wish. let's read about the president's not guilty plea. richard in new york, independent line you next up. caller: good morning to you. i will say quickly six things. where they are talking about the charges -- you have to look at the indictment. this is great. and i am conservative. donald trump had a direction he wanted to go so far with the united states and -- this is not a joke.

he should have life in prison. 20 years on the obstruction charge alone. that is a life sentence. and they -- fizzes very serious. host: ok hold on. i will show you the graphic we ve been showing people several days as we talk about the indictment charges themselves. and when we talk about this claim. when you look at it we've been focusing on this the last couple days. but finish your thought. caller: donald trump -- he has information on possibly an attack. and they also have an audiotape that this information is classified. he's not supposed to be showing

it -- [indiscernible] grand jury. no one is talking about this. host: that is richard. let's go to jason, dim outline. caller: how are you doing? -- democrat line. caller: how are you doing. if he was arrested for sexual assault and if he is convicted should he be able to run for president as a convicted felon? host: that is jason in california just to show you reactions from the former president event yesterday. it is the former house intelligent chair adam schiff he spoke about the claims republicans have made comparing the claims with this case with

what is being investigated by jack smith with president biden. and what was being investigated when it comes to my aunts and others. here is a ocean of his comments from yesterday. >> there is criminal charges made by republicans. what the case never presented was a deliberate intent to misuse classified information or to put it somewhere it was not supposed to belong. or obstruct an investigation. all of these things are very present in the trump situation. had he returned to the documents and made no effort to hide them. had he not lied to his lawyers and investigators. he would not be in this situation. it is that malicious conduct that -- use of classified information. this was anything but incidental in trump's case. host: that makes a difference in your mind between former

president -- vice president pence or vice -- former president -- or president biden having classified cases. caller: absolutely you have a president in the case of trump and the decision to bring the documents home when he knew he was not supposed to do so. then he has the effort to hide them, deceive investigators about them, all the efforts to mislead and obstruct the investigation none of those circumstances are resin in the case of pence, biden, clinton. there was never ill intent on any of their art. -- their part. this is someone who always believed it was most evident when he was president that he was above the law. host: as a sidebar concerning mr. schiff today you may want to

watch out in the house because they may come up with a resolution filed by dash of florida calling for a center of a california demo rat following his claims over the russian collusion pressuring him to leave office. it might be taken up today. democrats are expected to take a vote. other things to watch you can check out our website at c-span.org or our apps c-span now. you can comment on the lines, democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, independents (202) 748-8002. republican line. hello. caller: hello. it's not very good on donald trump because they've been going after him for so long.

we are just getting tired of it. host: ok. you are still on. caller: hello? oh, i am sorry. host: are you done? caller: no, i am not done yet. it is just not very good with this going on with all of this -- it keeps going back and forth. they need to just get over with -- host: that was thomas in texas. nebraska independent line we hear from spencer go ahead. caller: good morning. i don't understand how a man can do all of his dirt and plead not guilty. because when they got him in

office -- he got stuff on every one of the gop republicans in office and they are scared of him. and he knows it. host: how does that specifically relate to yesterday? caller: because he did not plead guilty and they don't want to do anything to him. i do not understand that everyone of them is scared. host: ultimately, this will be before a jury. using the jury will not have power in this? caller: no. he has something on them as well. everybody in office he says oh, sure, come stay in the hotel. i will set you up with whatever you want and even young girls. we know it because of the videotape. host: ok let's go to patrick. caller: good morning thank you for having me.

i agree with the young man in texas. i am tired of it too. i did not want to hear about it, the bottom line is he did not give the documents back. biden gave them back and cooperated with investigators. didn't give them back, hilary turned into silver. trump did not give top-secret classified document -- military intelligence on this. he did not cooperate with investigators. host: some documents made their way back but some of them did not that is the nature of what is being discussed with the indictment. go ahead. caller: he is like a little kid with this he gave half of them back, but he kept the rest of his gummy bears, you know? when people put in all types of fancy language and at like this

is the same as other policy issues have done, that is knowingly obstructing. he won't give them back that is how simple it is. host: as far as instruction from a judge yesterday involving the former president order to say not to speak about the case involving those classified document. during the arraignment the president was barred from speaking with other witnesses. this order is often imposed in federal criminal cases as they want them to be in regular contact -- to mr. trump and the white house. in our 8:00 hour, we will ask our guests, a former u.s. attorney and district of florida about the limo -- legal ramifications. in the order getting thoughts on

how -- viz. portion. and we are taking your calls during that time. and we are discussing -- what legally happened and the steps taken after yesterday. tammy is in louisiana republican. hello you are next up. good morning. caller: hello. first thing is first, adam schiff of all people to talk about lying. could you imagine? ok. second thing, the first fact that we have to look at joe biden is he was a senator. he took classified documents. all over the place. but he gave them back. but he should have never had them in the first place people. that is the first fact we have to deal with. host: what about the events of yesterday concerning the former president?

caller: i love donald trump. he is the only one that could save his country. no one else can do it because he knows everything about these demonic politicians especially on the democrat side. let me ask you something, mr. trump rated r lago, -- when they rated mar-a-lago, they did not take witnesses in. they wanted to turn the cameras off but we got biden and his lawyers determined what was classified. how the hell? how could get is that? how does that is logical that his lawyers -- you know what i think? i think they pay -- trump win

they would not allow anyone to go in watch what they were doing. host: let's hear from jim in virginia. independent line. caller: hello. i do not know how c-span selects its topics. i think it is odd that you guys part of the journalist crew is drinking chlorine as well. if you want to be biased and fair you should discuss classified documents in general i think there is enough guilt to go around whether you are the average citizen or the united states. host: were talking about the former president -- hold on. caller: i have the floor. host: ok. caller: -- fbi officials clashing about the biden -- c-span where are you discussing that? i want to make sure i tune in

that the fbi does not serve the interests of the american he. -- american people. host: since you called in about this topic, what do you think about these topics specifically? caller: i told you that c-span has nothing better to do than the trump arrangements and -- syndrome. you guys have a problem too. you are drinking the kool-aid. host: let's focus on the event yesterday with the former president pleading not guilty to b's charges in court. next in florida democrat line. hello. caller: hello how are y'all doing? i have several things to say. the indictment conviction -- it only takes one to say they are not guilty. but it is like this, you know he is guilty because listen to all of the republicans. they say somebody did this somebody did that, that spells

guilty because they are not fighting the issues. so come on, wake up. host: why do using a jury will not convict him? caller: because it only takes one trump supporter. guess what? not guilty. he had several. come on, you ain't that slow, are you? host: that is doug giving us his thoughts and opinions on yesterday. you can too. republicans (202) 748-8001, democrats (202) 748-8000, independents (202) 748-8002, text us at (202) 748-8003. henrietta republican line. go ahead. caller: hello good morning. yesterday i thought totally playing in donald trump's world.

the thing is, the more the democrats resists, the more he will persist. what happened yesterday, you have to be a dimwit not to see that they are out to get him. they don't like him. he doesn't play their game. he is the only man in history that went to washington and came home poorer. everyone else goes to washington and comes home richard. that is a guy i trust the guy that comes home poorer. ron desantis we don't need a poor president we -- had one. his name is joe biden. and everyone will get to know him. host: bullies in north carolina,

independent. you are of next. caller: good morning i just want to finish my statement. kudos to the previous caller. i think one was -- from louisiana and the gentleman from virginia. i did not vote trump the first time, i did vote for trump the second time. i can see it clear as day that this is correction, not from trump but from the biden administration. that is what i have to say. host: how did you come to that conclusion? caller: you can see it plain as day. host: i wanted to add to -- caller: please do not interrupt me. i can cut you off too, pedro. cnn, your show, is corrupt. you will show cnn, why do you not so -- show something from

boz oann and i watched c-span and c-span has its issues too. thank you and have a blessed day. host: ok democrat line in georgia. caller: yes, i did watch everything. and all of its reverse psychology that donald trump and all of the republicans is trying to play. it does not take a scientist to tell you that this man is guilty. he is used to getting over on people him. you all can remember when he came in, he said don't believe nothing you see and just a little bit of what you hear. donald trump is playing -- like i said he -- it does not take a little bit of stupid. and stupid everything is got a constant fence. it don't take somebody to be -- consequence.

it don't take somebody to be -- [indiscernible] but i am saying about these documents is people are looking at donald trump. he does not give a darn about anybody. think about the military men and women out there in these countries -- i will put my head on the chopping block. that man came all the way down to donald trump -- host: how does that relate to yesterday specifically? caller: because donald trump pleaded guilty. and he knows he is guilty -- pleaded not guilty. and he knows he is guilty. that is reverse psychology. would do anything to make somebody think that they are wrong. and he is innocent. host: ok. -- count-31 applies to the

former predent. and this also includes conspiracy to obstruct justice and his aide and others charged with conspiring in holding a document, incorrectly sealing a document or record, and concealing a document in a federal investigation as well. and that is part of the charges and false statements and representation. all of those things the former president pleaded not guilty to. and then he traveled to new jersey for a fundraiser. we showed you a portion throughout the morning. you can still watch out on our website. or follow on the app. run in florida, republican line. go ahead. ron in florida, hello? he hung up. let's go to stacy. stacy in illinois. independent line. hello. caller: good morning how are

you? host: doing well go ahead. caller: thank you for having me on. -- we are failing the country with the judicial system. i believe what he did because i see what he did. he is not above the law like anybody else. destroying the doj, we lose in our country because of this inconsistent of belief of what this person has said. all the evidence is there. we need to stop the invisible. when you see the invisible you should be able to see the truth. there is not a witch or broom anywhere. this is our country that looks lead all. they are taking -- from the senate to the people that are listed and all of those that he

did for the trespassing combo we've the people have -- they did not need to work for us if there going to lie in the country. we make the preamble and the commitment of the country. this needs to stop. so stop the people and -- this is what i have disabled -- what he did he did take the papers home. do not let the fbi get those things stepped on because we are messing our system up. host: thank you. caller in illinois. here's an issue that new york times reported that a judge -- has adesso -- deformation lawsuit against the former president with comments he made recently on cnn. -- they came over mr. trump subjective.

-- he could not have defamed her in 2019 when -- rape and he has been held accountable for sexually abusing her but not raping her. -- it goes on from there you can read more in the new york times and other sources. we are talking about the not guilty plea of the former president when it comes to the indictment of the federal council. jack smith concerning the documents with baltimore maryland. dorothy is up next. hello. caller: good morning everyone. please do not hang up. i have a few things i want to say. if you go online, i went online to do this -- go online and look up when trump was talking about

people defining classified information. look that up and look -- go on and look up 2019 with trump sharing technology with saudi arabia. it was on npr, abc, and others. you name it. now i am coming back to what he said about not guilty area trump had information about our nuclear. he also had information about other allies. he had our military plans. we had some of their military plans. trump could not be arrested about having boxes. he is getting arrested about the information that was in the boxes that he howled. why did he need that? that is a question why did he specifically need those things? those things belong to us. if he is out ooffice why would

an out of office former president need our secre host: that is dorthea maryland. this is larry georgia republican. caller: good morning. you have mr. chiffon a little while ago. he is the last person that should comment on mr. trump. he should apologize for lying. he said that he contributed to information that he knew for a fact -- polluted with the russians. host: how does that relate to yesterday? caller: pleading not guilty -- he is incident -- innocent to be -- until proven guilty. this is why we have force. -- court. the user not always like they seem. host: ok that is larry in georgia. that was yesterday in new jersey

with the president addressing his supporters talking about the charges laid before him particularly the ones that are coming under what is known as the espionage act. here is a former president donald trump. >> charging of former president of the united dates under the espionage act was a bit -- an act for a crime so heinous that only the death penalty would do. threatening me with 400 years in prison for possessing my own presidential papers which just about every other president has done. it is one of the most outrageous and vicious -- ever put forward an american court of law. the espionage act has been used to go after -- it has nothing to do with the former president legally keeping his own documents. as president, the law that applies to this case is not the espionage act, but simply the

presidential records act which is not even mentioned in this ridiculous 44 page indictment. under the presidential -- act which is civil, not criminal, i had every right to have these documents. host: doing more of the available at c-span.org or on our at c-span now. with the washington journal we are discussing the former president concerns that he is having an they are building a legal defense. -- several of whom turned them down -- some of the people said the former president record with his own lawyers at times wit in dub and trouble himself in connection with their work trump. and they serve as witnesses against him. and -- not always paying his

bills including the legal bills from wall street journal this morning. jean in madison wisconsin. for president pleading not guilty these charges on our -- lined. go ahead. caller: go -- good morning. thank you particular michael. i want to say as an independent that i think it is -- it would behoove the americans to look at hillary clinton's record in terms of destruction of her evidence that she had. top secret information on her laptop which faye erased, washed away. -- which they washed away. and looking at donald trump who also has information that is questionable as to whether or not he should have that. and joe biden who had lawyers

instead of fbi people. i just think it is funny that the law is not universal. i think it behooves the american public to make all people, not just donald trump but hillary clinton responsible for her activities and also joe biden for his activities. there -- none of them are but -- are above the law. the think we do to look long and hard at all of these cases to see whether or not it is fair and balanced. that is what i have say and i wish everyone in this country a wonderful life. and i say prayers that this world gets better. host: ok you probably saw a video outside of the courtroom yesterday with any of the former president supporter outside the courthouse before and after the president entered and exited to

discuss the legal affairs before him. one of the profiles is a 40-year-old cuban man showed up draped in american flag with freedom and he also carried the head of the dead pig on a spike. there is the picture from yesterday provided in the yahoo! story saying he called the scene a historic morning for the democratic process. he said he was there to watch the president experience justice like anyone else. he -- the bagovernment to be democratic if u are supporting a persongainst democracy. that is from yesterday. with the president leaving the courthouse stopping by a restaurant to talk with some there as well as -- of the

president. many of the clergy there said that -- while he was at the location after before going to new jersey to address the crowd there. in florida, democrat line, michelle. hello. caller: hello? host: you are on go ahead. caller: i am 77 years old. i have been for the past seven years watching all of the information on seminary channels and reading the newspapers like new york times and usa today and it is a very sad time for our country. if you have -- if you are a parent and you have grandkids or if you're a parent and you have relatives that are very close to

you and you love them all, and you know someone has papers on nuclear plans, has papers on information about different countries in the world, and that this man can control and bribe dictators, politicians, and different countries. what would you tell your grandkids? what would you tell your family members? cousins, uncles, about the fact that you support the justice system which will provide information to make trump's -- all of his legal problems on

this nuclear and national security information go away. i would just like for everyone to think about their future generations. their future kids. this man has been, for the last, and i believe that possibly hillary clinton did a very bad things. maybe joe biden did bad things, but i am talking right now about a situation where we have our kids lives endangered because of this particular nuclear -- goal security -- national security information. host: ok we got your point. this is jersey girl in

pennsylvania. she said i hope that -- republicans are strong on national security and defense. they say that somebody who treated classified documents with the same care and respect -- like most people treat junk mail. the department of justice created a document -- and the $5 million paid to ukrainians still hidden and i find that interesting, don't you? twitter if you want to send us a non-guilty plea you can do that as c-span wj at our a spec.com/to be span -- facebook.com/fees span -- facebook.com/c-span. and mary on there were public in line you are next step. caller: can you hear me? host: i can, go ahead. caller: i just wanted to say i

am proud of -- who left the white house as a proud man. you can hear the hurt in the republican forces when they speak about donald trump. we have common sense to know that president biden has done something wrong with our children. a lot of people know that donald trump did something wrong but when you love somebody and you love them like they love him, they will stick by him regardless. host: you are a republican. why aren't you sticking by him? caller: just because how i am saying -- host: i am saying because you are republican how are you sticking by the former president? caller: i could not vote for him this time because i have common sense. you've got to forget about everything else that you love sometimes.

we know our children are wrong, you still have to -- you've got to put that barrier in say look, i know you did this and i'm not going to back you anymore. this is the united states. this is not going to affect just the black people, and mexicans, or lower -- host: how does that specifically relate to yesterday? caller: because if you do not look at the big picture and when you vote for somebody who is doing wrong -- we all will face it. it has nothing to do with being a republican or democrat. you better open up your eyes and see what is right or wrong. he did wrong. host: he has only been charged by the justice department he still has to go through a legal assess. that has to play out the next several months. as we watch the events in florida on top of his other legal challenges.

we are talking about the event yesterday specific the. let's hear from new hampshire independent line. hello. caller: good morning. all i see is more corruption. we did not hear to political artie's anymore we have two middle organizations. they just do not care about the united states, they don't care about our country, they care about their own pocket. it really does not make much sense to me. things keep going and going. we are tired of it. i am 70 years old and a veteran. i am ashamed. thank you. host: new hampshire journal talking about the next steps when it comes to grand jury and such and so forth saying the historical criminal charge filed against the former president involved those encapsulated by -- documents puts the federal legal system in the spotlight as

well. and -- when they said before the indictment can be filed, the prosecutors presented an outline of their case. and it will go to a federal grand jury in miami. once a vote, they then filed the indictment. and the grand jury now giving enough evidence that led to the indictment which led to the not guilty plea of yesterday from the former resident. let's hear -- former president. let's fear from tom in san jose. caller: good morning thank you you are a very decent man. i would like to ask what can't donald trump do to have republicans not vote for him? can he commit adultery? yes. can he lie? yes. can he lie about the election being stolen? yes. now he is lying about having documents.

he can do that. he caused an insurrection to overturn the election. he does not believe it is a fair election. i believe the people that vote for him -- they vote for him because they see he is an angry person just like they are they are angry about their lives. they want to push their beliefs on us. and it is their way or no way. i do not think they actually believe in democracy because they do not understand democracy is for everybody and not just their way. i do not think they are capable of understanding what trump stands for which is all about himself. host: how does that relate to yesterday specifically? caller: well, listen to them complaining about justice being done. ultimately the rule of law. this is a rule of law. this will help in a court and everybody will be able to see and hear this but that is not good enough for them. they will attack hillary clinton and everybody else.

look at the shiny object over here because we don't want them to look at him for what he is. he is like republicans we want to go out and get this. we are angry about everything no matter what it is. that is what yesterday was all about with all the protesters. host: john in baltimore maryland . independent line. hello. caller: good morning to you. i want to say with trump being -- pleading not guilty i do not have a problem with this. d did do wrong, but joe biden did wrong. he did worse with all the corruption with him and his son, the funding, and the last caller talked about however wiccans are backing trump. the democrats back biden and hillary. they are all corrupt. as far as yesterday i do not have a problem. it is what it is. like the 70-year-old man caller that just called to talk about those criminal organizations. it is right they are russian,

but i would have a problem with trump doing this because stuff that joe biden has done is far worse. i hope trump beats it. as a black man, i would vote for trump because i cannot stand these democrats. they are the worst thing on earth right now. joe biden did worse. host: diane, missouri, republican. good morning. caller: how are you? host: i'm well, thanks. caller: i watched it and i believe -- listen to your -- on this matter everyday. i listen to the feedback. i was proud to see people that were waiting in line supporting donald trump. they did it peacefully and they

got their message across without taking over the streets and i really appreciate that. i just hope everything works out and that people will really open their eyes to the truth. host: the courthouse yesterday in miami where though former president appeared avril followers outside of that tilting. offering support with traffic as well. you can see that play out in various media outlet. from yesterday we are talking about the not lt lee. and in a few minutes we will have a legal expert on to talk about the legal matters that happened to be shelved -- after the process yesterday. rose in california. democrat. go ahead. caller: yes, i wanted to ask you a question area and ask your opinion on something.

if he gets the indictment and he is in prison for a crime, and he can still run for presidency, why can't someone who is already in prison vote? yet he can run our country being a criminal? but someone imprison a prisoner cannot vote. what is your opinion on that? host: i will not give you an opinion but i will ask you specifically what you have with the not guilty plea. caller: with that vote. he is nationally on tv he is saying he is -- basically guilty that he says i have the right to. people say he did not take them but he is telling people he took them. they are saying no he did not it is a piece of paper. i have sons in the military. for somebody who took $2 billion, i am worried if he gave some people that money. i have two sons in the military

and i am worried for them now. i hope every parent who has children in the military -- i hope they are concerned about that because he had young people in danger. these man, even if the lawyers can defend him, they are walking out on him left and right. it is terrible. host: north carolina republican line. hello. caller: hello. i just wanted to say that this is shameful. this man's out of the office right now and they have badgered him and badgered him for what? how many years? eight? and he won in 2020 and the democrats have drug him through mud. shame on them. and anybody that would vote for a democrat, they deserve what

they are getting right now. host: specifically yesterday when it comes to -- hold on. with the former president what do you think about the not guilty lee specific -- not guilty plea specifically? caller: he is innocent. he has done nothing different from what the rest of the hoodlums have done. the rest of them have done the same thing. and look at biden. i mean, he is dirty. he is the dirtiest president -- i don't even call him president. he is not my president. host: kirk in alabama, independent line. good morning you are next up. caller: good morning he should plead not guilty because he is not guilty. there is a specific law where he has a right to the declassified documents whenever and however. so, why is joe biden with

documents from senatorial data on that 40 -- with no authority to have any of it. technically stolen. why is he not facing these type of charges. whereas president trump had every legal authority to have the document and he -- did with the archives people wanted. this is a civil matter. how has a civil document case been elevated to a federal crime? even so much to charge with espionage. and then he is the one selling our secrets to documents in chinatown and various places. to our enemies, ukraine, whoever has got money. he should be the one that is charged with espionage or treason for having our borders open, leaving billions of dollars in army and terrorism in afghanistan, and weaving our weapons behind area -- leaving

our weapons behind and the other various things that he should be charged with. you have a president that -- was given the right to do what he cannot. host: republican line florida. go ahead. caller: yes, as a republican i am an american first. i do not differentiate between republican and dimmick at as far as saying this when his people and this one is not. as for donald trump, i am not a supporter. i do feel he has the right to plead not guilty just like any criminal or anyone accused of a crime has that right whether they are guilty or not guilty they have the right to plea not guilty. however, i am so suppressed -- depressed about all of these people who are going overboard to defend a man that they know in their hearts is guilty.

and they have joe biden, what about this with joe and hilary? they all had their time in worked -- in court. from what i understand joe biden is under investigation. so we need to stop looking at that and look at people for who they are, -- and stop hating on other americans. host: diane, finishing this first hour. former president trump pled not guilty to the indictment from special counsel jack smith. a lot of technical, legal questions to be asked going forward. joining us to help us walk through those questions is the former assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of florida david weinstein to talk about the documents, yesterday, and what happens from here. he will join us "washington journal" continues.

♪ >> c-span's campaign 2024 coverage is your front-row seat to the presidential election. watch our coverage of the candidates on the campaign trail with announcements, and greets, speeches, and events. to make up your own mind, get news on the c-span or, are free mobile video app, or anytime online at c-span.org. c-span, your unfiltered view of politics. ♪ >> on august 20 4, 1950 5, 14-year-old emmett till visited ryan's grocery and meat market in greenwood, mississippi, where he was accused of searching th a white store clerk, carolyn brian, and his 15-year-old cousin was with him when the incident happened and days later when emmett till was abducted.

sunday, on "q&a," the co-author of "a few days full of trouble," recounts the events that led to emmett till's murder in his -- and his efforts to get justice for his late cousin. >> i was in the store, nothing happened when i was in there, and then shortly after [indiscernible] nothing happened while they were in the store. they came out of the store and it was a short time later, miss bryant comes out of the store. emmett loved to make people laugh. he was a jokester. the atmosphere in 1955 in

mississippi, a black man whistling at a white woman, that was death itself. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "u.n. day." you can listen to "q mandate" and albert -- you can listen to "q&a" and oliver podcast on our c-span now at. caller" -- "washington journal" continues. host: joining us now, david weinstein, current partner at jones walker, former u.s. assistant attorney for the southern district of florida, here to talk about the events of yesterday. thank you for your time. guest: you're welcome. pleasure to join you and explain things. host: appreciated. one of the next steps for the prosecution and the defense stemming from yesterday? guest: at this point, the former president has been arraigned, he entered a not guilty plea and asked for discovery from the government. the next steps for the government is to start handing over the documents, the

information they intend to rely upon during the trial whenever it might take place. a lot of these documents are classified documents, so on the defense side, the defense team is going to have to submit themselves for background security clearances. they are going have to be given classified -- access to classified documents, and then they will have to set up some sort of a skiff where the documents will be held, or the defense team can look at them and take notes, but they will have to leave their notes in the room, so they will have to create a secure, safe area for defense notes to look at. interestingly enough, the defendant is entitled to see the evidence against him, so it will be a question of how we are going to get this process in place so that the defendant and defense team can look at things. sitting on the outside of all this is the codefendant, nauta, he also had initial appearance and did not have this legal team

in place, so he has not been arraigned yet, and until he is arraigned as a codefendant who has been arrested, so to speak, in a case that the speedy trial clock will not start get, the district court judge will not get to have set a trial date. intereinday for everyone to pay attention to his will and naut appears in court with lawyers and enters his guilty from that point, we will get the first trial date in this particular matter. host: you know better than most that florida is known for having a speedy process when it comes to. what is the timeline -- when it comes to trials. what is the timeline potential he like there? guest: if this was a normal case, which we all know it is not, it would get set for trial and it will get set for trial until there is a motion to continue within the next 75 days of whenever nauta is arraigned. just over two months to perhaps two weeks from now the case will get its first trial setting and

the judge will issue a trial order and tell them when pretrial motions are due in the case will move forward. in a normal case, there will be a continuous, maybe a second one, and it should be in about six months from now and then the case would go to trial, be resolved, and they'll be the end of it. even in the other cases, it would stretch until nine months until there was a trial, a change of plea and sentencing. in this case, i think we will be lucky after pretrial motions are heard within the next nine months, and then from there, if there are adverse hearings to the government that they need to take up on appeal, that is going to go up to the circuit court, so there will be more hearings and delays. and for all quite apparent reasons here, it looks like the case probably will be sent for an actual trial setting until perhaps summer.

and then that is going to be in the midst of the conventions. who knows where and when the case will finally get tried. host: how does it factor in that you said mr. nauta had not developed a legal defense team and there were reports the president was having trouble ng a defense tea is there an issue as far as if you cannot have the full complement of people you need? guest: you need to have a lawyer or another two lawyers that are permanently entering notices of appearances to represent you. however lc staff your legal team, whether it is with experts -- however lc staff your legal team, whether it is with experts or other lawyers helping you to prepare the case for trial, that is up to you. once you have a permanent council, and the president has that, it does not matter when you get before the judge and you say i have not assembled the other lawyers on writing. you have a lawyer -- on my team. you have a lawyer, and they will

enter a permanent notice of appearance. district court judges run a tight rein on their calendar, and if you have a lawyer and the lawyer entered a permanent appearance, he or she needs to get ready and do whatever it is for the day the judge says this is when the trial is going to take place. host: you talked about the documents and evidence in question and how that will be seen by both sides. because they are sensitive documents, does that mean a declassification has to happen? guest: not necessarily. to my knowledge, waste on the way the documents are listed in the counts of the indictment and based on the way they refer to them, there are even continued redaction's with regard to titles of the documents within the document itself, they are still classified. people are entitled to look at classified documents if they have the proper security clearance. what will need to happen is the government lawyers have that

security clearance. if they do not have it now, they have to get it while reviewing the documents. the council for the president will have to go through the same screening process. they will be investigated, their backgrounds checked and cleared, and then they will be given the appropriate security clearance to look at the documents. when you get that clearance, you are obligated to look at them and not take them out of the areas where they are supposed to be and then you have to closely hold that knowledge. it will be interesting to see just how we are going to see these documents addressed in a trial or evidentiary hearing when the public cannot see much, if any at all, of what is on the documents. there will potentially have to be hearings held outside of the presence of the general public. so, it is going to be interesting, certainly as a side event here how they are going to continue to treat classified documents, and they could

declassify the now, but, remember, that is not going to change the nature of what they were classified at the time they were possessed by the former president outside of a secured area. host: david weinstein, our guest. if you would like to ask a question on legal matters concerning the former president and his not guilty plea yesterday, (202)-748-8001 for republicans. (202)-748-8000 for democrats. independents, (202)-748-8002. you can text your questions or comments at (202)-748-8003. mr. weinstein, judge aileen cannon, how much of a role does she play going forward? guest: a central and pivotal role. she is the district court judge assigned to the matter, and she controls her calendar, her docket, and she is in charge of local rulings made in the

matter. she is assisted by a magistrate judge who is paired with her, and she may refer to preliminary matters and evidentiary hearings to the magistrate judge she will conduct hearings and then make a report recommendation, but it is up to her to accept his report and recommendation. she will be in charge of granting motions to continue. she will be in charge of ultimately deciding not only the pretrial motions to suppress, motions to dismiss, but other motions that we called motions limiting certain evidence and testimony that will come into the case. certain lines of questioning, and she will be the person who takes the raw palliative evidence that is out there with regards to what is going to be admitted and makes some rulings to determine what fits inside the box. she will be in charge of the jury selection process. she will look at potential jury pools, be in charge of

scheduling, when the trial will take place, what hour it will take place on, so she plays a pivotal role in this case with regard to getting it to the endpoint, and that is a trial in this matter. host: how much does it matter that she was appointed by the former president and she had a ruling last year concerning these very documents itself? how much does that matter going forward as far as her possibly being influenced by the? guest: we are in uncharted territory of uncharted territory. there are many district court judges, in fact, all of them, who are presidentially appointed, and then senate confirmed. they sit in these positions until they retire, and until they are no longer enacting district court judge. obviously, we have never had a defendant who has appeared in front of a judge who they nominated.

it is uncharted with regard to that. when they take the oath of office, any judge or public official, they agree to uphold the constitution, which is what put them in the position. i have to believe -- we all have to believe, that as part of the justice system, they uphold the oath they take when they sit there, but, you are right. we have seen rulings from this judge that were favorable to the defendant already. that is not unusual in any case. judges make decisions favorable to defendants and the government, and then so matters that are unfavorable to a plaintiff. in this case, her decisions were reviewed by judges of higher authority. by the 11th circuit court of appeals, and they took her to task with some of the rulings based on the case law and based on their interpretation of the evidence and sent the matters back and overturned her prior rulings. when i appear in front of a

judge and make a presentation and argue the case law and the judge disagrees with my interpretation, i have to abide by it. and i cannot look at what i have written inside until the judge disagrees and i will keep arguing when you have not told me it is wrong. we have to believe that she will listen to what the 11th circuit has already said with regard to some of these issues and that her future rulings will be consistent with that. having said that, if they are not, and if the government can assert or believe under oath in a pleading they will have to file that she is already determined in some of these issues and that her determinations are biased and prejudiced, they could file a motion to recuse. it up to this point, we have not seen enough for them to actually do that. arguably, many people think they have. others think they have not. until there is a future rolling

that shows some sort of a bias or prejudice, she is believed to be, and we will all have to believe her to be an impartial arbiter of the facts here as someone who will look at the facts and law, look at what the 11th circuit has already said on many issues, both to her and other judges and cases that have been rolled on, and make a ruling that is consistent with the facts and the law. host: before we go to the first call, do you have any personal experience of being before her as an attorney? guest: i have not, she sits in the northern end of the district in fort pierce, and i down here in miami. while i can practice up in fort pierce and have been there, i have not had the opportunity to draw a case that has landed in front of her. host: david weinstein, former u.s. assistant attorney for the southern district, joining us. tanya from san antonio, mcallen, starts off with the guests. the question -- from san

antonio, texas, starts us off at the guests. go ahead. caller: what can we expect, as republicans, democrats and independents, from if there is a conviction or a charge, what is the backlash of him already exposing the documents, nuclear whatever, to other countries, that he has not made some kind of agreement like i will show you this, but if something happens and i need this, i went this to happen? i am afraid of that. i am afraid this is going to start a war. i have military, my

granddaughter is military, my kids are all military. i am afraid that he has done something to start a war, that could start a war. host: got your point, caller. we will refer to the. guest, mr. weinstein guest: thank you for the question. you have touched on something behind why the prosecution has taken place. the fact that these documents could contain depends classified information were taken from someplace where they were secure, cooked in a place where they clearly were not secure and may have been shown to other people is why there was an indictment and why the process is going to move forward in the government will present evidence to convince all jurors that this case has been brought validly and that a conviction should be obtained. with regard to the exposure of this information, there are certainly things going on right now behind-the-scenes that none of us know about with regard to

what was in the documents, who had knowledge of what it was, and adjustments have been made so that if that information was released to someone, somewhere, who could use it against us, that we have a counter plate against exactly what is going on -- counter play exactly against what is going on, and that is why they wanted the documents back. that is why they asked for them when they were missing, and that is why they are likely doing whatever they can to smooth out what information was put out there, and hoping to make sure whatever could happen will not happen. host: republican line, ronald. caller: yes. i am ronald. i want to call my opinion about how bad our country is. they blame it all on trump. biden had tons of it in different places all around. his son was talking to all these

china and selling our top-secret information to china and all these nations. making millions. and our country is sitting blind. and the fbi has to be paid off to not say nothing to biden or hillary. they have got to be paid off. they bought them out. that is what i want to say. host: mr. weinstein, that is ronald. sticking to the point of the parallels you have probably heard between what the former president was charged with, investigated by the special counsel when it comes to president aydin, former vice president pence -- president biden, former vice president pence, what are the parallels, if there are any? guest: there are parallels, but these are two different set of facts. you can group the investigations that are ongoing that have been completed against the former vice president pence, and

ongoing investigation with president biden and documents he had when he was vice president and the issues related to hillary clinton. you could separate them because they are different, vastly different. as we have seen from the concluded investigation into former vice president pence, the documents he had in his possession were inadvertently taken. i know that many people are saying that is what happened with former president trump, but now we have seen, based on the evidence contained in the affidavit and the statements in the indictment, based on statements made by the former president himself, this is not an inadvertent situation where i am packing up my boxes when i a movingm from the white house or out of the vice president's office, and i am collecting documents and putting them in boxes and taking them with me and i am not sure what is in them. with former vice president pence, what happened was the documents were collected.

he had no idea they were in there. it was not an intentional act. and then when the people came looking for the documents because they discovered they were missing, he immediately went through the boxes, didn't actual doro and diligent search with people who were authorized -- did a diligent search of people who were authorized to look at the documents. when he found them, he complied with the request and return them. that investigation was closed and no charges were filed against him. same thing took place with regard to hillary clinton and her use of potentially classified information. and the ongoing investigation with regard to president biden, when he was vice president, is going through the same process. they complied. they did what they were asked to do and in a quick and expedited fashion, and they did not mislead anybody or allegedly mislead anybody while making false statements. contrast that with what we have seen in the papers filed against the former president. he did not comply when he was asked. almost two years ago to return

the documents. his first set of documents that were returned in the compliance we now know that there was no diligent search. again, according to documents filed in testimony related to the grand jury, that -- presented to the grand jury, that he in fact directed people to take the documents and withheld them and he talked about knowingly keeping them in places they were not supposed to be. and then when asked again, said, no, i have given them back, but when the search warrant was executed, they found more of the documents. so you are talking about two different sets of circumstances. they are treating everybody the same. the responses are different, and that is why you have one individual who was now indicted by a grand jury and three other individuals, two of whom are cleared already, and a third who they are going through the process, to see whether or not he is going to be cleared. host: dave joins us from california, independent line, with our guest david weinstein. caller: hi guys.

yeah. i am not going to get into as far as passing judgment yet on what is happening now with trump, but we obviously have a problem with the archives on the way the process works. we need to revamp that because what are their personal pictures mixed with top-secret documents? that is crazy. we basically have two criminal organizations running the country, and they are using this to bribe and persuade other politicians and whatnot around the world and in the country to get what they want. that is what i see. guest: dave, you raise an interesting point with regard to how we handle classified documents. look, we all do not have to love and embrace technology, but when i try to make a transaction with my bank, i have to go through 14 different layers of authentication and classification and clarification before i can even transfer money.

it seems odd to me, and certainly this is at the heart of what our problem is, that there is not a better way to hold onto documents that are classified. when i go to the library, and, yes, people still go to the library, you check out a book, dana with the book is, and when you do not return it, they come looking for you for the way the book is. we need to have a better system. i agree. something should be done about the way classified documents are handled. if there is a better process, whether it is digital, stricter controls, we may not be in a situation where documents are just laying around from a place that is in a secure area that they could get swept up and put interpersonal documents. host: mr. weinstein, what do you think that the charges or at least many of them stem from with the espionage act and not with the presidential efforts act? guest: people have been talking a lot about the espionage act. it is not just one particular statutes but rather a series of

statutes. again, when we hear the word espionage, we think about spies and secret midnight meetings and mail drop boxes and documents that are exchanged and envelopes of cash exchanged. that is not what the espionage act is about. in this instance, we are talking about the taking of classified documents out of a location where they are supposed to be and putting them somewhere where they should not be. and, you know, with regard to what is taking place under these charges and under the ones filed with regard to the espionage act, it is done to protect the security of our country. host: there is an argument that "the wall street journal" editors made when it came to the presidential records act, saying "it is striking and legally nota that the indictment never mentionthact but allows the president access t unclassified and classified documents once he leeshe office, it allows good-faith

negotiations of the naon archives, but it says mr. trump had no right to take any of the documents. some documents had previsly been the property of the former president. if the espionage act means the president cannot maintain those documents, the pra is all but meaningless." what you think about the argument? guest: you have to look at the process and a lot of why where we are today is because people do not follow the process. look. if in fact there are presidential records that they believe either were declassified or classified but they believe they no longer need to be classified and the are presidential records where they were improperly classified, there is a process to work through the documents and to figure out whether or not the presidential records or are they classified documents? that process does not involve taking these documents, putting them in bankers boxes, and taking them and shipping them to your home in florida or your

home in new jersey. the process involves picking up the phone, talking to the national archives and saying, i have documents that i believe are presidential records and they should not be classified documents, and i need additional time to go through these. i am leaving office in january, so i need you to set up a secure location where we are going to keep these documents and then my staff and i are going to go, make appointments, go into a secure area, we are going to review the documents and save these are documents are presidential records and here is why we believe it is so. this document is declassified, and this document, while still classified, should be declassified. so i am asking you to declassify it. that is the process, and had the former president followed the process and the boxes had been sent to a secure location and not shipped to florida or new jersey, again, we might not be

in this situation, and we would be talking about the presidential records act. host: eve is in michigan, democrat's line, good morning. caller: good morning, pedro and good morning, mr. weinstein. my question here is that the people on the other party, host of them, pretend like donald trump was not a reality show person that they recognize from a reality show, so they thought that they knew this man. this man was not a man that was in politics. most people in politics do not act like this. you know this as well as most people who follow politics, that you put your head down and you learn from other people. this man came in like a bull in a china shop. you cannot do the things he did and expect to get away with it. host: ok, that is eve in michigan.

guest: well, what i take from that is that we all have to learn from your situations. look, when i started off as a yellow lawyer, i knew what i had been taught in law school but i do not know how to be a lawyer, so i listened to people around me who had been part of the process on both sides. so prosecutors, when it started off as a prosecutor. defense attorneys who, things in and out of the courtroom. i learned my lesson from people around me, and i did not put my head down. i kept my head up, i listened to what judges said, supervisors, and i learned from being within the system. it is important for us to have people who are both part of the system and who are from outside of the system. if you are from outside of the system, you do not have to follow everything that the system does and sit and stand when told, but you have to learn to listen and get advice from people around you who have good experience in dealing with these situations.

host:host: are guest is david weinstein, former assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york. he is here to talk about the trend -- the case brought against former -- president biden. what to think about the strength of the special counsel's case? guest: i agree with what the former attorney general, bill barr, had to say. on paper, this is a strong case. normally, indictments are bare-bones. they set out the dates, the times, and with these events are, and because the special prosecutor knew there would be great scrutiny paid to the case, he set out over 40 pages of information about why he believed the charges should be brought. again, people are presumed innocent until proven guilty. just because the grand jury returned an indictment, that does not mean the person charged is guilty. but if you look at the facts and the way they are laid out, he not only sets out the violations that took place but how they got

to be violations. what was said by the defendants with regard to their knowledge, proving intent, proving wilderness, proving their actions and getting those documents from point a to point b and the fact that they were classified. he has broken them down into two sets of documents. there is a set of documents in the first when he four counts or 21 counts -- in the first 24 counts or 20 wink counts of the documents that were returned when asked for at the first time, but taken away from where they are supposed to be. and then a second set of documents were documents retrieved from mar-a-lago where they currently sat, and from where they should not have been. and then he sets out the allegations as to how these two individuals obstructed the investigations, the false statements they made and that others made. again, we get pictures in this indictment because this is 2023, and, of course, if there are no

pictures, it did not happen, so we see. with the locations look like on paper, this is a strong case, but it is not what is on paper that is important. what is important is presenting evidence for 12 people in a courtroom and for those 12 people to determine beyond a reasonable doubt that the government has met its burden. but on paper, a very strong case here. host: we heard yesterday that the former president would not be allowed to talk to witnesses. we also heard that the presidency will push back against. what do you think the judge will do not matter? guest: in every case where a defendant is charged, the defendant is directed not to speak to witnesses that the government intends to produce at trial and are going to testify against them. that is standard, and there are orders entered and conditions of your release entered.

you are given a list of witnesses, and you are told, you, the defendant, are not to have contact with those people. now, your lawyers can reach out to these people if they want to talk to them. and if they do not want to talk to them, they can say, i do not want to talk to you, or if they are represented by lawyers, the lawyers will say my client does not want to talk to you. that happens all the time, so it is not unusual for a judge to direct a defendant not to talk to other people. as far as codefendants, if your lawyer, and the codefendants lawyer wishes to collaborate with the codefendant and wishes for the two of you to talk to each other, you do it through counsel with counsel present, preserving the attorney-client privilege. you have a joint defense agreement. and you ensure that any privilege that attaches to conversations continues to attach, but i have done it myself. i tell my clients, do not talk to your codefendants. you do not need to. if you have something you need to find out for them -- from

them, talk to me, and i will talk to their lawyers. we need to preserve privilege. i do not think we can say the word unique enough with this case. there are lawyers who are witnesses now, who were lawyers, some are still lawyers for the former president. how do direct a lawyer not to talk to their client anymore? that is a bit of a gray area that exists, but now they have turned and become witnesses, whether willing or unwilling, so, there should be a reason for a defendant not to be talking to witnesses. whether or not this defendant to come highest with those conditions remains to be seen. and then, ultimately, if he does not, are they going to do anything about it? again, a more traditional defendant, if a court finds out you are in violation of your release orders or any order of the court, you are dragged before the court. there is certainly going to be a contempt hearing, a hearing on violating your conditions of release. i am not sure we will see that happen here.

host: in los angeles, republican line, you are next up. caller: thank you. host: go ahead. caller: yeah. i am in the perspective that the democratic party has been trying to get at trump for about seven years and i think this is a continuation. i am an expert witness for the superior court in los angeles. i will go with alan dershowitz saying this does not meet the conviction criteria. he feels it is a very weak case. i am going to use the word vendetta by the democratic party, and it has twisted -- this whole thing was a law

created to go after trump individually because he has been president and has access to everything, and to take that away from him and make it a crime is just pure politics. it is disgusting to see our system twisted like this. thank you for your information. i will not agree with all of it, but it certainly gives us a better outlook. c-span, thank you very much. host: tom in los angeles. mr. weinstein. guest: tom, look, we are all part of the system. that is what is the beauty of our system and country. we are entitled to have opposing viewpoints, and we are entitled to disagree about what the law is in the application of the law, and that is why we have judges. that is why they review the facts, they compare what is on the books, read the statutes and look at the intent behind them when they are drafted by the

legislature, and we can agree to disagree about what powers a president has when they are in office and when they leave office. but we have to look at the facts here. i will agree with you, tom, that while he was the president, he was authorized to have access to. these documents he should have access. he is the president of the united states. but at that point when he is no longer the president, and these documents are still classified, and they are not presidential records or personal records, but they still obtain a privilege of being a classified document, one containing defense secrets, defense information, both of our country and other countries, well, then, they should be treated as such and only be kept in classified areas and not be taken from a place where they should. if the facts established in a court of law that that is what happened, then, you have to answer for what you did. if they don't establish that, there -- or 12 jurors don't

believe the government can prove their case, that is why we have the system. we all have to accept the verdict and take our matter from their. but this discussion we are having and the roles that we have, they have to be followed. otherwise, it becomes unkempt. host: there is a viewer on twitter who asks about the audio part of the indictment document released, saying, will the audio of the former president incriminating himself be included in the trial or deemed attorney-client privilege? guest: that is a question for judge cannon to answer. she will be assisting in the decisions made by rulings of the d.c. circuit and by the 11th circuit. the u.s. supreme court and others. if you make a voluntary statement in a place where you have no expectation of privacy, and where there are people who are not your attorneys, and there is no privilege. you have no expectation of

privacy. and your statement is in admission, and the judge will evaluate all of those criteria. if in fact there was no privilege that attaches, there is no exclusionary rule that should be applied by virtue of the u.s. constitution or emily rule of law or evidence -- constitution or any rule of law or evidence, then, he is, the recorded statements will to prove both the intent of the former president and the lack of a mistake on his part to convince the jury that he knew in fact the documents were still classified, that he should not have had access to the, and that they should not have been shown to anybody without the proper security clearance. host: in alabama, independent line, jason. good morning. caller: good morning, y'all. first off, i think the reason why trump did not go through the process, as mr. weinstein mentioned, was because in january of 2021, he was so busy lying and trying to work his members up into a frenzy, he was

on working on process the right way,, going to the national archive are going through the gsa to help impact. so they did a rush job at the last minute and like a petulant child, he wants to pretend it is ok. i called because something mr. weinstein mentioned earlier about judge cannon that my attention. a lot of the trump court members have been talking about how unfair it is and the social objective and all this, but what mr. weinstein mentioned was that judge cannon has the option to recuse herself if it is under her determination, if she refuses herself. to me, that is an inherent problem in the system. you could say it worked because she got overruled and got taken past the judges above her, but you kept mentioning how unique this situation is. i would offer that the situation is so unique, and you already have evidence of the fact that

she is compromised or at least her judgment may be impaired in the situation, she should be made to recuse herself because maybe the process works, and, like she tried before, maybe she makes a ruling and she did not ultimately stop the indictment, but she slowed it down, and you could make the argument that she could do the same thing again because there is evidence she did before. to me, that is an inherent problem that shows, that it may not necessarily be two tiered, which i think it is, but you depend too much on people who may have a bias. i believe she has shown that bias, and i believe the system should remove her so that she cannot make the same mistake twice. host: that is jason in, thank you for the call. we will let our guest respond. guest: jason, if the government believes that is what the evidence shows right now, and that is what exists, then they have an opportunity to file a motion to recuse. that is on them. on the others, if the defense

believes there is some sort of evidence to show an inherent bias or if they have an opportunity to move to recuse, and, as a judge, if you believe, either because -- and it usually occurs in situations where you have an interest to a family member, generally a lot of times we see refusals ever done by the judge based on stock holdings they have, they do not want to get rid of the stock holdings, so they are obligated to recuse themselves from the case. we have seen situations where judges have left the bench, gone , directed the options be sold and they no longer have a conflict interest within the case. ultimately, on the recusing issue, it is up to the parties on both sides. if the judge does not think he or she is biased, for them to point out facts to the judge, and for the judge to look at the facts and determine whether or not he or she should grant that motion to recuse. it is not up to me or those of us who are listening and watching and have our opinions.

it is up to the two parties in the case to decide whether or not they think this judges unbiased and will be unfair to one side or the other. host: give us your sense of our jury selection could look like for this. guest: it is going to be very difficult. there are several issues and questions that are going to arise. first of all, we saw in the initial appearance and in the arraignment that took place. in miami this is not where the case was set to land, although, it was presented to a grand jury here in miami, the prosecution indicated that it should go to west palm beach, which is another part of the southern district of florida. that is where the case was assigned, and that is why it ended up in front of judge cannon. so, that is whether jurors should come from. it is in palm beach, so the jury pool should be selected from jurors in palm beach county. now, the palm beach county is significantly smaller than the courthouse here in miami. in some ways, it is a lot older

and antiquated they need in the courthouse of fort pierce, which is where judge cannon sits. the question is going to be, can we as the southern district of florida, prepare the courthouse in west palm to handle what will need to be a jury pool of hundreds of thousands of people so that they can be brought in, they can be acquired on to determine if they have an inherent bias for one side or the other? for the security to be maintained? in a criminal case -- for the security to be maintained? in a criminal case, the defendant must be present in the court room for every critical stage of the case, and the trial is the most critical part of the case. this is not a situation like in a civil case, where if the defendant does not feel like being there, they really don't care but they are not there, they have to be there, so you have security concerns at the west palm courthouse for the former president to be there every day and for people to be able to protect him, and for him

to be in a situation now where the general public is going to be within feet of the president. there are security matters and things done to ensure nothing comes into the courtroom, but you still have security concerns. if they determined that cannot be handled in west palm and they have to bring the case to miami, the next question becomes, yes, a case in the southern district of florida, people who live in miami are part of the southern district of florida, if i am the defense, i am going to say, well, they are not part of the actual location where the case should be, so you need to bring people from west palm to miami. even on a good deal with traffic, it is going to take jurors down here they're going to put them -- take 90 minutes. how are they going to get jurors down here every day? are you going to put them in bands, set up a remote situation

where use grangers? we -- were you screen jurors? we have learned one thing from covid, we can do a lot of things remotely that did not need to be in person like before, so will the defense agree or will the government agree to something like that? that gets us to the point of getting the pool together. now you have to sit people down. i find it hard to believe that there is even one person in the southern district of florida who has not heard about this case and who does not have an opinion. because we all have opinions. then the question becomes, can you put your opinion or opinions aside? can you focus on the evidence that is presented in court by the prosecution, look at the law and instructions given to you by the judge, and make your decision, guilty or not guilty, based on that? not on what you think about your side. if you answer honestly, and you say i can, then you will be a member of the jury pool.

if you answer honestly and say, no, i came into the courtroom and -- i have not heard one word, i believe the former president is guilty. or i came into the courtroom and there is not one thing you could show me that would make a believe that this person was guilty of the crimes charged, i believe that this is just a political witchhunt to get him, well, then that person will not be selected. as part of the system, we have to rely on honest answers of jurors because that is the way the system works. if you give us an honest answer and tell as you can put that aside, we consider you part of the jury pool. that is a process that is going to take days, if not weeks. again, in a regular case, you can complete jury selection at federal court in the morning and you are done, and you know a little about the jurors, not as much as you want to, but you know a little and then you are on your way. jury selection alone in this case will take weeks.

host: in ohio, democrat's line, you are on the line with the former u.s. assistant attorney for the southern district of florida. caller: you suggested there needs to be a better process for handling classified information, presidential executive order 12536 describes a uniform system for classifying, safeguarding and declassify national security information. this order was signed by president obama in 2009 and preceded by this same document with president george bush and president clinton. are you in agreement with the document and will be used in this trial #guest: i -- trial? guest: i am familiar, and you get to the heart of the matter, and there is a process in place,

and it has been followed by at least three presidents and all the ones you have abided by the conditions and the changed conditions that are there. if people follow the process, then the process works. i absolutely think that that executive order is going to be brought up during the course of this litigation. i suspect the defense will bring it up and the motions to dismiss based on prosecutors not looking at that particular executive order and not allowing the former vice president to follow it to a place, but if he claims he followed it and he followed the declassification process, then the government will produce documents that show that certain documents were declassified or hear the absence of any declassification documents and that will be damming against the former president because it will show he did not follow the process. in fact, the documents that say they are classified, while they are still classified. host: rick from north carolina, republican line. hi. caller: good morning, gentlemen.

how are you? i have some statements from mr. weinstein. you talk about the uniqueness of this case, and you talk about statutes, and you talk about processes. something really stands out to me. hillary clinton willfully destroyed evidence under subpoena. i think that is a little bit more intent than a former president having classified documents in their hands. i believe the president has the ability to declassify certain documents to have them in their possession. my question to you is, where is the fairness? where is the adherence to statutes and processes when you have a secretary of state running for president who willfully and knowingly destroys

evidence under subpoena and there are no repercussions? and then, this really seems with the trump case to be perfect timing. i know that a trial probably will not happen until after the election with all the time it takes to get anything together and prepare, but i do not see the same due diligence being done with regards to joe biden's classified documents. definitely did not see with hillary clinton willfully destroyed evidence. host: ok, say made that point. our guest address to before, but, go ahead. guest: two different things going on. one, there was an investigation into what occurred with the former secretary of state and evidence that she had in her possession and whether or not it was destroyed, whether or not it was produced, and what declassification was of that information. did it have anything to do with classified emails, exchanges, documents, etc.?

they conducted an investigation and reached a conclusion. as for the investigation being undertaken now and the timing of things, they have been looking for these documents for two years, and they made their request back and, initially, marge, i believe, or may of 2021. so this is not about timing of returning an indictment intentionally close to an election. we are well over a year away from an election. there is even a nominee for either political party at this point in time. it has got nothing to do with the election process. finally, with regard to the investigation about the documents that were obtained by president biden when he was vice president, that is still ongoing , with an independent counsel, who is looking at what is going on here, and until we hear the conclusion of that investigation, like we did in the hillary clinton investigation and former vice president pence's investigation, there we don't know what the answer is. so, there is a process. it is being conducted

independently. we will get the answer into time. host: a couple more calls for our guest. this is from monte in oregon, independent line. caller: good morning to both of you. i just got curious. trump claims he declassified these classified documents, but how does he bring good lawyers to go through some kind of a process to be able to look at these classified documents that yet trump says are classified? how does that work? guest: so let's deal with the unclassified documents question first. contrary to statements that have been made, you cannot snap your fingers and declassify a document. you can say, i would like to declassify a document, and here are my reasons why. you go through the process, you send it back, you tell the intelligence agencies you

believe it should be declassified, and then there is a memo and memorandum, and declassification markings are taken out the document, and there was a record. with regard to getting his lawyers, his current lawyers to look at documents that are still classified, the process involves a background check, it involves federal agents interviewing you and people you know, looking at your background, and then determining whether or not you are eligible to view the documents and there is a process where you have to read through materials, where you are given guidelines, where you are given instruction, where you view information with regard to how the documents need to be handled, specific instructions about where they can be viewed, what you can see, what you can retain, who you can talk to after you look and obtain the information. so if his current team of lawyers go through the process and are certified and qualified and get that top security clearance, then they will be

able to view the documents. if they do not, then they will have to find lawyers who can get through the process and will be certified to look at the materials. host: david weinstein, one more call, from mason, new york city, democrat line. caller: yes. i have one simple point to make. no matter how you are going to spin it, the end of the game is one political opponent going against a chief political opponent. this is exactly what happens in third world countries. [indiscernible] one chief political opponent. that feels like cuba and all third world countries. to, america, this where we are at today, a third world country. host: what are you looking for legally, into the caller's plan, how do you think this will impact the political system in the united states?

i know you are a lawyer, but from a legal aspect, what do you think? guest: outside the courtroom, politics affects the case and a huge way. we cannot deny that. inside the courtroom, you have to put politics aside. people will have political beliefs coming in, and that is what happens during a juror selection. you have to take the politics on that it happened outside the courtroom. with regard -- politics and let it happen outside the courtroom but not inside the courtroom. it will be interesting to see how quickly the former president can get his lawyers certified to look at classified documents, and once they start filing motions, motions to suppress, dismiss, exclude, let's see what the defense has to say about it. let's see what the responses from the government and then in the evidentiary hearings, where they have to support evidence to support their side. let's hope it all happens quickly and this matter does not drag out as long as it could drag out because outside the

courtroom, it would be in the best interest of the defendant, not necessarily the defendant because we know he wants to delay, but in the best interest of the american public on both sides of the aisle for the case to be resolved in advance of the nominating conventions next summer. and for there to be a conclusion. enter politics to be outside the courtroom -- and for politics to be outside the courtroom and for the legal system to operate inside the courtroom. host: the former assistant u.s. attorney for the southern district of florida, david weinstein. thank you for your time. i hope you come back. guest: thank you. glad to be here and help answer questions. host: we will continue on with your calls concerning the not guilty plea of the former president donald trump concerning the documents case. here is how you can reach us until 10:00. (202)-748-8001 for republicans. (202)-748-8000 for mcgrath's --,

kratz. (202)-748-8002 for independents. "washington jonal" will continue after this. ♪ >> book tv every sunday on c-span2 teachers leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. at 9:15 p.m. eastern, the catholic information center talks about the legacy of the sexual revolution in america and the overturning of roe v. wade in 2022 in her book "adam and eve after the pill revisited." at 10:00 p.m. eastern on "afterwards," michael waldman examines the impact of the supreme court's 2021-22 a to rulings with faceboo he is interviewed by politico senior legal affairs reporter. watch book tv every sunday on c-span2 and find a full schedule

on your program guide or watch online anytime at book tv.org. ♪ american history tv, saturdays on c-span2, exploring the people and events that tell the american story. at 645 time eastern, ohio democratic senator sharon brown leads a bipartisan group of senators and a reading of dr. martin luther king jr.'s 1963 letter from birmingham jail, and at 9:30 eastern, on the presidency, in his book "coming fdr," jonathan darman reveals how puleo transformed franklin roosevelt into the man who led the country during the great depression and world war ii. watch american history tv, saturdays onpan2 and find the full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org /history.

>> be up-to-date in the latest in publishing with book tv's podcasts about books. with current nonfiction book releases. plus, bestseller lists, as well as industry news and trends through insider interviews. you can find about books on c-span now, our free mobile app or wherever you get your podcasts. ♪ >> a healthy democracy doesn't just look like this. it looks like this where americans can see democracy at work and where citizens are truly informed in the public thrives. get informed straight from the source on c-span, unfiltered, unbiased, word for word from the nation's capital to wherever you are. it's your -- the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. >> >> "washington journal"

continues. host: the house coming in at 10:00 until then we will take your calls concerning former president trump appearing in court yesterday pleading not guilty to those indictment charges from the special counsel. make your thoughts known on the line, if you want to text us, you can post on her social media sites and their twitter feed. you can also follow the show on instagram. if you're interested in reading the indictment materials, it's on a special location on our website at c-span.org and follow along with the events of these next few days and anything current going on in congress as well on her app at c-span now. the events of yesterday not only played out in the papers located

in washington but across the united states as well and even internationally. to show you some of the headlines -- a picture of the former president sitting in his limo and pleads not guilty. this is the citric county chronicle out of florida with a sketch from yesterday's events. cameras were not allowed inside. the south florida sun-sentinel offering its front page as well. from the outside of those supporters and tp and detractors there of the former esent, trump appears in court is how they move that in the president went to new jersey after the events in miami and some of the new jersey papers picked it up.

this even hit internationally, our neighbors to canada in the toronto sun saying on their front page come a picture of the president -- of the former president. also out of brazil with their picture. the president and his limousi and then the gulf news. that's out of dubai. that's just some of the headlines playing out from the events of yesterday. we will hear from you in this hour. yvonne in arkansas, democrats line, hi. caller: hi, i just want to know all the republicans are so worried about hillary clinton and joe biden and hunter biden. what about them and how they were running down jim jordan and mccarthy and marjorie taylor greene. don't you think they were in the

bathroom or the barroom or wherever. why didn't anybody ask him about what they read on the documents? did trump hold over their heads because they know the documents were down there and they are not saying anything? host: charlie in miami florida, republican line. caller: good morning. the media establishment is so all in for the anti-trump agenda . they talk about espionage. espionage indicates that someone has done something to help a foreign entity or maybe an enemy of america. who has done more about helping enemies and joe biden? chuck grassley has videos of the bidens and joe being bribed by

foreign countries like russia and ukraine and china. he is the one that's taking payoffs and when that comes out, it's embarrassing. when you are republican, you what's the justice system go totally after trump. i'm talking about they are all over trump and they are redacting the documents in congress and they reject the part where it says that biden has been arrived. biden has done impeachable offenses. he needs to be impeached but all the media, you were ignoring the border and ignoring anything about biden and you forget that hillary clinton's folks had the hammers out, destroying bones and documents host:. larry is next in colleen texas, independent line. you will have to turn down your television, please.

are you there? one more time for larry from texas. ok, it's good to alex in ohio, democrats line, you are next. caller: good morning. this goes back a few years. i was thinking about when trump went to saudi arabia and was playing with the sword. sometime after that is when saudi arabia paid millions of dollars to some golfers to come over there to play in saudi arabia. more recently, saudi arabia bought the pga. i was listening to public radio and they were talking about now that saudi arabia owns them, and has but into the pga, are we looking at possible basketball? host: how does that apply to yesterday? caller: yesterday?

i think yesterday was a smokescreen. trump has already won with the tournament being played it is golf course. i'm sure all of his debt is being taken care of by saudi arabia. host: how does that equate to the not guilty plea yesterday? caller: probably it will drag on for many months and at the end of it, he will plead guilty to one of the lesser charges and nothing will come out. that's the problem i see. host: republican line from florida, this is mary. caller: hi, i just wanted to say i am so sad about the state of our country today. i had no more confidence in the fbi and the cia and the government. i never really liked trump but i have to admit he has done the best job as president in my lifetime. i've been aware that i wasn't

voting for him but ever since eisenhower, i've been following presidential terms and so forth. trump was really an excellent president and everyone in our country, poor, middle, everyone was better off in our country was on the right track. i believe he is innocent and at least democrats all over the world, at least consider that he is presumed innocent. that's what our country is all about. don't believe in mainstream media when they say he is guilty. they have no right to be judging. they are not on the jury. host: you said he's innocent so what do you base that on? caller: i base that on the fact that he did an excellent job for our country and he has done

nothing other than what the former president have done. he did not willingly try to defeat his enemies by going -- by creating false stories for the fisa court. it's really obvious that the democrat administration is out to get him and will make up stories and they have so much control of the main street media . it's frightening, it's like pravda or any other country. host: let's go to brian in hamilton, virginia, independent line. caller: good morning. good morning to the world. this kills me. i voted for trump in 16 but i did not go for him in 2020 and i will never vote for him again. the indication in the indictment

is there is plenty of evidence against him. we need to wait for the trial and hear the actual evidence but i just believe that there is a bunch of smoke and mirrors and there is far more to this than what's in that indictment. he does not deserve to be president. his mishandling of our top-secret, nuclear secrets, all kinds of things -- people could be getting killed now in the cia and fbi wherever overseas because some of that stuff could have leaked out. they wouldn't steal the photo -- the documents, they would photograph them and in 30 seconds, they would be all over the world. host: let's hear from the president himself. he was in new jersey and his former vice president mike pence

and the latest on the document situation. the speech was about a half hour in length it's on our website at c-span.org and here's a portion of the present from yesterday. >> we learned nothing about the biden primary debt bribery scheme. very respected person was conducting it mine is not such a nice person. mayan and is a deranged lunatic. many times, that is the magnitude in numbers and severity. that's the prosecutor they gave. he found nothing and he totally exonerated mike, i'm happy about that and mike did nothing wrong but he had classified documents in his house they exonerated him and biden is a different story. you have to really think about what he said is a senator, he took those documents which was

unprecedented. the prosecutor in the case i will call it our case is a thug. i've named him deranged jack smith. i wonder what his name used to be? it sounds so innocent. jack smith, he is a very nice man. he is a behind the scenes guy but his record is absolutely atrocious. he political hit jobs. he's been known to viciously arrest a certain governor. you know the governor, bob mcdonald of virginia. he absolutely ruined his life and the life of his family come all these wonderful family members. i knew them only to have the case overturned 8-0 by the supreme court. he destroyed that man in the family. by the way, i will tell you, i am here i love you all and we can take it. host: jonathan who writes for

usa today writes a piece this morning in today's paper -- today is that president 77 birthday.

more thereby jonathan churley and you can read more of his arguments there. oklahoma, republican line -- caller: good morning and thank you to c-span, i appreciate would you guys do. i was just going to point out concerning the jury pool and the intent argument area with the espionage act, it's going to be tough sledding for the prosecutors to convict trump. the american public are smart. the espionage act committed requires somebody to damage the

country and then they have to prove that damage was done to the country. the problem with that is everybody knows, you can call trump anything but he is a died in will american capitalist everybody knows, why would a man like that destroyed his own country and do it in a way which they had to prove how he destroyed the country? why would he do that? on its face, the people trying to prosecute him have a hard hill to climb, some would say a ridiculous hill. the other thing would be the status of the president classified where as a vice president like joe biden or when he was a senator who had documents did not have the right and hillary clinton when she had stuff on her server as secretary of state did not have the right to do that. the american public will see that this is very selective, biased prosecuting in the american public will see that.

we are smart. i think it will work itself out and if we want real justice in the spirit of the law, we need to adjust these acts and maybe improve them. mr. trump should not be the sacrificial lamb. host: we will go to sharon in bay city, florida, democrats line. caller: thank you for taking my call. so much to say but the last caller did not address the fact that trump lied to congress about having those documents and played a game of hide and seek and put them in unsecured places. i wonder how many people have actually read the charges. trump has hurt air country on the world stage. other countries will view us as whether it's safe to give us secure information about their military maneuvers and the other things. it's very upsetting and he has

embarrassed their country. anybody that believes him, i don't know, it's unbelievable that people still don't see him for what he is after what happened with covid and the fact that he lied and he said he lied to bob woodward and he said he knew that covid was five times more deadly than the flu but he was out in public saying -- host: stick to the events of yesterday. caller: it is a pattern. i'm trying to bring out the pattern of lying. and how easily the lies just fall apart. people in the country of read those charges -- i'm not saying heap should be found guilty before he has due process but that's our country. it supposed to be law and order and what applies to one applies to the other. hillary clinton was investigated and biden is still being investigated. it's not like they did it so i

should be able to do it. i don't understand that kind of thinking. host: darrell is next in west virginia, independent line. caller: good morning from aston, west virginia. i have some questions. if we are going to charge former president trump, the mainstream media needs to be has to be vim and vigor with their questions for everybody. i've got a couple. as a senator, how do joe biden get those documents out of the ski andf did anybody help him? f hunter lived in the house where some of those classes -- classified documents were found and he was throwing parties at that house and had access to those documents. did everybody have security clearances? were those boxes moved? the documents that were found at the biden center which was chinese funded, who had access

to those documents? i would like to see pictures of the classifications of each document for mr. biden. host: those events are still being investigated by the special counsel. when it comes to president biden, the documents situation is being investigation. caller: hello, thank you for the opportunity. i would like to share with the concern that i have that justice is supplied unevenly here. as everybody said before, trump has been politically persecuted by the democrats throughout [indiscernible] it's like the ultimate agenda to get him out of the political

picture. that is very concerning. the politicization of the federal government, i work in the federal government and people instead of being civil servants try to push the government in certain directions. the governments -- the democrats will say in my opinion have been actively involved with that and we all know that the high-level political people in the democrats have requested this. host: how does that relate to yesterday? caller: it's the way that the president has the authority to declassify anything. if somebody doesn't like it, so be it. he has the authority. if he said declassify, some when else needs to do that paperwork and it becomes a technical case. host: a fox news reporter says a

protester wearing a prison custom tried to block former president's trumpet motorcade. men was holding a sign, jumping in front of an suv between taste -- before being grabbed by secret service agents running alongside the vehicle. the video was captured by a fox news reporter. the same anti-trump protester held a sign that said lock him up but it's unclear if the men will face charges. you can see that on the fox news website. these are the events of yesterday before the president traveled to new jersey for that fundraiser. we will show you a little bit of the goings-on from yesterday. sharon in pennsylvania, democrats line is next. caller: i think maybe trump's having a hard time committing lawyers because they know deep down he did something wrong and

they don't want to be caught up in this process of having to live for him. i think they should also show the trial when it comes on tv so everybody can get to see exactly what's going on and what he's been accused of. thank you. host: steve is in ohio, republican line. caller: good morning, c-span and good morning america. i have to say that donald trump is a clear and present danger to the national security of the united states. unfortunately, i cannot believe i'm saying this, i am 63 and a u.s. navy veteran -- i support and then the constitution of the united states. i have to say, follow the fact and the evidence thus far. he will have his day in court in a jury of his peers will either convict him or not. just follow the facts.

he had the documents, he was asked to return them, he hid them, he moved them around, he avoided it. he didn't want to comply. this is the way he operates. this is the way he's been operating. it's an embarrassment. the republican party has no shame. you could stop this right now for your country, for all of us. democrats, republicans, for air country. you need to stop this. one more thing, donald trump is like a moth to the flame. he cannot control himself so ask yourself one question -- it's as plain as the nose on your face, ask yourself how if he was elected, how could he have a security clearance? how could be given a security clearance, would you allow him to go in the back room like he did in helsinki with vladimir putin? host: ok we got your point.

we will show you the list of charges that were laid against the form president to which he pleaded not guilty tyesterday in miami. is the conspiracy to obstruct justice on the withholding of documents or records or concealing a federal document in a federal investigation, a scheme to conceal and false statements and representation. that's the case that has been laid against the former president and he's pleading not guilty to that. our guest in the previous hours as we will see what happens in the days and months ahead when it comes to the process how it plays out. the speech that the president made last night is still available at our website at c-span.org. the indictment document is there too. you can read it for yourself. also follow along on c-span now. in alabama, robert on the republican line caller:. caller:how are you doing?

host: go ahead. caller: want to thank you for taking my call. i would like to say that what's going on now is going to elect president trump. it will get him elected. people are seeing have crooked the administration is in power now. a lot of people i know personally that didn't vote for them last time are going to vote for him this time. they see [inaudible] host: i apologize, you are breaking up a little bit so we will leave it there. thank you for calling in. a couple of other things to show you and tell you about as far as what's on our network today. there will be a hearing this morning taking a look at the highway collapse and infrastructure law in philadelphia concerning pi-95

implement -implementation of infrastructure laws enacted by congress will feature federal highway administrators testifying on the subject after that major highway collapse and you can see that at 10:00 on c-span3, our mobile app and c-span.org. later this afternoon, a hearing on the supreme court ethics in light of investigative report alleged violation by justice clarence thomas. testimony from law professors and a judiciary subcommittee at 2:00 this afternoon on c-span3 and it involves legislators but they are in the field instead of battling it out in the halls of congress, congressionaball game in and the annual game for that will be at nationals park itill begin at 7:00 p.m. on c-span now and you can follow along on c-span.org. that's some of the events

amongst others going on in and around washington, d.c.. miami, florida, democrats line, hello. caller: hello, good morning. this will come to pass in time because nothing is done in the dark that comes to light. it mr. trump is guilty, he may not get time punished in this life but he will get punished in the next life to come. we will not help each other when we are fighting and fighting. host: what about the not guilty plea from the former president yesterday? what do you think about that? caller: he will say he's not guilty. nothing that he is done for the past year, he said he did it and he never apologized for anything. it doesn't have remorse for anything.

you don't expect them to say he is guilty. host: ok, james in mississippi, independent line, good morning. caller: yes, i was calling because i wanted to say uh, when republicans say that this is wrong, you know for a fact c-span has been punishing -- publishing everything in the open they are doing now and they continue to attack c-span. you know for a fact that every time the president or a republican says this is a scheme

, all of these people and i will tell you about the indictment. all of the people that have testified against president trump were republicans. every one that you put up on the screen, they say they work for him and they did all these things, they are all republicans. host: what about the events of yesterday? caller: i think the prosecutor and the people that filed these charges, i'm ashamed that the media, the jurors would allow the president to save all of these things about this prosecutor. when barr was in office, you didn't have that but this particular prosecutor went to florida.

now they are attacking him on every side and this is not fair because i feel if you are going to do one, do all. it's sad to see that it could be right there in their face but when it comes to biden, they will justify this. host: we got your point, thank you. this is sandy in youngstown, ohio, republican line. caller: hi, please give me time to say my point. everybody else has had their say. i'm just saying they've been attacking trump since he first ran and he didn't do anything. he believes in the constitution but the democrats don't. they are turning into socialist. nancy pelosi was asked what she

wanted from the first indictment and she said trump in prison. eric holder recently said we need to have each meant number three. host:host: ok? how does this relate to the events of yesterday? caller: he's being persecuted. they don't want somebody in who believes in the constitution. biden said he doesn't believe any amendment in the constitution. he's turning this into a communist country. he's calling regular people like me who believe in the constitution and the rule of law , they are calling us extremists and terrorists and parents want their children to not be indoctrinated. they are calling them extremists and terrorists. host: how does this relate to yesterday? caller: it relates to yesterday that he's been going through this. they are trying to stop him.

biden was just on video saying they need to keep him from being president again and he says legally. host: a couple of other stories to share with you with the events in and out of congress. heard about inactivity in the halls of congress amongst republicans. roll call reported that the house bill passed tuesday that would prevent the consumer product safety commission, a week after republican conservatives scuttled their measures to get the bill to the floor. it had 29 democratic supporters. there was the assertion that the measure had bipartisan support.

that's from the hill. when it comes to monetary money matters, the fed has raised

interest rates at the fastest pace in three decades and is poised today to leave rates alone for the first time in 15 months till out time to gauge the impact of its aggressive attack on inflation. a top official said it's clear that any pause may be brief with another rate hike likely as soon as their next meeting in late july. when it comes to matters on the naming of military bases, out of fort polk, louisiana, reported by the local television affiliate --

there is more about his history in the renaming of that fort atklfy.com. charlotte, north carolina, democrats line, hello. caller: good morning, i hope i have time. i cannot believe that these people think trump is innocent. he is going to get to process and has the right to plead guilty. for him to go to the rally last night and braylen the prosecutor, they think they can watch him rail on everybody. i didn't hear jack smith say a thing about him. if they are the party of law and order and honoring the constitution, then he needs to honor the prosecutor and he

needs to honor the constitution. when it comes to trump, all of a sudden, people don't back institutions because they are investigating him. he did not participate with the rule of law because he would not turn over those documents. as far as them saying about hillary and joe biden, joe biden participated with the rule of law and gave them access to his documents but trump did not. he is on tape saying he did not. furthermore, they had a whole senate conference and present that was republican so if anything was hot during that time, they should have investigated hillary them. that's why she didn't do it. host: that's carolyn in north

carolina, kathy and, independent line. caller: hello? i just want to say that yes, my new he would say he is not guilty. if people would just sit down and just look at maybe some of the things he has said and done and maybe just take the time to fact check everything he says. if they do that, they will find out how much he is lying to the people. if you said anything against him for the truth that any of his rallies, he wants you out of there. the reason is he wants you to believe him. thank you for taking my call. host: one more piece of things to watch out for in congress today on the house side, the washington examiner reporting

you can see more there on the house side possibly today so keep close to c-span for that. new jersey is next and this is from francis, republican line. caller: how are you? this document case is a classic entrapment case.

president trump was the only president since the conception of the presidential records act that has refused -- that was refused a place in a location where he wanted to put his records. he is the only president since the act began. what i'm looking at is there is no way anyone knows if those boxes were staged. and what are they talking about, 140 pages of documents of papers ? 140, not all of those boxes. they had no cameras, they didn' let anybody in, nobody trusts the fbi anymore especially the ones in washington. as far as the thing goes with

the hillary email thing, president obama used certain names to email hillary clinton on an unsecured server. that's a fact. host: reba is next in gaithersburg, maryland, democrats line. caller: thank you for taking my call. can you hear me? host: i can go right ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. there is a whole lot of stuff we could argue about over the last six years but i believe in the rule of law and yesterday. there is an indictment and it's not made by joe biden. the doj brings it to the grand jury of americans in this case americans and laura which is [indiscernible] the grand jury said there is enough to bring charges. so the indictment happens.

that's not guilt or innocence. that's determined by a trial jury. a trial jury hears the evidence the doj has come of they hear the defense, here's the witnesses'defense and prosecution and asks questions and all the normal stuff we know happens in a trial. at the end up it, jury of americans decide. we all have our opinions. they are sometimes based on something we read here or there, sometimes based on how we feel about trump, sometimes based on the actual indictment which i encourage everybody to read. it's a very easy read. it tells with the doj case is. when the trial happens, you will know what they are framing their case from.

the reason i bring up all this rule of law is there are certain members of congress don't want this to go forward to a jury trial. any soon they want to delay. they are acting like a jury trial is something, they are trying to skip the fact that a jury trial is how we determine guilt and innocence, rule of law. host: ok, let's hear from richard and racine, wisconsin, independent line. you will have to get closer to your telephone. caller: is this better? host: it is, thank you. caller: past conduct by the doj and fbi, moving facts around and leaving words out and they left out the patriotic people with

january 6. let's be honest, they are doing this to get rid of donald trump, get in there somebody more amicable, the way things are done and continue our never-ending wars of the military-industrial complex and pump money into that baby. how much have we given ukraine so far? $100 billion. there on accountable for 400 -- host: how does that relate specifically to yesterday? caller: you had to indict him otherwise joe biden -- he says you have to get rid of trump. you might have someone who comes in and says there were no weapons of mass distraction when bush went into iraq or every other administration has been greasing the palms of everybody in the washington, d.c. area. host: emma in pennsylvania,

republican line. caller: hello? host: you are on. caller: i'd like to ask one question. trump supposedly had documents for over two years since he's been out of office. how is it possible biden has had them for 40 years in the archives and the government never asked for them back? this affects what's going on today. i feel that trump is innocent until proven guilty and everybody needs to settle down and just listen to the facts. , the true facts. the fact is he only had them for 2.5 years. biden had them for over 40 years. why was there never any question why he had them? host: joining us from pennsylvania, 15 more minutes to the house of representative comes in and we will take you there.

we invited members of congress to come in today to talk about the events of yesterday. a member of the intelligence committee joins us now for this discussion. good morning and thanks for giving us your time. guest: thanks are having me on. host: the events yesterday, what was your determination watching that play out? guest: i'm not thrilled this is taking place but the facts of this case in terms of former president's handling of classified information, i think the department of justice gave him plenty of opportunities to return the documents and have folks come in and look through the documents and take any sensitive classified information back to the archives. the president did not respond to that. the difference from what some of your callers are talking about, vice president pence was allowed to come in and return them immediately and i think president biden does the same

thing. this looks like a pretty plain case. it's really dangerous how the present handle these documents. who is he showing these documents to? we go through rigorous training on the house intelligence committee and how to handle classified information. we had to go to a secure location to review those documents. we cannot take them with us. innocent until proven guilty. host: do you or any other members of the intelligence committee have a sense of the nature of the documents that were held by the president and the sensitivity there was when it came to national intelligence? guest: we do in the special counsel laid out some of those but not in detail because they are classified, the gravity of some of the documents. host: could you describe the nature of some of those documents?

guest: eric military is planning contingencies. we are always very careful to protect sources and methods. there is documents that are in an unsecured location that reveal our men and women out there collecting human intelligence for us and the methods were use to collect that intelligence compromises our national security but also compromises our allies around the world. host: as far as the process itself, some have talked about the espionage act being used in this case and some have talked about the presidential records case for a vehicle for the present to hold onto these. talk about those two things and where do you think there is the middle on that? guest: i'm a doctor, not a lawyer but i will trust the

special counsel on this, the doj and attorney general to be sensitive and how they prosecute this case. they are bringing the espionage case. i don't want to speculate on what the president was doing with these boxes or who he was showing them too. we will let special counsel lay that out. it could be he was holding onto this tested these but that's dangerous because they were in an unsecured location so i'm not sure which direction special counsel should pursue. the insinuations pretty dangerous. host: are there changes needed to the process? guest: i think so. we go through that special training. we are reminded before every hearing that any notes or documents backing up secure locations, we should just not assume a president or vice president understands all of

that. i think that needs to be reiterated over and over again. host: you have heard the president talk about the fbi and the department of justice and criticizing them over these issues. what do you think it ultimately does in the long term with those criticisms? guest: i'm worried about what it does to our long-term institutions. we depend on the fbi and the intelligence community to work closely with us in congress. and to deliver information that keeps us safe and protect our national security. the public starts to lose trust in icy members of congress trying to lose trust. there's is not a good thing. i talked to fbi director ray as to how we start rebuilding that trust. also between the intelligence community and the public? host: pure fellow republicans

are some of talked about the fbi holding onto information that would look bad for joe biden and his son and family. what you think about those claims? guest: there are ongoing investigations into the biden family in the present allows that to go forward. nobody is above the rule of law. . host: as an intelligent person, have you seen any documents that would verify what republicans are claiming? guest: no, these are ongoing cases we have not been briefed on any of that. host: what do you think about connections with the former secretary of state when it comes to the handling of her classified material versus what we see with the former president? guest: it's my understanding the department of justice and the former fbi director, james comey did that investigation and

ultimately cleared hillary clinton but i would have to take a look at that. that's my understanding. host: what are you looking as far as next steps when looking at the events of yesterday? guest: i think you let the legal process take place. the present entered a not guilty plea and if he's clearly innocent until proven guilty, just like any other american citizen, he is do a fair trial. host: democrat of california, a member of the intelligence community, one more thing -- supposedly on the house floor today, there will be a motion to censure adam schiff, the former head of the intelligence committee, what do you think of that? guest: it's petty politics. we have a lot of responsibility to the country and i think the special notion of this tit for tat is ridiculous. host: thank you for your time.

until the house comes in, your calls concerning the events of yesterday and the former president entering a not guilty plea when it comes to the charges from jack smith, the special counsel. democrats line from baltimore is next. caller: good morning. i've been listening to everybody call and he's been indicted now. anybody that knows anything about the law coming he's indicted but that doesn't mean he's going to jail. i have to see it to believe it. until all the people that were born from 1940-1960 is gone, this country is never going to be right. could you -- a lot of people are working during the day but is there a way like on a saturday or sunday you will have people to call in between the age under

40 or maybe under 50. a lot of these people are old like myself and they are set in their ways. they are not trying to pay any attention to logic. host: thanks for the suggestion. i know people of all ages call this program and give their thoughts and opinions. from kathy in florida, independent line, good morning. caller: good morning, cathy from the stupid state. yesterday, the circus came to town. we had 70 motorcycle cops, 10 suv's to escort him to the courthouse, they closed down major highways, they close down regular streets and what happens is he uses the campaign stop after court, he went to a restaurant and met with a few supporters.

i'm afraid south florida will be in for more of this nonsense as this progress is. i don't understand why he just can create a zoo for these little hearings. this will go on for years so i said i hope someone wises up steps giving him a forum for his campaign. host: showing you some of the video from yesterday's event, not only there in florida but also the event that took place as golf court in new jersey. there is a picture of the president's motorcade there. from the speech yesterday, you can still find it on our website at c-span.org, it's about 30 minutes or so. republican line, this is tony in illinois. caller: hello? host: you're on, go ahead. caller: why is everybody so afraid of donald trump?

why are they so afraid? the democrats are being run by communist. nobody brings that up. democrats are turning this country into a. communist country host: how does that involve the events of yesterday specifically? caller: why are they afraid of donald trump? they are after him ever since he was president. they have been after him since day one because he is an american. he stands up for americans and democrats to not stand up for americans. they stand up for illegals. host: ok, tell is next in kentucky, democrats line. . caller: hello there. i keep hearing these people say clinton did this and hillary did that and biden did that. hillary is not in the picture anymore.

he went to helsinki and they say he's for americans and went to helsinki and had the rearmed meeting. host: pat is that involve the events of yesterday -- how does that involve the events of yesterday? caller: he is still pushing lies. he is not going to quit. his people could about the past wiry pup -- they ask why these republicans still stick with him. it's not money because they are getting all the money they need. what is it that makes them stick with him? then we go back to when he did what he did all the time he was president. he lied about everything. he went to helsinki and if he so strong for americans, why is he

taking up for the russians all the time? host: lisa in oklahoma, independent line, go ahead. caller: hi, i was just wondering , as commander-in-chief, isn't trump entitled to classified military and defense documents? host: there is a whole conversation going on as far as with the president can and cannot hold to us for as materials. go ahead. caller: if he is still could bed and cheap of the military -- host: i don't know to the extent you want an answer but we are running out of time but finish your point. caller: biden might be the president but i think trump is commander-in-chief of the military. host: that's currently president

biden's job so -- caller: i'm not so sure about that. host: let's hear from marcia in apollo beach, florida, republican line. caller: it's amazing to me how much people talk about misinformation and disinformation and it's so obvious that there is hardly any real news. based on the conversation i'm hearing now, everybody is saying 100 different things and they not all right. my question about this is about the chain of command of the paperwork. it was reported that lawyers were not permitted to be there when the at the i was doing their search. to me, that taints everything. if you cannot prove that you didn't add paperwork to boxes and tipped them over, he was validated on all the evidence in

my opinion. host: a few more minutes until the house comes in. this is diana and wisconsin, democrats line. caller: hi, i would just like to ask the american people and people around the world to look up three words -- espionage, treason and insurrection. then put that behind trump's name and see if it fits. back in my day, i'm 76 years old, anybody that was caught with espionage and treason, they were taken out and shot. that would eliminate a lot of this modeling. host: joe in kentucky, independent line, hi. caller: how are you doing, thanks for having me on.