john: i'm john heilemann. mark: and i'm mark halperin. "with all due respect" to the apple geniuses that jumped the gun on their product announcement on twitter, all we have to say is that -- >> aye aye aye. ♪ mark: aye aye, captain trump. tonight we are pumped for the , matt lauer power hour, the abc news commander-in-chief forum, where hillary clinton and donald trump will answer questions on military affairs and veterans issues. and oh, is this event timely.

today new polling from nbc , suggests that trump might have an advantage with some national security voters. to set it up trump went to , philadelphia to speak at the union league, where he talked about national security and made some new proposals including , that he would ask the military for a plan to defeat isis within 30 days of taking office. he would end sequestration cuts, he would build up the country's defenses by modernizing the military, adding more equipment, and modernizing the missile-defense system. trump said typically he would be the best commander-in-chief, and of course, pulled out lines on his rival. mr. trump: 3 crucial words that should be at the center always of our foreign policy: peace through strength. unlike my opponent, my foreign

policy will emphasize diplomacy, not destruction. sometimes it seems like there wasn't a country in the middle east that hillary clinton did not want to invade, intervene in, or topple. she is trigger-happy and very unstable. mark: john, on these new trump proposals, is it good policy and good politics? john: most of the proposals, apart from asking for an isis plan, are pretty standard fare. in that sense they are fine. the 30 day proposal when asking generals to come up with a plan to defeat isis is comical based on the criticisms he has based against barack obama and hillary clinton. against everyone.

and even more comical that he says he knows more about isis than the generals. mark: he has contradicted himself, saying that he was always been against the iraq war. had he given the speech for the entire campaign, it would be very potent politically. al balances tradition republican positions and it critiques the obama administration with some politically powered positions he has had all along. saying that the burden sharing needs to be bigger, america needs to be more about america rather than leading the alliance. i think whoever wrote this with him or for him understands where the electorate is. i just do not know whether it is too late. the democrats have been so relentless in battering him. and trying to make him a non-credible messenger. i think it's a strong center-right critique in policy proposals. it hit the sweet spot for enough of voters, but again, i not sure

that he is going to break through with it and he has the credibility to sustain. john: it was an answer that blended policy and politics. i basically agree with that. the isis thing is so glaring. it is basically his way, although he did not quite plan, although he might up, but he said yesterday that he has a secret plan to end isis. i will say that the headlines that you see in the major papers, "donald trump bows to traditions, ends military caps to boost military" -- these are all headlines they will love. let's see how it goes in the battleground states. john: i don't think you disagree that he could have given the speech starting in mid-may. mark: should have. john: and could have! mark: perfectly good policy, but late. john: beyond the question of the

forum tonight, veterans security and foreign policy are where hillary clinton and donald trump have been in the disagreement zone. we talked to his campaign staffer kellyanne conway. kellyanne: two thirds of the country actually want to go in a different direction and hillary , clinton represents the old direction. trump has talked about american exceptionalism, making sure that we don't just go into war willy-nilly. i mean, hillary clinton voted for the iraq war and has been a large part of how president obama did the democratic primary in 2008. john: among the differences between donald trump and hillary clinton on national security, what stands out as real, significant, and salient to voters? mark: this isolationist-interventionist approach is muddled, because they have moved from each other in some strange ways.

you know i think rahm emanuel , and haley barbour would agree this notion of america cannot carry the burden alone. we need to be protecting america first and that includes having spending from allies. i think on things like not closing gitmo, harsher interrogation -- i am not sure if that is the mood of the country. i will say this -- john: those are significant. areree with you, but those real differences. he is proposing doing things that are illegal under current law. mark: president bush got reelected with those kinds of policies. i will say this -- arguably they were legal when they were doing them. i will say this trump still , needs to consolidate the center-right before he can poach the center. and i think that the differences help them at a minimum consolidate the republican base. john: here's the difference that matters a lot, which is that she

knows more about the world than he does. a lot more about the world. and you can disagree with her on policy in a million ways, but she can talk about any country on earth with some degree of depth and what it means in the united states. and i do not believe he can and that speaks to him and today's -- and it is a key argument she is making. mark: he is lucky he won the coin flip because she goes second, so she can't go in and critique everything that he said. new polling, interesting results from the military and veteran demographic. amongst those voters in this poll, trump beat clinton 35%. -- 55%-30 6% -- 36%. trump won handily 25 points over clinton 53-28. these registered military voters were asked whom they trust more with nuclear weapons. the two were effectively tied.

voters in the military and veterans will be critical in the general election and there are some places that are key battlegrounds like north , carolina, virginia in the top 10 states for the most active duty with reserve members of the military. so john this poll caught , everyone's attention when nbc put it out. does it suggest a meaningful edge for trump with the election? john: no. that is the answer to that. it is borne out by one piece of research. you can see how john mccain performed in 2008. look at where mitt romney was. there were late polls. in both cases, romney and mccain outperformed where trump is now. so he is doing worse than previous republicans, and they lost. mark: i still believe the donald trump is underperforming on the issue of jobs where he has to convince people that he would be a better jobs president did if he cannot improve -- present.

if he cannot improve that, he is in trouble. the fact that he is beating her in these areas given their resumes -- using the three abacus, this might be good enough. this is a different kind of coalition. he is -- again, he will have to find extra votes. john: if she performs the way obama has performed with the coalition, and the way that romney and mccain performs -- she's going to lose. in the end this will not be the decisive factor. can she perform with the obama coalition? and can he bring a bunch of new voters into the process that we have not seen before? next we go south of florida, joined by libertarian candidate gary johnson. back in a minute. ♪

♪

♪ john: in the words of the immortal tim russert, "florida, florida." we can count on the sunshine state for juicy stories and skulduggery. our current example, the controversy revolving around donald trump's contribution to florida attorney general pam bondi after his campaign was found to make potentially improper donations. and a decision was followed by a $300,000 per person fundraiser hosted by trump at his resort in florida. when we sat down with kellyanne conway, we pressed her on whether there was a link about the money and a decision not to prosecute.

kellyanne: using the state department as a concierge for foreign donors, there is no link between that and hillary clinton and donald trump. mark: people should treat this just as a coincidence? kellyanne: there were never discussions. i wouldn't say yes. -- i would say yes. john: i do not think they will discuss this matter anytime soon. where does this story go? mark: i think reporters are still going to dig without cooperation from either side. people are going to look to see and you bet the democrats will look to build on this. they have pointed that at a minimum, it looks bad. and despite what she said today, this is boasting that he gave money to politicians in order to influence their decisions. john: he basically said income was in countless settings, that it amounted to legal bribery, and he was a smart and savvy to do it. i agree with you.

i think this sequence of events is quite damning. and again it doesn't prove , anything, but boy it stinks. mark: florida has an open records law and i think there will be more digging. both sides complain daily about our coverage. they say, you are treating us unfairly. you and i both agree we have to go hard after both sides. this goes to questions about judgment and character and integrity as many issues about hillary clinton. we need to cover her policy initiatives, but this is an example of a multifaceted series of events in which trump did things that look bad entity -- look bad and fit a pattern that he has of giving, as he has said of trying to influence , candidates. john: and that he lied about it. "oh, i've never met pam bondi," was his first answer, which he had to walk back yesterday. when he's lying about it, she has said things that invite a lot of skepticism.

when you have two people that seem to be lying, and the fact pattern is what it is, he has to look at it in a really hard way. and i think it is good if it makes us also look back at trump university. when the clinton campaign was driving that this summer, i continue to think on the basis of what we know about the story, there is even more to look about. mark: researchers are all over the clinton foundation. ok a quick history lesson. , the year, 1940. a gallon of gas was $.12. nbc's live broadcast on television, and the dallas morning news endorsed franklin d. roosevelt for president. it was the last democrat on the morning news supported for the highest office in the land until now. the new not-very enthusiastic endorsement says, we reject the politics of personal destruction. hillary clinton has made mistakes and a bad judgment, but her errors are planning a -- are plainly in a different

universe than her opponent's. does it matter that the dallas morning news, for the first time in decades, is endorsing a democrat for president? john: i think newspaper editorials matter not all, zero to most people that look at newspapers. but i will say it reflects something. it is meaningful that it tells you there continues to be a lot of disquiet among those that have reliably voted for republicans forever. this will not sway the vote. mark: the clinton campaign is sitting on more republican entities that will endorse her. there are more than they are according -- core team. there is more that will come that they don't even know about. the press is in some cases a sucker for these stories. we are talking about this because it is interesting. but there will be many more and they would get their share of new cycle wins on stuff like this. it is another little needle. another little -- john: we cannot resist it when a man bites a dog.

that is a dog being bitten by a human being. john: we have dan balz and adam nagourney, gary johnson and bill wells, very interesting guys. all coming up after this. ♪

♪ mark: welcome back. this is the booking of the year. we are joined by 2 political heavyweights. our chief correspondent for the washington post from the headquarters in washington dc. it's awesome to have you guys on together. at 30,000 feet let's start with , dan. tell us what you think trump beats clinton.

dan: closer than it was. trump has made up some ground. he has had a pretty good couple of weeks. she has not had a couple good weeks. there has been some natural closing. this is a time when that begins to happen. and we will have to see what happens after the first debate. she has an advantage in the electoral college. you know it is a cliche, but she , has many more paths than he does. and all the polling bears that out. mark: critiqued the manna from bethesda. adam: dan balz is always right. i think hillary clinton has a lot of institutional advantage. i think you are right about the electoral college advantage. i agree that clearly there is going to be tightening at this point. especially against a candidate like clinton, given the importance of change in the race like this. i don't think she would even be where she was if she was not running against trump.

all that said, he was a hotly contested candidate. i don't think the debates will change things. maybe. she has a lot of ways to win. i think right now she is on her way to doing that. john: adam, staying with you when there's talk about national security and foreign policy, veterans issues -- both campaigns seem to think they are playing a winning hand. neither one seems to be on defense. just analyze that. it's not often when you have to candidates have two that think they are winning on the same issue. adam: were both present the idea that they are winning. clinton has a strong argument. we talked about the finger on the button, or the equivalent of that in this digital age -- argument against trump. the temperament thing does have resonance. and the idea that you do not want someone that has not had experience in foreign policy to be president during what could be a difficult time for us. trump does raise issues about clinton's record. i think he will keep eating her

on this. at the end of the day voters , will think, with two candidates they clearly don't like and don't trust, which one will they be more comfortable about having in power to make critical life-and-death decisions? i think clinton might have a stronger hand to play. she has a strong record of blowing good hands. mark: there was panic in the republicans that the party would have to abandon their nominee. trump has had a good run. is that talk dead in republican circles? dan: i don't think it will ever go away. that is because there's so much question in republican circles, particularly among those people that worry about campaigns and down ballot. he continues to be a volatile person and volatile candidate. he has been well scripted. he has stayed on message. but he always has the capacity to go off. i think that means down this

stretch, the republicans are going to be nervously watching how much they want to embrace him, how much they want to keep distance, or which campaigns might want to go in a different direction and take the argument that we need a check against hillary clinton that she will be the president. but right now some of that has tamped down. i think republicans are hoping against hope that the turn that they have seen in donald trump will continue. john: your paper made news yesterday when they came out with the 50 state poll. want to talk about that a little bit. right now it suggests that texas and mississippi is a tossup, including texas and arizona. does that comport with your fingertip feel about those states? dan: no, i think we were surprised by those. mississippi is hard to explain. i don't think there is any

likelihood that donald trump loses mississippi. texas has been a change in state. democrats have talked about their hope of turning texas blue, as they put it. i still think it is premature. it's not all that unusual in elections ina texas that democrats begin to feel more hopeful. clearly something is stirring. we know that the bushes are not for donald trump. we know ted cruz is not for donald trump. we now know that the dallas morning news is not for donald trump, the first time they have endorsed a democrat since world war ii. so there is something going on in texas. but in the end, texas ends up in trump's column. mark: stripping out all the other variables and if you just watch the last week of them out on the trail who seems to be , performing better? adam: during this week, trump has been performing better. but again and again we see these

scenarios where he is scripted and disciplined for a day or two, and then everything blows apart. if he only did the teleprompter from here on out, that he would be a better candidate -- i find that unlikely. and mark, everybody on the show has been covering clinton since and know thatry she is in some ways like obama. she likes to get her back up against the wall. just when everyone is writing her off, she gets good again. i think we will have at least one or two more of these events and she will be stronger again. john: guys, mitt romney has tweeted for the first time since july. it says "i hope the voters get , to see gary johnson and bill wells on the debate stages this fall." we have both those folks on the show right after you. so just tell me, do you think

that gary johnson is going to end up in the first debate, either by making the threshold of 15% or by some other means? dan: i am still doubtful, unless he's over that 15% threshold, that the commission will relent and put him on stage. i don't rule it out because this is such an unhappy electorate is -- electorate that is looking for other options that the commission might feel they have to provide those in at least one of the debates. we will have to wait and see. he have to climb more in the polls to make that come about. john: adam, what do you think? adam: i hate to say this, but i agree with dan again. where was he in the 50 state poll? dan: we did not have an actual national number. mark: he was about 15 in a number of states. dan: about 15 in 15 states.

mark: dan balz of the washington post and adam nagourney of the l.a. times. no substitute for experience. great to have you. thank you. managerp, a campaign walks into a hotel bar. you will be shocked at what happens next. we will tell you after this. ♪

♪ john: this morning, mark and i, as we often do at 9:30 or 10:00

a.m., were sitting at a nearby bar but who should walk in but kellyanne conway. we asked her to take a seat and conducted an interview. we started by asking if voters really care about national security and who has the upper hand on that front. >> national security and terrorism has catapulted to the top of the voter concern list. you do see with the increasing advance of isis, which are president referred to as the jv team instead of the savage , murderers that they are, many americans are really worried about terrorism and the impact of violence here and abroad. san bernardino and orlando, certainly, then of course brussels, paris. people are very worried about our place in the world and about security. i noticed in a new nbc whole poll that donald

trump has gained an advantage with veterans in military households. mark: why would a businessman be ?tronger >> people are increasingly understanding what it meant that she was secretary of state. it's an inappropriate use of state department time. people at the state department work for us, the taxpayers. and the last time i looked there are a lot of trouble spots , around the world that could use the united states state department help. how about giving rights to women and girls in countries where the -- nations took money while she was in the state department. you don't really give rights to women and girls the same way you do here. poor judgment, libya, syria, if two thirds of the country want

to go in a different direction and hillary clinton represents the old direction, then maybe look at mr. trump instead. he has said he has a plan, that brave men and women should not come home without work. it is a scourge on our nation if we don't take care of our veterans. that is part of his platform. and he talks about strength in peace. he talked about american exceptionalism. he's talked about making sure we don't go into war willy-nilly. hillary clinton voted for the iraq war. mark: it would be unprecedented for the country during a time of arrest, to turn things over to somebody that has never held elective office and has no military background. it is that something you are concerned about? how do you get over the public's rational concern that he is not

somebody with a typical background to be commander in chief? >> president obama had limited elected experience and no hands-on military experience when he was elected. this country is willing to do that, but somebody in charge when they think that those who have been in charge failed. and obviously then senator , obama's ability to say he was against the iraq war. it is the nagging issue for voters in 2008. how did he become president of the united states against senator john mccain? and so, i do think the electorate will do because they're looking at things like -- senator obama, you talk about experience, experience has gotten us to this place in iraq and afghanistan, and we should really think about the value of experience. i think that is very much donald trump's message. mark: do you know the facts around his decision to make a

contribution to sam bondy's bondi's political organization? do you know about that? >> my understanding is they never discussed trump university matters at all. it's very customary for him to contribute to republican candidates across the country. he's been very generous with his contributions, including some of the candidates who don't support him now in his presidency. and that is what he said. he obviously is a floridian. mark: without looking at the documents involved, you are asking people to accept this timing as a coincidence, even though it came around the time that her office was making a decision? >> they never discussed it. there is no connection between that and hillary clinton using the state department with contributions from foreign donors.

mark: so people should say that the conservation was given around the time that they were making a decision, that is a coincidence? that is how they should treat it? >> they never had a discussion on it. so i would say yes. john: that people should be look at seat documents -- to see the documents? >> i have no idea. i really hope everybody covers it with the same kind of vigor, funneling billions of dollars to hillary clinton's foundation. and when she was secretary of state. everybody should put the pieces together. is, on guess my question this, there was a new york times story that says there's a whole history of donald trump violating campaign-finance regulations. and he has proudly said in various debates that he has made

campaign conservations to politicians because he wanted to get something. what people should take away from this is she was , considering whether to take legal contributions from the charitable foundation. that she then decided not to. >> $25,000. a foreign government. john: i understand that. it seems to a lot of people to look like straightforward -- the contribution was made. she decided not to take action. -- john: why is that sequence of events not questionable? >> i think the whole reason this is in the news is because donald trump is winning in the polls now. mark: our thanks to kellyanne conway for taking part in that on-the-fly interview.

john: we will be right back with libertarian candidate gary johnson and his running mate right after this. and as always, if you are watching us, you can also listen to us on the radio. and we will be right back. ♪

♪ mark: one is a mountain climber, the other dabbles in fiction writing. but together they are running a third-party bid to take over the white house. our next guest is gary johnson, libertarian candidate for president and his vice presidential running mate, thank you both for joining us. >> thank you. mark: we want to cover a lot with you guys. let's start with some policies

and talk about the u.s.-china relationship. what is working and what is not working that you would try to change as president? >> i think we need to join arms with china to deal with north korea, so diplomatically, that is something we have to push for. free trade, absolutely believe in free trade. i realize that the tpp does not include china, but look, i do not view china as the adversary -- i don't view them as an adversary. mark: do you see them as a military threat at all? the current government does. >> i think it is a very interesting time. i was thrilled that he, not being a cult of personality guy, but coming from the reformist government, he won over his opponent who was a cult guy. so i think that he would want to steer the country in a more

western orientation for economics purposes, and i still think that, but along the way, he has decided the commonest -- the communist party's number one, it has to be protected at all costs. so we have the huge and type -- huge anticorruption probe and being responsive to what the people want about smog in beijing. those are two things he is pushing very hard. so i think there is a lot to work with in terms of helping him look good and i think we can , engage productively on that basis. i think that we are looking at the tip of the iceberg in government controlled economy and it's just going to get a whole lot worse. john: russia has been an issue in the election, then we normally see. partly because there is a perception that vladimir putin is trying to meddle in our affairs. donald trump seems to be more towards latimer pitted and russia. and hillary clinton, not.

give me a sense of what your posture would be towards russia. >> we would like to engage putin in a game of chess. i think bill would love to have that same opportunity. that said, we need to join hands with russia diplomatically to deal with syria. that is the solution when it comes to syria. do we really want to go to war over the baltic state? i don't believe so. and look the ussr broke up. , ukraine, a part of the ussr. if you want to call that a civil war, i wouldn't call it a civil war, but certainly a division of alliances, and do we really want to inject ourselves in that? going forward, i will like to strengthenlike to relations with russia. ofould not want a policy division or antagonism. john: did you sense russia trying to meddle in the election? >> i wouldn't say it trends that way little bit. and that is the sick of most

important relationship after -- second most and port relationship after china. and the approach is somewhat less of pleasure than the relationship with china. what putin wants to do is not in our interest. his annexation of crimea, while the whole world kind of acquiesced, that was an aggressive move. so it's a little bit testy or, perhaps, but russia has been a great country for a long time, and nothing would give me greater pleasure than being able to find common ground there. i agree with governor johnson, i think syria is exhibit a. and the chinese and russians have worked with us on various security council issues, just in the last couple of years, so it is not hopeless. mark: a name, current or former supreme court justice that would be the model for the kind of justice that you wouldn't nominate and why -- that you would nominate and why? >> i never name names for anything.

i certainly talk about qualifications, but i think it's just a mistake to name names. as governor of new mexico, i was surprised at how many people came to apply for every single job in state government, agreeing with you, governor johnson, philosophically on what you have to say. mark: what would you look for in a nominee? >> the notion that the nominee would if you the constitution from the standpoint of original intent. andly today, we have talked we will get a briefing on what those words really mean and how we might better describe them. >> it means a lot, original intent means to keep in mind that this is a federal government of enumerated powers. limited, specified powers. and under the 10th amendment, powers not expressly conferred on the federal government are reserved for the states or the people. mark: what is the current supreme court decision on the books that you disagree with? >> i would dial back citizens united a little bit. i'm not sure gary agrees with me.

>> kelo, that's the one about taking for public purposes and giving to a private party. now it is a feral. it didn't work out. asked yesterday, we know you are in favor of marijuana, but you are asked about other black markets sports , gambling, prostitution. you didn't exactly answer the question yesterday. are you in favor of legalizing those kind of markets? >> i think those are really state issues, bottom line. i'm not looking from a federal standpoint to address those. i do recognize or believe that the federal government did step in and prevent online poker, whatever decision or whatever i might do to reverse that, i would reverse that. john: in principle, do you think

that should prostitution be legal? is that something in principle you favor as a libertarian? >> leaving it to the states. in principle, look, i have never engaged the services of a prostitute and have no intention of doing so, but if you were to do so, where would you do that? you would do it in the only state where it is legal. you would do it in nevada where you know you would not contract a sexually transmitted disease. but i leave it to the states. --k: habilis way to end this a fabulous way to end of the segment. we're going to talk about the challenges they face, right after this. ♪

♪ mark: we're back with the libertarian ticket for

president. the former governors, let's turn to the politics guys. the big question you're facing right now, 15% threshold to get in that first presidential debate. do you think that threshold is too high? gary johnson: i do not think the threshold is too high, but the issue is we are not included in any top line poll. meaning johnson, trump, clinton, that does not occur. 100% of polls are trump and clinton, maybe we are the third name down in about half of those polls. if we were on the top line, tomorrow we would be at 20%, minimum. and i have said this humorously before, and i mean it. if mickey mouse were the third name included with trump and clinton, mickey would be at 30 % because he is at a known -- he is a known commodity. john: if you accept the notion that 15% is the standard you're trying to reach, we have a story

up online that shows that you are advertising in sparsely populated states, why spend money advertising in states like that rather than going big and national? that could do better to drive your number of. bill weld: we were at 15, 19, 23, 25 in those states. the republican cochair has said above 50%unning well in swing states would be -- above 15% in swing states would be good. gary is running over 15%. in 40 states he was at 13% yesterday in the washington post poll. it is clear that we are a factor. he leads among active military and young millennials. he is second among independents. so it is not like we are way down there. i do think the 15% is arbitrary. the commission recommended it to the debate commission in 2013 that they lower it to 10%. the overwhelming fact is that 75%-80% of the electorate, not

just an interest group, wants us in the debates. and the presidential commission is a tax-exempt nonprofit whose sole purpose is to help educate the citizenry on the presidential election. how can they say we should not even be in the debates, if they are answering the wrong question? they are answering, who do we think we like for president of the united states. the party who pays their bills through their major contributor's, or are they answering the question, who should be president? mark: if your poll numbers are high but they reach a decision they are not high enough, are you prepared to try to take some action to reverse their decision? gary johnson: i think there will be consequences for that. we are not in the iraq-iran veterans association for him this evening -- forum this

evening. mark: did you take action to try to change that? gary johnson: they took a lot of heat for it and i think there will be a lot of heat that will go along with not putting us in the debates. mark: you are a good lawyer, so is there any legal recourse if you are denied access to the debates? bill weld: they are not being bipartisan. the commission on debates, that would go out of existence. mark: that would not get you in the debates. bill weld: not in september, not in time for the debate. firstjohn: would you go for a lawsuit against the commission? bill weld: i think public opinion is going to be more important than any lawsuit. i'm going to make a lot of noise every day between now and november 8. it will be on a whole constellation of issues, are you beyond the powers of your charter? are you being faithful to your supposed mission of educating the voters of the united states?

or are you part of the washington brainwashing scheme? john: there are two more debate s scheduled currently. if you don't make it to the first debate, do you keep pressing on to get into the other debates? gary johnson: absolutely. the way things are ratcheting right now, if they announce the debates in seven or eight days, that could reverse itself. so, nothing can be in concrete because this is a moving target. i will tell you, we have a lot of momentum going here. if you were to choose anything happening in your candidacy, it would be momentum. and momentum does not reverse itself. john: when you said announce the debates, you mean it will be in the debates? mark: who is playing donald trump in your debate prep? gary johnson: i think that bill will. john: who is playing hillary

clinton then? [laughter] bill weld: we have all of her briefing books. mark: we would love to have you on all the time. do you feel like the media is giving you enough access to the airwaves to make your case? gary johnson: there is an insatiable appetite in the man -- and the media right now. i was just saying, have you seen the abraham lincoln political video which is now the most watched political video of all time? it came out 10 days ago, and there have been 18 million views. mark: you do not feel like you have no access to the airwaves? john: we promise to give you more. we will be right back. ♪

♪

mark: those guys are impressive. their chances of getting in the debate are not as weak as i thought before. and i think if they get on the stage they can really make away in this race. john: i think they are impressive. if they had a higher national profile, they would have a huge impact on this race. maybe more of an impact than ross perot had. i hope the commission seriously consider spending whatever arbitrary rules it has to get them on that day is. mark: all our coverage on donald trump's big national security speech is online. and coming up, emily chang has the latest on apple's big product event today. thanks for watching. until tomorrow, sayonara. ♪

♪ it is thursday, september the eighth. this is "trending business".s". i am rishaad salamat. ♪ live in sydney and san francisco this hour. the japanese economy grew more than thought in the last quarter. tokyo, supering in mario heading to the iphone. l