during the obama and trump administrations. abigail grace, who worked until 2018 was hired in february while until 2017 joined schiff's committee in august. the same month the whistleblower submitted his complaint. and it goes on b to point out that grace was hired to help schiff's committee investigate the trump white house. that month trump accused schiff of stealing people working at the white house. and chairman schiff said if the they are worried, he should work on being a better employer. no, he should have fired everybody just like bill clinton did, all the u.s. attorneys on the same day. that would have saved us a lot of what's going on here. so we need those two witnesses. they are critical. and then we also need someone who was a cia detail to ukraine. state department shows that it was a state luncheon. it was ramifications in the last elections. he speaks arabic and russian. reported to a friend of the clinton's aids chose to continuous contact with the fbi's state ukrainian b officials. ahead of vice president biden. he was obama's point man on ukraine. he was ass

officials. it came back to the obama administration and our rule is they have to actually look at corruption before giving taxpayers' dollars. the president have been doing that. we found in the hearing that facts don't matter if we are trying to fit into the rule of law. the reason we are doing this is the train is on the track. this is a clock/calendar impeachment, not a fact impeachment. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. i recognize miss loughlof lofgr. >> i was a staff during the nixon impeachment and the clinton impeachment and here we are today. at its core, the impeaching power is about preservation of our democratic system. the question we must answer is whether the activity of the president threatens our constitution and our democracy. it is about whether he's above the law or whether he's honoring his oath of office. the house judiciary committee staff and it was not me, it was other staff, wrote an excellent report in 1964. impeachment of the president is a grave step for the nation. the proper performance of constitutional duties of the president's office. th

back from the obama administration, the trump administration, and our rule is that they have to actually look at the corruption before giving taxpayer dollars. the president has been doing that, and it is now blown up, because we really have that facts don't matter if we are trying to fit it into a law or a breaking a rule that we want to impeach on. and as i've said, the reason that we are doing this is the train is on the track this is a clock calendar impeachment, not a fact impeachment. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back, and now recognize 5 minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman, this is only the third time in modern history that the committee has assumed the grave responsibility of considering impeachment, and oddly enough, i have been present at all three. i was the staff of congressman john edwards during the nixon impeachment. president on the committee during the clinton impeachment, and here we are today. at its core, the impeachment power really is about the preservation of our democratic systems. and the question we must answer is whether the activity of the pr

previous year had bribed a public official. they had corruption issues coming from the obama and the trump administration, and so he has to look at the corruption without giving taxpayer dollars and the president was doing that, and it is blown up, and the facts don't matter if we are trying to fit it into breaking of the rule that we want to impeach on, and the reason we are doing this is that it is the train on the track and a clock calendar impeachment and not a fact impeachment. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back and i recognize ms. lofgrren. >> this is the third time that a president has been recommended for impeachment and i have been there at all three. i was on the staff of president nixon and president committee on the clinton impeachment, and here we are today. at the core, i feel that the impeachment power is really about the preservation of our democratic systems and the question we must answer is whether the activity of the president threatens our constitution and our democracy, and it is about whether he is above the law and whether he is honoring his oath of of

say you are a lawyer and worked for the obama administration and we see which political angle you come from. we are talking today about four lawmakers in washington with and called, three democrats and one republican and it is the republican of the four who is casting just a little bit more doubt saying what we've heard so far it does not adequately support the allegation here. so this comes to the heart of, is this politics or is it a matter of fa ct. is this politics or is it a matter of fact. frankly, the best political decision the democrats made here was not to pursue an impeachment inquiry. everyone is still scarred from the 197a impeachment of president clinton, where republicans lost seats after they moved forward. that's fixed from the in the mines after the majority leader. but he came down to with the conduct was so egregious, so in the open and so contrary to what we expect of a sitting us president that i think nancy pelosi believed she had to act andi nancy pelosi believed she had to act and i don't think this is politically and anybody‘s best entrance but at some point

previous attorney general -- the attorney general under the obama administration had actually been held in criminal contempt of congress. >> eric holder. >> eric holder. and that we shouldn't and can't start impeaching presidents for asserting privileges and immunities especially when for example the white house counsel agrees with that and that it's up to the democrats to go to court if they don't agree. >> but we have never ever seen any administration, including richard nixon while he was under impeachment investigation, including bill clinton when he was under investigation, issue a blanket refusal to produce no witnesses, to produce no documents, to produce no e-mails, texts. yes, it is true that there are legitimate grounds for dispute about each perhaps certain of the documents that the house has sought. but the idea that it is a legitimate exercise of executive authority to shut down cooperation completely -- >> can i just point out how differents that from t s thathi mueller report? we're going to let people testify, we're going to let them talk to mueller, we're going to provide

? >> yes, it was a number that dadates back to 2015, still u ur the obama administration, but it was the latest reliable number that we had on the total number detained immigration in the united states -- in migration attention i in the uniteded sta. it is not much different. the u.s. is still the country with the highest number of children held in migration attention worldwide. amy: what you're saying is ththere's beenen a continuing fm the obama to the trump administration. finally, the legacy of the torture program as the united states, you having served for years as the u.n. rapporteur on torture. >> it was a very bad precedent. in many other countries who said the united states is the country that founded democracy, human rightsts more than 200 years ag, they are now officially applying torture. so why shouldn't we do the same because we are also dealing with terrorists? so it was really undermining the absolute solution of torture and that is a very negative long-term effect of the bush. amy: we will link to your report on the imprisonment of children worldwide. your figures, oh, t

under the obama administration. and we are told that he will be the counsel on the committee staff participating in today's questioning for the democratic side. in just a moment, we are anticipating the photographers being cleared from the shot. do we have any audio available to us from the hearing room as yet? we'll bring you that. it's just kind of ambient sound. and then presumably we're going to hear a gavel here in just a moment from the chairman when we're under way. committee running six, seven minutes late thus far use it's taken a while to filter into the hearing room. let's hear what we can. >> the house committee on the judiciary will come to order. the chairman is able to declare recesses. >> we're reserving the right to object. >> noted. the gentleman is reserved. >> mr. chairman, pursuant to cause 2 j 1 of rule 11, i am funnishing you with a command for delay of hearings on the subject signed by all of the republican members. >> the gentleman will suspend. i could not understand what you're saying. repeat it clearly. >> pursuant to clause 2j sls 1, i am furnishing you

counsel who previously worked in the obama administration. he's going to have about 45 minutes to question, followed by the republican counsel and each of the members will have their own five-minute rounds to ask questions as they try to make the case to the american public why the president should be impeached, why he shouldn't be impeached. this is the next phase in what is expected to be a quick moving process here in the house to potentially have that impeachment vote before christmas. nancy pelosi in private has not told her colleagues a specific timeline for moving forward. she refused to do that last night i'm told in private talking to her colleagues. we'll see if she says anything different today. but the moment democrats mostly united believe the president should be impeached and they're trying to make that case to the country today. >> on the other hand, the republicans are mostly -- i should say, completely united in opposing any sort of impeachment. manuerageu stand by. the intelligence committee took what they learned from more than 100 hours of testimony, sddozen of

, no, it's not because the obama administration wouldn't sell them one. they could have bought one from europe but they decided to defy nato. we'll see in this meeting with merkel is going to be as tense as that one. >> i wonder if the president is going to react -- i'm going to play some of that video of these world leaders seemingly -- seemingly joking about their meetings, their respective meetings yesterday with the president and the lengthy news conferences in effect he had while they were sitting there. watch this. >> we'll continue to discuss that. now the president is meeting with angela merkel, the chancellor of germany right now. we expect to hear what he's saying momentarily. they're going to make sure we can hear what the president and angela merkel are saying. kaitlan, you're still there as we clear up the audio part of this. tell us about the reaction, if any, that you're getting from the white house to those world leaders seemingly joking about the president. >> so, wolf, we've reached out to the white house. no comment back from them but we've also reached out to th

credit for this but in the obama administration but the best day for you? >> there were many but for me it had nothing to do it for policy but the day the supreme court affirmed the right of gay marriage. that was such a happy day because one, it was so right and so joyful and it mattered in the most profound ways. i still get choked up thinking about it. we let up the white house and rainbow colors. and everybody celebrated regardless of their sexual orientation but just pure joy. >> i would not have guessed that. the worst day? [laughter] too many to count. [laughter] i write about them in the book but around the snowden experience. but honestly i can't name them all but there's also a lot of good days with the opening to cuba and we really stuck the landing on that. two years of secret negotiations and then we could unveil all of that simultaneously and effectively. in the day is worthy of celebration but pure joy. >>. >> when you introduce it in your book your first and last meeting with president trump. tell us about that. >> my first and only encounter with donald trump occurre

essentially turkey had no choice, he says, but to buy it because the obama administration was preventing them from buying an american missile defense system. but john, experts say that's not true. they say actually turkey not only wanted to buy the missile defense system but wanted to be able to have technology transfer. which essentially would have allowed them to build their own missiles and the u.s. did not want that to happen. that is why it didn't happen. but the president is saying they stopped them from buying it. macron pushed back saying they could have bought one from the europeans if they wanted to, but instead they chose to defy nato. now, another point of contention you saw yesterday was macron saying that he and the president have a very different agreement on what constitutes a terrorist group. as you've seen what the turks have tried to do so far in the last few weeks, something that's been under scrutiny where after the president decided to withdraw those u.s. troops from syria leading to that turkish incursion into syria is turkey has tried to frame these kur

needs to execute the war. past, the obama administration had been providing substantial military aid, but not what is known as lethal javelin antitank missiles, but nevertheless a lot of equipment was provided over the previous five years to the ukraine. this year, the 391 million dollars which is in question, which the president clearly held up, and the testimony would indicate, was held up for political purposes, to get the ukraine government to initiate an investigation against trump's principal rival joe biden. host: we had your colleague don bacon on a short while ago and he talked a bit about the concerns he had over the delay servicesd -- the armed bill, the authorization bill passing. what is the status on that, and why is it seemingly being held up? guest: it is being held up for many reasons, but the two big reasons are within the house version of the bill, we essentially eliminated the opportunity for the president to appropriate money on his own, without congressional approval, to build his wall. over 5.5 billion dollars out of the defense department and transferred it to

administration said you can't have them. the obama administration said you can't have the patriots. you can't -- we are not going to sell them to you. they said that a number of times. and then turkey went out and bought the russian missile. so we'll see what happens. we're still talking about it. but they wanted to buy the patriots. they tried to buy patriots. i think most of you know that and they were shut off from buying the patriots. they were not allowed to buy it so that puts them in a bind also. mr. stoltenberg: but the russian system was not integrated into the missile defense system. they can't work together with the rest of the nato system. of course. i welcome the fact there are talks going on between the united states and turkey to see an alternative for the patriots system. i hope -- we have deployed-- \[indiscernible] the deployment of different \[indiscernible] in turkey. so we addressed this issue. and try to find a way to solve it. trying to solve problems internally. president trump: turkey bought billions and billions -- it was one of the largest orders of f-35's, wh

obama administration were decrying other nato members for. not contributing directly enough to the security of nato in a variety of missions. so it is always a huge issue. one other thing that i think should be on our agenda is afghanistan. the president's isolationist impulses are always on display. he is hinting that talks with the taliban are starting back up again, that they want peace and they will have conversations. afghanistan really because it is a nato mission there, part of it, afghanistan gives you an indication of where nato countries contribute and what their numbers are. and you can see where the president might go on that when he talks about drawing u.s. troops down from afghanistan, will he ask other countries to continue to support the mission there. >> i want to talk about that restraint you were talking about with president trump. you clearly has had foreign policy briefings in the past ahead of these foreign trips here. but that has never stopped him before as far as what comes out of his mouth. so what do you think is the difference now? >> reporter: an electi

administration, from the obama administration and now to the trump administration. we've seen in some ways while there have been bumps on the road it's been a largely positive trajectory into some ways in terms of security in the indo-pacific it is accelerated under the trump administration. in that sense i don't think there's a lot of unhappiness in new delhi about the trump administration calling out unfair trade practices on the part of china, in terms of the u.s. stepping up its 60 present in the region include in the south china sea, in terms of course meeting improved coordination with partners including japan, australia, india and some countries in southeast asia. and just in terms of public opinion a survey taken in 2017 after the election of president trump, this is by the pew research center found in the was the least at the american country of 40 plus countries surveyed, only 9% of indians had an unfavorable view of the united states. the does seem to be continued public support in some ways for deepening the partnership in this context. i will leave on three issues i see as sli

president said we achieved a better ukraine policy that was achieved under the obama administration so again you have democrats misrepresenting facts, misrepresenting testimony to put forth false narratives and the american people are not buying at the polls show. shannon: the phone records show rudy giuliani making calls to the omb, why would he be involved with monetary policy, they will talk about the fact the president used phrases like quid pro quo when he knew there was an investigation to better allegations and the reason the aid flowed is he knew he got caught. here is what house intel chairman adam schiff says. >> the president of the united states solicited for interference in our election and used the power of his office to get his political dirty work done. the only question is how much more extensive was the scheme, how many of this may have been involved? >> reporter: is turning this from house intel to house judiciary cases the investigation will continue, he's not going to stop looking for witnesses or information or documents, he says the white house unlawfully withhel

better ukraine policy then was achieved under the obama administration because of what we gave them with the javelin missiles and military. the democrats mr. present in facts and testimony to put forward false testimony, and the mecca people are not buying it,. >> shannon: rudy giuliani making calls, why would he be involved in monetary policy? they are going to talk about the effect the present started to use phrases like quid pro quo when he knew there was investigation specifically into that -- are allegations of the whistle-blower. the reason the aid float is he knew he got caught. here is house intel chairman adam schiff said. >> the president of the united states solicited foreign interference in our election and use the power of his office to get his political dirty work done. the only question is how much more, how more extensive was the scheme? how many others may have been involved? >> shannon: even though he is turning this over from house intel to house judiciary, the investigation will continue. he's not going to stop looking for witnesses or information or documents. he say

to buy our patriot system. and the obama administration wouldn't let them. and they only let them when they were ready to buy another system, which is not the same system. but turkey for a long period of time wanted very much to buy the patriot system, which is our system, which is what nato uses, which is a great system. which is the best system. but they wouldn't sell it to turkey. so you know, there are two sides to the story. i have to say this. but we will be discussing that with turkey in a little while. we'll be meeting with turkey in a little while. and also tomorrow. president macron: to be clear about a few points. [indiscernible] one of the reasons for the refusal a few years ago of the americans not to sell the patriot, even having a european option totally compliant with nato. they decided not to be compliant with nato. reporter: mr. president, prime minister johnson i believe is organizing some sort of discussion later today about syria conflict. are you going to take part in that and meet with that? and if not, why? president trump: are you talking about ambassador?

in. >> david, sticking with the substance of this, i'm curious, having covered many administrations in washington, what would have happened if george w. bush or barack obama was caught red hand ed using military money to get re-election help? >> i think we're at a point now where the political divide is so severe and the republicans are so committed to protecting their dear leader no matter what that they can't concede the basic facts. i mean, during the iran-contra scandal way back, ari, there was not much debate eventually, after the investigation was done, of what oliver north did, selling arms to iran, giving money to the contras. whether congress forced them to break the law, whether it was impeachable. that's what the argument became. what we have now, and eventually when it came up with the clinton business that he had the affair with monica lewinsky, clinton didn't argue that nothing happened. there was a debate about whether this was impeachable or not. what do you do about this? at this point in the game after the report came out, and i read the republican report and wrote

percentage point higher than at the tail end of the barack obama administration. we've seen job growth continue to expand, we see people earning more, yes, we had a slowdown in that rate of growth and we want to see robust, 3 and 4% economic growth a year but the fact we still have the economy expanding and they can cheer a recession all they want but they're not going to succeed just by cheering on a recession alone. liz: joel grift, great to see you. come back soon. >> thank you. liz: the probe of the russia probe out i think by monday. yes it is out by monday. we'll tell you why president trump says attorney general william barr was misquoted in a "washington post" report based on anonymous leak? got that story and what the media is missing in this story. coming up. cologuard: colon cancer screening for people 50 and older at average risk. i've heard a lot of excuses to avoid screening for colon cancer. i'm not worried. it doesn't run in my family. i can do it next year. no rush. cologuard is the noninvasive option that finds 92% of colon cancers. you just get the kit in the mail, g

woes and the trump administration in the u.s. is rolling back more permissive obama era policies on cuba the country's 2 currency system one for residents and one for tourists could soon be gone as part of the efforts to get the economy go it's a tale of 2 currencies. for the last 25 years good cuba have come with $2.00 price tag. the paizo and the convertible paizo also known as the cook. locals generally use the former while tourists play in the converse of bull. here's the difference in value $24.00 paid those gets you one convertible peso which the central bank says it's worth one u.s. dollar but over the past few years questions have been raised about that assertion . that's mainly because of how important goods are priced items originally purchased in foreign money often have huge markups reflecting the reality that the paizo has no value abroad this leaves locals either having to fork out more pay those or join tourists in using the more valuable cook now in the experiment approved by the central bank to have an it department stores are scrapping the jewel currency system and

, what did we do? we rolled back the obama administration's cudden up to cuba by applying new sanctions. we recognize that engagement has not improved cuba's regime. it was worst. the risk to the cuban people and the risk to the united states was worse and the capacity to venezuela. it only made sense when americans had their stuff stolen to give them a chance to get it back. and we've applauded countries who have expelled cubans who have come to live as doctors inside their borders who were really working on behalf of the document. this is a program that's hard to fathom sometimes. they send doctors to countries all around the world. they traffic to generate income for the cuban leadership, so the doctors receive 10 or 20% of the revenue that they generate and the rest goes to fund the cuban regime. we see these tyrants in the region for what they are, and recraft policies to confront them, not to appease them. and this really gets to the second point. a policy on venezuela is mixed with restraint. we've seen folks calling for regime change through violent means, and we've sa

time in the obama administration. live coverage on cspan2. >> it really represents the best of the values we promote to women's foreign-policy groups. we all know her from her public life in the clinton administration. she served as one of the youngest secretaries of state ever and went on to serve as us ambassador to the united nations and as national security advisor to president obama. in her book called tough love them takes us behind the scenes of us foreign policy making from rwandan genocide to the bombing of us embassies in east africa, syria and more. she gives a clear eyed insight into these and other topnational security moment. susan was in the room at the table and even in the crosshairs of american political discourse . what i like most about susan's book is not just the foreign-policy discussion, it's also her personal story which is really just as fascinating and captivating as the moments in this situationroom. i think susan sums it up best . i aim to share what i've learned along the way. the importance of alwaysdoing your best . pick yourself up, dust yourself of

discuss national security and her time in the obama administration. live coverage on cspan2. >> it really represents the best of the values we promote to women's foreign-policy groups. we all know her from her public life in the clinton administration. she served as one of the youngest secretaries of state ever and went on to serve as us ambassador to the united nations and as national security advisor to president obama. in her book called tough love them takes us behind the

southern border of mexico has almost none of that. in 2014, the obama administration prevailed on the mexicans to do more on their southern border with central america, but they were stretched to do that. they only had several hundred people committed to that effort. to enhance it, they have to diver resources away from law enforcement. david: what could the united states due to help? there is talk that we could declare the cartels a terrorist organization. with that allow us to do things, to actually go after them? jeh: there is a lot we can do. mexico is very sensitive to a u.s. military presence in their country. there is a lot we can do cooperating in law enforcement, devoting our own resources, dea, fbi, perhaps even at the state idea of this designating the cartels as a terrorist organization, my question would be, to what purpose? is there an enhanced authority that the u.s. government would get by doing so? the answer is probably no. there is a lot we can do in law enforcement supporting. drug dealing is already a federal crime, many sanctions already in place for doing busine

of the obama administration. >> sure. yeah, and andrea, one of the more intriguing plot twists of this primary. but i think president obama is making the right decision, to let democratic voters assess the qualifications and capabilities of the many candidates and make a decision without president obama tilting the scale. we know that joe biden worked with president obama. that is part of biden's rich legacy and his qualifications. the question for democratic voters, and it's a tough one, do you want to go with the steady hand and experience of someone like joe biden or do you go with the youthful energy and the vision, someone like a mayor pete or elizabeth warren, someone who is asking to bring transformational change. democrats are blessed with a lot of qualified voters who all share the same core values when it comes to a fair tax plan, immigration, gun control and so forth. they're rich with blessings. the question is who do they decide to go with as their nominee in 2020. >> jim, on the obama factor, biden was asked about a politico magazine article recently reporting how ob

pushing back on the president who said twice today that if the obama administration wasn't going to let them buy the american defense system they could -- that's why they had to buy the russian one macron said, no, that's not true. they could have bought a european one if they wanted to they chose not to they are going against what nato's standards are here and it was pretty stunning to see him pushing back so quickly on what the president was saying about leaders. he says he has a good relationship with. >> really was extraordinary. remember, we're talking about this is a meeting of the nato alliance and they're sitting there and i mean macron like fact-checking the president in realtime especially with regard to the weapon system you're talking about. it really was extraordinary. thank you, guys. >>> coming up for us the house intelligence committee is about to release a report that the democrats hope will be making their case for impeachment of the president of the united states. republican lawmakers are already -- have already put out their own 100 plus page report rebutting what th

. ambassador to russia in the obama administration, and chief white house correspondent for "the new york times" and peter baker joins us as well. hans, i've got to start with you. as we've been looking at the video now from president trump and president ma macron, the o bromance doesn't seem to be brewing anymore. they clashed on isis to a degree and then there was these russia comments at the end that were fairly interesting as well. >> reporter: look, we thought we were watching a press conference but it seemed like couples counseling. at the beginning neither of them were responding to the attacks. macron clearly not answering directly the attacks that president trump made earlier this morning, really hitting at france's economy, suggesting that it was totally inappropriate for macron to make the comments about being the brain death of nato. you saw it get tense where the president himself said that sounded like a nonaven-answer w he was talking about macron's answer about the isis fighters. one thing we don't know is whether that press conference was at the end of their meeting.

reporting as well christine romans with us here too that under the obama administration they were willing to sell those patriot missiles but turkey wanted a technology transfer and the concern there was that turkey might share that with russia. of course, turkey is now cooperating with russia having bought its missile system. the other disagreement, what is nato's role in effect? the president has said repeatedly really we don't get that much out of nato but about who is the primary adversary there and president trump saying, doesn't have to be russia. we could talk about china. we could talk about terrorism. that's notable. is it not? the president again trying to turn down the temperature on the u.s. relation -- there was a moment where he said we get along with russia. i think it's a good thing to get along with russia. i go to big stadiums and people like it. >> jim, that was pretty remarkable and his statement about stadiums tells you that for him this is largely a political issue. one that his supporters seem to -- seem to back him on. i heard three interesting, i thought, p

serving in the obama administration live at 1:20 p.m. eastern also here on c-span2. >> the house impeachment inquiry hearings continue on c-span. today, the house intelligence committee will vote in a closed-door session to send their findings and president trump to the house judiciary committee. then on wednesday five at 10 a.m. eastern to house judiciary committee led by chair jerrold nadler hold a public inquiry hearing on the constitutional grounds for presidential impeachment and will hear testimony from law professors. follow the impeachment inquiry and watch live on c-span3, online at c-span.org, or listen on the free c-span radio app. >> cspan's studentcam 2020 competition is in full swing. all across the country middle and high school students are hard at work creating the short documentaries on issues they most would like the presidential candidates to address in their campaigns. we would love to see your progress. take us behind the scenes and share your photos using the hashtag studentcam 2024 chance to win additional cash prizes. still working on an idea? we have res

the obama administration were to have. and they only let them when they were already mired in of the system which is not the same system. but turkey for a long period of time wanted very much divided and paid for the system which is our system which is what nader uses which is a great system which is the messes they were selling turton so you know there are 2 sides to the story i have said this. but we will be discussing that with turkey or what it will be reviewed. and also tomorrow there are very kind of people do you top the full view there with you seeing the europeans on somebody that we had said to so this and even said so of this decision in the. and if one were inflamed by the refusal a few years ago of the americans not to still it's still a bold decision even having a european. off so that you can find me this is going to be. something. for prime minister constantly for her. not quite ready. for her. when. you see what a school he resumed i think it is really. he's not here this is the house kimberley has got here i guess will be meeting with. prime minister well i'll be se

buy our patriot system and the obama administration wouldn't let them. and they only let them when they were ready to buy another system, which is not the same system. but turkey, for a long period of time, wanted very much to buy the patriot system, which is our system, which is what nato uses, which is a great system, which is the best system. but they wouldn't sell it to turkey. so there are two sides of the story. i have to say this. but we will be discussing that with turkey and we'll be meeting with turkey in a little while, and also tomorrow. >> but to be clear about the point, they were with europe and we accepted to sell to them. so it was explained by the refusal of the americans not to sell the patriots, their decision, even having a european option, totally compliant with nato. so they decided not to be compliant with nato at that point. >> sir, mr. president, prime minister johnson, i believe, is asking about some sort of discussion with the conflict with syria. are you going to take part in that? >> are you talking about ambassador johnson? >> prime minister johnson.

show a lot, said what would you agree with trump on and comey said, the obama administration was not tough enough on the chinese stealing of intellectual property and not tough enough on chinese 5g and the president is write abriu that. >> there is bipartisan support on that, if you want to call it that and the idea of waiting until after the election regardless of who wins, you could argue that the -- if a democratic nominee were to win, whoever that will end up being, they may be as tough as well. >> why not >> don't hear it from the left, we're being too easy on china. >> they decided to get out of -- suddenly they're back, that stuff, 18% of that ends up in california. >> china now, get back into the business. >> when you stay -- >> do you understand what i do on the show? do you know my role here it is to translate you to them you know that, right >> there is a google cramer translator 18% of the pollution ends up in china, in california there is a new one for you >> -- initiatives on new energy, by the way, they still are doing a lot of solar, in china. >> they have that -- >>

the obama administration wouldn't let them. and they only let them when they were ready to buy another system. which is not the same system. but turkey, for a long period of time, wanted very much to buy the patriot system, which is our system, which is what nato uses, which is a great system, which is the best system. they wouldn't sell it to turkey. so you know there are two sides to the story. i have to say this. but we will be discussing that with turkey in a little while. we'll be meeting with turkey in a little while and also tomorrow. >> just to be clear about this point for you, the full-on view -- [inaudible] so one of the persons explained by the refusal a few years ago by the americans not to sell the patriots. it was their own decision, even having a european option totally compliant with nato. they decided not to be compliant with nato. >> mr. president. prime minister johnson is orchestrating a discussion about the syria conflict. will you take part in that and meet with him? if not, why? >> president trump: are you talking about ambassador johnson? >> boris johns

patriot system and the obama administration wouldn't let them. and they only let them when they were ready to buy another system, which is not the same system. but turkey for a long period of time wanted very much to buy the patriot system which is our system which is what nato uses which is a great system which is the best system but they wouldn't sell it to turkey. so, you know, there are two sides of the story, i have to say this. but we will be discussing that with turkey in a little while. we'll be meeting with turkey in a little while and also tomorrow. >> to be clear about this point, and to -- the full view they were discussing with europe and we accepted to sell it to them. so this is not due -- and one person explained by the refusal of a few years ago of the americans no the to sell the patriot. it's their own decision, even having a european option totally compliant with nato so they decided not to be compliant with nato. >> sir, mr. president, prime minister johnson i believe is organizing some sort of discussion later today about the syria conflict. are you going to tak

patriot system, and the obama administering if wouldn't -- administration wouldn't let them. and they only let them when they were ready to buy another system. which is not the same system. but turkey, for a long period of time, wanted very much to buy the patriot system which is our system. which is what nato uses, which is a great system. which is the best system. but they wouldn't sell it to turkey. so, you know, there are two sides of the story. i have to say this. but we will be discussing that with turkey in a little while. we'll be meeting with turkey in a little while and also tomorrow. >> [inaudible] with europeans on -- and we accept -- [inaudible] by the refusal of two years ago, the americans not to sell the patriot. even having the european offshoot, totally compliant with nato. so they decided not to be compliant with nato. >> sir, mr. president, prime minister johnson, i believe, is organizing some sort of discussion later today about the syrian conflict. are you going to take part in that and meet with him? if not, why? >> you talking about ambassador johnson? >>

arnie said it was the obama administration that had prevented turkey from buying patriot missile systems therefore he'd been put in a bind and it had to go to the russians if it also the highlights a bilateral relationship that exists between the united states and turkey that seems to exist separate to and in spite of even the fact that they're all members of nato and it really throws the spot but i think going forward into this meeting and beyond on the real role and function of nato as an organization now if not necessarily yet at this point questions about its very existence ok john i thank you. and donald trump's also warned the european union to shape up on trade trump says the u.s. is being treated unfairly and things will get very tough for the e.u. if it doesn't change donald trump has threatened tariffs on french products in response to a new french tax on technology giants trump believes u.s. firms like google are being targeted very quickly to take advantage of the american companies it's going to be us it's not going to be france. so we can actually use you know to ac

administration have completely stripped them of that power. we saw the same thing at times with the obama administration. i guess my question is, why wouldn't congress exercise their article one powers? they have a court ruling that's supportive of them and say to don mcgahn, hey, don, a federal judge has told you you have to testify. and they rejected the stay of the doj. so, don, you've got two choices. you can either come testify willingly, or we're going to send marshals after you. and if you continue to do it, we're going to -- we may even take the extraordinary measure that they took during watergate and possibly jail you for ignoring a federal judge's order. and, danny, the only reason i bring this up is there's so many people, it was a republican party that i heard during the obama administration that was frustrated at people just ignoring congressional subpoenas. now you're seeing the same thing on the other side. so, yes, the practice has actually stripped congress, the legislative branch, of any of its powers. why not make a point of don mcgahn? they've got a ruling in their fa

are going to put federal resources in a presidential campaign. during the obama years, we had a hurricane that came into the gulf and the posture of the administration was one of we are going to watch it, we are going to watch it, we are going to watch it, we are going to watch it, then it shifted to florida and we have to do something about this and make sure resources are are available. why? because the battleground state of florida is important that we let the people on the ground know we have your back, more so than the people in louisiana or elsewhere. how these resources get allocated is also a factor. it is not just the vote, per se. it is also the federal dollars and how they are spent in presidential cycles by incumbents and the promises that are made by candidates that are running to sort of let people know, i have your back, i am with you. whether it is federal aid for education, no child left behind was a program out of the bush years. medicare part d, who was that for? >> you can begin to contextualize and understand exactly how all of this fits together. by undoing

tried to buy ours and the obama administration said you can't patent. the obama administration's that you can have the patriots you can either sell it. and they said that a number of times and then turkey went out or bought the russian missiles so we'll see what happens we're still talking about it but there they wanted to buy the patriots that it tried to buy the patriots i think both of you know that and they were shut off by the pictures they were not allowed to buy out so that puts him in a bind also but their actions just do not begin to go didn't you get integrated need to get a missile defense systems because these russian systems cannot work together with the rest of the new systems of course. the a model if i don't or postpone the how does doesn't work you give to someone to do this is a big difference and also by the need to actually earn all the we have deployed to augment their the turkish air on missile defense system today with the pilot over the risk the money to intervene so we address this issue. and we try to find a way to solve the because it's not proving some prob

? >> the obama administration said you can't have the patriots. they said that a number of times. and turkey went out and bought the russian missile. we're seal what happens. they wanted to buy the patriots and tried to buy the patriots. they were not allowed to buy them. >> but the russian system will not be integrated with the rest of the nato systems, of course. there are talks going on between the united states and turkey. also that the united states augments the missile defense system today. we address this issue and we try to find a way to solve it because it's creating some problems internally. >> and as you know, turkey brought billions and billions, one of the largest orders of f-35s, the greatest fighter jelt jet in the world. now, they're going to go to russia or china -- they don't want to do that. they want to buy the best plane. they're making it for themselves and they're making it difficult in washington to buy that plane. they have a big order up. >> say it. >> will you have white house counsel present? >> i'm not thinking about it. i'm thinking about this. the impeac

during the obama administration, a man who has argued 39 cases before the u.s. supreme court and just happens to be the author of a new book not yet one week old. it is called "impeach: the case against trump." counselor it raises an interesting question. aside from sound and fury and a jacketless jim jordan in the hallway, when will the republicans, when will the president's team need a fact-based rejoinder strategy, defense? >> i think they're going to soon. >>> the nato summit is just getting underway. we're watching president trump there with other world leaders that he'll be meeting with throughout the next couple of days. marking the 70th anniversary of the alliance right now. the president is at a meeting as you see there with nato secretary-general. and he'll be having a bi-lat later in the day with the french president macron. let's take a listen. >> many times. i think he's doing a fantastic job. i'm a big fan. his contract was extended. i was happy about. that you're doing a fantastic job. we appreciate it. i think the secretary-general told you that through some work and s

is that -- >> they tried to buy hours and the obama administration said you can't have -- the obama administration, not going to sell them to you. said that a number of times in turkey went and got the russian missile. we will see what happens. still talking about it and they tried to buy the patriots. and puts him in a bind also. >> the russians systems cannot support the rest of the system and folks going on between the united states and turkey, we have deployed the turkish air and missile defense system, widening so we addressed this issue -- some problems. >> turkey -- one of the largest orders of f 35s, the greatest fighter jet in the world and another country whether it is russia or china, they want to buy the best planes but making it difficult in a way themselves but also making it difficult. a very big order, billions of dollars. >> half way -- >> i'm not even thinking about it. the impeachment office, the history of the republican party. 196-0. and angry about the senators are angry about what is going on, hurting our country the other side very badly. we have tremendous s