CSPAN - Washington Journal 08/16/2025

All Episodes

Previous Next

Aug. 16, 2025 07:00-10:00 - CSPAN

02:59:47

Washington Journal 08/16/2025

Participants

Main

donald j trump

admin 05:46

george beebe

35:46

mimi geerges

cspan 28:26

Appearances

brian lamb

cspan 00:43

jane mcmanus

00:49

translator russian

03:26

Clips

al green

rep/d 00:06

justice neil gorsuch

scotus 00:17

lloyd chapman

00:04

patty murray

sen/d 00:08

sean duffy

admin 00:04

sean hannity

fox 00:18

Callers

donna in west virginia

callers 00:07

eben in california

callers 00:09

john in ohio

callers 00:17

john in unknown

callers 00:02

valerie in kentucky

callers 00:06

woody in washington

callers 00:06

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Show episode speakers

Speaker	Time	Text
unidentified		Up this morning on Washington Journal, your calls and comments live.
		And then we'll talk with former CIA Russia analyst George Beebe about President Trump holding direct talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on ending its war with Ukraine.
		We'll also discuss President Trump's recent actions to address crime in Washington, D.C. and how communities could be improved with Robert Woodson, founder and president of the Woodson Center.
		Washington Journal is next.
		Join the conversation.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
		It's Saturday, August 16th.
		President Trump and Russian President Putin met in Alaska yesterday for nearly three hours.
		They held a joint press conference that lasted 12 minutes and did not take questions from reporters.
		President Trump said, quote, there's no deal until there's a deal.
		He said really great progress was made, but offered no details on what that might mean for the war in Ukraine.
		Meanwhile, President Zelensky will meet with Mr. Trump on Monday at the White House.
		We're getting your thoughts on that this first half hour.
		Here are the phone numbers.
		Republicans, 202-748-8001.
		Democrats, 202-748-8000.
		And Independents, 202-748-8002.
		You can also send us a text to 202-748-8003.
		Include your first name in your city-state.
		And you can post your comments on social media, facebook.com slash C-SPAN and X at C-SPANWJ.
		Welcome to today's Washington Journal.
		We're glad you're with us.
		Take a look at the front page of the papers this morning.
		Here's the Washington Post.
		No deal as summit wraps early.
		It's the Wall Street Journal.
		Trump and Putin meet in Alaska.
		And here is the New York Times.
		Trump and Putin End Talks Without Ukraine Deal.
		Well, President Trump posted on social media on his Truth Social this morning at 4.45 a.m.
		He said this, a great and very successful day in Alaska.
		The meeting with President Vladimir Putin of Russia went very well, as did a late-night phone call with President Zelensky of Ukraine and various European leaders, including the highly respected Secretary General of NATO.
		It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a peace agreement, which would end the war and not a mere ceasefire agreement, which oftentimes do not hold up.
		President Zelensky will be coming to D.C. the Oval Office on Monday afternoon.
		If all works out, we will then schedule a meeting with President Putin.
		Potentially, millions of people's lives will be saved.
		Thank you for your attention to this matter.
		We'll take a look at a portion of President Trump's remarks after that meeting with Putin at the press conference.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		I will say that I believe we had a very productive meeting.
		There were many, many points that we agreed on.
		Most of them, I would say, a couple of big ones that we haven't quite gotten there, but we've made some headway.
		So there's no deal until there's a deal.
		We really made some great progress today.
		I've always had a fantastic relationship with President Putin, with Vladimir.
		We had many, many tough meetings, good meetings.
		We were interfered with by the Russia-Russia-Russia hoax that made it a little bit tougher to deal with, but he understood it.
		I think he's probably seen things like that during the course of his career.
		He's seen it all.
		But we had to put up with the Russia-Russia-Russia hoax.
		Knew it was a hoax, and I knew it was a hoax, but what was done was very criminal.
		But it made it harder for us to deal as a country in terms of the business and all of the things that we'd like to have dealt with.
		But we'll have a good chance when this is over.
		So, just to put it very quickly, I'm going to start making a few phone calls and tell them what happened.
		But we had an extremely productive meeting, and many points were agreed to.
		There are just a very few that are left.
		Some are not that significant.
		One is probably the most significant.
		But we have a very good chance of getting there.
		We didn't get there, but we have a very good chance of getting there.
		I would like to thank President Putin and his entire team, whose faces who I know in many cases, otherwise, other than that, whose faces I get to see all the time in the newspapers.
		You're almost as famous as the boss, but especially this one right over here.
		But we had some good meetings over the years, right?
		Good productive meetings over the years, and we hope to have that in the future.
		But let's do the most productive one right now.
		We're going to stop really five, six, seven thousand, thousands of people a week from being killed.
		And President Putin wants to see that as much as I do.
		So again, Mr. President, I'd like to thank you very much, and we'll speak to you very soon and probably see you again very soon.
		Thank you very much, Vladimir.
unidentified		Next time in Moscow.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Oh, that's an interesting one.
unidentified		I don't know.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		I'll get a little heat on that one, but I could see it possibly happening.
		Thank you very much, Vladimir.
		And thank you all.
		Thank you.
		Thank you.
unidentified		Thank you so much.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And that was the end of the press conference.
		The leaders did not take any questions after that.
		We will go ahead and take your calls now.
		Here's Marissa, Democrat in Belfry, Montana.
		Good morning.
unidentified		C. Stan, a light in the darkness.
		Thank you so much for everything you do.
		Hey, what I really want to say is why is my tax dollar being spent to roll out the red carpet for this murderous, barbaric, and my tax dollar being spent so that he has a microphone to spread his propaganda and for our,
		if you want to call him a president, Trump to get up there and start whining about just a whiner.
		And anyways, I've got a couple things else I'd like to say.
		Number one is: would you please do a show on the homeless?
		Because I don't know what he's doing with the homeless people.
		Is rounding them up or what?
		And another show on treating farm animals humanely.
		If you could possibly do those two shows, I'd really appreciate it.
		Thank you.
		Bye.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Marissa.
		And here's Julian in Stanford, Connecticut, Republican Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
unidentified		How are you today?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good.
unidentified		Good.
		I'm just curious.
		Don't you ever get tired of these demented Democrats complaining about everything about Trump?
		Don't you ever get tired?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So what did you think of the summit yesterday, Julian?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Did you follow the news about that?
unidentified		Mimi, Mimi, he's in a tough spot.
		He's in a tough spot.
		What is he supposed to do?
		What is he supposed to do?
		Do you want to go to war with Putin and Russia?
		Is that what you want to do?
		Because that's the only alternative we have.
		That's the only alternative.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, Julian, let me ask you this.
		And here's what critics of the president say: is, you know, why the warm handshake?
		Why the red carpet?
		Why all the friendliness?
		Why not take a more stronger stance with Vladimir Putin?
		Why not say, look, we're going to do, you know, he's talked about tariffs.
		Why not follow through?
unidentified		Mimi, I think you know that over the years, President Trump has been very tough on Putin.
		He has imposed the tar, the, I can't think right now, but he shut off the pipeline.
		He did a lot of things to stop this man.
		But if he doesn't want to stop, unless you want a nuclear war with him, he's not going to stop, Mimi.
		Do you understand what I'm telling you?
		And you know this, Mimi.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Here's Deborah, Houston, Democrat.
		Hi, Deborah.
unidentified		Hello.
		I'm just kind of disappointed with C-SPAN with this ongoing coverage of Trump.
		I mean, it's just getting ridiculous.
		During the week, it's all his press conferences and just stuff you can see all over the news.
		And I'm not sure why C-SPAN is covering so much of this.
		It's actually becoming a propaganda for Trump.
		It's just mindless.
		There's other things going on that I see C-SPAN is not covering, like the EFSI files.
		Maxwell, they're covering it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What did you think of the summit yesterday in Alaska?
unidentified		I thought this was an open forum.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		No, no, it's not.
		Sorry.
		But we will have open forum later, Deborah, if you want to call back then.
		Bob in Ware, New Hampshire, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Hi.
unidentified		Do you realize that Putin just got a ceasefire?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Sorry, did I realize what?
unidentified		Putin, he just got himself a ceasefire.
		The sanctions are put off now.
		He doesn't have to worry about it for, I don't know, maybe another 50 days.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Is that what you wanted to bring up?
unidentified		The sanctions, the tariffs?
		I don't think this is going anywhere.
		Trump is going to make a phone call, and there's our points of progress that were made.
		I think they were all economic progress that he's talking about.
		There's nothing about the war here that is going to happen, except that Putin has longer life to keep his country economically pathway viable because Trump's putting off the sanctions again.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And Bob, the Wall Street Journal has this.
		Trump rolled out the red carpet for Putin.
		He got little in return.
		It says, so here's part of what it says.
		Both men stake their political reputations on a successful summit, and Putin appears to have gained the upper hand.
		The Russian president was treated as an equal on U.S. soil, managed to sidestep any potential American sanctions for now, and announced no battlefield concessions.
		Trump, who vowed on the campaign trail to end the war on his first day in office, failed to secure even a temporary ceasefire.
		The article continues, but this is in the Wall Street Journal if you'd like to read the whole thing.
		Here's Frank Zephyrles, Florida, Republican.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Well, good morning to you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What did you think, Frank, about the summit?
unidentified		Well, I thought it was a farce.
		To be honest with you, you're doing a flyover.
		You're supposed to do that afterwards.
		You wait until you get something.
		Second of all, you don't treat a man like that that's your enemy.
		You don't give him a red carpet.
		On that plane going down there, he said one thing.
		If he doesn't give me what I want, then I'm going to give him sanctions.
		He didn't give no sanctions.
		Third of all, I hope he enjoyed that lobster and that Philetmin Young and the red wine that the taxpayers had to pay for.
		I am so pissed at this.
		He got nothing.
		Absolutely nothing.
		Did you see how smug he looked sitting there?
		You're talking about a child?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You're talking about Putin looked.
unidentified		You're saying he's like a child.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Did you say that?
		You're a Republican, Frank.
		Did you vote for Mr. Trump?
unidentified		Of course I did, but I ain't voting no more because the guy's a liar.
		That's all he knows how to do is lie.
		That's it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Mary in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Morning to you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, Mary.
unidentified		Hello.
		Yes, we're here.
		Thank you.
		Thank you.
		You know, we all know that the emperor, excuse me, that the king doesn't know when he's naked.
		He doesn't know he's not wearing clothes.
		That's that old adage that we all know.
		This is true of Trump.
		We all know this about him.
		He's oblivious to anything that isn't praised.
		And when he's dealing with someone like Putin, who was the master of being with the KGB for so many years, that man knows how to handle people and what they want.
		And he knows he only needs to flatter them.
		It almost made me ill to watch as President Trump reached out for his hand, and then he shook it and he embraced it with the other hand.
		This is a thing that you do maybe for a very good friend or someone that you think so much of.
		But we're talking about a man, and this is sad, who has the reputation for so many horrible things.
		And we have a president, unfortunately, who is a convicted felon of 34 crimes.
		And no one will ever talk about those things.
		Even when they're going on and on about Epstein and Maxwell, they don't ever seem to bring up the fact that they cannot rely on whether or not President Trump is telling us the truth because he's a convicted felon.
		No one seems to pay attention to those things, and it bothers me deeply.
		Thank you very much.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Mary.
		And here is ABC News about that flyover, the military flyover.
		It was a B-2 stealth bomber conducts flyover as Putin and as Trump Putin arrive at Alaska base.
		The stealth bomber was accompanied by four F-35 fighters.
		It says the two leaders walked along the red carpet, rolled out at joint base Elmendorf Richardson with F-22 fighter jets on either side as the four F-35s and a B-2 spirit bomber soared overhead.
		In case you're interested about that military flyover, and here's John Northfield, Ohio Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
john in ohio ▲ ● ▼		I don't support Trump on anything except the slight chance that he might be an alternative to the constant barrage of crash talk against Russia and Putin.
unidentified		I don't support many of his policies, but we don't, in this country, we have no alternative to the Democratic right-wing and the Republican right-wing trash talking,
		any chance for peace in the situation in which the Democrats are copying the Republicans' traditional warmongering and now offering an alternative.
		In fact, are offering an even more right-wing, ugly, trash talk about, well, Putin was once an intelligence agency, and never mentioning that H.W. Bush was the head honcho of the CIA before he was president.
		And the fact that this is an organization that kills people, including our president, in 1963.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, well, John, let's hear from Russia's leader, President Putin, what he had to say at the press conference yesterday.
translator russian ▲ ● ▼		We see the strive of this administration that President Trump personally to facilitate the resolution of the Ukrainian conflict and his strive to get to the crux of the matter to understand the situation in Ukraine has to do with final threats to our security.
		We have always considered the Ukrainian nation and I've said it multiple times, a brotherly nation, how restricted it may sound the same roots and everything that's happening is a tragedy for us.
		Therefore, the country is sincerely interested in putting an end to it.
		At the same time, settlement in the long term, we need to eliminate all the primary primary causes of that conflict.
		We've said it multiple times of Russia and to restate a just balance security in Europe on the whole.
		I agree with President Trump, as he said today, that naturally the security of Ukraine should be ensured as well.
		Naturally, we are prepared to work.
		I would like to hope that the agreement that we reach together will help us bring closer to that goal and will pay for the Russia.
		We expect that the European capital will proceed constructively and that they won't grow a ranch and will not make any attempts to use some backroom dealings to conduct provocations to torpedo the nation progress.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That was Russia's leader, Putin.
		And this is Ukraine's leader, Zelensky, posted this on X.
		He said, we had a long and substantive conversation with President Trump, started with one-on-one talks before inviting European leaders to join us.
		He said this call lasted for more than an hour and a half, including about an hour of our bilateral conversation with President Trump.
		He reaffirms his readiness to work with maximum effort to achieve peace.
		He says we support President Trump's proposal for a trilateral meeting between Ukraine, the USA, and Russia.
		Ukraine emphasizes the key issues can be discussed at the level of leaders and a trilateral format is suitable.
		He talks about coming to Washington on Monday.
		He said, I'm grateful for the invitation.
		And he ends by saying we continue to coordinate our positions with all partners.
		And I think everyone who is helping.
		That is President Zelensky on X.
		And this is Bob in North Carolina, Republican.
		Good morning, Bob.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
		Farmer Bob here.
		Hope you're doing okay today.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I'm doing great.
unidentified		Well, I'm glad they met.
		And the best thing I can say about this is let's see how it goes forward from here.
		The whole Russia-Ukraine thing is a terrible situation.
		I have no idea how it's going to sort out.
		I didn't know how it was going to sort out three, three and a half years ago when the whole thing started.
		And at least they're talking.
		I didn't know that Zelensky was going to meet with Trump on Monday until I saw it on your show here.
		Yeah, that just, Bob.
		Yeah.
		And so I'm glad they're going to meet.
		Let's see how it sorts out, and we'll go from here.
		You know, Russia has occupied now a lot of Ukraine's territory since 2014 when it went into Crimea.
		Nothing was done about it then, unfortunately.
		So they're talking.
		Give them a couple of days and see what goes from here.
		You know, we're reading a lot into it, so let's see what happens.
		It's the best thing I can say, and I hope it works out for the best.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Here's Dee, Calhoun, Georgia, Democrat.
		Good morning, Dee.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I was just, my opinion on all of this is, Mimi, we're in trouble.
		Our country is in trouble.
		I just believe, I believe the part of the meeting was to discuss Ukraine maybe a third or fourth.
donna in west virginia ▲ ● ▼		Fourth was to discuss how good Trump is doing, following Putin's orders behind the door.
unidentified		And then the rest is what he's going to do to continue to take over.
		I do believe that.
		I mean, I just hope the people wake up.
		I mean, it's not here just yet.
		You know, when you have money, you're fine.
		You don't pay attention.
		But when you're really a worker out here and you're on budgets and everything, you're going to start paying attention.
		But I think this was a terrible thing to do.
		And people talk about how, you know, they hope it works out and everything.
		It could work out and it would be great, but it's not.
		And I do believe that Trump is going to try to take, I mean, we're in trouble.
		We're in trouble.
		And so I just hope that people pay attention and, you know, maybe do something because, I mean, he's bringing everything down.
		He's, you know, the cuts, the jobs.
		I mean, you would think that he would want to, you know, make our country flourish and everything.
		But I think his policies, his, you know, his illegal activities, such as, you know, something, even the courts are going along with him.
		And so that's all I have to say.
		And I think.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Dee.
		And this is Duke, Independent Line, Stonington, Maine.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Yes, because Monasius Span.
		What gets me, this summit there is the cost that this summit costs the taxpayers of this country.
		I mean, even to fly that beast car over there.
		I mean, the millions of dollars that this cost the taxpayer, and what good did it do?
		Nothing.
		The red cappet thing, all of this is just a joke.
		Putin looks at Trump as a joke, and he's laughing behind Trump's back because Trump is a joke.
		And nothing's going to come out of this, and it's too bad.
		We got no bang for a buck at all, and nothing good is going to come out of this.
		Things are going to continue on as they are.
		And in my opinion, when Zelensky meets with Trump on Monday, that all Trump is going to do is insult him again, just like he did before, and nothing's going to be accomplished.
		That nothing's going to be accomplished.
		And I think it's a crying shame to waste all this money and all this time.
		I mean, that sham yesterday is going to accomplish absolutely nothing.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Mike.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Reston, Virginia, Democrat.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
		Good morning, everyone.
		I do not care for Trump.
		I want him to be impeached.
		However, I think I agree with him on this position.
		I think the United States tried to provoke, and their goal, they stated their goal is to weaken Russia.
		Russia has the right to protect its national security borders.
		NATO was trying to expand and encroach on Russia since 1990.
		And we would do the same thing if they were in Mexico or in Canada.
		Talking about dictators, we met with Netanyahu and the whole Congress rival to him.
		On live TV, we have massacres and slaughters, and people don't say anything.
		I want to know that people disagree with Trump meeting with Putin.
		Why don't they complain about meeting with Netanyahu?
		All the media is all propaganda.
		They show a little bit of Ukraine being attacked, yet they show nothing about Gaza and the slaughter and the starvation.
		Our hypocrisy and our media lost its credibility.
		Our high moral and human rights is gone.
		We have no respect in the world.
		On this one, anyone, if Russia has a threat against its border, it has the right to protect itself.
		It's NATO that want to occupy Ukraine, and Russia has the right to protect its border.
		Even though I don't like the Russian system, I don't like Putin, but he has the right to protect his national security, as we do, as any country will do.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Got it, nice.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Gina, a Republican in Mississippi.
unidentified		Is it Carrier?
unidentified		Correct.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
unidentified		Say it for me, Gina.
unidentified		Carrier.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Carrier, like the French way?
unidentified		Yes.
unidentified		Okay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead with your comments.
unidentified		Well, first of all, I agree with just about everything the last caller said.
		You know, I have for 10 years, for 20 years, I've been an avid watcher of the show.
		But ever since Trump was re-elected, I had to stop watching it because I can't stand the constant lies and hate every day towards Trump and everything he does.
		It's just become a joke that most of the people that call in don't have a clue what the truth even is.
		They assume everything.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, Gina, what did you think of the summit?
unidentified		Well, let's just face it, none of us really know yet what took place in that summit.
		We don't know what took place behind the doors.
		We know what they came out and told.
		And maybe they have a reason not to spill, you know, not to tell everything to the media who are, you know, like this show.
		All you're going to do is spin it against Trump.
		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Phil, Long Island, New York, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Phil.
unidentified		Hey, how are you doing?
		You know, I watch C-SPAND a lot, and it's amazing how many uninformed people there are about a lot of many things.
		They just know like talking points, and they don't really know the whole background of what's going on.
		You know, a quick synopsis.
		You know, when Obama first became president, one of the first things he did is take out the missile, the supposed missile defense system that was supposed to go in Poland that was agreed to by Bush.
		Then Clinton went there with a red reset button to reset our relationship with Russia, and they were supposed to help us with North Korea being disarmed with nuclear weapons.
		And then right before Obama's second term, his election, he was caught off mic telling, I think it was Medgev, that after the election, he'd be better able to work with him and do things.
		And then Crimea was annexed, and nobody did nothing.
		NATO, nobody cared.
		So now we're in this situation of a three-year war that looks like it's going endless.
		The Ukrainians are running out of people to fight.
		They have conscript squads that have to go throughout the country to get people to draft them.
		All right.
		The people there have these apps to let each other know where these conscript squads are, right?
		They borrow each other's kids because if the conscript squad sees them with kids, they can't bother them.
		They don't want to.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, Phil, bringing us to the summit yesterday, were you pleased with how that went?
unidentified		Well, we had to start somewhere.
		Where are we supposed to start?
		We had to start somewhere.
		Like the lady before said, we don't know what happened behind closed doors.
		But if we don't start somewhere, how do we get this resolved?
		Okay, everybody's bashing it, all right?
		But we had to start somewhere.
		If NATO and the European Union doesn't like how we're trying to do it, maybe they should handle it.
		Everybody wants us to do the extreme sanctions.
		They're talking about Lindy Graham's bill.
		Secretary of Treasury Besank was on Fox this week, and he said he said to Europeans, Well, what are you going to put in?
		What are you going to put in for sanctions?
		They're still buying oil and gas.
		He said they all looked at their shoes.
		I mean, we got to start somewhere, and we got to look at the whole thing.
		India was allowed to buy that oil.
		Everybody looked the other way for three years.
		There was a joint session of Congress here, and they let Modi speak, and he was buying Russian oil at the time.
		Both parties are full of S.
		Okay.
		Thank you for letting me share.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Trish in Seattle, Washington, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
		Yeah, I have three words about yesterday: waste, fraud, and abuse.
		It was a waste of our money.
		It was fraud because it's who he is.
		It's who this current White House occupant is.
		He's a fraud, an abuse, abuse of the taxpayers' money.
		But my heart really goes out to the people of Ukraine for the current White House occupant to say that Ukraine started the war.
		I mean, really.
		I mean, really, for him to say that.
		So I feel sorry and I support Ukraine.
		And I hope our Congress, you know, kind of like grows the pair and steps back and does.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Got it, Trish.
		And we will continue this conversation with former CIA Russia analyst George Beebe to discuss those direct talks with Russia in Alaska and about ending the war in Ukraine.
		But meanwhile, take a look at this.
		This was part of an interview with Fox News yesterday that President Trump did with Sean Hannity.
		And this was after the talks on Fox.
		Here it is.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Look, as far as I'm concerned, there's no deal until there's a deal, but we did make a lot of progress.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		The meeting took place in this room.
unidentified		Yeah, this is where you met.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Right in this room.
unidentified		Well, did you have?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Let me examine it.
		Oh, there it is.
		That's where you were set.
		That's it.
		I would say that's it.
unidentified		Yep.
unidentified		So did you have a loan time with him?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, I did.
		I did actually after our speeches.
		He made a very good speech, and I also finished it up.
		And afterwards, we spoke right after that.
		We spoke very sincerely.
		I think he wants to see it done.
unidentified		Yeah.
sean hannity ▲ ● ▼		In your press conference, you talked about a lot of things that you agreed on.
unidentified		And maybe one big issue you don't agree on.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Are you prepared to go public with that?
		No, I'd rather not.
		I guess somebody's going to go public with it.
		They'll figure it out.
		But no, I don't want to do that.
		I want to see if we can get it done.
		You know, still, it's not a done deal at all.
		And Ukraine has to agree.
		I mean, you know, President Zelensky has to agree, but it's a terrible war where he's losing a lot, and both of them are.
		And hopefully it can get completed.
		That'll be a great achievement for them.
		Forget about me, for them.
		And you'll save 7,000 lives a week.
		That's a lot.
sean hannity ▲ ● ▼		I spoke very briefly to Secretary of State Rubio, and he did say to me, he goes, there's a difference when you're in the same room together versus, you know, talking to each other through the press.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Even through the phone.
unidentified		Even through the phone.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		It's not the same thing.
		When you're on a telephone, it's not the same thing either.
		This was, I mean, we were together almost three hours, and it was very extensive, and we agreed at a lot of points.
		I mean, a lot of points were agreed on.
		But there's not that much.
		There's, you know, one or two pretty significant items, but I think they can be reached.
		Now it's really up to President Zelensky to get it done.
		And I would also say the European nations, they have to get involved a little bit.
		But it's up to President Zelensky.
		I think we are, and if they'd like, I'll be at that next meeting.
		They're going to set up a meeting now between President Zelensky and President Putin and myself, I guess.
		You know, I didn't even, I didn't ask you about it.
		Not that I want to be there, but I want to make sure it gets done.
		And we have a pretty good chance of getting it done.
unidentified		If you had to grade it on a scale of one to ten?
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		So I think the meeting was a ten in the sense that we got along great.
		And it's good when, you know, two big powers get along, especially when they're nuclear powers.
		You know, we're number one, they're number two in the world.
unidentified		And it's a big deal.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And joining us now to talk about the meeting between President Trump and President Putin and the war in Ukraine is George Beebe.
		He's at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.
		He's the director of grand strategy there.
		George, welcome to the program.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Thank you very much.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What were your takeaways from the summit?
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think the meeting went about as well as could possibly be expected.
		This was not a meeting that was going to end the war in one fell swoop.
		The two presidents, I think, did make substantial progress toward what I would call a framework agreement for laying out what an ultimate peace deal for Ukraine is going to look like.
		I think they made some substantial progress on improving the U.S.-Russian bilateral relationship.
		But there are significant elements of this deal that have to involve Ukraine, that should involve our European allies as well.
		So you can only go so far in a bilateral meeting between the Russian and American presidents.
		Now, what's happened subsequently as President Trump has announced Untruth Social is that he in fact talked with President Zelensky.
		I think he's consulted with Europeans.
		And it looks like we have the makings of a deal.
		And I think we'll find out what the details of this look like on Monday when President Zelensky is due to visit the White House.
		But I think this is a meeting that made, I think, very, very significant progress in bringing this conflict toward a conclusion.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You think it was significant progress, even though we don't have any details?
		I mean, President Trump said there's no deal until there's a deal.
		President Putin said, mentioned a, quote, agreement.
		Right.
		But on what, we don't know.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		That's right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So you do think that there's a framework in place based on that?
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		I do.
		I think it's quite clear reading between the lines, particularly from what President Putin said about an agreement and about President Putin's reference saying that he hopes that the Ukrainians and Europeans won't torpedo this deal.
		It looks to me like they made very substantial progress on a framework.
		Now, what is that framework?
		What does it include?
		I think we can only speculate at this point.
		Nothing has been made public.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Well, let's take a look at what Russia wants.
		And here is, this is according to the BBC.
		They want territorial control of parts of eastern Ukraine.
		They want Ukraine to back off plans to join NATO, end to U.S. and EU sanctions, and a potential restart to nuclear talks with the U.S.
		Now, that first one, that territorial control of parts of eastern Ukraine, that's going to be a tough one.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Right.
		And I think that is probably the stickiest issue and one that clearly President Trump is not going to negotiate with President Putin over.
		I think he recognizes that the optic of the U.S. and Russian presidents sitting down with a map and carving up Ukraine is a very negative optic.
		I don't think they did that at all.
		However, I think some of these other issues that you mentioned, such as the Russians wanting an assurance that Ukraine will not be in NATO, I think they want an assurance that NATO military forces are not going to be stationed on Ukrainian territory.
		I think that's something that the U.S. and Russian presidents probably agreed on.
		Now, why is that?
		I think the biggest reason is that President Trump doesn't want to bring Ukraine into NATO.
		He does not see that as something that's in America's interest to undertake a treaty commitment to go to war with Russia to defend Ukraine.
		And by the way, he's not unique in that.
		Clearly, President Obama was reluctant to go to war to defend Ukraine against Russia.
		President Biden equally so.
		So this is a commitment that I think is more an acknowledgement of an existing reality than a real concession to the Russians.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		President Trump had said that he was hoping to get a ceasefire out of this.
		That did not happen.
		Why?
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, because a ceasefire, I think, has to be negotiated.
		You've got to put in place specific terms and conditions so that everybody is clear on what's inbounds, what's out of bounds, and how do you monitor and enforce that ceasefire.
		If you announce an unconditional ceasefire first, without putting in place all those measures to make sure it is adhered to, it's very likely to fail.
		So the other part of this, though, is that the Russians have said we want to make sure that some core issues are addressed, things that the Russians regard as at the root of this conflict, before they're willing to agree to a ceasefire.
		And I think that is what has in fact happened.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I think when they say root causes, what does Putin see as the root causes of this war?
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think they've been quite clear and quite consistent in talking about this.
		And President Putin alluded to this in the press conference yesterday.
		He is concerned about the possibility that Ukraine will be in NATO or that NATO members might put military forces on Ukrainian territory.
		Those are the biggest issues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		But is that what prompted him to invade in 2022?
		Or does he see that Ukraine has is that doesn't actually exist, that this has always been part of Russia, and I'm just merely taking back the land that rightfully belongs to Russia.
		Is that what he considers root causes?
		Because NATO didn't move forces towards him in 2022.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		I don't think that's the way the Russians see this.
		Of course, it's been official U.S. policy and official NATO policy since the spring of 2008 that Ukraine would one day be a member of NATO.
		And up until this point, that has not changed.
		Our official policy is still exactly that.
		So that's one aspect of this.
		The second part of this was I think Putin and Russian officials were concerned that the U.S. and NATO military relationship with Ukraine was progressing on the ground in Ukraine, despite the fact that Ukraine was not moving imminently toward official membership in NATO.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So what does that mean, George?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Explain that.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, it means that we were deepening our involvement in training and equipping the Ukrainian military.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That was American or NATO?
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, both.
		I think the Russians see those two things as very much one thing.
		And we were outfitting Ukraine so that there was compatibility with NATO military standards, so that over time, the Ukrainian military and the Ukrainian intelligence services were deepening their cooperation and partnership and integration with the U.S. military and with the CIA.
		And the Russians found that trend very disturbing because they were concerned that it would reach a point of such integration, such a military presence of the United States and NATO in Ukraine that they couldn't prevent an ultimate move into formal NATO membership.
		They saw the window closing for them.
		And I think that's what really prompted this.
		Now, are there other aspects to this?
		Treatment of Russian minorities in Ukraine, territory that the Russians believe historically and culturally is rightfully Russian.
		Sure, that is a part of this.
		But those were issues that existed since the breakup of the Soviet Union.
		What changed was the advance in that security relationship.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And is the way to handle that to invade Ukraine and try to take it?
		Because, you know, you recall in 2022, the idea was that Russia would take Kyiv in a week.
		Did Putin see that as the only way to stop NATO membership was to invade Ukraine?
		Because what actually happened was Finland and Sweden ended up joining NATO, and it did expand as a result of that invasion.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		No, there's no question that the Russians have subverted their own interests and in many respects been their own worst enemies on this.
		I think as a result of this invasion, Putin has actually worsened Russians' security situation overall.
		And I think that's part of the reason why he's seeking a deal.
		I don't think he wants a situation where Russia acquires a limited amount of territory in eastern and southern Ukraine.
		It's not going to conquer all of Ukraine.
		It's not capable of conquering all of Ukraine.
		It doesn't want to try to occupy and govern that.
		That would be an enormous, expensive, and bloody headache for the Russians.
		But in capturing these portions of eastern Ukraine, the Russians have actually worsened their security relationship with NATO.
		They've made the threat that they face from the West even worse.
		The only way they can deal with that broader threat from NATO is to make a deal, is to improve the relationship with the United States, is to improve the relationship with NATO.
		That's the card that we have.
		That's the leverage that we have in all of this.
		And I think that's the reason why Putin, in fact, wants a deal.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		If you'd like to join our conversation with George Beebe of the Quincy Institute, you can do so.
		Our lines are bipartisan.
		Republicans are on 2028-8001.
		Democrats 202748-8000.
		And Independents 202748-8002.
		I want to ask you about Russian media and how this summit is playing there.
		I know you speak Russian, so I wonder what you've seen or if you've been following that.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, the Russian media going into this meeting were, I think, cautiously optimistic about what might happen.
		Obviously, there's a lot of uncertainty about what kind of deals might actually get struck.
		Can the United States deliver?
		Is Trump sincere about wanting a compromise deal that will bring this war to an end?
		But I think the mere fact of the meeting, the mere fact that President Putin was accepted on American territory, he was treated with respect.
		He was not arrested as a war criminal.
		All of those things are things that the Russians certainly notice Russian media is treating this as a real diplomatic victory, certainly not a military victory, but for years the United States under the Biden administration treated Putin as a pariah, treated Russia as an international pariah, attempted to isolate Russia diplomatically,
		punish it economically, and inflict as many material losses as we were able to on the battlefield, hoping that all of that would convince Russia to say uncle, to capitulate, that the costs of this invasion were far greater than the benefits.
		In fact, that didn't work.
		What I think has been necessary all along, even prior to this invasion, was to strike a geopolitical bargain with the Russians, namely that we will not attempt to bring Ukraine into the NATO military alliance or station NATO forces on its territory.
		In return, I think the Russians have made a very significant geopolitical concession in return.
		And we're going to find out about this on Monday.
		I think they have accepted two important principles.
		One, that Ukraine can apply for membership in the European Union and Russia won't attempt to block that, which I think is an enormous victory for the Ukrainians.
		And it will enable them to be politically and economically anchored in the West, even if they are militarily neutral.
		The second thing that I think Putin has recognized is that Ukraine has legitimate interests in its own self-defense capabilities and that they can legitimately receive assistance from the West in ensuring that they have the ability to defend themselves.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What about the land?
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, the land, I think, is going to be a very thorny issue.
		And my guess is that's going to take a fair amount of negotiating.
		That's not going to be solved in one or two meetings.
unidentified		That's probably going to give up any of the land he's taken.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, he will, I don't think, give up any land in the Donbass, meaning in the Donetsk and Lugansk regions that Russia currently holds.
		My guess is that he won't give up his claim to all of Donetsk, even though Russian military forces don't yet occupy that region in its entirety.
		The other regions that Russia has formally annexed but is not yet close to conquering militarily, that's up in the air.
		I don't know.
		I think there may be some room for maneuvering there.
		And then areas in the north of Ukraine that the Russian military now holds.
		I think that is a potential bargaining chip that Putin could use in trying to strike a deal.
		None of this is going to be easy, however.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I want to take calls, but do you see that as rewarding Putin for his invading of Ukraine by giving him any land?
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, I don't think anybody's going to give any land.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So let me say, let him keep.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think there's a very practical question here, which is, what is the alternative?
		Does Ukraine have the capability militarily to drive Russia off of the territory that it has occupied?
		And I think that question has already been answered.
		It was answered in 2023 when the Ukrainians launched their so-called counteroffensive to try to drive Russia back, and it utterly failed.
		And ever since that time, the Russians have actually advanced.
		So your alternative is not, you know, take the land back.
		Your alternative here is how do we make a deal?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to callers.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We'll start on the Republican line in Washington, D.C. Anthony, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, ladies and gentlemen.
		My name is, of course, I'm Anthony Johnson.
		And I'm really pleased to participate in this discussion.
		First, I think President Trump was very excellent.
		It is probably, in my mind, is in the mind of clearly displaying his intelligence, his ability to lead, and his clarity of vision.
		And what I really want to ask the gentleman to do, you think he's probably a good student of Russia's history and to point to the world is we have to remember that in Nigeria's history and pleasure, the area called Russia always give up their territory, but they still have this currency where they redevelop, they regroup.
		And now with a smart president like President Trump, we are checkmating them for this development of regrouping.
		So this thing, this peace summit is a real good beginning, and I'm sure it will end well because it'll be a checkmate towards Russia's continuous development in a different kind of world that we have now.
		And I'm sure Russia has economical problems, which this gentleman is aware of.
		And I'm sure our president is ready to turn Russia around.
		They're already on the way to democracy.
		And with a good president like President Trump, capitalism, democracy, they are ready for it.
		And this will be a better for the whole world, especially for the European Union.
		I mean, the whole world in touching.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Anthony, let's get an answer.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think the caller put it very well that this is a good beginning.
		I think what we're going to see from this point is a series of negotiations that are occurring in parallel and each at different paces.
		One track in those negotiations is going to be between Ukraine and Russia.
		It's going to be over things that are largely bilateral, including this issue of territory, where the border between Russia and Ukraine is going to be drawn.
		It's going to be about exchange of prisoners of war, various other war reparations, things like that, things that really can only be negotiated between Moscow and Kyiv.
		Another track is going to be on this question of security guarantees for Ukraine, Western assistance to the Ukrainian military.
		I think the Russians, in recognizing that Ukraine has a right to self-defense capabilities, are also going to try to impose some limits on that.
		For example, I think they're going to want to distinguish between defensive military assistance to Ukraine from the West and what they would regard as offensive strike capabilities.
		Long-range strike capabilities, for example, they're going to try to rule out.
		That's going to be an issue that experts are going to have to negotiate at the working level.
		The devil is going to be in the details.
		How long a range of strike capability are we going to agree is too much.
		And then the other area is going to be on broader European security.
		I think the Russians are going to want not just strategic arms control to be reinvigorated.
		They're going to look at the question of theater nuclear forces in Europe that they find threatening.
		They're going to want to talk about conventional military limits, confidence in security building measures.
		That's going to be a track that will take a long time to negotiate.
		I think in the meantime, the fight, the active fighting in Ukraine is going to come to an end.
		But these negotiations that I think are in store are going to proceed for quite some time.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Vincent, Gaithersburg, Maryland, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Vincent.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		I'd like to start off by saying every time it's mentioned that the war started three and a half years ago, the media never, including C-SPAN, says under former President Biden.
		And Trump now is undoing the severe damage of what President Biden did.
		Okay.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yep, keep going, Vincent.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We can hear you.
unidentified		Yeah, and but and this is Gared toll with C-SPAN hosts in your own missionary statement.
		It says C-SPAN hosts are not to be personalities.
		Their names are not to be mentioned, all of that, which is impractical.
		Come on, let's face it, of course, you're going to be a personality.
		Of course, you're going to have your name mentioned.
		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's go ahead and get a response on that the war was started under former President Biden.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, it's a fact that the invasion took place while President Biden was president.
		I think the conditions that led to this invasion actually far predated President Biden.
		This was a conflict that was brewing since, I think, the early 1990s, when in the aftermath of the end of the Cold War, the fall of the Berlin Wall, the question of what Europe's security arrangements would look like really came to the fore.
		And I think fairly quickly the United States insisted that European security would be a NATO-centric order, one in which the Russians could consult,
		one in which the Russians were certainly welcome to support decisions that were being made by NATO, but one in which Russia really did not have any kind of decision-making involvement in matters that they regarded as quite pertinent to their own security interests.
		And the Russians over time grew more and more vocal in saying NATO's eastward expansion needed to come to an end.
		And I think that was something that long predated President Biden.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		But what was it that triggered Putin in 2022?
		I mean, as you said, this was long brewing.
		Was there something that former President Biden could have done?
		Could he have been more forward-leaning in that relationship?
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think we were not willing to discuss what for the Russians was a core security interest, and that is this question of NATO involvement in Ukraine and potential NATO membership for Ukraine.
		They repeatedly said, you know, we have to come to an agreement on this.
		We can't continue to stand by, watch the security relationship between the United States and Ukraine deepen without taking action.
		They were concerned that the window was closing.
		And so they did, in fact, urge us to make deals.
		They put on the table some draft treaties that were meant essentially to end NATO's eastward expansion and to roll back NATO military deployments in regions near Russia's periphery.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Did that include military support for Ukraine from the United States directly?
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		No, that was not addressed in this.
		But we treated this as something we were not willing to address.
		We essentially said that there is a principle at stake here, and the principle is that all countries have the right to choose their own alliances, their own security arrangements, and Russia doesn't get a voice in that.
		It doesn't get a veto.
		Whether NATO has an alliance relationship or a military partnership with Ukraine is not Russia's business, and we will not discuss it.
		Now, the problem with that is that there are other principles that are also at stake here.
		Back in 1975, the United States, Soviet Union, and European states reached what at that time was called the Helsinki Accords.
		They contained a number of principles, one of which enshrined this principle that states can choose their security arrangements.
		But there was another principle that the Russians think is very important, and that is that states shouldn't enhance their own security at the expense of neighboring states.
		That there's an indivisibility of security that we have to take into account.
		And that's a principle that we've not been willing to talk about with the Russians.
		These principles are in tension with one another.
		The principle that you can choose your allies is important, but the principle that in so doing you shouldn't threaten other countries is also important.
		Their intention, how do you reconcile those, that's a diplomatic process.
		That's a process that you have to discuss to find an acceptable balance.
		And where I find fault in how the United States has addressed this, not just under Biden, but under previous presidencies as well, is we've not been willing to acknowledge that there is a tension there and that that tension requires a diplomatic process to work out an acceptable balance.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Renee, Nysettville, Florida, Democrat, good morning, Renee.
unidentified		Good morning, Amy.
		This discussion is very disturbing.
		He has got a different narrative than I've heard.
		And now I see that he worked for Mr. Cheney, and I wonder if that's why we went into Afghanistan for Russia.
valerie in kentucky ▲ ● ▼		Because for one thing, the president is supposed to represent us.
unidentified		And our country is not with a communist country.
		We are a democratic country.
		And it seems like, you know, he's all for Russia now.
		And we need somebody in those meetings so we know what they're saying.
		Because without somebody in there, I don't trust our president.
		He's under Putin's thumb since before 2016 when he was over there.
		And getting money from Russia, his son said that, you know, they didn't need the banks in the U.S. because they had Russia.
		And Russia doesn't give out money for nothing.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Renee.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, I would say that in a diplomatic process, you're not simply going to impose conditions on your adversaries.
		You're going to have to reach a deal that involves a compromise that ensures that all of the parties involved have at least their core interest address.
		And there are going to be some things that you're not going to get.
		You're not going to get an unconditional surrender of the other side at the diplomatic table.
		And so those negotiations have to reflect a reality that if you're going to get a deal, the Ukrainians need their core interests addressed.
		The Russians need their core interests addressed.
		The United States and Europeans have to make sure that our vital interests are protected and all of this too.
		And I think that's what we're seeing right now, a process in which that's the kind of deal that we're pursuing.
		It looks to me like we're close to an arrangement that all parties can look at and say, you know, we're not overjoyed by the terms of this, but we got the things that we really had to get.
		And I think that will be a major achievement.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		George, explain how Russia sees NATO as a threat, because NATO is a defensive alliance.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So were they worried that NATO troops would all of a sudden invade Russia?
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, you know, it's funny because when you say NATO is a defensive alliance, that's something that we've been urging the Russians to accept for many, many years.
		Don't worry, we don't pose a threat.
		We have no offensive ambitions.
		You know, just relax.
		You're being paranoid.
		The Russians look at that and say, okay, what about Kosovo?
		What happened in 1999?
		The NATO alliance just completed its first round of expansion.
		We brought in Hungary, we brought in the Czech Republic, we brought in Poland.
		So NATO has moved eastward.
		Second, NATO went to war in Kosovo, in Serbia, in the former Yugoslavia.
		And it did so not because the Serbs, the Yugoslavs had attacked NATO.
		Not at all.
		And it did so without a UN Security Council mandate.
		So from the Russian point of view, there was no legal justification.
		NATO was not attacked, and the UN Security Council did not authorize this military operation.
		And NATO went out of area into a part of the world that did not include the NATO member and conducted a military operation that ultimately resulted in a change in the border of Serbia.
		Kosovo became independent.
		The Russians looked at that and said, what would prevent NATO from doing that on Russian territory?
		What would prevent NATO from saying, for example, with Chechnya, here's a separatist part of Russia that has been attacked unjustly by the central Russian government.
		There's a humanitarian crisis.
		NATO needs to ensure the Chechen people are protected from the Russian government and its brutal attacks.
		They saw a parallel there.
		So when we say, oh, Russia has nothing to fear, it's just a defensive alliance, the Russians say, gee, that's not how we see it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		It's Dr. Robin, Republican, Old Forge, Pennsylvania.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Robin.
unidentified		Hi.
		This has really got me puzzled.
		I think what Trump did was good yesterday.
		He has to be decent to Putin.
		I don't care if you hate him or you love him.
		You can't be mean to him.
		It's a meeting to try to get this conflict done.
		Now, about this trouble here, I think Putin is not going to want to give up the land.
		Zelinsky says he is not going to give up the land.
		So right now, I don't think anything's going to get done.
		And President Trump is trying so hard, he wants the killings to stop.
		But I think that the European nations aren't doing enough.
		They have to get involved more in this situation because it's just going to be at a stalemate with the land.
		I don't see how they're going to come to an agreement on this.
		It just seems impossible.
		And I do blame Biden for this.
		He wasn't a strong president.
		He was weak.
		He didn't do anything.
		All he wanted to do is send ammunition, send bombs, do this, do that, because they all hated Putin.
		Well, if they take a good look, the Democrats, what they're doing in this country is what Putin does and the propaganda with our news.
		All right, Robin.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Go ahead, George PP.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think the question of changes to the map, the territorial issue, is a very, very difficult one.
		It's probably the most difficult issue in this war.
		There are lots of ways this could be handled.
		One is to agree to disagree.
		You simply say, we're not going to recognize territory that the Russian military occupies as legitimately and legally a part of the Russian Federation.
		But we will agree to a principle that we're not going to try to change the situation on the battlefield, that this will be a subject for diplomacy, for political negotiations over time.
		That's how the United States, for example, handled the incorporation of the Baltic states into the Soviet Union.
		For many, many years throughout the Cold War, the United States never formally legally recognized that the Baltic states were a part of the Soviet Union.
		But we didn't go to war with the Soviet Union to try to liberate the Baltic states, and we didn't allow that fact to preclude diplomatic engagement with the Soviet Union in defending our own national interests.
		That's one way the Ukrainians could handle this.
		Another way is to hold a referendum.
		It's to ask the people in these territories themselves to vote on what they would like their status to be.
		That's one way of getting around this question of the leadership in these countries making territorial bargains or concessions.
		It would be rooting the status of these regions in popular will, self-determination.
		And that's another way of handling this.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Would that work in this case?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Would you be confident that that would be a free and fair election in those areas?
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think that's an excellent question.
		I think the difficulty that you will immediately get into in holding referendum of this sort is: do you do so under military occupation, the threat of soldiers carrying rifles looking over your shoulder affecting how you vote?
		The next question is who actually is a resident of these territories?
		What about refugees that have fled the fighting and are now in Europe, for example?
		Do they get to vote?
		How do you determine who legitimately gets to cast a ballot in all of this?
		Those details are going to matter.
		They're going to be very difficult to sort out.
		So it's not an easy process.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Joanna in Germantown, Maryland, Democrat, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I have a couple of comments.
		First, I've read a lot of Russian history over the years.
		It's fascinating.
		And there's two things I've learned about the Russians.
		One is that they've always been imperialist.
		They've always been expansionist.
		They've always wanted to conquer other territories.
		And number two is they tend to be paranoid.
		And I think these two things fundamentally drive their policies.
		Okay, that's number one.
		Number two, Putin has publicly, publicly stated that he laments the breakup of the Soviet Union, that he believes that he's entitled to these Eastern European countries, whether it's the Baltic States or Poland.
		He's talked about that.
		Three, let's see, I'm getting a little bit lost of where I'm at.
		Okay, I frankly felt that that summit, quote, quote, yesterday, was shameful.
		He's opened up, Trump opened up the red carpet for a murderous thug, a war criminal.
		And yet, when Zelensky was here in February, on camera, he tormented and tortured that man.
		Ukraine has a sovereign right to their land.
		If you took it over here to the United States and say the Chinese were occupying Texas or Nebraska or Mar-a-Lago down there in Florida, would we say, hey, okay, just for the sake of peace and so nobody else will die, let's go ahead and let them have Texas, for example, or Nebraska.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Joanna, let's take up those points.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think the caller is correct that the Russians' approach to their own security has really been different than that of the United States.
		The United States is blessed by having the protection of two large oceans and neighbors to our south and north that don't pose substantial military threats to us.
		We're unusually secure, largely as a result of our geography.
		The Russians are unusually insecure by reasons of their geography.
		They are situated on a vast open plain without natural barriers to invasion.
		And there's no mountain ranges, for example, that make it difficult for invaders to approach by land.
		So, what the Russians have done over time is to adopt a strategy of putting geographic distance between their heartland area, the parts of Russia that are most economically, strategically significant to them, and potential invaders.
		And I think that's one of the reasons why they're so neuralgic about Ukraine.
		The Russians have been invaded many, many times, coming in from the West, and those invasion routes tended to go through Ukrainian territory.
		So, are they paranoid?
		Well, they're certainly unusually sensitive to the possibility that they can be vulnerable.
		And as that geographic distance appears to diminish for them, they start to get uneasy.
		And I think we're seeing all that.
		Now, as for this question of whether Putin is trying to recreate the Soviet Union, certainly he has said that anybody that does not lament the demise of the Soviet Union has no heart.
		But he's followed that up by saying anybody that tries to recreate it has no brain, has no head.
		And I don't think the case can be made persuasively that he is in fact trying to recreate the Soviet Union, retake territory.
		And I'll simply underscore that point by saying in Georgia in 2008, the Russians had invaded Georgia.
		Part of this was the result of NATO's declaration earlier that year that Georgia would one day become a member of NATO, something that the Russians wanted to preclude.
		But they had militarily nothing standing in their way of conquering that entire country, taking the Georgian capital, and making Georgia once again a part of Russia's empire.
		And they did not proceed.
		They did not capture all of Ukraine.
		They decided to turn back.
		And I think that tells you a lot about just how much the acquisition of territory in and of itself and the recreation of the Soviet Union is the fundamental driver of all this.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Peter, who's in Valley Cottage, New York, Republican.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Mr. Beebe, thank you very much.
		You are giving one of the most honest and fair assessments of the situation that I've heard in a long time.
		It was made very clear that President Putin wanted to keep Ukraine in the Russian sphere.
		And President Zelensky made it very clear that he wanted to align himself with Europe and the United States, and he wanted to join NATO.
		You have to remember, President Biden hadn't spoken to Putin once or had a meeting with him.
		And in November of 2021, Joe Biden signed a strategic agreement with President Zelensky that eventually NATO, I'm sorry, Ukraine would become part of NATO and that he was going to have a more relationship with the United States and with Europe.
		It was right after that strategic alliance agreement that was signed in January is when President Putin started putting the troops on the border.
		And then he invaded.
		And also, President Putin saw how weak President Biden was, what happened in Afghanistan and whatever.
		Putin wanted Ukraine to remain neutral and not stay in NATO, not become part of NATO, and also that he wanted that buffer zone between his country and Europe.
		And I believe Joe Biden was responsible for precipitating this conflict.
		Thank you very much.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you agree?
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think President Biden had an opportunity to strike a geopolitical bargain, a compromise with the Russians that probably would have precluded this invasion.
		And historians are going to debate how serious that opportunity was, how real it was.
		And the honest answer is nobody can say for sure.
		But I do believe that the Russians wanted a deal that would close the door on NATO membership for Ukraine.
		And we refused to engage on that matter.
		We simply said that is not an issue for discussion.
		Had we engaged, had we decided to try to seek a compromise on that, I think a deal would have been possible.
		I think that's what we're going to wind up with now.
		We're going to wind up with a deal that makes Ukraine militarily neutral.
		And that's going to be central to ending this war.
		And if so, I think that suggests that we could have done this same thing prior to the conflict and saved probably millions of lives.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		President Trump has been criticized for rolling out the red carpet for President Putin.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you think that that criticism is justified, or was that treatment of Putin necessary to move things along?
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, you don't engage in diplomacy just with your friends and partners.
		Diplomacy means talking to your rivals and your adversaries too.
		That's a reality.
		And so part of the deal, part of achieving peace in Ukraine, stabilizing the U.S.-Russian relationship, putting Europe on a path toward order and stability more broadly, does mean you're going to have to treat Russia with respect.
		You're going to have to send a signal to them that we're willing to make peace.
		And that means you're going to do some compromising, but not of your core security interests, not of the things that are most vital.
		And I think that's how President Trump is approaching this.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Bob in Illinois, Line for Democrats.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning.
unidentified		Hello, C-SPAN.
		Mr. Beebe, keep on taking up for Trump.
		You're going to sound ridiculous.
		I would never sit down with no one that happened to cause 400,000 people to die in a war and then dog out Selinsky.
		It's sad.
		It makes Biden look good.
		And at the same time, they're sending weapons to Ukraine.
		You know, he stuck up to Putin.
		Putin, that looks so bad.
		And then the last point, that Putin knows that the U.S. massacred the Indians and Mexicans to make the United States.
		So Putin looks at us like, what are you complaining about?
		Y'all had the United, the way y'all became the United States is to massacre Indians and Mexicans.
		So what's the big deal about me massacring Ukraine?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And let's get in, Nancy, here in North Royalton, Ohio, Independent Line.
unidentified		Hello, thank you for taking my call.
		I want to thank the guest for shedding light on what Russia's perspective might be on this, because in mainstream media, we never, never hear that.
		And I was just curious.
		NATO, my understanding is, was created in 1949.
		North Atlantic Treaty Organization as a means of defending Western Europe from any potential invasion.
		Since Russia and the Soviet Union are no more the Soviet Union, what exactly is Western Europe being protected from?
		I know that in this case it involves Ukraine, but down the road, what potential threats does Western Europe see that they feel they still need this, NATO?
		Is it possibly China or some other type of threat?
		And I'll let Senpafier.
		Thank you.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, this is exactly the question that came up in NATO capitals after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the end of the Cold War.
		NATO had a clear purpose during the Cold War of protecting its member states against the possibility of invasion by the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies.
		But that threat essentially disappeared.
		So what do we do now?
		What is NATO's purpose?
		And eventually, NATO groped toward a new mission.
		And that was essentially an evangelical mission.
		And what I mean by that was we said we need to ensure that the countries of the former Warsaw Pact, the former Soviet Union, liberalize, reform,
		adopt market-based economies, adopt democratic political procedures, and that they can do that most effectively under the umbrella of NATO protection that helps them put their military organizations under civilian control.
		So this brought with it a logic of NATO expansion.
		We're going to expand NATO not because we believe it's in the vital interest of the United States to go to war, for example, to protect Hungary from invasion from Russia, but rather because we think that membership in the NATO alliance will hasten liberal reform, better governance, and prosperity for the Hungarian people.
		Now, this immediately caused frictions with the Russians because the Russians looked at NATO and said, wait a minute, this is not a political organization.
		It is a military organization.
		And as it moves eastward, we start to feel under threat.
		So that's, I think, the nature of the conflict that began to emerge.
		And we haven't really reconciled this.
		I think we're now at a point where we realize that NATO, in fact, may have to go to war to defend its members.
		This was something that throughout the mid-1990s and much of the early 2000s, we didn't really think was a serious possibility.
		Now we're coming to grips with that and wondering, gee, is it in our interest to go to war with Russia to defend Ukraine?
		And I think the answer to that, that a series of American presidents have provided through their own actions, if not their rhetoric, is no.
		It's not vital to the United States to go to war with Russia, risk nuclear catastrophe in order to protect Ukraine from invasion.
		So we're now at a point where NATO has to adjust.
		What is it going to do?
		What is its purpose?
		And that's going to be a process we're going to have to work out.
		It's not going to be quick.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I know you're a Russia expert, but the caller did mention China.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think China is thinking vis-a-vis wanting to take Taiwan?
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think the Chinese are very clear that they believe that Taiwan is an integral part of China, that there is one China.
		Now, the next question is, how do you make reality conform to what they think Taiwan's status ought to be?
		Do you do it by military conquest or is there some other process over time that can bring reunification?
		I personally think that the Chinese don't want to have to invade Taiwan to bring this about.
		I think they would far prefer that this reintegration occur peacefully, nonviolently.
		But how that happens and how quickly it should happen, that's a matter that right now isn't clear.
		Now, the question of whether NATO should be involved in that, I think, is no.
		To go out of area and potentially risk war with China would be, I think, profoundly mistaken.
		It's not a mission that NATO ought to be involved in.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I wonder if you think if there's anything China can do to put pressure on Putin to end this war, and would they be willing to do it?
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Well, I think the Chinese have mixed feelings about the invasion of Ukraine.
		On the one hand, I think they don't like the idea of Russia invading another country and conquering territory and incorporating it into the Russian Federation, because it reminds them of what has been done, in their view, to China itself historically.
		So that principle of territorial integrity is quite an important one for the Chinese, and they're not happy that Russia has threatened that.
		On the other hand, I don't think they want to see Russia lose this war.
		And I don't think they want a situation where the United States conquers Russia in so doing creates a problem in the Chinese-Russian relationship because Russia becomes weak and a burden for the Chinese.
		And the United States is that much freer to concentrate its attention and power and resources on China.
		So there are mixed feelings here.
		Now, do I think the Chinese want a compromise settlement of the war in Ukraine?
		Yeah, I think they do.
		Not one that is tilted heavily against the Russians.
		But yeah, I think they'd like to see a compromise settlement.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And that's George Beebe, Director of Grand Strategy at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, former Special Advisor to Vice President Cheney on Russia and former CIA Russia Analysis Chief.
		You can find his work at quincyinst.org.
		George, thanks so much for joining us today.
george beebe ▲ ● ▼		Thanks, Mimi.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Later this morning on the Washington Journal, Robert Woodson, founder and president of the Woodson Center, discusses President Trump's recent actions to address crime in Washington, D.C. and how communities could be improved.
		But next, we want to hear from you what's your top news story of the week.
		You can start calling in now.
		Here are the lines.
		202-748-8001 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 Book Notes.
		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 Book Notes Plus with our host, Brian Lamb.
		BookNotes Plus is available wherever you get your podcasts and on the C-SPAN Now app.
		Sunday night on C-SPAN's Q&A.
		Sports journalist Jane McManus, author of The Fast Track, discusses the rise in popularity of women's sports since the early 1970s and the challenges female athletes have faced since then, including unequal pay and lack of media coverage.
jane mcmanus ▲ ● ▼		What you do have now are women who see themselves as athletes first, and they aren't looking to be pleasing to anyone else.
		And I think that is where things have changed quite a bit.
		They see, today's athletes see sports as their birthright, not just their brothers.
		And I think honestly, their brothers would say the same thing for the most part.
unidentified		Jane McManus with her book, The Fast Track, Sunday night at 8 p.m. Eastern on C-SPAN's QA.
unidentified		You can listen to Q&A and all of our podcasts on the C-SPAN Now app or wherever you get your podcasts.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		So you interviewed the other night.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		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 happened 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.
al green ▲ ● ▼		We can all watch that on C-SPAN.
unidentified		Millions of people across the country tuned into C-SPAN.
		Thank you!
		Jesus!
		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.
		And welcome forward to everybody watching at home.
		We know C-SPAN covers this live as well.
jane mcmanus ▲ ● ▼		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.
		That's a big upgrade, right?
unidentified		Washington Journal continues.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Welcome back to Washington Journal.
		We are asking for your top news story of the week.
		A lot happened this week, including that Putin-Trump summit that happened yesterday that we were just talking about.
		If you'd like to talk about that, there was the federalizing of the D.C. police and the deployment of the National Guard and other federal law enforcement into Washington, D.C.
		We have Governor Newsom in California on redistricting and the White House calls for review of exhibits at the Smithsonian.
		Also, President Trump hosting the Kennedy Center honors coming up in December.
		Those are some of the things that happened this week.
		Whatever you'd like to talk about as far as your top news story is on the table on the Republican line now is in Staten Island, New York.
		Anthony, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
		You asked the question about the root causes that was brought up during the summit.
		I was born in Ukraine, so please allow me a moment.
		NATO was created in response to Soviet Union, and when Soviet Union ceased to exist, Federation of Russia asked to be part of NATO.
		NATO said no.
		Ukraine asked to be part of the European Union.
		European Union said no because they found to be Ukraine a corrupt country.
		During the negotiations with Mikhail Gorbachev, Russia was promised that there would be no expansion of NATO.
		And since the 90s, many countries, including Finland, were added into the NATO.
		The Maidan and the overthrow of democratically elected president of Ukraine, Yanukovych, unfortunately was with support of America, where Senator McCain and many other senators traveled to Ukraine to support, unfortunately, the coup.
		The pipeline that was going through Ukraine.
		Imagine we had a pipeline going through Mexico to supply Latin America with oil and gas, and Mexico decided to blow up in something that would be similar to a Nordstrom pipeline underwater.
		How would we respond?
		How would America respond to that?
		And then finally, the missiles.
		The missiles that were placed in Poland that were planned to place them in Poland and other countries.
		How would America react if Russia placed their missiles in Cuba or Mexico?
		And when there is a response to NATO, like BRICS, this is basically a response when countries like Russia and China respond to and when America,
		before America and media blames other countries and names the leaders as dictators and bloody dictators, America also needs to look in the mirror Hiroshima and Nagasaki and many other bloody conflicts.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So Anthony, when did you leave Ukraine?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		You said you were born there.
unidentified		30, 30 years ago.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, and are you Ukrainian or are you Russian?
unidentified		I don't want to take sides.
		I am an American.
		I am speaking from the American point of view.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		No, no, I understand you're American now, but you started by saying that you were born in Ukraine, so that's why I was curious.
unidentified		Ukraine and I am Ukrainian.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Do you consider the war, I should say, Putin's invasion of Ukraine justified then because of those root causes that you mentioned?
unidentified		The way the world views the war between Ukraine and Russia is not the war between Russia and Ukraine, but the war between Russia and NATO and America.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, to answer my question, you do think that it was justified?
unidentified		I agree that the invasion, a Russian invasion, was not justified.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So, how do you think it should end, Anthony?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think the agreement should look like?
unidentified		The Ukraine needs to acknowledge that because of the root causes, such as NATO, Ukraine cannot have presence of NATO or any foreign troops on its soil.
unidentified		I think that that would be part of the negotiations.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And what about the land?
unidentified		Imagine Mexico takes over.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		No, no, no, I don't want to imagine.
		What do you think about this situation in Ukraine?
		Should Russia have to give back all of that land, including Crimea?
		Or what do you think should be?
unidentified		There are a lot of Russians who live on Ukrainian land that are Russian citizens.
		They speak Russian.
		If Ukraine poses language of only using Ukrainian language, there will be resistance.
		And that's exactly what happened in Donetsk, Lugansk, when Ukraine told the churches that you do not have a freedom of religion, that you must only speak Ukrainian.
		This is the response you get.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		I got to move on to other callers.
		Larry in Texas, Line for Democrats.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thanks for having me.
		I think that President Trump should focus on the United States.
		You know, all the high prices and the high light bills, utility bills are so high, and a lot of our senior citizens can't even afford, you know, to do it.
		You know, so I think he should stay focused on the United States for now.
		And if Ukraine don't want to join NATO, that's fine.
		You know, but the United States shouldn't have to do what they do.
		I understand some parts of the BAPA say we should defend them, you know, help them.
		I think we should pray for them.
		That's what if we all just come together one time in the United States and just pray for Ukraine and Russia.
		That's all we have to do.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		In Gardner, Massachusetts, Independent Line, Al, you're on the air.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What's your top news story?
unidentified		Good morning.
		Well, it's been a tough week for us.
		My wish for America is that our president would just stop talking.
		Every time he talks, he lies.
		All we want out of our president is the truth about any and everything.
		We don't need the lies.
		We don't need the stall tactics.
		We do not need none of that nonsense.
		We're in this world to enjoy peace and equality.
		But what do we expect from Trump over in Ukraine when the way he's acting in America?
		If we can't see that Trump really has no idea, no concept of what he's doing, there's something truly wrong with us.
		As an independent, I demand that my president have good sense.
		And at this particular time in my life, he don't.
		I'm 71 years old.
		I'm a veteran of this country.
		I fought in Vietnam.
		Trump does not respect the military.
		Trump does not respect the social services that we offer in this country.
		This country was built on social services.
		We respect and help everybody that comes into this country.
		But since our president don't want to do that, what we better do is wake up and realize he's never going to do anything for Ukraine.
		He's going to try to pay up a mini Putin.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Al.
		And on the Republican line, Nick is in Newburgh, Indiana.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		There's a couple things I wanted to discuss.
		One was the saying about Trump rolling out the red carpet.
		You know, it's the speak softly and carry a big stick.
		You know, the big stick was the B-2 bomber and the F-22s.
		I don't think he was just showing Mr. Putin how pretty those were.
		So I think people from the right and the left need to realize you guys just reported Trump's going to meet with Zelensky on Monday.
		There might be something really great and historical happening here.
		Like really, this might be really good news for the entire world.
		Ukrainians, Russians, Americans, everybody.
		So I think people from the right and the left both need to take a pause and say, hey, maybe this is working a little bit.
		The other thing I really wanted to speak to that Mr. Beebe brought up is I was wondering if there is a chance for those people to make the decision themselves of popular sovereignty.
		And what makes me think there's a little bit more of a chance in that, that maybe intuitively you'd think of it at first.
		My son played club soccer with a couple of Ukrainian boys.
		The boys were American as apple pie, but their parents were as Ukrainian as Ukrainian gets.
		And, you know, when this stuff all started happening, you know, it at first to me was just, okay, Putin's invading another territory.
		Here we go again.
		But it really hit home.
		They had people that were fighting and dying, and it was real to them.
		And what they taught me, among other things, is there's a real animosity between Eastern Russian Ukrainis and Western Ukrainian Ukrainians.
		And maybe with some sort of election, they can decide themselves.
		And I think ultimately for the historical conflict, you know, they're going to have to decide for themselves.
		But maybe we can bring them to the table here.
		Maybe this is getting done.
		I'm really encouraged by what I've heard this morning after Zelensky is coming to the table.
john in unknown ▲ ● ▼		I think that's great news for all of us.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Nick.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And let's talk to Jay Democrat, Washington, D.C. Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
unidentified		Can you hear me?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yes, I can.
unidentified		Thank you so much for taking my call.
		I got two questions for you real quick.
		I was really, in fact, I want to thank C-SPAN for the show this morning.
		Very educational.
		And I hear these arguments.
		I've been following the argument about Ukraine and our involvement quite a while now, as it's been going on.
		And I got two questions for you, similar to the dialogue you had with the earlier caller that said he was born in Ukraine.
		Would you justify, you think it would be justified for the amount of blood shed and killing that's gone on in Palestine, for example?
		I got one question after that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yes, and what's your other question?
unidentified		Boy, the other question is, last time I checked, we traveled halfway around the world and invaded Iraq.
		And why did we do that?
		Was it justified?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And here's Julie, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Hi, my name is Julie.
		Thank you for taking my call.
		I just want to respond to Mr. Beebe's report.
		He's certainly a very neutral diplomatic approach, but I am very disappointed that he never once tried.
		I'm wondering when he was going to start justifying.
		Putin's kidnapping of all of the children that they stole from the Ukrainian families and the bombing of hospitals and schools, which is definitely a war crime.
		Now, it was very insulting to the Ukrainian people to have the red carpet out for a man who has stolen their children, and Trump is there welcoming him.
		Now, I just have to make that comment.
		I really was disappointed in his, he never even once mentioned it.
		What are we going to do about getting those children back and stopping Putin from bombing civilians?
		He's not supposed to do that.
		That's a war crime.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And Josh, Columbus, Ohio, Republican.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Josh.
unidentified		Hi, thank you for having me.
		I think that as far as the news stories, I think the top, I would say, two news stories for the time is definitely Trump rolling out the red carpet for Putin in Alaska.
		Also, the D.C. trying to take over the police in D.C.
		I think it just goes to show just kind of we are in unprecedented times, not in a good way.
		I think we've kind of lost the norms and values that our country used to hold dear and that our leaders kind of followed.
		We've always had leaders of adversaries over to our countries.
		We invited Khrushchev over to Disney World.
		We've had, you know, we've had other people that we've tried to engage with, but we've always engaged it kind of in a showing our system is better.
		You know, work with us.
		Let's try to make an agreement, not a kind of, you know, hey, what you're doing is okay.
		We always kind of stood up and Ronald Reagan very clearly said, you know, Gorbachev, tear down this wall.
		I think it's kind of sad that we have kind of lost this leadership role.
		And we're kind of now almost pandering to some of these, to these, you know, dictators.
		And I think it's kind of sad also our previous speaker, I think, was almost, I get he's trying to come up with a diplomatic solution, but I think maybe he should go back to some of the tried and true methods of world diplomacy.
		You know, John F. Kennedy stood up to the, you know, to the Russians in the Cuban Missile Crisis and had a firm line.
		A lot of our other leaderships have had better success.
		I mean, it's just kind of sad that we've gotten to this point where we want to pander with dictators and do business with them rather than stand up to them.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And this is the New York Post.
		The previous caller talked about the Ukrainian children that have been kidnapped and taken into Russia to be re-educated.
		The New York Post says this, Ukraine's First Lady demands return of thousands of kidnapped children as peace terms with Russia are considered.
		It says Ilya, a two-year-old Ukrainian boy, was kidnapped by a high-ranking Russian officer for his, quote, good looks, only to be abandoned when his underlying health issues were uncovered.
		He was never seen again.
		The estimate is over 20,000 children taken.
		Those are the documented cases.
		It's feared that it's much more than that.
		Doug, Watertown, New York Democrat.
		Good morning, Doug.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		How are you this morning?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I'm doing okay.
unidentified		Okay.
		Before we do anything foolish, I think actually Trump is trying to do something good in that he's just trying to freeze everybody, you know, trying to say, let's have a ceasefire, and instead of fighting, let's talk.
		And I think that's a good thing.
		I hope Zelensky agrees with that.
		Whether Russia takes the territory or not, whether Ukraine takes the territory back and defeats Russia, the issue is basically, we've got to avoid nuclear war.
		And if you go back to World War II, I believe Hitler first took the Sudetenland and then later invaded and took all of Austria.
		Now, he stopped at the Sudetenland, and when he went on, that's what caused World War II.
		I think if you freeze here and look for a solution and then have that ultimate threat about war and then NATO coming in and everything getting all mixed up, there's more pressure to solve that war.
		But you first have to just say, stop.
		Ceasefire, stop.
		And don't fight, but talk.
		And that's what I think is trying to be accomplished, and I think that's right to do.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Doug.
		Now, regarding more on the kidnapped children, this is also from the New York Post with this headline: Melania Trump sends a letter to Putin about abducted Ukrainian children.
		It says that First Lady of Melania Trump wrote a letter to Russian President Putin raising concerns over the plight of abducted children in Ukraine.
		This is according to White House officials from yesterday.
		President Trump hand-delivered the letter written by his Slovenian-born wife to his Russian counterpart during their high-stakes summit at Joint Base Elmendorf Richardson in Anchorage, Alaska.
		Herman in Miami, Florida, Independent Line, good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'm calling just to make a couple points.
		The first one is a very nuanced and very well done discussion on the part of Mr. Beebe.
		Very well done.
		I want to make this point.
		Ukraine, specifically Kiev, has been a central part of the heart of Russia for centuries.
		It is almost impossible to think in terms of Russian cultural heritage and their idea of their expansionist plans to even conceive that they would not be interested in finally acquiring Kyiv.
		Kyiv is just so much a part of Russia in Russia's way of thinking that they will never stop at the boundary that might be imposed on them by this transitional agreement.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So you're saying even if they were allowed to keep eastern Ukraine that they would just continue trying to take all of it?
unidentified		Yes.
unidentified		Well, for those of us who have studied Russian history and Ukrainian history, it is very clear that the heart and soul of Russia began in Kiev.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Oh, sorry, Herman.
		Susan, Georgia, Republican line.
		Good morning, Susan.
unidentified		Good morning.
unidentified		I just couldn't hold back any longer.
justice neil gorsuch ▲ ● ▼		I have been really upset since the day that Vladimir Zelensky came to the White House and he was treated so horribly.
unidentified		I was totally in shock for months.
justice neil gorsuch ▲ ● ▼		And now Trump rolls out the red carpet for Putin.
unidentified		And I don't think Putin is ever going to cease fire.
		I think he's playing Trump like a fiddle.
		My husband is a real Trump supporter, and I keep telling him that he said, no, Trump's going to get us make peace.
		No, Putin is Satan.
		I don't think he will make peace with anybody.
		I think that I'm hoping that NATO gets together and they let those weapons through and they let the Ukrainians be able to start flying stuff over to Russia and let them get the wrath of Ukraine because it's totally unfair.
		I have been a Republican for a while now and a real Trump supporter.
		Uh-uh.
		I think something's going on with Trump.
		I think Trump wants to make a deal and a big trade with Putin.
		There's some he's a selfish man and he wants to get his gain.
		And I'm sorry to say that because I've always been a MAGA supporter, but no more.
		Ukraine is the injured party.
		Can't they see that?
		And that's all I have to say.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Dennis in Lorain, Ohio, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Dennis.
unidentified		All right.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		Take about everything that Mr. Trump says.
		The bottom line is always money.
		So what is this about?
		Money and power, power and money.
		They have been killing and stealing for money and power.
		And then the common American is duped to think that some moral ground, Christian ground, is the reason behind their actions.
		Well, the Bible, if they read it, is plain and clear.
		Money, the love of it, is the root of all evil, the root of all evil.
		It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man in the kingdom of heaven.
		So who's getting richer?
		Those at the top, who's getting poor?
		The common American that's been duped, ooh, bamboozled, and just confused about what the reason all this war is about.
		This industrial war complex is getting rich.
		Look at who's got stock and the bombs is being dropped.
		You get the answer to your questions.
		America needs to wake up because you say you believe in God.
		Well, God right now is giving America a chance to demonstrate and prove that they are truly a Christian nation and they are not active Christian.
		And I'm here to tell you today that the end of this has got to come.
		It can't continue.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And take a look at this poll from Pew Research about this topic, how Americans view the Trump administration's approach to the Russia-Ukraine war.
		This is, it says, majority of Americans are not confident in Trump's decision-making about the Russia-Ukraine war.
		Here's how it comes out.
		So not confident is 59% net, and then somewhat is at 25%.
		Net confident 40.
		So what you're looking at is confident as at 40%, not confident at about 50% on that.
		And that survey was conducted, by the way, August 4th through the 10th, so before the summit with Mr. Putin.
		Here is Vana in Boston, Massachusetts, Independent Line.
		Good morning.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for all suspenders.
		Good job.
		I'm independent, but I want to suggest you guys interview someone from the government and ask them what they are doing to protect farm animals from the cruelty of meatpacking.
		Terrible thing happens in a lot of houses all over the country, and the government can help those poor animals if they want.
		Thank you so much.
		Have a good day.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Gene in Park Ridge, Illinois, Republican.
		Gene, good morning.
		What's your top news story?
unidentified		Good morning.
		Thank you for C-SPAN.
		I think it's excellent that the president is sitting down with President Putin.
		They need to sit down and hammer this out because too many people have died.
		What is next is North Korea, Kim Jong-un.
		Invite him to the White House because there are over 3,000 Americans that remain landlocked.
		And these are missing in action that died.
		They were starved to death in the camps during the Korean War.
		So he's on a good footing right now.
		And let's continue this effort and be a peacemaker.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Dr. Roger in Springfield, Illinois, line for Democrats.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Roger.
unidentified		Morning.
		I just wanted to have America listen, listen well, that the takeover of Washington, D.C. police department is only a scheme because he's going to, President Trump and Pam Bondi, they're going to fire the entire police department, even though they won the Attorney General suit last night and the police chief is safe in her position for right now,
		but they're going to fire the whole entire Metro Police Department and then replace it with the National Guard.
		And because the and it's just a mess.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yes, Roger, I wanted to get you that article.
		Let me ask our producer to send that to me about the latest on that.
		We'll also have a guest coming on in about 15, 20 minutes or so about that topic as well, if you'd like to stay with us on that.
		Terry Rogers, Mini, Minnesota, Republican line.
		Good morning, Terry.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Say, I'd like to see a poll stating the number of Americans that would support going in and putting boots on the ground and entering into a nuclear war so that we, you know, instead of just complaining about it, let's hear some liberals tell us what they would do different.
		I mean, I bet you if you had that poll, you wouldn't find 1% of the American public willing to go and die in Ukraine.
		I thought your one guest speaker was really good when he mentioned something I didn't know.
		Kosovo, when NATO went into Kosovo without authorization and took Russian land, nobody said a thing about that.
		Funny how that kept under.
		I also think that you should do a little more articles on what's happening with Russia and Russia, Gate, where it's coming out.
		I mean, I haven't heard about Brennan, Clapper, all the things that are being released on that scandal.
		It's just like it didn't even happen as far as C-SPAN is talking.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And take a look at this latest on D.C.
		It says the Trump, this is Wall Street Journal, Trump administration steps back on takeover of D.C. Police Department.
		After a court hearing, the DOJ revised its directive but reasserted expectations for local police to help with federal immigration enforcement.
		It says after being ordered, so it was ordered by a federal judge.
		In a new order issued Friday evening, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said the head of the Federal Drug Enforcement Administration would only act as a liaison between the Trump administration and the Metropolitan Police Department's chief rather than becoming the emergency police commissioner as had previously been announced.
		And here is Sharon Bemidji, Minnesota, Democrat.
unidentified		Good morning, Mimi.
		Thanks for taking my call.
		Two quick things.
		I truly believe that the only reason that Trump even cares about this Ukraine business is a prize.
		It's all about the Nobel Peace Prize.
		His head is already exploding, that that's a possibility.
		Absolutely insane.
		And my second point is that you were just talking about Melania.
		And that just, I got to chuck a lot of it.
		We all remember a few years ago her wonderful jacket.
		I don't care.
		I don't believe she cares.
		Again, it's just deflect, deflect, deflect.
		So anyway, thanks.
		Have a great day.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Chuck in Claremont, California, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Chuck.
unidentified		Hi, thanks for taking my call.
		Hey, all of these misfits just calling into your station, putting Donald Trump down, they're just jealous.
		They're jealous because he's a great president, the greatest this country has ever had.
		I'm African American.
		I'm here to tell the entire world Donald Trump is doing a wonderful job, and so is Vladimir Putin by putting his foot where it belongs in Ukraine's rear end.
		Donald Trump is the greatest president this country has ever had, and he's doing an outstanding job in Washington, D.C.
		And I can't wait till he comes to California and New York and all the other sanctuary cities and states throughout this union because the Democrats are garbage and so is Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and all of the rest of the liberals.
		You're garbage.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Well, President Trump was with Vladimir Putin at the summit yesterday after their meeting in Anchorage, Alaska.
		And Russia's President Putin did speak.
		And here's another portion of what he said yesterday.
translator russian ▲ ● ▼		Overall, it's very important for our countries to turn the page, to go back to cooperation.
		It is symbolic that not far away from here, the border between Russia and the U.S., there is a so-called international dateline.
		I think you can step over, literally, from yesterday into tomorrow.
		And I hope that we'll succeed in that in the political sphere.
		I would like to thank President Trump for our joint work for the well-wishing and trustworthy tone of our conversation.
		It's important that both sides are result-oriented, and we see that the President of the U.S. has a very clear idea of what he would like to achieve.
		He sincerely cares about the prosperity of his nation.
		He still understands that Russia has its own national interests.
		I expect that today's agreement will be the starting point not only for the solution of the Ukrainian issue, but also will help us bring back business-like and pragmatic relations between Russia and the U.S.
		And in the end, I would like to add one more thing.
		I'd like to remind you that in 2022, during the last contact with the previous administration, I tried to convince my previous American colleague the situation should not be returning when it would come to hostilities and accept it quite correctly back then.
		That is a big mistake.
		President Trump is saying that he wasn't present back then.
unidentified		They will be quite sure that it would indeed be so.
translator russian ▲ ● ▼		And I can confirm that.
		I think that overall, me and President Trump have built a very good, business-like, and trustworthy contact.
		And I have every reason to believe that moving down this path, we can come, at the sooner it better, to the end of the conflict anyway.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Back to your calls now.
		Lenny, Miami, Florida, Republican.
		We're asking for your top news story of the week, Lenny.
unidentified		Hey, guys, good time.
		Just want to say about this war, which can be ended within a few days.
		As soon as Trump will end support of our taxpayers' money, the war will be end in a couple of days.
		Second part I want to say about Zelensky, who's supporting Nazi regime sympathizers, like Stepan Bender called streets in his name.
		Why nobody even mentioned anything about that?
		That's all I want to say.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Jan in Wake Forest, North Carolina, Independent Line.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Jan.
unidentified		Good morning.
		Yeah, I think that a lot of people are just being distracted.
		Yes, the summit meeting with Putin is important.
		Nobody's mentioning the fact that it looks like Trump was owned again by Putin.
		And Putin came away very happy and giddy about it.
		And Trump looked just very depressed and he looked like he'd been roughed over.
		But that's not the most important news of the week.
		The news of the week is the invasion of Trump forces here in America over in Los Angeles and then Washington, D.C., and he's talking about New York and everything else.
		And I'm wondering, is that a distraction because of the cover-up of the Epstein files?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Karen in Mobile, Alabama, Republican.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Karen.
unidentified		Hi, how are you today?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good.
unidentified		Good.
		I just wanted to say that he could never feel Ronald Reagan's shoes.
		He was the best one we've ever had.
		Not even George Bush could feel his shoes.
		We've never invited the USSR to the United States without the leading president of a country that he's trying to take over, not invited.
		I think this is just a ploy just to get us from not talking about Esteem and he's taken our lives into his hands.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		How do you think Ronald Reagan would have handled the situation, Karen?
unidentified		Would have handled it just like he did when he went to Govisha, tear down the wall.
		And he didn't meet with anybody.
		Govachev didn't meet with him and he didn't meet with Govachev.
		He just wanted the people free over there.
		He was looking for the people to be free.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's Philip in Dallas, Texas.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Democrat, good morning, Philip.
unidentified		I'm not a Democrat.
		The problem is mankind shit all history.
		Republicans say they're conservatives, and the Democrats say they're liberals because of religious ignorance.
		The problem with mankind is basically cultural and religious ignorance, and the government because it doesn't do anything important.
		Both parties are screwed up.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay.
		Leo, a Republican in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
		Leo, you're next.
unidentified		Hi, Mimi.
unidentified		Thank you for taking my call.
eben in california ▲ ● ▼		I want to first say that Mr. Beebe this morning and that Anthony fellow from, I think he said he was born in Ruke, Ukraine.
unidentified		I thought it was just horrific hearing from them.
		The reason why I'm calling is my issue of the day is Section 230 and not holding platforms culpable for fake news.
		I think the education system in our country is such that the average person out there does not do enough homework to discern what is true and untrue.
		And second to good parenting, I think a good education is ultimately important.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So tell me more about Section 230.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		What do you think is the problem with it?
unidentified		Well, like newspapers where there's some sort of corroboration going on, Mimi, you know, it seems like that you have to go to, you know, you have to do your homework and then layer over some logic to what you're hearing to come up with good conclusions.
		So I would love to see platforms that are, I guess they're held harmless for what is posted on them.
		I think that needs to change.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So you mean, like as an example, if somebody posts something on X that is demonstrably false, that X should be held liable?
unidentified		Well, yes, or, you know, fined for not doing their due diligence to make sure that they're doing their part to, you know, make sure that the Americans really understand the truth in everything.
		You know, it disappoints me.
		I do my homework.
		I listen to C-Stand, obviously.
		But, you know, I don't think the average American out there has the capability of hearing.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Yeah, so just so everybody knows, if you want to look at things like Section 230 and see what it actually says, just go to congress.gov and then you can do a search there and you can read, they'll have an overview for you, a summary and everything that will describe it so you can be better informed.
		Here's Rick in Coatkill, New York.
		Democrat?
unidentified		Yes.
		Thank you very much.
		Great program, live for C-SPAN.
		It's the only place that you can get both sides.
		I'm very surprised that Trump, well, Trump for the last couple months has kind of seen through what Putin's been doing and using him.
		I'm very surprised, and while Trump isn't known for his mental capacity, I'm surprised that he doesn't see that Putin's using him as a useful idiot again.
		That's something that's clear from the beginning, and now it should be even clearer.
		But yet he goes on Hannity afterwards and tries to spin a positive tale.
		It's just sad.
		It's crazy that our country has this person running it right now.
		Thank you.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And in Standish, Maine, a Republican line.
		Robert, good morning.
		Your top news story.
unidentified		I think that the top news story is the lack of historical knowledge about Ukraine.
		Both of my grandparents are from my male grandparents are from Ukraine.
		Another one is from Romania, and the other one's from Poland, the females.
		And the issue with Ukraine is that it has been the breadbasket Central Europe.
		And it has been overrun for over 600 years by various powers that took the grain and whatever was grown and just did not appreciate the people there.
		My one grandfather, Adolf, who was a husar in the Ukraine militia.
		The other one, Petar, was a stable boy for the Cossacks.
		They were both conscripted into the Imperial Russian Army in 1914 and 15.
		And after their service, both of them immigrated to America because of what they have issued.
		I'm a proud American.
		I have two honorable discharges from the Army.
		My brother served in the special forces.
		My father landed in the second wave on the DC.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And so, Robert, when you say that the issue is lack of historical knowledge, what specifically do you think Americans lack in knowledge about the history of Ukraine?
unidentified		Well, it has been taken over by every power, north, south, east, and west, throughout its entire history.
		And the Ukrainian people are strong, and they live by the code of the era that they lived in.
		Currently, the code of the Ukrainian people are: defend our country.
		The country is being defended by conscripts into the Ukrainian army and volunteers from all across the world.
		All right.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And Edna, Illinois, line for Democrats.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Edna, you're on the air.
unidentified		Good morning, Phoebe.
		Meaning, you look beautiful today.
		I don't know why people don't realize Trump is not a politician.
		He's not a lawyer.
		He knows nothing about government.
		Please, America, stand up for your rights.
		Don't be afraid.
		Everybody is afraid to speak up.
		This Epstein stuff is not going away.
		I feel for those young ladies.
		I feel for them.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And here's a statement from EU countries about the war in Ukraine.
		They said this: the people of Ukraine must have the freedom to decide their future.
		The path to peace in Ukraine cannot be decided without Ukraine.
		Meaningful negotiations can only take place in the context of a ceasefire or reduction of hostilities.
		Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine has wider implications for European and international security.
		We share the conviction that a diplomatic solution must protect Ukraine's and Europe's vital security interests.
		And one more call, James in La Quinta, California, Republican.
		Hi, James.
unidentified		Hi.
lloyd chapman ▲ ● ▼		Yes, I'm African American and I spent 20 years in the U.S. Navy.
unidentified		I think Trump's doing a great job.
woody in washington ▲ ● ▼		I think he's representing the United States and shown great leadership.
unidentified		The world needs peace, and I think this is the beginning.
		The Democrats did nothing to stop this war, and Europe did nothing to stop this war.
		So I'm very proud of what I saw yesterday.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		And coming up next on Washington Journal, Robert Woodson, founder and president of the Woodson Center, discusses President Trump's recent actions to address crime in Washington, D.C. and how communities can be improved.
		We'll be right back.
unidentified		American History TV, exploring the people and events that tell the American story this weekend.
		As America celebrates its 250th anniversary in 2026, join American History TV for its new series, America 250, and discover the ideas and defining moments of our founding.
		This weekend, an event to mark the 250th anniversary of the 1775 Battle of Bunker Hill, an early Revolutionary War conflict between colonial and British troops.
		America 250 Commission Chair Rosie Rios announces the kickoff of Our American Story, a project designed to collect and preserve thousands of personal stories from across the country as it heads towards its 250th birthday.
		On Lectures in History, law professor and author Joyce Lee Malcolm on Benedict Arnold's triumphs as an American Army general in the Revolutionary War and whether his legacy as a notorious American traitor is entirely accurate.
		Exploring the American story.
		Watch American History TV every weekend and find a full schedule on your program guide or watch online anytime at c-span.org/slash history.
		Sunday night on C-SPAN's Q&A, sports journalist Jane McManus, author of The Fast Track, discusses the rise in popularity of women's sports since the early 1970s and the challenges female athletes have faced since then.
		including unequal pay and lack of media coverage.
jane mcmanus ▲ ● ▼		What you do have now are women who see themselves as athletes first, and they aren't looking to be pleasing to anyone else.
		And I think that is where things have changed quite a bit.
		They see, today's athletes see sports as their birthright, not just their brothers.
		And I think honestly, their brothers would say the same thing for the most part.
unidentified		Jane McManus with her book, The Fast Track, Sunday night at 8 p.m. Eastern on C-SPAN's QA.
		You can listen to QA and all of our podcasts on the C-SPAN Now app or wherever you get your podcasts.
		And past president, why are you doing this?
		This is outrageous.
		This is a kangaroo cause.
		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 washington journal continues Welcome back.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Joining us now to discuss President Trump's actions to address crime in Washington, D.C. is Robert Woodson.
		He's founder and president of the Woodson Center.
		Welcome to the program.
unidentified		Pleased to be here.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Tell us about the Woodson Center, your mission, and your funding.
unidentified		I founded the Woodson Center 44 years ago in Washington, D.C. I'm a veteran of the civil rights movement.
		Became disenchanted because the kind of gains that low-income people did not benefit from the gains of the civil rights movement, that when the doors are opened up, those of us with college education walk through, but left behind.
		I also broke ranks on the issue of forced busing for integration.
		I believe that the opposite of segregation is desegregation, not integration.
		So that put me at odds with the movement.
		And so I left and began to work on behalf of low-income people of all races.
		And that's been the mission of the center, to provide a place where the voices of those that are locked out, economically disadvantaged, can have an opportunity to prosper.
		And so the Woodson Center has been established to do that.
		We're like a Geiger counter.
		We go into low-income communities.
		Instead of looking for pathology, we look for strengths.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And your funding?
unidentified		Is it mostly donations?
		All donations, both large and small.
		We have a base of about 16,000 donors all over the country.
		And we're very blessed to do that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Well, as you know, this week, President Trump placed D.C. police force under federal control.
		He cited out-of-control crime.
		He also talked about homelessness.
		This is for 30 days.
		So first, what was your reaction to that news?
		And if you think 30 days, what do you think could happen in 30 days?
unidentified		Well, I'm not so sure that.
		First of all, we wouldn't be talking about crime if he didn't do that.
		So that's good.
		I'm glad that he put that on the first on the agenda.
		But I think bringing the federal government into federalized things, I'm not so sure that that's the answer, but at least it's a beginning.
		It's like putting a tourniquet on a wound.
		It's crime suppression.
		It's not crime prevention.
		It may be good for the short time to stimulate discussion and action about what should be done.
		But it's a temporary measure to, I think, act as a catalyst.
		But it gives us an opportunity now to focus on how do we prevent crime.
		And that's what the Woodson Center has been engaged in by involving those who are suffering the problem in their solutions.
		Low-income people have been passive over the past 50 years in remedies to address poverty in America.
		Someone said that when bull elephants fight, the grass always loses between the right and left.
		And so what we do at the Woodson Center is give voice to the solutions coming from the communities suffering the problem.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Are you conflating the issues of poverty with crime?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		In other words, is it mostly low-income people that are doing the crime?
unidentified		I don't conflate crime with, because I don't think being deprived is synonymous with being depraved.
		I don't.
		But the reality is a lot of low-income communities are plagued with crime and violence, and that is preventing them from developing.
		And so I don't associate it necessarily with poor people, but the reality is that when these communities are in distress, violence is a consequence of that distress.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So let's talk about the root causes, because crime is more concentrated in urban areas on a per capita basis.
unidentified		It really is.
		But I think it's important that the big divide in America is not really between blacks and whites.
		It's between those in America who believe in redemption and those who believe in despair and conflict.
		The very fact that we have crime in low-income communities over the years has, there are solutions.
		The solutions is among people suffering the problem.
		I think it was Chuck Twendell, Charles Swindell, Pastor, said that 10% of who we are as a people is external.
		90% of who we are is our attitude about the 10%.
		And for years, the low-income communities have been wracked with despair and crime because of the people living there have been ignored and their priorities have been trampled upon.
		And therefore, what we do at the Woodson Center is go into those communities and apply a different approach to solving poverty.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So what has worked?
		You've been doing this for 44 years.
		So you should know what works and what doesn't work.
unidentified		Yes.
		First of all, what doesn't work is parachuting into these communities professional services to aid the poor.
		And what we have done in the past with the poverty programs, we have undermined the very institutions in these communities that enabled blacks to survive in the past.
		We look to the past, for instance, and there are naysayers who say, well, the problems we're facing today is because of institutional racism, legacy of slavery and Jim Crow.
		Well, we look to the past for examples of resilience.
		And so part of what our research is is how can we learn from the resilience of our past when whites were at their worst, blacks are at their best.
		For example, we talk about education.
		At the turn of the century, there were five major high school black high schools, all black high schools.
		This during time when racism was enshrined in law.
		We had five high schools, one in Brooklyn, New York, Baltimore, Washington, D.C., Atlanta, and New Orleans.
		They had used textbooks, half the budgets of white schools.
		Every one of those black high schools out-tested the white schools in those cities.
		We closed the education gap between 1920 and 1930 in the South from three years to six months because Julius Rosenwald partnered with Booker T. Washington and they built 5,000 schools.
		So it was, so during the 1930s, the black marriage rate was higher than any other group between 1930 and 1940 during the Depression.
		So there's evidence that what really enabled blacks to survive during Jim Crow was the value system in the institutions that they designed and built themselves.
		And so what the Woodson Center does is go back and reflect on and learn from these valuable lessons.
		And then what we do is apply them today.
		We don't look at that.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		But I want to let people know that they can join the conversation.
		Republicans can call us on 202-748-8001.
		Democrats 202-748-8000.
		And Independents 202-748-8002.
		Robert Woodson of the Woodson Center will be with us until the end of the program.
		So tell us about how you...
unidentified		Let's take an example.
		And 28 years ago here in Washington, D.C., there was an area called Benning Terrace.
		There's a public housing development where there were 53 murders in two years in a five-square-block area.
		The police were afraid to go in there.
		I had been working with a group called the Alliance of Concerned Men.
		These are seven ex-offenders who had been redeemed and were giving back to the community.
		And I said to them, you have the trust of officials and the kids on the street, but no one can measure your effectiveness.
		And a 12-year-old boy was killed there.
		And I said to them, God has chosen your venue for you.
		Go back and go to that community and bring the leaders, warring factions together.
		They went in there and through their trust that they had moral authority and social trust, they were able to bring, identify the 16 boys, just 16.
		And they came to my office downtown.
		I provided, I mean, and they came to the table for a truce.
		And so when the kids said, no one ever asked us to be peaceful, but because of the moral authority and influence that the Alliance had, the boys, they identified with them, the boys agreed to a truce.
		Just 16, that's all.
		And after the truce was signed, the Housing Authority came and provided jobs for them to clean up the very community that they had destroyed.
		And the Woodson Center raised some private dollars for them.
		And so the boys went back into that community, 16, and began to remove graffiti.
		They became coaches to the kids.
		So once the character of these kids changed, their characteristics had an advantage because they had the respect to the younger kids.
		And so as a consequence, these predators that have now been converted to ambassadors of peace served as moral mentors to the younger kids.
		They started three football teams.
		And now people who used to run from them began to run to them.
		So the whole community was transformed and redeemed.
		The Housing Authority was going to tear it down for $13 million.
		But now because of the peace, they were able to take a million of that and invest it in the Alliance of Concerned Men.
		And so for 12 years, we did not have a single crew-related murder.
		The Woodson Center extracted the principles that worked in Benning Terrace, and we have adapted that to Baltimore, Atlanta, Georgia.
		Bernie Marcus, the founder of Home Depot, came to visit us to see firsthand what we were doing.
		And as he was leaving, some junior high school kids saw our older guys who were youth advisors, and they ran up to him and hugged him.
		Bernie said, you can't lip sync that.
		That's true community.
		And as a consequence, he funded us to start the program in Atlanta.
		We did it in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
		The same approach.
		When you are seeking cures for snakebite, you take the venom of the snake and inject it into the body to trigger the body's own immune system.
		The same principle works here, where you take people from the community and they stimulate the neighborhood's own immune system.
		So they become antibodies.
		So the way you reduce violence is they insinuate them into the community so they begin to have a moral influence over the whole community and it gets redirected from pathology to purpose.
		And so we've done this now in other cities throughout the country.
		Milwaukee, Wisconsin now has adapted it as a part of their school budget.
		We have young adults maybe 10 years older than the kids.
		They're from the same moral and spiritual and geographic zip code.
		And they become moral mentors and character coaches.
		They become surrogate fathers and surrogate brothers and sisters.
		So we have a whole movement around the country that we've demonstrated that this approach can work.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		I want to bring callers in, but I just want to ask, like, how do we scale that up?
		I mean, it sounds wonderful, but is it having an effect on a wider scale?
		The cities that you mentioned all have high crime rates, and residents there don't feel safe.
unidentified		They can, but there is a resistance to these unorthodox approaches because elitism is the biggest barrier that we face.
		The assumption is that only professional providers can help people because untutored is unwise.
		But our grassroots leaders have moral authority, but the qualities that make these leaders effective makes them invisible because they're not whining and protesting.
		They're not talking about racism.
		They're just busy doing their work.
		But it can be scaled because we've demonstrated it in Milwaukee, Wisconsin for 20 years now, and it's been in part of the school budget.
		Not a single scholar from either left or right came into these communities to inquire as to the success and how we began to write about it.
		And so the biggest challenge that we face is that indifference on the part of the professional community.
		If they didn't create it or invent it, they don't acknowledge it.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
		Well, let's talk to callers.
		We'll start on the independent line in Albuquerque, New Mexico with Brian.
		Good morning, Brian.
		You're on with Robert Woodson.
unidentified		Hey, good morning.
		Pleasure to speak with you.
		Here in Albuquerque, a growing trend is the violent criminals are getting younger and younger.
		We just recently had 12, 13, and 14-year-olds caught doing armed robberies.
		And of course, they had bags of fentanyl pills in their car with them.
		And they're trying now, our leaders are trying to update our criminal justice code for the juveniles, which badly needs to happen.
		But in my mind, it's the parents.
		How do we get the parents held responsible for what their children are doing?
		They're running wild on our streets all night long, and nobody wants to do anything about it.
		You know, our juvenile jail is full to the guilds.
		Our county jail is full.
		Our DA and the political types, you know, they don't want to put people in prison.
		You know, the Democrats, they don't want to see black and brown boys in prison.
		They say, oh, they'll just come out worse.
		We've got to give them another chance, let them go.
		And then they do another crime, and then they murder a few people.
		Then they decide to put them in prison.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Brian, we got that.
unidentified		I totally agree.
		And I mean, personally, I have lost a brother to violence on the streets.
		I've also had a nephew shot to death.
		So I'm aware of that.
		But we must exercise control.
		There have to be consequences when people injure people.
		So, no, I think we need to be tough, but we need to be smart.
		We need to combine restrictions on kids, but we also have to redirect them.
		Our grassroots leaders are in these communities.
		A lot of times, the older young men serve as surrogate fathers.
		For instance, our coaches at Benning Terrace have been working with the mothers and they work with the mothers and the teachers by establishing strict rules that boys have to obey their mothers if they are going to practice in their football team, and that means a lot.
		So we've been able to exercise parental control of these kids, working with the parents through this kind of approach of using surrogate young men as big brothers and fathers.
		But if we can just invest in these local solutions, these local antibodies, I can tell you that we can bring about a dramatic reduction.
		I can send you information about how schools, South Division in Milwaukee and Pulaski High School, was overrun.
		And dramatic changes have occurred.
		And kids are finishing school.
		And the Pineywood School is a 115-year-old black boarding school in Pineywood, Mississippi, where all of the kids are from urban centers, but 100% go to college from that school.
		So there are examples of moral excellence.
		We just need to invest in them.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		When you say invest, how much is this going to cost?
unidentified		Millions should be invested.
		Right now, we spend $50 million to Abraham Kendi's at Boston University to study racism.
		Harvard gets $100 million to study ancestors of who founders who own slave.
		That's just two institutions, $150 million.
		If we took a fraction of that money and invested in these neighborhood institutions like the Pineywood School, like the Alliance of Concerned Men, like the Running Rebels in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, there are a number of on-the-ground resources that have demonstrated that they can redirect the restore the values and behavior of these kids.
		We just need to properly resource them and properly recognize them.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's talk to Rhonda in New Jersey.
		Democrat.
		Hi, Rhonda.
unidentified		Hi, good morning, America.
		I just want to comment that I think everything Trump's doing in Washington is just a cover-up for white supremacy and taking over Washington and turning it into his little mini Kremlin.
		He's putting these National Guards out here to start picking on young black men.
		Now, Janine Sapparo's coming out saying we should start locking up 14-year-olds.
		They're looking for young black men.
		They're against Browns and blacks.
		He wants to turn the country white, and they're all criminals.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right, Rhonda.
		Let's get in a response.
		Go ahead, Mr. Woodson.
unidentified		Well, first of all, the question is: you know, what is your solution?
		You know, it's fine to sit back and whine and complain about white people doing this.
		I don't believe that our destiny as black people is determined by what white people do or don't do.
		If we were able to maintain strong families, even during slavery, 75% of slave families had a man and a woman raising children.
		When we were denied access to hotels, we built our own.
		If we were able to accomplish these things in the face of a raw racism when racism was enshrined in law, Why can't we do the same thing today?
		We need to stop whining about what white folks have done to us or propose to do for us and instead become agents of our own uplift, building on the past success and applying those values to our present day challenges.
		That's what we need to do.
		We need to stop whining about what white folks are going to do to us.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And what do you make of Janine Piero, who's the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, wanting to charge younger juveniles as adults?
unidentified		I don't think that that's the solution.
		They're immature.
		And I don't think that is an approach that works at all.
		In fact, there are several states that tried it, and the reoffending rate is higher among that group.
		That is not.
		But we do need to restrain these kids.
		We do need to, but there has to be something, some intra-measure where they are, where the public is protected, but it's wrong to send them into the adult system where they'll be victimized in these prisons.
		We must move beyond trying to be tough and be effective.
		And I'm telling you that I have spent a lot of time with young people whose lives have been redeemed.
		And I think that the Alliance of Concerned Men works with 150 of these hardened young men every week.
		And I think we need to intensify this mentorship of people who can witness to people.
		Values are caught, not taught.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Janice, Republican in San Diego, California.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Janice.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I absolutely love most of what he is speaking on because I grew up in San Diego, California, the majority of my life.
		I got into trouble one time.
		I was 13 years old, 14 years old.
		And a couple of me and my friends were at the 7-Eleven, and a young girl came out, and she was white.
		And a couple of the young ladies that I was with at the time, I didn't know very well, went off on her, started to jack her up, and went there and basically harassed her.
		She called us the N-word.
		They grabbed her purse, they took off.
		Me and another one of my friends never touched her, didn't get a dime.
		Nothing in that purse.
		She had $1.24 in that purse.
		I was arrested at my high school because it was a lunch break during school.
		We were arrested.
		Me and one of my other friends were arrested and went to Juvenile Hall.
		I went before the judge and the judge told me, because I grew up in a very nice neighborhood, pretty affluent.
		My parents both worked.
		My father served the military.
		I got recommendations from my teachers who said I was a great student and I had a good future, blah, blah, blah.
		Went before the judge.
		The judge had told me to my face, he said, Ms. Bradley, if you ever come back in my court again, I will throw the book at you.
		But because I see your recommendations and that you have a future, blah, blah, blah.
		It scares the hell out of me.
		But I was also put on probation.
		I abided that.
		Kids need to have fear.
		The problem today is they have no fear.
		They fear nothing.
		They have no repercussions.
		They have no consequences.
		And it's sad because instead of people looking at the actions of the people and the persons that are doing this, all they're looking at is their race.
		I don't give a damn if you're black, if you're white, if you're Mexican.
		If you invade my space and you hurt my people, I'm going after you.
		I don't care what your race is.
		And for people to go there talking about, oh, Trump wants to turn this into a white racist this and that, that is absolutely absurd.
		Crime doesn't have a race.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Okay, Janice, thanks for sharing your story with us, Mr. Woodson.
unidentified		Yeah, I totally agree with you.
		There is a crisis, but you know, something was just reported to me that one of the institutions that we looked to to rescue these kids was a KIPS school.
		There was a series of charter schools that were started 25 years ago, profile, and I think, where they had the highest standards for urban kids.
		There are about 5,000 kids attending 15 schools.
		Well, recently, the founders of the KIPP school suddenly got a pang of white guilt and said that as a white man, I do not have enough to fully understand how systemic racism and specifically anti-blackness impact you.
		The slogan reflects white supremacy.
		In other words, what he was saying, it's racist to expect kids, black kids, to conform to the standards of society.
		To me, I would rather be hated than patronized.
		And so it is important for us to realize that solutions exist, that we need to be inspired by examples of these solutions and get behind them.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Let's take a look at what President Trump said about crime in D.C. on Thursday, and then we'll continue our conversation.
donald j trump ▲ ● ▼		Half of the people here, maybe all of the people here, most of you live in D.C., you are petrified to go out.
		And you're liberal.
		And if you're liberal, you're going to have to change.
		You're Democrats.
		You're going to have to change your ways.
		So we will have crime under control very shortly in D.C.
		But there are record numbers.
		And sadly, what I guess the mayor did, but whoever it was, they asked the numbers to be fudged so that it would show less crime.
		The fact is, it's worse than it's ever been.
		And we will have it just like we did at the border, where borders are totally in great shape right now.
		The best ever, record-setting shape.
		We'll have the crime situation solved in D.C. very soon.
		And we're also going to beautify the city.
		We have a beautiful city, but you can't have graffiti and you can't have roads with potholes and you can't have the medians, the dividers in the roads falling down on the street.
		We're going to be beautifying the city, making it really beautiful.
		We're going to be getting the criminals the hell out of here.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We don't want the criminals in Washington, D.C. Mr. Woodson, I want to ask you to comment on the Congressional Black Caucus.
		They put out a statement, and here is a portion of that statement.
		We'll put it on the screen.
		Taking over local control of the D.C. Metropolitan Police and deploying the National Guard under the guise of public safety puts residents in danger.
		This unprecedented attack on D.C. home rule is a blatantly racist and despicable power grab, and it won't stop in Washington, D.C. While we don't know yet, we don't yet know the full impact this decision will have on D.C. and the black and minority communities Trump has suggested he may target next.
		We do know this.
		Militarized over-policing will inevitably lead to increased fear and mistrust among communities that have too often been treated as occupied populations rather than as citizens who deserve to be served and protected.
		I wonder what you think of that and if you agree with what they're calling militarized over-policing and increasing fear and mistrust.
unidentified		When, you know, I can best quote a young man when the Klan came to Washington, D.C., was demonstrating.
		A Washington Post reporter went up to an 84-year-old man in Broad 8, one of the highest crime areas here.
		They said, what do you think?
		Are you going to demonstrate against the Klan?
		He said, bring them down here if they can get rid of these drug dealers.
		He was not being some conservative uncaring about race.
		His reality was very different.
		The very fact that less than 9% of people in high crime areas in these cities even vote in the mayor's elections means there's the height of apathy.
		The great promise of the civil rights movement was if you put blacks in charge of these cities, the police departments, the school systems, the great promise was conditions will improve for all blacks.
		Well, some of those same members of the black caucus have been in charge of these cities for 50 years where the very conditions continue to deteriorate, not for all blacks.
		There are 1,600,000 black millionaires, and the number of blacks who finish college has dramatically increased.
		So if racism were the sole culprit, the question is why are not all blacks suffering equally?
		So the black caucus needs to come up with their agenda for solving these problems.
		What is their agenda for reducing violence about investing in these communities?
		They have none because they profit off of the despair of low-income communities.
		And that's a reality that we must confront.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		On the Republican line in Georgia, Carolyn, you're on the air with Mr. Woodson.
unidentified		Yes, good morning.
		It's good that the Wilson Center, the Woodson Center is up and running, and also the King Center.
		There are lots of centers in this country, and we need more and more like hundreds of thousands of centers across the country to really help these children.
		The King Center is doing a very good job, but there are a lot of people in the community that do not take advantage of them.
		My understanding is that these children are being upheld in wrongdoings, that parents behind closed doors are accepting what they are doing sometimes.
		And I've heard a young man to say, young student to say, well, I'm the man of the house, and whatever my family need, I'm going to get it by all means necessary.
		So they go out and bring things into the home, and the parents accept that.
		That's behind closed doors.
		And not only the parents are upholding these children, all kinds of people are upholding them in wrongdoings.
		It used to be said that wrong is wrong and right is right.
		And these children do not understand which is which, and I don't know who are teaching them that wrong is right, but somehow we are teaching them that.
		And this bail thing that no cash to get out, that needs to be eliminated.
		And President Trump is doing a lot, and he's doing very good by doing this to the Capital City because it's a wonderful place to visit, and people need to go in and be proud of that city of the DC River.
		And so I like to know, I know the Woodson Center is a good center, and the King Center and a lot of others, but how many more centers do you think we need?
		Because money is being poured into the black community.
		Millions and millions of dollars, all kinds of money being poured into the schools, the community, and we're not getting any better.
		So what about more centers, thousands of centers across the country?
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		All right.
unidentified		Part of what the Woodson Center is trying to do is really develop what we call our Joseph Fund, a $50 million pot, so that we can bring together these islands of excellence.
		The St. Mary's School in New Orleans that has 600 urban kids all going to college for the past 17 years.
		The Pineywood School in Mississippi.
		There are other islands of moral and spiritual excellence that exist all over the country where these values are on display.
		The voices of Black Mothers United, thousands of moms who've lost their children to suicide, I mean, to homicide.
		That's a part of our strategy.
		In Racine, Wisconsin, for the last half of the year, the homicides, not a single homicide, because of these community-based interventions.
		So I think the will to achieve is there.
		What we need is the resources to bring these healing agents together so that they can begin to reach the public with these solutions.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Diane, a Republican in DeSoto, Kansas.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Good morning, Diane.
unidentified		Good morning.
		I'm just going to say I'm just blown away, impressed with this wonderful man and his approach.
		I'm donating today.
		I don't have a lot, but I'll do what I can.
		And I just urge others to do the same.
		Thank you so much, Mr. Woodson, for what you've done.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And following that, we got a text from Kendra in Richmond, Virginia.
		She said, hello, Mr. Woodson.
		As an African-American woman, I love that you are a guest today and you are speaking truth and are mentioning solutions.
		How can people get in contact with you or follow you?
unidentified		Well, you can follow us at the Woodsoncenter.org or 1776unites.com.
		We have a curriculum that celebrates our past accomplishments.
		We have an animated series, for instance, of heroes from the past who have succeeded.
		We have a curriculum that has now, that goes out to all 50 states.
		It's been downloaded over a million times.
		So we are a center of solutions and oriented.
		But also, I think that what we must do as a nation, someone said we must speak to the longing in the hearts of a majority of Americans to re-embrace the values of love of God, love of neighbor, love of country.
		And so people are motivated to change when you show them examples of victories that are possible.
		Not always showing them injuries to be avoided.
		And the Woodson Center has examples, endless examples.
		So please be in touch with us, the WoodsonCenter.org.
		We would love to hear from you.
		We'd like you to participate with us.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And donate.
unidentified		And donate.
unidentified		Always donate.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Your center has established something called Violence-Free Zones.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Can you tell us what that is and where they are?
unidentified		The Violence-Free Zone is what I said at the beginning, where we have a program like the Alliance of Concerned Men where groups like they come into a school.
		We teach them on our model, where you hire, let's say, if you have a school of 1,000 kids, they're influenced by 10%, and that 10%.
		So we have six or eight young adults who are transformed predators to ambassadors of peace.
		They go in to the school and become part of the school staff, but they are liaisons between the kids and they develop trust with the kids.
		And as a consequence, they are able to redirect that small group that and then as a consequence of changing and redeeming them, they begin to influence a whole school.
		So we have taken over whole schools to transform them from the most violent to the most peaceful, where suspensions are down.
		And so that program is in place for 20 years in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Baltimore, and Washington, D.C. is our most celebrated one with the Alliance of Concerned men.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		And can it not be in all high schools in Washington, D.C.?
unidentified		It should be in all schools, not just urban schools.
		The biggest crisis you see we're facing today is not racial, it's moral and spiritual that is consuming our children.
		According to a Harvard study, the leading cause of death for urban kids, black kids, is homicide.
		The leading cause of death for Appalachian whites is prescription drugs.
		And that the suicide rate in Silicon Valley is six times the national average.
		So it doesn't surprise me that if we keep bombarding our kids with the message that they live in a racist society, if you're white, you are a victimizer.
		If you're black, you're a victim.
		Where does that lead us?
		And that therefore our young people are victims of endemic forces, institutional forces that prevents them from exercising control over their life.
		That's a lethal message.
		Maybe the kids begin to believe that it's because they're unworthy.
		So we must stop this naysayers.
		We must stop the nihilism.
		And we must say to our young people, your destiny is in your own hands.
		And we need to provide the means for them to be inspired to improve themselves and stop all the naysayers.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Here's Naomi in Silver Spring, Maryland, Democrat.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Hi, Naomi.
unidentified		Hi, thank you so much.
		And thank you so much to the guests.
		I agree this is an incredibly important topic and it's complicated and new ones.
		I wanted to add or Dr. You made a statement earlier that kind of caught my mind and made me pause, but if policies were racist, that you would see the same outcomes across the board for black people in the United States.
		And I think then we could also add in white folks in the United States.
		But I think that that in and of itself may be a racist idea.
		I want to just pause it because it assumes that any exception to the norm or that any outcome that's not based on faith or the expected is an exception so that black folks who are succeeding are an exception to the norms or white folks who are in poverty are an exception to the norms.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		So Naomi, let me just explain, because you've got a bad connection, what she's saying is when you said earlier that if there was systemic racism, then all blacks would be doing poorly.
		And there are obviously very successful African Americans in this country.
		So she says that that in itself is a racist belief that you would have across the board results from systemic racism.
unidentified		Well, why?
		But the assumption is all blacks, the people who make that claim do say that it is across the board.
		That's a racist assumption.
		Mine is just the opposite.
		I'm challenging that racist assumption.
		I'm saying that it is not across the board.
		They're not being affected.
		So no, I agree with you, but I'm not making the assumption.
		But those who use systemic racism as a rationale for what they do, they are the ones who are making the race case.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		Kurt New Jersey, Independent Lion, can you be quick, Kurt?
unidentified		Yes, Robert Wilson, I am honored to speak with you.
		You are a mentor of mine, of your words.
		God will be holding the door for you someday.
		And I think of, you know, I have a healthy white fear growing up in a black neighborhood and being outnumbered.
		And to this day, you know, I can still have that fear.
		But I pray that we find the fear of God, which is the understanding of love.
		I think that's what compels you.
		Thank you.
		I will never forget talking to you.
		Well, thank you so much.
		I believe in this country's values.
		And I know from reading the history that the best is ahead of us.
		But we must stop whining and looking for each other's, that we should look for positive some solutions and not blame the past.
		We are a country of redemption.
		We are a country of second chances.
		And you can learn nothing by listening to the voices of despair and dissension.
		We must put them behind us.
		And it's not just conservatives or liberals.
		Someone once said that evil is evil, and we must unite against evil.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		It's Robert Woodson, founder and president of the Woodson Center.
		You can be in touch with him at WoodsonCenter.org.
		Thanks so much for joining us today.
unidentified		Thank you.
unidentified		It's been a blessing.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		That's it for today's Washington Journal.
mimi geerges ▲ ● ▼		We're back again tomorrow morning at 7 a.m. Eastern.

▲