he is a founding director for the center on global energy policy at columbia university and the final panel member will be sarah, the director and senior fellow for energy and national security program at the center for strategic and international studies. at thisblair, you are end. and that quick introduction a thank you for your patience this morning, hopefully, you have gained good insight from the questions that were posed by the committee members to the secretary and his responses as well. thank you for your willingness to be before the committee. if you will please proceed, admiral blair, and i will remind you that your full written statement will be incorporated as part of the record we ask

that you please keep your to no more than five minutes. admiral blair: thank you. i have the feeling that everything has been said but not by everybody, so we will fill in notes. sen. murkowski: thank you for recognizing that. admiral blair: as we approach the 40th anniversary of the creation of the strategic petroleum reserve, a lot of the energy landscape has changed but the three things that are the same -- oil market is volatile, american businesses, and american families are vulnerable, and the spr is our only short-term line of the defense on supply interruptions, and it would be full hearty to draw down the single weapon we have to counteract oil supply disruptions and price spikes. madam chairman, you emphasized that your concern was national

security and that is my background and i agree. but economic security and national security are tightly intertwined. the geopolitical actions are causing a disruption in global supply and there is a great pressure for military action. when i was the specific -- when i was the pacific command, like, pressing the free flow of oil from the swing region was one of the most important concerns. whenever a crisis occurs, we need time to work with allies to apply political pressure to negotiate before send in troops and the spr is essential to a smart, regional, national security response. today's low oil prices make it easy to forget that a little more than one year ago, unrest in key oil regions pushed high oil prices higher. as isil advanced in 2014, sent oil to $24 a barrel and they

feared oil from iraq could be knocked off-line had isil interrupted their perception, prices would have soared and spr increase would have been necessary to protect the u.s. economy only one year ago. would any responsible american leader caps on continued instability and study oil supplies from venezuela, iraq, russia, libya, iran, and saudi arabia? civil unrest the impact from oil prices and oil price manipulation? all of these are possibilities and in this geopolitical landscape, why would we consider reducing our short-term enough offsetting supply interruptions? yes, the dramatic increase in new is all production has increased our dependence on imports and has dropped in cash and has contributed to oil prices dropping terry 92% of our

transportation sector runs on petroleum. dropping. 92% of our transportation sector runs on petroleum. our economyects from a global market dominated right outside actors who share neither are values nor interest nor they fond of us. policymakers are taking advantage of current low prices to modernize the spr, as you have recommended, so it can respond to disruptions when they occur in one price increases inevitably rise. just having the petroleum is not enough. as discussed repeatedly by andetary and the equipment spr needs maintenance and modernization in the flows of crude oil and petroleum that changed over the last all years since the spr was built on without modernization, the spr cannot do its job of fully

offsetting a large supply disruption. cap to be able to deliver -- we have to be able to deliver the in this complex oil refining system we have in the country. i would make five recommendations, congress should fully fund and the department of energy's it accelerate maintenance. -- energy should accelerate maintenance. spr should be loaded on marine vessels for delivery. as incremental supply without displacing privately owned oil on the market. congress should update and release criteria to allow for release of oil from the spr in response to a supply emergency, even if it does not affect domestic production or imports. if, and i think this is the criteria, if the interruption is likely to affect the price of oil, posing a substantial risk of economic consequences, and i share the sentiments you describe on doing this carefully, but i think we need

the flexibility or when a crisis hits. the white house and department of energy should complete the the secretary mentioned about the appropriate size of the spr, given the changes in energy landscape, but my guess is when all is said and done and appropriate size will not be far from what we have today, it feels about right to me. after reaching a consensus on this size and the guidelines for using the spr, the department of energy should initiate a long-term program to update and upgrade infrastructure so that it is reliable for decades to come. in today's uncertain and the legit -- they just medical environment, spr is our immediate defense against oil supply disruptions and price spikes that is to be preserved to modernize, not reduced. it is only one part of the conference of energy strategy to reduce america's dependence on oil. as has been mentioned in the previous panel, when it

efficiency, feel diversity in the transportation sector, and a strong energy to improve and i think we can play a key role in enhancing the sen. murkowski: national security policy. to i. -- enhancing the national security policy. sen. murkowski: thank you, mr. blair. mr. booke? mr. booke: how about now? ok, great. thank you. i appreciate the work you are doing here to look at the energy policies of the past in the context of today's fundamentals, including the crude oil exports and renewable fuels and the topics in the first panel. i think there is one policy that stood the test of time, the spr. it has been an insurance policy, as you described it. an asset, as he described it and

i want to make comments about that tickets. it seems appropriate to ask if we have the right amount of insurance? whether we pay a fair price and if the policy has the right features? spr,regards to the obligation is for 90 days of net petroleum cover. in june 2005, the spr had about 54 days. this a joke, it exceeded 140. i think someone else mentioned that 41% of net imports from canada and only 16% came from canada, a reliable supplier in june 2005. good news for relatively recent good news and timeframe matters. an example for my industry. early last year, analysts. oil prices would remain above $100 thought oil prices would remain above $100 a barrel per year. if you go back over the series of the oil prices for the last 100 years, the average about $35

a barrel. which perspective is correct? it is tempting to think the future will look like the recent past. in fact, it probably does look more like the recent past. remind usket lessons it is a point to look at longer trends. i did an experiment and i will summarize. starting with generate 1985, kathleen monthly results when inventories got about 90 days and when they bought crude when they fell below. over the last 60 calendar months, the average result was a win, about $1 billion in profit. over the time series, it is a about 500 million dollars. downsizing the spr could be a losing bet and it could be for other reasons, too. opec producers are many thought out, soap expect capacity is falling. that will not be there to balance the market in a demand recovery. demand is not likely to stay week forever.

capacity is supposed to come on for 30 and stay on for 90 and shale has not worked like that, at least not yet. it did not turn off quickly on the way down and it may not turn quickly on the way back up because job losses could slow it down. meanwhile, a large spr has other uses to be a signal to opec to add supply to its high market. you did they can do it and they can or the money or we can do it and they will not find the money. insurance tends to be cheaper when you are lower degrees of risk. as admiral mentioned, a period of low prices seems at a better time to expand. the premium is about 200 million a year right now, and if you think about that, that is about 5:76 a barrel in current dollar terms. -- $5.76 a barrel. tour i willbusiness give you one. if you take with the nation consumes to june of this year on a one trillion month basis, 1.92

barrels, our model applies if you put one billion barrels into the market today, prices would about $11 a barrel. the market changes a lot so i will give it back kind of number with a haircut. 75% haircut, $2.75. billion barrel could get about $37 billion. $4 billion in premium, $37 billion in coverage sounds like a good deal and i'm not using multipliers. if you sell it down to 90 days, you could raise $12.9 billion at $50 a barrel but giving up the 2.7 billion dollars in coverage for those numbers. after that is a good deal. you called it an asset, and it is an asset, it is not usually a good idea to liquidate long-term assets for short-term financing purposes. another thing that does not work very well is buying high and selling low. i calculate nominal acquisition

32t at an average of about dollars per barrel. a real dollar terms, about $74 a barrel. the forward curve, the monthly prices out for future delivery to the end of 2022, does not get above $65 a barrel right now. you have questions about whether or not it is a good time to sell. finally, in terms of the coverage we have, what product should we pick for product reserve? it is not so easy. if you look at the 2013-2014 propane prices, right before the projectedey prices would remain in the historical range. by definition, surprises to fight production, even by the eia. market forces responded and there was no repeated probing crisis last year. government emergency product stockpiles could yield price signals that inform the papers of market participants.

we do not know what will happen with the northeast gasoline supply was there. in fact, it has about two days or the new york site and one day at fort massachusetts, maine, raman. -- and burma. -- and vermont. drivers might court. tell talkers could national life -- inventory in the new england part of the east coast in the and did not come back up after the reserve was created even though they rose back up toward traditional five-year levels in the years that followed. that is circumstantial and you cannot buy to the moon on that type of statistic that i would suggest you may have simply replaced private inventories of government inventories to know

that energy security benefits and that does not seem like a good idea. thanks for the time to, and i look forward to questions. -- time to comment and i would forward to questions. petitionyou for them to be here today and for your intention to the important issue. i think much has already been said so let me make three points with my time. that spr is my view remains an important national security asset even though the u.s. is a large producer and lower importer than in the past. u.s. oil imports up on from that 60% to 20% of our consumption as the result of more supply and of reduced demand. we talked about how the international energy agency requires 90 days of import cover, so some say that means we need less oil and spr. in today's oil market, a slight disruption leads to price increases here at home whether important or not. harmfulikes have

economic consequences for consumers and for the overall economy. all but one of the 11 postwar recessions, for example, work associated with oil price shocks. cushiontoday needs to global supply disruptions regardless of whether u.s. refineries import from the specific countries or the disruption occurred. i think we should be especially cautious about selling the spr as the oil market enters uncharted territory. opec is not only allowed a price collapse that has boosted production, leaving almost no spare capacity. next oil that can be brought onto the market with little short notice. -- extra oil that could be brought onto the market with little short notice, so it opec abandoning spare capacity, we may be up for sharper ups and downs and any disruption to global supply could have an outside impact on price because there is no buffer left in the market to cushion it. there are geopolitical risks in the world in key oil producers,

even more so when the prices threaten instability in some markets. a recent study from columbia center on global energy policy looked at increased risk of clinical instability in venezuela as a result of the price collapse, so now is not a time to sell up a strategic asset we have had for 40 years. more policye spr is for stability. -- kindit iran renewed sanctions on iran without a buffer of spare capacity or strategic stocks, we may well impose economic pain on ourselves at the same time we try to impose it on iran. second, given how the oil market has changed, it makes good sense to study whether the size, composition, location, or use of the spr should be modernized, but the outcome of that analysis on whether to reduce the size of the spr, not imperative to fill shouldt hole,

determine whether we do that and i think that is to win the oil price is at the lowest point in six years. third and finally, there is an urgent need to modernize the spr and existing infrastructure to ensure it can remain affected in the effect -- event of an emergency. i would argue any money for the spr should be put toward the critical need for any other. since the purpose of the spr today's market is a temper price shocks from global supply add toion, barrels must the total world supply. that means when an spr crude is delivered to u.s. refineries, foreign oil, those refineries, would have purchased this to be used elsewhere, but changes in u.s. production and a perception thee that harder to achieve midwest refineries which have been the historic destination for spr crude. spr crude now needs to move from the water in the gulf coast to east or west coast refineries, yet, the oil boom in the u.s. over the last several years has

left very little a news -- unused capacity at the marine facilities, some of the docs were used in an emergency to look spr crude, other commercial stocks would be displaced. investments are needed in wearing capacity that would allow the spr to add incremental barrels into the global market and this was confirmed by the doe's 2014 test sale. this is an issue, not a stock, barrels and spr, how much oil is in the spr is important, but what is important is how -- kelly getting that at the of four drawback rate point $4 billion today and i don't think we come close to .hat addressing need this prayer serves as a critical piece of the nations of protection and energy security strategy since the holocaust of the 1970's and remains so today. while it makes sense to consider various measures to modernize it, including producing --

strategy since the 1970's and remains so today. makes sense to consider various measures to modernize, including producing -- thank you for the opportunity to testify today. sen. murkowski: i appreciate your comments. the opportunity to be here. i will shorten my comments to make sure we have time for discussion. today, three points about the strategic petroleum reserve as an element in global security and offer areas of consideration for deliberations on how to modernize the important reserve. first, the u.s. ser is an important pillar of u.s. and supply of security and the sbr is not only the world's largest government owned and emergency managed stockpiled but part of a globally corrugated system of emergency petroleum supplies that have been around in oil markets in the mid-1970's. these strategic stockpiles artwork of the most visible and enduring examples of shared security policies around the

majorin the world's energy consumers. as fair and the united states is a fundamental pillar of the system and sends an important signal. second, changes to the profile and hesitate the changes to the spr, greater domestic production and new pipeline configurations and the assumptions on which the logistic system relies, assuming that a spare oil is released in increasing production and midwest and gulf coast systems, and infrastructure change to accommodate changes such as certain pipeline flow reversals may make it considerably more difficult to move the product to market. this in combination with ongoing deeds to necessitate the conversation about modernization. third, oil markets have changed and will continue to change. serves -- makes an assessment necessary and

important. plays a different role in the global economy than it in 1974. the oil today is used for transportation comforted 35% in the 1970's and according to the national agency, the concentration of doilies can't eccentric -- can accentuate economic impact because of fuel and the broad reach protest petition for cost into other sectors of the economy. second, while oil trade flows are shifting, the production surge in north america combined with growing oil demand in asia means oil is increasingly traveling east and set up west for major production centers. the trend toward refining crude closer to production centers means global trade is likely to decline in greater favorite trade flows. opec makes up a smaller percentage of oil supply, 40% today, and more important, the strategy capabilities of very

little export economies have shifted over that time frame. a strategic review of the spr should take several issues into consideration. first, the nature of future oil supply disruptions of vulnerabilities. since the creation of the international energy agency, there have been disruptions in stock releases and a number of spr exchanges. none of the releases or for the intended purpose to defy disruption in the middle east but each provided economic and selection from geopolitical and natural disaster related supply disruption. the severity of supply disruption is offered in terms of oil supply bus and duration, -- supply boss and duration, but they depend on other factors like overall market conditions, the crude quality, seasonal factors, logistics, and spare production capacity. this means answer the question on what we are regarding against . second, optimal structure and competition of the spr is part of a broader energy security

strategy. the ser is only one of several policy towards the united states has in and all supply disruption and long-term policy committed to greater vehicle, infrastructure protection, and their precipitation are critically important. the spr plays an important role to the policies. thus far, the united states has chosen to pursue accrued based government-managed stockpiled with the exception of the heating oil reserve and gaffney reserve in the northeast. this is not the approach taken by other countries and important to note that they have a mexican publicly and privately -- they mix of private and public product. what is the size and quality of spr going forward? the adequacy of the global strategic stock system is a valid question. the u.s. spr does not exist in isolation and it is used in correlation with numbers in the

international community. international strategic stock system is a role in protecting they.s., and when produced oil for producing countries, they were three quarters of the oil demand in the 1970's hundred and 50% today. emerging markets and developing markets share of oil demand is expected to grow. china since 2001 has been in the process of creating their own strategic stockpile and in how to release supplies in the event of a disruption. intentso signaled their that are less part one. whether they should be correlated with strategic stock systems is an important area for policymaking consideration. in conclusion, the last 40 years have proven that we have -- should be humble about our ability to forecast oil market and take measures to anticipate

any disruptions. about 10 years ago, the congress voted to increase the spr to one billion barrels of oil. the strategic review underway at the u.s. department of energy and recommended by the committee are pertinent and important courses of action. efforts by other committees in congress to some portions of this pr before then important review is completed our shortsighted and i recommend you wait until the result of the final review before making any of those decisions. thank you very much. sen. murkowski: thank you. thank you for all of your comments this morning. testimony fromhe the commentsfter that we heard from the secretary and i am just beside myself as to why we are having this discussion in congress right now about how much we are going to sell off from the strategic petroleum reserve to fund,

whether transportation bill or anything else out there, each of you have mentioned the issue of spare capacity and how it is just not what it once was. each of you have mentioned the issues as they relate to the volatility of the world at large right now, the geopolitical issues we are facing, we have some inherent geographic issues that have not changed. the fact that you have got significant oil coming out of the middle east that goes through a chokepoint that is just inherently dangerous and seemingly more so as the world becomes more tense and more volatile. the fact that you have all recognized that the strategic petroleum reserve really is this offset thedefense to

supply disruption, this is what we have that we can use quickly, but we can only use this stockpile quickly if it functions as we have said it up to function. -- set it up to function. this is where i think we have a little breakdown in communication amongst your thecy makers here who think draw down, our ability to draw down a certain amount, is all that we need to know. but the draw down needs to be able to work with our distribution ability right now. as you have outlined, we have all kinds of changes that have come about, whether it is the flow of oil from north to south now moving from south to north,

just capacity restraints, the issues, the limitations within our ports from maritime perspective as to how we can move it, i don't think people understand that we have the stuff sitting in the salt caverns down primarily in the gulf area, our ability to move it out to respond is not what we need it to be unless we work toward the modernization that you have discussed and that the department of energy has discussed. hereve got the situation in the congress where we need to be looking critically at this energy security asset, but the asset is only as good as its ability to function, and this is where i am more than worried. when we are talking about if they were to be a sale, the

first thing that you should do with the proceeds is to work toward the modernization. whether it is the $800 million that needs to go to the modernization and the $1.2 million or the $1 billion that the secretary had mentioned for thew we provide marine transport aspect of it, we have got to look critically at this. i do not think that we are having sufficient discussion on that aspect of our strategic petroleum reserve, and i think key. the question i will ask to you and i will ask you to be quick with the responses, if i may, the metric that is used here, what is happening here in congress, and i do not mean to make it sound like it is just basic math, but you have people who are looking and saying, our

obligation is a 90 day supply, so all we need to do is look to how many date supply we have -- they supply we have back to 90 and that is what we have available for sale. can you please explain in plain english,. thekly, why that is not metric the congress should be using when they look at the strategic petroleum reserve? blair: we can go in the same order, i guess. my answer would be that it is not the physical supply that matters, it is the impact on the american economy and the speed and increase of the amount of time we have to solve supply interruptions. why prescription for the right answer is to look at a series of scenarios and really think through what we would actually want to do any scenario and take a step back and choose a good, prudent amount would allow us to

have that flexibility. in most of the cases we can think of, therefore, when it happens, we had the flexibility to work with it, not tied to some mechanical number that probably is not applicable when an event occurs. i think i try to offer a way of thinking about it which was the insurance pay via relative to the premium and i think that would be the right way to think about it. the size of the reserve is really a static amount at this point. that oil, unlike the insurance comparison where you do not pay your premium, going to the policy, it is gone, it is here. we have a small carrying cost. need to develop the modernization would involve to keep it working, it is another $2 billion on top of the $4 billion i gave you over 20 years, so $6 billion into $37 billion in yield, a low number.

i took it to be conservative. we are talking about the difference between having oil and not having oil. i would you give up this carefully amassed 700 million barrel stockpile? just try to go to the market to buy 700 area there was an hurry. i was me with oil traders yesterday and there would be very pleased if you were to bid for that much oil in a rush. make threeriefly points in response to your question. short answer is days of import cover about the right magic in today's market to determine how much we keep in a strategic stockpile. the markets change quite a bit since oil price controls and long-term contracts and oil globally traded like today did not exist 40 years ago. have today aree adverse impacts to the macroeconomy to consumers as a result of price spikes and that is going to exist whether we are

a large importer or not. during the gulf war, for example, crude's prices spiked and they went up roughly the same amount in the united states and in the u.k., although it was anet exporter and the u.s. large net importer. it is important to remember we have only had this title for a couple of beers. while there is good reason to think that prices recover and u.s. oil production will grow, u.s. production is declining, down about half a million barrels from the high point this year, demand is up in response oil price, so there is no guarantee our imports will remain as low as they are today. i think it is likely they will continue to decline, but we want to be careful about shedding 40 strategic asset in response to a trend that we have seen in a couple of years. the question on how to determine the sign, i don't have a number but i suspect they would look at things like assessing the impact on the macroeconomy of price

spikes, estimate the likelihood of supply disruptions and associated price spikes, and assessing the impact of releasing sbr volumes to mitigate the price spikes and on a level of spec acid in the market, and then you compare benefits to the caring an opportunity cost of holding the spr. that is the analysis we should do before we sell a large chunk of it. probably fourake points. first, that is not the only international obligation so if we were to use the strategic petroleum is up, our obligation to how much regard out and could you be to that selected drawdown is actually a different number, so you have to take that into consideration. david is below a certain below ad -- there is, certain threshold do you do not have the flexibility to do a $37 the barrel a day and there is this unspoken element to this which is the size

matters and it sends a signal to the global economy on what you're willing to put the reserve and how much protection you have. given the newfound energy position we have in the united states only think about the future, we have to reassess the calculus. that you to the extent are going to sell down any portion of the spr, it seems like the department of energy has did. if you're going to sell it down and the rest of it does not work, maybe you have not invested the money wisely because you shut the size and it does not work the way he needed to. istly, the important part the international context. we do not do this alone and our effectiveness is corroded by the international strategic stock system which is increasingly ineffective. the way we care for, maintain, and modernize our spr actually does send signals to the rest of the international community and that is why we would like them to participate. i think it is important for us to realize ours is michigan

share not a growing one. -- ours is a shrinking share, not a growing one. sen. murkowski: very good points. straight to what i raise, it just seems a little crazy that andould be urging china india to come into this collaborative energy security network while we are thinking about eroding our own. thank you, all. this is something we have been working on together and i think we are of like minds. >> thank you. sen. murkowski: so you buy into the modernization of this, correct? on what you mean by modernization. sen. murkowski: infrastructure. >> i think there is an important need. sen. murkowski: would you use sales to do that? >> i guess i do not have a strong view on that.

if the money can be appropriated also, that would make sense and the only way to find it was to sell a relatively small spr crude, 40 million barrels, 50 lane girls depending on the price, -- 50 million barrels depend on the press, i think we do it because whether there was 600 or 650, the cannot get into the market at the volume we need, it will not be effective. sen. murkowski: in general, do you think this is a surplus or not? >> i think we need to do the kind of analysis i described to figure out how much the market has changed and the different kind of risk we are protecting against today that would work for the years ago. to a think it could be much smaller or should it be bigger? firstk we need to do that before we sell a large fight for the purposes. >> so there could be some day in the future a place where you might consider that a surplus? is certainly possible but

given how the market has changed, we should give addition to reflect up or down but i think we should do the work first. >> mr. booke, and that you mentioned private sector efforts and international efforts. this has always been a curious subject for somebody who cares industry and how much they took it would pipe till prices. have you seen european countries or others make jet fuel reserves work successfully for them, mr. book would you have comment? >> i don't know much about jethro preserves. -- about jet fuel preserves. the more you to go at the question, the more complicated it gets. aboutis a lot of analysis the system and which they manage

the strategic positioning of the refineries. it will be changing as well, so if you do not take that into consideration anything about the operation of the global strategic tax system, it is hard to assess ours as relative to this. >> how do think they are doing juxtaposed to us? that itoverall analysis is a good idea they have additional reserves or not/ ? >> it is a question of being able to manage a given their circumstances. some countries in europe do not manage the stocks within their own country. is a mixed bag. i think there has been criticism about the ability to draw down on something i private sector stocks and -- something our private sector stocks and seeing those stocks as the noble business of their finer systems. on the other hand, there are a number of instances where the global economy has benefited

from the release of product reserves and the efficiency of some of those systems because they are managed to family relative to our releases. it really is circumstantial. >> so you would not give them a positive mark -- this is something we have not done -- we have -- well, except for [indiscernible] , but we have not done what refined product reserves. we have not done that. is the european or world markets results of that positive or neutral or negative? >> think the global market has benefited from the fact that the globalic stocks are in stocks and that has been a benefit. >> mr. book, tell us about your beer. mr. book: i think there is a reason they have private stocks. inhave the best refineries

the world. there are finding system is in the client and they have a lot of refinery capacity that is really going to propose a strategic question. are they going to decide to keep uneconomic facilities in place will they rely on imported fuels from our refineries? that enables us to make a different choice. for that reason, it makes sense for them to do it then for us. >> and your point is that even though we do have it on home heating oil, it has not helped because the market has not responded quite the way or has not had an impact on the market in a way you would like to see. mr. burke: we want to be careful and we say it has not helped. -- mr. brooks: we want to be careful when we say it has not helped. it can be useful in hoarding and other negative aspects when it comes to critical resources, sure, but sometimes having an insurance policy in place is reassuring to people who decided

they needed twice as much of a case there was not enough. the possibility that all you have done is taken working capital that private companies previously put in to inventories and gave them essentially a subsidy, your guide is to spend it on something that has a higher fire because the federal government will pick it up. that is an uneconomic result. the same energy security for that great at expense, something you want to avoid. >> i'm not sure all the european models are done that way. mr. book: not at all. they rolled into the commercial system and they have a different , so the strategic stocks they have a co-mingled numbers and as part of the ongoing capacity in the european system. >> i think it shows the different option or way of looking at things. i have always been perplexed by our two colleagues who have to think so much on home heating oil. there are parts of the northwest, seattle, with home

heating oil but for the most part not something we deal with. when we deal with certain regions and we have had members of the committee who this is a big issue so you wonder what we can do to alleviate some of that costly challenges the consumer space on heating oil. thank you for this important hearing and we will continue to work with you and others and try to figure out a path forward. i certainly believe we need to make the investment here to modernize and keep this is your petroleum reserve. we need to come up with resources. i think we have to get that number and make the investment, so thank you for the hearing. sen. murkowski: thank you. to our teacher before being here today and giving us a little -- thank you were being here today and giving us extra time. we stand adjourned. today on c-span, donald trump makes a campaign stop in las vegas.

then his republican rival ben carson at the national press club in washington, d c they did today on "washington journal," live with phone calls, live coverage of the justice rally on the national mall. every we can come of spent at work futures programs on nonfiction books, politics, and american history. this morning at 10:00 eastern, marking the 20th anniversary of the million man march, live coverage of the justice or else gathering with keynote speakers. sunday evening at 6:30, retired neurosurgeon and gop candidate ben carson discusses his new book which he wrote with his wife candy. beginday, columbus day, at 10:00 a.m. eastern, we are live from new hampshire for all the coverage of the no labels problem solver convention which includes a republican and democratic presidential candidates. on c-span2, at 1:00 p.m. eastern

today, coverage of the brooklyn book festival with featured authors that include joy and great on barack obama, the clintons, and the racial divide. the history of corruption in how the and mona on middle east needs a sexual revolution. coming up sunday night at 9:00 -- at 9:00, david gregory on his current book, "how is your faith?" on faith and religion. on american history tv on 8:00, sanonight at diego state university professor on alexander hamilton, his role in the creation of the federal government and is believed in a strong central government to mediate between the states. sunday afternoon at 4:00 on the first or," years of the soviet union's war in afghanistan, and alleged war

crimes, including the bombing of hospitals. it are complete schedule at www.c-span.org. -- get our complete schedule at www.c-span.org. made asday, donald trump campaign appearance in las vegas or he talked about his campaign, media, and foreign policy. from the treasure island hotel and casino, this is one hour and 10 minutes. [applause] [applause] ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ >> you won't hear this in the media -- but donald -- [applause] donald gave $20 million to the

st. jude's children home, $20 million. [applause] he decided to give it to children with cancer. that's donald trump. by the way donald has more hispanics, hundreds of thousands and they'll love him, believe me. [applause] >> thank you everybody, thank you. thank you very much. thank you. so nice, thank you. thank you very much. what a great career. you know they have hundreds and hundreds of people standing outside the can get in. they didn't get the good real estate. you got there good real estate.

i feel badly. i feel badly. [applause] bill ruffin owns this hotel and he has been a friend of mine and we did deal together. it's a great thing to be involved with somebody that is so talented and so smart. such a great business person bill ruffin and he's a great poker player. i at least put my money on him and make game of poker and he always walks away quietly and takes everybody's money and goes on to the next one. that's what we want. thank you, i love you too. i want to start by saying kevin mccarthy is out, you know that right? [applause] and they're giving me a lot of

credit for that because a city really need somebody very very tough and very smart. like me, thank you. i like that guy over here whoever it is. it's bedlam in washington right now, it's a mess. i've never seen anything like it. i've been doing this for a long time. i've always been in politics. for three months have been a politician. it's so embarrassing, i'm a politician. i never wanted to be a politician but at some point they said we are going to make our country great again and everybody assumed. [applause] but kevin is a nice guy and i hope they find somebody that's going to have those qualities where we can negotiate and use the debt ceiling is coming up

very rapidly and do something really significant. if we don't we are going to be really we are going to be in very big trouble. we are going to be in very big trouble. we are in a big beautiful bubble right now and i predicted the last couple and i'm telling you we are going to get her act together or we are going to be greece on steroids. that's what's going to happen. there's nothing wrong with republicans taking a tough stance and sticking with it. [applause] i wrote the article deal and i think is the biggest selling business book of all times. who doesn't have that? i the way of coming out with anyone in about three weeks. do you know what it's called? crippled america. can you believe that? what a difference.

that was a long time ago. now i am doing one called crippled american as much as i hate to call it that it sort of happened by mistake. we had a photographer of a great book publishing company simon & schuster, the best. maybe i shouldn't say that. we want to keep it here but you know it's a really great company and they sent this fantastic tugger for andy took pictures. i'm smiling. like life is a bowl of cherries. in the meantime china is taking our jobs we are losing to isis and we don't know what we are doing. is it true? so i have all these pictures smiling but i had a couple i guess i wasn't prepared and i was nasty looking. and then i said maybe we should use that picture instead of the

nice pictures. i'm not going to give it to my family are anything but maybe we should use it so i have the nastiest looking picture. honestly for a period of time that's what we have got to do. we have got to put our heads down and straighten out this mess. nobody can do it like me. nobody. nobody can do it like me. [applause] i will bring our jobs back. you know what's interesting "cnn" did a poll. look at all the cameras up there. every time they had me on live of these other guys make the same speech over and over again and they read it. if i say the same thought twice i get criticized. he said that three weeks ago. how many thoughts and you have? jobs think the military is in trouble and the vets are being poorly taken care of and we are going to straighten it out. [applause] we are going to reveal obama --

repeal obamacare. [applause] we have to. we have to. we don't have a choice. look at the response i get. sometimes it's not the biggest response. my stance on immigration is first of all i just met with a whole group of hispanics. and what else that i really appreciated. i did know he's going to say that but currently thousands of hispanics, incredible people. my relationship is great. they did a poll and everybody probably saw the poll. i won with hispanics in the state of nevada. [applause] they are incredible people. and i think i won for two reasons but one of them is they know i'm going to bring jobs back to this country. we are going to take their jobs back and people are going to have jobs because this 5.3 and

5.5%, we have close to 100 million people that are out of work. they're out of the work worse. we have 50 million people in poverty. they are considered poverty like third world. our infrastructure, our airports are worse than third world. you fly into kennedy lax were like a third world country. i get along with everybody. by the way i do, i do. i don't dislike -- i have the biggest bank in the world like seriously big. the rent comes then, boom like clockwork i don't have to worry. i have tremendous relationships with mexico, with china, with everybody. the problem is we are not being led right. when china japan brazil, name a

country anybody. name any country, they are taking advantage of us. france, they are taking advantage of us. you know that because you know what they are doing with iran. you could name any country. russia, that's a pretty easy one. russia. he's having a field day dealing with our leaders because our leaders are incompetent. they are incompetent. [applause] so we have had -- or even israel. if you look at israel we are taking advantage of israel if you think about it because what we did with that stupid deal with iran is the worst thing that has probably happened to israel since the initial israel, since day one. i would say maybe, maybe potentially the worst thing that

ever happened as israel and i have so many jewish friends now. some continue to support them. it's almost like what are we doing here? they support them but they say say -- and the whole thing is crazy. he has been so bad to israel and bb is a great guy. i know him. i thought he made a great speech the other day the meditations. i was one of the few people, he asked me to make an ad for him. i was honored and it took all credit for it. full credit. but we have a problem with somebody different things. i love talking about this, the media. do we love the media? [booing]

the level of dishonesty is incredible and i always ask the press, not all of them, some are fun but the level of honesty in the media is so dishonest. i will do a crowd and i'll have a crowd like this and the cameras never panorama. they never panned the room. it's true. they don't do it. [applause] they don't do it. pan around. go ahead, panic but they won't. i was in oklahoma the other day, unbelievable. we had 20,000 people in this massive park and there were more than 20,000. i'm now going low because if i tell people more they say oh it wasn't. i had one crowd with a group

from politico who is totaled -- totally dishonest, politico. bernie sanders in the look and i have far more people than him but it's important because it shows the dishonesty. when i was in oklahoma the other day and we had 20,000 people at least. we added band show with a thing the thing in the back all chrome crete. you can't see anything. we must have had two or 3000 people. i was saying they can't see anything. there was a stage with this massive wall behind me. we had much more than 20. i have actually become very conservative and this is what i get criticized. i went home and my wife said how was it? was a crowded? it's true. she said they had the camera on your face the entire time and they never panned the crowd. they are terrible.

the media is terrible. i'm going to go into a whole thing. no, they are terrible. pan, they won't turn the camera. and they won't put this part on because they never put it on. what are you pan the camera's? they don't want to do that. [applause] it's terrible. look, they don't move. my wife tells me, how was the crowd in the home of? i said it was amazing. i thought you watch. i did but they never showed how many people were there and then the reporter got on. donald trump is here and it made a speech in oklahoma. and he left. [laughter] i said every record. he was here and he made a speech , little controversial.

he's a little controversial. they are really dishonest people. the same thing in dallas. i went to dallas and they treated me fairly good they are. mark cuban called me up is a good guy and he owns the mavericks and he said i would love you to use the place. i said when? it was thursday when he called. how many seats? he said we have 20,000 seats so we had the floor filled up and we had the place a few days. i think they sold 12 or 15 the first day. it was a holiday and i got there and it was incredible. but they don't really -- i will tell you a great story. today in one of the big newspapers "new york times" we never did better. we are hotter than ever. i think we were 32 of 35. remember this.

[applause] it's disgusting and the reporter that did the story was totally inaccurate, and calls of my people and says i want to meet with mr. trump. he never even spoke to me. so they did a story. is he winning? yesterday morning i won the state of florida. i was at 28 or 29. so think of this. the governor of the state, bush, former. no, hey honestly and rubio the senator. [booing] rubio was the gang of eight. very weak on immigration. bush is in favor of common core. so that means your children, right? that means your children are going to be educated by the

bureaucrats in washington. i don't think so. so this reporter called up my people. i have great people. i would love to speak to mr. trump. she writes this horrible story and she didn't say we had 24 million people at the debate. the biggest -- and the history of "cnn" and fox had the biggest audience in cable i think they said. and by the way those were the preliminary numbers. i have a big chunk of the apprentice. i get a lot of the profits on the apprentice so you cannot tell the enemies i left. the head of is an amazing guy. he came up along with the head of reality television and they come out to my office. they said we want you and we

will do anything. he's one of the biggest executives. i said honestly i think i'm going to run and i want to make our country great again. i think i'm going to run, i think. and he said i don't know but just in case so they had there up front. usually the biggest place in manhattan and they announced their schedule. they announced that the apprentice is going to be extended with donald trump. season 15 and they didn't want to go beyond that. they said if you run, it's called equal time so if i do the apprentice you have to let other people let's say lindsey graham to a two-hour show on television. i don't think so, right?

so basically you are precluded. what happened was i said no, no so they announced it and they sell the advertising and it's is one of the easier shows on television. even after all these years, 12 years 12 million copies and now they extend the extend. i'm honored and i get a call from mark or net. he said i can't believe you are turning down an extension. nobody turns down an extension. i'm giving up a lot, believe me. on top of it, on top of that i'm self-funding my own campaign. i'm putting up my own money. [applause] i'm the only one. [applause] it's amazing the response.

all these guys are totally controlled by the special-interest and the lobbies. i've been there. now all of a sudden i went like this. so i turned it down and begin the story from a very dishonest paper. donald trump gets fired from nbc. [laughter] they know it's not true. in fact i did a big chunk of the show. i created it with mark or nat. they said trump gets fired by nbc. and they know it's not true. they said yeah we knew but it just sounds better. they are such a dirty, rotten liars. so i gave up the apprentice and then i said we had to put down in certified numbers and they said they be trump won't run because that's a big thing.

then they say he will never do for me. he would never do it, too smart. that's the kind of guy we need but he's not going to do it. he's happy. got a great family and lots of rate things so they will say he never filed for me. he will never file financials because maybe he is not that rich. by the way i was one of the few that filed on time. these guys have one page. i work with some companies. it's true. and they were late. they needed extensions and i filed on time. i actually filed ahead of schedule. they found that my company and phil would know because he knows my company is much bigger much stronger much richer than they ever thought possible. they couldn't believe it.

from that day i had done this and my wife, it's very interesting. has anyone heard of avon to and milani asked. they are two great women. you watch they are going to come out and start campaigning pretty soon they're going to be great. they believe so strongly in women's health issues that bush by the way didn't want. hillary puts on the vote, how dare he talk about it? she acted indignant. here's a woman cheating the united states government for years with her e-mails. [applause] they gave petraeus, has a criminal record now and for doing one tenth of what she did. and i don't know i think she's going to get away with it. can you believe that? i think she's going to get away

with it. general petraeus, good guy. they destroyed his life. what he did with 2% of what she did. i look forward to running against her because frankly that's come to be such a big issue. it's going to be such a big issue. [applause] and don't forget she will fight very hard because she has to win because the statutes of limitations in six years and do you know what that means? there is some guy up there that's probably a lawyer and he's laughing like hell. if a republican gets in and they have to look at this, 60 or so she's fighting for her life. i think the democrats are going to leave her alone because it's a corrupt system and we have a corrupt system. i think they will leave her alone but if a republican gets in i'm not saying she's guilty, they have to check in but if they get a republican in they have a six years statute of

limitations. so she's really fighting. so she's really fighting for her life in a sense and it's very interesting she said i don't like donald trump's tone. i don't like his tone reagan bush said the same thing. and rubio said it to. they said i don't like donald trump's tone. i say wait a minute we need a tough tone. are we tired? [applause] weak, pathetic, sad people that don't have a clue that won't do anything we are going to make the country better than it's ever been before. we have a chance to do it. [applause] so they said we don't like mr. trump's tone. they want to be low key.

lets fall asleep and china did you ever see china's tom? believe me i deal with them. they don't talk about it's a beautiful day mr. trump. this guy is so beautiful. it's all business. we want to extend lease. there are no games. there are no games, no smalltalk there is no smalltalk. there is no how is the weather? it's all business with these people. when i deal with china and i love china, love the people. i love the mexican people. they are great but i deal with china and a walk in with waves of people, smart people. but i will tell you china can come in and you are sitting

there by yourself and you have 25 people. if you are good you can do deals that are unbelievable. so i asked my people last week, i said and tell me what is the trade imbalance with china? i was surprised. it's almost $400 billion a year. essentially that means that means we are losing 4 billion. it gets worse than that it does they devalue the currency so they are taking our jobs, they are taking our base and our manufacturing and then on top of it think of this one, china is our largest creditor along with japan. wheat you owe each of them one point $5 trillion of a steeler jobs, they take her money and we owe them money. how do you figure that one? not too good.

i call it a magic act. we owe them $1.5 trillion. we owe japan 1.5 trillion dollars. i was in los angeles and i saw the bigger ships i've ever seen. the cars are pouring out of the ships like the long island expressway. the are going 50 miles an hour up the ramp. it's almost like the ramp, and a few cell last week it was in one of the papers. they have a wall, the great wall they built a ramp. the wall was so small they didn't have to bother tearing it down. how stupid are we? but china we have an imbalance.

almost 400 leading dollars a year. if that's the number you know what's worse. and the government gives you number they say 5.3% unemployment. the number is probably 32% rate i saw one report done by a credible guide saying our unemployment rate is 42% because when you add back 100 million people you are right up there with those numbers but its half of 100 so we have a 25% unemployment rate. this is done by politicians so that they look good. if you stop looking for a job statistically or considered that you have a job. then they say unemployment is down and we are down to 5.3. we are not down. i wouldn't have caught on to be honest. i would have been catching on if the economy were real. the phony set of numbers. they cooked the books. have you ever heard the expression? the politicians cooked the books so what happens is they get the

reports yesterday in the reports are amazing. i love polls. somebody said they talked about polls and the other people down. that's because i'm winning and the other people are losing. i saw last night on television. there may be a time when they stop talking about it. if i number two, three, four or five some of these guys have nothing. they have zero. out of 20,000 people they have zero. how do you do that? to me that's more impressive than leaving. it's true. i saw a television ad. i was in iowa yesterday. aipac's overflow crowd amazing to you. the like you they want to see the country be strong. i was talking about the polls.

one of the reporters is here today. they said on television mr. trump talk about the polls. i thought to myself maybe i can talk about polls too much and then i realized i've been waiting since i came out. and maloney a my wife and my daughter said you know dad if you ever run you're going to win. why do you say that? because nobody thinks you are running. when they pull you before i signed my life away because that's what you do. you know it takes guts to run for office. especially if you're not a politician. nobody understands what's going on. so here's what happens. florida winning big. florida. 28, 29%.

that's it great importance today. anybody from pennsylvania? we love pennsylvania. i'm leading big. ohio. ohio. so the poll comes out and it's quinnipiac which is a great polling company. it's the real deal and they just hate it. i'm leading ohio and i'm leading with a good governor. he is the good guy and i'm leading by a lot. people say what's going on? than they have a poll come out which is a great pull and i have 35%. 35%. [applause] so we get as i said the highest ratings in the history of "cnn".

the highest ratings and by the way, i love these things. who won the debate? every single poll, "time" magazine, and drudge, places i never heard of everyone said trump but then i hear on the television donald had a bad night tonight. i thought i won. first of all, i like "cnn." i think roger ailes is great from fox but i go home and i watch it and i say i'm going to watch myself on television. who wouldn't do it? then i see the pundits coming, these highly paid guys. and they say they didn't like it and i was good in the first debate. and they said for 28 minutes i didn't say anything at the end.

i wasn't asked any questions. i wanted to say but it was so dishonest. so for the first two hours everything was me. it was either question to me. these guys are honorable guys. stand up. they are rich guys. these guys are loaded. that's why they are in the first row. of course i was hurt in the theater the fourth rows with us. so they won out and they do this thing on television. i'm saying i can understand it. my doctor says that every single polling organization they all say you one. but on the "cnn" debate, it was two hours. a two-hour debate. it was two hours and they made it three hours. it was a two-hour debate when i got there. don't ruin my story.

it was a two-hour debate and then a day and a half or two days before what happened is it was in variety and hollywood with porter. a terrific group. they did a nice cover story on me. i like them but they did a story about rates. they took the raids, in the case of fox and "cnn" $4000 for the 30-second ad to 200,000 so it was a 4000% increase. now he is really perking up. that's her language. so they went from $4000 to $200,000 and they sold out. so i get there and i didn't know this because all my people didn't tell me this. they said it's a three-hour debate. the reagan library, was a method that many people and it was

about 100 degrees in there. i didn't care. but you had a couple of people on the stage that were serious. they were melting. they went home and i lost 10 pounds. but they go out and i get there and i hear it's a three-hour debate. actually i was asa good athlete but who the hell wants to watch a three-hour debate? but they did it just to make money. so the first question was mine and the second and the third question in the fourth question was to the other guy. mr. trump said you are horrible guy, that truth sex and then they go and mr. trump doesn't like your face. what do you say? have you respond? do you world will watch. then they say you debated so

brilliantly. the entire thing was either questions at me or a question to the other candidates having to do with me. i think they came out specifically 48% and in the third hour of people started getting -- i am a ratings machine. it got to be too obvious so for 28 minutes they did and asked a question. here's the press, he didn't do well in the final hour. they didn't ask many questions. we have fun with it but i have fun with what i'm doing and we are making an impact like i've never thought possible. [applause] they have seen great dishonesty in other ways. iowa stud real estate guys in

new york were -- a lot of real estate guys in the room. politics is a much dirtier business. so i get a call from club for growth. i've never heard of it but my people said club for growth, what is that? they are growing the wallets in their pockets. club for growth supposedly conservative. a guy wants to see me so he comes to my office and we have a perfect nice talk and he's telling me about club for growth which is nice. he then sends me a letter and asked me if i would make a 1 million-dollar contribution. think of it. i said 1 million? i'm rich but i'm not stupid. a million dollars. so he wants a million dollars and a letter. he stupid enough to put it in a letter. how many in the broom would say he was in my office for a half an hour give him a million

bucks. i can't do that. what happened was we say politely no and all of a sudden it comes out in the news conference. i'm not a conservative and i'm not as some i'm not that. i believe in eminent domain which i don't believe in. sometimes we have to use it. every once in a while you have to build a road. i don't love it but sometimes you need it. you wouldn't have any roads. sometimes you need it. the good news was that had no impact. the pictures were so beautiful. i was 20 years younger. i look so handsome. i never knew i was that good looking. i looked so good. so they spent a million dollars on advertising. that shows you how dishonest politicians are. people came in, club for growth

does have a news conference. they absolutely invested in and they also said he raised taxes. i cannot with a tax bill lowering far more than anybody else. [applause] in fact, so much so "the wall street journal" which was bought for $5 billion and is now worth $500 million but they will criticize me. they did an editorial. now you tell me. you buy something for 5 million and it's now worth 500 million and maybe a couple of bucks more and then they write this nasty editorial. can you believe that? so i get criticized but one of the things i'm criticized for is my tax break is too big. what i'm doing is taking care

of -- because frankly we have lost the middle class. then they give you that editorial and here's the good news. i have never heard one person say that was bad. i get these editorials and they say that's devastating but they criticize me also. it has to be a personal dislike but the amount of the tax reduction is massive and it's going to put people to working people are going to be energized. the middle west is going to come back. [applause] i put them in the same category because people have forgotten about the middle class in this country. middle him -- middle income people is with out the country. you know who they have forgotten

about that time, maybe even worse? the veterans. they have forgotten the vet -- they have forgotten the veterans. they have totally forgotten the veterans. and i will tell you what, if i get elected, i'm running against against -- do you know what the power is? i have to knock on wood but so far when people attack me they get. they go down. it's true. so i get attacked by rick perry governor of texas. he attacks me viciously. he was a friend of mine. i got along with them great. i'm leaving practically from the time i got in. i think it's over three months. they said michele bachmann.

she lived for a week and they said herman cain, he lived for a week. i've been here three months. that's a long time. stand up, stand up and say it. do we love this guy? >> love him. [applause] but if i win -- i like that t. again you know what? aoa city people how do you react? pressure is very interesting because i've seen people that are really smart and that don't make it. they put on forest pressure on themselves. am i right? i got a call from one of the biggest reporters who i have

respect for but one of the biggest. i don't know him. from a major newspaper. his name art our day mentioned he said to me could i ask you one question? how does it field? he said you've done something that nobody else has ever done. i think i'm on 14 covers. i'm on more covers than any supermodel in history. can you believe that? by the way "people" magazine, i didn't love the picture. they did something with my nose. it's true. i love "people" magazine. they screwed around and i said just leave me alone. but milani looked good, ivanka looks good payday might take the picture i don't know.

come here, come here. [applause] where you from? >> i am from columbia. >> is this a set that? did i ever meet you before? >> we vote for mr. trump. mr. trump, we love you. we love you. [applause] >> i swear to you, i think she is totally beautiful. i never met her before, i swear. this all started with the "people" magazine.

a nice story, right? couldn't be nicer but i don't know what happened. so i'm looking and you tell me. i have a wart on the end of my nose. terrible. but that's okay. i've always wanted to look like kerry grant but anyway you are beautiful. [applause] [applause]

>> you are beautiful. >> thank you mr. trump. [applause] that's so great. never met her before. she's amazing. she is amazing. thank you, appreciate it very that's my relationship. they did the polls in nevada and nobody believes it but that's my relationship. new york we have a hispanic station and the emcee of the station, i don't know him and he's talking about trump. how bad is trump? they love them, all hispanics they loved trump because they know i'm going to do the right thing. i love the hispanic people. they know i'm going to do what's right. [applause]

a couple more things. i want just to talk about -- so we have the 2nd amendment and they want to take your guns away. [booing] we can't let it happen. the press wants me to put policies together because they say we agree he's leading in the polls but he can't go much longer because he doesn't put policy favors up. i guarantee mine is much higher than any of these people. [applause] by unical is one of the great professors. i put policy out on tax and i put policy on immigration and the 2nd amendment which is basic we you are allowed to protect yourself, okay wax. [applause] and they said don't you think it's important to start talking about policy.

it's not important to the people because they know i'm going to do the right thing. they know my stand but now i'm keeping the press happy. in the end it's all that simple. i will say this. i love being here with you. i loved my trip to iowa and i was in new hampshire and south carolina. somebody said -- i'm doing a business but i'm giving it to my kids and my great executives. i can be doing this all the time i have to to because we want to win. we want to win. i don't want to focus on the deals.

what's important to me and i just saved over the past couple weeks. one of the networks today said i could trademark the expression make america great. who would think of it? i had a couple of candidates. i had a couple of candidates. aye and go and they say make america great again so they started using it but the responses are the same. they don't believe in politicians. i was going to tell you before where these guys that came out were friends of mine but then they cannot viciously against me.

walker was a friend of mine. i get a lot of flak. i use them to put pictures of my family n.. but he came up and he gave me a plaque and he thanked me very much and he was so nice. one of his guys came out and he said bad things about me. chop his dad. he's a bad guy. i said oh thank you. he was supposed to win. he was favored to win. i gave the real numbers. in one paragraph that said big deficits schools are in trouble and votes are in trouble. i didn't know this. i thought it was all good. so i'm standing in iowa and he got wiped out and then he left

and when he left he said everybody has to leave. one person to take on trump, we have got to be trumpeted as want to do the right thing. [applause] no, think of it. then we have lindsey graham. [booing] he was always nice. he called me because he wanted a reference or something and then he wanted campaign contributions and it left me his number. he gave me his cell number and this was three years ago. it's true. i found it. i have a whole pile of junk. that's stuff that will never be used again. i had a news conference and i held up his number. they said read it out and i ratted out.

he was a nice guy and he wanted contributions and that was fine. i had a previous life. mine nonpolitician and my politician. i gave him a hard time. i don't start these things. everyone says these mean. hit me with that beautiful red hair. look at that beautiful hair. i wish i had that hair. it looks good. [applause] said he hit me really hard. i'm in my 20s and 30s and the hits the hell out of me. he was a nice guy, what happened? he said i will never leave. why not? just leave, it's not working. then they have the polls in south carolina. i met 29 or 32 or something like

that. he's at 20, so something is wrong. he's probably not going to run for office again. i think these guys have been mortally wounded. and then we have rand paul. [booing] he was expected to win and then he goes around for the last debate in these telling everybody i'm going to attack trump. he's not a true conservative. e what i like his ideas. [applause] i am a conservative guy. and these are vicious guys. just take it easy. he said news conferences telling everybody what a bad guy a.m.. he is another one that is expected to win. i have great respect for the people of kentucky.

i love that state and i love the people but what are they second-class citizens? take your place. i think it's unfair for the people of kentucky. how do you do that? so he starts getting really vicious. every time i see him, i won't even say it. then he said i would get him in the debate. am i right? asus right? i'm going to get him in the debate. i'm going to go after him. he's not going to have a chance. i'm going to do numbers on them that are unbelievable. the first question i attack him. after that he was perfectly nice. he backed me up twice. so this is a crazy thing. jeb bush is doing great.

he is a nice guy but he was doing great. when i think of the president i think you need somebody with tremendous drive and energy and up here. [applause] i didn't see the fire in jeb. stand up. what was the expression? low energy he said. sometimes she will say something about somebody. sometimes like i called rubio a lightweight. water, yeah water. remember the response on live television in the present state of the union speech? they said be careful because he's a young rising star and is talking in a sweating. i'm watching saying is he going to be okay? and he's sweating and to keep

sweating and the waters pouring down all over. i said was that live television? but i called him a lightweight. he may be a nice guy. i really don't know him but he attacked me viciously and booked booked -- bush attacked me viciously. it wasn't all that vicious that vicious is a nice person. i said he's a low energy individual and somehow that one-stop. i don't know if lightweight is going to stick with rubio. then i attacked carly's record because her record running a business was a disaster. she was named to the ceo hall of fame as one of the worst in the country. but she's got that good patter patter like a machine gun. i said if you listen for 10 minutes you get a headache. [applause]

you get a headache. the press loves her. i am at 29 and she says six and here's the headline. carly is surging. i mean honestly she is surging. then said something very nasty. i like him. he said something really nasty about my face. i'm a religious person. can you believe i'm protestant? i was all set to go after him and then he took it back. i can't do that. he took it back. i was all set. i was disappointed that he took it back. i didn't want them to take it back. i didn't wanted to take it back. and i couldn't do it because he stood up and he said no the

press talked me into saying something that i didn't mean and i'm taking it back and i said that's really cool. [applause] why do you say something bad about me please? yesterday i stuck up for him because the press killed him. the press was saying he made a statement essentially there were some maniac over there shooting people. they said that's terrible and that's disrespectful to the people. i didn't see it that way and i said i think he was treated unfairly by the press. it became a big story. actually stuck up for him. it's the first time i've ever done that. i don't do that. [applause] so i just want to tell you we are going to bring jobs back to this country. [applause] we are going to have caro icon one of the greatest businesspeople of all times. we are going to have phil. we are going to have the

smartest the best negotiators in the world and i know most of them and believe me i know people you have never heard of that are better than the ones you have heard of. i turned down millions, i feel so foolish. one guy wants to give $5 million. he wants to give a fortune. i don't want it. i feel like a jerk. i said no. and i go like this. i was in iowa and i asked a question. supposing, i'm so funding my campaign other than the tiny ones. we had a woman $7.59. how can you send that money back? first of all it cost you costs you more money to send it back. it's cute, it's beautiful.

they feel invested in your campaign. if you wrote a letter saying i'm sorry i don't want your money, it's nasty. i don't want the big money. so i turned them down and it's so different from what i really am. i was in iowa and we had a packed house. they said i don't feel good about turning these people down. i said i feel like a schmuck. how many jewish people in this room? am i right? i feel like what am i doing? i'm turning down millions of dollars and i said okay look how about if i take the money but i swear to you i won't do anything and you know what they did? do you stood up and they went crazy. they hated it. i said i promise you and here's the thing, let me take millions

of dollars from these people. i will not do them any favors. i will go out of my way not to do them favors and everyone stood up and said one thing, don't do it. if i lose i was stupid. i don't think i get enough credit for cell funding. i get so much publicity. i feel crazy but put in an advertisement. what do i need for? at "cnn" they say all trump all the time and then you put an ad in. they say i can't take it anymore. so it's zerocome and you will see than the filings. i don't know if i get credit because of cell funding. do people know that i'm self-funded? [applause]

so we are going to bring back our jobs. this last trade deal is a disaster. by the way hillary came out saying the same thing i've been saying for five months. i took a commercial saying the trade deal with no good. it's no good. 11 countries that are ripping up united states and taking our jobs. china is going to come in the backdoor and make a great deal with us. they always make a great deal with us. we are led by very stupid people. so hillary came out against it. obama wanted it. hillary came out against the president. be careful hillary, you may be indicted. be careful. [applause] that's very dangerous for her to do. i give her credit but the reason she did if she thinks someday

she's going to be debating me. i our day have the pipeline, which i love. whether it's good better and different it's not going to hurt anybody. it's not going to have an impact she changed her mind yesterday. you saw that. i'm telling you obama is angry at her. this could be the end of e-mail. this could finally be the end. she's going to end up like general petraeus, seriously. this could be the beginning of the end but i want to run against her. i really do. i want to run against her. i don't want to run against bernie. that's too easy, right? some people say communists and some people say socialist. i've always wanted to run against a socialist/communist. in this country i don't think it plays but we are going to take

our jobs back. we are going to make our military so strong, so powerful that nobody is going to mess with us and we will not have to use it in my opinion. nobody is going to mess with us. [applause] but. [applause] [applause] as part of that we are going to make our vets the cherished people that they should be. there are very special, special people.

or wounded warriors, our vets are going to be taken care of properly. we wouldn't be here for wasn't for them. [applause] we are going to come up with a health care program that's going to be unbelievable. if your premiums will not be racing 55% like you're doing now. we are going to terminate obamacare. we are going to come up with a plan that sub good that everybody is going to be taking care of but we are going to come up with a plan that works. [applause] so just remember the look in neighboring look at the people you are sitting next to because this is more than just a group of people listening to a speech. if you came here to listen to other candidates he would have 10 rouson front and you'd have an isil chat and everyone would say boys have warning. this is a movement. [applause] this is a movement.

this is a movement to take our country back. this is a movement to take our country back. it's like this everywhere. i'd like to say you treated me so nicely but the truth is it's like this everywhere i go. there is a movement on in this country to take our country back. they used to use the term silent majority. it wasn't politically correct to use it because i think it had to do with nixon. nobody really knows but whatever. there is no more descriptive term and i'm bringing back the silent majority. before a type of silent majority have realized that i brought it back a couple months ago and i was in front of a group from south carolina that was going absolutely wild. i set the silent majority and i realize it doesn't work anymore. it's the loud noisy incredible

majority. that's what it is. [applause] we are tired of being pushed around. we are tired of being led by stupid people. [applause] we are tired of having our negotiators give iran $150 billion. 24 day inspection periods, self inspection. we don't get our prisoners back. we are tired of having them approach us two days ago and saying we should have had our prisoners back. saying we want to give your three prisoners that we want 19 people from you and they want many other things and that should have been included in the deal. they are tired of it. we are tired of surgeon bergdahl who is a traitor. [applause] he's a traitor, a no good traitor. should have been executed.

the. [applause] we get surgeon bergdahl and they get five of the biggest killers that they wanted more than any people, more than any people for years they been trying to get these five killers and they are back on the battlefield and we got bergdahl. yesterday i heard he probably won't serve any time. 30 years ago he would have been shot and people are tired of it. so just remember this day because things are happening. if at all happens, and i think it might very well, we are going to make this country great again , greater than ever before and it's going to be something special. thank you very much. thank you everybody. thank you. ♪ ♪

thank you everybody. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

nun. ♪ ♪ cases,series landmark scott was assigned duties in several three straight -- free states. he tried to buy his family freedom, but she refused and he sued. follow the case of scott versus standard -- stanford. guest, george

washington law professor christopher bracy and university of michigan history professor martha jones. cases, lines monday at 9:00 p.m. eastern. andill take your calls facebook comments during the program. for background on each case while you watch, order your copy of the plant book. -- of the landmark cases book. all campaign long, c-span takes you on the road to the white house. unfiltered access to the candidates at town hall everygs, speeches, and

campaign event we cover is available on our website that c-span.org. >> presidential candidate ben carson talked about constitutional rights at the national press club. the candidate has a new book out about the constitution entitled, "a more perfect union." is an hour. mr. hughes: good afternoon and welcome. my name is john hughes. i am an editor for bloomberg. and i am president of the national press club. [applause] mr. hughes: thank you. our guest today is republican presidential candidate and neurosurgeon, dr. ben carson. he will discuss his newest book,

one he wrote with his wife candy. it is entitled "a more perfect union: what we the people can do to reclaim our constitutional liberties." first i would like to introduce our distinguished head table. from the audience's right, joseph morton. he is the washington correspondent for the omaha world herald. he is the membership secretary of the national press club. a reporter for the gray sheet. jennifer laszlo, president of respectability usa. benji saarland is political reporter for msnbc. candy carson, she is the wife of our speaker. [applause]