CSPAN - Washington Journal 08/13/2025

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 13, 2025 07:00-10:00 - CSPAN

02:59:50

Washington Journal 08/13/2025

Participants

Main

mimi geerges

cspan 35:56

Appearances

benny johnson

01:02

brian lamb

cspan 01:46

chris van hollen

sen/d 00:57

karoline leavitt

admin 03:05

muriel bowser

00:53

tammy bruce

03:39

ted johnson

deadline 04:13

Clips

al green

rep/d 00:08

amy larson

00:24

ana cabrera

msnow 00:20

donald j trump

admin 00:12

mike gravel

sen/d 00:13

patty murray

sen/d 00:16

rima laibow

00:07

sean duffy

admin 00:08

Callers

tom in texas

callers 00:18

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Coming up on C-SPAN's Washington Journal, we'll take your calls and comments live.
		Then we discuss President Trump's approach to fiscal policy with Axio senior economics reporter Courtney Brown.
		And deadlines, Ted Johnson discusses President Trump's visit to the Kennedy Center.
		Also, the Atlantic Council's Matthew Kroenig on changes at the State Department, President Trump's upcoming meeting with his Russian counterpart, and Israel's new offensive plans in Gaza.
		Washington Journal starts now.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
		It's Wednesday, August 13th.
		National Guardsmen have begun arriving in Washington, D.C., part of an 800-person mobilization ordered by the president on Monday to crack down on crime.
		In a news conference on Monday, President Trump mentioned the cities of Los Angeles, New York, Baltimore, Chicago, and Oakland as possible future targets for similar measures.
		We're taking your calls, texts, and posts on crime this morning, asking, How worried are you about crime where you live?
		Here are the phone numbers: Republicans, 202748-8001.
		Democrats, 202-748-8000, and Independents, 202748-8002.
		You can send a text to 202-748-8003.
		Include your first name in your city-state.
		And we're on social media, facebook.com/slash C-SPAN and X at C-SPANWJ.
		Welcome to today's Washington Journal.
		There's a few polls that just came out by YouGov, so we'll go over those.
		And this was the question: How big of a problem, if any, do you think crime is in major U.S. cities?
		67% said it was a major problem, and 23% said minor, 3% not at all.
		If you break that down by politics, you'll see here that the major problem for Democrats goes down by 53%, still a majority, but less.
		Republicans, 90% said it was a major problem, independents at 63.
		Then a minor problem or not a problem was 35%.
		For Democrats, 5% for not a problem.
		Republicans, only 7% said it was a minor problem, and only 1% of Republicans said it was not a problem.
		Independents, those numbers are 26 and 4%.
		They also took a poll asking about D.C. specifically, and the question is: do you approve or disapprove of putting Washington, D.C. police under federal control and deploying National Guard troops to the city?
		This was just taken after the announcement on Monday.
		21% strongly approve.
		38% strongly disapprove.
		And again, we'll look at that broken out by politics.
		Only 2% of Democrats strongly approve of that move.
		68% of Democrats strongly disapprove on the Republican side.
		52% strongly approve.
		And 5% strongly disapprove.
		Well, yesterday, White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt was talking about actions that newly deployed law enforcement officers took on Monday night in D.C. Here she is.
karoline leavitt ▲ ● ▼		On another matter, yesterday, President Trump took bold action to finally restore law and order right here in our nation's capital.
		The president declared a crime emergency in the District of Columbia, federalized the D.C. Police Department, and mobilized the D.C. National Guard to end violent crime in our nation's capital.
		As part of the president's massive law enforcement surge, last night, approximately 850 officers and agents were surged across the city.
		They made a total of 23 arrests, including multiple other contacts.
		Last night, these arrests consisted of homicide, firearms offenses, possession with intent to distribute narcotics, fare evasion, lewd acts, stalking, possession of a high-capacity magazine, fleeing to elude in a vehicle, no permits, driving under the influence, reckless driving, and a bench warrant.
		A total of six illegal handguns were seized off of District of Columbia streets as part of last night's effort.
		This is only the beginning.
		Over the course of the next month, the Trump administration will relentlessly pursue and arrest every violent criminal in the district who breaks the law, undermines public safety, and endangers law-abiding Americans.
		President Trump will not be deterred by soft-on-crime Democrats and media activists who refuse to acknowledge this rampant violence on our streets.
		He is going to make our nation's capital the most beautiful and safe city on earth, just as he promised on the campaign trail.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I'm taking your calls this morning.
		How worried are you about crime where you live?
		We'll start with Eugene and Boston Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		Thank you.
		I'm very curious as to why C-SPAN has not had the mayor of the city of Boston, Michelle Wu on, to talk to her about crime fighting.
		In the city of Boston, she has dropped the murder rate to the lowest level since 1957.
		Why isn't that national news?
		Why isn't it being talked about more?
		Why hasn't she been on C-SPAN to explain to the American people how she's accomplished that?
		All Donald Trump is doing is smoking mirrors to redirect and divert attention, controlling the narrative.
		You know, crime is bad all over America.
		I think most people know that.
		But America is a nation that was given birth through crime.
		So it's really not a listening to me.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Eugene, what is the mayor of Boston saying about how she's been able to do that?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What are the lessons learned from Boston?
unidentified		Okay, but why don't you have her on C-SPAN to tell the American people that?
		I'll tell you what she did.
		She didn't put troops in the street.
		She didn't put National Guards in the street.
		What she did is that she showed people how much she cares.
		When she first took over as mayor, crime was out of control.
		But what she did is that every time it was a crime involving a young person, she was there.
		She showed up.
		She gave young people more safe space, safe spaces.
		In the city of Boston, if you're in school, you can go to the science museum, to the art museum.
		You can go to places like that anytime for free.
		Also, what she did is that through the inner city, through areas that were a little problematic, she made all the buses free so that, you know, people working those dead-end, low-weight, minimum-wage jobs that's struggling to get to work in the morning, they don't have to worry about paying a fare.
		You know, and what she's done has really just been miraculous.
		And they've got Bob, not Bob Kraft, but his son, Josh Kraft, running against her to, I think, get the murder rate back up.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Eugene.
		And this is Tony in Houston, Texas, Democrat.
		Hi, Tony.
unidentified		Hello.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		How worried are you about crime where you live, Tony, in Houston?
unidentified		I'm not too worried.
		I'm just worried about that so-called president of ours.
		You know, crime would be way down if he didn't let all the crime out of prison.
		You know, like the White House.
		He's going to pardon everybody.
		So really, crime is not too bad here in Houston.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And here's the Hill.
		The Hill saying this conservative pundit and social media personality Benny Johnson used an appearance in the White House press briefing room's new media seat to rail against crime in Washington, D.C. and suggest a Department of Government Efficiency Doge staffer who was recently assaulted in the district be awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
		Take a look at the exchange with Benny Johnson and Caroline Levitt in the press room.
benny johnson ▲ ● ▼		As a D.C. resident of 15 years, I lived on Capitol Hill.
		I witnessed so many muggings and so much theft.
		I lost track.
		I was carjacked.
		I have murders on my ring camera and mass shootings.
		I witnessed a woman on my block get held up at gunpoint for $20, and my house was set ablaze in an arson with my infant child inside.
		And so to any reporter that says and lies that D.C. is a safe place to live and work, let me just say this.
		Thank you.
		Thank you for making this city safe because a parent should have to go through what my family went through having the fire department rip open their door to save their infant child.
		And so thank you for your work on securing this city.
		My question to you is this.
		Nancy Pelosi has attacked the president for deploying the National Guard to the city, saying that it is to cover for his incompetence.
		Hillary Clinton has also attacked the president for securing the city of Washington, D.C. I'd like to get your response to Nancy Pelosi and Hillary Clinton.
karoline leavitt ▲ ● ▼		Sure.
		Well, first of all, Benny, I'm so sorry that happened to you and your family.
		There have been, unfortunately, far too many victims of crime in this city.
		And I know the majority of residents in the District of Columbia agree with you.
		In fact, a new poll from the Washington Post I was reading this morning, this was released in May of 2024.
		So it's quite funny how many of you in the media agreed with what the president was saying yesterday.
		But now once the president says it, many of you are disagreeing with him.
		But this poll released by the Washington Post found that 65% of district residents think crime is an extremely serious or a very serious problem.
		And this was up from 56% last year.
		So the concern that you share with so many other residents in the District of Columbia is real.
		And that's why this president is taking action to address it.
		To get to the heart of your question, I think it's despicable that Democrats cannot agree that we need more law and order in a city that has been ravaged by violence, crime, murders, property theft.
		This should be a winning issue for all Americans.
		I don't understand.
		It's just anything President Trump does, the Democrats want to disagree with.
		I think the president would love to work with Democrats on this issue to bring law and order to America's cities, but unfortunately they have failed.
		And that's why he's taken this historic action to federalize the National Guard.
		And as you're seeing from last night's numbers, we already have seen success.
		We are removing violent offenders.
		We are arresting criminals.
		And we are removing drugs and firearms off of the streets of the city to make it safer for all of its residents.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We're asking about your level of concern about crime where you live.
		Checking in on Facebook, we've got Jeff who says, I'm definitely concerned.
		For D.C., I think sending the National Guard after crime decreased is a bit much and very confusing.
		Martin says, not very much.
		Not even worried when I go into DC.
		And Sue says, small town in Oklahoma, really not much crime here, but Oklahoma City morning news always showing shootings during the nights.
		And Lane says, somewhat worried, but I am armed and ready.
		Anthony is in Detroit, Independent Line.
		Hi, Anthony.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		Crime, I guess, in Detroit, I would say it's a big issue, one of the top issues.
		But personally, it hasn't affected me too much.
		So, you know, I'm not too worried about it myself.
		And yeah, we have a new mayor coming in after 12 years.
		We'll have a new mayor for the first time.
		So we just had the primary election and it got narrowed down to two candidates.
		So it's a big topic right now.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And Anthony, are you worried about certain areas of Detroit?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you not go during certain times, certain places that you won't go in Detroit?
unidentified		No, I'll go anywhere, but I mean, I'm not going to be out at 2, 3 in the morning, but yeah.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Linda in Mississippi, Line for Democrats.
		Good morning, Linda.
unidentified		Yes.
unidentified		If they're so concerned about crime in DC, why don't they march over to the White House and arrest the number one criminal that has more felons than anybody they're picking up out the streets today?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Jim in Arkansas, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Jim.
unidentified		Yeah, I don't know why people don't want to talk about the elephant in the room.
		All of these cities that are run by black mayors and black chiefs of police, whether they're women or men, whether it's Memphis or LA or Chicago, it's all black people committing these heinous crimes against innocent white people.
		Wake up.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And in a press conference with a reporter, D.C. Mayor Muril Bowser discussed her approach in working with federal law enforcement to reduce crime.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		She made these comments yesterday.
muriel bowser ▲ ● ▼		What I'm focused on is the federal surge and how to make the most of the additional officer support that we have.
		We have the best in the business and MPD and Chief Pamela Smith to lead that effort and to make sure that the men and women who are coming from federal law enforcement are being well used and that if there's National Guard here, that they're being well used and all in an effort to drive down crime.
		So how we got here or what we think about the circumstances right now, we have more police and we want to make sure we're using them.
unidentified		Are you concerned at all that some of the police that are out there are FBI agents who are assigned to offices who are now patrolling the streets at night?
muriel bowser ▲ ● ▼		I'm going to rely on the police chief to work with her counterparts to make sure people are being deployed in a useful way.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And on X, Fred says, I live in a mountain community above San Bernardino, Riverside in California.
		My community has a little bit of crime like most, but down the hill in San Bernardino and Riverside, they've got a lot more crime.
		I try not to be down there after dark.
		And on Facebook, Bob says, the more that is allowed, the more I worry.
		It's time for zero tolerance on certain crimes.
		Immediate dispatch upon discovery.
		It's not that difficult.
		Denise, Indiana Democrat, good morning, Denise, you're on the air.
unidentified		Hi.
		Yes, I am concerned about crime on the streets.
		I live in Indiana, but I'm not concerned here.
		But in Washington, D.C., I'm only concerned about the January when those insurrections did that.
		That's what I'm concerned about.
		And some of those people that are mad, why they part of the January 6th, those guys.
		And that's what I'm more concerned about.
		And I think every time the president opens his mouth, he tells a lie.
		So I'm concerned about him too as well.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Stacey in Waldorf, Maryland, Democrat.
		Sorry, Republican.
		Good morning, Stacey.
unidentified		Good morning.
		How are you?
		I've been living in the DMV area, which is D.C., Maryland, all my life.
		And even though crime has gone down in D.C., it's still really, really bad.
		And I don't understand why people are so upset that we're getting more police presents for 30 days.
		I mean, literally a couple years ago, like two years ago, an Uber driver was dragged to his death by two teenage girls trying to carjack him.
		Last summer, a gentleman sitting outside of a new Apple store was shot to death waiting for his wife in a carjacking.
		So crime is really bad in certain areas of D.C.
		And those families that live in low-income areas, you know, they have bullets flying through their windows at night right above their heads where their children are sleeping.
		So something needs to be done.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So Stacey, you said, you know, 30 days, this is a temporary solution.
unidentified		Correct.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think would be a good permanent solution?
unidentified		We have to be, well, I think you got to be stricter, I mean, with the laws and execute them.
		And unfortunately, there is a lot of the juveniles in these cities are definitely out of pocket.
		I mean, that's where the crime is really rampant is with the juveniles.
		So get some social service programs going, after care.
		I mean, there's a lot of different things we can do, but to sit back and do nothing and say, oh, the numbers have gone down, so it's okay.
		The numbers need to keep going down.
		There was a spike in D.C. during COVID.
		So now those numbers are coming down, but it spiked up.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, Stacey, what here in D.C.?
		Regarding those social programs that you talked about, who's going to pay for that?
		Do you think that the federal government should be allowing more funding to go into D.C.?
unidentified		Oh, absolutely.
		And I mean, and taxpayers need to do it.
		I mean, you got to do what we got to do to protect our family.
		And that's the American citizens.
		So if I have to pay higher taxes to keep these kids off the streets so they're not like little victims of the gangs and being plucked off by the drugs and all that, then so be it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And here's James in Arkadelphia, Arkansas.
		Democrat, good morning, James.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		I'm responding to that fellow that called here from Arkansas said, all your crime is in your black areas.
		Like I call all the different states where black marriage is controlling.
		You got to remember, just here in Arkansas, all mass shootings and shooting and rapes and stuff are done by white males.
		But you never hit nothing on, you never hit nothing on it on C-SPAN anybody.
		But every time you look around, white males are doing mass shootings.
		They never talk about it.
		White males are doing this porn on their kids in Arkansas.
		Never talk about it.
		It's a lot of things going to white males dude that no one will talk about.
		So every time you have somebody come on there, it's always white.
		Put somebody on there of color, if it's Hispanic or black, and let them describe the situation.
		I've been here 80-something years, never had a problem, go where I want to go.
		So for this man to call here and say, oh, your crams in black areas, he is completely wrong.
		And we know exactly where he's coming from.
		We're a bunch of the people in Arkansas are racist.
		It's period, point blank.
		And they know their president is because he let all those people out there beat cops.
		Some of them dad behind it.
		And he pardoned them.
		They tell him, law and order, where's the law and order?
		Thank you very much.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Adam is in Washington, D.C., Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Adam, go ahead.
unidentified		Yes, thank you.
		So I grew up in the Washington area myself, then moved away to Chicago and returned to D.C. about five years ago.
		And for a short time, I rented an apartment on U Street, which is a very heavily trafficked area with restaurants and bars and retail.
		And it is a complete mess.
		It looks like a dystopian, post-apocalyptic scene.
		You have noise, loud, loud music playing until 2 in the morning.
		You have a lot of open-air drug transactions going on.
		You have police that park their cars along U Street, and they have their, they're flashing their sirens.
		They don't have the sirens on, but they have the lights on.
		They don't do anything.
		They just stand there and sort of observe, which actually makes it feel even more menacing.
		And I had to move into a different part of the city to get away from that.
		Also, the area around the convention center feels very menacing and dangerous.
		I don't think crime is under control in D.C.
		It may be true that homicides are down and violent crimes are down, but there are a lot of different other, there are other crimes going on, drug crimes, other types of vandalism going on, cars being, you know, their windows being smashed and their tires being slashed when they're just sitting there parked on the streets.
		So I do think there's a lot of work to be done.
		I think the mayor has ignored the problem.
		I think the police chief has ignored the problem.
		And as an independent voter, I don't appreciate Democrats telling me that I don't see what's going on, that the statistics show that violent crime is down.
		But as a resident, I still feel very menaced walking around D.C. Thank you very much.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And Adam, before you go, what have you seen so far?
		Have you seen any federal agents?
		Have you seen the National Guard?
		What have you seen on the streets so far?
unidentified		So in the neighborhood that I'm living in, which is around Logan Circle, I haven't seen a large presence.
		You do when you walk around, you'll see the trucks, you'll see the Army trucks, you'll see some people patrolling.
		I'm not sure what parts of the city they're focusing on, but they don't seem to be focusing on the part of Northwest Washington where I live, at least not right now.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And this is WSA 9 reporting this at Senator Van Holland and Delegate Norton to reintroduce a bill to grant D.C. full control over the National Guard.
		Here is Maryland Democratic Senator Chris Van Holland on Congress's role in federal resources.
		So here he is.
ana cabrera ▲ ● ▼		Our understanding is that Congress would have to step in if he wanted to make this longer than a 30-day deployment.
		Republican lawmakers seem on board with this initial move.
		Speaker Mike Johnson saying Trump is right.
		And Majority Leader Scalise saying this will make D.C. safe again.
		They have the majority.
		Does the president have any guardrails?
chris van hollen ▲ ● ▼		Well, they may be able to move this quickly through the House, but in the Senate, we have guardrails with respect to getting over the filibuster and cloture.
		Look, I think that this is an example that everybody should be following closely around the country.
		You know, Republican members of Congress, they're all rah-rah when the president wants to do this to the people of the District of Columbia.
		But the precedent that he is setting is one that really is a dress rehearsal potentially for other places.
		In fact, he himself, you know, mentioned a couple other cities around the country.
		So this is part of the very dangerous slide towards authoritarianism.
		It's also an effort to distract attention from other vulnerabilities the president has, like releasing the Epstein files.
		So I think there's a lot going on here, Ana, but it is a dangerous, it is a dangerous slide that we're witnessing.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Back to your calls now, Jim in Hudson, Florida, Republican.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Jim, how worried are you about crime where you live?
unidentified		Well, I'm worried about crime where I live too, in Florida.
		And we don't see much here in Hudson, but let me give you an example of how politicians feel about crime.
		Back in Trump's first administration, Chicago has always had crime.
		They got crime now.
		Well, the mayor Lightfoot, Trump offered to go help her with her problem, and she wouldn't let him come.
		She says, no, you're not coming because you straightened us out, which he would have.
		He'd have went on bloviated about how wonderful he was and how he helped her.
		And she wouldn't let him come.
		So he goes out of office.
		Biden comes in.
		She asked Biden to come and help her.
		She asked Biden to come and help her.
		And he wouldn't go help her for the same reason.
		He said, if I come and help you and this don't work out, you're going to blame me for this.
		You're going to get off the hooks.
		So the politicians, they don't care about the people.
		They care about how they look when it's all over with.
		And it's just terrible how politics plays such a role in the way things get done in this life.
		That's all I've got to say.
		And have a good day.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Jamal in Virginia Beach, Virginia, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Jamal.
unidentified		Hey, good morning back to you.
unidentified		How are you?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good.
unidentified		Listen, you asked about a permanent solution to these issues, right?
		I would not disagree with what the other callers will say.
		I just want to compliment their conclusions.
		If you leave this at the nucleus of the family and you give those families the resources, whether they be programs, extracurricular activities for the kids, or just general education for parents that might not have the resources or the tools to be effective parents, you can end up, because I do agree with one of the callers who said that the juvenile issue was a situation.
		You can make society a little more improved if you give parents the ability to be better parents.
		That's just one issue.
		But as far as using federal law enforcement to intimidate people into better behavior, I think it's a slippery slope because this is happening in a predominantly black city.
		So imagine when an independent socialist becomes president and then they decide, you know, I think the real crime in America comes from white racist men with poor ideology.
		Let's get into these predominantly white municipalities and bring federal law enforcement into the mix.
		A combination, you know, of the appropriate things will ultimately help the situation in a more effective way.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And Mark from New York sent us this text.
		He says, not concerned about crime in my area.
		I believe parents should be held more accountable to what their kids do and be charged alongside them.
		However, parents need and can't get help to put their kids somewhere to get help.
		The system has failed us.
		Here's Jim, Riva, Maryland, Democrat.
		Hi, Jim.
unidentified		Hello.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, go right ahead.
unidentified		Hi.
		Yes, I want to mention one thing about this whole takeover with the National Guard.
		It didn't come about until a young man from Dog got beat up on the streets.
		And there's some controversy about that.
		But the name of the young man was Big Balls.
		It's kind of amazing to me when a young Jewish couple was murdered in the district.
		They didn't call out the National Guard.
		But when Big Balls gets beat up, they call out the National Guard and all this other stuff that goes on.
		I don't think that I've worked in the District of Columbia my whole life as a stagehand.
		I got off at some very odd hours.
		You had to be street-wise.
		Everybody understood that.
		If you're out at 3 o'clock in the morning and you're not street-wise, well, you're going to be in trouble.
mike gravel ▲ ● ▼		And it's a lot of times these assaults come in areas where there are prostitutes, there are gambling, there's all sorts of drugs and everything else.
unidentified		You have no business being in them areas in the first place.
		But I think it's a show of force.
		It's unnecessary.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		But shouldn't you be able to be safe all the time, Jim?
unidentified		I'm sorry.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Shouldn't you be able to be safe all the time?
unidentified		I mean, I never I never in the District of Columbia since I was a teenager felt 100 percent safe.
unidentified		And I never felt safe in any city if I was in the wrong place at the wrong time.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And here's Dion in Chesterfield, Virginia, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, good morning, Mimi.
		Okay, so first of all, I do agree with that last guy.
		I am a little bothered by the guy that called earlier that was saying it's just black people beating up white people.
		Obviously, that's not like an all-the-time case.
		I do feel like it is in, like that one lady said, a lot of like low-income areas.
		But I guess what bothers me the most is you really have a lot of people calling up here who don't even live in those type of areas or never really frequent those type of areas that call up here and give their opinion, especially that it's like all these black cities.
		And it just bothers me, especially because you just get like a lot of white people, in my opinion, giving them an excuse to like be racist and say like racist things, like that man said about it's just black people beating up white people when that's not the case all of the time.
		So I just wanted to say that.
		And as far as like the resources with the kids, I do agree with that.
		I just feel like, because I think somebody was saying that yesterday about like the lack of resources and things like that.
		I feel like with these kids, like there's nothing for them to do, especially like these teenagers.
		And then like the parents are probably working all the time because life is expensive.
		So they're gone all the time at work trying to make ends meet.
		And so just like leaves these children like with a lot of idle time.
		And a lot of times, in my opinion, that's also how they wind up getting in with the wrong crowd, hanging out, like hanging around the wrong type of people and then doing the wrong thing.
		So I just wanted to give my opinion on that just because, you know, this topic is just really, really bothers me.
		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Dion.
		And this is the Washington Post.
		Man shot and killed near sites of two slangs cited by Trump.
		It says the fatal shooting came hours after the president said he would take control of the DC police.
		One more call on this topic, then we'll go to Open Forum.
		Here's Gay in Pompton Lakes, New Jersey, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'm so disappointed in C-SPAN.
		You have an opportunity to provide stats and facts to people.
		You have a laptop there, which would be so simple to Google the states and cities with the highest rate of crime.
		By doing that, it would provide people with facts.
		This is a narrative.
		There's crime all over the country, everywhere.
		There are pockets of crime.
		And yes, it's bad and it needs to be resolved.
		But facts matter.
		Not a narrative.
		People are calling up based upon what they hear on different media outlets.
		But again, crime, let's be specific.
		You have a laptop there.
		Google it.
		So people know what cities are the most crime ridden today.
		Thank you so much.
		I'm so disappointed because we are living in a time where this narrative is no facts.
		We used to get facts and then people can make a decision based upon the facts.
		Thank you so much for your time.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Gay, and we will switch to open forum after a quick break.
		You can start calling in now about any topic.
		Of course, you can continue about the topic of crime if that's what's on your mind.
		The numbers are Republicans 202-748-8001.
		Democrats 202-748-8000.
		And it's 202-748-8002 for independents.
		We'll be right back.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		So you interviewed the other night.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		I watched it about two o'clock in the morning.
unidentified		There was a little thing called C-SPAN, which I don't know how many people were watching.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Don't worry, you were in prime time too, but they happen to have a little rerun.
patty murray ▲ ● ▼		Do you really think that we don't remember what just happened last week?
patty murray ▲ ● ▼		Thank goodness for C-SPAN, and we all should review the tape.
unidentified		Everyone wonders when they're watching C-SPAN what the conversations are on the floor.
al green ▲ ● ▼		I'm about to read to you something that was published by C-SPAN.
sean duffy ▲ ● ▼		There's a lot of things that Congress fights about, that they disagree on.
unidentified		We can all watch that on C-SPAN.
		Millions of people across the country tuned into C-SPAN.
		Speaking!
		Jesus!
		That was a make-for-C-SPAN moment.
		If you watch on C-SPAN, you're going to see me physically across the aisle every day, just trying to build relationships and try to understand their perspective and find common ground.
tammy bruce ▲ ● ▼		And welcome for to everybody watching at home.
		We know C-SPAN covers this live as well.
		We appreciate that.
unidentified		And one can only hope that he's able to watch C-SPAN on a black and white television set in his prison cell.
		This is being carried live by C-SPAN.
		It's being watched not only in this country, but it's being watched around the world right now.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		Mike said before, I happened to listen to him.
		He was on C-SPAN 1.
		That's a big upgrade, right?
unidentified		Washington Journal continues.
patty murray ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We're going to just continue taking your calls on Open Forum, whatever is on your mind.
		Previous caller challenged us to look up the most dangerous cities in America, and I've got that for you.
		This is a Newsweek article from two days ago.
		A full list of America's most dangerous cities as Trump cracks down on DC.
		So here it is in order according to FBI crime data.
		That is number one is Memphis, Tennessee, followed by Cleveland, Ohio, then Toledo, Ohio, Little Rock, Arkansas, Peoria, Illinois, Springfield, Illinois, Detroit, Michigan, Akron, Ohio, Beaumont, Texas, and Rockford, Illinois.
		Those are the top 10 most dangerous cities in America with the highest crime rates.
		Alex in Minneapolis, Minnesota, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi, Mr. Alex.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yes, Alex, go ahead.
unidentified		Hi.
		I'm just calling about the way words are used.
		You guys read headlines all day, every day, so you're going to know this more than anyone.
		The headlines will always still present things as though we're in a normal election cycle or a normal United States, and they'll say things like, Trump has ordered the National Guard and taken federal control over the D.C. police.
		And I don't know why they're not wording it because we know through history, we have a definition of what fascism actually is.
		And so my concern is why the newspapers and the TV networks aren't using the words such as, in the headlines, such as fascist and overthrow and dictator.
		They're still using words like president and all these other kind of casual normal words.
		And I thought maybe even on C-SPAN, you guys could have that, you'll think I'm joking, but this is actually a serious idea.
		You got to have the Democratic line and the Republican line and the Independent line, as you still have.
		And then you could add maybe a fascist line, and that could be the line that Trump supporters would call it on.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, Alex.
		Nancy, Orlando, Florida, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Hi, it's Nancy from Orlando.
		I just wanted to comment on, you know, I guess the National Guard matter.
		I guess the president ordered National Guard to come to the district.
		So I'll tell you this.
		I lived in a district for a couple of years on and off.
		And since 2015, I've never seen such a theft.
		I mean, the theft is unbelievable.
		And I recently just left there for some business, 10 other things.
		And someone from the district actually stole my purse.
		I was in Maryland.
		I tracked them down.
		I didn't actually approach them.
		But the theft is unbelievable.
		And I spoke to one of the police captains in Maryland.
		It was like, yeah, I'm not surprised that they came from the district.
		It's a really big issue.
		And it's mainly theft.
		And a lot of things is not shown in the public, the amount of theft, the crime that's in the district.
		Love it, love it.
		It's my stomping ground.
		But it just something needs to happen.
		And I'm glad something is being done in that respect.
		But ultimately, we need to pray.
		And we need to do something, you know.
		But thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Nancy.
		And here is Suzanne, Republican Line, Cincinnati, Ohio.
		Good morning, Suzanne.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Well, first of all, I think when you tell people publicly, as the president has done, that this deployment of police forces, National Guards, Park Police, every police force that he sent to Washington is only going to last for a month.
		Well, that lets anybody interested in committing some kind of crime know that after a month, they can get away with whatever they want to get away with.
		So I question how effective that is.
		You know, you don't tell people your strategy and then expect them not to use it.
		I do agree with him, though, on a couple of things.
		I've been a teacher most of my adult life, and I love kids.
		But I think parents should be held accountable for what their kids do.
		If their children have mental problems, then they ought to have to prove that they couldn't get help for that child.
		And they ought to know where their children are at 2 and 3 in the morning.
		That's ridiculous.
		I think that I also agree with President Trump that he called them young punks.
		And if you're 14 years old or 13 years old and you're doing something serious to harm someone, you're old enough to know what you're doing and you should be tried as an adult.
		I'm not saying you should be confined in adult prison where you can learn even more bad habits from hardened criminals, but your record ought not to be wiped clean so easily.
		You ought to be tried and prosecuted as an adult.
		I don't care if you are a teenager.
		You know what you're doing.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Suzanne, when you worked as a teacher, did you teach teenagers or what age group did you?
unidentified		I did not.
		No, ma'am.
		I have taught teenagers at church, but no, when I worked in the Dallas public schools, I taught kindergarten through third grade.
		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And Debbie is calling from Burton, Michigan, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
		Yesterday, the day before, you looked at the guest you had and said, well, Ron Johnson, he's getting a gun.
		Well, Ron Johnson literally gets it down to the last three, five, eight votes that he can't push over the line, and he calls Uncle Donnie.
		And Donald Trump calls these people, threatens them with being primarily, threatens them with doxing their people.
		And that's not the way to legislate.
		So please, before you give Ron Johnson too many.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Mike Johnson.
		Mike Johnson.
		The Speaker of the House.
unidentified		No.
unidentified		His name's not Mike Johnson, is it?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You talking about the Speaker of the House?
unidentified		Yes, I am.
		So I'm sorry.
		Just woke up.
		I'm sorry.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		It's okay.
		It's okay.
		But I got your point.
		Richard, Louisville, Kentucky, Republican.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, I just read online today that here in the state of Kentucky, in Louisville, Kentucky, the Department of Motor Vehicles has been selling driver's license out the back door to illegal aliens and selling them to these people.
unidentified		They're not even taking the driver's test.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Can we say again, Richard, in Louisville?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Is that in Louisville?
unidentified		Yes.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you remember where you saw that?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So I can look it up too?
unidentified		Breitbart.
		The report, the state reportedly has sent more than 1,500 letters to holders of illegal issued license that you must return those licenses.
		But the thing about it is, I can't believe, and the city of Louisville and the DMV here in Louisville is run by Democrats, and they made $200 per license.
		Now, this was reported by a woman who worked, a wonderful lady who would give her heart and soul to work for the DMV, and she reported to her supervisors, and they fired her.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Now, here's what I found on Breitbart.
		Florida cops bus gang selling driver's licenses, including CDL, to 1,000 illegal aliens.
		Wait, maybe you're talking about this one.
		Let me just bring up another one.
		Okay, this is what you're talking about.
		So on Breitbart, whistleblower, Kentucky DMV employees secretly sold driver's licenses to illegals.
		This says a former Kentucky DMV employee says she was fired after reporting that fellow employees were selling driver's licenses to illegal aliens for $200 each.
		It has her names.
		It says the employees are being paid under the table.
		I immediately let my supervisor know.
unidentified		Yeah.
		What I want to know is what is the governor of Kentucky, what's he going to do about this?
		Because this man hopes to run for president of the United States one day.
		And I want him to get on this and get on this now.
		Thank you so much.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Jack, Tallahassee, Florida, Independent Line.
unidentified		Good morning, Mamie.
		Good morning, C-SPAN.
		I wanted to comment about the juveniles and people on the streets and everything.
		Warner Reagan that, well, one name sticks out in my mind is Tawana Broadway.
		She was in a medal institute.
		She was crazy.
		And that's why we have mentally unstable people on the streets of most cities in the United States.
		And when my wife and I went to Washington, D.C., this was in the 90s.
		It was 1994.
		I stopped and tried to help a lady on the, I think it was the Potomac Parkway.
		And the highway patrolman came over and said, mister, you better leave.
		Now, this was in 1964 in the springtime.
		And I think that regarding the homeless people and the juveniles that don't have anything to do, they should bring back the draft.
		And they can learn something, you know, even if they don't go overseas or anything like that.
		They can learn something and try to get their life straightened out in that stretch of time they would be serving in the services.
		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Carolyn, Democrat, Charlotte, North Carolina.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes.
		Good morning, Mimi.
		Good morning, C-SPAN.
		I think that crime in America, oh, it's definitely a problem.
		But to tackle it by saying that D.C. has so much crime, D.C. has so much crime, Trump's attempt to float this idea that, oh, he's going into D.C. and handling all the crime, he has a dark undertone because on the top, it looks like it's a good thing, but on the bottom,
		it's like he created the problem because he's not really looking at crime per capita.
		I don't think the newsletter article was crime per capita based on the population.
		The larger the population, the more crime you're going to have on any level.
		But some of these small places have more crime than the largest cities based on the population.
		And it has a dark undertone because he's targeting mostly Democratic cities.
		I think he's trying to do an attempt to use crime as a way to put these Democratic cities, large Democratic cities, they have a large voting base on martial law eventually.
		And it looks very nice because he's saying that he wants to control the crime.
		I think Donald Trump is a fake president that makes up problems.
		He's got people hunting down supposedly illegal aliens because he's labeled them as the biggest crime crime people, and they're not.
		It's American citizens that are crime-ridden.
		And if it comes down to crime, America itself, the whole country, is more crime-ridden than any place in the world.
		We have more guns than any place in the world.
		We have more drug problems than any place in the world.
		And if you wanted to do something, he would tackle the drug problem, but it's so big he can't handle it.
		Okay, he can't tackle the gun problem because he would lose votes.
		We have more guns, we have more drugs than anybody, and that is the basis and the bottom of our problem.
		And you cannot put enough people in prison to stop that because they're going to be building prisons.
		Everybody's going to be in prison, and there's going to be a lot of money to be made on that prison situation.
		It's just like Alligator Alcatraz.
		Prisons are to be made, not to stop crime, but to make money.
		And that's my point.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Oscar, a Republican in Spruce Pine, North Carolina.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Oscar.
unidentified		Hi, good morning, Mimi.
		Here in North Carolina, my little slash of heaven in Appalachia, we have very little crime.
		And what we do have is usually drug possession and distribution and little stuff like that, shoplifting, maybe.
		Now, back in my younger days, I had a lot of revenue, chasing the bootleggers and stuff like that.
		But just North Carolina has passed an open carry law now that you can carry a weapon if it's in plain view.
		At strangers, you still have to have a permit to carry a concealed one.
		But if it's in plain view, you're allowed to carry it.
		And when you go into Walmart, of course, we've got a Walmart, and you see about a third of the customers in there with Berettas or 38s or something hanging on their hip.
		You're not going to commit too much crime.
		So I'm kind of happy here.
		I'm 88 years old.
		I live alone.
		And I've got about four guns in the house.
		So I feel safe here at night.
		And as far as President Trump goes, I think sometimes I think he's got a little bit too much ego.
		But as far as his results, he is getting results.
		And I admire the man I voted for him three times.
		And if it be that way, I'll vote for him the fourth time.
		And thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Jim in Wisconsin, Independent Line.
		Hi, Jim.
		Jim, you there?
		Wisconsin?
		Curtis, Dallas, Texas, Democrat.
		Good morning, Curtis.
unidentified		Good morning to you.
		This is my first time calling, but I listen to C-SPAN all the time.
		And when I listen to C-SPAN, you know, we need to stop.
		We really need to stop because the blanks are blaming the whites.
		The whites are blaming the blacks.
		The Republicans are blaming the Democrats.
		The Democrats are blaming the Republicans.
		The Independents is blaming both parties.
		Evil is evil.
		Let's talk about what we can do as Americans.
		I am a black American.
		This country is torn apart because of evil.
		Evil that lies in the heart of people that don't care.
		Let's stop blaming each other and come up with some shows to see what we can do about the problem.
		Eagle is throughout this country, from east to west, from north to south.
		Let's come together, have a show.
		It's going to take more than one show, but have some shows to talk about what we, as people of America, can do about all this crime and whatever.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Curtis.
		And some news for you from Govigzek with the headline: after firing of BLS Chief, that's the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Luttnick tells federal statisticians that independence is, quote, nonsense.
		He says employees should only focus on accuracy and getting, quote, the right answer.
		According to the Commerce Secretary, it says the comments coming on the heels of President Trump firing the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics after her agency released a weak job reports sparked concern among the staff present for the remarks.
		Commerce Secretary Luttnick immediately followed up his comment by noting accuracy was the only important concept for federal statisticians and stressed that they, quote, can't be twisted by anyone.
		It said still, Luttning seeming to label statistical independence as irrelevant, as an irrelevant consideration caught employees off guard and renewed questions of potential political interference in federal statistical work.
		Jerry in McKinney, Texas, Republican.
		Hi, Jerry.
unidentified		Hi, how are you doing?
		I'm not a Republican.
		I'm an independent.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		My question is: if Donald Trump couldn't call the National Guard out for Washington, D.C. on January 6th, that that was Nancy Pelosi's job, yet now he's called the National Guard out for this situation.
		Can't Nancy Pelosi say, okay, National Guard, stand down and go home?
		I mean, he gave, he says it was all her fault on January 6th.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You're saying that he is the one in charge of the National Guard and he can deploy and he can pull back as the president.
unidentified		Yeah, he didn't do it on January 6th, did he?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Jerry.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And next time you got a call on the right line, okay?
unidentified		Okay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Benjamin, Tampa, Florida, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, and hello, C-SPAN.
		I'm just calling to put in what everybody else is putting in a little two cents about the state of the world.
		I wish that we could honestly just kind of better each other.
		It sucks that everybody has this one singular point of views going out where people are supporting an individual like Trump.
		I can't necessarily complain too much besides the fact that I'm a 28-year-old that has watched the world change drastically.
		I thought I was supposed to really be proud of where I'm growing up, be proud of the state that I am in, be proud of the United States of America.
		This is honestly a sad turning point.
		And I just want to say I do wish that everybody eventually wakes up and everybody realizes that the human nature and human rights are what matters the most.
		We should care more about each other and less about dividing.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Tom Democrat in Rock Island, Illinois.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		High time, Tom.
unidentified		I'm a veteran.
		I'm an older veteran.
		I fought for democracy.
		I'm now sitting here in my later years, close to dying, and I'm ashamed of myself.
		I'm ashamed of this country.
		I'm ashamed of the voters that put that man in office.
		We must stop chasing his chaotic distractions.
		This is one of its serious, but it's still a distraction.
		This man's taking over our country.
		We are playing word games.
		We are saying we are arguing over things he wants us to instead of looking deeper.
		Guns and crime will never go away until after we clear the problem.
		We cannot go on like this.
		Okay, thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here is Cameron, Republican in Michigan.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hello, Cameron.
unidentified		I would like to echo that man's statement about 180 degrees in the opposite direction, but I'm going to try to keep this conversation not necessarily definitively against Democrats or Republicans or independents who think he owns the most of the size of the country.
		I'd just like to say that I'd like to see us all work a little more together instead of being divisively apart.
		I see a portion of the country and the demographic of the country, a political will of the country, for a long time has been dismissive of the crime that has been riding in our nation's largest cities.
		Again, run by a political party that has used, I think, the wrong tactics.
		And I believe Donald Trump is odious, yes, and as personally, necessarily unlikable as he is, I think that is a necessary qualifying requirement for a president of the United States.
		I want to say this as gently as I can, not blaming anyone.
		This country, I've grown up, I'm in the late years that that man talked about a minute ago.
		This country has always been a junkyard.
		All right?
		Been junkyards all over the country.
		Everybody of all races know what I'm talking about.
		Within a junkyard, there's always what's called a junkyard dog.
		He's ugly.
		He's mean, and he's nasty.
		You don't approach this dog.
		You don't come around the backside of the counter.
		And you certainly don't come in the fence when the fence is closed.
		Now, I don't want to see the fences of this country get closed, but I do believe that Donald Trump is serving the purpose as our junkyard dog.
		All right?
		Mean, ugly, and scary, and nasty.
		Certainly don't want to get bit or chased by him.
		When you act out in such a way, you're going to have him biting and chasing you.
		All right?
		That's for him to figure out.
		I'd like the whole country.
		Allow this man the same amount of time that you allowed Joe Biden his four years.
		Donald Trump, this four years, he didn't have his first four years.
		It was stolen from him.
		Again, by a national-oriented political mindset.
		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Larry Ellington, Florida, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes.
		This is, I want to thank C's fan.
		I think you do a wonderful job.
		But I want to correct Washington, D.C. is under federal jurisdiction.
		The capital of the United States is under the Congress.
		The head of the Congress happened to be Nancy Pelosi.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yeah.
		I don't think that's true, Larry.
		I think that is still in D.C., so the president does have jurisdiction.
unidentified		It is in D.C., but the Congress is a separate entity of the it's it's not under the president.
		It's not under the executive.
		It's under they control.
		Nancy Pelosi controls.
		Donald Trump don't control.
		He has no control over Congress.
		Congress controls itself.
		It polices itself.
		They have to decide who's going to police it, not Trump.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, let me get you a fact check on that, but I'm running out of time, so we'll do it in the next open forum and we'll look into that issue a little bit more, Larry.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Steve, Ohio Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'll make a comment about the International Criminal Court founded in 2002, and there's about 125 countries that belong to it.
		So how do we go after war criminals in the world?
		It would be through the International Criminal Court.
		In 2002, in March, Joe Biden declared Vladimir Putin a war criminal.
		The State Department tried to walk it back a little bit, but I think they got on board with that for what the Russians did in Bucha in Ukraine.
		So how do we go after these war criminals?
		Do we meet with them and talk to them?
		Like, I guess President Trump's going to meet with Putin this week.
		But about Netanyahu, when they issued a warrant for Netanyahu, Biden said that it was outrageous and wrongheaded.
		I disagree with that.
		I think there's gross violations of human rights abuses being committed in Gaza, which would be genocide, a forced disappearance, torture, cutting off food supply.
		Yeah, these are violations of the human rights.
		And also, there is a law, it's been codified, the Leahy Law, named after Senator Patrick Leahy, where we wouldn't give weapons to any foreign country who is violating international law, and Israel would be one of them.
		One chart, and I'll finish with this, Council on Foreign Relations, November of 2024, put out a chart, U.S. aid to Israel in four charts, actually.
		We have given Israel $310 billion since 1946, and that's in economic and military aid.
		So I think we should cut off their weapons supply until they get on board and stop committing genocide and starvation in Gaza.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Steve, and that'll be it for this first hour.
		But coming up on the Washington Journal, we've got Matthew Kroenig of the Atlantic Council to discuss the changes at the State Department and President Trump's upcoming summit with his Russian counterpart.
		But first, we're joined by Axia senior economics reporter Courtney Brown to discuss President Trump's approach to economic policy.
		We'll get to that right after the break.
unidentified		This August, tune in to C-SPAN for highlights of our America 250 coverage.
		Join us as we continue to explore the American story through the voices, sites, and stories that shaped it.
		Give me liberty or give me death.
		On Monday, we'll feature the reenactment of Patrick Henry's Give Me Liberty speech from its original location at St. John's Church in Richmond, Virginia.
		Watch C-SPAN's America 250 highlights beginning Monday at 9 p.m. Eastern on C-SPAN.
		Weekends bring you book TV featuring leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books.
		Here's a look at what's coming up this weekend.
		At 8 p.m. Eastern, Stacey Abrams, a one-time Georgia state legislator and gubernatorial candidate, talks with former Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden about her latest fictionalized thriller, Coded Justice.
		And then at 9.15 p.m. Eastern, Michael Grinbaum gives an inside look at the glamorous Condi Nast publishing empire, the people who crafted its publications, and the standards they set for American culture with his book, Empire of the Elite.
		And at 10.15 p.m. Eastern, Book TV takes you to Freedom Fest, an annual libertarian festival held this year in Palm Springs, California, to hear three authors discuss their works.
		We'll talk with Wrong Speak Publishing founder Adam Coleman, attorney Kent Heckenlively, and computer information technologist Sean Worthington.
		Watch Book TV every weekend on C-SPAN, too, and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org.
		Celebrate National Book Lovers Day with C-SPAN by shopping our sale happening now at cspanshop.org, C-SPAN's official online store.
		Enjoy savings of up to 10% on all books site-wide.
		Every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations.
		Scan the code or visit c-spanshop.org to browse the National Book Lovers Day sale going on now.
		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Joining us now to talk about President Trump's economic policies is Courtney Brown.
		She's senior economics reporter for Axios.
		Courtney, welcome.
unidentified		Thank you for having me.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's start with the inflation numbers.
		They just came out yesterday morning.
		What are they and where were they expected to be?
unidentified		So the inflation numbers were kind of hot.
		They weren't super hot, but they were a little warm and they showed that President Trump's tariff policy is starting to impact consumer prices.
		But you kind of have to lift up the hood of the report and dig into certain categories to see it.
		So categories like furniture, categories like apparel, those are the categories that economists have been watching for the last few months for signs of businesses passing on tariff-related costs to consumers.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And is that, does this indicate that they are passing along those tariff costs?
unidentified		At least somewhat, but this is the big question for the Federal Reserve, right?
		Is it a one-time price hike?
		They take the cost of the tariff, they pass it on to consumers, the price goes up one time, or is it a continuous kind of cycle of price hikes?
		That's what the Fed doesn't want to see.
		Economists at the Fed are starting to come around to this idea that maybe it will just be a one-time price hike.
		Of course, painful for consumers, but less of an inflationary problem.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What about groceries and gas?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Where were those?
unidentified		So the headline consumer price index was actually down relative to June because gasoline prices fell, gasoline and energy prices fell.
		But that is, of course, what consumers think about most, gasoline prices, grocery prices.
		But economic policymakers actually like to watch the core CPI number that excludes energy and food costs.
		And that was the one that was a little hot.
		So we're seeing some relief on the energy front and on the grocery price front.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk about President Trump's deal with chipmakers NVIDIA and AMD.
		Of course, NVIDIA is the $4 trillion company.
		Yes, quite big.
		What is that deal?
		So explain the deal and what it means.
unidentified		So NVIDIA makes, NVIDIA and AMD make the crucial chips that we need to really get ahead of the AI revolution, right?
		They make the chips that power data centers.
		And President Trump said earlier this year, actually, I don't think it will be in our national security best interest if you sell these chips in China.
		And what happened was NVIDIA and AMD cut a deal with the White House over the weekend.
		The Financial Times reported on Sunday that if they pay 15% of some of the revenue they make from their chip sales in China, they can obtain the export licenses to sell these chips in China.
		And it's remarkable.
		We've never seen a deal with the private sector and the government like this.
		So it was a really eye-popping There's questions about that.
		There's questions about that.
		I've spent the last few days talking to my favorite kind of lawyers, trade lawyers, about whether or not you can, essentially taxing an export.
		And there are questions about whether that can happen, whether the U.S. can do that.
		So I think there might be some legal questions around this, but who's going to sue?
		I mean, NVIDIA likes this deal.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		They want to sell to China.
unidentified		Yes, yes.
		And they see it as worth it.
		If they have to give a cut to the government, fine.
		They want access to the Chinese market.
		Now, will the Chinese buy these chips?
		We saw some headlines from Chinese state media that they were warning companies not to buy these chips.
		So there's still a little friction there.
		But American companies want access to the Chinese market.
		And if that means they have to pay a slice of their revenues to the government, we have no idea how this is going to be collected or what the money will be used for.
		But it seems like they have a deal that would allow them access to the Chinese market.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Typically, these export licenses are granted based on national security interests.
unidentified		Exactly.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Exactly.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Not necessarily making a deal for how much we can get from it.
unidentified		That's the question.
		Why is it that a few months ago, this was a big national security concern?
		Even under the Biden administration, they had national security concerns about selling these chips in China.
		But if these companies agree to pay a slice of their revenue, it's no longer a national security problem.
		I think there are lots of questions about that and how the administration is thinking about that.
		I think President Trump was clear on Monday that this is not the super powerful NVIDIA chip that U.S. businesses are buying stateside.
		It's kind of like a slimmed down version that NVIDIA made specifically actually for the Chinese market.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		If you'd like to join our conversation, if you have a question about the economic policy of the Trump administration, you can feel free to give us a call now.
		Republicans are on 20248-8001.
		Democrats 202748-8000.
		And Independents 202748-8002.
		On Monday, the head of Intel Corporation, the CEO, his name is Lip Bhutan.
		He visited the White House.
		Why?
unidentified		Well, President Trump had some concerns.
		And I'm laughing because it is remarkable the grip that President Trump and the White House has had on the private sector.
		And I wrote about this earlier this week, this kind of command-central economy that President Trump has.
		I think there were concerns about the Intel CEO's dealings in China.
		And President Trump said, no, no, no, the CEO is conflicted.
		He should resign.
		I mean, think about that for a sec.
		A president asking or telling a private company that their chief executive should resign publicly.
		I think the Intel CEO made the trip to Washington to smooth tensions over.
		It's not great when the president is publicly calling for you to resign.
		And I think that meeting ended up well.
		And I think now maybe there's a better rapport and tensions have cooled down a little bit.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		The article you're referring to is your article titled Trump's Command Capitalism Playbook Signals a New Economic Era.
		And you've got a quote here by a former trade negotiator who said, quote, What we are seeing is, in effect, the monetization of U.S. trade policy, in which U.S. companies must pay the U.S. government for permission to export.
		If that's the case, we've entered into a new and dangerous world.
		I understand the new part.
		What makes it dangerous?
unidentified		I think it's the national security question that you smartly asked.
		It is, you know, what are we putting at risk if companies can just essentially pay to play?
		As we talked about, there were national security concerns about selling these chips abroad.
		Democrats and Republicans alike are worried about the AI race, are worried about whether China might get ahead of the U.S.
		And if there are these deals being cut in back rooms with companies and the government, those concerns kind of go out the window.
		And so on the national security front, what are we risking there?
		I think that's the part of the danger.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, let's bring in Matt, who is calling from Falls Church, Virginia, Line for Democrats.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Matt.
unidentified		Good morning.
		So my question for the guest is, locally, I live here in Northern Virginia.
		And while I've had several friends lose several government jobs, I've also had some friends losing jobs in the tech sector.
		And I'm just wondering, where does the guest think the current jobs and unemployment figures are going to be heading in the near future because of tariffs?
		Yeah, this is something I've been reporting on, and some of my colleagues in the Axios Newsroom have been reporting on.
		We think this is going to be the big economic story in the years ahead.
		You know, what happens when AI becomes more embedded in our lives, when companies really start to hand off tasks to AI and AI agents?
		That's a big question.
		I think economists right now are looking at the college job market, college-age students, and it's really hard for college students to find a job.
		And one of the reasons, not the only reason, but one of the reasons is that some of those entry-level jobs that college recently graduated students would take are now kind of being done by AI.
		I mean, this is not a widespread phenomenon yet.
		I think we're still in the early stages, but AI is here, and there will be some impact on the labor market.
		There will be some impact on productivity.
		But what exactly that impact is and how big it is, I think that's, we don't know, which is frightening.
		And yeah.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Ricky in South Carolina, Republican.
unidentified		Yes, I would like to ask the guest why she thinks that the United States don't need to give them chips because they control all the rare earth and pharmaceuticals.
		China does.
		Right.
		This was a big tension with the U.S.-China trade negotiations.
		They have more than 90% of the supply of rare earths, I believe.
		And there was some tension between the Trump administration and Chinese officials because they weren't exporting these rare earths the way that I think negotiators had agreed upon.
		And so there was some risk of trade tensions flaring back up.
		But you raise a good point.
		Is this the trade-off?
		I think I mentioned that Chinese state media were cautious about their businesses buying these chips.
		And so I think the question of, do we get rare earths and we give them some chips, is that part of the deal?
		That doesn't appear to be the case.
		But as I said, I think companies, China is a huge market, I don't have to tell you.
		I think companies don't want to be blocked off from that market, even if there are concerns about national security.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		It's interesting that the Chinese government had said, don't buy these chips because there could be a back door.
		So they're worried about their national security.
		From American chips.
unidentified		Exactly, exactly.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		The deal between Nippon Steel and U.S. Steel.
		How does that factor in?
		First, explain that deal and does it factor into this chip deal?
unidentified		This deal dates back to the Biden administration.
		The Japanese company wanted to buy a U.S. steel maker.
		The Biden administration had some concerns about that.
		I think ultimately they decided, I don't know about this.
		This could be troubling.
		Do we want to give up?
		Do we want to have our supply of steel controlled by Japan?
		President Trump also had concerns about this.
		And ultimately, what the Trump administration decided is, yes, this deal can go through, but the U.S. government gets a golden share, which essentially means that the U.S. government gets a say on big corporate decisions, board appointments, if there's a new CEO, new CEO appointments, things of that nature.
		And so again, it's kind of this intermingling between the government and private businesses that's really been a trend since Trump has been in office.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And continuing that trend, Tim Cook and Apple being exempt from future chip tariffs.
unidentified		Right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Explain that.
unidentified		Because they made, they agreed to make a huge investment in U.S. manufacturing, building plants here, not going as far as we're going to build iPhones in the U.S., no, but agreeing to hand over substantial money and invest that in plants and jobs and things of that nature.
		That is what President Trump likes to see.
		He likes to make deals.
		And if the private sector is going to make these deals, I think they get a little something in return.
		Maybe Apple won't be exempt, won't be subject to these tariffs.
		And what's interesting is that during President Trump's first term, all of these exemptions were happening from tariffs, but it was really a shielded process.
		I did a lot of reporting trying to understand who was exempt from what and why and how that got, how that deal got made.
		Now it's kind of happening in the open, which as a reporter and a nosy person, I sort of appreciate.
		But I think it's so fascinating to see these kind of trade-offs happening in the Oval Office in front of cameras.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And Courtney Brown is with us from Axios.
		If you've got an economics question for her, you can go ahead and call the numbers.
		Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		Democrats, 202-748-8000.
		And Independents, 202-748-8002.
		You can also text us.
		That number is 202-748-8003.
		I want to ask you about numbers.
		The inflation numbers are the first report to come out since President Trump fired the head of the BLS.
		You wrote a piece yesterday.
		It says the headline is, there's no good replacement for government data.
		Tell us about it.
unidentified		I want to start by saying something a little bit nuanced, which doesn't always get put out there off the bat.
		It is true that the Bureau of Labor Statistics, along with other statistical agencies around the world, are really struggling right now.
		They are having a hard time getting survey response rates up.
		They're dealing with strains on their budget.
		And so all of this has raised the question of what is how is our data, is our data accurately showing what's going on in the economy.
		And then on top of that, so you have that long-standing issue.
		On top of that, President Trump two weeks ago fires the head, the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a Biden appointee, accuses this person of rigging the numbers, his words, not mine, and decides he wants to nominate his own pick to lead the BLS.
		Now, if confirmed, this person would be very powerful.
		And, you know, the Bureau of Labor Statistics is not something people really talk about.
		But, you know, yesterday, while CPI came out, it's almost like those numbers took a back seat for economists because this pick was announced on Monday night.
		There were so many questions about what this nominee would do to economic data and whether it can be trustworthy.
		So my piece kind of looked at this idea that if government data were to go by the wayside, there was an interview with Fox where E.J. Antony, Trump's pick, said that maybe we don't release the jobs report on a monthly basis.
		Maybe we release it on a quarterly basis.
		Maybe we suspend it while we figure out some of the underlying issues with the methodology.
		And I think that sparked a lot of worry in the economist community, but also in the CEO community.
		They use this data to make their own business decisions.
		And so my piece was really looking at what if that happens?
		What if we don't get the monthly jobs number?
		What if we don't get CPI on a monthly basis?
		What would economists, CEOs, investors look at to understand what's happening in the economy?
		And there's really no good replacement.
		There is so much private sector data, but there is not something that is really the gold standard of the world.
		Even with all those issues I mentioned, U.S. data is the gold standard of the world, and no private company can measure up yet.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Bruce, Independent Line, Kingston, New York.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Bruce.
unidentified		Yeah, good morning.
		Good morning, Courtney.
		This is a really interesting and I think very essential discussion going on now.
		I want to bring up a perspective on this.
		So although we want to give due respect to the presidency and the institutions that are regulating the commerce of the United States and the globe, actually, there are perspectives that see a lot of the Trump position as being more of a shakedown.
		And it seems to me that when you clean off the ornamentation and language that protects it, this is not much different.
		The tariffs aren't much different than a kind of extortion racket.
		And frankly, the thing that gets me the most is when he starts tapping private enterprise and very dignified CEOs in this country, intimidating them into giving them what is essentially a cut, which is right out of the movies for the mafia crackdowns.
		So I'm interested how we guide the language as much as see the perspective in real time and not always sugarcoat it with economic language when it's a little less than real economic science.
		And I'll hang up and look for your comment.
		But companies are agreeing to it and countries are agreeing to it.
		And what does that say about the might of America on the global stage?
		President Trump said that if you want access to our store, essentially, the American store, you have to pay.
		Of course, we know that tariffs are not paid by exporters.
		They're paid by American importers and ultimately might be passed along to the consumer or eaten up by profits.
		I think that It is mind-blowing to watch these CEOs agree to these deals, these leaders agree to these deals, when in large part, when you look at the text of the deals, you're wondering, like, what did the U.S. give?
		I mean, I'm thinking about the trade deal with the European Union.
		You know, Europe has double-digit, has to, has to impose double-digit tariffs on their exports.
		They're going to be subject to double-digit tariffs.
		They had to make a huge investment in the U.S.
		And what did the U.S. really, really give?
		I'm not sure what we gave.
		And that's kind of the trend through a lot of these trade deals.
		I think this language of a shakedown, I think the White House would say that they're doing this for the American people.
		All of this investment is flowing into the U.S. and it's going to create jobs and this and that.
		Of course, we have to see if that happens, but I don't think they view it as a shakedown.
		I think they view it as being in the ultimate good of the American people.
		Of course, we don't know whether that's the case or not.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Lynn in Pomfret, Connecticut, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Lynn.
unidentified		Yes, I'd like to ask about the discussion she had on the company being able to sell chips to China and the government getting a cut from it.
		Can't we say that's the beginning of democratic socialism?
		I think there are those comments out there.
		But think about President Trump's background.
		I mean, he made his name as kind of like a red-blooded capitalist, right?
		He was a businessman.
		He was in real estate.
		I don't know that he would call it democratic socialism, but there is a lot of injection of the government into the private sector.
		And I think there are a lot of Democrats and Republican economists who would agree that tariffs are a part of this theme here.
		You're applying a tax on companies and consumers, essentially.
		And you're telling companies they have to pay X percent of their sales to do business outside of the U.S. and in China.
		And it's really something we haven't seen before, at least not to this scale.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We've got a question for you on X from America Inc.
		Has the SBA announced any small business initiatives and loan programs to promote the creation of small business American manufacturing?
		Are a majority of new manufacturing plants only being built by foreign investors?
unidentified		That's a great question.
		I don't think the majority of these new investments are only from foreign investors.
		For instance, Apple agreed that it would pay a couple hundred billion dollars or invest a couple hundred billion dollars in the U.S.
		But I mean, President Trump in aggregate has landed deals that would, again, in aggregate, bring more than $1 trillion into the U.S. between its deal with the U.S.'s deal with Europe and Japan.
		And I think this question of small businesses and manufacturing and whether the government is stepping up to give small businesses a hand, it's such a good one because I spend a lot of time talking to Wall Street folks and CEOs, but I also try to get the small business perspective because sometimes there's such a gap in the sentiment.
		And I think right now, I talked to a small business owner a few weeks ago.
		They are really struggling with tariffs.
		And one thing I find fascinating is they're struggling with getting the money to essentially put a down payment on the goods they're getting from abroad.
		So that's, you know, small businesses don't have huge margins.
		So that's difficult.
		At the same time, they want to be a player in this AI race.
		They want to make their businesses more productive.
		And at this point, it's kind of a trade-off.
		Like, I'm struggling with the capability to get my goods.
		And how am I supposed to, on the other hand, make an investment in AI that might pay off in the long run?
		It's just, it's hard right now for small businesses.
		My grandfather's a small business owner.
		I know it's hard.
		And I am curious what the government is going to do with smaller shops, not just the NVIDIAs and the apples of the world.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Charlie in Warren, Massachusetts, Independent.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Charlie.
unidentified		Hi, hi, Mimi.
		Haven't talked to you in a long time.
		Hi there.
		Ms. Brown, I'd like to ask you about the Bureau of Labor statistics.
		From what I'm hearing, they're having a hard time with businesses aren't cooperating with them.
		Do you know anything about how they do these surveys?
		Isn't it snail mail?
		And they don't require businesses to do anything to that's that's isn't that what the problem is?
		There was a great story in the Wall Street Journal yesterday afternoon talking about they cite administration officials and they are talking about do we need to infuse this process of collecting data to compile the jobs report because it is a survey of businesses and households.
		Do we need to bring it into the 21st century?
		How are we collecting this data?
		And you're right, businesses are not required to respond.
		In fact, some of the large revisions we've been seeing in recent months have to do with the fact that businesses are not responding until later.
		And then the BLS goes back and adjusts its estimates for jobs growth on a monthly basis.
		There are questions.
		I mentioned at the outset, the U.S. is not the only country dealing with these issues with their statistics agency.
		The U.K. similarly has had to go back and re-revise data in huge ways because they have a problem with getting people to respond to these surveys.
		And so is the Trump administration going to try to improve that process?
		And are they going to be transparent about how they're trying to improve it?
		And there's this really interesting trade-off between timeliness and accuracy.
		We can have the monthly jobs report, but maybe we have revisions down the line.
		Or maybe we release the jobs report quarterly, which is what Trump's pick to lead the BLS was suggesting in an interview.
		But we don't have that timely update on what's happening with the employment market, employment, yeah, employment market.
		And I think there is, you know, there are questions about whether the trade-off should be less timely data, but more accurate data.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		One more question for you.
		This is Rob on text from West Virginia.
		Considering labor rates in the U.S., how will we afford things after manufacturing of them returns to the U.S.?
unidentified		I assume this has to do with wages and paying workers.
		It's generally more expensive to pay workers in the U.S. than labor abroad.
		You know, I had a really depressing conversation with small business that basically said that this idea of trying to bring the U.S. into this new manufacturing age and make all of the things here in the U.S., it's just never going to happen for this exact reason.
		It's very expensive to make all of the goods that we import here.
		And it's going to take a long time to build these factories, to get the workforce up to speed.
		And we have huge demographic issues in the U.S. Our workforce is aging.
		The labor market is predicted to be kind of structurally tight going forward.
		And do we even have the bodies, if you will, the labor to work in all of these factories?
		And how will companies afford the wages?
		These are the questions that they're grappling with.
		And maybe it ultimately ends up somewhere in the middle where, you know, it's not President Trump's dream of bringing all manufacturing back to the U.S., but maybe more factories are here in the U.S.
		And there is still some business that is done abroad with respect to imports.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That's Courtney Brown, Senior Economics Reporter for Axios.
		You can find her work at axios.com.
		Thanks so much for joining us.
unidentified		Thank you for having me.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Later in the program, Matthew Kroenig will join us of the Atlantic Council and he'll discuss changes at the State Department and President Trump's upcoming summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
		But first, it's open forum.
		Start calling in now.
		Numbers are on your screen.
		It's 202748-8001 for Republicans, 202-748-8000 for Democrats, and 202-748-8002 for Independents.
		We'll be right back.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		In our earlier discussion with Zakir Tamiz about his full biography of Charles Sumner, he discussed his differences with Professor David Herbert Donald on the same subject.
		On December the 24th, 1995, Professor Donald talked about his book called Lincoln on the television program BookNotes.
		David Donald died in 2009 at age 88.
		During his teaching career, which he finished as a professor of history at Harvard, Professor Donald was praised for his Lincoln book by historian Eric Foner.
		Quote, it is often considered the best single volume of Lincoln ever.
		It's the most balanced of the biographies out there, said Foner.
unidentified		We discuss author David Herbert Donald and his book Lincoln on this episode of BookNotes Plus with our host, Brian Lamb.
		BookNotes Plus is available wherever you get your podcasts and on the C-SPAN Now app.
		And past president nominal.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		Why are you doing this?
unidentified		This is outrageous.
		This is a kangaroo clause.
		This fall, C-SPAN presents a rare moment of unity.
		Ceasefire, where the shouting stops and the conversation begins.
		Join political playbook chief correspondent and White House Bureau Chief Dasha Burns as host of Ceasefire, bringing two leaders from opposite sides of the aisle into a dialogue to find common ground.
		ceasefire this fall on the network that doesn't take sides only on c-span c-span shop.org is c-span's online store Browse through our latest collection of C-SPAN products, apparel, books, home decor, and accessories.
		There's something for every C-SPAN fan, and every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations.
		Shop now or anytime at cspanshop.org.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		I saw you interviewed the other night.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		I watched it about two o'clock in the morning.
unidentified		There was a little thing called C-SPAN, which I don't know how many people were watching.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Don't worry, you were on prime time too, but they happen to have a little rerun.
patty murray ▲ ● ▼		Do you really think that we don't remember what just happened last week?
patty murray ▲ ● ▼		Thank goodness for C-SPAN, and we all should review the tape.
unidentified		Everyone wonders when they're watching C-SPAN what the conversations are on the floor.
al green ▲ ● ▼		I'm about to read to you something that was published by C-SPAN.
sean duffy ▲ ● ▼		There's a lot of things that Congress fights about that they disagree on.
unidentified		We can all watch that on C-SPAN.
		Millions of people across the country tuned into C-SPAN.
		That was a made-for-C-SPAN moment.
		If you watch on C-SPAN, you're going to see me physically across the aisle every day, just trying to build relationships and try to understand their perspective and find common ground.
tammy bruce ▲ ● ▼		And welcome forward to everybody watching at home.
		We know C-SPAN covers this live as well.
		We appreciate that.
unidentified		And one can only hope that he's able to watch C-SPAN on a black and white television set in his prison cell.
		This is being carried live by C-SPAN.
		It's being watched not only in this country, but it's being watched around the world right now.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Mike said before, I happened to listen to him, he was on C-SPAN 1.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		That's a big upgrade, right?
unidentified		Weekends bring you Book TV featuring leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books.
		Here's a look at what's coming up this weekend.
		At 8 p.m. Eastern, Stacey Abrams, a one-time Georgia state legislator and gubernatorial candidate, talks with former Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden about her latest fictionalized thriller, Coded Justice.
		And then at 9:15 p.m. Eastern, Michael Grinbaum gives an inside look at the glamorous Condi Nast publishing empire, the people who crafted its publications, and the standards they set for American culture with his book, Empire of the Elite.
		And at 10:15 p.m. Eastern, Book TV takes you to Freedom Fest, an annual libertarian festival held this year in Palm Springs, California, to hear three authors discuss their works.
		We'll talk with Wrong Speak Publishing founder Adam Coleman, attorney Kent Heckenlively, and computer information technologist Sean Worthington.
		Watch Book TV every weekend on C-SPAN 2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org.
		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We're back.
		It is Open Forum.
		Look forward to hearing what you have to say.
		And just a quick update for you from Axios.
		Sherrod Brown is launching a comeback Senate bid in Ohio.
		Says that he served three terms in the Senate, and it's the Democratic Party's best shot at flipping a critical seat in increasingly red Ohio.
		That's from Axios.
		And this is Thomas calling from Honolulu, Hawaii, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Yeah, I'm not yet able to go to sleep, so I thought I'd call in this open forum.
		I haven't called in in about 14 months.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So you thought you'd just hang out with us because you can't sleep, Thomas?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Is that what's going on?
unidentified		Yeah, I didn't.
		I don't have to leave the house and put my clothes on again.
		So anyway, I haven't called in about 14 months because I was getting frustrated because the vast majority of calls seem to me to be just reflecting the almost mindless polarization we hear day in, day out from mainstream media, left and right-wing, left and right-wing media, social media, anti-social media, as I call it.
		But I decided to call in because for what it's worth, this has always been the case.
		It's still the case.
		There's a lot of people making a lot of money dividing we the people, meaning we the little people, the working class, the 99%, whatever you want to call it.
		And not only are they getting rich at that, by having, as long as we're fighting each other, we're not going to unite and use our collective power against the people who are really causing our problems.
		And that's what the 1% is, the demo public and the ruling class, as I call it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So Thomas, how do people make money off of polarization?
unidentified		What do you mean by that?
		Well, I'll show my bias.
		Fox News has been around almost 30 years, and it's been their business model since day one.
		It hasn't been objective reporting.
		The fair and balanced stuff they used to brag about or use at their tagline was nonsense from the beginning.
		But the left wing has had to respond to some extent to fight fire with fire.
		So what happens when they're all making money trying to attract an audience?
		Fox is still the most profitable by far because they tell their audience what they want to hear.
		And they triggered parts of our brain.
		Fear and rage are much more profitable than plain old objective news.
		So, and the left wing has to respond in kind.
		And on anti-social media, we all get to be our own broadcasters, right?
		So we just regurgitate what we hear from our favorite media sources that tell us what we want to hear.
		And then that seeps into your programming as well.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Got it, Thomas.
		Let's go to Texas Republican line.
		Carlos, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		To begin with, I'm an American citizen and I live in the great state of Texas.
		There's people that move here from Mexico and they brought their church with them.
		Don't get me wrong about the church.
		I believe in churches.
		But everything they own belongs to the church.
		And the church don't pay no taxes.
		And I heard it here recently that they're still doing it from the 70s.
		That's not fair.
		You know, I paid my taxes ever since I was able to work.
		I'm not an educated person.
		I believe in common sense.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Carlos, what do you mean by their bringing their churches with them?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Are you saying that they all go to the same church?
unidentified		Yeah, it's a religion.
		And they're Germans.
		And they don't, everything that they own, and they own a whole lot right now.
		You'll see the houses that they built, The businesses say that they got and the church owns all the business treaty.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		And that's not fair.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Got that.
		Charlotte in Milwaukee, Democrat.
		Good morning, Charlotte.
unidentified		Hello.
		I just would like to correct the man.
		I would like to correct the man that said black people is attacking white people.
		That situation in Ohio, the German man, I mean, the Russian man clapped a retarded black man.
		And he got dealt with because he clapped the retarded man to the Fox News and Showdown.
		He clapped somebody so he didn't get just jumped over for nothing.
		And also, there's a man in Ohio that he attempted to kill 30 black people.
		And a man in Georgia was saying he was going to kill black people and German people.
		I mean, black people and Jewish people.
		So that's stuff that Trump has done.
		So it's not stuff that black people have done.
		We prefer to be left alone.
		And I'm tired of all this basic stuff.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Charlotte.
		And here is State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce.
		She's giving her final briefing to reporters because President Trump has nominated her to the U.S. to be U.S. Deputy Ambassador to the United Nations in New York.
		Here she is.
tammy bruce ▲ ● ▼		During my first press briefing, I promised you and the American people that my commitment would be always to speak directly and clearly about President Trump's America First Foreign Policy Agenda and its implementation by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
		With the help of the extraordinary men and women who serve the State Department, my team and I worked every day with that promise in mind.
		And it is a commitment that will continue to inform all of my work.
		As this remarkable chapter in my life continues, I want to take a moment to thank all of you in the bullpen and also in this room in general for your camaraderie, your banter, your professionalism, and yes, even the occasional haranguing, which normally is from the bullpen.
		Yes, I'm looking at you, Daphne.
		You've kept me sharp, grounded, and on more than a few occasions laughing.
		The relationship between the spokesperson and the press is a unique one, and I'm grateful that I know all of you.
		I also want to thank Secretary Rubio for his faith in me and people I have mentioned often during these briefings, the men and women of the State Department.
		From day one, your expertise and deep sense of mission have shaped the way we engage the American people and the world.
		With your help, we made the daily press briefings relatable, enhancing transparency and giving the American people the foreign policy news and insight they deserve.
		In just 200 days, we've conducted over 200 interviews, provided daily press briefings every week, managed countless major announcements, and delivered department-breaking news, sometimes right in this room, in real time.
		This success is a testament to your coordination, skill, and strategic work, an unshakable commitment to excellence.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And we're back to open forum.
		You can give us a call.
		We will be in open forum until about 9.15.
		We will take your calls on these lines.
		Republicans are on 202-748-8001.
		Democrats 202-748-8000.
		And Independents 202-748-8002.
		Here is Jean in Farmville, North Carolina, Democrat.
		Hi, Jean.
unidentified		Hello.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I have, okay, I have different opinions.
		I am a Democrat, but if Trump is scared, I think he should have the National Guard up there.
		I mean, he was scared to be in Vietnam.
		So, I mean, if he's scared, maybe he knows something we don't.
		And maybe he is going to do something good, you know.
		But as far as my other opinion is Texas trying to take over the country, I wished every American would not do any extra driving, not use any extra gas, and show Texas that we do not need their gas if they want to take over the country.
		How are we going to let Texas know that they shouldn't put demands on everybody in the country?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Gene.
		And this is a tweet on X by the Kennedy Center who says this: The Kennedy Center is honored to host a visit from our chairman, President Donald J. Trump, tomorrow.
		Thanks to his advocacy, our beautiful building will undergo renovations to restore its prestige and grandeur.
		We are also excited to be announcing this year's incredible slate of honorees.
		And joining us to talk about that is Ted Johnson, political editor for Deadline.
		If you're on the phone, please go ahead and stay on the line, but we will get back to call shortly so you can keep calling in.
		Ted, welcome to the program.
		You there, Ted?
ted johnson ▲ ● ▼		Yes.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Oh, there you are.
		Okay, now I can hear you.
		Tell us about Deadline.
		What kind of a publication is it, and what's your approach to politics?
ted johnson ▲ ● ▼		Well, we are a media and entertainment publication.
		We're actually based in Los Angeles.
		I'm the DC correspondent and bureau chief for Deadline.
		And our interest is anywhere that politics, I mean, anywhere that entertainment and media actually intersects with politics, which is quite a lot.
		It's more than you realize.
		The Kennedy Center is a quintessential story because here you have the president kind of ensured that he would become chairman of the Kennedy Center in the second term.
		And the Kennedy Center Honors is a big, huge entertainment event.
		It is held every December, and it is probably the biggest annual meeting of the Beltway elite as well as the Hollywood elite.
		So very keen interest on what's going to happen today.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So as you said, he is heading over to the Kennedy Center later today.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What's the purpose of that visit?
ted johnson ▲ ● ▼		Well, they've kind of teased that he will announce this year's slate of Kennedy Center honorees.
		And I think there's a lot of interest in this because these are the first batch of awardees that will have his stamp on it.
		He's complained in the past that some of the honorees don't reflect a lot of the culture.
		So we're expecting, actually, they've actually teased this.
		We're expecting people from country music and probably a performer and an actor who have been supporters of the president.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So in announcing the visit, President Trump used the term, quote, the Trump Kennedy Center.
		Was that intentional?
		I'm assuming it was intentional.
		What does that indicate to you?
ted johnson ▲ ● ▼		Well, this goes back to a couple of weeks ago.
		There was a lawmaker on Capitol Hill who actually proposed renaming the Kennedy Center as the Donald Trump Center.
		That is, I should caution, that's just legislation that was proposed in Congress.
		We have no idea if it will go anywhere.
		But Trump seems to, you know, it's almost like a bit of a tease on his part that he threw that in there and then he kind of corrected himself.
		We'll see where that goes.
		But it seemed to rattle a lot of people because the official name is the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.
		It was established in 1971 as a memorial to the 35th president.
		And there was some pushback by members of the Kennedy family over even the suggestion of renaming the Kennedy Center in honor of the president.
		Or there was another proposal of renaming the Opera House at the Kennedy Center in honor of the first lady, Melania Trump.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And we'll just show the Truth Social post where President Trump does that just the beginning, where it says, great nominees for the Trump Kennedy Center.
		Whoops, I mean Kennedy Center Awards.
		So that's where he mentioned that.
		You said that President Trump is the chairman of the Kennedy Center.
		To what extent has he been?
		I mean, he's obviously busy running the country as president of the United States.
		To what extent has he been involved in the operations of the Kennedy Center?
ted johnson ▲ ● ▼		Well, a lot more so than any of his predecessors.
		He's the first president to come in and make himself chairman of this institution.
		He's visited the Kennedy Center three times in this presidency, and he's hosted the board at the White House one time.
		So there is that involvement.
		He's also kind of led the charge, so to speak, when it comes to getting congressional funding for a massive renovation of the Kennedy Center.
		The big beautiful bill that passed last month includes $257 million to do an overhaul.
		And as a real estate developer, he's taken a special interest in this.
		When he visited the Kennedy Center in June, reporters peppered him with questions that he kept on going back to the plans for the renovations.
		So my assumption is he's taking a very, very sharp interest in this and also in who the honorees will be.
		This seems to have rankled him in the past.
		So I imagine that he kind of had a veto power over who was going to be honored and who was not going to be honored.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Well, we'll be watching that visit.
		Ted Johnson, political editor for Deadline.
		Thanks so much for joining us today.
ted johnson ▲ ● ▼		Thank you for having me.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And we are back to Open Forum.
		You can feel free to give us a call.
		We will be with you until about 9:15 or so on Open Forum.
		The numbers are Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		It's 202-748-8000 for Democrats and 202-748-8002 for Independents.
		We'll go to Fort Lauderdale, Florida, Independent Line Stella.
		You're on the air.
unidentified		Hey, how are you doing?
		Thanks for having me.
		Just two things.
		Thank you.
		Just two things.
		I wanted to read a verse.
		2 Corinthians, sorry, 2 Chronicles 7, verse 14.
		If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven, forgive their sins, and heal their land.
		I feel like this country needs this.
		And then number two, why is it people, if you don't vote the way they want you to vote, they shun you?
		Like I voted for Trump.
		You know, I'm not, you know, with his whole personality thing, but I like some of his hobbies.
		But there are people getting divorces, getting to family disputes because of the way they voted.
		If you have a friend or family member that don't want to talk to you because of the way they voted, you voted, that's a problem.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And Cindy from Clarksburg, Maryland, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hello, Cindy.
unidentified		Hi.
		I just hopped on here and got through really easily, which is surprising.
		So I don't know if this is completely open.
		I'm just going to respond to what I just heard, the discussion about the Kennedy Center, which will always be the Kennedy Center for this country.
		That's the bottom line.
		I could drive by there three times a visit.
		If I was in the White House, I could have a meeting there with the board.
		But let's be real, people.
		This is a joke.
		And that's the least of our worries.
		Thanks for taking my call.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Philip in Jackson, Mississippi, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Philip.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
		Bottom line is, I know that there are a lot of people out there concerned about the cultural and political issues with the president and certain cultures.
		And I just want to tell you that there's a really excellent piece of work called Run in My Shoes that might help alleviate a lot of the tension and also the just falsehoods that are circulating.
		This is a college, collegiate level study, and I think people will be most interested in looking at it, especially in the times that we're living in.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And here is The Hill with the headline, Alabama Republican Barry Moore, or sorry, Alabama Representative Barry Moore announces run for Senate.
		It says that Representative Barry Moore, a Republican of Alabama, launched a campaign Tuesday for the Alabama Senate seat being vacated by Senator Tommy Tubberville.
		Here is his announcement video.
unidentified		And this campaign isn't about climbing some ladder or pleasing the establishment.
		I'm not a rhino, and I'm sure not one of those MAGA pretenders suddenly coming to be conservative.
		I ain't never been nothing but a Republican, and I stand up for our values in Congress every day.
		Barry works harder than anyone I know.
		Whether it's helping a veteran, listening to the needs of a farmer, or standing up for what is right in Washington, D.C.
		It's true.
		It's because I've never forgotten where I come from.
		I grew up on a farm.
		I started my own company with one old truck, and I spent my life fighting for the folks who get up every day to work hard to keep our country running.
		And now, after a lot of prayer and conversations like this one, I've decided to run for the United States Senate.
		I'll keep standing with President Trump to secure the border, to stop the reckless spending, defend our farmers, and fight back against the Washington swamp that's forgotten who they work for.
		I'm not going to change, and I'm not backing down.
		This campaign isn't about me.
		It's about you.
		It's about our families, your freedom, and the future of this great country.
		I'm Barry Moore, and I'd be honored to earn your vote as the next U.S. Senator from Alabama.
		Let's fight together for our values, for our family, for our America.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Back to your calls now.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Jim Eagle Point, Oregon, Independent Line, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		How are you?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good.
unidentified		Good.
		I just wondered, I have a question to our government about the additions of the White House, the expansion of a ballroom, and now the Kennedy Center to be revamped and the statues being taken in and then put back by each different president that comes in.
		How is that going to affect our budget?
		And why is it that we're spending all that money on those things when we can't feed our children lunch?
		And that's my opinion today.
		Thank you very much.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's some information from the White House.
		It says the White House announces the White House ballroom construction to begin.
		That's at whitehouse.gov, and it is estimated to cost $200 million for that.
		Dennis, Wisconsin Independent Line.
		Hi, Dennis.
unidentified		Morning.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		You know, people stand on getting the busy signal for 20 minutes trying to get through to you.
		I know I do.
		And then we get on.
		And our representatives, obviously, our Congress needs to step up.
		I mean, they need to be quit the fourth estate.
		You know, where we're at today, 20 years ago, you know, Ralph Nader was a guy.
		30% didn't vote in this election.
		They are going to determine the midterms.
		And I wish, I wish I could say with more certainty that that means that this will put an end to this possible fascist takeover of our system.
		But I was wrong about the first time.
		So, but the thing of it is, is that, you know, we should be doing what Australia does.
		And if you're a voter and you don't want to vote, that's your privilege.
		For years, I used to turn in blank ballots.
		And those blank ballots should be counted.
		You know, every vote should count.
		And if you show up at the poll and turn in a ballot and there's nobody there you want and you turn it in blank, those statistics should be reported.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You want a none of the above option on the ballots.
unidentified		Absolutely.
		And, you know, it should matter.
		But the other end of it is, is like Australia does, if you don't vote, it's a $10 ticket.
		You can do the same thing as Madison does with parking tickets.
		If you do not turn in a vote without a decent excuse, you pay the $10.
		And, you know, how many, 30%, $100 million at $10, you know, that can go towards paying down our debt.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Here's Mike, a Republican in Florida.
		Hi, Mike.
unidentified		Hi, good morning.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		I just want to say, as a former Democrat, I cannot believe how twisted the Democrats have become, where every issue is, they're on the wrong side of it.
		If you look at every issue, let's say the crime in D.C., how can a Democrat be against getting the crime down in D.C.?
		What are they thinking?
		Enough already.
		Trump isn't the devil.
		He's not Hitler.
		If everything is Hitler that he does, then nothing is Hitler.
		That's about all I have to say.
		People, wake up out there.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Annie, a Democrat in St. Petersburg, Florida.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Annie.
unidentified		Good morning.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What's on your mind?
unidentified		Well, I'm calling, there's a lot of things.
		I'm just really concerned about this visit with Putin.
		I mean, I don't really feel as though Trump has our best interest in mind.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And why do you think that?
unidentified		I just feel as though he's going just to be seen with Putin.
		I really wish that he was taking this more seriously because that is a country that's suffering.
		And to not include the Ukrainian president In on this is unbelievable.
		I just I can't even think about it.
		So, I mean, um, I think that this is just a show for Trump.
		And also, um, I just wanted to talk about all these renovations that are going on at the White House and all this money that he's supposedly putting into all this.
		And at one time, he said he was gonna, you know, Mexico was gonna pay for the wall, and it's ending up that we are now actually paying for the wall.
		And we really didn't need it after all because he got rid of everybody.
		He's getting rid of everybody.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, this is Denise Aurora, Illinois, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Denise.
unidentified		Hi.
		Yeah, back in 1916, our friend Donald Trump and his best buddy, Vladimir Putin, managed to win the Republican election.
		And it was amazing to see that Putin was successful in getting him in there.
		And sure enough, along comes the 2020 election.
		He tries to do the same thing again.
		But this time it didn't work too well, did it?
		And then along comes 2024, and he manages it in 24 to get the overgrown pile of meat elected a third time.
		We see the two buddies now getting together on Friday to see how successful they were at both being in office.
		We have two dictators ruling the world now.
		This pile of crap that we have has been put there by the white men in this country who are so scared that the black men are someday going to take over.
		Just remember the night of November 5th, 2024, election night.
rima laibow ▲ ● ▼		And all the talk on talk radio all over the country was, no blacks, no Jews, no women.
unidentified		No blacks, no Jews, no women.
unidentified		Got it, Denise.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Medina is in Silver Spring, Maryland, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		How are we doing today?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good.
unidentified		Excellent, excellent.
		Yes, thanks for taking my call.
		Greatly appreciate it.
		I just wanted to plant a quick bug in people's ear about this ballroom renovation that's going to take place.
		I understand that Clark Construction is a company that was awarded the bid for this project.
		Me being a local DC resident, Montgomery County area, I'm familiar with Clark Construction.
		And just for these MAGA Republicans who are always crying and complaining about jobs being taken away from them, well, I want them to know that Clark Construction hires about 80% immigrant workers.
		So I'm sure that 80% of these workforce will be working at the White House doing that work.
		And so just kind of plant a bug in people's ear regarding the expansion of this ballroom that's going to be taking place.
		So thank you.
		Greatly appreciate your time.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And I didn't see anything about who is, who got the contract, but it is, yeah, I can't get that right now.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We'll go to Patty in New York, Republican line.
unidentified		Hi, thank you for having me on.
		I'm just calling because listening to all the people calling in, it's like I like to give more of a positive talk toward our president and his administration and what they are doing for us, the American people.
		I think he's doing a great job.
		I feel more safe in our country than we've ever had before.
		We had a look at the devastation for years with the Biden administration and telling us that the borders closed, which it wasn't.
		They allowed all these people to come in and look what has happened.
		All our president is doing is keeping us safe, cleaning up the mess, and making this world a better place.
		I would hope that the American people that call in, being negative, would appreciate that and know that their families are safer than any time in the past years here.
		So I say kudos to the president.
		Keep on doing what you're doing.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Patty.
		And here is that information I was trying to show you about the ballroom from CBS News, White House to add its 90,000 square feet ballroom to the East Wing.
		It says that it announced this last week, so July 31st or the week before, a 90,000 square foot ballroom with a capacity of 650 people.
		It'll be constructed in the White House's East Wing, approximately $200 million project funded by President Trump and other private donors, according to the White House spokesperson.
		Quote, she said this, quote, the White House is one of the most beautiful and historic buildings in the world, yet the White House is currently unable to host major functions honoring world leaders and other countries without having to install a large and unsightly tent approximately 100 yards away from the building's main entrance.
		Here's Jerry, Mississippi, Independent Line.
		Hi, Jerry.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I just called to say that kind of like a lady called a while ago in the Republican.
		I basically call myself an independent.
		I voted for two Republicans in my life.
		One of them was Richard Nixon and the other was Donald Trump.
		But I will say this: it's a lot of Democrats out there, kind of like myself, kind of conservative Democrats, are switching and starting to go Republican now, especially with a guy like Donald Trump.
		He's not what you call a full-fledged Republican.
		And these people calling in knocking him, this man is a billionaire.
		Now, why?
		He's got to love his country because they took assassination attempts on him twice.
		And he's still trying to help this country do what's best for this country, turn this country around.
		Now, isn't people calling in with all this negative stuff?
		They hate Trump, this, that, whatever thing he does.
		But what they need to understand is Donald Trump is riding this bus.
		I mean, he's driving it.
		Now, you need to sit down in your seat and keep your mouth shut because if you don't like it, in four years, you can change things.
		But that's the American people who will.
		And that's all I got to say.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Jerry.
		And we had a caller in the previous segment of Open Phones asking about the National Guard at the Capitol on January 6th.
		And I told him I would find him the fact check on who was able to call up the National Guard for the Capitol.
		So this is PolitiFact, checking the statement by Sean Hannity that said Donald Trump authorized up to 20,000 National Guard troops to protect the Capitol before January 6th, but was rejected by Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer.
		They're rating that as false.
		And here is why.
		That there is no evidence.
		Pelosi rejected Trump's authorization for 20,000 National Guard before January 6th.
		And there is, in fact, no record of former President Donald Trump officially authorizing 20,000 National Guard troops to protect the Capitol ahead of January 6th.
		There is no evidence that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi denied such an authorization, and experts said she doesn't have the authority to do so in the first place.
		That's in PolitoFact.
		Also, checking the issue that Nancy Pelosi took responsibility for not calling the National Guard.
		It says this in a brief video, then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, quote, I take responsibility for not having them just prepare for more, referring to U.S. Capitol Security, not the National Guard.
		No member of Congress has the authority to activate the D.C. National Guard.
		Only the President, Defense Secretary, and U.S. Army Secretary have that ability to do that.
		So if you'd like to see that, it's at politifact.com.
		Here's Rob, Just Speak Virginia, Democrat.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		One thing I need the viewers to kind of investigate, or maybe the media, is that in the state of North Carolina, over the previous two years prior to the 2024 election, the Republican-controlled legislator of the election board removed over 750,000 people off the rolls.
		They used various reasons to do it by.
		And so these swing states like North Carolina, and there were a lot of people affected, and people are local media are, you know, you've heard stories come out there.
		You've had a lot of voters that are saying that, hey, I had, when I went in to vote on voting day, I was removed off these rolls.
		So they removed a bunch, and most of them were Democrats.
		So they're kind of, you know, tilting elections by, you know, stealing the elections, if you want to say, in these swing states, such as such, because they only, Trump only won North Carolina by 183,000 people.
tom in texas ▲ ● ▼		So if you do the math, you know, 750,000, 183, you know, that's almost like, you know, a quarter, you know, of that, so that they can tilt it in their favor.
unidentified		And so if they did more investigating these local areas and find people that actually were moved illegally, and they've still, some of them still voted.
		You know, who knows if that vote counted on the provisional or not.
		But that's the way they're kind of doing it.
		And that's what they're setting up in Texas now to kind of go through its way.
		So that caller that called in that says, you know, four years, if you don't like, you know, Trump, you can, for the Republican Party, you can vote.
tom in texas ▲ ● ▼		No, that's not, that's exactly what they're trying to prevent right now by doing what they're doing in Texas and other places.
unidentified		But again, it's a pretty good read.
		You can look it up on the board of elections at the North Carolina website and show it to your viewers.
		But it was over 747,000 people removed in the two years prior to the election.
		So they had already started it back in 2022 to gear up for it.
		So thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Rob Jay, New York, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Jay.
unidentified		Good morning.
		My question is when I think about Trump.
		And he said he's just self-made billionaire when we know that it was his father's money in New York.
		Yes.
		I was saying, my question is this.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Jay, you got to put your TV down because you're here in the delay.
		You got to mute it completely.
		Go ahead, but we heard your first part.
		Go ahead, complete your thought.
unidentified		Jay?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		So, just a reminder to all callers, you've got to turn off your TV, mute it completely so you don't hear it.
		There is a delay from what you're hearing on the phone.
		Paul, Palm Desert, California, Independent.
		Hi, Paul.
		Paul, are you there?
unidentified		In Palm Desert?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Paul?
unidentified		Yes.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, go ahead.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You're on the air.
unidentified		Yeah, I just wanted to say that overall, I think the president has done a decent job, although I do have a problem with him protecting Gelaine Maxwell.
unidentified		What's that her name?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, Ghelane Maxwell.
unidentified		Yes.
		I find that the most difficult thing to understand.
		Everything else, I can kind of see the, you know, the wherewithal and the plus and minuses, but protecting child molesters is something that's a definite no, and I think everybody can agree with that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		How do you think that the president is protecting Ghelaine Maxwell?
unidentified		She got a softer sentence when it pertains to where she's being housed.
		And it's my understanding that if Donald Trump didn't want that to happen, it wouldn't happen.
		I think that's a fact.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, she was moved.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I can find some information on that real quick.
unidentified		But we got you.
		Does anybody listening support that?
		Anybody, Republican, Democrat, independent?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Ken in Tampa, Florida.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
unidentified		How are you?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		How are you doing?
unidentified		I'm good.
		And I hope that you'll give me the opportunity to say what I got to say, just like all these other people who call in and say, I've been listening, I've been listening.
		But one thing I would like for you all to do is when these people call in and refer to people as illegal aliens, I would like for them to explain what is an illegal alien?
		What is an alien?
		And also, Mimi, I'm retired military, and I got stationed in Fort Knox, Kentucky in 1981.
		And just to make a long story short, there was the first time I've ever seen the Klang people in full battle dress.
		Even though I'm a black person, they didn't say much to me or anything.
		But I remember that Grand Dragon came out because he was visiting, and he told those people out there because he was a visiting person speaker.
		He said, in order to control them in words and all this type of people in the government, we need to put away these sheets and hoods and put on two-piece and three-piece suits and uniform and badges.
		And when I look at the Congress and these police force today, now it dawned on me what this guy was talking about.
		America is going down the hill every day with this individual named Trump in the White House.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So here is what we've got on Ghelaine Maxwell.
		So this is the Hill.
		It says, Raskin, that's Jamie Raskin, demands documents on Maxwell prison transfer and interview with Todd Blanche.
		It says that the House Judiciary Democrats are launching a probe into the transfer of Maxwell to a lower security prison, arguing the move creates, quote, the strong appearance that it is attempting to cover up the full extent of the relationship between President Trump and Mr. Epstein.
		Maxwell is a close associate of deceased financier Jeffrey Epstein.
		She met with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche last month and sat for hours of questions about the actions that led to her conviction on child sex trafficking charges.
		A couple of items for your schedule.
		The House and Senate are both not in today.
		At 10 a.m. right after this program, we've got security experts examining the recently released warfighting framework from the U.S. Space Force.
		It outlines operational planning for conflict and combat in the space domain.
		We'll have that live from the Atlantic Council right after this program at 10 Eastern.
		And later today at 1, military police experts will discuss the current state of the global arms market.
		You can watch that live from the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, 1 Eastern on C-SPAN 2.
		Both those programs are on our app, C-SPANNOW or online at c-span.org.
		Here's Kim, Michigan, Independent Line.
unidentified		Hi, Kim.
		Hi, Mimi.
		How are you today?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good.
unidentified		Good.
amy larson ▲ ● ▼		I just wanted, I have a fact check for you to go on msn.com that they have a, that Stephen Sund, who was the chief of the Capitol Police during January 6, 2021 incident, he requested the National Guard through Nancy Pelosi and it was denied, I believe he said eight different times.
unidentified		But if you look up on your computer, msn.com, and type in chief son, you'll see that response from him.
		So that political fact, a little bit biased.
		Thank you so much and have a wonderful day.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Monica in Delaware, Line for Democrats.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi, this is Manicu.
		We're calling.
		I have a question.
		If you've committed crimes and they're so against crimes, then how come we have all these criminals that have committed or been investigating for crimes and the White House on the administration staff?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And coming up right after this break, we'll have Matthew Kroenig of the Atlantic Council discussing President Trump's meeting with Russian leader Vladimir Putin in Alaska later this week.
		Also talk about reorganizing the State Department and what it means for U.S. diplomacy.
		That's coming up right after the break.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		Weekends bring you Book TV featuring leading authors discussing their latest nonfiction books.
		Here's a look at what's coming up this weekend.
		At 8 p.m. Eastern, Stacey Abrams, a one-time Georgia state legislator and gubernatorial candidate, talks with former Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden about her latest fictionalized thriller, Coded Justice.
		And then at 9:15 p.m. Eastern, Michael Grinbaum gives an inside look at the glamorous Condi Nast publishing empire, the people who crafted its publications, and the standards they set for American culture with his book, Empire of the Elite.
		And at 10.15 p.m. Eastern, Book TV takes you to Freedom Fest, an annual libertarian festival held this year in Palm Springs, California, to hear three authors discuss their works.
		We'll talk with Wrong Speak Publishing founder Adam Coleman, attorney Kent Heckenlively, and computer information technologist Sean Worthington.
		Watch Book TV every weekend on C-SPAN 2 and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at booktv.org.
brian lamb ▲ ● ▼		In our earlier discussion with Zakir Tamiz about his full biography of Charles Sumner, he discussed his differences with Professor David Herbert Donald on the same subject.
		On December the 24th, 1995, Professor Donald talked about his book called Lincoln on the television program BookNotes.
		David Donald died in 2009 at age 88.
		During his teaching career, which he finished as a professor of history at Harvard, Professor Donald was praised for his Lincoln book by historian Eric Foner.
		Quote, it is often considered the best single volume of Lincoln ever.
		It's the most balanced of the biographies out there, said Foner.
unidentified		We discuss author David Herbert Donald and his book Lincoln on this episode of BookNotes Plus with our host, Brian Lamb.
		BookNotes Plus is available wherever you get your podcasts and on the C-SPAN Now app.
		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back to Washington Journal.
		Joining us now to talk about foreign policy in the Trump administration is Matthew Kroenig.
		He is strategy and security vice president and senior director at the Atlantic Council.
		Matthew, welcome to the program.
unidentified		It's great to be here.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's start with the Trump-Putin meeting happening on Friday in Alaska.
		What are the end goals of this meeting?
		What are both sides trying to get out of it?
unidentified		Well, Trump has been very clear that his goal is to try to end the war in Ukraine and stop the killing.
		And there's been a lot of focus on that over the past several months.
		And so I think this meeting is to try to advance that diplomacy.
		I think expectations are pretty low, unlikely that we get a breakthrough in Alaska.
		But with the two leaders meeting face to face, perhaps they can feel each other out and get a better sense of where we go from this point forward.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Now, the Wall Street Journal has this headline that says, Russia has high hopes for a Trump-Putin summit.
		Peace isn't one of them.
		What is it that Russia wants from the United States?
unidentified		Well, Trump's strategy has been to first really kind of try carrots with Putin.
		And I think he was getting frustrated and seeing that wasn't working.
		And he was getting ready to turn to tougher measures, threatening tariffs, deciding to increase military support to Ukraine.
		And I think Putin was maybe afraid of what might be coming.
		And so Putin may have agreed to these negotiations as a way to try to forestall those tougher measures from the United States.
		So that report about what Putin hopes to achieve, I think that is what he's hoping to achieve to buy some time and to avoid the more punitive measures from the United States.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You know, President Trump not too long ago famously said that all we get from Putin is BS.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Is there any thought that we might get something other than BS from Putin this time?
unidentified		I don't have high hopes for the meeting on Friday because really there's a fundamental conflict of interest here.
		The U.S., Ukraine, Europe's goal is to ensure that Ukraine can survive as an independent state.
		Putin's goal is to make sure that that doesn't happen, to ensure that he has effective political control of Ukraine one way or another.
		And so I think what we've seen so far is that Putin believes he can win on the battlefield at very high cost, but we've seen no interest that he's wanting to wind down the war.
		And so ultimately, I do think it's going to take more pressure from the United States and Europe through tariffs and other measures to show Putin that things only get worse from here, that you're better off looking for off-ramps, that you can't win on the battlefield.
		But I don't think we've convinced him of that yet.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		No, Ukrainian President Zelensky is not going to be at the meeting.
		Do we know why that is?
		And did the U.S. push for him to be at the meeting or did they want it to just be bilateral between Putin and Trump?
unidentified		Unclear how that exactly came about.
		And I think ultimately any peace agreement is going to have to have Ukraine and Zelensky's buy-in.
		It affects the security of our European allies, so they're going to have to be on board.
		And Trump did say, I think just yesterday or the day before, that ultimately Zelensky will be brought in, that he'll be the first person that Trump calls after the meeting with Putin.
		But this meeting is just one-on-one between the United States and Russia.
		And so that's another reason that they're not going to be able to comprehensively solve the issue on Friday, because, again, for this to work, the Europeans and the Ukrainians are going to have to support it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And President Trump has said that there is going to be some land swapping.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do we know any details of that and what he is expecting Ukraine to give up in exchange for ending the war?
unidentified		Yes.
		Well, there are two possibilities here, one that would make sense and one that wouldn't.
		Well, and actually, for the sake of completeness, maybe three.
		You know, best case scenario first would be if Ukraine could take back all of its territory recognized under international law.
		Given the realities on the battlefield right now, though, that looks very unlikely.
		And so the other two remaining options would be, you know, one option would be, and when people hear land swaps, they sometimes think that we're going to say, okay, Putin, congratulations, you've invaded Ukraine.
		You now get to keep half the country.
		I think that would be unacceptable to the Ukrainians.
		And personally, I don't think that makes sense.
		So the third option, and what I hope Trump is talking about with land swaps, would be essentially to say, okay, Russia, we realize you're occupying large parts of Ukrainian territory.
		We're not going to try to contest that militarily, but we don't recognize that under international law.
		That's still illegally occupied territory.
		But let's stop the fighting.
		Let's stop the killing, as Trump has called for.
		So I hope what it means is a ceasefire along the current lines, recognizing that Russia is occupying parts of Ukraine, but not legally recognizing that as Russian territory.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And as far as security guarantees for Ukraine, what do you think would be the best outcome in that case?
unidentified		Well, this is critical because Trump doesn't just want a ceasefire.
		He wants a sustainable ceasefire.
		He doesn't want a position where Russia can simply restart the war in the near term, you know, use the ceasefire to rearm, rebuild, and reattack.
		And so you would want a situation where Ukraine is strong enough that it could defend itself from future Russian attack.
		NATO membership might be the best way to deter Putin.
		We've seen that he's unwilling to attack NATO members for a variety of reasons.
		I think that's probably off the table politically.
		And so then the other measures that could make sense would be Ukraine building up its own defense industry and ability to defend itself.
		And that's something that's taking place already.
		But then also there's been discussion of security guarantees from European allies, getting a coalition of countries, say maybe the UK, Sweden, or others, to put forces on the ground as kind of a tripwire deterrent.
		But these are all things that would still need to be worked out.
		And getting the ceasefire, I think, is the first step.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Well, the outgoing State Department spokesperson, Dami Bruce, was asked about that at a conference.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		She was asked about Friday's meeting, so here's what she said, and then I'll have you react to it.
tammy bruce ▲ ● ▼		The president's not calling this a negotiation.
		He is not the one that asked for it.
		This is what, as I've equated to you before, his remarks were that this is to see what's happening, to see what's possible.
		So the negotiation, I think, is certainly not the right word.
		How he expects to get to where he gets, I won't have details for you in that regard, but there's a reason why he's the one there, and we aren't.
		He is clearly, the list that I read out to you regarding being the president of peace is an astounding one.
		Perhaps it's situations around the globe that just didn't interest other people.
		But for President Trump, everyone matters.
		He sees these dynamics, which his presence and the power of the United States is able to change, and he knows that.
		He has many tools in his tool chest.
		We know, of course, that he had remarked about secondary sanctions on those who are buying Russian oil.
		That's one thing of many that can happen.
		We know, of course, of NATO's commitment regarding defensive weapons and helping and assisting Ukraine.
		There's many things that are moving that should have an impact that President Trump, again, I don't know what his approach will be.
		What I do know is that I'm grateful that he's the president, that I'm able to be here, read to you a list of ceasefires and peace agreements, and know that he's meeting with Putin in regard to one of the most outrageous dynamics that we've experienced.
		I will also remind people that he has met alone with President Zelensky.
		He has met alone with European leaders.
		This is a man who is doing everything possible and fairly to get an end to this carnage.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And Matthew Kroenig, she mentioned the secondary sanctions on those buying Russian oil.
		That was placed on India because India was buying Russian oil.
		Where does that stand and has that been put in place?
		And do you think that's having an effect?
unidentified		Well, this would be one of the best coercive tools the United States could use against Russia because part of the way Russia has been financing its war machine is even though there's sanctions against Russia from the West, Russia has been allowed to sell energy, oil and gas to India, China, other countries.
		And so the idea of secondary sanctions would be essentially to sanction those countries and say if you do business with Russia, then you can't do business with the United States.
		Or another version that's been floated are 500% tariffs, which would essentially be the same thing, that you'd have to pay 500% tariffs to export something to the United States, which would essentially make them cost prohibitive.
		The U.S. Senate has legislation ready to go right now that could put this in place.
		Last I checked, I think it had something like 93 senators in support, so almost unanimous support.
		And so really all they're waiting for now is the green light from the White House.
		And so they're holding off for now, but this is a sword of Damocles hanging over Putin's head.
		And I think one of the things negotiating him to come to the negotiating table to try to forestall these tougher efforts.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		If you'd like to join our conversation with Matthew Kroenig on foreign policy from the Atlantic Council, you can do so.
		Our lines are bipartisan.
		So Republicans are on 202-748-8001.
		Democrats 202-748-8000.
		And Independents 202-748-8002.
		Turning now to the war in Gaza.
		Last week, Israel's Security Cabinet approved plans to take over Gaza City.
		Where does that leave a push for a ceasefire in that conflict stand?
unidentified		Yes.
		Well, great question because Trump's goal coming in, as you know, was to try to get a ceasefire between Israel and Gaza, was to try to get Hamas to release the hostages.
		And we haven't seen much progress there.
		And in fact, in recent weeks, Hamas is seen to be more intransigent.
		And so I think what this is from Netanyahu is an attempt to try to coerce Hamas to threaten to go in and occupy Gaza City.
		And this would really undermine Hamas's position of trying to show that it's still in a leadership position, that momentum is on its side.
		It does raise big questions, though.
		Occupying an urban area like this would be very dangerous.
		The United States has experience with that from its counterinsurgency operations in Iraq.
		And then also we still have this big unanswered question of what comes the day after.
		Netanyahu has said he doesn't want to occupy Gaza City forever.
		But then once Israeli forces leave, how do you make sure that Hamas just doesn't come back to power?
		There have been discussions about maybe Arab country sending in peacekeepers, although nothing really concrete there yet.
		So I think that's what explains this, trying to coerce Hamas, but a lot of unanswered questions still.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And regarding humanitarian aid, President Trump has committed to taking the lead on getting that humanitarian aid distributed in Gaza.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		How would that work if the Israelis occupy Gaza City?
unidentified		Well, the humanitarian suffering of the Palestinians is tragic.
		And so I think what the United States and Israel are trying to do are both to advance their diplomatic and military objectives while at the same time trying to alleviate the suffering of the Palestinians.
		And so the Trump administration just in recent days has announced plans to ramp up its support to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, a non-governmental group that's there on the ground providing aid to the Palestinians.
		And so that's the strategy.
		But there are many challenges, of course, delivering aid to a war zone.
		Hamas is stealing some of the aid as a tool to gain resources to advance its aims.
		But that's the goal to try to look after the suffering of the Palestinians while also advancing military and diplomatic objectives.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's bring callers into the conversation.
		Fritz is an independent.
		He's in Clarksville, Tennessee.
unidentified		Hello.
		I just got back to Russia last week.
		And I can tell you, the sanctions are a big fail.
		You can get anything you want in Russia.
		There's new construction everywhere.
		Every block in St. Petersburg, you're renovating a new building.
		And the Ukrainian, my wife is actually born in Ukraine and still has relatives there.
		And we get a whole different story about what's going on than we hear on the media.
		She says her brother-in-law was almost impressed in the service, and it cost us $2,000 to get the Ukrainian amount of it.
		And this has happened everywhere.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I was going to say, what were you doing in St. Petersburg?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Were you on vacation in Russia?
unidentified		Yeah.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And do you have a specific?
unidentified		I'll go there.
		I've been going there every year for at least 12 years now.
		Okay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And you're saying that you're not seeing any impact of sanctions that the economy seems to be doing well in Russia?
unidentified		Yes.
		I mean, like I say, you got new construction going up everywhere, renovations.
		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's ask our guest, Matthew, the effect of sanctions and how the Russian economy is doing right now.
unidentified		Yeah, well, I think you're right that the sanctions have been less effective than the West had hoped.
		And I think there are a number of reasons for that.
		One, as we were discussing before, that Russia still is able to export energy to other countries like India and China.
		Second, Russia is getting a lot of economic assistance, especially from China.
		And even though China is not providing military aid, it's providing essentially everything else Russia needs to sustain its war effort, super heavy-duty trucks, excavation equipment, et cetera.
		And then also, this is a priority for Putin.
		So even though I think the sanctions have taken some toll, he's willing to devote resources to the military effort, to his attempts to rearm, which are his highest priority.
		So I think the solution, therefore, is to turn to some of these tougher economic measures that we still have on the table, including these secondary sanctions or tariffs, or seizing frozen Russian assets.
		There are billions of dollars of seized Russian assets or frozen assets that could be seized.
		So I think we'll see how the meeting goes with Putin and Alaska.
		If it doesn't go well, I think you might see the United States and its allies turning to some of these tougher economic measures.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And just so everybody's aware, CNN is reporting that talks between, these are online talks between Trump, Zelensky, and EU leaders are now underway, according to the French presidency.
		That was printed 13 minutes ago.
		So we expect that those talks are underway as we speak.
		We'll give you more information if we see anything.
unidentified		Could I make a quick comment on that?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Oh, yes, sir, of course.
unidentified		Yeah, I think that that's a good sign because the Allies would be worried, I think are worried of Putin and Trump going into these one-on-one meetings.
unidentified		So touching base with the Allies first before the Putin meeting, I think is a good diplomatic sequencing for managing the Allies.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, here's Charlotte, Washington, D.C., Independent Lines.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Charlotte, you're on with Matthew Kroenig.
unidentified		Hi, I have a two-part question.
		The first is about getting in the way of a state's national security objectives.
		So like Israel controlling Mount Hermon.
		Those are the source waters of the Jordan River.
		It's the snows of Mount Hermon that feed the Jordan River and provide fresh water to Israel.
		So Israel's got this national security objective about controlling Mount Hermon.
		It's not a matter of political party or policy within that country.
		Russia's been saying they want a land route to the Black Sea.
		You know, is there really a way to stand in the way of a state's national security objectives?
		And then the second part is about the land swapping.
		Do you think it's possible they'll recognize the old Polish border from 1939 when the Soviets invaded Poland, this city Lviv that they broadcast from so much, that used to be part of Poland?
		There's a huge portion of Ukraine that used to be Poland.
		Poland's a member in NATO.
		Do you think it's possible they'll recognize the old Polish border and have a border between Russia and NATO in the country?
		Thank you so much.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Matthew.
unidentified		Yes, well, thanks for that.
		And I think you're right that Putin sees the political control of Ukraine as important for his ambitions, which I think really are trying to restore the old Russian empire and to make sure that Moscow has a sphere of influence and a veto over the foreign and defense policies of countries on its border, including Ukraine.
		I think in your comment, you said, how can you stand in the way of a country's national security interest?
		You know, the problem, of course, in international politics is that often interests collide.
		And Ukraine's interest in surviving as an independent country capable of defending itself.
		The U.S. and NATO's interest in preventing Russia from gobbling up its neighbors by military force butts up against that.
		And so I think that's why you're seeing this conflict.
		On the old Polish borders, good points on history, but I think that's unlikely at this point.
		And what we often see in international history is that borders often reflect an underlying military situation.
		And so the underlying military situation right now has Russia controlling parts of the Donbass, but Ukraine able to defend much of the country.
		And so I think any kind of ceasefire, you're likely going to see a reification of these current lines of contact.
		And again, I hope not recognizing that under international law, but just essentially recognizing that as the facts on the ground now for a potential ceasefire.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here is Rennie in Lakewood, New Jersey, Independent.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Rennie.
unidentified		Good morning, everyone.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		Sir, we all know Putin is a war criminal.
		The International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant for him.
		I'm wondering, how is he going to be allowed on U.S. soil without him being arrested?
		If Trump wants to prove that he is not Putin's puppet, the minute he sets foot in Alaska, he'd be arrested.
		Thank you for my call.
		Yes, good question.
		And there is a dilemma here.
		You're right that Putin is a war criminal, wanted by the ICC.
		At the same time, getting an end to this war requires doing diplomacy with Putin.
		And so how do you square that circle?
		And I think essentially the calculation that the Trump administration has made that I think makes sense is let's try to get peace in Ukraine.
		That's the more important objective here.
		And so this is one reason why the meeting may have been held in Alaska because the United States is not a member of the International Criminal Court and so would not be obligated to arrest Putin and turn him over.
		If the meeting were held in, say, Switzerland, a neutral location that some people had floated, that could be an issue.
		So you're right, he's a war criminal, but I think the decision has been made.
		Let's get peace in Ukraine first, and we can deal with the justice issues later.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You wrote a piece, Matthew, in foreign policy with the headline: Trump State Department reforms are necessary.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Can you explain the reforms that you feel were necessary?
unidentified		Yes, well, management and reform of the State Department has been recognized as a problem for many years.
		There's been a huge explosion in the number of staff at the State Department from 60,000 in the W. Bush years to 80,000 currently.
		There's been the creation of a number of new offices, functional offices, reporting directly to the Secretary of State.
		So you have, before the reorganization, had 25 direct reports to the Secretary of State, which doesn't make sense as a span of control.
		You had all these layers of approval to where sometimes 40 people would need to approve a memo before it went to the Secretary.
		And so this is something, again, that outside groups have recognized for some time.
		My center at the Atlantic Council published a report in 2017, a bipartisan group of experts on how to improve the management of the State Department to streamline it and make it more efficient.
		And so I think that was the main motivation of the Trump administration's reorganization that was announced a few weeks ago to streamline the Bureau, eliminate redundant and consolidate redundant offices and functions to empower the embassies overseas and the regional offices and to make the organization work more efficiently.
		So I know it was controversial, but I do think there was a logic.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So you write also in that piece that the department is no longer the diplomatic powerhouse it once was.
		What happened?
		Why is it no longer like that?
		And do these reductions and consolidations that are happening address that concern?
unidentified		Yes, that's also part of the motivation.
		So if you think back to the early Cold War era, the State Department was really an intellectual force driving a lot of American strategy and policy.
		You had legendary policy planning directors like George Kinnan and Paul Nietzsche.
		Over the years, the Defense Department and the National Security Council staff have taken on more of these responsibilities.
		And I think a couple of reasons for that.
		One, the Defense Department has a lot of resources, so it just makes them a major player in foreign policy debates.
		And then I also think presidents have wanted to centralize foreign policy decision-making at the White House to give them more control.
		And so you've seen a great expansion of the National Security Council staff over the years.
		And so this was another reason for the reforms is to try to return some power to the State Department because the State Department, instead of formulating strategy and policy, was often just kind of doing foreign relations, literally relating with foreign counterparts, relaying messages from the White House and elsewhere, but not driving strategy and policy.
		And Marco Rubio, when he came in, I think, had a different vision.
		He was the chair of Senate Foreign Relations or a member of Senate Foreign Relations Committee and had an idea of what he wanted to do.
		And so that's what he announced as the logic of these reforms to put the State Department back in the center of the way the United States formulates its foreign policy, not just the way it executes it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Kevin in Charlotte, North Carolina, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		During Trump's first term, he met with Putin.
		And, you know, he didn't allow anybody from the State Department.
		I don't even think he had an interpreter in there.
		Is this the same kind of meeting?
		Is it just going to be him and Putin and maybe somebody from Russia or somebody from our State Department going to be there?
		And, you know, I'm pretty cynical.
		You know, the fact that Putin asked for this meeting, I'm thinking that he's wanting to get Trump straight because Trump has been a little bit out of bounds when it comes to Putin here lately.
		You know, I noticed that Epstein spent a lot of time in Russia.
		Trump spent a lot of time in Russia.
		I know the KGB, you know, they tape everybody.
		I'm thinking that this has something to do with the reason for the meeting.
		I don't think it has nothing to do with Ukraine.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Kevin.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Matthew.
unidentified		Yes, well, you're right.
		In the first Trump administration, Trump met with Putin without an American interpreter.
		And I think part of the logic for that and for this upcoming meeting is, and we heard this from Tammy Bruce, the State Department spokesperson, I think Trump does put a lot of faith in his own ability to read somebody in a negotiation.
		I think he said yesterday that he'll know in Alaska within two minutes if Putin is serious or not.
		But I do think it makes more sense to have an American interpreter there, American experts there, because these issues are so deep.
		And you don't want to rely on a Russian interpreter to make sure that you're communicating exactly what you want to communicate to Putin.
		So, in terms of who will be there, I don't know that I've seen that.
		Mimi, I don't know, maybe you and your team would know, but I hope he's there with an American interpreter and experts to help guide the conversation.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Don is calling us from Madison, Ohio.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Democrat, hi, Don.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
		Good morning, America.
		Good morning, Matthew.
		My question to Matthew is this, and to the rest of the Americans: if we were invaded from the north, or from the south, or from the east or from the west, would this army take so much of our land and then say, well, we'll stop if you give us this land?
		As an American, I can tell you what I would say: not one square inch would I give them.
		I would fight them tooth and nail and push them back out of my country.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I like your talk, Matthew.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Matthew.
unidentified		Well, thanks for the compliment.
		And your comment, I think, is absolutely right.
		And we have seen that when the United States has been attacked historically at Pearl Harbor or 9-11, we have fought back.
		And that was Ukraine's initial response.
		I think there were people who thought that they might roll over to the Russian invasion.
		You may remember that Zelensky was offered an option to get out of Ukraine, and he famously said, I want ammunition, not a ride.
		They've decided to fight back heroically.
		But just looking at the military situation right now, it just seems unrealistic that Ukraine is going to be able to take back all of its territory.
		We've seen the front lines essentially stalemated in recent months and years.
		And the Ukrainians are running out of people.
		So Russia does have the advantage in terms of size.
		And so I would love to see Ukraine take back all of its territory.
		But I think the maybe unfortunate reality is that some kind of ceasefire along the current lines may be the best that we can do right now.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And I wanted to bring to your attention the Wall Street Journal article, State Department issues human rights report reflecting Trump priorities.
		It says that overhauled report softens criticism of Trump administration allies such as El Salvador and adds criticism of Brazil and South Africa.
		I wonder if you have seen that, Matthew, and what you think that reflects as far as Trump administration priorities when it comes to human rights around the world.
unidentified		Well, I haven't seen the report yet, but I can make a couple of comments.
		One, I did see Senate Foreign Relations Chairman James Risch tweeted the report and praised it.
		And so it does seem like leading Republicans in the Senate thought it was a strong report.
		Second, with the State Department reforms in the Trump administration, some of the big changes were made to the Bureau doing human rights, and that was part of the controversy.
		But what a senior State Department official I spoke with said is that they think that essentially what happened is that often Democrats in particular would kind of push progressive agendas controversial in the United States, DEI and issues like that, on more traditional societies overseas, essentially exporting America's culture wars in a way that was actually hurting our foreign policy, you know,
		assessing a country's compliance with DEI before approving arms sales to allies, for example.
		And so that was part of the purpose of the reforms as well, to eliminate what they saw as some of that harmful social justice work.
		And so I haven't seen the report, but I guess that that may be reflected in that.
		And Risch's statement seemed to suggest something along those lines saying that Rubio has returned to more traditional human rights reporting with this new report.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		On the Republican line in New Jersey, Albert, you're on the air.
unidentified		Hi, good morning, everybody.
		I just want to say I love America.
		I love President Trump.
		And my question was, I heard information on the internet.
		I don't know if it's true, but I wanted to ask Matthew.
		They said America was going to put nuclear missiles at the border in Ukraine at the border of Russia.
		And that's what started this conflict.
		And I wanted to know if that was true.
		I'll listen.
		Thank you.
		Yes, well, thanks for that question.
		And I've thought a lot about nuclear issues over the years.
		I've written five books on nuclear weapons.
		And so the short answer is that's not true.
		The United States has nuclear weapons deployed on the territory of some Western European allies.
		But in an agreement with Russia at the end of the Cold War, the United States agreed that it would not deploy nuclear weapons on the territory of new NATO members, countries like, say, Poland or Estonia.
		And so certainly not a country like Ukraine that's not even a NATO member.
		Now, some experts, including me, have said, well, maybe we should rethink this, given everything that's going on.
		Might it make sense for nuclear weapons to be in a place like Poland?
		But so far, that hasn't been the case.
		Again, they're in countries in Western Europe, and there were no plans to put nuclear weapons in Ukraine and still are no plans to put nuclear weapons in Ukraine.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Matthew, a lot was said during the last administration about not giving certain weapons to Ukraine in the fear that that would escalate the war and maybe push Vladimir Putin too far.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		At what point, I mean, do you think it's possible that he could be pushed to the point that he would use a tactical nuclear weapon?
unidentified		The short answer is yes.
		And Russia's nuclear strategy, it's been referred to as an escalate to de-escalate strategy.
		But essentially, the idea is if they were losing a war with NATO on Russia's border, that using a nuclear weapon or two or six to try to force the other side to back off would be better than losing a humiliating war on their border that could lead to the collapse of the regime or to Putin being killed in the streets.
		And so I do think that if Ukraine were to have major success on the battlefield, if Russia's military turn and ran and Putin was facing this kind of humiliating defeat and agree or disagree, but I think from his point of view that using a nuclear weapon or six to see what happens would be better than losing for sure.
		So there was this moment in October 2022 where Ukraine was having its most success in counteroffensives.
		And the Biden administration has publicly said since then that they estimated that the chance that Putin used nuclear weapons in that moment was about 50-50.
		So he didn't do it, of course, but I think it's a real risk.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Which is awfully high for a nuclear weapon, 50-50.
unidentified		Awfully high.
		And probably the closest we've come to seeing a nuclear weapon being used since the Cuban Missile Crisis in the early 1960s.
		One other comment on this, though.
		I do think that you're right that the Biden administration was thinking, oh, if we provide this weapon, that's maybe going to go too far and Putin's going to respond with nuclear weapons.
		I think that was the wrong way to think about it.
		I really think it is more about is Putin going to lose in a humiliating fashion or not?
		I think that's what would drive him to use nuclear weapons, not did we provide X weapon or Y weapon.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, let's talk to Terry.
		Independent line, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
		Hi, Terry.
unidentified		I meant to call on the Republican line.
unidentified		I apologize.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Terry, you've got to call on the right line.
unidentified		Okay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, go ahead.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead with your question.
unidentified		The Trump administration does not have a foreign policy.
		They have antics.
		It just is all their policies.
		They're really not policies.
		They're Trump antics.
		That's all I have to say.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Let's talk to Martin, Louisville, Kentucky.
		Democrat, good morning, Martin.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		I just would like to mention that it used to be back in the day, all we were ever told was that the Soviets, the one thing we have that Soviets are afraid of is our technology.
		An example of what I'm talking about is in 1986, on my birthday, November 20th, Reagan and Gorbachev met for the first time, and they had met for like four hours and making tremendous progress on things.
		And all of a sudden, out of blue, Gorbachev looked over his glasses at Reagan and said, now, I hope you understand all this depends on you signing an agreement to keep that Star Wars research program in the laboratory.
		And Reagan didn't expect that, and the meeting ended with no agreement.
		Now, but I just don't think it's true anymore.
		I just don't, and maybe because of the way the information is shared on computers and the fact that the Russians have been very effective in getting people in our government system to give them information like the John Walker spider ring.
		But I just don't think the Russians are afraid of us at all anymore.
		And I'd like to hear what the guest says.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Matthew.
unidentified		Yes, well, a couple of comments.
		I do think that the Russians are afraid of some of the things we can do, including ramping up sanctions and tariffs, seizing frozen assets.
		There are other political or military things that we could do as well.
		On missile defense, I think this is something where Russia does worry.
		It's one of the things that they complain about.
		And Trump has made this Golden Dome initiative one of his signature defense priorities.
		And it's really kind of trying to revive Reagan's space-space missile defense program.
		During the Reagan years, it was unrealistic, probably too visionary.
		But the technology has changed.
		Cheap space launch that we see from SpaceX and others has made it possible and affordable to put a large numbers of sensors and interceptors in space.
		So early days still, but I think that is going to be a major priority.
		I did want to return to the point about Trump's antics, because I think the caller is right to a point that Trump is an unusual president, doesn't follow the same policy processes that other presidents have in the past.
		Yet I will say that it works for him, and we have seen some successes in the past six months.
		NATO allies spending 5% of defense is an important achievement.
		And I know it's controversial, but I think striking Iran's nuclear program to set that program back was also a success.
		So I think he's trying to oversee a system that works for him.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Matthew, I want to ask you about the closure of USAID and it being used as an arm of American soft power.

▲