tv MSNBC Live MSNBC January 23, 2017 11:00am-12:01pm PST
what regulations are stopping you from conducting more business? what are the ways we can give you more market access into, you know, other countries around the globe? and i think that's what his focus is going to continue to be. is how do we create a tax and regulatory environment that gross the economy and benefits the american worker so it's not just about creating more jobs, but it's also about lifting up those jobs through higher wages. >> sean, a couple questions, if you allow me to take them one at a time. auto l elijah cummings confirmed president donald trump talked to him at the luncheon about the high price of prescription drugs. when is this meeting going to be set, or is it coming up soon? and will the president be meeting with the full body of the congressional black caucus as well as hispanic caucus on issues related to those communities? >> let's take one at a time. i'm not aware of the conversation.
i'm sure -- you've heard the president the last couple of weeks talk about the price of pharmaceutical drugs and the need to get those prices down and bring manufacturing back in the pharmaceutical industry to benefit the country. it's an issue that's going to -- he's going to continue to work on. he understands, as we reform health care, as we repeal and replace obamacare, the getting ahold of the cost of prescription drugs, to give more people access to them, but also to allow greater plans in health care, that's going to be a key part. so, he's going to -- that's going to happen. i think, look, you're seeing with respect to the other meetings, it's day one, working day one here. he's going to start with the leadership. he's going to have a great conversation with them. then i think you're going to see a variety of meetings, congressional black caucus, hispanic caucus, special -- he's someone who really enjoys that kind of conversation. i think you'll see a lot of meetings occur. like the ones that you did today. the business leaders coming in, these union workers. and it's interesting, the
president was asking these folks today, how many are are the oval office? three raised their hands. we talk to union leaders and we hear, we didn't get a lot of attention 37 here we are on working day one and you have the president reaching out to some of america's best business leaders and union workers and line workers and bringing them in and saying, i want to listen to what's going on in your life. what can we be doing to help you? and i think that you're going to see a lot more of that. a listening president who's engaged in trying to figure out what policies and actions that he can take, that this government can take, that he can work with congress, to make people's lives better, to make their security better, to make their economic security better, but you're going to see a lot of that. that's who he is. that's what he did during the transition. i think that's what he's going to do going forward. he appreciates the ideas and opinions that come -- that come throughout oval office or in small groups, where he gets to share their perspective, their ideas or their opinions. i think that's what he's going to continue to do later this afternoon.
>> i'm sorry, april? >> i'm sorry. i want to go back to what the gentleman said about the mandate. the new york post gentleman. he said something about the obamacare and the mandate. with the numbers you talked about and is in the news from inauguration day and the numbers saturday, do you believe that you have the mandate to be able to force through what you had talked about, replacing obamacare that really subsidize the whole piece of it to help low income people get health care? >> well, i think what we have is a mandate to make health care more accessible and lower cost. that's what the american people were promised under obamacare. it's not a question about a mandate. it's also not about forcing anything. it's about what's doing the right thing. it's about providing people what they've been promised, which is, you go around this country and you look market after market, they're down to one plan. that's not what the american people are promised. not only that, but in many cases
you're seeing the rates go up 10, 15, 20, 30, 50%. that's not what they were promised either. so, i think what the president's doing, and it's not just -- i think he's gotten bipartisan support for this, to work with congress and to take executive action where necessary, to implement a health care system that provides more people health care, truly allows hem to keep the doctor and plan they're signing up for, lowers costs, creates more competition. so, do i think he has a mandate? sure. but it's not just -- it's not about -- it's not on this issue. i think that all leaders have a mandate from the american people to fix the system and make it better. julie pace. >> i have two foreign policy questions. there is some discrepancy between what the russians are saying and pentagon saying in terms of some potential joint action. can you clarify that? generally s the president open to joint action in syria with the russians? >> in that instance, i know it's still developing and i would refer you welcome back to the department of defense. they're currently monitoring this and i would --
>> are they generally open -- >> the president has been very clear that he's going to work with any country that shares our interests in defeating isis. not just on the national security front but on the economic front. if we work with someone to spur economic growth and allow u.s. small businesses and companies to -- >> just on this idea of doing joint military actions with russia in syria. >> if there's a way we can combat isis with any country, whether it's russia or anyone else, and we have a shared national interest in that, sure, we'll take it. >> second thing, when he was at the cia on saturday, he was talking about the u.s. not taking oil during the iraq war. he said there could be another chance for that. what did he mean when he said that? >> i think what the president aes been very clear about in foreign policy is too often the united states is going in with a lot of money, a lot of man power, in many cases losing both loss of life, and we to want make sure our interests are protected. so f we're going into a country for a cause, i think he wants to make sure that america is getting something out of it for the commitment and sacrifice that we're making.
>> the upcoming -- >> no, he's been very clear throughout the campaign that he is committed to making sure that america -- the american people and the american taxpayer see some benefit and ensure that our interests overseas are not just sending blank checks. that we're doing something that either protects america or is in our economic interest. john roberts. >> a couple things, if i could. later this week, executive actions, does the president plan to take action to green light the keystone xl and dakota pipelines? and on ttp, john mccain says it was a serious mistake to do what the president did for america's economy and our strategic position in the asia-pacific. why was ttp the right thing to do? >> why was it the right -- >> why was it the right thing to do to repeal ttp. >> i think so i said it. because i think the multilateral -- when you enter into these multinational agreements you're allowing any country, no matter the size, any one of those 12, including us,
to basically have the same stature as the united states in the agreement. we're basic callie on par with very small companies getting access to an amazing market, the united states. in return, we're negotiating at the lowest common denominator. i think when you look at big, multinational agreements, multilateral agreement, they're not always in the best interest of the united states. the beautiful thing about a bilateral agreement is if any one of the two parties in the agreement decides at any time they want to get out of the agreement or they're not being treated fairly, they can renegotiate it much easier. in a multinational agreement, that's not the case. in many cases, all of the other countries have to agree to an action or to let somebody out. that's not putting the u.s. interest first. >> the question about keystone and dakota access. >> i'm not getting in front of the president's executive actions but i will tell you areas like dakotas and keystone pipeline, areas where wean increase jobs, economic growth and tap into america's energy supply more, that's something he has been very clear about. i think he talked about it not
only on the campaign, but around the thanksgiving period he was talking about that being a big priority. that's one of those ones where i think that the energy sector and our natural resources are an area where i think the president is very, very keen on making sure that we maximize our use of natural resources to america's benefit. it's good for economic growth. it's good for jobs. it's good for american energy. jonathan karl. >> thanks for being here. before i get to a policy question, just a question about the nature of your job. is it your intention to always tell the truth from that podium and and will you pledge to knowingly never say something that is not factual? >> it is. it's an honor to do this. and, yes, i believe we have to be honest with the american people. i think sometimes we can disagree with the facts. there are certain things that we may not fully understand when we come out. our intention is never to lie to you, jonathan. our job is to make sure --
you're in the same boat. i mean, there are times when you guys tweet something out or write a story and you publish a correction. that doesn't mean that you were intentionally trying to deceive readers and the american people, does it? and i think we should be afforded the same opportunity. sometimes we believe something to be true or we get something from an agency or we act in haste because the information available wasn't complete. but our desire to communicate with the american people and make sure you have the most complete story at the time, so we do it. again, i think that when you look net-net, we -- we're going to do our best every time w can. i'm going to come out here and tell you the facts as i know them. if we make a muistake, we'll do our best to correct it. as i mentioned the other day, it is a two-way street. there are many mistakes the media makes all the time. they misreport something, they don't report something, they get a fact wrong. i don't think that's that's always to turn around and say, you were intentionally lying. i think we all go -- try to do
our best job and do it with a degree of integrity that in our respective industries. >> do you have any corrections you would like to make or clarifications? >> well, sure. ask away, jonathan. >> for instance, i don't want to relitigate the whole issue be but one issue of metro ridership. you made a statement -- >> we did. at the time the information i was provided bit inaugural committee came from an outside agency that we reported on. and i think knowing what we know now, we can tell that their numbers were different. it's not like we made them up out of thin air. >> do you stand by your statement that that was the most watched inaugural -- >> sure. it was the most watched inaugural. when you look at -- look, you look at just one network along got 16.9 million people online. another couple of the networks, there were tens of millions of people that watched that online. never mind the audience that was here, 31 million people watched it on television, combine that with the tens of millions of people that watched it online on a device.
there's -- it's unquestionable. i don't -- and i don't see any numbers that dispute that when you add up attendance, viewership, total audience in terms of tablets, phones, on television, i'd love to see any information that proves that otherwise. so, do you dispute that? >> well, i don't want to get into numbers. >> wshlgs i do. i mean -- >> okay. >> i'm just saying f you're asking me a question about my integrity, i have a right to say, if you add up the network streaming numbers, facebook, youtube, all of the various live streamings that we have information on so far, i don't think there's any question that it was the largest watched inauguration ever. >> ronald reagan's in 1981 -- >> i'm pretty sure reagan didn't have youtube, facebook or the internet. i think 41 million people watched his. 41 million watched his. let's just take the nielsen ratings, 31 million, and add it to cnn, 16.9 million.
that's a little higher. i'm just saying -- you're asking me for numbers. there's just two entities together. >> and the approach you took on saturday, any second thoughts on that? >> look, i -- jonathan, look, i want this to -- i came out to read a statement and i did it. we're here today. i'm going to stay here as long as you want. so, i want to make sure that that that -- i think you guys might want to leave before i do. look, i want to make sure we have a healthy relationship. we saw the other day that -- i'm not trying to rehash history but you're asking the question so i'm going to answer it. we had a tweet go out about martin luther king. think about how racially charged that is. and someone rushes out and says to the entire press corps that the perfect united states has removed the bust from his office. do you -- i mean, think about what this signal -- hold on,
please. >> apologize -- >> he apprised to, quote, my colleagues. that's the exact quote. that quote, that report got tweeted out around. and to report -- where was the apology to the presint of th united states? where was the apology to the millions of people that read that and thought how racially insensitive was? where is that apology? >> you accepted his apology, though, sean. >> i'm asking, where was that apology? i'm just saying that when you -- when things like that happen, when john lewis says he's never missed an inauguration and we find out, actually, he did, he skipped george w. bush's. there are points at which we have a right to make sure we correct the record. i mean, you're talking about integrity and you're talking about telling the truth and facts. i don't know that it wasn't malicious at all. i'm not saying -- there's a point at which we have a right to dp out there and correct the record. and i think that over and over again there is this attempt to
go after this 39 and say, well, that cannot be true and that's not right and the numbers weren't there. there's a rush to judgment every time. it's a two-way street. we to want have a healthy and open dialogue with the press corps and with the american people what he's doing to unite this country. at the time he's trying to unite this, and he keeps talking about uniting this nation, bringing people together. then a tweet goes out in a pool report to a few thousand people saying he removed the bust of martin luther king, how do you think that goes over? >> sean, did the media invent the feud between the president and the intelligence community? >> look, i think you saw from the response the other day. he walked into the cia, people were hooting and hollering, gave him a five-minute standing ovation. that doesn't look like a relationship -- i mean, that's -- they were excited -- >> it's not a media invention. >> no, there's a difference between having differences with intelligence leaders and leaders of that community who have strong differences with than the
people and men and women who toile every single day in our intelligence community. it was reflected at the cia. i mean, they came there. they were so excited. there was 1,000 people that applied for 300-plus seats. we ended up taking in 400 people. that doesn't sound like a huge feud. they were exciting, cheering, clapping when he walked in. to see reports to make i sound like there was some fence-mending that needed to happen. it sure didn't look that way when you walked in. i'm going to move on. >> what is the u.s. strategic interest in moving the u.s. embassy from tel aviv? on cici the muslim brotherhood was discussed. >> i just gave you the read out on the call with the president. that speaks for itself, what was discussed. i'm sorry, the first part? >> what is the u.s. strategic interest in moving the embassy -- >> as i noted yesterday through several press inquiries, there's no decisions.
we're at the very early stages of that decision-making process. yeah? >> will there be a detailed discussion when prime minister may comes on friday of the potential pa ram terrameters of trade deal might look like? is donald trump going to get a state visit back to the uk later in the year? >> we're here on working day one. we're excited that prime minister may is coming on friday. we look forward to it. i'm sure there will be the discussion of trade. the degree to which, i don't know yet. i'm sure we'll have an opportunity to brief you out. i don't believe we have any -- that's something our team will be working out with prime minister may and we'll keep you updated on that. >> after the executive order withdrawing the u.s. from the ttp, what specific steps will president trump take to expand u.s. trade opportunities abroad? >> again, i think, when he talks to prime minister may, he'll have a great conversation about the potential for greater trade
with the uk. i mentioned earlier when he met with these manufacturers this morning, that was, you know, right up at the top of that list. how can we get greater market access? what are the specific challenges these manufacturers are facing getting market access into countries around the globe? that's an important issue. it's not just other countries but within existing trade deals, is there a trade deal we can settle with wto, is there an existing option to the trade deals now? there are things congress can update to mick shaur we're importing and exporting more to benefit american businesses. >> thanks. has the president or will the president have a chat, even an informal chat, with the prime minister before, in fact, she comes here? >> there are no plans for that now. it's always possible. he's been having a tremendous number of calls.
i think the number is well over 80ow ofeople that have talked to him, congratulated him prior to being inaugurated. he's talked to mexico and canada. he talked to prime minister netanyahu yesterday. there's going to continue to be a robust number of world leaders. there's a tremendous excitement, i think, in the diplomatic core and world leader level that president trump and this administration want to engage. there's times when he's talking to these folks and they say, i haven't heard from anyone in years. there's a genuine excitement to re-engage the united states, also in trade and other interests, but also in the area of national security. >> needless to say, this is a big one and the first. >> right. >> ttp -- why is this executive order anything more than
symbolic? when will president trump start negotiating deals with the other 11 countries? that could take some time. and some would say that's giving china room to make inroads. >> bilateral deals is something china has been engaging if. the president is going to look to countries to engage with -- [ inaudible ] >> most we have exciting trade agreements with to begin with. this was an expansion of that. in some areas it allowed whether it was the service industry, financial services, additional market access. but i think this is -- this is not a deal that was in our country's best interest. the president could have come into office, a president could have come into office, renegotiated it and sent people back to the drawing board. it hadn't gone to congress because it wasn't finalized. i think this president pulling out of the agreement is not just about this one agreement. i think it's symbolic, both here in america and around the world, of a new era of trade policy. one that's going to put american
workers first and foremost and one that assures the rest of the world that the way we negotiate bilateral agreements is going to ensure that we get something out of these deals. as i mentioned to john a minute ago, the problem with multilateral agreements is often is becomes the lowest common denominator on so many things. for the u.s. that has low tariffs and other service industry benefits for countries, we have to make sure we're going out and fighting for the american worker. jennifer? >> you're not going to renegotiate, to be clear? >> we pulled out of ttp. >> of all the existing -- >> i'm not going to -- we'll have further updates on trade issues later this week. jennifer? >> on nafta, does the administration still feel like you need an executive order to remove yourself from nafta? >> that's a great question. i believe there's an actions that has to be taken under the provision of nafta where you set -- you send notice to the other two countries. the exact nature of how that's described, i don't know. but it is -- there is a trigger
within nafta, one of the sections, allows it is the perfect united states that we intend to do is that. >> will there be a north american trade bloc? >> he's already spoken to the president of mexico and prime minister of canada about his desire to renegotiate. and i think as he meets with both of these individuals over the next 30 days or so, that's going to be a topic. now, if they come in and express a willingness to do that, you could negotiate it within the current parameters and update it through the existing structure. if they don't, and he decides to pull out, then we would have to go back to the drawing table in the future. mara? mara? i want to make sure mara gets a question this time. >> just to follow up on the china question. china actually has a regional agreement called a regional comprehensive economic partnership and now japan and australia, two of our great
allies, are talking about joining that. just -- does president trump see a national security component to these trade deals? and is he concerned that now china will write the rules for asia-pacific trade? >> well, i think he has been very, very clear about china's place in the geopolitical landscape of economically and national security wise. so, he understands the need -- that's part of the reason that trade is important. bilateral trade. it provides a check on a lot of this. again, he's always going to be fighting for the interest of the country and the american worker. how we engage and with whom is going to be decided on whether or not we can get a deal that benefits our country economically and in terms of national security. that there are things we can do economically -- or economically that actually end up also benefiting us from a national security standpoint because of the economic relationship that exists between the two countries. yes, sir. mara gets a follow-up.
no, you earned it. >> thank you. just really simple. what is the average national unemployment rate? >> what's the average? >> i mean, what's the overall unemployment rate. >> are you talking about whether or not we include the full -- >> i'm just asking you. >> the bureau of labor statistics puts it out -- >> you accept --. it's not a question of what i accept. there are ways can you put oul full employment -- >> i know the difference. >> so there's a reason we put out several versions of that. one is that it -- i will tractive nature of how you count the unemployed, whether long-term unemployed or whether or not they're still seeking a job. there's a reason you put out several of these statistics. it's so that economists can view them and decide, look at different landscapes on how to make economic policy. >> during the campaign at one point he said it was 42%. i just want to be aware of where we're starting. >> part is his economic team will look at a multitude statistics and drive econoc policy. his goal is to get as many americans working together. that's his ultimate goal.
when he sees people hurting that haven't had wages lifted up, that are unemployed, that can't save for their kids' future, that are having trouble with their health care costs. that's what he really cares about. it's not just a number to him. it's about -- it's someone getting by. are their wages going up? can they find a better job? do they have access to education, whether it's higher education, college or vo tech kind of school so they can train for the schools of the next century? those are the kind of things the president -- he's not focused on statistics as much as he is whether or not the american people are doing better as a whole and whether or not a family. it was interesting, i know when we talked about carrier at one point, someone said, well, that's 1,000 jobs. you talk about those 1,000 jobs and their families, during the holiday season i would beg to differ that those people were unbelievably ecstatic that the president and vice president intervened. so, every one of these meetings you saw happen at trump tower and then now, it's all about, you know, whether it's 2,000 jobs or 20,000 jobs, that's -- that's the focus. it's making sure that we have --
that small businesses have greater opportunity to be successful, that american workers can have their wages lifted up, the benefits they receive in terms of health care and education is something that provides them the support they need. that's what this is all about. for too often in washington we get our heads wrapped around a number and statistic. we forget the faces and families and the businesses that are behind those numbers. so, i think that's where his head's at. is trying to look at those people that come to his rallies, that have come to his events, that he has met with in person that are struggling saying, mr. trump, i'm working as hard as i can. i'm working two jobs. i'm doing everything by the rules. and i keep getting screwed. that's what he's fighting for, is that man or woman out there doing everything they can right, but can't catch a break. and i think he draelsaddressed n his inaugural speech talking about shifting power outside of washington, d.c., back to the american people. for too long it's been about stats, mara, and about what
number are w looking at as opposed to what fe are we looking at. david? >> two questions. one on daca, i was curious about the message from this administration to white house, to young people who may qualify and not yet have -- should they enroll going forward and those in the program now seek renewal? >> well, what the -- what those people should know is that the president's laid out a list of priorities. the priorities are focused on making sure people who can do harm or have done harm and have a criminal record are the focus. as he said throughout the campaign, we've got a series of individuals we have to figure out, people overstayed their visas, have committed a crime. we'll go through that in a systematic and methodical way. right now the focus is on people who have done harm to our country. >> 2016 was the highest year on record in the last three years and last three years have been the hottest on record. scientists say we're getting dangerously close to the point
human civilization is being threatened. how does president trump plan to address this is? >> i think he's going to meet with his team and figure out what policies are best for the environment. one of the things he talked about during the campaign is there's a balance. he's making sure we use our resources appropriately, maximize things to make sure we don't do so at the detriment of economic growth and job creation. there's a balance. i don't think it's an either/or situation. we can make sure we're doing things smart for the environment and longevity as well as making sure we're doing things that create economic growth and job creation. >> what is the president's message to the millions of people here in washington and around the country who were protesting on saturday? and a follow-up after that. >> okay. that's very polite of you. i think he has a healthy respect for the first amendment and this is what makes our country so beautiful. is that on one day you can inaugurate a president, the next
day people can occupy the same space to protest something. he's cognizant to the fact that people were there to protest an issue of concern to them, not against anything. this morning debbie dingell was on television. she's talking about -- let me just -- i don't want to inaccurately quote her. jonathan is a stickler for that. she said, different women were there for different reasons but they were all there to make sure their core american values will be protected. and i think many people like me were there for positive reasons. and i think the president shares debbie dingell's views that there were people that came to the mall, as they do all the time. sometimes in smaller numbers -- >> you have to reach out to them. >> i think he reaches out to them in the way he started on the night that he won the elections. on the way that he did on inauguration day, by sending a message that talks about fighting for them. but more importantly, i think the president's going to show through action and through success that he's fighting for them and fighting for every american. one of the things that we've
seen so often in this town is a lot of so lot of soaring rhetoric, about how much people care. i think the president is going to show through deed and action and success that he wants to fight for people's health care, he wants to have a better education system, he wants a stronger america. he wants to go in and fix our inner cities. he wants to make sure our inf infrastructu infrastructure, our roads and bridges. through action is where he's going to prove to the american people how much he cares to unite us and how much he cares to make this united states better and safer. >> on the other side of this, another group -- >> i forgot, did you ask. >> i did. >> that's polite. >> just a follow-up. when we have the march for life here in washington, you've said, this is a pro-life president, what concrete promises is he making? we haven't heard a lot about what that policy is going to look like. >> it's day one. >> but you've had a lot of time
to make those promises. what should their expectations be? >> their expectations should be that he's going to stand up and value life, born or unborn. same aas he's said throughout the last year and a half, he's going to stand up, protect life, promote it, instill policies that promote life, that promote adoption, that help support young women, that help support funding of agencies and clinics, that support women's health. i think that's what he's going to talk about, is supporting all of life. le born, unborn throughout life, making sure we have health care that can support the american people and the american families. that's what he's going to fight for. that's what he's going to be clear on. anita? >> i have two questions. first one with the congressional meeting today and also at the retreat, you talked about his legislative agenda, besides health care, can you give us one, two or three legislative things he wants to get through right away. not the executive action, legislation. >> right. immigration is obviously going to be high on that list.
tax reform, regulatory reform. that's three and four. >> immigration is not an overhaul, though. >> well, i think he's going to work with congress to get the appropriations process going. it's not just building the wall. that's through the appropriations process. is how do we enact policies to make sure that what we have now doesn't happen again? so, it's daushg -- it it working with them. it's a comprehensive look at how we're keeping people out of this country that shouldn't be here. people that come to visit are leaving when they're sposed to, to make sur we're tailoring immiation policies that make sure we're not an open door for anyone to just walk in. people that come here safely or to bring jobs or support our economy come in. we have to do immigration spa smartly and that's what he's looking at. >> i have a second one. >> you're right. >> i haven't heard, you said or someone else said specifically, has the president spoken to any of the intelligence agencies about the investigation into the
russian connections? and will he allow that to go on? >> i don't believe he has spoken to anyone specifically about that. and -- he has not made any indication that he would stop any investigation of any sort. >> clarification. you said you're willing to work to anybody to defeat the islamic group. does that include bashar al assad? >> i think what it's -- we're going to smartly do this. let's be clear. part of it is to make sure they have america's interests in what they're doing and who they are. so, we're not going to get together with people under the guise of defeating isis if that's not truly they're guise. let's not take that too far. thank you. yes? >> sean, will the president release documents showing he has left his businesses? >> i believe we have. yeah, he has resigned from the company, as he said he would, before -- before he took office. don and eric are fully in charge
of the company. he's taken extraordinary steps to ensure that's happened. [ inaudible ] >> what would be the message for the hispanic community in the u.s., one of the priorities has been the wall. what would be the relationship between this administration and hispanic community in the u.s.? >> i think his relationship with the hispanic community is going to be grea whether it's jobs or education or health care, the president's coitted to uniting all americans and working towards a better, safer, more secure, more prosperous america that benefits everybody. whether -- regardless of your background, that's something that he's committed to. yeah. >> sean, financial times. does mr. trump agree with rex tillerson that the u.s. should try to prevent chyna fr accessing islands in south china sea where it's building runways and other facilities?
>> i think areas in the south china sea that are part of international waters and international activities, i think the u.s. is going to make sure we protect our interests there. it's a question of, if those islands are, in fact, in international waters and not part of china proper, yeah, we'll make sure we defend international terts from being taken over by one country. does that answer -- >> would you prevent china from actually -- >> look, i'm not -- i answered the question. i think as we develop further we'll have more information. >> thank you, sean. thank you, sean. >> i'll get to you, i promise. >> welcome to your first day on the job. >> thank you. >> very simply, there was an earlier question about jerusalem and u.s. embassy there. and a lot of talk about executive orders. is this something the president can accomplish by executive order? >> it is, but i think as i noted, john, it's very early in this process at the beginning stages of this decision-making process and his team will
continue to consult with stakeholders. yes, ma'am. >> thank you, sean, welcome. are we not to expect an executive order to renegotiate nafta or will he wait until he meets with president netanyahu next week? the other question i this is, he didn't mention latin america at all in his accept -- you know, in his inauguration speech. does he plan to visit latin america this year? >>. >> on the first part, i think we'll have further announcements on trade throughout the week. i don't -- >> not going to happen today? >> i think we're done with executive orders for the day. as i always say, stand by. but we do not have any intention to have additional executive orders today. i believe there could be additional ones throut the week on trade. we'll have further updates for you on there. and then the second part? >> plans to latin america, given he left them out of his
inauguration speech. >> well, i don't think he left them out. he was focused on this country, our american workers. i don't think he got into detail on any countries. that i'm aware of or that i can recall. but i also think that we're here on a -- on the first working day. we're announcing theresa may coming this friday. we're excited to have the prime minister here. as i said, we already talked about setting up a meeting with canada, mexico. he talked to prime minister netanyahu, about having him come over. and president al sisi. we'll get there. there's a lot of calls to return, a lot of excitement throughout the world and a lot who are excited to come here and have the president visit them. yes? >> yes, sir, last week, the republicans, key republican group, delivered a white paper to the trump team urging the president to maintain an executive order from president obama, barring anti-lbgt work discrimination among federal contractors. the president said he would rescind the orders from president obama, they're
unconstitutional. will he maintain this executive order -- >> i don't know. i'll have to get back to you on that one. i don't know we've gotten that far on the list of executive orders. i'll be glad to get back to you. what's that -- again, i just don't know the answer. i'll try to get back to you. yes, sir? >> on immigration, the chief of staff seemed to indicate over the weekend an executive order shutting down the daca program is ruled out. is that officially ruled out as you go forward? and does the president support action in congress that would essentially permanently establish those protections -- >> i don't have anything further on the executive action front. i think i've asked and answered the daca piece in terms of his priorities right now. i think we'll have -- we don't have athing in front of us right now to sign onthat, so give us a little time. we'll see what congress moves forward with. i'm sure we'll have a further
readout on the executive order piece. >> what's the status on the refugee resettlement program? >> i'll have to get back to you. i think the best thing is contact department of state. in the back? >> american companies through the national markets. will the company try to improve access to the largest market, the european one, by negotiations or any other means? >> look, i think he's going to increase market access wherever he can. he's in the -- he's in the process of reviewing all of our current trade agreements and looking at potential bilateral options going forward. whether it's in the eu or in the asia-pacific arena or in the middle east, he's going to figure out where we can expand u.s. market access. that's, i think, what today's decision really starts to show. it's not about multilateral agreements under a trump administration. it's about bilateral agreements where we can figure out country to country how can we fight for the american worker, gain them
access to another market that will benefit large and small markets to sell goods and services. >> why did the president choose the british prime minister as the first foreign leader for him to meet? can we take from that that he intends to make the relationship even closer? >> i think we've always had that special relationship with britain. and that reflects in his first visit -- in the prime minister's first visit here. he's had a great conversation with her and he looks forward to having her here. but we can always be closer. >> yes, ma'am. what kind of relationship is trump looking for to build with china after he withdraw from ttp? and with taiwan, what -- >> what's the last part, please? >> taiwan, frustrated relations. >> well, i think on china he understands what a big market that is for u.s. goods and services. when he met with the head of
alibaba a couplweek o, that was part of the point. there's a huge market issue there. but in a large -- inancases, it's not a two-way street. there's so many chinese businesses and individuals, frankly, who can have ease of access in the united states to sell their goods or services. and i think that whether or not you're talking about the financial services or the banking -- you know, the other service industries, our manufacturing goods and services, or some of the ip problems we have with china, that is really is not a two-way street. so, he understands the market that china has and our desire to further penetrate that market. but he also recognizes there's a lot of concerns with how we are treated entering into china's market and we need to review that. yes, ma'am? i think we're going to have -- a lot further updates on that. yes, ma'am. >> jessica stone. welcome. >> thank you. >> question following on what she was asking about on ttp. part of the thinking of ttp was to encircle china economically. and i wonder if the president
has thought a little bit about what kind of bilateral relationships in the region, the trade relations will accomplish a similar goal? secondly, i heard you talking about nafta and a trigger, but i didn't hear you say you had triggered the triggered. >> we have not triggered the trigger. hasn't happened. again, i think we have an existing relationship with many of the countries that were part of the 12-nation makeup of ttp. and i think we're going to continue to explore how we can, in some cases, strengthen those relationships or look for bilateral agreements with nations we didn't have one through ttp. yes, sir. >> sean, congratulations. >> thank you. social security and infrastructure. on social security, the president will be meeting tonight with congressional leaders. what's he going to do given his campaign promise on not touching social security when paul ryan and mitch mcconnell send him a bill that includes in a funding package various cuts in social security? on infrastructure, has it fallen
off the radar screen or is it still a priority? >> on social security, he's going to talk to them. he's very clear on his pority on preserving and protecting this very important benefit to our seniors. he understands -- mr. trump's employed so many people over the years, he understands the struggle that people have later in life to continue to make ends meet. and i think he is keenly aware of how important this program is to so many people in their later years. so he's going to continue to fight to make sure that that's a program that is preserved and protected. and then on the infrastructure, he's continued to bring that up. he talked to business executives today about how many of our airports so important to our commerce system, getting planes to land in and out, roads and their ability to truck things across the country, even our freight system, that if our infrastructure is not strong, it inhibits our ability to have free commerce, inhibits, drives
up the cost of goods and services when someone has to take a different route or is limited in the opportunities they have because their runway might be closed or can't be expanded or a rail line breaks down or, you know, highway is just not -- the wear and tear it puts on trucks or shut down. infrastructure continues to be a huge priority for him. yes, sir. >> two questions. the national security council, staffing of the national security council, when do you expect to have those positions filled? >> we've got many of them filled. >> how many are filled? >> i'd have to get back to you on the number. it's fairly robust right now. there were a lot of holdovers. general flynn has been working diligently with his deputy and others to make sure that that's filled out and ready to go. he's had countless meetings with counterparts and had several folks detailed over. it's a very, very robust effort from day one. >> the follow-up to john karl's question. are you retracting your claim on saturday it was the largest crowd in person?
>> that's not what i said. >> you said this was the largest audience to ever witness an inauguration, period, both in person and around the globe. >> right. in person and around the globe, in total audience it was. total audience but not simply in person. >> right. again, i didn't say i person. both in person and around the globe to witness it. >> you're saying those together? >> no, that's actually what i said. i don't know how you can interpret it differently. that's literally what i said. to witness it in person and around the globe. total audience, yes. >> but not in person? >> hold on. >> but you're saying here, just to clarify, you're not saying -- you weren't saying on saturday it was the largest inaugural crowd in person? >> i'm not. i'm saying it was the total largest audience, witnessed in person and around the globe. yes, sir. >> just to go back.
cbs nenews, senior leadership we not among those hooting and hollering and there were some 40 people in the first front rows who were brought in by trump and pence and pompeo. i'd like to give you a chance to respond on that reporting. >> i don't think that's accurate at all. if you listen to audio, you can hear the excitement that existed there. there were some people off-camera for obvious reasons. when you look at the number of people there, the audio alone tells -- speaks volumes to what had happened. i don't -- i don't think there's any question about that. >>, so the people in the front -- thamp seen on camera were cia employees? >> honestly, i don't have a s t seating chart. we had a small footprint. i don't know exactly who went over. maybe ten people, at most. ten? were in the travel going over.
>> people were in the front rows were cia employees? >> some. >> some. >> some were not? >> i'm sure we seated -- i can't -- i'm not really sure why this matters. ten people didn't yell that loud. >> yes, but you said they were hooting and hollering. >> yes, they were. >> there's not this rift between the intelligence community and the president. because senior authorities within the intelligence community are telling cbs news they're uncomfortable with that portral d the notion that people within the cia -- >> all i can do is to tell you to listen to the tape alone. i think you can hear a lot of that. >> sean, a couple questions. has the president formally requested overseas pentagon advice about how he can change the campaign against the islamic state? >> i think he has ordered it. as i mentioned, he'll be at department of defense on friday to swear in general mattis as next secretary -- well, to, you know -- to go through the ceremony of that. he is obviously the secretary of
defense. so, at that time he will continue to have conversations about what he wants from them and the joint chiefs. jim? >> just a follow-up. >> yes. >> i don't mean to beat a dead horse on the issue of u.s. embassy in israel. at the end of the president's first four years, at end of the next four years, will the united states embassy be in jerusalem? >> well, i think i've answered it twice now. we are at the early stajs of this decision-making process. >> it's not whether. it's when and how. >> there's a reason you go through a decision-making process. that's what we're in the process of starting right now. i just don't want to get ahead of -- if it was already a decision, we wouldn't be going through a process. okay, i just answered the -- thanks, julie. jim? >> first of all, congratulations. thanks for taking the question. getting back to saturday at the cia and your statement here at the podium, why make this crowd
size issue something to talk about at all? why get into it? did it bother the president that much that he felt that you needed to come out here and straighten that out for us? why did he choose the cia as the venue to talk about that? >> so, two things. one, i just got handed a note. all the people -- no one in the front row was trump. they were all cia. >> front row? >> that's what you asked. >> i said first three rows. >> i'll find out who the other two we. sorry, got you the front row. give me a second, i'll get the second and third. you want to get t fourth and fifth or -- okay. let me see what i can do. look, i think one of the things that happened, jim, is that he kept hearing about this rift that existed. he taked about it a couple weeks ago how proud he is and how much he respects the intelligence community. and i think when he walked into that and saw it, he wanted to make sure people knew that what you're hearing on television or
in reports about this rift, i have the utmost respect for you. i honor your service. i'm proud of what you're doing and the sacrifices you're making. and i think he wanted them to know, you see and hear all this stuff on tv about this rift that so-called exists. clearly, it doesn't matter. like, don't believe what you're hearing. know that i have a tremendous amount of respect for you. i appreciate everything that you're doing. and i think that's why he wanted to do it. make sure they understand, they heard firsthand how much he respects them, how much he wanted to dispel the myth that there was a, quote/unquote, rift. >> in terms of the crowd sizes, why bring that up at the cia? why did you come out saturday afternoon to talk about that? did he tell you, sean, i'm upset about this, i want -- >> i'm not going to get into conversations i have with the president. i will tell you that it's not -- it's not just about a crowd size. it's about this constant, you know, he's not going to run. then if he runs, he's going to drop out. there's no way he can win pen. . no way he can win michigan. there is this constant theme to
undercut the enormous support he has. i think it's unbelievably frustrating when you're continually told it's not big enough, it's not good enough, you can't win. hold o let me just -- because i think it's important. he's gone out and defied the odds over and over and over again. he keeps getting told what he can't do by this narrative that's out there. and exceeds it every single time. and i think there's an overall frustration when you turn on the television over and over again and get told that there's this narrative that you didn't win, you weren't going to run, you can't pick up this state, that's not -- you know, that's a fool's aaron to go to pennsylvan. why is he in michigan? that's silly. a republican hasn't won that state since '88. he goes and does it. then what's the next narrative? oh, people aren't attending anything. john lewis is the first person to skip an inauguration. not true. over and over -- and then the
mlk bust. over and over there's this constant attempt to undermine his credibility and the movement he represents. it's frustrating for not just him, but i think so many of us that are trying to work to get this message out. so, i mentioned this to jonathan, but part of this is a two-way street. we want to -- we want to have a healthy dialogue. not just with you, but with the american people. because he's fighting for jobs. he's fighting to make this country safer. but when you're constantly getting told, that can't be true, we doubt that you can do this, this won't happen, and that's the narrative when you turn on television every single day? it's a little frustrating. and i think that for those people around him, his senior team especially, but so many other folks that are either here in this administration that gave up their time during the transition, they left a job to work for three or four weeks because they're so committed to having his nominees get through, it's a little demoralizing to turn on the tv day after day and hear, can't do this, this guy won't get confirmed, can't go through.
>> isn't that just part of the conversation that happens in washington? >> no, it's not. i think -- with being perfect united states and -- >> no, i've been doing this a long time. you've been doing this, too. i've never seen it like this, jim. again, i'm not -- i'm not looking to go back and forth, but you're asking for an explanation. and i think it's important to understand that whether it's the president himself, the vice president, the senior team, the volunteers or the people who are out there just in america that voted for him or walked the streets or put up a sign, that to constantly be told no, no, no, and to watch him go, yes, yes, yes every time and to come up to the next hurdle and someone put a block up, gets a little frustrating. i think we are -- and so you see this historic thing. he stands there at the capitol. i was not that close but on the platform. you look out and all your -- 's aamazing view. and it's just so many people who got in long lines, who had to go
around all this different stuff to get in. that was for the first time we had to go through fencing that far out. and then to hear, well, look at this shot and it's not -- it wasn't that big. it's a little demoralizing. when you're sitting there and looking out and you're in awe of just how awesome that view is and how many people are there, and you go back and turn on the television and you see shots of comparing this and that. and then you look at the stuff that's happening. the nominees that get put out, the democrats stopping -- there are two cabinet officials, ladies and gentlemen, that are taking their office today. he visited the cia and a director that was considered a consensus candidate wasn't approved. where's the story? and i think that -- so, to -- >> you have bigger fish to fry. why worry about a couple of tweets -- >> that's what i'm saying. you're minimizing the point here, jim. it's not about one tweet. it's not about one picture. it's about a constant theme.
it's about sitting here every time and being told, no. we don't think he can do that. he'll never accomplish that. he can't win that. it won't be the biggest. it's not going to be that good. the crowds aren't that big. he's not that successful. the narrative and default narrative is always negative. and it's demoralizing. and i think that when you sits here and you realize the sacrifice the guy made of leaving a very, very successful business, because he really cares about this country, and he wants to -- despite your partisan differences, he cares about making this country better for everybody. he wants to make it safer for everybody. so, when you wake up every day and that's what you're seeing over and over again and you're not seeing stories about the cabinet folks that he's putting or the success he's having trying to keep american jobs here, yeah, it is a little disappointing. so i just -- you know. >> can't always be positive. >> no, it's not. sotimes we'll make mistakes, i promise you that. but it's not always got to be
gative, jim. some days we do do the right thing. some days we are successful. so, it's not -- part of this is saying, when we're right, say we're right. when we're wrong, say we're wrong. but it's not always wrong and negative. there are things -- there's a lot of things he's done already, a lot of amizing people he's appointed and success. it would be nice for someone once in a while, report it straight up. he appointed this person, here's their background. not why they're not going to get nominated. not why it's not going to happen. >> thanks, sean. >> hold on. one last thing. i know we're getting into facts, so just to be clear. there were on no trump or white house folks sitting down. they were all in the cia. not in rows one through anything, from what i'm told. i appreciate julie's effort, but i wanted -- i've got hallie.
you got one. give me a second. >> first one on russia. the administration was asked about multiple interactions between national security adviser mike flynn and russian ambassador. i believe you at the time, the administration at the time, said the calls were related to setting up a discussion later. >> right. >> between president trump and vladimir putin. were those conversations about anything else other than setting up that discussion? and why has that discussion not yet happened between president and president putin? >> so, there's been one call. i talked to general flynn about this again last night. one call, talked about four subjects. one was the loss of life that occurred in the plane crash that took their military choir. two was christmas and holiday greetings. three was to talk about a conference in syria on isis. four was to set up -- to talk about after the inauguration, setting up a call between president putin and president trump. i don't believe that has been set up yet because the call was
to say, after -- they did follow up -- i'm sorry, two days ago about how to facilitate that call, once again. so, a total of t calls with the ambassador and general flynn. and the second call came, i think it's now three days ago, that was to say, once he gets into office, can we set up that call? it hasn't, to my knowledge, has not occurred yet. >> any other conversations between general flynn and russian ambassador? >> not that i'm aware of. during the transition i asked general flynn whether or not there were any other conversations beyond the ambassador and he said no. >> a follow-up. a statement the president made on saturday, and i want to clarify your answer here. can you unequivocally state this administration will not send more troops into iraq, as the president has put it, to take the oil? >> i'm not going to talk about what we may or may not do. the president has made it clear telegraphing taking options off the table. that's a reason he's successful
in negotiating because he does it in a way that doesn't telegraph what he may or may not take off the table. >> what are the president's thinking now on the supreme court? is he closer to naming some nominees? in a follow-up -- >> two? >> a nominee. and at the end of the obama administration, the number of prisoners in guantanamo bay was reduced to about 40. what are the president's plan for that prison? >> on the first, i think that in the next week or so we should have an update on a nominee for the supreme court. i think we'll have a nomination within the next couple weeks. he continues to make that a priority of his. on gitmo, i think you're going to see further action. i don't to want get ahead of the president, but this is something that's been discussed and it is in his current decision-making process how he wants to handle that. >> if i could -- one more. you said that the president disagreed with the characterization of a rift with
the intelligence community. >> that's right. >> do you dispute, though, his tweet comparing the intelligence community to nazi germany? >> no. what he was talking about is the process, not the people. that's a very different thing. shane. >> candidate trump made day one policies. he called it a contract to the american voters. a lot aren't going to get done today because you said he's done making executive orders. labeling china a currency manipulator and imposing congressional term limits. i want to ask you, why not pursue all of those on day one as he promised in a contract with the voters? >> i think he is -- we're going to continue to sequence those out. i think part of it is to make sure we don't spend our entire day signing executive orders and bringing you in. there's a way we can do this to make sure we're getting all of those things he promised the american people done in short haste and doing it in a way that doesn't just jam them out in a fire hose. i think part is ensuring we sequence these that gives the american people the proper --
the issue, the proper attention, that they deserve. because part of it is that when -- if we put them all out on one day, they lose -- they get lost in the ether. he made these promises and pledges to the american people because they're important to him. so -- >> he sll plans to fulfill that day one list? >> yes, that's his intention. >> is the presidentoingo shake up the leadership before the director's term is up? >> no decision has been made on that. kristen welker. >> thank you very much, sean. has he finished his plan on obamacare? on nafta, can you just clarify. i know he's going to meet with the leaders of mexico and canada. has he started to have discussions with them currently about -- >> yeah. so, on obamacare, i think he's going to continue the discussion tonight with speaker ryan, in particular, at the meeting he's going to have after the reception. when it comes to