♪ on the show tonight, convention plots and speaking slots, 19 days ago until republicans convene in cleveland. first, the world still reacting to the attack in turkey yesterday. the total number of people who have been killed is now 41 according to authorities. more than 200 injured, by three suicide bombers, who turkish officials say have ties to islamic state. hillary clinton and donald trump have each weighed in in the past day. let's review what they have said. the attack occurred before 3 p.m. turkish time.

tweeted, "yet another terrorist attack. this time in turkey. will the world ever realize what is going on? so sad. " then later, he said we must do everything in our power to keep his outside the united states. i would later, clinton responded, driving a slightly different message saying, "all americans it stand united with the people of hatred and violence." then, trump campaign sent an e-mail to the media that read in part, the terrorist threat has never been greater. half an hour later, trump himself spoke at a rally in ohio, driving home the message talking tough on terror. trump: so we can't do the border, but they can do chopping off heads. they can do whatever they want.

you have to fight fire with fire. mark: late this afternoon, on twitter, trump added to what he exploded on"isis hillary clinton's watch. she has done nothing about it and never will. not capable." case study for us to look at how these two potential presidents have reacted to it and international crisis. who seems to be handling it better, clinton or trump? john: the only thing we can say at this point is that trump is handling it more aggressively and energetically. he has been much matter on the topic than hillary clinton. , he clearly feels confident this is a winning issue for him. it's not 100% clear to me saying we have to become like the terrorists in order to beat them is necessarily either true, or a winning argument politically in the long run. mark: george w. bush was very aggressive rhetorically as the commander-in-chief as an incumbent, and basically helped

himself in the election against john kerry by talking tough. the question to me is, a non-income limit -- non-encumbered with no governmental experience our military experience get away with talking tough, or can hillary trump top that i do think trump is appealing? to people who don't li the way things are going in the war on terror. while president obama has been aggressive in some ways, there's no doubt his approval on dealing with the topic has been slowed. if we go into a situation in the fall where there are more attacks, trump's aggressiveness may, with the kind of voters he needs to build a coalition, me carry him -- may carry him. john: if there's a clear contrast between the two of issues,ump, on a lot of is playing the fear card. you all should be afraid things are spiraling, we must, take akoni in action. -- draconian action.

clinton is more about uniting, and not the status quo, but resoluteness. mark: here's what is good for voters. getting a chance to see how these people behave. this is how they would behave in the white house. it is actually a good real-time test for people to see the style of leadership. john: right. this afternoon at the north american leaders summit in canada, president obama held a three-way conference with the canada and theof president of mexico, speedy about immigration, trade and fighting terrorism. president obama: our prayers are with the people of turkey and all those affected by this terrible crime. assistanceered all that we have available to our ally and we stand prepared to assist them during this difficult time. we are still learning all the facts. ourwe know this is part of

broader shared fight against terrorist networks, and we will continue to work closely with turkey to root them out. past few days have not been great for president obama on the political front. most people barely noticed or commented on the failure of his efforts to influence the brexit outcome in the united kingdom. he was obviously in favor of remain. and then, the attack in turkey, shining another light on his struggle to rally a global coalition against the islamic state. what are the events of these past days suggesting about the relative link duck -- lame-duck-ness of president obama's lame-duck status? mark: i was surprised in the wake of the brexit, that people didn't take notice. he got more attention for the u.s.

i think it's a cautionary tale. the president has been counted out before. he is still the president. i thought this was a real sign on both of the issues, of certainly waning influence. his approval rating in the most recent data on handling terror, 42%. handling isis, 38%. it is clear that the world is not necessarily looking to him for leadership the way they once did, and it is a caution for him, hillary clinton and the white house. like i said, he has been caught -- counted out before. john: foreign policy is the weak spot for president obama, but if you compare him as a lame-duck to the following former presidents, george w. bush at the end of his second term, bill clinton at the end of his second term, president obama is a titan compared to those guys in terms of his approval rating, and in terms of his ability to have a role in the presidential campaign.

domestically, the president is strong. but on the world stage, no doubt he's not playing a strong hand. flip, theay see a president may turn to politics and domestic issues at the end of his campaign -- his role. when we come back, what do ted cruz and john kasich have up their sleeves? we read the tea leaves, after these words from our sponsors. ♪

♪ yesterday, we should you part of donald trump's protectionist trade speech in

western pennsylvania. turns out, the chamber of congress -- commerce, usually of -- the statement defending american trade policies, responding directly to trump on twitter, and looting at that plans we wouldms see higher prices, fewer jobs, and a weaker economy. this morning, trump fired back. "why would the u.s. chamber be upset by the fact that i want to negotiate better and stronger trade deals, or that i want penalties for cheaters? " the u.s.er tweet, " chamber must fight harder for the americans. china and others are taking advantage of the u.s. with our terrible trade tax." later, at a rally, he should have some knowledge about a complex policy issue. donald trump: by the way, i know every form of trade. their trade, good trade, bad trade, good trade -- free-trade.

u.s. commerce is controlled by special interest groups. they are upset by my statement on trade. i said, let me ask you a question. why? why would you be upset? i am free trade. the problem is you need smart people making deals. we don't have good deals. free-trade is killing us. are a little, we more than a month away from the trade deadline, but before we get there, how big a political price do you think trump may pay for abandoning a key element of republican orthodoxy, and in the process ignoring a large part of the business establishment? my hats off to chamber for standing on principle for what they believe in. but bill clinton ran against his party's trade position in 1982, and was able to expand the democratic electorate enough to win. don'tk republicans who agree with trump on trade are

going to have to get used to it. it's a big part of his campaign. if there is a path to not only winning the electoral votes but expanding the electorate it seems, it is through working-class voters who are as skeptical as trump is a current trade practices while it will cause friction. john: depend on how hillary clinton handles this. the truth is, in terms of globalization, which is what trump is railing against, and as much as he is railing against trade deal, he's trying to turn back the clock on and a net -- in admirable course. it's not clear to me that trump ss going to win from thi politically, but the question is whether hillary clinton can capitalize on it. the chamber is focused on down rates, but if trump looks like he can win this thing at the end i, think you will see

some groups that are skeptical. maybe not the chamber, but business groups like that, getting on board if they think he can win. a little more than two weeks out from the republican convention in cleveland. naturally, a lot of attention has turned to who will be attending and who will be speaking. apparently still the case, of the home state governor john kasich, isn't sure about either of his options. his spokesman said he may not set foot in the convention at all. chief strategist of his presidential campaign sent out a very unusual e-mail today about a new series of swing state polls from something called pedia.df -- ballot we are told by a source close to john kasich that you will be in cleveland, doing plenty of events to help candidates, but at this point does not have any plans to step inside the hall. change.ld meanwhile, senator ted, another

vanquished opponent of trump, it is even harder to pin down what he plans. he told the new york times, there's no expectation he will get a speaking slot although under the republican rules he did, qualify to get his name put in nomination. he may play a significant role on key committees and platforms a week before the convention begins. we are told by sources close to ted cruz that he is planning to be in cleveland not for the entire convention, not clear which day he will go. he wants to do a lot, hang out with and thank and meet with his own supporters. leaving an option open to perhaps extend his stay. given all that, what do you think ted cruz and john kasich are currently thinking about in cleveland? john: i think john kasich is trying to avoid getting any donald trump all over his suit. i think ted cruz is trying to

keep his options open, in case the dump trump thing does catch on, he is obviously that likely next nominee, with the second most delegates and the greatest standing to knock trump off. those seem to be the gains that they are playing. tok: neither of them want hug donald trump at this point. most of their team feels the same way pretty strongly. both at this point see themselves as potential front-runner for 20 20th trump loses. sight of the fact that when there's not talk in the air of disrupting the convention or a lot ofng the voters, what scott -- what goes on his positioning for four years down. ran against trump, the two spent the most type thinking about what 2020 might look like against hillary clinton are ted cruz and john kasich. john: for sure. those numbers are very strong for kasich, and the indications

are that kasich intends to do a lot of campaigning for down ballot republicans for what he considers a mainstream republican perspective. if kasich goes out without any of what he sees as the taint of trump on him, and campaigns successfully for those down ballot candidates, it will give him in his mind, a boost in terms of 2020 for sure. mark: it is a suite of things that have not gotten attention. stars? the is it george bush, raising money for him? who is out on the trail as a big surrogate? kasich and ted cruz are looking to do that. coming up, we'll talk more about the presidential race, and also the aftermath of the horrible terrorist attack in turkey. we will come right back. ♪

♪ clearly needs to change, in my opinion, to win the general election. i have said to him publicly and privately, you are a great entertainer. you are good for a crowd. you have a lot of twitter followers. that worked fine for you in the primaries. now that you are in the general people are looking for a level of seriousness, that is typically conveyed by having a prepared text and teleprompter,, and staying on message. my hope is he is beginning to pay that and become what i would call him more serious and credible candidate for the highest office in the land. mark: that was republican senator mitch mcconnell, speaking to new york one about his party's presumptive nominee. joining us to talk about the

state of the race, former bush and alsotions director the, msnbc political analyst. she wrote an op-ed about donald trump. it reads in part, party leaders last a weekched the of the truncated to see the way you experience a chase scene in a dream -- mitch mcconnell seems to be like exhibit a, not listening to the wallace doctrine, encouraging the guy to change. it's intractable. everyone is waiting for something that is not going to happen. donald trump is waiting for respect he feels he is entitled to do what is undeniably a massive political accomplishment. after losing in wisconsin he, went on to win every primary after that by massive margins.

he thinks he can transform the republican party. leaders are not impressed. they find cause to rebuke him about every seven days. i wrote the piece before i saw that today john mccain rebuked him for his position on waterboarding. he made it exactly seven days. mark: let me push back on your thesis. it seems paul ryan, for instance, when he has been a critic, trump has changed his ways. not every time, but some of the critiques and private advice actually does, at least on the margins, makes him more measure on what they want. nicolle: i think when he stumbles, like after wisconsin, after the last month which has been criticized as a wasted period of time, where he could have been beating up his campaign. he had a racism scandal, called a judge a mexican, even though he was american.

he got himself tangled up in all kinds of trouble from his unscripted moments, mostly on morning talk shows. i don't think they are mutually influence of. going a little bit acid normal when you go from a reality tv star to the nominee of a party. but this idea everyone is waiting for him to be normal is a fantasy. to ask you about what we saw from donald trump in the last 24 hours. attack.on the istanbul he says we have to basically find the way they fight, we have to be super by-line and not be so constrained by the laws we have on the books. is that helping him or hurting him? nicolle: helping him clear a different threshold, as you know. i saw your comments as an obvious problem in his point of view, that we are not them, and that is the very point. we cannot engage in their tactics. come on theers

question of terrorism, are about the only ones that held up during what the most abysmal month for any candidate for the presidency that i can remember. stillly place where he had an advantage over hillary clinton was on this question of who do you trust to protect us from terrorists, or who do you trust on the question of terrorism. he is on solid political ground, but the question when it is asked about whose votes qualified to be the commander in study'sho is the leader, she still has the advantage. in some ways, he has the public behind him when he talks tough on terrorism. people view a terrorist who would kill innocent people in an airport, children and families going on vacation, they view them as animals. most people, even while the debate is in congress, john mccain came out for me against enhanced interrogation methods

many members but of the public remain. donald trump is on solid political ground, but not the ground you stand on if you are trying to pass as a credible commander-in-chief that is why you are seeing. some national security leaders coming out to endorse hillary clinton. john: you wait out the conundrum pretty well, there is some political advantage in terms of how he's addressing the issues, but also the more fundamental test.if you were advising trump, if he called you and said, how should i talk about this, how much should i moderate? what would your advice be in terms of but -- balancing the objectives? in this great piece, he said the next president that wants to waterboard will have to bring his own docket. toould advise donald trump get on the phone with him. that is the point of the piece.

why isn't he on the phone with policy experts? if terrorism is an opportunity for donald trump to fix his political problem, that he needs to close the gender gap, get more married women to trust him on national security more than hillary clinton, why isn't he spinning the same amount of time he spends on twitter and on tv talking to really smart policy people like mike hayden? mark: what do you think of ted cruz' posture towards ted -- trump at this point? nicolle: the largest growing group of voters is republicans in the senate. their group is undecided. mike lee said yesterday he's not sure he will endorse,. ted cruz has not endorsed. kasich hasn't endorsed. i think the question -- when jeb

bush he wasn't going to vote in the presidential contest, he got a lot of flack. but it is now a position. mark: digg ted cruz -- did ted cruz pray any price? nicolle: i don't think anyone assumes he will vote for hillary clinton. but if you can't pull the lever for donald trump, that is a powerful statement. whether or not he will pay a price with a huge swath of republican voters, i think trump has 80% approval among republicans. republican voters want to see republican leaders get behind trump is possible. they pay the price. mark: for a while, there was a never trump movement, now there is significantly less. nicolle: it never had any viability. mark: is there now going to come more pressure on republicans to get in line? nicolle: i think they will have to stake out a position. there are two doors. you can vote for hillary clinton, or donald trump. the idea that they will sit it voter i am an undecided

laid out my quagmire. in my therapy process. i'm waiting for him to get better. that het inexplicable can't read the looming tower and have anything more intelligent to say about the nature of the enemy we face. tower to trump tower. nicole is going to stay with us. we will come back and talk about the terrorist attacks in turkey with the former director of the cia after this. ,♪

e ♪ mark: welcome back. the world is still wrestling with yesterday's suicide attacks in turkey, killing dozens of

maineers at istanbul's airport. we are joined by the former director of the central intelligence agency. , what could the u.s. government be doing that would be more effective than what president obama is doing to fight isis and other terrorist? mr. woolsey: as of now, we are playing a game, as if we were the hockey goalie. any shot on net in the whole season tickets through our --ching it we lose anything, everything. we have to do a better job of getting in the heads of the enemy. one thing is to call them for what they are, jihadi, islamist terrorists, and not to. mince words the way the president does all the time .you can't work effectively on something you can't even talk about. i think to take notice of the fact that we are going to have to make serious compromises. we all want our privacy.we also

all want security in a normal, average pleasant day in the united states and other parts of the world. security and privacy don't really clash that much. but when you get attacked, particularly by an institution as ruthless as isis, they do begin to clash. what we have to do is essentially about a public by the partnership -- public-private partnership, said that people in the government that are real experts on data, from the data industry that are very good at pulling together information on people from publicly available, data, and helping figure out from that data, where an individual group will be

going the next day, whether they new kind ofsome material or weapons. one has to be able to untangle what they are doing. some people say that might affect my privacy. it conceivably could but we have to make choices. i think we are going to have to compromise of that on both privacy and security. mark: a question from nicole lovell us. nicolle: you have been in contact with the trump campaign, do you have any knowledge on him? mr. woolsey: no, i am an old joe lieberman democrat and at this, point, no campaign has got an interest type -- in touch with me. nicolle:nicolle: do you think there's anything disqualifying about what donald trump has said about the nature of the enemy, or the things we should do about it ourselves? has he staked out any ground on counterterrorism that

disqualifies him from the presidency? mr. woolsey: there are things that i agree with and disagree with that he says, but i don't think anything is disqualifying. one can say all sorts of things, it's a free country. i think that trying to keep muslims out as muslims was a bad decision. nicolle: he walked it back, and fairness. now he describes it as a ban against people from certain terror regions. mr. woolsey: that could be quite legal, to ban people from syria, say, for a time. but i think you run into the first amendment if you want to ban muslims. but i think his ideas on trade are much too restrictive. there can be some compromises, but generally we ought to be free traders in the interest of prosperity. i disagree with him on that. but i'm not going to say any of these things disqualify him from running for president i just

disagree. ,mark: if the turkish government came to you and said we will do whatever you say to fight terrorism, what would you ask them to do? motivessey: work out between the fighting forces in the middle east, each of whom has been working with us at one time or another, the kurds and the turks could cooperate,. we would have to be overseeing it all, and anger and hatred there is long-standing. but these are both extraordinarily able groups of men and women. if we could do something to pull havetogether with us, separate flanks so they don't have to talk to another. but i think the key to victory over isis in syria and iraq, and

over the long run to any use of contemplatesis may probably lies in getting all of the sunnis, as many as possible together, and the kurds and shia. i'm sorry, the kurds entered. to bee: is there a case made by conservatives that when the president refused to enforce the red line he drew in syria d using chemical weapons on his own people, is there a fair argument that when that was put into motion, there was a weakening of american credibility and emboldening of russia and others? is there a thoughtful conservative policy case to be made that some of the problems are rooted in that action? mr. woolsey: i think there is a conservative case, medium case, and liberal case. i think it was one of the worst decisions of foreign policy. it made us look weak, it

enhanced the stature of the russians in the middle east. it made of america's word look like it wasn't worth anything. it was a very bad decision whatever, your politics. mark: what was the other bad decision? mr. woolsey: the other was supporting and endorsing the so-called nuclear deal with iran, which is completely unenforceable and very easy to event by goingb around. ofare sending millions dollars to one of the world terrorists states. that is about as stupid as foreign policy decisions cap. mark: mr. ambassador, thank you for joining us. coming up, more about donald trump's speech in maine today, right after this. ♪

♪ donald trump: just remember this. they signed a pledge saying they will abide, saying they will back the candidate of the party. and thethey sit back, press doesn't go after them on that. they broke their work. in my opinion, they should never be allowed to run for public office again, because what they did is disgraceful. that was donald trump at his rally in maine, moments ago talking about some of his former republican rivals who have not yet endorsed him. our next guest also has not yet

endorsed donald trump. we have a republican strategist from philadelphia, and an advisor from the anti-trump pac, and former advisor for jeb bush is transit -- presidential campaign. i'm going to ask you both about dump trump. what are the odds he will be dumped? >> i think the odds are pretty low, to be honest. it is a realistic chance and realistic opportunity to do so. the reality is that the delegates are unbound, legally. i think there will be a legitimate objection to him at the convention, and there should because donald trump is an exceptional candidate. he is extreme, outside of the mainstream of the republican party. minority in the

party that is not in alignment with him. he cannot beat hillary clinton in november. john: i want to ask you, if that is the case, why have the good people fail to dump this guy? >> we had a very fragmented field. 47% of the vote. he never got the majority of the party. trump was successful in playing with, or taking advantage of some of the factors within the republican party base -- fractures within the republican party base. that is not mean there should not be an objection to a candidate who is exceptionally bad on a number of issues. john: kim, you say he will not be dumped. why? >> if you look at the rnc at this point, they are already 100% on board. i think there is not as salacious and alternative.

taught usection anything, it is that you have to be pretty entertaining and pretty out there to wake people up from the doldrums they have had of the google political rhetoric for so long -- typical political rhetoric for so long. i loved john kasich, he was my guide. -- guy. don't see how he takes the stage and steals it. he's not that kind of person. if trump asked for your best piece of advice, what would it be? >> i would say, do what you are doing, but make sure you are walking back the stuff that is really out there. i think he has been pretty brilliant in this scattershot approach where he blows the doors off with something that makes everyone jolt, and then weeks later, since he does so one after another, the jolt is forgotten, and he can walk it back.

ofhas this electrical way going after voters and getting them to pay attention and it is not dumb,. i think he's doing a great job of it. i don'tlove the guy, necessarily know what i'm going to do, but i give him kudos for understanding how to talk to people. mark: if trump comes out of cleveland as the nominee, tell me the best case easy for the party for the fall in terms of down ballot races? >> i think the reality is he will get worse, not better. there is wishful thinking in washington. a lot of people in the establishment think he is going to start behaving better. the reality is, he will get crushed by hillary clinton. donald trump is a toddler. one toddlers don't get what they want, they act out they don't behave better. we will see when. bylary clinton is eating him nine points around labor day, he beating him by nine points around labor day, he will start acting out. hopefully with money and

resources from anti-trump conservatives, we can save the house, and at least keep it closed in the senate. a lot of senators are running there is agns, but atrocity at the top of the ticket. john: how bad do you think the atrocity could get for donald trump? think he certainly will be 2008.than mccain in he will lose arizona. i think georgia will go into play. i think in a national ballot which will be the real, problem in states like texas where there will be congressional districts into play, he will probably still win a lot of the red states, but his percentages will be lower than what we have seen from romney and mccain. donald trumpthink can actually win, and what do you think -- do you think it is a slim possibility or he is basically a coin flip with hillary clinton? >> each of them are dramatically

flawed. let's not underestimate their flaws. but i would say that, politics is head and heart. right now, we are got. -- ugt. people are worried. their fears have been stoked. there's a lot of smart people that i know that not there had when donald trump says we have to fight back. they are smart, but they are answering this early, because -- viscerally,hi because they are scared. these are real people in our everyday lives. i think trump has tapped into that and, they may be willing to suspend reality just to see what happens. your old friend, john weaver, close to john kasich, said at the polls about how

kasich and ryan are doing better clinton then trump. what do you think they are up to? >> weaver is a noted troublemaker, so i would guess he's making a little bit of trouble. i think that there is going to be some pushback in cleveland. there's good reason for there to be. the worst the polls look, the trump'smes behave -- behavior gets, the worse they realize their options. they do have options to get rid of donald trump. i think you could see a potential challenge from someone else to donald trump on the floor. it is john kasich homestay, he has existing delegates. i think there's an outside chance, given how bad the polls behavior andp's his campaign disorganization of late,, and the increasing

disorganization of anti-trump delegates, that's probably what john weaver was looking at when he sent that e-mail. mark: if donald trump is choosing between chris christie, newt gingrich, and senator corker, which of them would be the smartest take? -- pick? >> doesn't matter. it truly doesn't matter. according to the polls, it does not help him in fundraisers. unless there's somebody we haven't thought of, picking another political known quantity does not do anything for him. people realize no matter who he picks, even if it is a moderately even-tempered political old hand it will not affect the way, donald trump acts. if he picks someone completely exciting that we never thought of, i would have to see who it he would be the

loud head of the ticket to be outshined by anyone. thank you for coming on. we will get an update on turkey, how the world is responding to the terrible terrorist attack. if you are watching us here in washington dc, you can listen to us on the radio. we will be right back. ♪

♪ i'm here in the studio with an nbc news correspondent. lots of terrorist attacks are always horrible. what is different in terms of the symbolism or the effect of

this? < >> it's really targets the commercial and kind of symbolic epicenter of turkey. most of the attacks we have seen in the past, certainly there have been in other parts of turkey, but this is towards the establishment. in istanbul, the center of that specificso airport. the third largest in the world. it is a hub for the entire region. are targeting it, sending a message not just a turkey, but to the outer world. mark: turkey has dealt with a lot of domestic terrorism. is this going to change turkey's attitude towards fighting back? >> if they determine that it is isis, yes. turkey is already involved in the fight in syria. alone. there is a reluctance to do this without direct u.s. military involvement. if they go to war in syria,

meaning they have to go up against the charlotte said -- assad, they want to know that the u.s. has their back. i'm not sure any other countries are ready to do it in the event the u.s. will not back those countries 100%. if this turns out to be kurdish separatists, it would add a very dangerous dynamic. mark: given the lame-duck president, the destruction of brexit and all the other problems, is it conceivable there will be a change in having the war on terror without the u.s.? >> plea for countries like egypt and saudi arabia saying they wanted to play a rapid force.i don't think a lot of people are putting a weight into that. perhaps maybe something in yemen, maybe the borders of libya, but nothing serious.

i don't see any seismic shift in the security structure of the region right now. nobody is willing to make that change. very unlikely to happen unless the uss, we are going to do this, let's get everyone on board. mark: if there is an actor in the region who would lead that, is there anyone who would say, we can't wait for a new american president? >> if there is a country that will try to lead, perhaps the only country that could do that is turkey because of the fact that it is a member of nato, and on the european doorstep. it can literally bring the europeans dragging to this field of operation. saudi arabia and egypt, not likely. with is strained at home the problems in the sinai and slot and the rise of isis there. a lot of economic problems at home. it will not present power. saudi arabia maybe has resources, but it is in a brutal war in yemen that shows no end in sight. that military campaign has not

gone very well for the saudi regime i'm not sure they would be capable of opening a second front. beyond their borders. mark: what about other countries?are there any of them so unhappy with the status quo that they have tried to lobby for more >> ? we seen in countries like france, there's an immediate robust military campaign, but with time, it dies down. i'm not sure any european country has the capability to do it. the united kingdom perhaps, but given the brexit, their hands are full of everything domestically. they will bp occupied with that. i'm not sure they will be willing, given the economic uncertainty, that they will try to take on a military campaign to reshape the conflict in syria without a strong international presence. any effort they try to do will be met with some kind of diplomatic push back from iran and hezbollah. mark: thank you so much. thank you for being here.

we will be right back. ♪

john: right now, go to bloombergpolitics.com, to find a piece about the state department e-mail use. coming up, emily chang speaks to president. until tomorrow, we say to you .stanbul --sayonara ♪

mark: in ottawa, the leaders of canada, the u.s. and mexico unveiled a private climate plan calling for, the electricity to

come from clean energy sources by 2025. >> this partnership will see our country's stand side by side as we work toward the common goal of the north america that is competitive, encourages clean growth, and protects our shared environment now and for generations to come. mark: the three leaders say capacity,ica has the resources and moral imperative to build on the agreement. the turkish president says his country will overcome terror groups. his comments come a day after a triple suicide bombing at the istanbul airport left 42 people dead and more than 240 injured. the government blames the islamic state for the attack. u.s. senate leaders say they will hold a final vote tonight on the puerto rico financial crisis. there is a $2 million -- $200 million bond obligation,