♪ host: good morning, it's wednesday, july 12, 2023. the house and senate both return this morning but it's the house

judiciary committee hearing with christopher wray that will likely get the lion share of attention i capitol hill today. ahead of that hearing, we want to hear about your level of confidence in federal law enforcement. do you trust them to enforce the law? if your answer is yes, the answer to call is (202) 748-8000 . catch up with us on social media and twitter. i very good wednesday morning to you. you can start calling in that we will get to your calls in a few minutes but we have a preview of today's hearing we are joined by michael schnell of the hill newspaper. thank you for being up early for us.

guest: good morning and thank you for having me. host: the hearing we are talking about today is how it reads, the hearing will expand the politicization of the nation with law enforcement agencies under the direction of thy director wrist of array and attorney general merrick garland. what does that description tells about the type of morning christopher wray is inboard today? guest: this is being billed as your typical oversight hearing. legislative branch conducts oversight hearings with other federal agencies. the notable part of it is the time that comes at. this is a contentious moment between federal law enforcement agencies including the fbi of oars and the house republican conference. since the beginning of this congress, the gop majority in the house is taking a keen interest in these federal law enforcement agencies. what they have called weaponization of the law enforcement agencies. they believe these groups are biased and politicized against republicans.

we will see this come to a head today during this morning's hearing before the house judiciary committee. christopher wray will meet face-to-face some of the conservative and republican critics of his department and of law enforcement in general. the official notice talks about the politicization of that hearing and they take a specific look at attorney general merrick garland. it's sort of going to be encapsulation of likely all these grievances we have seen the house gop majority air in recent months especially around things like the release of the indictment of president trump and we will see that likely come to a head today. host: what committee members are you most interested in hearing from today? guest: jim jordan is always one to keep and i out for. he is the chairman of the committee any chairs the judiciary committee and select

subcommittee on weaponization which is something that was created in this congress for the specific reason of looking into the weaponization of the federal government. also jim jordan is a very good l.a. of former president trump. a number of grievances that these republicans have had has centered around former president trump in the indictment in manhattan and the federal indictment we saw brought down more recently. jim jordan will be one to keep an ion but i'm interested to see how the democrats play defense. you have jerrold nadler who is the ranking member of the committee who has been a high-ranking democrat for years. i'm interested to see how they go about this and how they message this because christopher wray, the fbi and federal law enforcement in general have been a key focus of the congress that republicans have kept it in the news cycle and the focus. i'm not sure how democrats will respond but they will play their role in this hearing. host: it was a few weeks back

where they talked about impeachment of christopher wray. is that still on the table? guest: there has been a resolution filed against christopher wray but it has not moved. notably, i think it's two of the members who cosponsor that resolution actually sit on the judiciary committee so that will be an interesting dynamic. to see him go face-to-face with some of his fiercest conservative critics, particularly those want him out of his job. i will note there has not been any movement on an impeachment resolution. not too much discussion about it but it will be discussed and it has been brought up as part of this wider conversation of christopher wray. it will be interesting to see if that is brought up during today's hearing. host: how much of what's happening today will impact the ongoing funding battle for federal agencies, particularly funding of the fbi?

there has been talk about how to change the funding of the fbi in light of some of these concerns that republicans have brought up. guest: right now, a key focus in congress and the capital has been the appropriation process. lawmakers are staring down the september 30 deadline where they have to fund the government, risk a shutdown propensity continuing resolution. just yesterday, jim jordan, chairman of the judiciary committee sent a letter to kay granger, the top republican on the top on the appropriations recommendations and have to do with law enforcement agencies. among those recommendations, bringing down the funding for specifically the fbi in terms of where its headquarters is. funding and the amount of money the fbi gets has been a prime

focus. that will likely come up during today's hearing and christopher wray will likely be confronted with it and i'm sure he will defend his agency. host: one more minute unworthy fbi headquarters is, talk of moving it to alabama? guest: yes, this has been a conversation where the fbi has been facing down in general. it's an interesting debate in on capitol hill. there will likely be conversation about that. the alabama thought was brought up recently but i don't know how much action that will receive. absolutely, the conversation about the fbi headquarters has been in the headlines and has been a focus of lawmakers this congress and we will likely see conversation about that this morning. host: it begins at 10:00 a.m. eastern.

the hill newspaper will be covering it as well. we always appreciate your time. guest: thanks for having me. host: we are asking you this morning ahead of this high profile hearing, do you trust the fbi and justice department to equally enforce the law? if you say yes to that question, (202) 748-8000, if you say no to that question, (202) 748-8001 and we will look for your social media posts as well. we are having this conversation in this first hour of the "washington journal" today. john is a first out of bridgewater, new jersey on the line of those who say no to that question. caller: good morning. it pains me to say that i love the fbi, i'm 75 years old and j edgar hoover was a hero. you know, i mean, what it looks

like especially with the hunter biden thing and the russian disinformation that there was a clear cover up or obstruction. comey,mccabe, they all seem to be biased against donald trump. they had their reasons for it perhaps but yeah, i don't want to distrust the fbi of all things. it's probably the greatest institution of all of our government institutions. i don't want to believe this but it looks like it is. it looks like they are biased. host: was there a time previously in your lifetime when you had the same lack of trust? caller: no, i may be an

old-fashioned guy. they hated j edgar hoover but i think he was right in on the red scare he was right and communist infiltration. even the mafia frankly. i just never felt the fbi was weaponized or politicized. this is the first time and i'm feeling bad about it. host: will you watch the hearing today? caller: marone, absolutely. i cannot wait. host: less than three hours, 10:00 a.m. eastern and c-span3 is where you can find it. this is tina in huntington, pennsylvania, go ahead. caller: good morning. i am absolutely going to be watching this hearing this morning. everybody in america should be watching it because you are finally going to see the coldhearted truth.

we cannot trust the doj, we cannot trust the fbi. they've been weaponized against us and he came down the escalator how many years ago? and it's not just him. i will be glad when all of this is put on the table and all of the lies are proven to be lies. it is my hope that those who have suffered under this radical left policies and makeup laws get justice. i am so looking forward to this and i cannot wait. host: that's tina in pennsylvania, met in maryland, go ahead. caller: how are you doing? i think it's important we find out what goes on in the fbi and they've committed a few crimes. nothing scares me more than jim jordan and his gestapo and it's

interesting they've spread this out as some sort of criminal action on the part of the democrats as they are doing it themselves before our eyes. thank you so much. host: that's matt in maryland. the phone numbers of do you trust the fbi, (202) 748-8000 if your answer is yes to that question, (202) 748-8001 if you say no to that question. we mentioned the official notice of today's hearing describing this hearing as examining the politicization of the nations criminal law enforcement agencies. the word that jim jordan has used in the past when it the fbi's weaponization of the fbi. he talked about that weaponization as he described it in one of the judiciary committees previous hearings. it was last month hearing ahead of special counsel john durham's testimony. this is what he had to say. [video clip]

>> parents, catholics, journalists, guess who gets of the worst? guess who gets of the worst? whistleblowers. if you dare come forward and tell congress what's going on, look out. they will come for you. they will take your clearance, your pay, they will even take your kids clothes. just ask mr. o'boyle testified in this committee as well. over the next few hours, we will hear the facts and details about the whole false trump russian narrative, the crossfire hurricane investigation and hopefully, it will help change things at the department of justice. regardless of what the biden administration and the garland justice department do, i know what republicans in the house are committed to doing. we will work to dramatically change the fisa law and we will change everything we can in the appropriations process to stuff the federal government from

going after the american people. host: that was jim jordan last month and we will hear more from him today in the house judiciary committee ahead of that hearing. christopher wray will have his opening remarks and we will air them live on c-span3. one story today on somebody republicans have pointed to as having key information about the biden family and that person's interaction with the justice department, the codirector of the maryland-based research that claims to have damaging information about hunter biden has been charged with arms trafficking, sanctions violations and acting as an unregistered agent for china according to a federal indictment that was unsealed yesterday. prosecutors in the southern district of new york accused the u.s. israeli citizen of violating the arms export control act and foreign agents

registration act in brokering arms deals between chinese companies, i ran and companies in the middle east. that story is in today's new york times. this is rated pittsburgh, pennsylvania. do you trust the fbi and justice department? caller: of course i trust the fbi and the justice department under biden. the only time i didn't trust them was when trump ran the show. this is just a dog and pony show by the republicans because they will not do anything to christopher wray. he was appointed by trump, wasn't he? host: he was nominated by president trump and 2017. caller: ok, they will appoint

the next attorney general. host: president biden will. caller: of course he will. they want biden appointing the next attorney general? that's not going to happen. christopher wray is at least a republican in charge so they will just do what they do. they saw what happened with roe. they know what will happen with the new border so they won't do any action down there because that's a good political point for them. they just want to yell at christopher wray and say what a bad guy he is but they will not take him out. he's in there because they don't want biden to appoint hillary clinton to the fbi. that's what they are afraid of. he's just a whipping boy for them, someone to take out the news headlines. i would like to say about c-span, it doesn't have to do with this but the since the

writers strike, i haven't been able to see anything like bill moore or the other comedy clubs that used to be on tv because of the writers strike. i have to turn to c-span and listen to the right wing republicans give their opinions and talk on this because that's my comedy for the morning and the day. i thank all of these trump is forgetting on their and making my day. host: that's right in pennsylvania, this is tom in fort lauderdale, orrick, good morning. are you with us? caller: good morning, hello? host: go ahead. caller: i don't know if trust is the right term but this congressional hearing today, i wanted to focus on the question the democrats should be asking on behalf of of the panel. they should be asking christopher wray about why he

isn't investigating the bribery of the supreme court justices. why didn't he investigate bribery, full-scale bribery, hundreds of millions of dollars of bribery and that should be the focus of all of their questions. host: this is robert in indiana, good morning. caller: yeah, i think they are all corrupt and the media is absolutely correct. they will not tell the truth area fox has the films that shows everything that's going on. the democrats just i don't know -- i may be 60 years old, i have never in my life seen a country go down like it has the last year. my electric bill went from $110

set $340 per month. you tell me that biden is doing a good job? he's worthless. somebody's running this country and i believe it's obama myself. he couldn't do nothing when he was in there for eight years. i'm sick of this stuff. host: we will hear from the fbi director christopher wray today at 10:00 a.m. eastern, the 66th director of the fbi, nominated by president trump on june 7, 2017 and has served since august of 2017. he served in as assistant u.s. attorney in georgia from 1997-2001 and worked his way up through the ranks of the justice department during the george w. bush presidency. fbi director present -- christopher wray will go before the cameras and judiciary

committee on c-span3 at 10:00 a.m., less than three hours from now. do you trust the fbi and justice department? how would you answer that question? caller: i trust the fbi and doj more than i trust jim jordan and donald trump. they say you can't do that, we can only do that. it's just ridiculous. host: this is dusty in myrtle beach, south carolina what do you think? caller: yes, i trust the fbi. i've watched three of these hearings in the past and i watched, no, four, democratic politicians on the panel and

they wiped the floor with jim jordan and donald trump. i will tell you something right now, these people are using our tax money and wasting time when they should be attacking this inflation and childcare and get this country straightened out. they are doing this for donald trump because they don't have the guts to stand up to donald trump. we are tired of it. these republicans are going to get voted out. we have a lot of people coming here from ohio and there is an opportunity to talk to people and i asked them, do you know jim jordan? they say yeah. alan the world can you put him in office -- how in the world

can you put him in office? he's less qualified. he's in there because they don't have somebody who can't tell as big ally. host: we got your point. jim jordan is the chairman of the committee, the ranking member in the top democrat on the committee is jerrold nadler. they will have opening statements at the beginning of the hearing and jim jordan will go first and then jerrold nadler and then the opening statement from christopher ray. christopher wray gave a speech before the u.s. court of appeals before the circuit court last month and he talked a little bit about the fbi's mission, referencing attacks against the agency. this is a little bit of what he said back then. [video clip] >> there is no question these are challenging times, in some

ways historically challenging times and not just for the fbi but for the country as a whole. we are in an environment where pretty much every major institution is under attack whether it's law enforcement, business, the military and even the judiciary. all too often, in today's world, people's standard for whether something is fair or objective, whether you talk about an fbi investigation, a court case and even election, is whether they like the result. whether their side won or lost. too many people these days profess to value independence and objectivity until they don't like the results, the outcome. worse yet, when something doesn't go their way, there is a tendency to attack the motives and the legitimacy of the institution and that's not healthy, it's not productive and

more importantly, that's not how independence and objectivity work. given the judiciary's critical role as a referee, i suspect many of you in this room can relate. like you at the fbi, we are not on either side, we are on the american people's side, on the constitution side and because of that, our focus has got to be doing the right thing in the right way every time. that means in every case we are involved with, no matter who or what we are investigating. what i'm constantly trying to drill home to our people is that when the second-guessing and complaints about the results of an investigation come our way, which they inevitably will, we've got to be sure we rigorously stuck to the process. while no one likes to see the organization they dedicated their careers, really their lives to unfairly criticized, i

sleep just fine at night of the talking heads and armchair quarterbacks are reduced to complaining about the results of investigations as long as we can stand behind the professionalism, the rigor and the objectivity of the work itself. host: that was christopher wray at the end of last month, a speech before the u.s. court of appeals for the fourth circuit judicial conference. he will be speaking today just after 10:00 a.m. in his opening statement and then taking question from members of the judiciary committee. c-span is where you can watch it live. asking you this morning, do you trust the fbi and justice department? if you say (202) 748-8000 if you say no, (202) 748-8001. caller: good morning, i have a

question on the doj part of it and the fbi. i trust the lower half of it, the people on the ground but i do not trust the upper echelon. i think i see the majority of the upper echelon taking sides in a political way. the investigations have been fraudulent as far as going by certain evidence in the beginning to get warrants to look into what people like president trump, just going into mar-a-lago like that. you have the same circumstance with biden and his family. i just think there are two standards to the doj. and the people need the correct way of doing things. if you are guilty, you are guilty. that's what i have to say about that.

i think is a country, we need to start getting together regardless of party. it's just an unwelcome time for me, my family and my grandchildren. and the status of this country. we are being overtaken in our government is giving it away and that's what i have to say. have a good day, thank you. host: donald from arkansas is next. caller: good morning. i would just like to say yes, we do trust the fbi. this donald trump is nothing but a manipulator and a liar. nobody can trust the guy not to burn the white house down. let's understand that. marjorie taylor greene and graham are all in with the russians. everything donald trump does, they are behind. he doesn't agree with anything except for money.

if you are paying donald trump, you're with him. host: bring it back to christopher wray and the justice department. caller: yes, merit garland was hired by trump. why are the republicans putting him on trial now? why would they put him in front of the american people? republicans have been dishonest. they have been lying. garland is doing his job. trump needs to be locked up and go to jail. host: that's donald in arkansas, this is craig in california, good morning. caller: good morning. yes, i think i trust the doj and the fbi although certainly the fbi's had missteps in the past, ruby ridge was horrible and also the church in texas at waco, the horrible decisions come i wouldn't say it's corrupt but

they are coming after trump with all of these different things because they are crimes. he knew he lost the election and he kept saying that it was stolen. he gained millions of dollars in donations to save america which he never used. that's under investigation as well. fox news got sued by dominion voting systems for their lies about the election being stolen. they paid 780 $7.5 million to keep that case and going to work. for some of you, if you saved $1 million per year, it would take you 787 years to make that money. the documents case, they tried and tried to get those documents back. trump was moving them around. finally they went in with a

legally obtained subpoena to get the documents. and he keeps lying about it. yes, i trust what they are doing. it's a terrible thing that this has to happen but i've known about trump since the 80's. he is a very bad guy. unfortunately, they have to take action. thanks for taking my call. host: we are asking whether you trust the fbi and the justice department. nbc news in a pole from earlier this month at a different take on a similar question, asking whether you had a positive or negative view of the fbi and justice department. when it comes to the fbi, 37% had a positive view and 35% had a negative view and you can break that down by party and republicans said 17% had a positive view of the fbi and 56% said negative. democrats almost a mirror flip.

when it came to the justice department in general, the numbers are pretty similar, 35% of a positive view of, 36% have a negative view and republicans with a much different view than democrats. just 13% having a positive view and 55% having a positive you and democrats, 59% with a positive view and 40% with a negative view. that was from nbc news on july 3. that was just last week. asking this morning if you trust the fbi and justice department, (202) 748-8000 if you say yes, (202) 748-8001 if you say no. we promise we will look for your social media post as well.

this is alex in d.c., you are next. caller: can you hear host: host: me? yes, go ahead. caller: i just want to say i hear a lot of witticism of donald trump and the sources of information rather than the information itself. i think everyone would be well served to put those things aside and focus on the issue at hand which is can the fbi and doj be trusted and has there been corruption in the recent investigations? i think there is a ton of evidence to support that they have been evenhanded.

whether it's the allegations of whistleblowers you had at the doj and prosecutors tipping off hunter biden in the search. for those attacking people like jim jordan and james comer, put your personal feelings aside and watch the covid origins hearing yesterday and see how they tried to get stuff out and ask if you want to continually be misled and lied to about things like that or you want people who are willing to ask difficult questions. they are difficult questions and people deserve to have answers as to where covid came from and do we have justice in the country. consider the facts and watch the hearing. host: that covid origin hearings taking place on capitol hill yesterday, it was the house oversight select subcommittee. it was something we paired on c-span and you can go back and watch in its entirety on our

website at c-span.org. there are several key moments in that hearing if you want to check them out on our website, c-span.org. this is eric in elk grove village, illinois, good morning. caller: yes, thank you. i'm a 69-year-old guy. this is the greatest time in american history to be an old person because i can see our country is going down the toilet and i can die in peace, knowing there is nothing going to be left in this country. i also want to say there is no such thing violence. it's black man violence. caller: good morning. i got all kinds of confidence in the fbi.

what they are all disturbed bout is the fbi digging out all these people that were in the overthrow of the government thing. i am 83 and i'll will be damped if i've ever seen our country that tried to be in overthrow so we can get a dictator in here. it's time for the republicans to wake up and get rid of him as far as a candidate. you've got 15 or 12, 14 over there that could really do the job, all they have to do is get them in. i would like to see liz cheney in their either as president or vice president and she will straighten this thing out. she has been on the committee.

she knows what's happening. let's get these guys in prison with no pardons, no pardons for none of them. including whoever is involved from congress. you've got some in their sitting that are making all kinds of waves because they know the hammers coming down on them sooner or later. thank you. host: the january 6 investigation by the justice department, the largest set of investigations in the justice department history, more than 1069 defendants have been charged and almost 50 states. the justice department last week released a rundown of some of those cases on the 30 month mark since the january 6 attack at the capital.

approximately 350 people have been sentenced including approximately 110 individuals who have been charged with using deadly or dangerous weapon or causing serious bodily harm. approximately 140 police officers were assaulted on generous six of the capital including 80 from the u.s. capitol police, six to from the metropolitan police and approximately 11 individuals have been arrested on a series of charges that relate to assaulting members of the media. approximately 935 defendants charged with entering and remaining in a restricted federal building or on the grounds, 103 defendants have been charged with entering a restricted area, safety one defendants have been charged with obstruction -- district from governor property, 49 defendants have been charged with destruction of government property. that's just some of the numbers

from the justice department released last week on the 30 month mark since january 6 of 2021. this is steve from charleston, south carolina, do you trust the fbi and doj? caller: no, good morning. first let me say that i am so glad you did not separate the phone lines this morning according to political parties. this is something that affects everybody. it doesn't matter what party you identify with. i do not trust the fbi. i have two specific examples. both of them have to do with my personal life. we can talk about people shooting up a bunch of kids and hate groups around the country and they are allowed to do that. i used to be a government employee and i work for the navy but i'm retired now. i work for a private company.

we did training every year on computer security and they are real specific. several years ago, my government email was breached at the navy. i received an email were people get into your email and people say if you don't send them cryptocurrency, they will put photos on the internet. i phoned my security guys their response after the training i went to was delete the email and change your password and i said that's it? i said i've got an email addressed in something you can track. i called the fbi which is over the bridge in charleston harbor and the lady said the same thing. she said if you want to go on the website, you can do that and reported their.

they are reactive instead of proactive. it has to do with school shooters and everything else. you remember the tragic ame there was a guy down here who was not even allowed to go to canada. he is a domestic terrorist. he was going down here and he called for black people to take up weapons to kill all the white people they could. the fbi left and me and they just blew it off. when you have situations where you have a bunch of people sitting around the desk saying don't bother me, i don't want to do anything, that's a problem. they wait too late, they are reactive instead of proactive a lot of problems could be avoided if they just followed up on reports. host: when was the department of justice in your mind proactive? was there a time when they were

doing this job in a way they should do the job? caller: i couldn't put a year on it. i do remember, i'm 705i remember seeing reports like they would infiltrate these white supremacist groups including the ku klux klan. they may be doing that now but i don't know. i seriously doubt it. i think they wait until something happens and then they clean up the bodies. that's a problem for democrats or republicans or independents. i just don't trust them. it's not about politics, i don't trust them to do their job. host: will you watch today's hearing? caller: absolutely. host: if you are on the dais,

what question would you ask christopher wray? caller: i really want to get down to the nuts and bolts. i want to find out what they know and what kind of evidence they have and if they are going to follow up on anything. i hate the partisan politics part of this thing and that's where it will end up. they are just trying to get one person politically and i think that's wrong in this situation. host: this is danny and west virginia, good morning. go ahead. are you with us? we will go to dennis in indiana, good morning. caller: good morning. i absolutely do not trust the justice department. if the justice department was the way it should be, they would not have made a deal with hunter

biden on a felony gun charge. he should go to prison like everyone else in the country does. it's ridiculous. i do not trust christopher wray, he is good. the justice department cannot be trusted, the fbi cannot be trusted. this government is out of control. we need to go back to a constitutional government that eliminates the alphabet agencies. host: one of the callers said earlier that donald trump nominated christopher wray. does that make a difference to you? caller: absolutely not. the washington insiders room donald trump advised him to put him into the fbi. host: is he to blame for christopher wray being there? caller: all the blame and the people that advised him. host: this is deb in minnesota,

good morning. caller: good morning. i don't trust either one of those departments. i would say probably 30 years ago i did but not today. this is getting to be ridiculous. your earlier gentlemen callers mentioned one thing after another in the last caller from indiana mentioned that hunter biden should be locked up and i agree. i am not a democrat or a republican. i'm an independent and i vote by the person, i vote for women's issues. june 24 last year was awful for women's health. what's going on was our fbi and justice department, there are two sets of standards.

the average person is getting sick of it. host: a few more of your comments from social media -- about 15 minutes left in the first hour of the "washington journal." do you trust the fbi and justice department, having the conversation ahead of the 10 a.m. eastern hearing were fbi director christopher wray will go before the justice department.

it was michael schnell at the top of the hour that caused by some republicans on capitol hill to move fbi headquarters out of washington, d.c. to the state of alabama. here is the story from the wall street journal.

that is from the wall street journal today. this is from bethesda, maryland,

you're next. caller: good morning. i absolutely trust the fbi and the doj. i've never had to deal with them but they are doing a good job in the divided country we live in now. i wanted to share one more opinion and that is they seem to have lost my confidence in the supreme court justices. they seem to think they are beyond any ethics and rules don't seem to apply to them and they seem to make decisions based on their political beliefs rather than according to the constitution, thank you. host: cleveland, ohio is next. caller: hi, thanks for taking my call. i do trust the fbi and the justice department. when trump was president, bill barr was sitting next to him 24/7. i have never seen merrick

garland sitting with biden. they talk about weaponizing the fbi and the doj or whatever. it's a bunch of bs. all congress is concentrating on is going after the bidens. they need to do some work. they have done nothing, nothing since they have gotten into power. i think it's a waste of taxpayer money, thank you. caller: seattle, washington is next. good morning, there was a group in this country that has been voicing for centuries that there is a bias in the justice system in the united states. if the fbi had released the

biden family corruption before the 2020 election, there is no way biden would have become president. because of the cover up by the justice department, that's why i believe the election was stolen. it was. i believe it was stolen from him. the cover up. if you cover-up a lie in corruption and deceit, i don't trust them. host: do you plan to vote in 2024, do you trust the system to vote again? caller: most certainly i will vote again. i've been voting since i was 18 years old. i most certainly will. we american people just want

truth and for our elected officials to work for the american people, that's all we want. but we are not getting that. host: is there an investigation that could happen that would make you believe the election was not stolen? caller: well, i believe it was stolen. there is no proof that anyone has to investigate. if someone told me that someone broke into my house, i will -- and i know for myself -- all the evidence, i don't need an investigation. they covered up for the biden crime family. the proof is there. i am convinced host: this is connie in new jersey, good morning. caller: good morning.

host: go ahead. caller: i trust president biden. i don't trust trump. it's a man for food for generations -- hello? host: i'm listening. caller: it's a man who for generations [indiscernible] you don't have to have a college degree to know him. these people who called and they are so smart, in the history of the fbi, they are all republicans. all these people put in high places, they are republicans. they are not democrats. host: that's connie in new jersey. a couple of tweets --

at a hearing and may he talked about the attacks in congress against the justice department and the yard. [video clip] >> why are my colleagues trying

to undermine the fbi? why are they asking to defund the fbi? it is not because the fbi is not doing its job. is because the fbi is doing its job. the problem they have is that the fbi is doing its job in investigating their dear leader, donald trump. if you can undermine the investigator, if you can undermine independent journalists doing investigative reporting, then you can undermine our entire system of democracy. that is the authoritarian playbook 101. you attacked the democratic institution, you attack the independent objective individuals who provide checks and balance in a democracy and then, rather than follow the law and the rules, you can violate the law and the rules because

there is no one with any credibility who can hold you in check. do you want to know the reason why the fbi is going down credibility? it's because it's being attacked by people he and the other side of the aisle and that has to stop. host: denna crabb -- democratic congressman dan goldman, about five minutes left in the segment and we been talking about the fbi and the justice department justice department ahead of today's hearing with christopher wray. we will show you that hearing on c-span3. reason it is there is the house will be in it 10:00 a.m. eastern gavel-to-gavel coverage all week on c-span when the house is in session. on c-span2, the senate will begin at 10:00 a.m. eastern and c-span3 is where you can watch the high profile hearing and watch at c-span.org and the free c-span now video app. this is larry in delray beach, florida, you're next. caller: good morning.

i don't trust the fbi. the reason is our three different reasons. they have the computer and it should have been checked. the computer is checked and they knew it they had. there was of its lea's stuff that was out there that shouldn't have been put out there before the election. secondly is the leaks. every time there is a leak, it is a link for the democrats so the press is not doing its job. the fbi is working in tandem with the press to put out leaks. the only leak it came out for the republicans i believe is when the biden information came out on classified documents. how is it these leaks are not looked at by the fbi themselves. leaks are illegal and they should go to jail for these leaks. that is changing the attitude of the people out there but they are doing it in a legal way. i think that's a huge issue for the country that you are allowed

to talk about things that are private with respect to an investigation and then you have these investigations open to the public. it doesn't work for the justice department. host: raleigh, north carolina, you are next. caller: can you hear me ok? host: yes, ma'am. caller: here is my point -- i really like the fact that president biden and vice president kamala harris are keeping the doj away from them. some people would say its arms reach but i would see even further. i kind of consider that it's very much like this irs funding, the defunding of the doj or not trusting them. i find that people who don't want to pay their taxes, they are the one that don't want to fund the irs. people who are doing things that

are on the side of shadiness like i would say our previous president trump, they are the ones attacking the investigators. they are the ones that want to defund our police. they are the ones that want to defund the doj simply because they don't want their precious overlord, our previous president, to be able to get away scott free from all of these investigations. if we defund the doj, if we make one thing the doj, then they can't do their job and investigate the previous president. i absolutely think president biden is doing things absolutely correctly. the man is not old and doddering. the man is intelligent. he has been in politics for years. he knows how to do things in a legal and moral way. what we have are people attacking him because he is

doing things legally. i think i've said enough, thank you for the time. host: let me ask you, did you get a chance to see the story that got attention fromaxios about president biden behind closed doors, saying he is a quick trigger temper and putting some of his admonitions including cuss words, did you see that story? caller: yes, what i would say is this -- i had worked in corporate america for years. i have watched people get frustrated and upset about decisions that are made and actions. in america, people use cuss words all the time to express frustration. does it bother me he might get upset for expect other people in his administration to follow his

general direction? is he allowed to get angry when that's not happening? i have to figure that people in in important positions get frustrated because things don't go their way all the time. is your question and my frustrated that he cussed and got matt? no. if you are asking a different question, ask it again. host: it just got a lot of attention. the story came out monday. it talked about biden's quick temper behind closed doors. host: this is doreen, but luge louisiana -- baton rouge, louisiana. good morning. doreen? then we will go to thomas. caller: good morning. it is funny to watch these republicans. it is very dangerous what they

are doing. they have come out openly and said they do not want anyone to -- want anymore democracy. putting down the fbi is a strategy. the woman before me summed it up perfectly. host: that is ed in the virgin islands, our last caller in this first segment of the washington journal. coming up, a discussion of the nato summit happening this weekend. we are joined by benjamin freeman, and later this morning, neil king joins us to discuss his book "american ramble" and what he learned on a walk from

washington dc to new york city. ♪ >> c-span is the place to turn to see this year's national governors association meeting with comprehensive coverage. it all starts live from atlantic city. governors will address issues around mental health, maternal health, public health, along with disaster response. watch c-span's washington journal live as incoming nga chair spencer cobb makes an appearance. at 10:00 a.m., our live coverage

of the nga continues. watch comprehensive coverage of the national governor's association meeting friday on washington journal and on c-span2, or online at c-span.org. ♪ >> book tv every sunday on c-span2 features leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books. at 7:00 p.m. eastern, be jealous talks about healing america using exale from powerful conversations he has had with americans. afterwords, an author shares her book -- she is interviewed

by heidi heitkamp. watch book tv sunday on c-span2. find a full schedule on your program guide are watching anytime online at c-spa.org. >> nonfiction book lovers, c-span has a number of podcasts for you. listen to best-selling nonfiction authors and influential interviewers on the afterwords podcast. book notes plus episodes our are weekly hour-long episodes. find all of our podcasts by downloading the free c-span now cap or wherever you get your podcasts, and on their website

-- >> a healthy democracy does not just look like this. it looks like this where americans can see democracy at work. where the citizens are truly informed, our republic thrives. get informed straight from the source on c-span, word for word from the nation's capital to wherever you are because the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. host: a deep dive on the key nato summit happening in lithuania. our guests are 2 security experts. mr. friedman, the summit began yesterday. what was your take away from day 1?

guest 1: it is a protectable disappointment for ukraine. the biggest issue is ukraine and what the alliance will do for ukraine. ukraine wants to be a fall member of nato. they want that membership as soon as possible and it appears what happened at the summit is the can was kicked down the road. ukraine was told they can join nato at some future point. that is a disappointment to ukraine but it means the united states will not be on the hook for defending ukraine anytime soon. host: the headline from today's washington times -- zelenskyy tillery's nato leaders for lack of membership --pillories nato

leaders for lack of membership. guest 2: he is frustrated. this alliance needs unanimous consent to move forward with anything. their support among nato members to bring ukraine into the fold eventually, but when there is an active war, a firm date would be beyond possibility. host: is that something we knew before yesterday? was there consensus on that before this? guest 2: i think privately, yes. our president's statements were not helpful. he could have taken a more positive stance. i don't think that will change the trajectory of ukraine eventually becoming a nato member country.

i'm more interested in following how china is reacting to this also. host: let me come back to the frustration expressed by president zelenskyy. "it is udented and absurd when a timeframe is not said for anitation for ukraine's membership. it appears there is no readiness to invite ukraine to nato make it part of the alliance. for russia this means motivation to continue its terror." guest 1: it would be unprecedented if we made ukraine a member now. host: article six would automatically happen? guest 1: article five. you cannot enter nato without

article five. if you put ukraine in nato today, we would immediately be faced with a choice. do we go to war -- do we violate the general understanding of article 5 and do nothing for ukraine, or do we enter into the war and have a nuclear crisis on her hands immediately. we will put ukraine in nato when the war ends, but we are giving russia and incentives. russia has very little incentive to bargain at the table to keep the war going at low level. that is the circumstance that ukraine is in. what the united states and other nato members should do is be very blunt with ukraine.

"you are under existential threat as a country, and we will not defend you. why? because russia has nuclear weapons." i think we should just admit "we will not take that risk for you." we will give you arms forever and support you in other ways. i think that would be fair and honest with ukraine. we have been beating them down the path since nato said "you can join eventually." host: early in the war i heard about a no-fly zone. is that being discussed around the table? guest 1: essentially i think it was floated by analysts mostly because the biden administration didn't want to do it so it went

away but you hear rumblings from eastern europe, poland, latvia, and let the when you who tend to be the most hawkish members of the alliance talking about -- latvia and lift the way neah -- modly and li -- latvia and lithuania who tend to be the most hawkish members of the alliance -- guest 2: a specific day and time aside, but stronger language -- i i'm waiting to see the reaction of nato to china's characterization of nato. the reaction from asian nations that are there as well as

members from nato countries that were there was pretty forceful, but we are waiting to see if there is a continuation of this forceful pushback on a characterize asian that is favorable to moscow that nato is an aggressive organization. host: our guests are brett sadler and benjamin friedman. if you want to join this conversation, you can do so. phone lines as usual. democrats, (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. and independents, (202) 748-8002 . we will also be looking for your social media posts as well. going into this summit, we got

the news that the way had been cleared for sweden to eventually enter nato. can you take us through the back story of that, what turkey's objections were and how this played out and unpack that? guest 1: sweden and finland sort of operated as a pair. finland is unique because they have this long history of neutrality they have never been in nato and the war in russia spurred them to reevaluate that rather swiftly and move towards membership in the alliance. the alliance welcomed them with open arms with the exception of turkey. i guess the main objection turkey had to sweden was there politics vis-à-vis people who turkey deems terrorists -- kurds.

sweden reform some of its anti-terrorism laws to placate turkey. it seems there was a new list of complaints. the resolution it would appear is that turkey got some greater commitment from sweden to support its nato membership. the more you expand the alliance, the more veto players you have. host: did this f-16 deal have anything to do with it? guest 1: i think so. i think behind the scenes the u.s. said "we will stop pulling f-16s if you go along with this." the delay was erdogan holding out for a higher price from sweden and the united states. u.s. is paying sweden's way.

if someone has to pay turkey, it should be the people coming into the alliance. host: what is sweden -- what does sweden bring to the alliance? does it bring any liabilities? guest 2: i'm not as negative on the cost to the united states. f-16s were part of the negotiating. they sweetened the deal for erdogan to basically relent on sweden because of this issue over the kurds. oh two the lesser extent the long-standing problems that turkey has had with the eeo. -- to a lesser extent the long-standing problems that turkey has had with the eu.

sweden comes with a significant military capability and an industrial base, will add -- industrial base. it will add to nato. host: you have talked a couple of times about watching china and china's reaction. what was china's reaction to the expansion of nato from 30 to soon to be 32 members. guest 2: what you heard nation great law dialogue you are hearing also today -- heard in the shangri-la dialogue is what you are also hearing today. historically, that argument does not hold much water. it takes unanimous consent to move forward on any decision. it is hard to get countries to

agree on reactive policies like supporting ukraine. it is not in its nature or organizational structure. the chinese are queuing to this narrative and rhetoric because it does sometimes resonate in regions like africa and southeast asia. host: the nato summit is what we are talking about in this hour of the washington journal. brett sadler and benjamin friedman are our guests. why is this happening in lith uania? guest 1: it takes place in member nations, and they switch. they are trying to show some

degree of support for the united states or for taiwan and nato itself is pretending "we need to do something about china," in their official communiqués. china is shaking their fists to saying "we do not want to over here doing anything with taiwan." nato has its hands full already with russia. asia is a distraction. china is a distraction for nato. it ought to focus on the war and problems such as they are in europe. host: it is a meeting of the north atlantic council within nato. how does this work? guest 2: it is just a subset within the wider nato organization, a different decision process and deliberation. host: live pictures of some of the events in this hour.

plenty of callers for you gentlemen already. we will go to michigan first. caller: the thing i was thinking about is with sweden in their, sweden has some very nice fighter jets from what i have heard and also when it comes to that deal in ukraine, they still have not got imprint goshen figured out, where he is -- not gotten prigozhin figured out where he is. there may potentially be a war starting in the east and going after moscow. that may bring some of the fighters away from the ukraine border. and potentially even give a better chance for ukraine to potentially get some more footage. those are just my own thoughts. if i was."

zhou and still upset -- i was prigozhin still upset with pu tin that's what i would be doing. guest 1: -- guest 2: reports right now are that he is somewhere in petersburg, which is the center of his base. some reports are that he is in moscow. what is really going on and his relationship with boudin is an open question. -- relationship with putin is an open question. wagner will continue to play a role in african countries and latin america. it will be interesting to see how russian people respond because on the books these mercenary organizations are illegal, but that has not stop this regime from using them to great effect for political all

purposes overseas. to echo the caller's comments, sweden does bring good fighter jets. they also have submarines. they need something to counter russia's missiles in the black city. right now they have -- the black sea. right now they have nothing. host: how concerned is nato about a group like that being possibly right on the border? guest 1: it would raise concerns but it is not exactly new. russia has come through belarus going into ukraine already, so you have to look at belarus as an unofficial ally of russia, and thus a potential venue of attack. it is unlikely that russia would attack anytime soon a baltic state. in the future that might change. there is reason, largely because

they have been so bogged down in ukraine, i think they have their hands full there, but is worth keeping an eye on. there were a lot of predictions when priozhi -- when prigozhin was heading towards moscow, but putin made a phone call and made it go away. there is no obvious candidate to take over for putin even in a coup. prigozhin isn't the candidate.

host: our next caller is on the line for democrats, from washington. caller: i am pretty elderly, but i am still bright and into history especially now. i graduated from the university of washington, a very respectable university, and i majored in general studies, which i wish more students would do more. anyway, i studied russia quite a bit and in the 50's i had to really be careful what i said. my sponsoring professor told me -- you know, the 50's. how would we feel if the philippine islands wanted to go back to spain? proximity is one thing.

it was presented in the 50's as belarus is part of russia. also just luck on the map. that was their breadbasket -- look on the map. that was their breadbasket. host: bring me to the war in ukraine. what is your question? caller: taiwan is also so close to russia. i think we are greedy and not thinking of others. i think that is very important. does anybody see how i am trying to make my point? host: mr. sadler, are we being greedy here? guest 2: i take the caller's point. history does bear out. let's go first with eastern europe. many of those countries going back to imperial russian times and through the first world war

and the rise of e bolshevs, many of these countries there is a reonhey were very adamant about joining nato. they did not want e history repeat. there is a living history and many of these countries of oppression under the soviets and communist domination throughout the cold war. they do not want to go back to that. the united states and western countries have in some cases been too slow to respond. they know well the nature of the russian regime, and the same is true in asia with china. many of those countries have suffered under war, but they also saw what mao did. taiwan, most notably in that regard. a country like south korea, taiwan, the philippines, they came to the united states seeking a military security arrangement that would secure their borders because it was in

their national self-interest. i was not foisted onto them. the -- it was not foisted onto them. the reason these persist is because the goals of these countries align so well. the people see of fear and a threat to their territorial integrity from china. it is not because the united states wants to push them into a more forceful position. only -- host: anything you want to add? guest 2: -- guest 1: i think it is fundamentally wrong to extend u.s. military alliances to anywhere that people ask us to. our interests are not the same.

george kennan, the great statesman, before he died said that expanding nato beyond the cold war states was a mistake of historic proportions, and i think he was right. i think that has been proven out. i think it was a mistake to expand nato into eastern europe, closer and closer to russia. it was predicted by kennan and others. this would juice russia's imperial ambitions, not that this was exactly a direct threat to russia, but it would make russia think "you will take away our little brothers." "you are creeping towards ukraine with nato, and we will take it back before you can take it from us." the nato expansion helped cause the war in ukraine. the united states was not

responsible for that, but we were reckless. they do expansion is something that should have stopped a long time ago. host: regardless of how this war ends, we have said now at some point down the road ukraine will join nato. what does this mean for the next war? guest 1: we have said that the door remains open to ukraine joining. they don't have a date. i think it is far from a sure thing. there are 30 plus members of nato now, and they all have to say yes, including hungry. -- yes, including hungary. i think a lot of the yeses from other countries, including the united states are soft. i would not count on that. host: does nato have an official will end that they -- an

official end they want to see in ukraine? guest 2: the position appears to be, and there are some margins on the edge of this, this return back to the fold territorial integrity of ukraine. there is an interesting history. that is for us a deeper conversation, if colors want to talk about crimea specifically. the treaty and recognized borders of ukraine in '94, restoring that, but it is important for all of the leaders in nato -- it is a war between moscow and kyiv. the voice from kyiv has played very strong in that. it is in our national interest, and that she always reigned

supreme as to how that influences what that condition is. host: plenty of colors for you gentlemen. this is dave in hail, michigan. caller: good morning, gentlemen. a couple general questions. might sound kind of dumb in my respect because i don't keep up too much. is there term limits as these countries joined nato as their elections go can they come and go as they want? are there term limits? agreements that you stay with nato for a certain amount of time? number two, between north and south korea we have a demilitarized zone. would there be conversations of a demilitarized zone as we get more borders around russia?

thank you. guest 1: first on the demilitarized zone, the -- i don't think that is likely, but ukraine has long been seen as a kind of buffer between nato and russia, so i think regardless of whatns, whether or not nato continues to serve that function -- ukraine is spoofing that they are very good at that -- ukraine is proving that they are very good at that/ whether or not we call it dmz or something like that, they are able to be a buffer. what was the second question? host: it was on nato terms, whether countries can come and go. guest 1: there are no terms.

a country could always leave the alliance. you can always just say "we are not doing this anymore, even if o are sti -- even if you are still a member. you could say "as a political matter, we are not applying article five to them." host: what about not living up to obligations? 31 countries are meeting their commitment to spend 2% of gdp on defense. guest 2: it has led to an atrophy of many of these western countries' defense industrial base because they see that they have the nato coat to protect them. they see strength in numbers.

putin's actions in the last year have changed that. you're starting to see countries get on a trajectory to achieve that. it takes years to grow to the 2% where you need to be, so it will need to be something that is watched, but it has been a wake-up call across europe that great power or conflict or major war is a reality in this world not something left in the historical dustbin and they are realizing they don't have the equipment to defend their own borders, let alone keep their obligations in nato. host: this was something donald trump got a lot of attention for, for prodding nato members about their commitments.

was he right? guest 1: he found the more you -- he was saying something pretty similar content wise to what other people had said so that is old. ia agree with brent. there was free writing by nato allies -- free riding by nato allies. i'm not sure there is a lot of follow-through. you had germany say we will spend 300 billion euros extra. that is happening very slowly. they are kicking the can down the road on that. nato said "we will go from a 40,000 ready force made up of different countries'

militaries, and then" silence. i think the reason for all that is twofold. one they loved and said, the united states is still carrying us. they send 20,000 new forces to europe. they are -- we are doing the lion's share of the aid to ukraine. they are bogged down. the threat you are seeing in berlin is not as great as it was in february 2022. host: with the role of yens -- will yens at stoltenberg go down as -- will jens stoltenberg go

down as an effective chief of nato? guest 2: his support and his ushering in finland and hopefully sweden shortly and in the near future, pinning down a track for ukraine to come into nato, i think that is what he will be judged on in the future. it looks like he has been very effective. host: do you agree? guest 1: no. he has an impossible job, to get consensus among 30 members. moving forward on those expansions as we have heard -- i don't agree with him policy wise. he is a big advocate of adding new members. he seems to be interested in putting ukraine in, which i

think is a bad idea. nato expanded to montenegro under his watch, which is an harmful, but it seems pointless. i don't agree with him on policy. you know, he is effective in the things he is doing, but i don't agree with a lot of the things he is doing. host: randy in kentucky. caller: you have a country there, russia, that is about the size and population as the country of mexico. are we just wanting to colonize everyone in the world, or are we so paranoid that we think russia is large enough to take over the world or europe or whatever? are we just trying to make sure we take away all of their security around their country? i don't know. it seems like we are so aggressive on the things that we

do around the world. because so much trouble. maybe it is just me. i thought that we didn't like colonizing the world. i thought we wanted to get away from all of that. guest 2: colonization is expensive, and does not really help national interests very well. i have not seen that certainly in my living memory. the russian regime, soviet and now under putin, the nature of it has in one of brutalism. that has played out. the eastern european allies we have their have called for a more unified approach because they have lived under the yoke of the soviets and russians so they know what they are due dealing with. that is what is going on. it does not get enough play in

english press, but the prime minister from estonia said at the shangri-la dialogue about their experience and what they think the future importance of having ukraine in nato is. they understand the nature of what they are dealing with in the russian strategic culture. when you look across the world and you see reports of u.s. activities, most of it is reactive. that is unfortunate because that leads to waste, bad decisions, and unnecessary suffering. the u.s. needs a more proactive approach that goes after its national interest first and foremost. there is a presence of chinese and -- there is weakening of regimes, and working through proxies in african countries

that are also harmful to u.s. interests. while russia may not have the military might to take over ukraine writ large or threatened western europe, it can threaten wholesale distraction and human misery wi through long-r -- human misery through long-range missiles. we need to eventually make clear to moscow that, that is not something that they can get away with. guest 1: i don't agree with the caller about the word colonialism. i would use a different word, but i agree with the caller's overall direction. there is a dominant idea in the united states that the way we achieve security is essentially to dominate the world militarily, and the way we do that is by setting up military alliances.

there are various arguments about how that stabilizes the world. i think that is a mythology we created for ourselves during the cold war. we don't want to colonize countries in the sense that we are stealing and exploiting their resources. indeed, we are invited to empire by empire. russia has nukes, so that makes it very hard for us to coerce them. they have 1/15 of the gross domestic product of non-us nato, and they have about a fifth or half of the purchasing power of europe and a fourth of the population. this is not a bipolar power.

it is not a near peer arrival of the united states. it is a problem. we need to be clear what a horrible threat they are to your crane, but -- to ukraine, but acting like they will travel around the world iss unrealistic. host: benjamin friedman and brett sadler are with us. our next caller is from tuscaloosa, alabama. caller: mr. friedman just said that the u.s. strength through power is what dominates our ability to to defend the country. who, what, and when was responsible for denying the ukrainians their nuclear weapons?

there was a reason why somebody did that. it was quite a while ago. i was hoping you wouldn't mind addressing that problem. if they had nukes, i don't think there would be a war right now. guest 1: the nukes were the soviet union's which were stationed in ukraine. i'm not sure they could have gotten around that problem, but there was a big diplomatic effort to get them to return the nukes. it was a time when we wanted to control nuclear weapons and keep them bottled up, and they signed an agreement, the good pest memorandum, ukraine did along with the u.s., russia, and the u.k., which said that no one will invade ukraine, and they will give their nukes back to russia. if somebody invades it will be bad. it was called security insurances.

we agreed to go to nato and complain if someone violated it. if they had nukes, would russia have invaded them? probably not. host: on that what if? guest 2: that was the genesis for the '94 agreement that ukraine would give up its nuclear weapons. the acknowledgment was the borders including donbas and crimea with be respected. there is a tight affinity. there were some military arrangements that were not necessarily sustainable. access for the black sea fleet that was russian, the port enables maintenance, and things like that. it is not a tenable agreement. in the end they signed onto a

deal with no heart assurances. they did not get as good a deal as they could have. the rationale for that in '94 is russian and ukrainian people are of the same family. "we would never go to war with each other!" when putin invaded in january of 2022, it was a shock to many in the expatriate community. that family is now broken. that is a testament to wen yu sign an agreement -- to when you sign an agreement, make sure there are assurances. host: what do you think about cluster munitions? guest 1: the problem -- i don't

know exactly what the dud rate is. host: what is a dud rate? guest 1: the bomb does not go off, but it could end up going off later. a lot of questions abandoned them. the u.s. is sending cluster munitions to ukraine because we are running out of other shells to give them, and this is something we can do for them now while we try to produce other stuff they need more, i think. i this kind of a fraud question -- it is kind of a fraught question. if use up the war in ukraine you're supporting war with all of its bad effects. you should bear in mind the destruction you are signing up for. we are not patting them on the

shoulder and being nice. this is a war we are supporting. host: but a lot of trepidation about the use of technical nuclear weapons on the battlefield by putin. guest 1: we don't worry too much about that. the russians are attacking all sorts of civilian targets in ukraine. host: cluster munitions? guest 2: the russians are using them. the dud rate is a threat. cluster munitions in the u.s. arsenal are not to be used, so transferring them to ukraine is not a downside.

this is a weapons system that is not nuclear so would not be escalatory, but it does provide the ukrainian forces another option. i ma navy man. this -- i am a navy man. entrenches there may be some utility -- in trenches there may be some utility. i am skeptical how effective these will be in turning the tide, but as a defensive weapon it should have been delivered a year ago. host: good morning to our next caller. caller: is ukraine going to have an election in 2024? there was a peace agreement that russia had with ukraine, but we decided to deny it.

president biden denied it. the whole reason why russia went into ukraine is they were going to join nato. this is just plain ridiculous. are we going to let china keep their spy bases in cuba? i don't think so. it should be the same way with russia. thank you. host: mr. sadler, do you want to start? guest 2: it is up to the ukrainian people when the next election is. if you go back to 2014, the real genesis of this current conflict, it was because ukraine wanted to join the eu. there was an insinuation that, that could eventually lead to a

joining of nato. it was an economic union that began this in 2014, not nato. as far as the spy bases in cuba, the united states has been aware of that and done nothing. there is also a russian presence there that is a legacy from soviet times. they are going back at least two 200 -- to 2008. the united states government should have been much more forceful about its objection to the russian and chinese presidents in cuba. -- chinese presence in cuba. guest 1: i have seen reporting that ukraine was close to a deal with russia that would involve neutrality early in the war, but then was told to not go forward

without by western powers, but i don't know how solid that is. i don't know how far it got so i don't think it is gospel. it it is something i would like to learn more about in reporting. i am on the side that said nato helped cause the war, but it had a lot to do with the internal dynamics of ukraine, their sense that they had a government there that was hostile to them, the implementation -- it is a bit complicated. the united states signed a security cooperation agreement in the fall of 2021 that did not help matters. it seemed to russia more likely that we were doing a lot of exercises with ukraine. president biden said the other day that when he met putin in geneva, the big request putin had was to pledge not to put ukraine in nato.

biden was bragging in this interview on cnn, saying "and i said no because nato has an open door policy!" i'm not saying that if he had said no, it would have stopped the war at that point, but it is possible. host: a question from mark in massachusetts. "what if poland were to enter the war on its own?" guest 2: what would that do to nato? nato would not invoke any defense of poland, if they got involved on their own. you have countries who all have different interests. i think it is likely that poland sends troops into ukraine. absent direct frontline conflict. other countries that might join

in, but it would not be a nato sanctioned activity. host: article five, is that only if a country is attacked as opposed to if a country since their troops into another country and they are attacked to their? guest 2: that is the understanding of how it has been implemented in the past. guest 1: i agree. it might been who nato or nato leaders to say "poland is on its own here. this is not a nato sanctioned activity." i don't know that poland would do that. they are in range of a lot of russian missiles. host: to bob in raleigh, north carolina. good morning. mr. friedman, earlier they set up a map wit the eastern european countri bdering russia.

those counjoined in with the nazis to attack russia so isn't there some type of historical precedent for the russians to be very leery of these countries? it makes me wonder, if we really did support the russians in world war ii. guest 1: i think the phrase just because they are paranoid doesn't mean they are not after you comes to mind. russia has a long history of being attacked. they do not see themselves as fundamentally secure. i would agree that it is not crazy for them to be concerned about nato coming to their border. my own view is that they were more aggressive than defensive, and they wanted to keep ukraine out of western hands, more as they saw it as a direct threat. they are very unlikely to be invaded, but they have not totally got in over their fear of that. -- totally gotten over their

fear of that. we need to let bygones be bygones. germany joined nato in 1995. i don't think we need to litigate world war ii to talk about this war. host: we talked a little bit about what you are watching for today, but we have already seen news about sweden a timeline, or lack of timeline from ukraine. are there any more big issues that may come out of day two of this summit? guest 1: one thing to watch for is if there are any bilateral pledges from nato members. it is possible to give arms to ukraine or some sort of aid, as a "sorry we didn't give you a date to join nato. we pledge to support you to a certain degree for the foreseeable future."

i don't know if that will come out of the summit, but that is a possibility. guest 2: china -- we haven't talked enough about china. most european countries recognize that china is a threat to free markets, democratic principles, the rules-based world order that everyone has benefited from through the cold war and after the cold war. statements of commitment to improve their defense spending to the 2% goal helps to that end. also growing their munitions production capability is helpful in the fight we are in right now in ukraine. host: dave in florida, time for just one or two more calls. caller: thank you for taking my call. i also wanted to address the global security regarding china. i noticed the other day when

what's her name was in china, they had their big meeting. host: the treasury secretary. caller: yes, treasury secretary ellen, i'm sorry -- treasury secretary yellen, i'm sorry. there was talk of limiting rare minerals from the united states. they said "if you do this, we will do this." one of the things they said is they would limit the sales of rare or metal -- rare earth metals to the united states. one effects the national security. the rare-earth metals and the green thing is a mess.

that is part of this global security that is missing the u.s. up completely. if we got off of that and went back to fuel, we would be better off than pursuing this hopes about green 0 -- this hoax about green energy. wire we doing it? -- why are we doing it? guest 1: there's a lot of risk about the risking china. -- about de-risking china. china is worried about the u.s. cutting off their ability to produce chips. there's a little tit for tat going on over that. my view is that china is not a, threat to europe and we can talk about the global based order into esoteric ideas, but there

is no direct chinese threat to europe. there is not a direct chinese threat to anyone apart from taiwan. htey our growing -- they our growing -- host: list or sadler, you get the -- mr. sadler, you get the final moment. guest 2: many of the european governments the reasons, they are taking the stronger stance is nefarious influence campaigns. that is having an impact on european governance. they are starting to feel it. it is hurting the bottom line. that is the reason why there is an awakening in europe. there is a smart way to go about the economic statecraft. china is dynamic. this is not our father's cold

war. they are inside the free market economy. i have concerns about what secretary yellen did on her trip to beijing, but i think china in 2010 when it first pulled the trigger on using rare-earth for diplomatic purposes with the japanese of the time woke up the united states government. the chinese will not get much in this. microelectronics that they are targeting,v they do not have much in their arsenal if they think that is what will get us to negotiate host: nouns like we could do another round discussion but we will have to ended here for today.

you can find them on twitter, thank you for your time. coming up next we have a discussion with neil king and his book “american ramble” and what he learned while writing the book. announcer: c-span shop because our latest apparels, books, to core, -- the core. we have --decor we have something for every c-span fan. all proceeds go to help our nonprofit. -- we feature nonfiction books

in one place so you can discover new authors and ideas. each week we are making it convenient for you with critically acclaimed authors discussing history, -- announcer: the c-span bookshelf podcast makes it easy for you to listen to all of c-span's podcasts that feature books all in one place. you can listen to podcast and different ideas. you can listen to multiple episodes with critically acclaimed authors covering current events and culture and other topics. book notes plus and q&a is included plus others. listen to c-span bookshelf podcast feed today you can find it on the free c-span now mobile video app or where ever get your

podcasts and on our website c-span.org/podcasts. ♪ announcer: c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your view of what is happening in washington live and on demand. keep up with live events, proceedings, hearings, and also stay current with the latest episode of washington journal and find a scheduling information for c-span tv networks and c-span radio plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now app is available in e google store today. wnload it free. or anywhere that you get your -- download it free today. c-span now, your front row seat to washington anytime, anywhere. ♪ announcer: the 1/18 -- 118th

congressional directory is available now. it has the president's cabinet, federal agencies and state governors and others. scan your code on the right to order your copy today or go to c-span shop.org. every purchase helps support our nonprofit operation. ♪ announcer: since 1979, in partnership -- c-span has provided complete coverage with the halls of congress from the house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefings, and committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat to how issues are debated and decided. with no commentary, no interruptions, and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. announcer: washington journal

continues. host: neil king stepped out of the front door of his home not far from where we are in capitol hill to go for a long walk. and in about six days he traveled 330 miles and ended up in new york city. he has a book that he wrote about this called “american ramble” and what he learned " why did you do it? guest: i wanted to go out right after covid, and what we saw in 2020 and experience of full spring and -- the founding swath of america, washington and new york city. i met a lot of people on the way and caught up with people about

our history and the stories the landscape told. host: we can show you what the route looked like it was a roundabout path we washington dc, maryland, pennsylvania into new jersey and into new york. the book is called american ramble, of walk of memory and renewal. it came out this spring. what was the memory? what was the renewal? guest: it was about my memory and my renewal. i had a cancer bout and we all have personal struggles and it was about overcoming some of that but it was investigating our national memories who it is that we build statues for and who it is that we recognize. some of the heroes that we have forgotten and overlooked and the prospect of there being a national renewal at a time of a lot of challenges. i really wanted to go out and mix it up with people that could give me hint about those things. host: you're walking in the wake

of the january 6 attack on the capital. amid a contentious 2022 election season. how much did those two issues, with people you met on the walk? guest: a fair bit. i met a great guy named ted outside of his driveway he said what are you doing? are you coming from? i said maryland i just came from my house from the i am on a walk to new york. he looked at me he was an african-american in new york and i said this is a walk of renewal and healing. and he said you're going to try to get the nation in tune. and i said that is not putting -- that is putting a lot of pressure on me. but i was not out to quiz people on political things i was there to be interested in what interested them even if i was only with them for 15-20 minutes to immerse myself in their world and that was a voluble exercise.

host: a ride last week in usa today has a larger write up on the book itself. the headline i walked from d.c. to new york city and i found my faith in america restored along the way written in the july 4 week. what restored your faith in america? guest: a lot of it is we sit around looking at our screens with what were things are being delivered in twitter, facebook, or whatever tv channel you watch. but there is a different story that unfurls out in the landscape. there is a stream of basic rooted goodness out there. i am not saying one is versus the other, or that everybody is delusional watching tv, but i think it is really good to keep in touch with the simpler things and the more rounded -- grounded things.

in my case, this was a month long walk where i just immersed myself in that storyline. i guess that you cannot help but people being refreshed when you do that. host: neil king here to talk about his book “american rambl”" . you can call in, if you are in the central time zone, (202) 748-8000, and if you are in the mountain pacific time zones you can call (202) 748-8000. guest: i had appointments to

meet people along the way and i had my lodging planned out. it is different then what one might think of with ramble. it is directional with wondering, but that being said there was a lot of serendipity. i had a lot of free hours every day where things just happen. i fished, crossed rivers by canoe or kayak, i met with various people that came up along the way. in some ways, that was kind of the ramble aspect to it. host: have you always been a big walker? guest: i have this is the biggest walk i have taken. it was not so much be impressed by this physical exercise of walking between these two places it was much more of an intellectual or spiritual endeavor. there's the appalachian trail and a lot of other big huge long hikes that people take. i would not put that in this category per se. it is more of an immersion and

extraordinary fascinating stretch of territory between my house and new york city that i have crossed a billion times. you may well have too. people raise up and down i-95 but i wanted to see the real world which is hidden and that is what i found. host: what was hidden? guest: i walked across into lancaster county where a lot of the amish and mennonite individuals live. i met school kids in the back of the school playing softball. it was an amazing sight. i went in there into the playground and watch them play softball. they came and we had a great discussion with them and their teacher. they invited me inside of their school house and they saying a couple of hymns about the afterlife. it was just an amazing stretch of an hour or so.

i have been in touch with them. i have spent a number of other days to go out and meet with them. that is very much a hidden world i wondered into. host: we been showing our viewers pictures and video you took along the way. and they him singing there and you watching it. the phone lines if you enjoy the conversation, in eastern or central time zone, it is (202) 748-8000 or (202) 748-8001 if you are in the pacific or mountain regions. th would be a jaundiced view of the country. resentment or envy or bitterness. as they looked at politicians with the john decide. -- jaundice eye. did it give you that view?

guest: no it did not. when you are out walking small roads and through the countryside, you are meeting people rooted in a different world than what i would call a jaundiced one. it is people who are very much involved in their endeavors. i met with the family for instance in pennsylvania in lancaster county who lived in the same house on the same form for 10 generations. the guys great, great, great, great grandfather had bought the place in the 1760's before we were even a country. this is not a family i would remotely describe as jaundiced. i met a lot of people who are very immersed in remembering our past and resurrecting in a way -- our memories and the things that had begun to wash away. that is also a very worthwhile endeavor. host: this is connie on the lines from florida. you are on the line with neil

king. caller: yes, good morning. i saw a lot about your book on different media, npr and etc.. i watched the cvs -- cbs morning interview with you. and i wanted to ask the way the reporter set it up there was quite an epiphany once you hit the new jersey turnpike. you call at the center of commerce of the capitalist world or something. and i wanted to know more information about what the motions of that -- emotions you felt in that more natural and human parts of your trip versus seeing the new jersey turnpike. guest: that is such a great question. the whole, my main purpose of walking out the door is putting aside distractions and paying attention to the particulars of every moment if i could.

and to really watch one particular spring unfold as i walked north. and in doing that, it brought about so many of these moments of unexpected joy and really super simple things. that little clip that you mention, i came into this town right along the jersey turnpike, i was going to hike up this river to go under the jersey turnpike. the people they are said he would not be able to do that there is no way a walker can go there. they lent me a kayak and i kayaked up through this quite ancient brook between warehouses for amazon and all the rest, -- and 12 lanes of jersey turnpike. it was a great blending of natural beauty, that docks, geese, turtles and all of that. these things have been there for thousands and tens of thousands of years. a different human world. that was part of what i found that these things are

interconnected. there's a lot of wondrous things just off of the stuff we had built that might not be so appealing. that might be part of the hidden world i was talking about. host: amelia is next from maryland. good morning. you are on with neil king. caller: good morning mr. king. it is nice hearing you speak about the wonders and beautiful places across our country. i always get this tinge of kind of like -- i don't know, it just bothers me all of the things that are going on in our country and the thing is there's going to be beauty in nature and beauty in every country as we ramble across it. but for those of us that are progressive and want to see the country, just be in a better place. it is hard for us to feel that joy and get that connection with nature when we see that, blind,

we are constantly destroying our him -- that, one, we are constantly destroying our economy. -- and i want to see what your views are on that. did you talk to any people along the way or was there a connection with nature but tuned in a little bit late so i did not hear all of what you said. guest: i really appreciate that question. i am not trying to argue that all of the stuff that is legitimately worrisome is not out there, i also have a lot of concerns that you just expressed. i guess part of my message is one way to defray that and create a certain sort of space for emotional peace at times, it is not just a nature thing, some of it is going out into the social world and putting your

trust in people that you don't necessarily know. expanding your own circles of where you might belong. i spent a lot of -- i was walking by maryland long roads and slow lanes. this is not per se a nature walk, it was much more of a human social walk. so i was walking through towns, past houses, speaking to people as i went. during that span of time, i was on the road for a little less than a month. i made 10 or 15 legitimate friends way outside of my normal sphere of friends own. people with very -- friend zone. people with very different beliefs and i have stayed in touch with those people. for me it was an act of expanding my citizenship and building more of a sense of trust in the aspects of our country that can be eroded if you are immersed in the news

that you are talking about. again, i am not saying it is not a legitimate concern. host: speaking of the news you have a background in reporting. where did you work? guest: i worked at the wall street journal for basically 20 years. i covered things all over the world and to presidential campaigns here in the united states. i wrote a lot about the u.s. economy and it's good and bad sides. a lot of inequality issues with global economics -- and i was there at the wall street journal until i left in the beginning of 2017. host: did you find being a reporter the man on the street help you become the man on the street? guest: yes. -- profoundly so. i think a lot of people could do a walk exactly like this any gender, race, and i could go on. -- on to some length about that

aspect. but also being a reporter and having traveled around the world is much as i have existing kind of natural and a little easier. host: eddie from tucson, arizona wants to know that not being on twitter for 20 days help with this restoration in faith of america. guest: i did. i went on twitter and i have a whole thread that people can look up under my twitter feed. it is all 76 or so tweets on the way that were my little excursion along the way. a lot of people at the time found quite magical because we were just coming out of the first winter of covid. very few people were kind of out and about and on the road. i walked out my door right after i got my second vaccine. the world for that brief spell was opening up again. i did not completely disengage in that way, but on the other hand i was not walking down the

road or following things are twitter -- on twitter or following the news and i found that relieving. host: jerry in austin, massachusetts. you are on with neil king. caller: yes i am a disabled combat veteran over 30 years service active duty. i came in when i was 17. i have heart hearing, hearing aids, cannot see that well and i cannot understand what this great man is trying to say. his voice is garbled, the call ends are garbled, i do not have a computer to talk to c-span. host: i tell you what something you can do is perhaps by this book “american ramble” or check it out at the library. you will have several hundred pages of the explanation of his journey that neil king took. you can read that and he will give you a sense of this block of memory and renewal that

would be my suggestion for you. waynesburg, pennsylvania. good morning. caller: hello i just wanted to disagree a little bit with the woman who called a couple calls ago. i also have a progressive point of view, and yes, it can be very discouraging to see the many problems such as racism and how we are not much responding to crime. but at this moment, i am next to a nice stream with my dog in rural pennsylvania. and like your guest said, it is so good for the sole to get out and effort --soul to get out and appreciate nature. and i think we have to decouple from all of the negative news sometimes. i do not blame the media like so many people do, but what is on

in the news is not always what is happening in our everyday lives. host: do you listen to c-span radio when you go on your walks? caller: often i do, yes. on the radio app i do. i have listened to c-span ever since you guys were born in the 70's or something. host: 79. neil king, go ahead. guest: i am in full agreement with what he is saying. i am not being pollyanna-ish by saying the real world is only world you will see when you look alongside a stream, but i think there is a counter narrative at a different story where you go out and immerse yourself in a long stretch of the american landscape. pretty much i would argue that most of the country, you will find a lot of trusting people, giving people, you know i have

found some people that were less that way and i write about that in the book. i also write about some of the concerns, environmental concerns that i have an darker aspects of our national history which i think a lot of us need to be attuned to. i explore all events of this is not just that i go out and grin in the sunlight sort of book. it kind of explores the full picture. host: what happens along roadways in life. i want you to expand on this paragraph you wrote in your wall street journal write up on the trip. you wrote there have been 400 or so generations of humans since the dawn of civilized nation but just 10 have -- past the age of steam have displayed our life which is why it taps into our earlier selves. you begin to understand why the prophets were all walkers, and the encounters with the single

stranger so often happened along the roadways. host: you know at -- guest: you know i think that is such an invaluable thing to wait out. our lives were upended either railroads when they came about in the 1830's. we have become so attuned to speed. going everywhere by car. as i point out in the book and thought about on the walk, walking is about 20 times slower than driving. hundreds of times more tactically meaningful and really spiritually uplifting over time. particularly as you add one day to the next. a lot of the encounters that i had with people along the way did have this sort of parable style quality. almost an illuminated quality about the people sharing morsels of wisdom that really altered my thoughts as i went. suggesting friends of theirs that i should meet a week down the road.

and you do begin, i did not still -- say that i started feeling like a prophet, but you start to understand why so many of the early holy books were written about walks like that essentially. those personal encounters along the roadway can be so meaningful. host: a couple quick fire questions for you in twitter. james, did you stay in hotels? guest: no i did not. i have a garbled voice because i got lyme disease because i was bitten i a tick. and so i stayed in airbnb's, hotels and that sort of thing. host: did you get lyme disease on this walk? guest: no it is in the previous events. host: another question what kind of footwear did you use? guest: i get a lot of footwear

questions. i used lone peak shoes. they are great and faithful. i just have one pair. host: the guest sounds like he has two ears and one mouth and knows how to use them accordingly. own lines if you want to join in and chat with neil king. (202) 748-8000 if you are in eastern or central time zones. (202) 748-8001 four mountain or pacific time zones. he is with us for the next 30 minutes or so. we have our next caller. go ahead. caller: good morning how are you doing guys? host: good morning we are doing good. you are on with neil king. caller: you had a lot of colors this morning. let me ask you, did you find a difference in your travels between red states and blue states and places where you had nice, regular people in them where you had a bunch of

piss drinkers. guest: [laughter] it is interesting. when you go out in those states there is no such thing as those. when you walk through this box, you are in mainly red areas because once you get out of the country those areas tend by and large go on that side of the spectrum most of my walk really did take place if you want to use those distinctions in so-called red america . but the distinction to me -- was important of who settled first in those areas. the german-american areas, amish

mennonite, areas settled by quakers, presbyterians outside of philadelphia. it is just really amazing as you go at a slow, three-mile in our pace. you can see those differences in the way the houses are designed or the villages are designed or the way people interact with you. those early imprints still stick. it is fascinating to look at up close. host: renee walks -- rights he walked a small area of america. do you plan to walk other areas of the nation? guest: i do. i am working on a book concept now that would take me to the lead up of the two 50th birthday of the country. -- 250th birthday of our country and i would like to call it our land which do shorter but deeper dives into wider sections of it.

i am really open to the interesting portals and entryways to this part of a country in doing that. host: over this past weekend, there were recommendations for walks, rambles you can take on your own. what were some of those? guest: get is fascinating. i am now in new jersey not far -- we built on the east coast so many canals during the 18 and 20's and 30's. and many of them have pathways along there. the delaware -- the cnl path, it goes from washington all the way to pittsburgh. and they are -- and elsewhere in the world there are so many amazing trails. i really do urge anybody that feels physically fit enough to at least once in your life build a trip, even if it is only three or four days around a walk in someplace that is amenable to that. there is something that is life

altering about seeing the world at that pace and interacting with the people at that pace. it is so markedly different than the way we normally travel now. host: william in virginia good morning you are on with neil king. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span and thank you for your -- thank you mr. king, i just wanted to say real quickly, i will try to be quick. this is one of the first times c-span is nonpolitical mostly. that is awesome because those mornings c-span gives me quite riled up. but beyond that, i want to just say -- point out that i am blessed in a situation where i can walk to the store in 10 minutes or i can jump in the car and drive to the store in five minutes. or i can walk two minutes to the bus and wait two minutes for the

bus and be back in 20 minutes. so i just wanted to extrapolate on -- i actually personally wanted to ask mr. king how do you get to the grocery store? that is all. thank you. guest: thank you very much i live in a very pedestrian area in washington dc near the capital. i could live my entire life on foot. i could walk to a multitude of different kinds of grocery stores. i can walk to c-span and walked to the library of congress, the smithsonian museums. that is slightly a different pitcher than most people in america face, but the ability to walk to the store is a really great one to have. in terms of this, i will note on the political front, i went out to get a sense of america where we are now. i did not on the other hand go out to quiz people about politics. i met people from all different political insulation --

persuasions including so-called trump people who are incredibly generous to me. and other people whose politics i did not know who were a little ungenerous. so it comes in all stripes. and most importantly, i found what difference it makes to just literally stand on the same patch of ground with somebody of whatever political persuasion and you find other aspects of that day and moment of your life to have in common even if you might be separated by the way you see the world politically. host: living here on capitol hill, how often do you make the stroll down the nation's front yard to the national mall? guest: multiple times a week. i live 1.1 miles from the capital. i walk up the mall all the time or run up it for that matter. it is one of the blessings of living in washington. it has so many of these great,

you know, i can take a mile run to the washington monument and go see the lincoln memorial and all of those things. guest: how often do you try to stop and chat with those like you did on this 330 mile ramble? guest: less often than i did on this block. but when you're out on foot, cars contain us and section us off. now that i have written the book and i am out driving back and forth between washington and new york doing all kinds of book events i did a big one last night in princeton, i am astonished by how the driving leaves no residual memories behind. while the walk i can talk about for days on end with all the people i met. it is just a different type of time walking time versus driving time. it has a different richness about it. host: last call, stephen from

brooklyn, good morning you are on with neil king. caller: hello, how are you? host: go ahead. caller: i find this fascinating. i hitchhiked the course of united states three times from the east coast to the west coast, i did it three times. the very last time i did it, i had three dollars in my pocket. that was it. i had to get from san francisco to new york. i got picked up by two girls who were going to connecticut. we had the time of our lives. when they dropped me off in manhattan, they gave me five dollars. so you know i have seen and done it. it is a fascinating journey. it is a fascinating journey. there is nothing like it. so when i hear mr. king talking about walking, i am thinking, well, you know maybe i was cheating a little bit because i had my thumb in the air, but it

was the early 70's. it was a different time. then when -- adolph the third it up a hitchhiker and was murdered by the hitchhiker everything changed. all the laws in all the 50 states changed. i am not sure if it is still legal or not, but you're supposed to be on the on ramp when you go to the washington bridge you cannot be on the roadway. i do not know if that is still the law or how effective that is. but yeah, it was a great time and it was a different time. i was in my teens. i'm going to be 70 now. i still remember those days like yesterday. like it just happened. i had the time of my life and it was a lot of fun. host: thank you for the call in brooklyn. neil king, it hitchhiking versus hiking. guest: i really appreciate what he just said.

i am a big fan of brooklyn to buy the way. i write about that in the book, the demise of hitchhiking. i also hitchhiked across the country. there was a time where we would put our trust in the stranger and they would put their trust in pulling over to pick you up. i have a lot of amazing experiences like he was recounting. it really is a shame that that kind of thing has gone by the wayside. we farmed out the hospitality industry to an industrial sector called the hospitality industry. and we have kind of stopped providing it to strangers ourselves in a way and it is an unfortunate thing. i appreciate the fact that this left such an impression on him because i also had a lot of those adventures back in that day. i guess may be the equivalent of what you c do now is not sticking your thumb out, it is going for a long walk like this. it is a similar act of trust. host: the book is “american ramble” a block of memory and

renewal. the author is neil king. you can find him on in king d.c. or online at neil king junior.com. thank you for joining us. guest: thank you it was a great pleasure. host: we have 20 minutes left on the program before the house gavels in. to that time we turn to our open form where if you have public policy or a political issue to talk about. the numbers are on your screen. go ahead and start calling in and we will be right back. ♪ announcer: c-span's campaign 22 for coverages your front row seat to the election. watch for candidates on the campaign trail with announcements, meet and greets, speeches, and events to make up your own mind. campaign 2020 four on the c-span networks. c-span now are our free video

mobile app or any time online at c-span.org. c-span your unfiltered view of politics. ♪ announcer: listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio just got easier. tell your smart speaker play c-span radio and listen to washington journal daily at 7:00 a.m. eastern, important russian will hearings and other public affairs events throughout the day we days from 5 p.m. to 9 p.m. eastern catch washington today for a fast report of the stories of the day. this into c-span anytime just tell your smart speaker lay c-span radio. c-span powered by cable. ♪ announcer: since 1979, in partnership with the cable industry, c-span has provided complete coverage of the halls of congress from the house and senate floors to congressional hearings, party briefings, and

committee meetings. c-span gives you a front row seat to how issues are debated and decided with no commentary, no interruptions, and completely unfiltered. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. ♪ announcer: if you ever miss any of the c-span's coverage, you can find it anytime online at c-span.org. videos of key hearings, debates, and other events feature markers that guide you into interesting news highlights. these markers appear on the right-hand side of your screen when you play select videos. this timeline helps you easily get in idea of what was debated and decided in washington. scroll through and spend a few minutes on c-span's points of interest. announcer: washington journal continues. host: it is time for open form ending our program any public

policy issue or political issue you want to talk about you can go ahead and call in. democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, independents (202) 748-8002. as you are calling in, here is where we are in capitol hill today. the house and senate coming in at 10:00 a.m. eastern you will see the house gavel-to-gavel coverage here on c-span and the senate on c-span two. a high-profile hearing happening at 10 a.m. eastern with christopher wray the fbi director at testifying before the house judiciary committee. we will show you that on c-span3.you can also watch on c-span.org and the free c-span now video app. members starting to arrive in that room for the house judiciary committee on capitol hill. in the meantime, some news this morning. first on the domestic front, the numbers out on the inflation consumer price index that is the measure of inflation in the past

month. consumer prices in america rose at the slowest pace since march of 2021 showing signs of cooling in juneau. that is from the bureau of labor statistics this morning. they say it cpi rose .2% last month and 3% over the prior year in june. a slighted celebration for may's .1% month over month increase meta-slowdown compared to the months 4% annual gain. good news on the inflation they are. and overseas president biden is that the key nato summit and he spoke this morning while standing next to ukrainian president volodymyr zelenskyy about efforts to aid ukraine in its ongoing war against russia. this is some of what he said earlier this morning. >> you just concluded the first meeting of nato ukraine meeting counsel. all of our allies agreed that

ukraine's future lies in dado. that is not as a -- lies in nato. that is not a surprise to any of us and i hope that is not a surprise to you, mr. president. -- we have a membership action plan to create a path to nato membership while ukraine continues to make progress on necessary forms. we are not waiting for the process to be finished to make the long term commitments that we are making to ukraine's security. vladimir and i, i shouldn't be so friendly here, mr. zelenskyy and i talked about the kind of guarantees we can make in the meantime. when i was in ukraine, and when we met in other places. today, the long-term commitments we are making are backed up by the notion and in the meantime we are going to provide security to ukraine for its needs against

any aggression that may occur. today at members of the g7 are launching a joint declaration of support for ukraine to make it clear that hours of work will last long into the -- that hours support will last long into -- our support will last long into the future. this has long-term security commitments with and to ukraine. we will help them build a strong and capable defense across land, air, and sea. which will be a force of stability in the region that will deter against any and all threat. i want to thank my fellow g7 leaders and president zelenskyy for the work to make this happen. i think it is a powerful statement, powerful statement our commitment to ukraine as it defends its freedom today and rebuild the future. we will be there as long as that takes. again, i thank all of my colleagues for their support for this. [applause] host: that is

president biden a little bit earlier this morning. now, our open forum. any topic you want to talk about we will take your calls until the house comes in in about 17 minutes. doug indiana, democrat good morning. caller: good morning to you. i just want to talk about a little bit about the concern of our social security. i understand that there is a lot of concern there. i was just wondering from the very first day that somebody begins to work, if they could not have a program to where instead of social security being taken out, there be a private investment with the banking system to be where the money would be taken out for their retirement age and still -- instead of social security. how something like that would even get started i think to me would be a great idea. that everybody have their own individual savings account that

they would build over years of their time of them i met -- time of employment. that is all i have to say. host: should they be able to draw from the savings account before retirement age if they need to? caller: i would say not because you did not withdraw from social security so why withdraw from a private investment like that that will benefit you in the later years of your life. host: that is dug in indiana this is paul in florida. it is open forum. caller: good morning thank you and the c-span for their service. i would like to make a few statements on politics and service if you will allow me. public servants, servants who serve their constituency to separate those who are more sincere and those who are less sincere, we need a new law that says those that claim to serve us should not earn more than the

median income of those they serve. i will end it there. host: that is paul in florida. this is roberta in california. democrat good morning. caller: good morning. i am fascinated with the senate, their hair is on fire discussing the pga merger when there is a mass merger and acquisition of health care which is already international embarrassment due to the great expense and poor quality of our health care. they are consolidating health care systems, laboratory systems, hospital systems, it goes on and on. soon it will be a juggernaut. besides all of the suffering, rural health care will really a challenge because a business of that magnitude will not be

concerned with the care of the rural areas of the country. host: that pga liv golf merger that you mentioned the hearing happening yesterday before the senate subcommittee on the investigations on capitol hill. we covered the hearing and here is a minute or two of that exchange between the pga tour or member discussing dashboard member discussing some of the -- saudi funding of the live tour. >> i honestly believe that our government with both president bush, president obama, our military and the billions -- brilliant seals did their job. anyone who is involved in that thing has answered justice. i go on to say that with my own children i thought it has been incredibly important to them to understand that because someone has the same skin color or the same religion as those, as the

people that were involved and the criminals involved in 9/11, that does not mean that we hate them. we are raised in the united states of america and we have different values. we look at things differently. when i grew up, in our house we had a sign that said no irish need apply. that is something my mother -- it was a taste of what it was like because of religion or heritage, you did not get something you deserved. i am very proud a friend of mine once said that my second son said that he had never, ever heard me say one negative remark about any middle eastern, any muslim religion, anything like that. i am very proud of that. i think america stands for something different.

i think if someone does a crime, you go after them. for this crime, it is death. i absolutely -- i believe that our special services did their job. i am grateful to them, but i refuse to describe a whole other people because they had common religion or skin color. i'm not doing that under any condition. host: if you want to watch the full hearing it took place yesterday. you can do so on our website at c-span.org. it is open forum democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, independents (202) 748-8002. we will be an open forum of for the next 10 minutes until the house of representatives comes in for the day. this is rick in nebraska. independent. good morning. caller: good morning i have

several comments. what is regards to joe biden leaking military secrets about the ammunition standard. i also would like to comment on the race in america. i live in nebraska. host: can i ask about your first comment, are you talking about the supply of ammunition and sending cluster munitions to ukraine? is that the story you are referring to? caller: yes, and the other thing i would like to speak about is race in america. my dad took me on trips to the deep south. we were someplace down south and there was into water fountains once and for whites only, i walked up to the black one only and my dad grabbed me and explained to me what was going on. we saw the cotton fields, we went to florida's -- to what you

would call low income housing. it affected me to make me the person i am today. i'm not concerned with skin color, i only want people to treat me the way i treat them. that is the deal in america. you treat somebody how you want to be treated. that is all i have to say. thank you. host: that is rick in nebraska. this is eric in houston, texas. republican good morning. caller: hey good morning how are you doing today? host: doing well what is on your mind? it is open forum it. caller: yeah, so, i just wanted to say, i do think i am really opposed in the cluster bombs going to ukraine. i think they have got a very high rate of duds that inns up hurting civilians down the line -- that end up hurting

civilians down the line. i am here at a restaurant this last friends, and -- we need to negotiate a peaceful settlement with ukraine and russia. it has been a little scary, absolutely, right? host: that is eric. this is tony in michigan. independent. good morning. caller: good morning thank you for taking my call. two years ago president biden said that we have been spending $2 million a day every for over 20 years in afghanistan and can no longer report it. now we are saying we are in ukraine for as long as it takes. i don't understand the two things coming from the same place.

have a great day thank you. host: paul riverview florida. independent. good morning. caller: good morning i have a comment about the gentleman with the social security idea. great idea, but however, the people coming into the workplace today starting out our back feeding through social security to pay for the checks that are coming out now. the money a new employee starts putting in the system is not set aside for when they retire, it is back paying the people that are already retired. just wanted to make that comment. everybody have a good day. let's go america. thank you. host: five minutes before the house comes in and five minutes before if you had over to c-span3 you can watch the hearing before the house judiciary committee during fbi investigator christopher wray. you can see their reporters in this live shot and the swearing

in shot of the fbi director. the members of congress and staff starting to take their seat. that will be live on c-span3 and about five minutes. you can also watch on c-span.org and the free c-span now video app. in the meantime open form and till the in this is gina in the yellow hammer state. republican good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for having me today. i wanted to say, i did not understand why america doesn't put ukraine and taiwan into nato to deter the attacks from china and putin. they should have done ukraine before the war started. number two, they need to keep it quiet and just put him in, taiwan, and china would back off

of taiwan. these people would have to pay into nato, not us, but we have to pay. i have a problem with that and somebody needs to explain it. thank you. host: when it comes to adding new members to nato every nation has to agree and it has to go through the -- caller: the countries that don't agree like china and russia should -- host: no i mean every nato country. caller: it's china and russia in nato? host: no ma'am. caller: ok, good. just put them in. host: that is gina in alabama. open phones if you want your voices heard and you have topics you want to talk about it is democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, independents (202) 748-8002. one other hearing that you have probably heard about yesterday, it is for the next joint chief

of the staff chairman general charles brown met with the senate armed services committee yesterday for a confirmation hearing. his confirmation comes from the washington post, they rights at a contentious time where -- pentagon leaders are accused of focusing too heavily on socialist issues at the expense of national security. defense officials have countered that the u.s. military remains the most people fighting force in the world saying its efforts to promote diversity have made the institution stronger i expanding the full of people will who can serve. and you can watch that on c-span.org. bidens pick -- that was a headline of the washington post article. democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, independents (202) 748-8002. this is mike in illinois.

independent. good morning. caller: yeah, a couple things i wanted to talk about. the banking problem, there is a thing that banks call fractional lending. if they have a million dollars in the bank they can lend at out 33 times plus the interest. so on that $1 million they can bring into million dollars a month in interest alone with fractional lending. that is one phrase that has been talked about. the other one is promissory notes. when you take out a loan you signed one that vague, the bank deposits it into their bottom line. basically it creates cash. you also pay it out over time. i believe you get paid twice, the bank gets paid twice. another thing is, to -- lawyers

on recently did not return their clients money in settlement. i wonder how prevalent that is across the country. that is another thing. excuse me thank you, c-span. host: mark in silver spring, maryland. lime for democrats. caller: quick i would like to make a point about mr. trump's claim of privilege jurisdiction over secret documents. there is a problem, there are other -- the other former president that lied, named obama, bush, carter, and -- how will you divvy up the secret documents? do you have an executive privilege roundtable?

do they quibble over which document goes to which former president? it sounds like the marx brothers comedy skit. it makes no sense and why not have all the former president's quibble over secret documents? they are just as entitled apparently is mr. trump thinks he is. and thank you for your time. host: that is mark. he is our last caller on washington journal today because the house is about to come in. a reminder fbi director christopher wray is getting set to testify before the house judiciary committee. he span three is where you can watch that -- c-span3 is where you can watch that. that doesn't for us here though. we will see you here again tomorrow.

have