>> we start with a look at the news and to fewer calls. none, republican strategist john feehery and democratic strategist brad woodhouse discussed the week in politics. then, kevin carroll talks about his latest piece about the former fbi official accused of taking secret cash payments from a sanctioned russian oligarch. take part in the conversation with your calls, texts, facebook comments and tweets. washington journal starts now. ♪ host: good morning. it is sunday, january 29, 2023.

president biden announced this week the u.s. will send 31 m1 abrams tanks to ukraine, versing the administration's long-standing resistance to request the highly sophisticated vehicle. we want to hear from you. what do you think about this move by the administration nearly one year into the conflict with no end in sight? should the u.s. continue to send military and humanitarian aid to ukraine for the long call? -- long haul? or, should the u.s. push for a settlement with the russians? if you agree that the u.s. should continue to send a to ukraine, call us at (202) 748-8000. if you think the u.s. should start pulling back from your grade, dial s at -- from the,

dial s at -- us at (202) 748-8001. if you are a current or former member of the military, we have a special line for you. that is (202) 748-8002. you can also send us a text at (202) 748-8003. you can find us on facebook.com/cspan, on twitter @cspanwj and on instagram @cspanwj. earlier this week, usa today published an article with the headline as biden seeks to avoid war, delivery of m1 abrams tanks to ukraine escalates conflict. i want to read for you an excerpt from that article. since the war beganwhit house and pentagon havet

to supply ukraine with the weapons itds to resist vladimir putin's aggression without sparking a wider war in europe. yet biden's announcement wednesday also signals that the war launched with the mily unprovoked invasionoon to enter its second yearhows no signs of ending. after more than 100 thousand casualties on each side, it is about to get even bloodier. let us go to president biden speaking at the white house last week on his administration's plan to send u.s. battle takes to ukraine. [video clip] >> armored capability has been critical. that is why the united states

has committed hundreds of vehicles to date, including more than 500 as part of the assistance package we announced last friday. today, i am announcing that the united states will be sending 31 abrams tanks to ukraine, the equivalent of one ukrainian battalion. secretary austen recommended this because it will enhance ukraine's capacity to defend its territory and strategic objectives. they are the most capable tanks in the world, they are also extremely complex to operate and maintain. we are giving ukraine the parts and equipment necessary to effectively sustain the tanks on the battlefield. we will begin to train ukrainian troops on the issues of sustainment as soon as possible. delivering these tanks is going to take time. time that we will use to make sure ukrainians are fully prepared to integrate abrams tanks into their defensive. host: that was president biden

earlier this week announcing he would send the m1 abrams tanks do ukraine. now, let us hear from arkansas senator tom cotton on fox news this week. he accused the biden administration of being too slow to provide this lethal aid to ukraine. [video clip] >> it is a welcome decision president biden and germany decided to finally provide these tanks to ukraine, but it is long overdue. it continues a pattern before the war started of president biden being scared of his own shadow with declining military support that the ukrainian army needs to deter the war in the first place and to defend ukrainian territory and fight back against russia's unprovoked war of aggression. it is an admission of their own mistakes not providing the tanks months ago, as you have seen time and time again for the last year when the administration explained some kind of weapons a system or intelligence would be

dangerously escalatory or provocative, only to provide it months later, too late for it to have been used stop further advances or facilitate ukrainian advances. what we need to do to end the war, stop it from being bloodier , is to back ukraine's army so they can defend their own territory. host: that was arkansas senator tom cotton. now, i want to bring up some social media posts from other republicans in congress about president biden's announcement. we will start with representative marjorie taylor greene of georgia. america is depleting our own military arsenal, giving weapons and takes to ukraine while china is building its military at the fastest paste -- pace in world history. it is time to put america first. another representative wrote

divided administration sent more taxpayer dollars to ukraine in the last year then were spent in afghanistan, egypt and israel combined. the days of blank checks are over. house gop will demand accountability for every penny. here is a post from representative andy biggs arizona. since the biden administration botched the afghanistan withdraw, behind millions of dollars of equipment for the taliban, why should we trust them with the $100 billion we are sending to ukraine? one more from representative mary miller of illinois. in america first agenda with secure america's southern border before sending in this money to ukraine. drug cartels, gang members and terrorists from across the world cross our border daily to kill americans.

i wish biden cared as much about america as he does about ukraine. let's go to the phone lines. we want to hear whether you believe the u.s. should continue to aid ukraine. if you think yes, call us at (202) 748-8000. if you think no, the number is (202) 748-8001. if you are a current or former member of the military, call us at (202) 748-8002. our first caller of the day is william in new york. you think aid to ukraine should continue, tell us why. caller: because there is a point in time when russia simply has to be stopped or slowed down. at this point, i think we are at the point where stop is the right word. host: thank you for your call. let us go to robert from iowa,

you do not think the age should continue. tell us more. caller: i think we need to get to a point where we understand, as nice as we want to be to the rest of the world, i certainly understand that, but we also need to take care of ourselves. we have a border that is out of control, our national debt is over $31 trillion now. if you look at the debt the country is carrying over and above that with social security, medicare, medicaid, it is probably $100 trillion higher. we need to get to a point where we are actually taking care of america first, because if we do not, we will be at a point we will not be able to help anybody else because we will be paying interest on our debt. i think it is time to back away

from our involvement in foreign conflicts and america needs to take care of itself first. when we were able to do that, we will be in a better position to help everybody else. host: let us go to walter in mississippi, tell us why you think the u.s. should continue its involvement with ukraine. [indiscernible] host: all right, that is walter in mississippi. the next caller is calling on the line as either a current or former member of the military, dave in virginia. you are on. caller: yes. i do not believe we should be in ukraine. our southern border is under

attack and i got out in 63. if we are going in there, let us go in there and quit pus syfooting around. biden is great -- i did not know what he is great at. she does not do what i think is right -- he does not do what i

think is right. host: let us hear from gloria from texas, you do not think the u.s. aid to ukraine should continue. caller: no. i think we have overspent. our country is in deep trouble. we need the money here. all the money being sent to ukraine, let europe help ukrainians. we need to stop spending so much money that we do not have. we need to take care of our people here in the u.s., that is all i have to say. host: the next caller israel in tennessee -- is ray in tennessee, current or former member of the military. caller: i am a vietnam vet, i am

89 years old. i am sitting watching our country get wasted. we do not have leaders that could get us into a war. biden and the pentagon, people running the pentagon, do not know what they are doing. just like they did not know what they were doing in vietnam, they did not know what to do in afghanistan. when you go to war, you do like eisenhower did. you go into win and get out. these generals we have running the country and our president, there is no way we should back doing anything over in ukraine with this leadership we got. wait until we get somebody in there that knows what they are doing. this bunch, no. thank you. host: on the line from

pennsylvania, dave, former or current military. you are on. caller: how are you? i am a retired military officer, i spent my time in combat arms outfits. i was flying helicopters when the wall came down, it was almost a 50 year cold war with the russians. roughly six .5% of the united states population are military veterans, between 1% and 2% of the u.s. population actually have had the opportunity to participate in a war like vietnam or iraq or afghanistan or whatever. you know, by us supporting ukraine, a country that was

invaded by a belligerent country that we trained and spent a lot of money to defend against for almost half a century, i think it is something we should do. for the 93 or 94% of the u.s. population who would rather send their kids or family members to serve overseas in a bad situation, people need to think about that. when the wall came down in the 90's, the soviet union -- former soviet union had an opportunity to be an equal player on the world stage. but a guy like vladimir putin, from the old cold war era, he is just like the old regime, the old system.

he will take over his weak neighbors and i think we need to support them. host: dave in pennsylvania. on the line supporting continued aid is robert in massachusetts. go ahead. caller: thank you. i think we should continue giving aid to ukraine, because it is shaping up to be the beginning of another world war. hitler's got away with it, vladimir putin is pulling right from the playbook of nazism. you take over one country, then the other countries such as iran , north korea, china, they all feel emboldened to jump in and get their piece of the pie. if we do not stand up now to

vladimir putin, it will all go downhill and democracy and the world at large will suffer for it. thank you very much. host: let us take another caller in florida, you also agree the aid should continue. caller: yes, definitely. the gentleman just before me is absolutely correct. the gentleman from massachusetts. historically, appeasement does not work. isolationism does not work, it just leads to further conflict. the best course is support the ukrainians. they are doing the fighting, they are losing their soldiers. their citizens are being bombed by the russian aggressors. if it is not stopped, it will

continue into a world war. this is the point where we have to support ukrainians, and hopefully they will have a swift victory. if russia leaves ukrainian territory, the war is over. that simple. we have to stop aggression. host: another caller, kevin in connecticut. in favor of continuing to render aid. caller: yes, i would like to piggyback on the last caller. it is all about democracy. democracy is so fragile, look what happened in her own country. we almost lost our democracy. -- in our own country. we almost lost her democracy. we have to support allies and ukraine. people forget about world war ii , republican leaders, marjorie taylor greene, democracy we have

to support. all of those guys fought for democracy. host: what happens -- is there a time limit on that? we heard from a lot of people, a lot of recent colors want to continue aid. -- callers want to continue aid. is there a limit for you on how long you think the u.s. should continue if ukraine is not able to decisively win soon, or what if this is indefinite? caller: you have to keep going, you have other dictators sitting in the waiting -- wing watching how they are running this right now. the get china threatening that island. host: taiwan. caller: yes. we have to keep going. host: i want to bring up this

article on the hill, the headline says support for ukraine in the u.s. still high, but slowly fading. it is according to a survey. the article says a majority of americans still support sending military aid to ukraine, but that majority is thinning according to new polling from global research firms. 54% of americans support sending weapons to ukraine, down from 59% last spring, according to the new survey. the rate is still higher than the average opinion of western countries in the poll, members of the eu, nato and australia would state the same at 48% since the beginning of the war. they surveyed 19,000 people from 23 countries around the world in late november and early december last year. support for aid is higher in the

u.s. then and european union and nato countries and australia, yet it is down a little bit from when the survey was first conducted. let us take more of your calls. ben in maryland, former or current military. caller: correct. i believe that the united states should ramp up the humanitarian aid. as far as military aid, i think european countries need to step up as far as any type of military assistance to ukraine. we know that china, north korea, iran and even south africa have combined with russia to continue

to perpetuate this kind of terror. we do not want to provoke a war we are not prepared to engage. i think humanitarian aid is something we can take the lead on and let the europeans defend their own area. host: ben in maryland, let us go to carl from illinois. again, current or former member of the military. you are on. caller: thank you. this is carl, i am 89 years old. i was in southeast asia between the korean and vietnam wars. i think we certainly should continue aid to ukraine. it has a the west together,

which has not been the case for quite a while. we have to help the ukrainians have some degree of success. it provides a good guide to china, which obviously has designs on taking over taiwan. the american support is to be expected, so they should not get ideas about things they should not be doing. in many respects, taiwan was more important to us then ukraine. however, ukraine is important for democracy to continue against the authoritarian nature of the russians. i think americans slowly often decline in their interest to supporting foreign things as time goes on, but i think -- my

concern is a dictator like putin is likely to not ever want to compromise on anything, because he will be out of there if he compromises. it is my opinion. host: let us go now to nashville, tennessee. marshall is on the line. you do not think the aid should continue. caller: i am looking at this as a moral situation. please just give me a minute to hear me out completely. before the war started, putin lined up 100,000 soldiers at the border 90 days prior. they knew he was going in. if nato would have put 100,000 or 150,000 soldiers on the ukrainian side, this war never

would have happened. putin would have turned around and went home. now, after however long it has been, we have seen war crimes and crimes against humanity, hospitals, schools and mass graves in ukraine. host: did we lose you? caller: i am here. host: keep going. caller: this war could be stopped in a heartbeat if nato and their self-righteous, pompous little civilized cells could get together and tell putin have 24 hours to show you are leaving, or we are coming into russia. host: you think nato should have engaged even though ukraine is not a native nation? -- nato nation? caller: this is not about a nato nation. this is about innocent human

lives being slaughtered by a communist country who wants to take over. where does our morality start? how long do we watch these human lives being destroyed? they could be stopped tomorrow. host: appreciate your call. i want to bring up some additional comments from president biden. this is from wednesday when he said the decision to send tanks to ukraine was not meant to escalate tensions with russia. [video clip] >> today's announcement builds on the hard-working commitment from countries around the world, led by the united states of america, to help ukraine defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. that is what this is about, helping ukraine to defend and protect ukrainian land. it is not offensive threat to russia. there is no offensive threat to russia. if russian troops returned to

russia, they will be where they belong. this war would be over today. that is what we all want, an end to this war. our teams do not permit one nation, will not allow one nation to steal neighbors territory by force. our terms preserve ukraine sovereignty and territorial integrity. those are the terms we are working on. these are the terms we all signed up for and 140 three nations voted for in the united nations general assembly last october. the united states standing shoulder to shoulder with allies and partners continue to do all we can to support ukraine. host: that was president biden speaking earlier this week, saying it is not an offensive threat to russia, his decision to send those tanks to ukraine.

we will go back to the phone lines. if you believe u.s. aid to ukraine should continue, call us at (202) 748-8000. if you think the u.s. should not continue sending military or humanitarian aid, call us at (202) 748-8001. if you are current or former member of the military, we want to hear from you on the line (202) 748-8002. our next caller is in north carolina. you think age should continue. that shade should continue . --you think that aid should continue. caller: i think everyone in this nation has a very short memory. we signed a treaty with three other nations to protect ukraine if they gave up their nukes. nobody seems to remember this. it was 25 or 30 years ago.

the treaty you signed with the united states is like signing toilet paper. you do not honor your treaties. you do not honor your treaties with other nations. 25 or 30 years ago, three nations -- u.s., britain and russia signed an agreement with the world that we would protect ukraine. now what? no brains. bye. host: on the no line, david in texas. share your thoughts with us. caller: they keep saying we are fighting for democracy. we are not. they are in 2014, a coup overthrew the freely elected government of ukraine. that is not a democracy.

the cia instigated the coup. if ukraine does win, you know who will pay to rebuild ukraine? it'll be the u.s., 99%. host: ok. let us go to miles, calling in atlanta, georgia. you do not think age should continue? -- aid should continue? caller: i think it is a matter of priority. i've heard mitch mcconnell say -- we have given billions of dollars to native americans and japanese-americans, european americans and others. yet, when it comes to native blacks, we are doing zero and up to $70 billion for ukraine. how many wars have ukrainians fought in for the u.s., where is native americans and native

blacks have fought in every war for this country? it is a slap in the face, rye am concerned. priorities at home first. host: let us hear now from tim from wisconsin. you think aid should continue? caller: i do. but i want a couple caveats, please do not interrupt area i want to make a couple of points. i want that stuff audited, the money sent over there. i want to see exactly how it is getting spent. the last gentlemen, we do not have any money supposedly for our border, sick veterans lying homeless in the streets. we have money to send over there and $31 trillion in debt. zelenskyy has thrown people of different faiths into prison and

people of different political ideologies into prison, his political opponents. ukraine has one of the biggest neo-nazi movements in the country going. supposedly, zelenskyy is this pure and holy leader, get he has all that stuff going on. putin is not an angel either. he was in the kgb, murdered a lot of people. i am not saying he is anything great. there is war crimes being committed on both sides. i think we've got to step back and look at this. there's a lot of defense companies making a lot of money off of this, just like they did in vietnam. look come many people we lost --

look how many people we lost. let us make all these things transparent, see what is going on. i just do not trust nato. host: that was tim in wisconsin. the next caller is from missouri, former military. caller: good morning, how are you? host: good. caller: i heard what biden had to say. a couple of these colors, i am there with them. -- callers, i am there with them. it is like america has a major. do we remember iraq? -- amnesia. do we remember iraq? russia was on our side, they

helped us, not hindered us, when we were claiming national security. this solesky guy -- zelenskyy guy is the product of a coup. he felt his country, britain, so he did with any country would have done, we would have done and what we did was we claimed national security against direct. -- against iraq. i do not get it. i think what it is, putin committed the cardinal sin. white on white crime. that is what it is all about, i think. host: i want to bring up, this is an article published by

newsweek about a year ago as the russian invasion of ukraine was getting underway. is ukraine a democracy? separating fact from fiction. i want to scroll down to the part under the headline free and fair election. ukraine's president is directly elected by the people while the countries lawmakers are elected in both singleseat constituencies and through proportional representation. the legislature chooses the prime minister by majority vote and the president appoints members of the supreme court after they have been nominated by the supreme council of justice. the u.s. state department found in its 2020 report on human rights practice in ukraine that the 2019 election was fair. in april 2019, zelenskyy was

elected president and in election considered free and fair by international and domestic observers. that is a newsweek article about ukraine and the weights government is run. -- way its government is run. in mississippi, former military. -- sorry, michigan. former military. caller: good morning. i am a vietnam veteran. my son is in uniform right now. all of these people calling in for more war, if you are able to join the military if you are of age, go join. if you have sons or daughters or grandchildren, take them by the hand and take them into the military and let them join the military. we need soldiers. the war is wrong, in my opinion.

let us start with world war ii, the origin of this war. after world war ii, the u.s. took in the whole nazi gestapo apparatus for the eastern front in russia. all his agents were taken into the oss, became the cia. he became the highest ranking native general, highest ranking west german general. an unrepented nazi war criminal was allowed to become the highest ranking general. his thoughts, his ideas, his goals were put forth in nato. the culmination as the soviet union, russia, whatever you want to call it. host: i want to ask you a question. you rightfully mentioned that when the u.s. is at war, american soldiers are often on the line. do you consider president biden

sending tanks and escalation of war that could put american soldiers at jeopardy, or do you think the u.s. has not yet escalated to that point? caller: absolutely. it is a total escalation. those abrams tanks are going to need very technical -- they need u.s. soldiers who know the expertise on handling those tanks. i was in artillery in vietnam. putin supposedly has nothing left except nuclear bombs. i'm almost ready for the grave. i have agent orange laughing at me, but i want to see our children, our grandchildren alive. this whole business with nato is an military and industrial caa plot to drag us into war. i will give you one example. yesterday was the 50 year anniversary of the signing of the peace accords.

i will give you one legacy of the vietnam war, the m-16 rifle, the ar-15, the weapon of choice for mass murder in the u.s. all of our enemies are laughing at us, watching us slaughter ourselves. it is such a shame. we learned nothing from our mistakes. we had straight forward to the next mistake. always warmongering generals and cia, it is appalling. thank you for the opportunity. host: thank you for your call. the next caller is mike in massachusetts. why do you think the age should continue? -- aid should continue? caller: i would like to start off by saying war is part of the american psyche. it is for economic reasons. we have got people building arms all over the country for the

jobs they are doing. it is one of the most profitable ventures in the world. that is why we are an endless conflict, one after another since the beginning of time. if we do not sell large amounts of weapons to the ukraine, nato is already picking up on some of it. no one wants to admit it, but wars are dragged on indefinitely, like vietnam, 13 years, because a lot of people got rich out of it. afghanistan, give me a break. 20 years? same thing, same reason. behind all of the flag-waving and patriotic music and pinning metals -- medals, like my dad

told me when he came home from world war ii, all we were was economic cannon fodder. it is sad to say, but until we change the system and change the world we live in, war is a big part of our lives. so what is the answer? if we do not sell these weapons to the ukraine, how many americans are put out of work? sad to say, isn't it? host: appreciate your call. let us go now to the no line, william in new jersey. good morning. caller: good morning. ukraine is not a democracy. he has put all of these political leaders in prison, there is no free press. biden did say the other day, the clip you ran, that they were

going to need training for the tanks, which means he is sending american advisers, just like in vietnam -- we started with advisers in vietnam. it will just escalate. they could have stopped this, but they did not want to. the one gentleman who said we should amass trips along the border, but they did not. they wanted this to happen. the gentleman from georgia, wisconsin, who said it is a nazi rich gene, it is. -- regime, it is. cnn posted a clip of the troops coming back, the people along the roadway were giving the hitler's sign and cnn got in trouble. we are not selling weapons to ukraine, we are giving it to them. host: that was william in new jersey.

i want to bring up comments from senate republican leader mitch mcconnell. he welcomed the news of tank delivery to ukraine. let us watch. [video clip] >> i learned yesterday and this morning that the white house and their counterparts in germany are finally moving forward with these overdue steps. germany has announced it will supply ukraine with an initial 14 leopard 2 tanks and the biden administration is expected to send at least 30 m1 abrams tanks , as well. good news. now that berlin has taken this step, i expect germany and other european countries with tanks in their inventory will move expeditiously to send them to ukraine. modern battle tanks will provide highly maneuverable armored

firepower that will help ukraine liberate territory and keep pressure on russian aggressors. as i have said repeatedly, time is of the essence. of course, as we rush these long-overdue capabilities to ukraine, the west's work is far from over. the drawdowns of western arsenals must also prompt serious work to expand the capacity of our defense industrial basis. the biden administration's efforts on this front are overdue, but important. i hope more of our allies will follow suit on moving quickly to put critical munitions and weapon systems under contract and expanding each of their industrial capacities. host: that was senate republican leader mitch mcconnell reacting to biden's announcement he would be sending tanks to ukraine. i also want to bring up this

article on cnn. it is under the headline "how foreign affairs chairman says some members do not understand what is at stake in ukraine." "the republican chairman of the house foreign affairs committee fought sunday to tamp down speculation that the new gop majority will be less likely to fund aid to ukraine in its war against russia, so he did suggest some members of his party may need to be convinced about the need to continue u.s. support." "i think there is enough support on both sides of the aisle, majority in the democratic party, majority in the republican," he said on state of the union, referring to a to ukraine. he added "we have to educate our members. i do not think they understand what is at stake.

if ukraine falls, china is going to invade taiwan. they have to understand the case , and they talk about the border. not mutually exclusive at all. we can do both. we are a great country. you can walk and chew gum at the same time." we want to hear more from you about a two ukraine. first, some tweets we are receiving from viewers and listeners. this is incrementalism in ukraine needs to stop. the united states and nato need to provide the ukrainian people with sufficient armaments to end the invasion of ukraine. his armaments need to be provided now, not months from now. -- d's armaments -- these

armaments need to be provided now, not months from now. if trump were potus, where would we be? give it seven days, it would be over. we need to realize putin is our enemy and has nuclear weapons. we need to save humanity from this dangerous man, vladimir putin. we want to go back to the phone lines to hear more from you. if you believe u.s. aid to ukraine should continue, call us at (202) 748-8000. if you believe the aid should not continue and the u.s. should pull back, call (202) 748-8001. if you are current or former military, your line is (202) 748-8002. the next caller is keith and wisconsin. former military. you are on. caller: good morning.

i am opposed to sending more what you call a to ukraine. -- aid to ukraine. what you are asking is if you support the slaughter of russian conscript in ukraine. russia's conscripts did not make the decision to invade ukraine. i know there is a lot of resistance to the war inside russia. what we should be doing is trying to support and encourage more of that. to force putin to fight a war on two fronts and reduce the bloodshed. i do not believe in more bloodshed. henry kissinger one time called them dumb, stupid animals who are used as pawns in u.s. foreign policy. that is the way the u.s. elites think of russian conscript. dumb, stupid ponds to be used -- pawns to be used in russian

foreign policy. many russians are escaping to other countries to avoid going to war. so i do not believe in more aid to ukraine. i believe what martin luther king would have done, he would have said and i for an eye leaves everyone blind. -- eye for an eye leaves everyone blind. we need to pull back and start thinking about the people who are fighting and dying in this war. host: that is keith in wisconsin , let us go to the line, patrick in pennsylvania saying the aid should not continue. caller: the war should have never taken place. my father was commander of the osi, my brother just retired as a senior master chief for the u.s. navy seals. there is no legitimacy for this war whatsoever. it would be the equivalent of us

-- of russia invading canada and installing a puppet dictator, that is what we are witnessing. the fundamentals of this cannot be more profound. over 70% of the money is missing. this deranged, demented president -- find the money they sent that disappeared down the rabbit hole. we are seeing literal constitutional destruction of our country. we are seeing big tech censoring everyone in order to prevent information to be deployed to the american people. i've got news for you. the president of the united states and military industrial cartels want this war to never end. they do not want to want to never end, they are casually talking about the use of tactical nuclear weapons in

order to reach their goal. imagine, you are in a russian neighborhood in ukraine and have missiles being launched into your community. we are the aggressors. nato and the cia overthrew a democratically elected government. i could show you 12 videos of neo-nazi badges on arms and backs of the entire security detail around the ukrainian puppets that was put in place by nato. america, the reality is this. this is going to come home. when you become a mass murdering nation and you allow your democracy to be essentially evaporated, you are going to pay the price. when you see the destruction of democracy, it cannot be more obvious where this is going. host: that was patrick in pennsylvania. the next caller is chris in

indiana. you think the aid should continue? caller: yes. vince for having me on. -- thanks for having me on. thanks to both sides, yes and no, whoever served in any war. thank you for your service. i do think it should continue, for more than one reason. i do not agree with war at all. but just a small analogy. when i was younger -- i am a short guy, got picked on my entire childhood by bullies. putin is a bully. that is on a world stage, not a schoolyard. i will be danged if we let anybody do that in 2022 or 2023, in a free world. the biggest point i want to get across, if i can keep it together because i have

adrenaline, we have to push this idea. like i told my senators here locally, i am looking for one good winston churchill to stand up to putin when he bluffs the nuclear stuff and say look, if radiation crosses a nato border, that is an act of war. maybe that will hush him up on a nuclear threat. we need someone to stand up and say that. putin unfortunately is smart enough to not cross the nato border. but radiation coming across, for pete's sake, that has to be inactive for. -- an act of war. someone needs to step up to the plate and not be a coward. there are too many cowards in nato right now. say that, out loud, in public. put an end to the bluffing, i

think that is what it is. i think he is capable of doing a nuke, but i think we let him know that nato will hang together if radiation comes across the border. thank you for your time. host: appreciate your call. let us go to randy in north carolina, former military. what are your thoughts? turned on your tv so we can hear you, please. -- turn down your tv so we can hear you, please. go ahead with your comment. caller: i just have a couple of things to say. i am not going to get into all of this debate about who is a nazi, neo-nazi. i watch the january 6 invasion, we have some of that stuff going on in our own country.

but i am a former military person, i work for the department of defense for over 30 years. i worked in logistics. we ship ports all over the country. that is part of what the government does. as far as continuing to support ukraine, i think it is a good idea. as long as russia is still the invader, we should defend. but we have to step back a moment. ukraine did not start this war, russia started it when they invaded crimea. they never left crimea. it has been escalated and escalated to where it is at today.

if they had held up weapons we would not be in this problem. we would have stopped this a long time ago. we let the beast out, it is time to put him down. host: appreciate your call. let us go to maryland, mike is also former military calling in. caller: good morning, how are you? yes, i agree with the gentleman from michigan, new jersey, pennsylvania and north carolina. i think all of those gentlemen made very important points. i just wish everyone a great day, thank you. host: let us hear now from tracy in michigan, go ahead. caller: yes, i agree with the

last caller in the previous caller from north carolina and pennsylvania. i wish our country was more sensitive to this catastrophe. i think they underestimate the ramifications of soviet takeover and destruction of ukraine. ukraine is a breadbasket of the world, people are already starving in africa because the grain shipments have been held up by the russian federation. there is brutality directly committed on women and children of ukraine and the elderly and animals. the american people who want to be preoccupied by hollywood and tiktok have any clue what would happen if ukraine falls, russia

is on the border of poland. that has to be avoided, and i have complete trust in president biden and nato. host: thank you, tracy in michigan. let us hear from paul and virginia, you think the aid should continue. caller: yes. i look at it like putin is like an analog of hitler, world war ii. if you let putin take over without regard to international law, that will encourage the whole planet to become lawless. any dictator can just take over if they have the power to do it. it is a threat to democracy and

the whole world. we have to continue aid. we are not sending people. we are fortunate that ukraine is so motivated to defend their country, we need to help them in every way we can. host: thank you for your call. we are going to take a quick break. after that, we will be back to review this easy week in politics with republican strategist john feehery and democratic strategist brad woodhouse. later, former c.i.a. officer kevin carroll discusses his piece for the dispatch about charles mcgonagle, the former fbi official accused of taking secret cash payments from a sanctioned russian oligarch. ♪

>> tonight on q&a, attorney and best-selling author philip howard provides a of public employee unions. he argues organizations like the american federation of teachers in the fraternal order of police have usurped decision-making power from elected officials and our arguably unconstitutional. >> these unions have become so powerful . they have consolidated a mass of

public employees. into the largest and most powerful interest group. they collect $5 billion a year, most of which goes to political purposes. they are a juggernaut and anyone who opposes them, they will consolidate national resources to get that person unelected. host: philip -- >> philip k howard with his book, nonaccountable, on c-span's q&a. you can listen for free to all of our podcasts on the c-span now mobile app. >> from c-span essentials this weekend -- this winter during our stay warm sale, going on now. c-span's online store, save up to 20% on our latest collection of sweatshirts, hoodies,

blankets and drink where. every purchase helps support our nonprofit operations. scanned the code on the right to shop now through monday during the c-span shop stay warm sale. >> in just about a year, first votes are scheduled to be cast in the 2024 democratic president shall primary, and if a proposal by president joe biden is approved, south carolina would vote first, changing the political environment. in this episode of c-span's the weekly, we go back to joe biden's campaign for president and what he said then. you can find the weekly on c-span now, our free mobile app or wherever you get your podcast. >> c-span now is a free mobile app featuring your unfiltered

view of what is happening in washington, live and on-demand. keep up with the day's biggest events from u.s. congress, white house events, the courts and campaigns and more from the world of politics. all at your fingertips. you can stay current with the latest episodes of "washington journal" and find scheduling information, plus a variety of compelling podcasts. c-span now is available on the apple store and google play. your front row seat to washington anytime, anywhere. >> be up-to-date in the latest publishing with book tv's podcast about books. with current nonfiction book releases, bestseller lists as well as industry news and trends through insider interviews.

>> "washington journal" continues. host: good morning. joining us this morning our republican strategist john feehery and democrats are to just brad woodhouse -- democrat strategist brad woodhouse. they will discuss politics with us. let's start with john. you worked for speaker dennis hast her when there was a debt limit fight. what do you are a member from that fight and what lessons can be learned now, that there is another fight coming up? what would you tell speaker mccarthy? john: i also worked for -- when there was a debt limit fight and i worked for bob michael. there have been debt limit fights every couple of years. the most important thing -- the big strategic problem for republicans is they have to make this fight as part of the budget.

that is what they are trying to do. the other thing you have to do is get your whole team unified. if you don't unify your team, you don't have negotiating power and that means you have to communicate aggressively with all people in your conference. they have to get together and come up with a game plan. they don't have that many cards, they don't have the senate or the white house and they are not all that unified on this issue. the number one objective is to make it as part of the budget discussion and have a unified team. otherwise you will not win. host: do you think that is doable? you hear democrat saying during trump's for years we passed clean debt ceiling increases. now republicans want to couple that with budget discussions. do you believe that is a legitimate argument without republicans looking cap critical? john: hypocrisy is a very important part of the coin.

republicans will pass a debt limit. they also want to spark a discussion about what are we doing with spending, revenue, what is going on with the economy? i think it is doable to have that discussion. i don't think the democrats or joe biden are going to get away with no negotiation, but they will have to extend the debt limit and i think they will succeed in getting at least a cursory discussion of the budget. host: brad i will get to you but first let's listen. this is president biden on thursday, speaking about the debt limit crisis and blasting house republicans for risking a default. [video clip] >> i will not let anyone use the credit of the united states as a bargaining chip. united states of america repays our debts. it took 200 years to accumulate that debt. let me explain this. under my predecessor, the last

guy that was president, the deficit went up four years in a row, accounting for 40% of the entire 200 years of debt. do you hear me? no president added more to the debt in for years. i miss bo, 25% of our country's entire debt. it a key millie did 200 years. on my watch we have taken a different path. as a result, the last two years, we cut the deficit by $1.7 trillion. the largest reduction in debt in american history, while doing all the things i just said. we paid for it all. the very notion that we would default on the safest most respected debt in the world is

mind-boggling. i'm not going to get into the reckless threats of taking the the economy hostage to force an agenda that will not only weaken us internationally but limit american workers. i won't let that happen. host: that was president biden. let's hear from house speaker kevin mccarthy in this video. you'll hear him criticizing biden for rejecting debt ceiling talks. [video clip] >> think for one moment. i don't think anybody in america would live this way. they would reach their limit on the credit card and just extend the limit and not look about where they are spending. no state can do this, no family can do this. no city or county can do this. this isn't even the behavior of past joe biden. he praised the idea of negotiating together. i don't think anybody in congress believes this as well. i think we have to be sensible and responsible.

we have to have a responsible debt ceiling. i'm not saying never, i'm just saying you hit $31 trillion, 120% of our gdp. their party has been in power for four years. you increased discretionary spending by 30%. $400 billion. i want to look the president in the eye, tell me there is not one dollar of wasteful spending and government? who believes that? the american public does not believe that. our whole government is designed to have compromise, but here is the leader of the free world pounding on the table, being irresponsible, saying just raise the limit? make them spend more? that is not how adults act. that is not how elected officials -- that is not how the american public believes their elected officials act. but i have asked for is to sit down, let's find common ground

and let's eliminate the wasteful spending to protect the hard-working taxpayers and protect the future of america. host: so brad woodhouse, you are the democrat on this panel. now that you've heard biden's argument, mccarthy's argument, who do you think has the upper hand and what would be your advice to democrats in the white house and congress? brad: i would say what john said is important for democrats and that is to be unified. unified and your approach and in your plan, you are much more likely to succeed. i think democrat saying we will not negotiate with a gun to our head or risk default so you can make a political show of cuts you don't actually believe in or cuts that the american people don't believe in. i would say democrats and president aydin, stick to your guns, do exact we what you are doing. here is what we have not seen from republicans. what is their plan? what are they putting on the

table? the democrats are not proposing to use the debt ceiling to create an economic crisis, republicans are. they should be the ones to say we want to cut social security and medicare. some have said that, others have said they don't. some say the fed should be on the table. they don't have a unified plan. i think president biden and the democrats right now have the upper hand. it does not mean it will stay that way but as long as we can say that you are threatening a default on the economy and a cut social security and medicare, which are still third rails in american politics and republicans can't come back and say this is our actual plan, i think democrats will have the upper hand. host: i asked john about looking hypocritical. democrats risk looking like they don't want to talk about deficit spending, and america's budget, conjure bidding to the debt. do you think there is a risk -- contributing to the debt.

do you think there is a risk of people at home saying why won't democrats talk about ways to reduce to bending? brad: president biden addressed that. the deficit has decreased every year he has been president. it increased every year donald trump was president. president biden is addressing that issue. we are seeing the deficit fall as the economy gets better. there are other ways to do this. we don't need to threaten a default of the economy. this can be done around the annual appropriations bill. every year there is one big massive bill that funds the government, because there is an inability in congress to pass individual appropriations bills. that is the time to do this. sometimes you will see a brief government shutdown over these proceedings. host: house republicans have said they will try to pass those individual appropriations builds this year -- bills this year. we will get some of your calls

to republican strategist john feehery and democrats started just brad woodhouse -- democrat strategist brad woodhouse. if you are a mccright, (202)-748-8000 -- if you are a democrat, (202)-748-8000. republican, (202)-748-8001. independents, call us at (202)-748-8002. we will get to your questions or comments in just a moment but before we do, i want to bring up cnn recently had some polling they put out and the headline says it all. it says nearly three quarters of americans think house gop leaders haven't paid enough atteion to important problems. en we drill down in the numbers, here is how the article goes. fewer than one third of americans believe that house gop leaders are prioritizing the country's most important issues according to a new cnn poll conducted by ssrs.

neither party's congressional leadership earned majority approval and republicans are particularly likely to express discontent with their own party. i'm going to skip down to read, the gop ratings are weighed down by relatively high dissatisfaction within their own party. 42% of republicans and republican leaning independents disapprove of congressional leaders compared with a 22% of democrats and democrat leaners who disapprove of their party congressional leadership. john, i want to ask what is going on with the republican party, 42% disapprove within their own party or folks who lean republican. john: they also had like 15 ballots to get kevin mccarthy as speaker. this is general unease with what the republicans have been doing. i think that is because they had

a slow start. i think republican leadership has to be very honest with their voters. they are not going to get all that they want. first you have to set expectations. they will not be able to change the world. the election was not that great and there is a lot of dissatisfaction with what happened. to brad's point, the republicans have to weigh out what they stand for on the budget and they are not -- they are not a lot of easy decisions. nobody wants to cut social security or medicare but if you have to balance the budget, you have to look at entitlements. nobody wants to look at defense but if you want to balance the budget, you have to look at defense. republicans have to lay out what they want to cut and why, because every constituency in washington, every spending program has a constituency and they have to make somebody angry.

they have to be willing to make the right people angry but they also have to make the right people happy which is their voters. they have to be systematic and legislate. host: brad, you are a member of the group called the congressional integrity project that is all about highlighting this new house republican majority. can you tell us about this group and its mission? brad: it was established in 2020 when senate republicans had the majority and they were launching all types of what i would call facetious investigations against candidate biden. biden won and the democrats took the senate and it went dormant and we relaunched it after republicans took the house, to focus on investigations that we consider biased or totally political that are happening within the republican caucus. you mentioned polling. there was a story today in the

washington post about some focus groups conducted in virginia among swing voters, and one of the reasons there was dissatisfaction among the elect -- among the electorate with republican control and among republicans is what people are hearing is investigations. that is the deals mccarthy cut to become speaker, largely about which committee slots people got. people wanted to be on oversight to investigate biden. they wanted judiciary to investigate biden. particular investigations that they want launched because those investigations will be a bent -- will be against biden and the biden administration. this focus group, participants asked what does that do to help my life? i think to john's point that republicans need to prioritize some type of plan, and they said things in the election that they will follow through on, what are they going to do about inflation or crime or the border?

right now the border plan seems to be investigate mayorkas as opposed to putting something on the table to actually deal with the border. i think these investigations are a net loser for republicans, as opposed to putting bills on the floor that address the issues they campaigned on. host: this is a tweet -- you mentioned that focus group that the post wrote about. the reporter who wrote the article about that focus group on twitter, wrote, i watched a focus group of independent voters and the results were fascinating yet predictable. they don't want investigations from congress, they want actions on actual issues, not a get even list. i want to bring it back to john. you have a book, the honest contrarian and other stories about washington, d.c. what is an honest contrarian? john: i am not the honest

contrarian, i am just a contrarian. he was someone who spoke truth to power, and did not go as far in his career as he could have because he did that. i always appreciated people who spoke truth to power. this book is about washington and my 30 years in washington and a personal history. i think it is a good read. some people will say it is a novel. i enjoyed writing it. to brad's point, and this poll's point, the investigations are better off if they are about the issues people care about, fraud in the medicare program. taxpayer money being ripped off. programs that are not working. investigations into police departments not doing their job.

those are things that impact people's lives. if you can find a way -- i don't think investigating biden is a bad way but you have to communicate it in the right way. i think people are excited about oversight investigations because that is about all they will be able to do. it'll be hard to get any legislative -- legislation done on their terms. for any congress to be successful, they have to produce things the american people want and if republicans don't do that, they will come up with a way to sell the deals that they make to their constituents. it is going to be a rough two years. host: let's go to the phone lines. first up is byron in wilson, north carolina on the independent line. what is your question or comment? caller: i have a question or comment. you talk about the budget and if you look back we had a balanced budget, the last time was bill clinton, not that long ago. then comes the republicans. george bush takes us into these

wars in iraq and afghanistan and stayed forever. when that is said and done, it is going to be upward of $15 trillion. they created homeland security. that's another $400 billion a year program. they couldn't even predict what happened on january 6. so that is a big old waste of money. look at the tax cuts from george bush and trump, looking at another $6 trillion. the republicans are the ones -- look at military spending. we've spent more than all the other nations together, all the other civilized nations together, rich nations, whatever you want to call them, together. we spend more money than all of

them put together on our military. then when biden tries the military budget this year, republicans gave them even more than they needed. all this stuff is going to the contractors. i think democrats do a very poor job of messaging out and they let republicans get away with a lot of stuff. they will spend the money and put it on the democrats. it seems like the democrats just let them do it. host: let's let our panel respond. brad, he says democrats don't do a good job telling the truth about republican leadership. brad: i think we need to sign him up as a surrogate. great independent voter by the way. there is a lot of truth to what he said. i don't know if his numbers were right but he sounds like he needs to be on the budget committee. we have had deficits go up. the economy was flat.

clinton came in and balance the budget. he had to do it with republicans who were running chambers of congress during that time. the deficit and the budget went out of hand with the wars he mentioned under bush. obama comes in and we do have this negotiation over the debt ceiling and we wind up with a sequester. democrats had to help lead republicans to control. trump balloons the deficit and the debt with massive tax cuts and now biden has come in and reversed that and the deficits are coming down. there is truth to what he is saying. there it is -- it is also true that we do not get messaging better. host: our next caller is coming from cleveland, ohio. michael on the democrats line. caller: good morning. how many appropriations bills were passed through the house, this past congress, and died in

the senate? half the people that: probably don't even work, and that is why they are not worried about social security as they never paid into it. host: john, we will let you take that. john: it is not easy getting to that economy. i think republicans are concerned about the 87,000 irs agents meant to go after the underground economy. the appropriations process, it has been broken for a while. i thicket has been broken on purpose because leadership likes controlling everything on both sides. the appropriations committee is usually much more independent, so leadership does not take very well to that. the breakdown is in the senate,

because they just don't manage the floor well. ultimately in the appropriations process you need to have a budget process that starts with getting the allocations, getting the agreement, the agreement has to be between all of the parties, and that is a difficult thing. we did all the appropriations bills when benny hassett was speaker. that was because we had the senate on board. then we had to do it again. getting all of the appropriation bills, makes them feel good about themselves but at the end of the day, if you get them all funded in one big package or not, it does not make much difference. i prefer to have them all done individually because it is more transparency and people know how it is supposed to work, but ultimately, it always kind of devolves down to the least

possible way to get something done and that is how congress operates. if they can do something well, they don't. they prefer to do it badly. [laughter] host: our next caller from annapolis, maryland, mark on the republican line. caller: good morning. a couple of comments before i asked a couple questions. when we go back to balanced budgets and you go back to the 1990's and to the peace dividend from 1992 to 2000 and the collapse of the ussr, obviously a bankrupt system to begin with. that is what enabled the balanced-budget and that was worked through with newt gingrich and a republican congress and bill clinton was the beneficiary of that and a collaborative deal where they worked together to get to that point.

fast-forward and we are dealing with the 9/11 terrorist attacks. clearly if military spending and decisions were made pretty quickly under the first bush administration. we would have been in a global depression for a lot longer than the economic induced recession. that spending was absolutely critical in terms of economic and national security. what happened with iraq is a different set of circumstances that could have been avoided, so the caller is right with that, but going to all the facts and circumstances here, there is no question that individual bills for appropriations need to return and these gigantic omnibus packages were people get

30 minutes of time to go through 2400 pages, doublespaced 16 font, so maybe it is 450, but that has got to happen. going forward in terms of spending, biden made a point about when he 5% of the debt established for the 200 years prior to his election, but the spending that happened during the 2009 -- the lack of energy independence in terms of export bans on the books in 1973 to basically 2016 completely untenable and that obviously locked in our dependence on foreign sources of oil and natural gas and other forms of energy and that reversal in 2015 created an independent framework for the u.s.. host: you are very well-informed

and we appreciate your call. i feel like if you were going to hire byron, you've got to hire mark for the republicans, breaking down these budget numbers. john: that is my guy. he makes a very good point. if we are going to balance the budget, we have to curtail wasteful spending on all parts and that includes defense which is really bloated, and we have to grow the economy. what happened with clinton was he had some spending cuts, and then the economy boomed and that is because he was smart about it. bipartisanship can lead to a booming economy which can balance the budget. host: i feel like the recent caller mentioned some of the reason why the budget is where it is now is because of the war on terror after september 11. he didn't get to current day but i think you could also argue that a lot of the reason the

budget is where it is now is because of the coronavirus pandemic. the question is, if we are winding down the war on terrorism and we are coming out of this pandemic, is there -- is it logical that those portions of the budget should calm down? brad: you probably are going to see some of that spending come down. at some point this year, the public health emergency that was declared for the pandemic will likely end. i think there is a bill on the floor, i don't think this is the way to do it but there is a bill on the floor to end it. i don't think it will pass in the senate but once that ends, you will see less spending. but the spending is going to get transferred. people will have to pay for vaccines and their own test kits. that is going to be transferred to other places. i do agree with john and i think

there is something that marbles me. -- marbles me -- marvels me. kevin mccarthy and leadership in the house seems to be more interested in the next president election but if i were mccarthy, i would think my role is to keep a republican majority in the house and the best way to do that is to deliver and the best way to do that is to work in a bipartisan basis. if he did that, you could fuel the economy, you could create more jobs, you could pass more infrastructure laws. may be biting gets credit and may be republicans in the house get credit, but they seem singularly focused on biden and not what is best for the house majority which may actually be passing some bills on a bipartisan basis. john: brad makes an excellent point, that this is a strategic decision for the republicans. to they want to keep their

majority by getting things done or to they want to muddy things up and damage biden, nab not get as many things done? the reason why this is personal to me is back in 1994 we had the same thing. making a decision whether we were going to send bill clinton another welfare reform bill that would make him a centrist and strengthen his credibility with the middle of the country, or what we going to continue the investigations and all of that kind of thing? we decided to send him the welfare bill. he got reelected but so did the republicans. it becomes -- ultimately, people should think less about their own political future and what is better for the country. what is clearly better for the country is getting stuff done,

getting the economy on a more fiscally responsible track and finding ways to reach agreement and then see where the chips fall. ultimately i personally believe the economy is going to come back because of what you were saying, that the coronavirus is going to recede and all of those restrictions will recede and supply chains will come back up and the economy is going to roll. host: let's go to the republican line. dottie calling from georgia. caller: good morning. we have to stop spending so much money and i'm realistic. i understand we spend most of it on social security, medicare and i'm about to retire next year. i don't want to take a pay cut. most people like me can keep working a little longer. we can work part-time and draw social security. i would much rather bite the bullet now than god help me i live another 20 years and i'm 80

years old and everything comes crashing down. one of my going to do then? we've got to do something. people have to be realistic. they've got to stop spending so much money. every year i listen to this spending and i get infuriated. i know most of it is on social security, medicare and defense but there have to be ways to can stop all of this spending. another pet peeve i have is when people talk about a tax cut. the democrats always say that is more spending. that is my money, that is our money. that is not congress's money. we give them tax money to do what we need them done. something has got to be done. that's all i have to say. host: brad i will let you respond. brad: about the tax cuts, when you'd cut taxes, trillions and trillions of dollars, when you already have debt and deficit spending, it raises the debt.

that is a fact. if you will do that, you have to live with those consequences but -- both fiscally and politically. one thing about medicare and social security, when we talk about the solvency. medicare and social security, you pay into and the reason it is an entitlement as you pay into it and you are entitled to get a benefit out of it. the way to make those programs solvent doesn't mean you have to cut benefits. benefits don't have to be cut to make those programs solvent. taxes can be raised, you can raise taxes on the threshold for social security when you actually have to pay more. there are ways to deal with the solvency of medicare and social security if you believe in

paying those benefits to people who have paid in, but when you do that, the other part of the ledger is dire, it is more difficult to figure out, how to balance a budget. we had a vice president famously say deficits don't matter and the economy has flourished with deficit spending and it has flourished we have gotten closer to a balanced budget. there is a constituency for every single area of federal spending. social security, medicare and defense are the big drivers and those things are extremely hard to cut will stop -- cut. john: there is a story in my book about efforts to cut social security in the late 1990's. i talked to my dad and he said if you lay one finger on my social security, i'm going to kill you. that is very difficult, to cut social security. much more difficult to do it in

a partisan way. there are a lot of ways -- you can have private accounts that supplement social security and give people more. at the end of the day, when people are in retirement they want social security and you have to do that without hurting younger people because younger people right now are the ones that don't believe they will ever get social security, so you have to figure out a way to make sure the air retirement is secure. ultimately with all of this, the solution is to get the economy growing again because if you get everyone jobs, that mean you don't have all of the pressure on medicaid. we have to think holistically about getting more people into the workforce and making sure they have jobs that can make them happy and figure out a way to get the economy growing and a lot of that means re-shoring things in the united states, getting manufacturing going again. host: i want to set the scene to

talk about the budget. this is fiscaldata.strategy.gov. 19% from fiscal year 2022, this is very recent. 19% of federal spending is on social security. another 15% is on general health. 14% is on income security. i don't know what that means. >> i think it is welfare, that kind of stuff. host: ok like food stamps. and then 12% on national defense. 12% on medicare. those are the top five. i think a lot of people don't think about how if you add all of those together, looking at over half that the federal spending, probably 60%, 70%.

just how difficult it would be to cut any of those things, but let's go back to the phone lines. tony in florida, calling as an independent. caller: good morning. i just have one quick aside here. either listen -- i've been listening to c-span instead of watching it because i can tell who is on which side of the equation. my biases get more filtered. i have a question. i keep hearing some people talk about investigations. we just went through constant investigations into russia russia russia, impeaching a president twice, and a private citizen once. we had the january 6 ongoing

investigation, which duplicates the doj investigation for politicking. why can't we now have any investigations? i don't want to hear crying about investigation fatigue. it is hypocritical. rest assured it is not just democrats who are hypocrites. host: john? john: i think both parties want to investigate the other one for political gain and at some point in time, you want accountability and transparency and there is some use to it but you can go overboard because ultimately you need to get stuff done and you can't tell the voters what you have done to make their lives

easier or to make sure their tax dollars are well spent, you are not ultimately doing your job. some people come to washington and they forget their job. some of their constituents want to have the investigations, so they have to be cognizant of that. that's on both sides. i like divided government because it theoretically keeps the politicians honest. i'm of the opinion that we need accountability on both sides because everybody needs to be kept honest. host: we are taking your calls, questions and comments for republican strategist john feehery and democratic strategist brad woodhouse. the numbers, democrat, (202)-748-8000. republicans, (202)-748-8001. independents, (202)-748-8002. let's go to the republican line. ray in lexington, kentucky. what is your question or

comment? caller: good morning. the greatest transfer of wealth in history, the biden administration, each of his two years in office, over 2% inflation, prices have gone through the roof and the next two years, another 5% per year inflation. by the time is out of office, it'll be 30% of my money gone. i've worked hard in my life and i just lost $30,000. how is this -- what are we going to do as far as -- [inaudible] put a freeze on wages and

prices? [inaudible] host: you are starting to break up of the love it but i think i got the gist of his questioned about inflation. brad: let's put a reset on where we are today. we have seen inflation fall for six consecutive months. we just learned this week that the economy grew at almost 3% in the fourth quarter. we were told none of that was possible. we were told that either we had to live with high inflation or we had to take such trick only and measures like what the fed has done on interest rate hikes that we would fall into a recession. that happened -- that had not happened. this president had come in and said -- done what he said he was going to do. pass legislation to deal with coronavirus relief and vaccines and health care, and he did that . he wanted to pass an infrastructure bill which he passed on a bipartisan basis with republicans.

he wanted to pass a chips manufacturing bill which he did on a bipartisan basis and they wanted to pass a bill to deal with energy, climate and health care and lower per strip should drug prices. all of those things have contributed to an economy that has been able to survive, despite the fed activity to slow it down. it certainly slowed down some, we saw that in the first two quarters. now we have declining inflation, raising growth that is increasing, and the lowest unemployment rate in 50 years. that is not an economy that i would feel ashamed of. we need inflation to continue to fall but every indication is that is going to happen. brad: when you say inflation is caused by too much demand chasing too little supply. i subscribe to that theory and i think ultimately why we will have inflation go down is because we will recover from the pandemic and all of the things

that were meant during the pandemic to restrict supply, we have a huge problem with supply chains, not producing enough in china because of their own coronavirus problems. we are trying to re-sure a lot of the supply chains which will take a while. ultimately the demand has not cooled that much and i don't know what the federal reserve is doing. no one is looking at what is going on with supply and people need basic stuff. you have things like eggs. it wasn't because assuming the fed was doing it is because they killed a bunch of chickens because of some chicken virus. we have to look at all of these things and think how do we make sure the economy is growing, supply is what the consumers want and then we will get the demand and that is why inflation has come down because we are dealing with the post-pandemic world. i'm optimistic for republicans

in one sense, that i think the economy is going to come back quickly and inflation is going to come down. [indiscernible] host: our next caller is ed in jackson, tennessee on the independent line. go ahead. caller: good morning. i think we've got more money than we know what to do with. in 1960, corporate taxes were 5% of gdp. now i think it is at 1%. health care was at 5% of gdp in 1960. now it is 18%. i say the democrats are terrible at messaging. it is not tax cuts. health care costs -- he said he never had a manager call and say let's change this because we are getting a tax increase or

getting more regulation. it's all about our health care. mr. woodhouse, i wish you would look into this. we spent $4 trillion a year on health care and $.33 of every dollar is wasted. that's $1 trillion a year. and then trump in his four years, added $8 trillion to the deficit. it is ridiculous. democrats are terrible at messaging. they let republicans talk all of this tax cut nonsense. i just give you some facts right there. host: go ahead brad. [laughter] brad: the democrats are terrible at messaging is what i've learned. i don't disagree that health care is a big driver. it is one of the reasons i believe democrats have tried to lead on health care and health

care reform and want to lower costs. some of these are so institutional, they are hard to break. it took cades for democrats in congress to be able to get something back out of big pharma. from a civil companies are important and the innovations are important and the drugs are vital, but the profits they were making on insulin, which we've had for over 100 years or more and have not changed much, so democrats are trying to rein some costs out of that and the president passed legislation that caps the cost of prescription insulin. allowing medicare to finally negotiate with drug companies to lower prices. i agree wholeheartedly that there is too much money spent in the system, there is too much profit in the system. we need to do more to take care of health care than we do taking

care of health care ceo's. john: with health care, you have an older population, people are linking -- living longer than ever. both health care costs are rso's -- costs are associated with older people. people who are younger are not as healthy as they should be. we want to attract capital to health care because it helps fuel innovation, but we also want to have a marketplace that works efficiently so that as you continue to attract capital into the system, you make sure you are inspiring innovation. i tend to think that the more government you put in, the more money you are going to waste and the more you will have to spend on wasteful forms and you will have issues where you just don't have the outcomes you want. give a thing is this expectation that doctors will fix everything.

i probably should not eat the craft that i eat. -- crap that i eat. the government spending is a lot of money on health care, more than ever, because they are spending so much on older americans to keep them alive and they are spending so much on younger americans who are not living the lifestyle that is as healthy as it should be. host: let's go to the democrat line. john in mississippi. caller: i was calling about social security. how is it going to run out when you've got millions of people, without even a chance to draw it? and then, how is it running out

of money when you've got millions of people who have paid into it for 40 years? 30 to 35 years of their life before they get a chance to draw that money. where did all that money go? don't just beat around the bush. i know i'm not the first person to ask this question. host: we are going to let brad answer. he is the health care person. brad: john is probably better for the budget than i am but -- john: a lot of people die earlier and that is unfortunate. host: there is a racial disparity too. john: african-americans do not

get as much out of social security as a group as other groups because they don't live as long. but social security is going broke because we made a promise to people, and they have lived a lot longer than we thought they are going to live, and they get their contributions. if you retired at 60 and live until you are 100 and don't pay into social security, you are making a goldmine off of it. that is not what the system -- it was originally thought of as if you retired at 65 and then you died at 70, that was based on those models. i don't want people to go off and die, but this is the challenge with social security. the problem is we get like 1% return on social security investments. we have to find a way to get that return up to normal standards with 8% over the

lifetime. host: i feel like i read somewhere that when social security was initially passed, it was almost equal -- eligibility age was very close to the average life expectancy of america at the time. john: that is exactly right. host: another caller, jen in maryland, independent line. caller: i am encouraged with some of the callers because of the intelligence of their information. it makes me feel hopeful for this country because it seems like we are really going to try and target into what the problems are to keep this country profitable. we worked our tails off. i don't know any american that does not work. we work hard for our prosperity, also for our children.

we want more accountability in this system. it has to happen. otherwise it is not going to work. host: all right. brad: we do need accountability. it is one of the beautiful things about the house of representatives is they are accountable to voters every two years. i will agree with another thing. i think i have learned a lot from the callers, their history of the budget process and what contributed to the budget and the amount of deficit spending. we've had some great callers. host: c-span callers are the best, including mike in florida, independent line. caller: my question and comment is, i'm on social security and medicare. i worked 55 years of my life or that. these are not entitlements, they are earned benefits.

i wish the republicans would say what they are. they want to balance the budget. you talk about entitlements. let's look at the entitlements in the reform bill that the energy companies get. these are entitlements, all the subsidies that they get. why don't they talk about that? john: entitlements are a budget term which means you are entitled to that money, which i think you would agree with. i think we should look at all of these programs and make sure that they are most effective. i continue to remain optimistic about the future of america. i know we have problems and washington has tons of problems but i'm very optimistic. anytime i go around the country, i think people are a lot smarter than we give them credit for, especially in washington and i think most people who come here are trying to do the best thing for their constituents.

brad: i agree on that. there is a caricature of washington a lot of people believe washington is george santos. washington is a lot of people who really care about issues and what happens is there are people who are here just for the purpose of going on television and while they are doing that, there was a lot of hard work being done to pass bills related to energy and health care and there is a lot of bipartisan agreement, for example, on health care in the omnibus that passed at the end of the year. i'm optimistic too. host: another caller. bill, new york, republican line. caller: thank you. i was just calling and listening to what is going on about

inflation and energy and i'm trying to use common sense. i'm really not trying to get political, i'm trying to use common sense and what i keep coming back to is in all honesty , we had low gas prices when we were producing our energy here in the united states and we were looking forward to getting the oil from canada through the keystone pipeline. we were doing fine, we were energy independent and what happened was when the new administration came in, the president signed an executive order to stop producing -- this is common sense i'm using -- to stop producing oil here and stop the pipelines and without

anything else to replace it, by the oil in other countries and their refineries are not as good as the refineries we have here. before russia, inflation went up -- host: we are to cut you off to let john and brad answer. brad: that is patently untrue. oil production in the united states is as high as it is is -- is -- as it has ever been. we are producing more oil that we use than we import. the keystone pipeline did not contribute to any energy prices coming up or down, one way or the other. there was no a thicket of order signed to prevent oil production in the united states. host: can you briefly explain

why gas prices got higher? brad: i think john addressed this. we have supply chain issues, we had inflation going up for a period of time, it got unacceptably high and we saw gas prices are lower than they were last summer. john: i like brad a lot and i think the biden administration came in with an anti-oil and gas mindset that helped contribute to an increase in prices. i think they have gotten dashed by reality and they figured that they went way too far in pursuit of a green agenda and have to figure out how to stabilize because increasing gas prices are not politically popular. they've come down. supply chain issues have come to get things. the marketplace -- complicated

things. the marketplace is the marketplace. the caller is right that we need more refining capacity and is -- and it is difficult to build refining capacity because of all of the activists who don't like that. this is an issue that we are not going to get rid of oil and gas in the next five years, because it is too important to the economy and most americans. there is going to be a transition. it is going to take place over decades, not in the next decade and ultimately the politicians are very sensitive to price increases in gasoline because they know it is politically host: one last caller in miami on the independent line. caller: i am hearing about social security, high gas prices. let us talk about illegal immigration, mr. woodhouse.

social security is going broke because you have more people -- i can tell you this. illegal immigration, article one, title eight, that has been breached by this president. you are allowing millions of people to come in here. host: alright we are going -- guest: i will say this. i believe the way to solve the issue at the border and immigration is you have to have bipartisan support for comprehensive immigration approach, comprehensive immigration legislation. every time democrats have come forward with that, republicans walked away. we passed a bill in the senate during the obama administration,

68 votes. they did not have the votes in the house. they didn't put it on the floor because he didn't think he had the votes with republicans to pass it. it has to be done on a bipartisan basis. the border and immigration have been a problem under democratic and republican presidents and congresses. it can only be solved in a bipartisan way. host: john, final thoughts? guest: let me say that i think we need to fix the problem with immigration. i disagree with the caller, illegal immigration actually helps fund to social security because illegal immigrants do not get social security benefits, but they do pay into it. immigrants are the lifeblood of this country, thank god for immigrants. we have a demographic problem in this country that is only complemented by people really wanting to come in and me to secure our border because of the

-- need to secure our border because of the illegal flood of fentanyl. we also need to have a legal system so it makes it easier for immigrants to come to this country and participate legally big -- because the impact of that is increases wages. people have better bargaining power when they are here legally. there are so many workers that are exploited, which is a pox on the system. i've been a proponent of comprehensive immigration reform forever. i do not love amnesty, but i also think we need to figure out a way to get people in the legal system, because it is better for our economy, public safety in the country. host: we will put you two in a room. thank you so much democratic strategist brad woodhouse, republican strategist john feehery. in about 20 minutes, we will

have former cia case officer kevin carroll, who will discuss the case of charles mcgonigal, the former fbi official accused of taking secret cash payments from a sanctioned russian oligarch. first, open forum. we want you to go ahead and start calling in now. republicans, (202) 748-8000. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents, (202) 748-8002. we will be back. ♪ >> the state of the union is strong because you, the american people, are strong. >> president biden delivers the state of the union address, outlining his priorities to congress on tuesday, february 7. his first state of the union

speech since republicans won control of the house. we will hear the republican response and take your phone calls. watch live coverage beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span, c-span now or online at c-span.org. ♪ >>ivsunday, february 5 on in-depth, and author will be our guest to talk and take your calls on american culture, politics and history. he is the author of many books. join in the conversation wh your phone calls, facebook comments, texts andweets. in-depth live sunday, february 5 at noon eastern on book tv, c-span2.

>> preorder your copy of the congressional directory for the 118th congress. it is your access to the federal government with bio and contact information for every house and senate member, important information on congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies and state governors. skin the code on the right to preorder your copy --scan the code on the right to preorder your copy. every purchase supports nonprofit operations. in just about a year, first votes are scheduled to be cast in the 2024 democratic presidential primary. if a proposal is approved, south carolina would vote first, changing the political environment. in this episode of the weekly, we go back to prior joe biden campaigns for president and hear what he says about the importance of iowa and new hampshire leading the presidential selection process.

you can find the weekly on c-span now or wherever you get podcasts. >> washington journal continues. host: we are back with open forum, it is your chance to weigh in on the news of the day. anything you would like to discuss. to repeat the numbers, democrats (202) 748-8000. republicans, (202) 748-8001. independents, (202) 748-8002. we are ready to take your calls right now. first up is carrie in tennessee on the republican line. what would you like to talk about? caller: i have a tendency number, i am from -- tennessee number, i am from pennsylvania. we got a raise in social security of $60. i get food stamps, they cut my

food stamps $300. you have all of these illegals getting all the free food. inflation is so high, you cannot afford to buy food. then they cut it. but the government is doing is nothing. host: in georgia, independent line. what would you like to discuss? caller: good morning. i would like to talk about police reform, which was a big topic yesterday. i think what is going on right now and what has been going on for a while is the good policemen are being held hostage by the bad policeman. what we as americans need to do is free the good policemen up from being a hostage to the bad policeman had -- policeman, because in the 70's, i was mp. i lived with guys who transformed from pee-wee hermon to superman when they got a gun

and a badge on. that is what we need to do. free up the good policemen from the bad. host: he mentioned police reform , that has been in the news with the release of video of the death of tyre nichols in memphis, tennessee. this is this morning's new york times front page. there are two articles about the case on the front page. officers race turns focused a system, because all five officers who have been charged with second-degree murder in tyre nichols' death or black, so was nichols. the other article talks about the response from the memphis police department, which acted relatively quickly to discipline the officers in that case. the video was released friday

night of the death of tyre nichols. paul in england, are you calling from the u.k.? caller: that is right. host: good afternoon over where you are across the pond. what is your question or comment? caller: the topic about police reform, they cover this up all the time. there should be reform, i reckon. do you think so? host: that is something up for congress, we will have to stay tuned. we appreciate your call. let us go now to maryland, dave is calling on the democratic line. caller: i would just like to say , i would like to talk about climate change and the new

congress, led by mccarthy, who is against doing things to help the climate -- in the future, look at all of the things going on with the climate right now. i think we really need to do quite a bit more, because in the coming years, it will get worse. right now, we have hurricanes, tornadoes, droughts. give credit to joe biden, he is trying to do something with electrical vehicles. maybe stop the drilling. spur on electrical vehicle production and people buying them. i think it is a real problem for the future, we are not giving it enough attention. that is my comment. host: appreciate it.

the next caller is cliff in oklahoma on the independent line. you are on. caller: yes, i would like to touch base with some of the stuff that was not talked about on social security. we need to take the cap office social security, at least raise it to one million before turns off. we need to find out where all the money went for all the endless wars that was pulled out of the social security fund and never put back in. the third thing is and corporations are people and vote like people and fund campaigns like people, they should pay social security like people. think of the money that has been raised and how much money that would put in for aging baby boomers like myself. host: appreciate your call. let us go to the independent

line, david in louisiana. caller: yes, i would like to make a comment on inflation. nixon took us off of the gold standard in the early 70's. in 1965, i was making $10,000 a year and i was rich. making $10,000 a year, did not know what to do -- nixon took us off the gold standard temporarily, and we have never gone back. the gold standard prevents the government from spending more money that is in the reserve. until we go back on the gold standard, inflation is going to continue until it breaks the country. thank you. host: ok. appreciate your call. on the line from maryland, kathy is calling as a democrat. go ahead. caller: hi, i'm calling in

regards to medicare. medicare for social security. the republicans are trying to take that from people. how can we live with 30% taking -- we do not have the tax break. when they are getting all the money, messing up. they missing us up because they are not thinking of other people. host: that is kathy from

maryland. let us hear from arthur in florida calling as a democrat. caller: yeah, i just wanted to say i think they come up with a lot of different ways to raise taxes in a fair way. alcohol, tobacco. i believe they should have a federal tax on all lottery tickets. every state. that is my opinion on raising some capital. the other thing is, the border patrol, instead of having a problem with not enough border agents, we have the coast guard that guards the waters of america. why do we not have a branch of the military that also could assist the border patrol? like mps? we have national guard that have requirements of duty of training

for two weeks out of the year. why don't you send the national guard to the border for their two week stint? that is all i have to say. host: continuing open forum, the next caller is alan in florida on the republican line. caller: good morning. i have a few questions. we are thinking about seriously saving the planet, if i drive 45 miles an hour, my car gets 57 miles per gallon. if we all just slow down, we will say 50% of the fuel the whole world is at, we have millions of barrels a day being saved. we slow down and we do not have to worry about getting into the

electric car market, we can do it gradually. they give you a $7,500 tax break when you buy an electric car. somebody who is buying it $80,000 and $90,000 electric car can afford the extra $7,500. i come on the other hand, am on social security -- i, on the other hand, am on social security. if i went to buy an electric car, i would have no benefit but the tax break. another thing is, when we have medicaid, is there one fund -- a certain amount of billions of dollars, then if we have more people coming into the country over the southern border that that fund is divided amongst all the people, they keep a minimum amount everyone is getting, or are they going to get a

reduction because we have more people on the system taking the money? that is all i've got, hope you have a great day. host: the next caller is rudy in california on the democratic line. caller: good morning to you. my concern is the drug problem that we have in this country. i had a brother passed away 21 years ago. he was 41 years old, from drug-related problems. when i hear people talk about fentanyl and fentanyl is nothing but the new whipping boy of this country, because it is sitting in the heartland. people do not realize it is us. the people wanting modern chemistry. until we learn to do away with stuff, we give power to the cartels. i personally know dealers back

in the day, they used to tell me if we did not have a market for it, we would be out of business. i am not condoning it, but that is the reality of it. we have to somehow stop the poor boys, men, women and girls from wanting this dirty stuff that has infected our country. i miss my brother, i love him. he would have been 62 today. it is heart wrenching. even he said himself do not blame dealers. they are not coming to me, i am going to them. it was rock cocaine, the whole stuff. but thank you. host: we are sorry for your loss. bill in florida, calling as a republican. what is your comment?

caller: good morning. i was calling to remind your earlier guest, mr. woodhouse, all democrats and all supporters of president biden that it does not require a bipartisan effort to administer and enforce the immigration laws in the united states of america. have a great day. host: that was bill from florida concluding open forum. they're going to take a quick break, then we are back with former cia case officer kevin carroll, who will be discussing his piece about charles mcgonigal, the former fbi official accused of taking secret cash payments from a sanctioned russian oligarch. ♪ >> this week on the c-span

network, the house and senate are in session. on wednesday, two hearings at 10:00 a.m. eastern. first, the house oversight committee investigates waste of taxpayer dollars in covid relief programs. then, the house judiciary committee hears testimony about the influx of migrants traveling to border communities. jerome powell hold a press conference. watch this week live on c-span or c-span now, the free mobile o app. over to c-span.org for scheduling information or to stream video live or on-demand, anytime. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. ♪ >> listening to programs on c-span through c-span radio just got easier. tell your smart speaker play c-span radio and listen to washington journal daily at 7:00 a.m. eastern, important congressional hearings in other public affairs events throughout the day. weekdays at 5:00 p.m. and 9:00

p.m. eastern, catch washington today for a fast-paced report of stories of today. tell your smart speaker play c-span radio. c-span, powered by cable. ♪ >> tonight on q&a, attorney and best-selling author provides a critique of public employee ions in his new book. he argues organizations like the american federation of teachers and fraternal order of place have you served decision-making power from elected officials -- usurped decision-making power from elected officials. >> unions have become powerful. since they got the authorization through collective bargaining, they have consolidated the mass of public employees, which is huge. a third of them belong to unions. into the largest and most

powerful interest group in america. they collect i estimate $5 billion a year, both of which -- most of which goes to clinical purposes. they are a juggernaut. anyone who opposes them, they will consolidate resources and get that person unelected. >> philip k howard tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span's q&a. you can listen to all podcasts on the free c-span now app area -- app. >> washington journal continues. host: welcome back. joining us this morning is kevin carroll, a former cia case officer who also wrote a piece for the dispatch about charles mcgonigal. mcgonigal is the former fbi official who was recently charged and accused of taking secret cash payments from a russian oligarch who was facing

sanctions. we will talk about it with kevin this morning. thanks for joining us. guest: thanks for having me. host: can you tell us your background in and outside of government as it relates to national security and corruption? guest: i had the opportunity to serve in a number of roles. i was in the army, cia case officer, intelligence operations officer. i was able to serve as counsel to peter king in congress and john kelly when he was secretary of homeland security. in private practice is where i am now, i've had the opportunity to defend people accused of public corruption, espionage, mishandling of classified materials and false statements. host: you are journalist, we have a deep dive. who is charles mcgonigal, what did he do for the fbi? give us the timeline. guest: mcgonigal held one of the

most important positions in u.s. counterintelligence. he was the special agent in charge of former -- of intelligence, the biggest field office. you have u.s. headquarters, enormous number of foreign gornment officials, including china, russia, iran. host: he was charged with -- what did he get charged with? what is he accused of? guest: he got charge into separate indictments, one in washington and one in new york city. the one in washington charges him with excepting $225,000 from foreign governments, including those of albania and bosnia. in return for doing official ask for them while he was still in the fbi, which is criminal. he made false statements about

that on his annual financial disclosures to the fbi. in new york, he was charged with sanction violations and money laundering for doing work with a sanctioned russian oligarch he previously investigated after he retired from the fbi. host: that is what i want to get into. he retired from the fbi in 2018, there is a russian oligarch, deripaska. for me, sanctioned russian oligarch -- explain what that means. what is a russian oligarch and what does it mean that he was sanctioned? was he sanctioned by the u.s. and why? guest: sure was. oleg deripaska was one of the wealthiest man in russia and his close friends with widener pruden. -- vladimir putin. after russia annexed crimea and parts of donbas in 2014, to punish russia, the u.s. treasury

department put financial sanctions on senior powerful russian individuals, such as deripaska, saying you cannot do business with them. in spite of knowing that, because he was investigating him before he left in 2018, mcgonigal went to go work for deripaska and launder the money he received from deripaska from a company in new jersey that he joined under a false identity well with the fbi. so he was charged with sanction violations and money laundering. host: after he retired, he went and worked for the oligarch he once investigated is the accusation. guest: exactly. host: we will keep talking with kevin carroll, you can start calling in. if you have questions or comments about not just this case, but u.s. oversight of foreign individuals, we will remind you of the phone lines. democrats (202) 748-8000,

republicans (202) 748-8001, independents (202) 748-8002. we will be getting to your questions and comments. let us get to your article in the dispatch. the headline, "the national security implication of charles mcgonigal's arrest." why do you believe that our national security applications, and what are they? guest: i'm afraid there could be serious implications. the indictment is only the government's version of the story, it is allegations and mr. mcgonigal has distinguished counsel representing him. i am sure we will hear his side. he was taking money from foreign governments is what was alleged while working for the fbi and the sanctioned russian individual. i am concerned for two reasons. as the special agent in charge of counterintelligence in new

york, he would have had access to a vast amount of u.s. intelligence information. which he could have passed on to a foreign government. since he has been taking money from the russians, he would have the opportunity to give information about u.s. counterintelligence operations against russia. perhaps worst of all, several years ago, there were allegedly many chinese arrested and executed in suspicion of working for the cia. mcgonigal was put in charge of that investigation. any lessons learned about why chinese intelligence was able to possibly identify people working for the cia could be compromised by mcgonigal. host: do you, in general -- we were talking right before we started this segment that it seems a woman that was involved with mcgonigal's would help the federal government break the case open. that he did this at least for several years, do allegedly --

years, allegedly, without being detected. what is the say about the government ability to identify agents that have turned rogue or bad actors within the system? does that need attention or oversight? guest: i think it does. clearly, the measures were insufficient. mcgonigal was committing these crimes. mcgonigal was married, his former mattress -- this dress stepped forward after he said he would not leave his boss-- mistss stepped forward after he sat he would not leave his wife and spoke to his boss. among the things she said that were concerning where that mcgonigal had a family in chevy chase, maryland, an apartment in brooklyn, and he would take her to lavish restaurant meals. go to see sporting events and private boxes. mcgonigal was a senior fbi

official, that is by on the financial means of a government official. so it is very concerning that unexplained wealth was not discovered while he was serving in the fbi. it should have set off red flags. host: let us go to the phone lines. democrats (202) 748-8000, republicans (202) 748-8001, independents (202) 748-8002. our first caller is nicole in maryland on the independent line. what is your question or comment? caller: it is kind of a comment leading into a question. back story, i worked at a bonding company. my manager was russian. i didn't know i was pregnant, i was working at the machine and we were putting together quarterly books on girl scout cookies. i went to the bathroom and when i came back, he went off on me.

i did not quit. at the end of my shift i said sir, i thank you for the opportunity, i will try better. i came back the next day, i found out i was pregnant. he told me his mother told him -- i did not know if it was the cold war or great depression, one of those times they had to eat dog food. he said it was the resources in their country that made them have to do that. host: that is an interesting story. we are going to go to another caller. jason -- did we lose jason? that is good to jeff -- let us go to jeff in virginia, republican. caller: for your guest, can you mention what reasons you worked as a case officer? guest: sure. what i am allowed to say is that i worked in the middle east and

united states. middle east abroad and united states. you sign an agreement when you leave the cia you are not allowed to say about where you served. i can say i served in the middle east and red states. i was not a -- and united states. i was not a russian target. host: we do have a question on twitter. does kevin carroll think the russian investigation on trump were legitimate? can you explain, before we go there, explain how this mcgonigal case has been brought up in relation to the investigations of russia and trump and the alleged collusion when it comes to the 2016 election? start there. guest: mr. mcgonigal was involved in opening what became to known as the crossfire

hurricane counterintelligence investigation of president trump's campaign. so this entire situation is unfortunate, because it will cast doubt upon the results of all the investigations that have taken place since. people on the left side of the spectrum may think that mcgonigal did not pursue certain leads to cover up russian contacts with president trump. people on the right side of the spectrum might reasonably think that mcgonigal opened the investigation into candidate trump for inappropriate reasons. the integrity of that investigation has unfortunately been cast into doubt. i think it was appropriate to open an investigation of president trump in 2016, because the statements he made in public about wanting the russians to hack hillary clinton's emails and the fact some people associated with his campaign have allegedly had contacts with russian intelligence.

as we all know, ultimately, robert muller found there was no provable criminal conspiracy between trump and russian intelligence. host: the question now is, do you think the russia investigation -- the trump brush investigations were legitimate, or do you have concerns? guest: regardless of what mcgonigal may or may not have done, the fbi had a duty to investigate when then candidate trump said certain things in public and higher certain people to work on his campaign. they had to at least look into it. host: isn't paul manafort -- can you explain who he is and how he relates to mcgonigal? guest: mcgonigal and manafort worked for the sanction russian oligarchs. manafort was the chairman of president trump's campaign and i believe present at the trump tower meeting, which included individuals representing russian

intelligence who were offering derogatory information about hillary clinton and manafort met overseas with a russian intelligence officer to give him confidential campaign information. the indirect association through deripaska of manafort and mcgonigal is a concern. host: deripaska, the oligarch, a well-known aluminum magnet and close friend of vladimir putin was reportedly a client of paul manafort, an attorney and former trump presidential campaign consultant. let us get some more of your calls. robert is calling from texas of the republican line. -- on the republican line. caller: i heard you say you thought this guy's activity should have raised a red flag.

my question or comment is, maybe it did raise a red flag, but the people above probably may be your paygrade that were able to see those red flags were just as dirty as this guy. guest: i read in the press yesterday that mcgonigal's ex-girlfriend contacted his boss, assistant director of the fbi in charge of the new york office, to report concerns. that man, mr. bill sweeney, hesitantly work wired -- retired -- bill sweeney, prominently retired. i have great respect for the

fbi, like any organization, it has its bad apples. i would hope and trust that the most senior people are not dirty. host: the next caller is tracy in st. louis, missouri, independent. caller: good morning. i have a question for you. all this stuff, mr. trump has done all of these things as a republican and supposed to be leading people in the right way and stuff. they are still going to let him consider being a president. that just don't even make sense to me. i really have a problem understanding that.

they talk about terms and stuff, here he is doing all of this stuff like a terrorist. then you've got the guy in florida making all these bad decisions about stuff. i am not a racist person, if you are a republican fine, if you are a democrat fine. all the foolishness and problems we have in the world today, who has time to worry about the kiddie stuff these republicans -- nothing to do with nothing. host: let us let the guest respond. guest: it should not be up to law enforcement who gets to run for president or who is elected president. voters ultimately decide. host: we have a text message

that came in from linda in pennsylvania. is this considered treason and if not, why? what bothers me most is all of the russia, russia, russian implications from the fbi and others. guest: treason is the only crime defined in the constitution. it has to be aiding and abetting the m&a -- enemy in time of war observed by at least two people. even though there is a war in ukraine we are opposing, we are not at war against the russians. by definition it could not be treason. mcgonigal has not yet been so charged.

it is not treason. host: on twitter, what other u.s. government officials are suspected of having contact with putin indirectly? guest: great question. i know michael morel stated on the basis of a historical record , it is on most a statistical certainty a certain number of u.s. government officials are betraying our country at any given time, which is unfortunate. the historical record shows him to be right. we do not know how many other government officials are having those contacts with foreign governments and not reporting them. one of the things we need to do a better job of his see where former government officials work. -- of is see where former government officials work. host: dino cia agents, fbi

agent's and the like have to report to the government -- do you know if cia agents, fbi agents and the like have to report to the government where they work? guest: they do not. you sign a form that you have to keep secrets or you could be prosecuted. you have a moral obligation to let the government know if a foreign government approaches you, but there is no reporting mechanism to say i am retired from the fbi or cia and this is who i am working for. i think there should be. host: evelyn in tennessee on the democratic line, you are out. caller: thank you. i just have a comment into question. the question is, is this fbi agent a democrat or republican? my comment is, trumpeted did the same thing. -- trump did the same thing.

there is a clip of donald trump, jr. saying they were getting money from russia. that is all i wanted to say, thank you. guest: i do not know what mr. mcgonigal's politics are. in my experience, fbi agents try to keep it close to the chest, which is appropriate because it is supposed to be nonpartisan. i do not know. i am familiar with the statement by one of trump's sons, he said -- this was well prior to his father running for president -- that russian investors in real estate or an important part of the revenue of the trump organization. it did not have anything to do with government service. they were not in the government at the time. host: let us hear from tim in michigan on the democratic line. caller: i hear all these people talking about how bad trump is

and what he has done. what about hunter biden and all the ties he has to to, russia and ukraine? looks like our country is going to garbage because nobody is doing about biden situation. guest: there is an open federal criminal investigation being run by the trump appointed u.s. attorney for delaware into whether hunter biden engaged in tax fraud or failed to register as a foreign agent. that investigation has been going on for at least two years. we will eventually see what charging decisions are made. host: we are talking with kevin carroll, former cia case officer. we are focusing on the charging of a former fbi official who was accused of taking secret cash payments from a sanctioned russian oligarch. this is fbi director, he was

asked about the mcgonigal case on friday. here is a portion of his response. [video clip] >> we are talking about a guy who has been gone from the fbi for well over four years. it is the fbi that initiated the investigation. it is our agents that painstakingly and methodically put the case together against him. it is the fbi that arrested him. the conduct he engaged in is accurately and comprehensively described in the indictment, i would refer you to that. our agents over the past few years with audibly and professionally -- methodically and professionally put together the kind of case you would expect them to and took all of the steps you would expect them to in a case like this. any conduct in that indictment is, in my view, not remotely representative of what i see from the men and women of the

fbi every single day. people trying to do their jobs in the right way. what i think the charges in that case demonstrate is the fbi is willing, as an organization, to shine a bright light on conduct that is totally unacceptable, including what happens from one of her own people. -- our own people. that is in the best traditions of the fbi. that is with the case summarized. host: that was the fbi director. if mcgonigal is found guilty -- he has been charged, but is innocent until proven guilty, how could that take-- tank the work you did with the fbi? guest: there are cases where a police detective is found to be brutal or corrupt and it throws into that all the convictions obtained with his testimony or cases he worked on.

so i'm sure defense counsel for anybody who went to prison on any case mcgonigal worked on will be chomping at the bit to see if there is way to get postconviction relief for their client. host: democrats, (202) 748-8000, republicans, (202) 748-8001, independents, (202) 748-8002. the next caller is salem in d.c. -- sam in d.c., independent. caller: good morning. i had a question regarding the role of the cia and mi six in the kidnapping of julian assange

and allegations related to him. guest: my understanding is mr. assange sought asylum in the peruvian embassy in london and he is still there. i do not believe he was kidnapped or poisoned by caa or mi6, the british secret intelligence service. -- cia or mi6. host: his case does not have anything to do with russia, as far as we know. guest: after the russians hacked hillary clinton's emails, sans-- assange's wikileaks published it. host: let us go back to paula in washington, d.c. on the democratic line. caller: good morning.

i just have one question. it is related to a former cia employee and fbi employees and the nondisclosure or disclosure, if you are being contacted. i was wondering -- i have known at least one former employee. they reported contact they thought may be inappropriate or whatever you want to call it. but then the reporting became more about them reporting it then actually the agency investigating what happened. i remember the individual saying you feel like you are under a microscope for just reporting it , then you become the issue.

i was wondering if your guest could comment on that, if that is something he has experienced. thank you. guest: your acquaintance did the right thing and letting the organization know they thought it might be being developed as a potential source by a former intelligence service. i think as a practical matter, what the fbi or cia would do, would be to ask the former employee is there any reason why an adversary service might have thought you were vulnerable? are you having financial problems, for example? what is going on with you? that has to be handled in a delicate and sensitive way, with an appreciation for the fact the person being a good citizen and former employee and coming forward with that information voluntarily, even though there is a legal requirement for them to do so. i have personally not had

experience with that situation, i would hope if i ever did i would be treated sensitively. i am sorry if your acquaintance was not. host: a couple questions on text message. the first is from massachusetts. why is this matter out in the open? what if this exposure of shenanigans destroys secret investigations into other bad apples? guest: it was kept secret for some period of time. but once you charge in a rain the suspect, dashcam derain -- charge and array the suspect -- arraign the suspect, it becomes public. not everything the government knows needs to be in the public. the information about his

mistress was not in the indictment. there might be very classified information suggesting the government knew about mcgonigal that they do not feel the need to disclose in order to get a conviction. host: we have a text from matt in texas, independent. could you explain the swalwell case and discuss what he is not disqualified to serve in congress -- why he is not disqualified to serve in congress following a relationship with a known chinese spy? guest: many facts in the swalwell case are not public. i am not familiar with it. as a single man and member of congress, he entered into a romantic relationship with a woman who turned out to have a relationship with chinese intelligence. he then received what is called a defensive briefing where the fbi warns the government official you may not realize it,

but the person you are dealing with is foreign intelligence. at that point, mr. swalwell broke off the relationship. i do not know if there is evidence he disclosed classified information improperly. speaker mccarthy has frequently said people who have not read the fbi briefing he received on the subject should not apply on it. i take his word on that that there may be facts and evidence in the public that point to misconduct. but from what i have read in the press, he seems to have done the right thing and follow the instructions from the fbi after receiving a briefing. host: the washington post says what we know about how swalwell and the chinese spy interacted. u.s. officials do not think she ever got classified information

as she cozied up to politicians. swalwell is not accused of any wrongdoing after u.s. intelligence officials briefed him in 2015 on their concerns about her. he cut off ties with her. john in new jersey, independent. caller: good morning, you are doing a fantastic job. i like the show, you especially. first objective person i have seen on the show in a while. two comments. first, mcgonigal should be put in jail and stay there. as far as the trump organization getting dirt on hillary, i do not see a problem with that from russia. they are not our enemy, we need to make them allies eventually. we will need them later on, the

80's are over. as far as kevin is concerned, i would like to see kevin do a little bit of investigating with the dispatch on not hillary -- she was finally clean for one time in her life, but obama and biden and their connections to ukraine. for years and years. let us see with the connections were, let us see where the money was coming and going. i would like to see that investigation. thank you. host: obama, biden and ukraine. do you think there is something there to investigate? guest: i am not sure if there any ties between former president obama and ukraine. i am not familiar. we do know hunter biden was doing business in ukraine while his father was vice president, i hope the criminal investigation being run by the u.s. attorney's office in delaware gets to the bottom of it.

if there was misconduct, he should be charged. if not, a memo should be issued. host: that is pending. let us go to michigan, charles is on the independent line. caller: can you explain more about the company in new jersey? do you know if it was sold and was mcgonigal a part of anything about that? guest: it is one of the damning parts of the indictment. while he was with the fbi, he took a phone and a mill address from this company in a false identity. there is no good reason to do that. certainly not while you are serving as an fbi officer. the payments he received were laundered through that company. in the indictment, it is

described as company a or one or something like that. i do not have further details on the company, perhaps the doj protected the company because they were not aware of what mr. mcgonigal was doing. it is one of the things that i am sure let the doj to file a criminal charge. host: nashville, tennessee. richard on the independent line. caller: good morning. i kind of called and after he got started, i would like to ask the gentleman -- in good morning -- and good morning. i am close to 70 years old. the first thing about politics i ever learned in kindergarten, i walked home from school during the kennedy assassination. i remember that as a little boy. over the last 60 or some odd years, i've washed politics and

foreign countries -- watched politics in foreign countries and this country. we are more or less additional war situation -- a digital war situation. i look at all the stuff of democrats, republicans, private sector business people around the world. i want to thank you for your service. you are in one of the government services, cia or fbi. my question to you, i need to ask you to do something. first, explain to the american people right now on how important freedom is in this country and what america offers. at the same time, tell me how does the american people explain to the little boy like me that

went through the kennedy assassination, all of the nixon stuff and vietnam and everything from world war ii when the women worked in factories, explained to me your background in that situation and why it is important. inc. you for your service. -- thank you for your service. guest: freedom cannot be more important. it is the reason why we held against the british and establish this country and the declaration of independence and constitution, and china rights to be free. it has been a privilege -- the constitution enshrines our rights to be free. it has been a privilege. host: democratic line, go ahead. caller: appreciate it. i was wondering if you could enlighten us on the situation with wendy day? guest: i believe she is the

ex-wife of rupert murdoch, that is all i know about her. i recognize the name in that context. host: not sure exactly what they were calling about, maybe we'll get to it on another show. that will do it for us this morning. kevin carroll, former cia officer, has written an article in the dispatch about the case of charles mcgonigal, charged with taking payments from a sanctioned russian oligarch. thank you for joining us. guest: thank you. host: that is it for us on washington journal. we appreciate you joining us. we will be back tomorrow, 7:00 a.m. eastern. enjoy the rest of your day. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2023] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪