author, caitlin emma joining us. that is it for our program today. another edition comes your way tomorrow at 7:00. see you then. ♪ [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] >> on this monday, president obama is planning a visit to the pentagon for meetings with the national security council. afterwards, he is expecting to give a public update. this is part of a series of events this week on stopping terrorist groups and their supervisors. be will have live coverage of the president's comments this afternoon, getting underway at around 12:25. this afternoon,

c-span 3 will have my coverage from the atlantic council. a former minister of mexico takes part in the discussion this afternoon on migration .atters this is her first visit to washington, d.c. as foreign minister. we will have live coverage of that at 4:00 eastern. all persons having business before the honorable supreme court of the united states are admonished to draw near and give their attention. >> tonight on c-span's "landmark ."ses t >> are you sure you understand? ernesto miranda was 23 years old when he was arrested in phoenix. after two hours of police questioning, he confessed.

at trial, miranda was convicted, and give sentenced to 20 years n prison. his lawyer argued that he had not been given the right to an toorney or the re right remain silent. follow the case of miranda versus arizona and evolution of police practices. .hen jeff rosen and paul casale that is like tonight at 9:00 3, and on c-span, c-span he's been radio. for background on each case while you watch, or your copy of the "landmark cases" companion book. it is available for $8.95 shipping at c-span.org. >> c-span takes you on the road to the white house.

best access to the candidates at town hall meetings, speeches, rallies, and meet and greets. we are taking your comments on facebook, twitter, and by phone. always, every campaign event we cover is available on our website, c-span.org. >> republican presence of candidates will hold another event this week, hosted this time by cnn. senator rand paul didn't make the cut. the candidates were required to have at least 4% support in iowa polls. stage, john kasich on the carly fiorina, marco rubio, ben carson, donald trump, jeb bush, and chris christie. republican presidential candidate donald trump recently held a town hall for supporters in des moines.

he spoke on a number of issues before taking questions from the audience. this is about one hour and 15 minutes. ♪ we're not going to take it. no, were not going to take it. we're not going to take it anymore. we're not going to take it. it.we wainain't going to take we're not going to take it anymore. ♪ mr. trump: thank you, everybody. this is so exciting. we will do questions. we are doing really well. iowa has been amazing. we are doing so well and i love this place. i'm back here all the time and i will be here a lot in january. [cheering] you are going to be so sick of

me. you are going to say we cannot give him the caucus. no, you are going to like me and we are going to do a great job for you. most importantly, we will get to that office and do the right thing. we're going to do the right thing. so, a few things. so much has happened. when we first came out, we were all talking together and we were talking border security which we're doing so great with. we're going to build a wall. mexico will pay for the wall. we all know that. we will have security. the drugs will stop. people will come into the country but come in and be legal. that is the way. that is the way. it affects iowa so much. we are talking about repealing obamacare. it will be replaced.

[applause] i don't know if you have been seeing what is happening but obamacare is a total disaster. it is dying of its own weight. by 2017, he'll be playing golf and i will be working very hard. you are nottead, getting the people signed up. there has been a lot of talk about it. obamacare is dead. we will come up with something that will be so good, so much better. premiums are going through the roof. high, that or so are so unless you were close to death, i don't think you'd be able to use it. we will take care of that. by the way, we have a lot of good people. the y is really -- we have people. [applause] ago and theymonth

do a fantastic job. it is so important. it is another form of let's stay away from opec and the middle east stuff. it is so important. actually, what i don't understand, because the one guy that is doing pretty good with me in iowa is ted cruz. everything i say, he agrees with. no matter what i say. he agrees. with the ethanol, he has to come a long way because he is for the oil. i understand oil pay some a lot of money. the oil companies give him a lot of money. so, i'm with you. i'm with everybody. look, i'm self funding. i have no oil company, no special interest. i have no lobbyists that want me.

they are representing countries that are ripping off the country. they are representing companies that are ripping off the country. i am working for you. we will make america so great again. [applause] and maybe better than ever before. so important. when we first started, i talked about china and japan and mexico. mexico both at the border and in trade. abisco is moving there. ford is moving there. they took the big plant away from tennessee, a great state. we will do -- we will get it. we will do what we have to do, ok? thank you. look at that group over there. i talk about that a lot. about 2.5 weeks ago in paris, i'm speaking a

little differently now. i can take care of china in my back pocket. that is easy for me. that is what i do. [applause] we have all the cards. these politicians do not understand. we have the cards. with china, our people pay tax. they pay no tax. they call it a tariff because it sounds better. we will take care of that. what happened is with paris, it is a different mindset. when the polls came out last week, my numbers went way up because people feel more secure with me. yeah, really. [applause] who knows why? who knows? but, my poll numbers went up. whenever there is something i do that is proper, but controversial, they say now's he

's done. that's it. that is the end. i will not go over all the different things because maybe you will change your mind. they will say that is it. it is over. and then they come and say, sir, your poll numbers went up nine points this week. they did? [applause] because i have to do what is right. i have to do what is right. you know what? if i don't make it, i don't make it. i have a good life. you all hopefully have a good life. i have a great family, nice people. they love me, i think, i hope. i think. but, i have a great family. i built a great business. thank you. who is that person? i love that person. stand up.

i love that person. thank you, darling. i appreciate it. spirit no matter where i go. we go to dallas, we have thousands of people. 35,000 people in alabama. 20,000 people in oklahoma. this is supposed to be like a record. it is big, yet it feels intimate. we are going to start taking questions. i just want to say -- i changed a couple of weeks ago. when i saw paris, i changed. and a big part of what i'm doing now is safety and security and smartness and smartness. [applause] it is interesting. it is to make america great again and safe again because we

don't feel safe anymore. that welem we have now never had to this extent is the power of weaponry. it is the power, the tremendous power. 100 years ago, i said do not go there anyway -- i said do not go. you will destabilize the middle east. the fact is right now we have to do things because we have some really, really sick th degenerates. and the press -- look at all the cameras going. nobody else has cameras like this. 100 times i make a speech, nobody cares. look at this. [applause] worry.n't they have me. that is why i'm walking around. they never pan the crowd. they never do.

my wife, i had a crowd of 7000 people last week -- more -- 7000 people in a can finonfined spac. my wife said the speech was excellent. did you have many people there? i said what? she said they never leave your face. i figured the cameras were screwed up where you could not move it. anytime there is a protester, and they could be in the back corner of the room, the cameras swoop over there. it is true. it is true. [applause] no, i used to think they could not move. they're connected with the crazy computers. in the all days, everything was better. the car seats -- he would sit in your car, you want to move

forward or back, you press a button. now you have to open up things and press a computer. the same thing with cameras. i didn't think they moved. i figured they were fixed. then, i saw a protester and those cameras were bent in positions like you would not have believed possible. they are very dishonest people. not all of them, but most of them. the press is -- you have one of the most dishonest in your backyard. "the des moines register" is the worst. [applause] the worst. the worst. dishonest. very you have some reporter named jacobs. she is the worst. -- it is such so misrepresentation. i don't care. i'm saying in their backyard. they are failing anyway.

they probably will not be in business in two years. "the desny, every time moines register" does a poll, i always do badly. i believe -- i'm only doing this so they don't sue me -- i hope they do because they don't have enough money to sue me. i believe, and i may be wrong, i will say i'm sure i'm wrong, but it is my opinion that they don't do it properly. because they pull like 300 to 400 people, but i believe -- if they lose 20 people. forget that one. i don't know that they do that. do you do that? des moines i have a " register" poll, i do poorly. we had a great poll coming from

cnn where we are leading by 13 points in iowa. [applause] then, we had another one where we are doing very well. i think "des moines register" -- just watch. trump disappears. i think we will do so well. i think we will actually do better. we are leading in most of the polls. we are leading in every poll, except iowa, there was one poll. monmouth, what the hell is that? explain it. i don't like it because they'll we treat me badly also. i only like polls that treat me well, right? but, we are doing so well. nationwide, we are leading every poll by tremendous. we had one in georgia -- 44%. think of that. that is 44% with 15 people.

i'd take 44% if we had three people. but, 44%. cbs came out, as you know, "the new york times" a few days ago -- 35%. we are killing everybody in every poll. when des moines comes out, i 'm sure it will be negative. we are going to win. honestly, iowa is so important to me. anould say let's not -- i'm evangelical, a christian, a presbyterian. [applause] i love billy graham. he came out with the most beautiful statements. he was so incredible. i don't know if you saw this. he cannot with statements about -- came out with statements

about trump. stand up. is that right? he was so incredible. franklin graham, the son of billy graham. billy graham was unbelievable. they were incredible. so, i think we will do -- we are doing really well with evangelicals. by the way, i do like ted cruz, but not a lot of evangelicals, out of cuba -- come out of cuba. not a lot come out. i like him nevertheless. we are doing great with evangelicals. we are doing great with the tea party. leading with the tea party. [applause] doing fantastic with old and young and middle. we are doing great with everybody. it is very important to me to win iowa. i could put less pressure on myself and i could say i don't care about iowa, but i do care.

i do care so much about it. that is why am here all the time. then lies happen. they lie so much. the people of iowa can't be that stupid. the people of the country -- i'm trying to make a point. i said the people of the country cannot be that stupid. they cut the country out. iowa, i love you people. remember that. [applause] i was talking about something and i won't even mention what i was talking about because the guy i was talking about was actually a very good guide, but i will say this, we want to win iowa so bad. if i win, i think we run the table. i think we run the table. [applause] we go right through it. big in new hampshire, every poll. christie got an endorsement from this crazy newspaper up there.

the weirdest deal i have ever seen. you know, the paper that was in his state called up and said are you sure about that? nobody ever called us. can't believe it. we could go into that but it is not relevant. we are leading new hampshire big. we are leading in south carolina, like monstrous numbers. we are leading nevada, texas. we are leading everywhere. we are leading big in florida. -- but, rubio, nice guy when the people put you in position to be a senator, you have to go vote. you cannot be the number one person who does not vote in the senate. you have to say hey, i want to go and vote. he should stay there a little longer. go in vote, create a nice record. but, i don't know.

how is he doing in iowa? not too good. not good. it seems like a two-person race right now. it is an important race to me. win all of that, if we iowa, and a lot of people say we win virtually every state in the union and it is over quickly. [applause] now, we are going to take questions. one of the questions will be about what about the republican establishment? they have a problem. it is sort of like the fighters. the great champions. sometimes they go to the hometown of the guy they are fighting and they will say we never want to get a decision, we go for the knockout. because you get a lot of bad positions.

they go into a hometown to fight and it is a decision. they say we are in a problem. they lose the fight that they won. the only way they win the fight definitely, knockout. if we win iowa, think we will win everything after that. it will show how important it is. iowal pledge of this to even if i lose. i don't think i have ever said that in my life. we go and win, iowa is staying where it is in the chain. it is not moving. [applause] there is a big move for us to move iowa into a much further back position by the establishment. folks, i win, it is not happening. you are staying right here.

it's great. [applause] you know, it is great. if i don't do that, tana will be very angry at me. is she incredible? [applause] thank you. the whole staff. chuck and stephanie, where is my big i? guy? how good is he on television? where the hell is he? big sam, come here. >> there he is. mr. trump: look at the size of them. come here, sam. look at him. big sam. come here. are we going to win? >> we are going to win iowa and put them away. we will stand on their chest, stamp on their throats. we will have the biggest victory in the history of the caucuses in the state of iowa.

[applause] mr. trump: beautiful. be careful. he did so well, i don't want him falling when he is leaving. beautiful. thank you, sam. these are great people. i will be here that night. that week and a couple of weeks before. i will watch you. i will not give you any chance that we lose this. let's take a few questions. we will have a little fun. we did a big interview with cnn before this. with hillary missing today -- she was two hours late. did you hear? [booing] i may be wrong. if i am one minute off, they will call me because they love hillary. you know why? i don't know why. she was a couple of hours late and everybody left. you know what happened? she was sleeping. she could not get out of bed. she was sleeping is right.

let's take some questions. >> we have sue from the aarp. mr. trump: hi. >> hi, mr. trump. good to see you again. the social security administration reports by 2034, if nothing is done to update social security, the average 2034,is going to lose, in 25% of their benefits which calculates to about $4000 a year. my question to you is this -- what will you do to update social security? what are your specific solutions to update social security to put it on stable ground for future generations? mr. trump: i'm glad you asked me that question. you have been paying into social security and medicare, by the way. medicare does work. there is tremendous waste, fraud and abuse.

we will not cut your social security and your medicare. we will take the jobs back from all the countries that are ripping us off. we will become a wealthy country again and save you social security. think of it -- i cannot believe this number, but who was the mandatory the number? over 6 million people -- i cannot believe it -- are age 112 and over and getting social security. who is the man that told me that? i heard it, i read it. 6 million people are getting social security, meeting someone else is picking it up. who is that man? he is over there someplace. ok. 6 million people more. he came up to me tonight. it is an amazing statistic. we will have to check it. can you imagine -- we know there

may be one million but not 6 million. anybody in this room 112 or over? if they are, the want to shake your hand -- i want to shake your hand. 6 million people over 112 years old picking up social security. there is tremendous waste. what we are going to do is save medicare, save social security. we are not going to raise the age and do all the things that everybody else is talking about doing. they are all talking about doing it. you don't have to. we are going to bring our jobs back. we will make the economy incredible again. my tax proposal which is in great detail in terms of policy and has gotten tremendous reviews from a lot of people. taxese are going to cut tremendously for the middle class and businesses, because

the middle class, our middle-class is being decimated. sue, when that happens, you will see an economy that takes off. we will get rid of a lot of that debt. to $21$19 trillion going trillion right now. if you go back eight or nine years, trillion was not a word anybody knew and now it is routine. we are going to save your social security without cuts. we will make ourselves rich again. a woman said to me in new hampshire, she said, i'm voting for you, i love you, but it is very crude when you say you will make the country which again. i said i know it sounds that, but many things i say are crude. we cannot make our country great again unless we make our country rich again. we cannot let everybody in the world rip us off. [applause]

we built china. the money they took out of our country, we rebuilt china. they have bridges all over. they have bridges like the george washington bridge. maybe i should not mention that one particularly. bigger than the george washington bridge. only a few people got that. they have bridges going up. we have rebuilt china. they have taken our jobs, faith, manufacturing. they have taken our money. not going to happen anymore, folks. not going to happen. [applause] i know the great businesspeople. we have the greatest businesspeople in the world. guys like carl icahn. he calls me saying he wants to help. we are not going to use special interests. we use donors to negotiate with guy, because he gave some

whoever it might be -- again, i'm the only one cell funding my campaign. -- self funding my campaign. when these guys give money to politicians, to a large extent, they own those politicians. they will do whatever the hell the special interests and donors want. social security, we are saving it. medicare, we are saving it. we are going to make her country rich. thank you, sweetheart. >> we have a question back here from jeff. what is your question? mr. trump: hi. >> jeff morgan, and i have a question on behalf of veterans for a strong america. mr. trump: am i good with the veterans? >> very much so. mr. trump: we are leading with the veterans by like -- forget

it. >> i have a question here that would like to read to make sure i have all of it. andvets for strong america, their 500,000 supporters, endorsed you this past summer. hase then, the vfa collected -- >> come on, jeff. you knew you were doing this. you are going to get fired. >> i'm a little bit nervous. they have collected tens of thousands of signatures. they want to deliver that to the iowa campaign. those signatures are to talk petraeus andl betra the comparisons between hillary clinton and the general, and the double standards taking place. when you get into office, will

you instruct the department of of hillary take care clinton's accountability? mr. trump: yes, it is called -- [applause] what i like about jeff, he started off weak, but finish stroned strong. that was a long route to get to a good question. yeah, it is called the statute of limitations, right? it is a six-year statute. maybe five. yeah, you have to look at it. -- you know the story. it is a crime. she committed a crime. perhaps -- we have

to have a fair justice department. and perhaps jeff will have some really good attorney general that will say -- look, we want to be fair with everybody, including hillary clinton, but she committed a crime. she should not be allowed to run. she is being protected. i have little doubt they will find anything, but they have already found it. when you watch television, you have these big scholars, lawyers -- yes, she violated sections oh an so and so. many manny, many laws. you mentioned the general. his life was over destroyed over nothing. i think she will be their nominee. the only question is if she will be allowed to run. she is being protected by the democrats, by the president. why do you think she is going

along with these insane policies of his? she goes along with everything. honestly in fairness to her, i don't think she believes it. but i think she is afraid he is going to say, i don't like her anymore. i will get somebody else. i'm telling you. so, the question of statute of limitations -- it is a five-year statute of limitations. she has a problem. in one way, she is running for her life because i know one thing -- if she wins, that is the end of that. if she loses, she could have a serious problem. another question, please. >> we have eric. what is your question? mr. trump: hi. >> hi, i'm asking a question on behalf of the iowa coalition. we have syrian refugees coming in and we cannot vet them properly. what would you do immediately on

the southern border? [crowd chanting] mr. trump: it is always exciting. [cheering] mr. trump: out. out. get him out. [booing] get him out. get him out.

[cheering] >> there is always -- usa, usa, usa. >> usa, usa. there it is. mr. trump: that is a hillary supporter. au know, i always say it -- single person always want to be right in line with the camera. stands up, he is gone in a couple of minutes. tomorrow, the headlines will be protests. we have like 2000 people here. the headline will be this --

wait, this person. [applause] sorry. you know, it is interesting because i've learned so much. i've never done this before. i have never been a politician. i hate being a politician. i know politician so much. if you cannot make money with politicians, there is something wrong. it is amazing. i see these people and sometimes -- i have had 20,000 people. not even a murmur, just love. every once in a while, you have somebody stand up. every single time it turns out to be a big story. it is a shame. that is the press also. >> until we were so rudely interrupted, eric go-ahead and ask your question.

mr. trump: we will probably have another one stand up at some point. refugeese syrian coming in through the southern border. what can we do right now to protect the southern border? >> thank you. mr. trump: i said at the beginning we will build a wall. it is going to be a real wall. -- you see that feeling? -- ceiling. that is nothing compared to the wall. we can build it, we can build it right. it will be strong and powerful and as beautiful as a wall could look. it has to be beautiful because someday they will name it the trump wall. [applause] it is going to work. walls do work. they wanted to build a wall 20 years ago. they could not get environmental impact statements. china is building in the south

china sea massive military bases. why? they are not supposed to. they have no respect for obama, our country. they are not supposed to be doing this. we can get them to stop by saying we will not do business with you anymore. we don't have to go to war. it is economics. the whole country would collapse in two seconds. we have such power and we don't know it. they are building massive -- now, they have little islands. put the biggest excavators. i said to a friend of mine from china, very rich and successful -- he paid me a fortune so i happen to like him. i said jokingly, how long did it take them to build these massive violence?

islands. ? how long did it take them to get the environmental impact statement? he said nothing. they said they will build there and they were digging two seconds later. bigave a problem -- i'm a believer in clean air and clean water. i'm a big believer. i have gotten so many awards for the environment. we'reou look at how impinged -- the wall was stopped because they could not get an environmental impact statement. among other things. orre was probably a snail turtle or snake or something. you are ruining the habitat of a rattlesnake. i don't know. they actually have a lot of people, people that would now be against it, but they wanted to

build a wall years ago. i said bomb the oil. i've been saying that for years. now they are. one of the reasons that we did not bomb the oil, obama did not want to hurt the environment. i heard that and i thought somebody was kidding. i thought a comedian was saying that. it turned out to be true. it going into the atmosphere. this is the way we fight today. i'm telling you, we are being led by stupid people. we are being le by stupid d by stupid people. [applause] saying takeve been the oil. i didn't want to go into iraq, but once we were there -- we should not have been there, but we left the wrong way.

first of all, we have a president who told him a date. it was like 18 months later. they said wow, don't believe it. they don't want to be killed. the enemy said they would leave on a certain date? the pulled back and then now you see what happened. it is a disaster and iran is taking over iraq. weekse sent 50 soldiers ago and the president announces we are sending 50 soldiers. he thinks it is a good press announcement. it is not. 50 soldiers is not a lot even if they are elite. those 50 soldiers, because of that announcement, have a target on their heart. why does he have to say that? why can't he let 50 soldiers go there quietly? stealth. why can't he just do that? [applause]

why can't he do that? grave50 soldiers are in danger today because of that. and, they probably don't even know that, but everybody is looking for them. we have people that don't know what they are doing. we still have general douglas macarthur, general george patton -- these were real people. [applause] today, we have generals that go on talk shows. i saw a general the other day on a talk show. he said -- this is serious. they are good men, but you have to lead these men. the generals, you have to have power over them. he said we are in the worst shape in terms of preparedness that we have been in for decades . this is the time where we have to be in the best shape because

the world wants to kill us. they said we are in the worship we have been in many decades -- worst shape we have been in many decades. he should not be saying that because you are telling the enemy that. the enemy feels emboldened, right? we should not be saying it. [applause] even if it is true, you don't say it. you do the opposite. one thing i will do -- i will build the military so big and so strong and so powerful that -- so powerful -- [applause] that nobody is going to mess with us. nobody will mess with us. in many ways, it is the cheapest thing you can do. everybody is toying with us right now. it is the absolute cheapest thing you can do. ok, come on. >> we have roger right here. what is your question? >> hello.

mr. trump: hi. >> what is your response to those that want to enact more laws regarding firearms in an effort to keep evil people from doing evil things with firearms? mr. trump: you are right. i'm a big second amendment person, by the way. [applause] here. get over here. my gunman. this guy, he has one of the great places. might as well give him free publicity. my son buys weapons from him. my son and i are members of the nra. come here. [applause] looks like somebody was aiming at him. you know my sons, right? they are serious believers in the guns. what is the name intercompany

-- name of your company? >> we are the largest supplier. [applause] thank you all. mr. trump: you have a great company. this is long before i was ever thinking about doing this, right? >> a long time. mr. trump: they make you a lot of money? i hope they negotiated a little bit. it is a great company. thank you. be careful. [applause] my son is a really great marksman. i'm a member of the nra, but not such a good shot. if you think about that question now there is tremendous pressure to get rid of the guns, the magazines, the bullets. i will the three bullets in every magazine, then 12 and then 23. will't think the bad guys

say i don't want to break the law, but i will put three bullets in. these people. i have arguments with them all the time. i'm a practical guy. if i didn't believe it, i could not say it. in france or in california -- i have permission to carry which is a big thing in new york. i have a license to carry. but, in france or california or all these places we have seen shooters, if instead of having hundreds like in france, hundreds of people in that room -- paris as the toughest gun laws in the world. france has the toughest gun laws in the world. nobody has guns except the bad guys. worst,lked in with the toughest, best best weaponry you can have and they said over here, boom. over here, boom. they kill 128 but many more are

dying right now. they are in terrible shape in the hospitals. they wiped the place out and they could have stayed there longer. you have those two sleaze bags from california, the married couple. a young married couple did the shooting. they are not a young married couple. they are the worst. they are sleaze. [applause] the young married couple. that is no young married couple. they walk into a place and they killed 14 people and others are going to be dying probably. if somebody had guns -- nobody had a gun. look at this guy right here. stand up. how would you have done if you had a gun? would you fire back a little bit? they would have been in trouble. believe me. that guy. [applause]

to an ivyi went league college and have a lot of friends. i argue with them. i say, ok, we're in paris. there are hundreds of people and you have no gun. don't you think they would have been better? they lose the argument, but they never change their mind. we have to fight for the second amendment. it is so simple. it's so simple. [applause] -- believe me, they want to take those guns away and you always know the bad ones will have the guns and have it more so than ever before so we will protect the second amendment if i'm president. [applause] will also bee

saying merry christmas again. [applause] do you ever notice -- do you ever notice -- [cheers] that's right, brad. merry christmas. by the way, merry christmas, everybody. and happy holidays. i have a lot of friends that aren't christian. they like christmas. everybody likes christmas. it is politically incorrect to say merry christmas anymore. president, merry christmas, happy holidays, enjoy yourselves. we are going to say merry christmas again. we are going to bring our country, bring that spirit back. go ahead. >> we have greg. what is your question? >> hi, i'm twith the tea party patriots. this comes from the eagle

forum. when nominated, what do you intend to do with ted cruz? will you name him you are vice president -- your vice president or -- mr. trump: he is a good guy. >> or appoint him to the united states supreme court? mr. trump: that second is interesting. i like ted cruz a lot. he is doing well, i'm doing well. it is not a contest between the two of us. i do like am. him. i would say we would certainly have things in mind for ted. he is someone i can certainly say that for. [applause] i like him, he likes me. he put out a tweet tonight and said donald trump is terrific.

that is a nice word. other candidates are not exactly saying that about me. will you say hello to phyllis for me? she is an amazing woman. >> we have ruth from iowa pays the price. >> thanks. hi, i appreciate you are not bought and paid for. i know you said super pacs are a scam. our politicians have been corrupted by donors. andwill you fix this mess improve accountability and campaign financing? [applause] mr. trump: great question. the super pacs are horrible. i have had many set up for me from people i do not know. some people called it the art of the deal pac. i started going around and see the corruption with the super pacs, where they are stuffed with money.

people that put the money in our dealing with candidates. the whole thing is wrong. i see it. bush has $125 million. $2 billion, it would not make any difference, ok? [applause] million --25 honestly, he is a nice person. he is a very nice person, but $125 million. people giveourself, $2 million, $7 million -- you know what happens. some of the super pacs are actually running the campaign. another thing that is interesting -- one of the super pacs has $6 million. of the $6 million -- this was reported on the front page of -- ones angeles times" of the candidates which i will not mention the name.

of the $6 million, after all of the bloodsuckers took their cuts, the fundraisers, they had $140,000 left for the campaign. that is better than being a real estate broker. i would rather do that than sell houses. they had $140,000 left. it was in the newspaper. i think i believe it. i have seen it. the romney campaign -- the guy made tens of millions of dollars raising money for romney. you give them money and they get a cut. our laws are so corrupt. our campaign-finance laws mr. trump: i don't necessarily want to stop people from giving, because i think that is a good thing. but you have to get away from the super pac's. what you have to have his people

have to know who it is, so you have to open up the process and let people know -- if they want to give $1 million, then they can, but you must know who it is. that puts a little pressure on guys like brad, who raises hundreds of millions of dollars. pac, itept of the super is no good. it is no good. it is a very dangerous, terrible thing. we will change our laws because you really have no choice. it is so out of control. it is so terrible. the papers that are in this room tonight should look at this, there is so little money left over for the candidate, that is one of the reasons i'm so happy that i'm doing my own. we actually sent legal letters to around eight or nine super pac's. first of all, i'm sure that out of some of them, they sold the money. send i have no money and sets up a donald trump something super pac. he sets it up.

all of a sudden he has two main dollars. people send him money. how much of that money do you think he is to use to do what he is supposed to be doing? that is common sense. maybe all of it. but, i doubt it. so we sent legal notices to everyone that we could find having to do with donald trump. we do not want their money. we said, don't do it. we don't want it. ideally, give the money back to the people that gave it to you. but the super pac concept is correct and it is terrible and it should be ended. we will go to new campaign-finance laws that will be terrific. ok? thank you. [applause] mr. trump: go ahead. >> we have kevin with america's renewable future. >> good evening, mr. trump. think you for coming to iowa. i'm a native of des moines, so on behalf of des moines i would like to think you for coming. thank you for supporting the renewable fuel standard. you talked about this a little bit earlier.

senator cruz is not in support of that. you thinkll me, do that is because of his ties to big oil? mr. trump: yes, it is. [applause] mr. trump: it is. if he is from texas, to the best of my knowledge, there is a lot of oil in texas. he gets a lot of money from the oil companies and he is told -- totally against ethanol and everything else that you are talking about. i am not. i'm totally in favor. it is a big industry here. [applause] mr. trump: you know, is that industry is upset, iowa has problems. i was here through weeks ago with a group -- any of the people here that were at that meeting? they were such amazing people, right? stand up. we had a good meeting, right? i learned so much about it. i was in favor of it even before. that is correct, either member you very well. how could you forget?

it was amazing. looking at the plants. also, beyond even the fuel capacities which we want to create as much as we can, tremendous numbers of jobs in iowa. i say to myself, if ted cruz is against ethanol, how does he win in iowa? that is very anti-iowa. i don't know how he wins in iowa. [applause] mr. trump: but i totally for it, ok? thank you. >> thanks. >> what is your question? of servinghe honor iowa as the republican national committee woman. i do have a question for you on establishment or a late gop, whatever you want to call it. as the state central committee, we are neutral. this is not to hurt you or harm you, it is for clarification. when we see you make a statement and sometimes it is controversial, as we have

noticed, -- mr. trump: sometimes purposefully though. firestorm, the fact checkers come through and your constitutionally sound. you agree with the party platform. i have not found anything where i see you in contradiction, unlike other candidates that are in contradiction to the platform. with the public. you have unleashed america from the bondage of political correctness. [applause] mr. trump: wow, thank you. thank you. [applause] question, whymy wouldn't a gop, or rnc be thrilled with a candidate that has the numbers that you do, that is resonating with the public, and is saying the things that is obviously -- mr. trump: come here. bring her up. so nice. [applause] mr. trump: when she first started that question, i thought

oh no, here it comes. after midway through, i really appreciate it. come on over here. get under there. that's great. that assessing nice question, thank you. come here. don't fall. [applause] mr. trump: thank you very much. that is so nice. what is your name? >> i appreciate you writing. there are a lot of other things that you could be doing. we appreciate you running. i will not fight you for the microphone, ever. [applause] >> why is it, why would they not be thrilled that you are -- the numbers that you have, the crowds that you have, the message that you are bringing, you are reviving the heart of america. this is what we should want. why? [applause] mr. trump: thank you. be careful. i was a member of the

establishment six months ago. i gave the range of $50,000 to the republican governors association. i gave tremendous amounts of money away. i was like the fair-haired boy. once i said i was running, they said what? you're not supposed to run. then i ran against all of these senators and governors and everyone said, well, i don't know. my ways that, if you run, you are going to win. she understands the love people and people love me. she said -- you have to actually go and run. you have to announce that you are running. because, nobody will believe that you are running. i did not want to announce because i did not want to announce and then have things not work out and be like some of these guys were there at zero. many of them are at zero. finally i said, we are going to do it. there were too many things that i watched on television with our president and the decisions that are made. horrible, dirty, traitor, and --

they get five killers that they have wanted for nine years. the worst killers. they are all back on the battlefield. some a decision. iran deal. how bad is that? they self inspect? ok, we are not building. they promise they're not building nuclear weapons. that's ok. we give them $150 billion and we do not even get our prisoners back? the whole thing is crazy. i saw this. and i said to my wife, i don't know if i will do well or not. who knows? is a risky thing. i have always heard that if you are successful person you cannot run for office, especially president. i see it all the time. the people go after me. i don't even care at this point. i say, we have to do it. i looked at it the last time with mitt romney and i did not do it and i probably should have, because you let us down. look, he let us down. we had a failed president.

he was a failed president. just as bad as he is now. it is true. [applause] and mitt romney let us down. that last month it was like he was not even campaigning. i said, why are you jay leno or david letterman? why are you not doing a? he just did not do it. so he lost the election. i backed john mccain and he lost. i backed mitt romney and he lost. this time i said, i'm doing it myself. we're going to win. [applause] but, there is an establishment out there. it is a real establishment. real people. there are people that are used to having their little puppets all over the place. there are people who are used to giving donations and having control. they are people that may call me, i will treat them with respect, but i will not be doing bad things if it is bad for the country. i will not let ford will they plant in mexico if i can keep it in michigan. [applause]

mr. trump: i'm not going to let the car companies and nabisco and all of these people and all of these companies -- i am all for free trade and i think it is great. i am for it. it has to be smart trade. i will not let them move to mexico and sell things without tax or anything. we lose our jobs and our factories and they go over here and make it and we let them come through. how does that help us, folks? i went to the best business school in the world, believe me, it does not help us. trust me. we will not make is like that anymore. we can't. we own 19 train dollars. the establishment is not ever probably -- in the end, if this country mming even the establishment, they will say it is a good thing. they will be beneficiaries also. we have a real establishment and they have never seen this happen before. a writer called up and said -- to my the top journalists

way of thinking, certainly in the country and beyond, and he said, mr. trump, how does it feel? and i said how does what feel? how does it feel, what you have done has never, ever been done before? i said, what have i done? he says you have dominated the summer of donald trump. now they call it the autumn of donald trump. hopefully they call it the spring of donald trump. i want the next autumn of donald trump. [applause] writer,p: i said to the i don't know what you are talking about, i have not done anything. friendly, if i don't win, i consider this to be a total waste of time. i'll be honest with you. as much as i like eating with you, i want people to do anything. he says, no you have one, even if you don't win. i said no, i don't win. if i do not win, i have wasted my time. is, the establishment cannot believe it. they have never seen a happen before. i was on the cover of time magazine four weeks ago or five

weeks ago. time magazine was going to pick the person of the year. everybody, even my enemies said that donald trump is going to win. i said, i want win. they said why? i said i was. just like i should have gotten the emmy for the apprentice the first three years. i was nominated and i should have. and i said i will never win. because i'm not hollywood establishment. said,th time magazine, i -- o'reilly is a great guy. he did an editorial at the end of the show saying, nobody has done more than donald trump. he should have one. i probably should have, in all fairness. but he said, nobody has done more -- taken over -- what we have done has been amazing. it is not just me, it is all of us. from dallas and mobile and oklahoma. all of us. because the spirit -- bill o'reilly had a whole big thing. the other shows, where they said, donald trump, what do you

think? well, angela merkel got it. what did she do? she has destroyed -- she is in the process of destroying germany. with the migration. we have to help the people at the migration. we have to create a safe zone someplace in syria. i do not want them coming into this country. i don't want them. we don't know who they are. [applause] mr. trump: we don't know who they are. [applause] then with their printing presses that now do the forged passports. you heard about that. so, we do not know. the bottom line on that is it is such an interesting question. you will know in about a month or two whether or not the establishment has treated me fairly. but the only thing that i can iowa, ihis, if i win think it is over. i have said before. iowa,e, i think if i win new hampshire is amazing, people are amazing, you would love the

people and they would love you. you have everybody. the whole country is in love. i call it the noisy majority. it is no longer a silent majority. it is the noisy majority. [applause] but, if we win like i think we are going to win, because we have such a big lead. honestly, it is not going to matter, they can do anything. i don't care about the establishment. they can't do anything. the only way they can do it is if i'm a little bit short. if i'm to vote short i have a problem. i will have to go in that convention and deal with all of these bloodsucker politicians and they will make their deals and i will have all of the money guys around and they will be in the back room making deals. but, if i get the number of delegates, there is not a thing that they can do. i will end up doing fine with the establishment. again, i was a member of the establishment six months ago. that was a nice question and i appreciated, thank you. [applause] >> we have had there. what is your question? >> hello.

my question is regarding education. in the past, you have come out against common core. mr. trump: absolutely. [applause] mr. trump: that was an easy one, i'll tell you. a, gore is a symptom of larger disease, and that is the fact that the government thinks you know best our children, rather than our parents. with the recent passage of the every student succeeds act, the back room deal made by republicans and democrats kept the federal government and education. what will you do to return power to parents and make them have the choice on how to educate our children? thank you. [applause] so, common core, i'm such a believer in education. i had an uncle was a professor at m.i.t.. he was a brilliant guy. in fact, i just retweeted an article about him today. you have to read it. when i see somebody like jeb bush -- i will tell you one thing i respect, he did not change his views.

he knew he was going to get killed on this issue and i respect that to a certain extent. but, it is so wrong. common core is a total disaster. we have people -- [applause] we have people, bureaucrats in washington telling you how your child should be educated in iowa and new hampshire and all of the different places that we go to. it is ridiculous. i go around and i see the principles -- i have seen so many students and teachers and professors and principles and i have seen some of the people. somein iowa, i have seen of the love that these parents give to those schools. this is real love. these are smart people. these are people that are not working for a paycheck. these are incredible people and i have seen -- member this -- our educational system is a mess. we spend more money per pupil as

a government than any other country in the world and we are in 20th place. i mean, like double what anyone else has. i want to bring education back to the local areas. you will have parents and you will have unbelievably talented people and they love their kids and they want their kids to be well educated because it is so important. and you'll be very happy with it, ok? thank you. [applause] >> ok, we're coming down to logan. what is your question? >> hello. mr. trump: a tough looking cookie. go ahead. >> i represent a cooperative. we're wondering what your plans are for providing clean, safe, reliable and affordable energy? mr. trump: you people do it. i have gotten to know you really well. you people do it. we are backing you 100%. the job and the spirit that you all have, you are always perfectly i tired with your green, we are backing you 100%.

you do a phenomenal job. there should be more people like you in this country. the whole grid is a disaster. the whole country. the infrastructure of our country is falling apart. and nobody can build like me. that is what i do, i build. on pennsylvania avenue, a big, tremendous hotel. that i got from the government of the united states. from the obama administration, a couple of years ago. we have the best plan. the gsa is terrific. they're very talented people. we are under budget and ahead of schedule. that is what we do. when you see these things, where they are building a bridge and dollarscost a billion and then across $12 billion -- how about when they built the hospital that cost $3 billion. i look at it and i can tell you how much it will cost. sir, $3250 million, no billion. $3 billion? do you think somebody got rich on that when?

we are going to stop all of this debt. we are going to make our country so strong and so wonderful. we love it anyway. but it is so sad to see what is happening. it is so sad. and we are going to change it around. are we all finish with those questions? >> you have one, joe? we have one more. your planner doesn't let up. she is brutal. corey, she is brutal. she did a good job on the apprentice though. >> i had a really good mentor. [applause] andtrump: i'll tell you, there is another special person who did a great job on the apprentice great shawn johnson. she is another champion. she is another one. and she is an incredible young woman. she is getting married. she is fantastic. wherever she may be, say hello. go ahead. >> mr. trump, can you talk about your jobs program?

we don't have enough work to pay people a living wage. mr. trump: that is true. we have such a problem and the biggest problem i have relates to education. the hardest thing that you get is when you go around and you see students and somebody students come out and here's and they always want to talk about the loans. student loans. and they are going through nice colleges and their good student to work hard to could be really top in their class. and they get on the say, mr. trump, we have no jobs. we can't get jobs. they can get jobs. we are to bring our jobs back from china. we're going to bring our jobs back from all of these places overseas that has stolen our jobs. we will bring our jobs back from south america and will bring them back from mexico. we will have jobs again, believe me. we will be manufacturers again. we will start making apple computers in this country. does it doll good to= to make them in china? we are going to bring our jobs

back. ladies and this has been a lot of fun. this is the first arrived in this kind of a thing, and it has been amazing. yes? mr. trump: thank you. thank you. [applause] mr. trump: i thought you were a protester at first. [laughter] mr. trump: isn't that a terrible way to end? a protester in your final words. that was very nice, thank you. we love the military. thank you. [applause] mr. trump: so, i just want to thank you all for being here, we love you all and it is so important. iowa is so important to me and the relationship that i developed here have been amazing. we are going to make our country great again and we're going to make our country safe again. thank you all for being here. thank you. [applause] ♪

where not been a take it no, we angered and take it were not a take it anymore ♪ >> c-span takes you on the road to the white house and into the classroom. this year, our student cam asksentary contest acts -- students what they want to hear from the presidential candidates. follow c-span's road to the white house coverage and get all the details about the contest at c-span.org. president obama is at the pentagon today meeting with his national security team. after the meeting, the president is expected to make a public

address on the response to isis. this is part of a series of events this week on dealing with terrorism. we will have live coverage on the president's comments this afternoon. at 3:30,ng up today c-span3 will be live with the atlantic council panel to talk about the potential for a nuclear deal with pakistan. and the foreign minister of mexico takes are in a discussion this afternoon on migration matters and us-mexico relations at the migration policy institute. this is her first visit to washington, d.c. as foreign minister. we will have live coverage at 4:00 eastern. >> tonight on the communicators, michael powell, president and ceo of the national

communications association joins us to discuss challenges to the fcc's open internet orders. the upcoming spectrum auction. and the impact of lte technology on wi-fi. mr. powell is joined by john mckinnon, technology reporter for the wall street journal. >> whenever there's a spectrum question, we argue for carving out some amount for wireless use. the war is always over how much, how extensive. that goes on is are there things that are happening that could destroy the effective use of wi-fi? guaranteed the same way that a licensed spectrum carrier is guaranteed exclusive use. but let me tell you something. the commission would have a hard time explaining to the american consumer if wi-fi didn't work. easternht at 8:00 p.m.

on c-span 2. >> a new des moines register iowa poll shows texas senator ted cruz in first place with a 10 point lead. the trump campaign says that paul was biased -- that poll was biased. the hill newspaper argues that senator cruz is surging in iowa two months ahead of the caucuses. ted cruz spoke at the heritage foundation last week on terrorism and national security. in his remarks, he speaks for about an hour.

-- he was the nation's youngest solicitor general and the longest-serving cells that are general in texas and the first hispanic solicitor general in texas. he spent five years at a partner at the nation's largest law firm. authored more than 80 supreme court briefs and argued 43 oral arguments including nine before the u.s. supreme court. courtked supreme

litigation as an adjunct at the university of texas law school. served at the he federal trade commission as associate deputy general. and as domestic policy advisory on the -- and as domestic policy advisor on the 2008 bush cheney campaign. obviously he can't hold a job. [laughter] and he served as clerk for chief justice william rehnquist on the supreme court. please join me in welcoming senator ted cruz. [applause] sen. cruz: thank you very much, james. thank you for coming out this morning. it is great to be with so many good friends at the heritage. jewel in thisch a country. such a font of creative ideas

and energy that i believe is needed to change the direction of this country. it's fitting that we are here today. in just a few months we will be celebrating the 30th anniversary of one of ronald reagan's most important speeches. a speech that he gave right here at this institution. initiating an endowment drive that led to so much good in his times and our own. reagan discussed the present challenges including the threat of terrorism. the correctives that the -- had just sent to colonel gadhafi. the corrective came in the form of a military jet and a bond on his front porch.

i especially liked president reagan's description of how one of his most famous appointees, u.n. investor jim kirkpatrick, once explained to the rest of the world what it meant to have conservatives in charge of foreign policy. first he talked about the u.s. government's approach towards terrorism. foe, ally, friend or or adversary, should be surprised by the events of last week. " his actions made clear his determination to protect american lives and the world from terrorism. and he singled out ambassador kirkpatrick. at the start of the administration, people like jane kirkpatrick were offering some pretty broad hints that things will be different. how will the reagan administration change american

foreign-policy she was asked? she answered correctly. she said, we've taken down our kick me sign. and someone said, does this mean that if the united states is kicked it will kick back? not necessarily, she said. but it does mean we won't apologize. apologizing.en things are different. -- andhaps even noticed perhaps you've noticed. i know colonel gadhafi has. that was reagan at heritage 30 years ago. the challenges that reagan faced in his times were daunting. the threat of soviet communism. a threat that many in america thought could not be beaten. we were told that on an almost daily basis by elected

officials, academics, those in the media. but with a focus, a determination, and an unshakable belief in the greatness of our exceptional nation, president reagan won the cold war. today, we are once again facing challenging times both at home and abroad. an aggressive enemy whose goal is nothing less than the eradication of our very way of life. and there are many in this country who fear once again that we cannot defeat this enemy. that to even speak its name labels us bigots. it reminds me of that line from the movie "the usual suspects." the greatest trick the devil ever played was to convince the world he didn't exist. it seems when it comes to president obama and hillary

clinton, radical islamic terrorism is something that just doesn't exist. but the rest of us living on terra firma in the real world are aware that israel, it is growing, and it is profoundly dangerous. what america needs today is a moment of clarity. our enemy is radical islamic terrorism. this is an enemy that can and will be defeated. as we enter the final year of the obama administration, proof for all that there is indeed a god. [laughter] hopecruz: there is little that this president will rise to the challenge. and a much greater likelihood that his successor will be dealing with an even more dangerous world that we face today. issues will demand the

attention of our next president. keeping america safe at home and strong abroad. should be the basic responsibility and the first priority of any commander-in-chief. attacks onrrorist paris and san bernardino have brought front and center the issue of radical islamic terrorism. but the problem has been festering unattended for the entire obama administration. however,dent obama such issues are peripheral at best to his core progressive agenda. an agenda that the pieces are enemies before actually defending the national security interests of our great country. while the president and his secretaries of state have chosen to ignore the problem and to proceed from global leadership -- recede from global

leadership, terrorists have carried out a string of deadly attacks around the globe. it is worth noting that the attack on san bernardino has been called the deadliest terror attack on u.s. soil since 9/11. 14 innocent lives murdered. actuallyction is incorrect. we have had one other terror attack on u.s. soil that's a 14 took 14 lives. it occurred in my home state of texas at fort hood on november 9 2009. that likewise claimed 14 lives, the littlest victim, the unborn baby of private francesca valdez was brutally murdered along with her mother as nadal hassan ahu akbar.l

the obama administration responded to this unspeakable terrorist attack by labeling it workplace violence. one of the things i am most proud of in my tenure in the senate is introducing legislation demanding that the victims of the fort hood shooter and received the purple heart and against the active opposition of the obama pentagon. i was very pleased to earn the support of both democrats and republicans on the armed services committee. we passed that legislation into law of december and april of this year. finally, the purple heart was awarded to those victims. [applause] sen. cruz: whether it is fort hood, san bernardino, or a number of others tragically in between. from little rock to boston, to garland, to chattanooga.

president obama's approach has been to treat each one in isolation. has calledtration the perpetrators lone wolves, not to be associated with former groups like al qaeda or isis they investigate any suspects, but they ignore the reality that our nation is under attack. ist america needs today first a firm resolve to always protect america's freedom at home, freedom that has made this the greatest nation on the face of the planet. second, we need more clarity that starts with defining the restorend third, we america's leadership in the world through a position of strength. how do we do that?

first, we protect americans freedoms here at home. inricans no longer feel safe their schools, their workplaces, and their cities. this should not be the new standard. this is not the new normal. heidi and i have two precious girls, caroline and catherine. they are seven and five. every time i pick them up, every time i hold them in my arms, i want them to be confident that they are protected and far from any harm. starts with the secure america. it is beyond time to secure border.- our when terrorists can simply slim across the rio grande, we are daring them to make this journey. immigrationof

and our country comes from visa overstays, we are inviting evil actors to game our system, as of the case with one 9/11 hijackers. when we are opening up our country to thousands of refugees from regions filled with terrorists, terrorists with the , ourt to kill us immigration policy ceases to be merely an economic or social question. border security is national security. we need a president with the political will to secure the border once and for all. detailedtlined a integration plan to do just that. it includes finally completing all 107 -- 700 miles of the ball, mandated by federal law, that the obama administration .efuses to build

tripling border patrol. the ground where attempted incursions are occurring. ,inishing the biometric system again, mandated by federal law and ignored by the obama and mr. asia. -- obama administration. illegaldes deporting aliens, ending welfare benefits for those here illegally, and includes ending the practice of catch and release. i have also introduced legislation in the senate to refugee program from those coming from terror -riden countries, syria in particular. millions of people have been displaced right the savage

violence. millions are now living in camps that place severe strains on the resources of our allies. it is natural that out of our generosity, we want to help stop that misery. while the united states has been the largest donor to the refugee cause by a factor of 10, giving $1.2 billion of taxpayer funds, what any other nation has contributed, we cannot make the mistake of extending the ofe generosity to the extent ensuring the safety and security of our citizens. the first obligation of the commander-in-chief is to protect the safety and security of the united states of america. clearcent episodes make the need for more vigilance. ,he first is the paris attack which took 120 lives.

we now know that one of the bombers had arrived in france under the guise of being a refugee. it only takes one in a sea of to destroy our safety and take unknown numbers of innocent lives. the second instant is fresh in the minds and hearts of our country. just over a week ago, a muslim couple who had pledged their support to isis murdered 14 americans in san bernardino. came to this country on the fiancee visa. her application should have sent up any number of red flags, including a fake address in pakistan. that should have been fairly simple to track down, but it went unnoticed. resterday, and yet direco

to congressestified that the terrorist had been in contact online and had discussed martyrdom and jihad. this appears to be not a love story, but rather, the deliberate infiltration by an enemy of america who came here to plot and car carry out a terror attack on our citizens. this must stop. , there are some on both the right and left who want to exploit the current crisis by calling on americans to surrender our constitutional liberties as the only way to ensure our safety. the bill of rights is altogether compatible with protecting the

safety and security of american citizens. there are some who have called for resurrected the old data collection. -- bulk data collection. more data from millions of law abiding americans is not necessarily a good thing. it did not stop for good, it's not stop boston, it did not stop chad newman, and it failed to .nveil the san bernardino plot rather than targeting the buckeyes, we missed the bad guys, while file late in the constitutional rights of american citizens. program the bold data -- bulk data program was emblematic of the tendency to gather more, not better,

information, which gives the government tremendous opportunity for abuse and has .een displayed powerfully like the fable of the scorpion and the frog, government will do what is in its nature -- a mass power at the expense of the people. , we commemorated at 74th anniversary of pearl harbor. b a reminder that it is often procession.f toponsored the freedom act kill the bad guys while protecting ordinary citizens privacy rights. indeed, intelligence capabilities are enhanced. those are not by words. those of the words of james clapper, the director of national intelligence as he told congress this past may. under the usa freedom act, investigators have more tools to

target suspected terrorists, access phone records, track down those with whom they have communicated. under the old program, all of us were presumed guilty at the outset, and yet, the phone records that could be searched was universally smaller than what can be searched under the freedom act. it has expanded the number of phones that can be targeted, but requires some evidence that the person's phone you are going after is actually connected to the terrorist. we should not shy away from smarter policies that enhance our ability to target the bad guys, while protecting the .ights of law-abiding citizens in addition to those voices on the right who are calling for sweeping aside citizens rights, there are voices on the left who were taking the same approach, and what us to voluntarily

surrender our second amendment rights. both of these approaches are misguided. chief among them, going after the second amendment rights of our law-abiding citizens, is our president. with all due respect. the president has it exactly backwards. we do not stop the bad guys by giving away our guns. we stop the bad guys by using our guns. let's be very clear. the second amendment is not the enemy. isis is. radical islamic terrorism is. those who want to murder us are. as joseph story so rightly noted, the second amendment is the palladium of our liberties. these rights enabled and armed citizenry to defend itself against criminals, or homegrown

migrant terrorists in our own cities. rather than stripping ordinary citizens from their constitutional liberty, we should have an set a clear strategy to utterly defeat isis. that brings me to my second point. in addition to protecting americans here at home, the strategy to defeat the enemy begins by calling it by its name. radical islamic terrorism. sunday, in the president's address to the nation, he made an interesting point. he said "for seven years, i have followed this evolving threat in my intelligence brief." and yet, though he says he understands this evolving threat each day, he has chosen not to deal with the reality. he has chosen not to confront the actual enemy. he has chosen to not call the

attack in fort hood, little acts ofston concerted terrorism on our citizens, .athers, mothers, daughters we need to take off the blinders of political criti correctness. is radical islamic terrorism, and is trying to destroy our country and way of life. in a wall street journal column in this context, it raises the specter that americans will be bigots if they .tter the word islam

our president refuses to do so. t afact, he spen significant portion of the sunday address as an apologist for islamic terrorism. loretta lynch said her department would prosecute anyone who's anti-islamic rhetoric edged towards violence. the day after a terror attack. away.ocent lives snuffed we went and attorney general , noting up to the nation an attorney general who declares for anyoneech police who speaks out against this

threat, as has been the case all too often in the obama .dministration we may be facing once again the weaponization. them to submit to the obama administration code of what is and is not acceptable speech. attorney general lynch that that is what she is most afraid of. how about having an attorney general who is focused on having her kids safe. in fact, we are seeing the consequences. neighbors reportedly found

their behavior, but until now did not say think because they .ere scared of racial profiling imagine how different san bernardino would have played out if the fear and political correctness had not silence the neighbors, if a phone call had been made if they had discovered the radicalization and if they had been apprehended before they went on a murder spree. loretta lynch is banned on what she -- loretta lynch's ban on what she calls anti-islamic rhetoric is already producing chilling effects. let's take off the blinders. it is time to say that these attacks are not isolated incidents. one.e wolves are not l

they are instead operating as an ideological pack. the thing that unites some is their adherence to islamic conviction that the world must amend to their form of islam, or die. this evil force is present in our country. as the fbi director reported, it is active in each one of our 50 states. once we have identified the enemy, we must do everything in .ur power to defeat them america and the world have grown more dangerous as president obama has receded from the world stage. every day goes by, the united states seems weaker and the more marginal actor. increasingly dismissed as irrelevant, increasingly viewed

by the world leaders, the president is a laughingstock. to third goal must be restore america's leadership in the world. as reagan said, the best way to protect america's leadership is promoting its strength. this principle should always guide our actions. the next president must contend with the worsening state of american interests around the globe, given the opportunity to squander their enemies embolden under president obama's watch. our most immediate challenge comes from the middle east, which is what i want to talk about today. make no mistake about it. this is a global problem and significant potential for conflict from the baltics to the south china sea are made ever more difficult by president obama shameful and destructive

defunding of our military. given president obama's dismissive address to the nation on sunday night. it is now virtual certainty that the next president will have to deal with the scourge known as the islamic state and it will not be a local threat. that ifnow for a fact middle east,the with eas they will attack our allies in the region and beyond. they are on the lookout for every opportunity to attack us at home. the next president will need to bring together the best civilian military leadership to develop a plan to utterly and defeat isis. a plan that is not shackled by concerns over environmental impact or the most restrictive rules of engagement that our armed forces have ever known.

during the 15 months of president obama's failed military action against isis, i have strongly advocated for with themilitary plan sustained directed bombing campaign. instead, we have a foreign-policy of a bomb here, a missile there, not actually achieving the goal of defeating isis. we should also be arming the peshmerga, who have had success against isis, despite the fact that they are using outdated weapons because obama administration refuses to arm them because it would displease baghdad. our focus should not be on

kerning favor with baghdad, it should be on utterly defeating are and the peshmerga critical boots on the ground for accomplishing that effort. that, we should also include the jordanian and egyptian militaries. in which the united states has made significant investment in past decades. that, weve and beyond should do whatever is necessary and required to defeat isis. some in the course of a political campaign have focused on the question of boots on the ground, american boots on the ground. that is getting the deployment of military force backwards. this is not a game of risk.

instead, you need a commander in chief who sets an objective of destroying isis, and we need to rely on the expert military judgment as to the tools necessary to carry out the objective including overwhelming military power, arming the kurds , and using whatever ground troops are necessary to kill the terrorists and come home. the issue of isis is, however, only one piece of the complex geopolitical landscape of the middle east. i would like to turn out to how we productively approach this troubled region in a way that would improve the water posture of the unitedture states. 36 years ago last month, the remarkable intellect and diplomat who i mentioned earlier, jean kirkpatrick, essayhed an entitled, "dictatorships and

double standards." she wrote to disprove the notion that the prime directive of american foreign-policy should be to democratize foreign government any time, anywhere, any under circumstances. convinced that democracy was in and of itself and abstract force for good, the carter administration supported liberalcall uprisings against authoritative governments. however well-intentioned, president carter's efforts may result had been

time and again material damage to the national security interest of the united states. dictatorships and double standards appear the same month that the revolutionary leader of ,he islamic republic of iran who seized power unopposed by the carter administration had gone on to take more than 50 hostages at the american embassy in tehran. hostages that he would hold for 444 days. and buster at patrick's -- kirkpatrick's philosophy cut the attention of an aspiring presidential candidate. ronald reagan. the tireless champion of freedom and human rights. he had been grappling with the issue of how to advance the american cause against the soviets when many of our exactly were not

paragons of democratic virtue. reagan understood double standards which was that established liberal democracy are not the only viable allies for america. they are rather the best ones and are to be privatized, celebrated, and fiercely protected, but if we refuse to work with countries that do not meet our democratic standards, who are not making a rapid enough conversion to democracy, to furtherll helpful our national security, then we are undermining our goals and so too, our national security. ronald reagan absorbed this concept without ever losing his passion for freedom. he knew the threat was not the

dimestore dictator, but the existential threat of totalitarian communism which is on the march with the stated goal of world domination. he knew that this is not an either/or dilemma. even as he kept finally important alliances with the philippines and south korea, he used quiet diplomacy, and sometimes public diplomacy, to successfully encourage these nations to more democratic practices. progressbe nice if the of liberal democracy was a linear evolution and freedom, once achieved, would be a permanent state of affairs? indeed it would. even a cursory glance at the history of democracy, in the 2.5 millennia and the experiment was first attempted in agent athens, reveal this is far from the

case. the reality is that in order to strengthen the united states, we cannot treat democracy promotion as an absolute directive. but rather, as a highly desirable ideal, one that can be reached most effectively through the promotion of the security and it interest of the united states. we could do worse, in my opinion, then adopting the philosophypatrick today. after all, the proof is in the pudding. it is not an accident that when the american hostages were released on janeway 20, 1981, they came home, not because president carter had allowed the revolution to triumph unopposed, but because now, president reagan was in the white house, and the ayatollah new he would -- knew he would defend america. one recent case study that would

have interested resident reagan and ambassador kirk object was the january 2011 popular on oustedng that mubarak. mubarak made an easy target. an aging strongman with the grim record on human rights. the fact that he had been, for 30 years, a staunch ally of the united states, and a key partner in securing israel, was quickly discounted. the google field revolution was a heady moment that seem to 21st century rebuke to the of oppression of the past. mubarak's fall was held as an opportunity for egypt to chart a new and more hopeful the mechanic future. plans were made for speedy elections. when those elections came, however, the results were disastrous for the united states.

as mohamed morsi, which had close ties to the muslim brotherhood, came to power. barack obama insisted that all that mattered was that morsi was duly elected, and for that reason, the egyptian should have to suffer under his rule. even when he started to undermine american interests, destroyed the egyptian economy, and allowed jihadists and weapons to flow from libya into .he sinai while the second uprising in 2013 would not be the ideal way to change the government, we should all shudder to think what could have happened in egypt had .orsi seen out his term we might well have faced the prospect of egypt on the brink of failure, unable to protect its borders from the radical islamic that morsi

unleashed. now, we have a leader that is aggressively fighting the terrorist cells and defending his border with lydia, and who is not afraid to call up the terrible provision -- perversion of his own faith that is causing the violence. this last summer, i wrote a book, entitled "a time for tooth." in that book, i profiled a gave apresident morsi dinner a first at cairo university. it was a speech in which he called out directly the threat of radical islamic terrorists. it was a speech in which he called out fellow muslims to perversion,inst the the evil that is radical islamic terrorism. for president morsi -- for sisi to give the

speech as a muslim leader was a demonstration of courage and resolve that was remarkable. he was quite literally putting a bounty on his own head. he did so with his eyes open and fully aware that the forces of he was up against. what does it say when egypt is candid than is the president of the united states. indeed, at the same university, president obama had spoken in 2009 on his so-called world .pology tour he said, among other things, iran has a right to nuclear up for thetand

national security interest of this country. another episode was the nato intervention of libya that toppled muammar gaddafi. easier target. an anti-american dictator that s,onsored terror attack notably, the dowling of pan am .light qaddafi have long been suspected of pursuing a covert nuclear successfulat, if would pose a grave threat -- to the united states. when a popular uprising occurred in 2011, it seemed a no-brainer to this demonstration that america would come to the aid of the beleaguered rebels, splashed

press the international -- the mission seemed almost absurdly easy, one that could be executed with no real american sacrifice. indeed, as the obama administration boasted, we could lead from behind, and the result would be the establishment of a liberal democracy in libya that would only require administrative steps such as mobilizing international support for a transitional government and freeing up communication networks. how profoundly wrong that foreign policy view was. as it turns out, rather than democrat thating the obama administration and its allies wanted them to be, the rebels were radical to to

jihadis. at the time, it was well known that gadhafi had abandoned his nuclear program. it was less well-known that he had begun cooperating with the united states in the fight against the same violent terrorists. he was actively working to apprehend radical islamic terrorists to turn them over to america. once he was gone, things turn for the worst. once he was gone, in less than 18 months, they would overrun our facilities at benghazi, murdering for americans, including our pastor. the first american ambassador killed in the line of duty since the carter administration. state,libya is a failed controlled by warring terrorist networks that pose a threat to

our ally, egypt, and are openly plotting against our allies in europe. intervention in libya was a disaster. the argument that republicans had to in principle support what might have been a democratic uprising against gadhafi, but the obama administration somehow is revisionist thatry and poor history at this took place after the cairo .peech it should have been clear to any that the obamaer administration was not capable of a policy that would actually thend and robustly defend national security interest of the united states. its third example. thanas dragged on for more

four years since the syrian civil war. once again, there are no doubts that al-assad, like his father a bad guy, and a puppet of iran, and then enemy to the united states and israel. there wase been that a secular nonviolent opposition that would have made his ouster a strategic interest to the united states. by the time i arrived in congress, it was clear that far darker forces were at work. in june of that year, the economist reported that out of nine terrorist organizations that they identified, seven had terrorist ties. assad was and

jihadi's in syria is worth. worse,, the situation is despite millions of dollars the united states has poured in to identify and train the syrian as ice now, controls a significant portion isthe country, while assad consolidating his position as a and russia.an quite simply, we do not have war. in the syrian civil it is not very fashionable these days in washington. indeed, it is not difficult to find politicians in washington who will thunder, we must topple assad with the same frosty that

they thundered, we must topple gadhafi, mubarak. we have seen the catastrophic policiesf these myopic . i would note, my view that we do not have a side in the syrian civil war is shared by one other world leader, a clear eyed and direct vision as to what is happening. israel's minister netanyahu was asked, when he visited washington, why he did not intervene in the syrian civil war. he responded that he would only do so if he had a clear side, which at this point, he did not. he said that in the rainy and iranianed -- an assad was a disaster.

he said, when two of your enemies are fighting each other, i don't say, strengthen one or the other, i say, weekend -- or at least, don't interbeing, which is what i have done. i believe today we are at a 1938 thate munich in president obama has returned from geneva, returned from agreeing to give over a hundred billion dollars to the ayatollah , promising peace in our time. anything, giving hundreds of billions of dollars, strengthening homicidal maniacs who intend to murder you has never worked out well. peril, weof great need clarity and vision that

prime minister netanyahu provides because he does not have time for political correct that so hamstrings the obama administration. i think we should this is our closest ally in the region. in the absence of an alternative to assad that is not isis, i believe we should focus on the immediate and unambiguous challenge to our security which is utterly destroyed isis. i understand this flies in the face of conventional wisdom that holds america should promote democracy at all cost. somewhat consider any progression in egypt that does morsi serving out his term as unacceptable. they are proclaiming today that those who do not support a

ouster are complicit with terrorism. there will always be those who believe it is america's obligation as a free nation to convince others that we are laboring for their freedom, whether we want it or not. there will always be those who believe that, by insisting on anything less than our democratic ideals, we are forfeiting the high ground. borrow and buster kirkpatrick's elegant phrase, confusing idealism with realism. ronald reagan was the single greatest liberator of human impression that the world has ever known. he did not do it by forcing democracy on unwilling nations,

but by an unwavering determination to defeat communism. after two terms of an obama-clinton foreign-policy so disastrous it makes the obama administration look good, we are in a desperate need once again for clarity. the clarity of ronald reagan's for most important words -- we win, they lose. by replacingin dictators, as unpleasant as they may be with terrorists who want to kill us and destroy america. like reagan, we are not abandoning freedom, we are doing what we must to protect it. the true threat to liberty is islamism, which is

as big a threat as soviet kind o communism. others who are, and we should be able to figure out the difference. ote,nvestor kirkpatrick wr it may not always be easy to differentiate between allies of change, but it is also not too difficult. believe that ordinary men are capable of using freedom, knowing their own interest, and choosing leaders. is perhaps the single greatest blunder of the obama administration and one of its first in 2009, when the president ignored the green revolution in iran, therefore

forfeiting the opportunity to replace the radical islamist terrorist sponsoring regime that andted, "death to america," ."eath to israel instead, america could have stood with the secular rebellion that was crying out for support from the united states. there was a case where regime change squared up with our most pressing national needs. instead of standing with the iranian people, and what could have been his tear down this wall moment, instead, president obama fell silent, and decided .o open up negotiations instead while the so-called arab spring did not produce a wave of

flowering democracies, but unrest and radical terrorism embodied by isis. we can lead by example and demonstrate the positive effects of democracy, as investors kirkpatrick further noted, it is not impossible that u.s. policy could encourage this process of democratization, provided the effort was made at a time when the government is fighting for producing gradual change, rather than to perfect democracy overnight. to publish this, policy are needed to understand how actual democracies have action come into being.

history is a better guide than good intentions. there are a number of encouraging 20th century examples of liberalization that should give us hope. the flourishing vibrant democracy that is israel is one of the great gifts the last seven decades have the stone on america. we should not squander. the end of the cold war produced a unified, democratic germany, as well as the vibrant democracies of eastern europe -- strategic allies and assets to the united states. we can most effectively continue this process by embracing our own ideals, by standing unapologetically for freedom, by defending americans here in our country, by having the ur encouraged to speak with moral clarity, to call evil bites name , by unapologeticly defending

america's interest around the world and using the bully pulpit of the president to invite others to recognize the rights againstiduals and unite the evil forces who seek to tear down freedom. thank you. [applause] >> good morning, senator. about prime minister netanyahu. one of your hands on experiences was traveling to israel and meeting with him. i what to know what you got out of meeting with him.

"two ofbeing quoted as your opponents, donald trump and ben carson and the prospect of them controlling nuclear weapons. you said it was a question of .udgment did you say that? what did you mean by a? senator cruz: let's start with the first question. you are right. i traveled three times to the nation of israel. i have met with prime minister that yahoo! both in israel and america. has clarityer who of vision that i think this nation desperately needs. i will say, one of the most shameful aspects of the obama administration has been the deplorable treatment of the nation of israel that culminated in a moment that would have been disbelieved if i had suggested i

t years earlier. if i had suggested that the prime minister of israel would come to america and address a joint congress, and be boycotted by the president of the united states and every member of the, that would have been dismissed as ridiculous, something that would have never happened, yet it shows just how bad american foreign-policy has gotten towards israel. that is something that will change if i'm elected president. [applause] you just asked what did i get out of the meeting. in each of the conversations, we had frank and candid discussions threats in the region, the threat facing israel, the

threat facing america, and the steps that need to be taken to strengthen israeli friendship and fight against our enemies. we talked about immediate developments. we had significant discussions about syria, iran, radical islamic terrorism. those have dominated most of the discussions. you know, i'm not going to comment on what i may or may not have set a private fundraiser -- said at a private fundraiser, but i will say, voters will make a decision about all of the candidates, and the decision will be who has the right judgment -- judgment and experience to serve as commander-in-chief. everyone of us running is being assessed by the voters on that

metric. that is why we have a democratic election to make that determination. [applause] senator, good morning. you covered all of the mideast strategy very well. liked it very much. i have a mideast question. need foru weigh in the a near-term all-out strike evolving strike capability. senator cruz: a very good question and the daunting question. this nuclear agreement with iran is nothing short of catastrophic . the consequences of this agreement, as it continues to go forward is america will become of islamic financier terrorism. obama administration will become

of number one financier islamic terrorism. why is that? everybody understands that iran is the leading sponsor of state terror. goever on $1 billion to the ayatollah, we know that millions of those dollars will go to jihadists throughout the globe who will use those billions to murder americans. politicianto every everything, who do they can do to not stop this deal, the blood of americans will be on their hands. , i believeforward this deal will accelerate iran

obtaining nuclear weapons. it so-called inspection regime , set somely weak locations off-limits altogether, it provides an extended waiting site isefore any inspected. we rely on iran to inspect themselves. interestingly enough it follows the same strategy that the obama administration used for the irs scandal. miraculously, in both instances the inspector discovered no .rongdoing whatsoever i think the author significant that the president of the united states will be informed that he has only two options. either acquiesce in allowing iran to acquire nuclear weapons,

or take direct action to prevent it. view, this provides a clear choice. i cannot wait to stand on the debate stage with hillary clinton. [applause] and, to make abundantly clear that if hillary is elected, iran a acquire nuclear weapons, and if i am elected, under no circumstances will the ayatollah have nuclear weapons. [applause] senator cruz: thank you very much.

>> the latest in the 2016 presidential race, according to times," sender ted ,ruz has surged to a lead signaling that his campaign is gathering momentum, and suggesting that a long nominating fight is ahead. donald trump, who continues to lead most national polls was second. read the rest of the article in today's "your times." -- "new york times."

>> c-span takes you on the road to the white house. the best access to the candidates, town hall meetings, speeches, me in greece. we are taking her on twitter, facebook, and by phone. as always, every campaign event we cover is available on her website, c-span.org. >> president obama is expected to address the media on isis this afternoon. the president, on monday, opened a rare meeting with his national security council outside the white house. this is all according to a report from the ap. it says that the president, the vice president, and advisory whit.et at the pentagon white house press secretary josh earnest said the president did announce anything as

a result. it is scheduled for 12:25. it should be just a couple of moments. president,it for the a look at a discussion on national security from this morning, "washington journal." good morning to you. guest: great to join you. host: there are many questions about people who enter the united states through waiver programs and the like. can you give your assessment and if they are doing the job they need to to make sure of who comes in. guest: terrorist travel has been a concern for a long time. i have been a number of steps taken since 9/11, but in no sense is in full proof. usa legislation play out that is probably overdue and appreciated

someghten up and shore up of our travel related security issues. the visa waiver program and senator feinstein and senator have put forward a piece of legislation that by large tries to shore up the visa waiver program that has been around since the 1980's. it meant that european countries and the like have the ability to speed up the visa process so they could travel to the united states for 90 days. it did not require an in person , andview with the embassy also, sometimes it lacked biometric data. i think that senators feinstein and flake recognize that, given the threat has changed, and since the program has been around, a number of europeans are fighting alongside isis in syria and iraq. 0aybe up to 6000-7004

four fighters. host: if these phone abilities are changed -- phone vulnerabilities are changed, either outstanding elem?em stucco guest: th , that has program been around since the 1980's, .as had economic advantages since then, the threat has changed. host: is there enough manpower and technology used? guest: the technology piece is an enabler. in and of100% an itself, but it ha sped up the

process. been up the process. it does require manpower. getoes require a person to a visa to come to the united states. it is a legitimate manpower issue. host: another program that got a lot of highlights was the k-1 marriage program, especially what we saw coming out of san bernardino. talk about this program. guest: i don't know the ends and outs of the k-1 program but generally speaking if you are an american citizen and you marry someone and have the visa processed which is somewhat similar to a traditional visa process but is sped up a little bit. there a lot of discussion playing out right now whether or not they should have monitored social media. terrorists behind san

ashmik, she was actually known to express some and thiserning -- concerning views toward the united states including jihadist fears. many people say that should've been picked up. it a surprise that postings on social media or an examination doesn't come into existence in this day and age? is playingink that out right now and clearly you are going to see changes. yes, that wasn't hidden. it wasn't concealed. she was very open with expressing these views. us with ak joining discussion, the fight against isis. if you want to ask and questions with your thoughts, call 202-748-8001 four republicans and 202-748-8000 for democrats.

before we go on your works, we want to go to your background at homeland security and your time served there. our center is focused on emerging threats, looking at cyber threats and looking atorism, and homeland security to include domestic radicalization and emergency preparedness. some of my colleagues came out with a significant report, empirically looking at the evidence in terms of the isis threat in america. and that is generating a lot of attention as of late. by and large, we are policy oriented. we try to use research and bring science with the art to better inform policy as we move forward. in terms of the white house, i have the privilege to work for president bush after 9/11. it was one of the most difficult jobs but also one of the most rewarding.

the country came together, we were united in dealing with a major and significant threat. unfortunately, the threat we face today while not identical has metastasized. we are no longer simply focused and concerned about foreign directed threats. play outeeing a hybrid in france where you may have had for an direction. it was implemented and executed domestically by belgian men and frenchmen. and in the united states we have worries about radicalization. from our first call comes california, rob on our republican line. caller: good morning pedro and frank. a couple of things if i can just take a minute to mention. column is there a fifth in the united states.

much as we could look at it back in world war ii. that is dedicated to the downfall of the united states? thatere is a fifth column would be easy to track because you go to websites and find out how many hits they have and where they come from. knows that does webwork, you can check out how many hits you get on a website and track where they come from all over the world. you can find out about them. what we are not doing that, i don't know. number two is the most important part, that there are many isis different groups that are scattered all around the world. the ones that are located in syria and iraq are obviously the points of intensification that we should be looking at and determining how many hits they get, how many people they contact, and so on. finally, the most important

part, as anyone who is gone to or turkey or any of these areas, libya. yemen. start naming them. our american citizens that have gone there should be tracked and found out about. and asked why they went there. let me unpack. some good questions there. unfortunately we do have a domestic threat that is increasing in terms of tempo. arrest been averaging an , more than one arrest per week this year alone. we do have a threat that i think we need to get our arms around. the foreign fighter dolomite you brought up, that is what makes syria and iraq different than what we faced in the past. while we have had westerners fighting alongside the taliban and al qaeda in the region and

pakistan, we have seen a significant number of americans fight alongside al-shabaab in somalia a and you have also seen that with al qaeda in the arabian peninsula and yemen. that said, the scale and scope we are seeing is much greater. you have up to 30,000 foreign fighters fighting alongside isis in iraq and syria. these are significant numbers. historically, al qaeda was praying on under governed spaces. with respect to isis, they control the space so you are dealing with a state threat which means some of the traditional military instruments can be brought to bear. we do have a significant challenge on our hands. i think it's fair to say that law enforcement has been well aware of americans fighting, attempting to travel overseas. a number of arrests have been made.

we also have europeans, so many others and the scale and scope in europe is much greater than it is here. i think the number is approximately 250 americans have either successfully or attempted to travel to iraq and syria of late. when you look at europeans it's more like 3500. the numbers in terms of scale are significantly greater. let me touch on one other thing, the internet. we discussed under governed spaces. the internet, we have seated that battlefield, i would argue, to the adversary. not only to collect information but to get rid of this information, to make it more theicult to access theological message and propaganda of isis. as well as to push back and expose, to paraphrase bill clinton, it's not the economy, stupid, but it is the economy.

-- the ecology. we need to expose it for what it is, ethically bankrupt. this is a concern not just for the government but for the private sector. host: democrats from new jersey, go ahead. caller: good morning. i happen to live in the same community as the five muslims from albania, some here illegally and some lately. they brought ak-47s, they were planning to attack fort dix and kill american soldiers. fortunately they were caught and convicted, and they are in prison. we did not learn the lesson that we should have learned. this woman from pakistan who helps her husband killed 14 in california is proof of that. i remember seeing on nightline a few years ago that there were

schools in pakistan that were teaching very young children to hate the west and christians and juice. and to kill them. -- christians and jews. we need to be much more careful about how we screen immigrants. i don't agree with trump on banning all muslims but we do need to be more careful. this is my question. i think part of the problem is the actual numbers. there have been so many more immigrants in the past 10 or 20 years than in earlier decades. its set of numbers makes difficult to screen people. you, we will let our guest respond. guest: i think you raised a significant number of questions. first, the threat we are facing today is not new, there have been plots including successful attacks on u.s. soil since 9/11.

i think what you're seeing with isis is an uptick in that activity so it's not only baghdad he calling the shots in syria. but you also have an increasing number of individuals who actually aren't attempting to travel overseas but are domestically and they are going to do it yourself jihad. they are turning to the internet to radicalize. a threataling with that comes in different shapes, sizes, and forms. it is metastasizing to one extent or another. you are right, we have a challenge in terms of scale and scope. authorities are at least aware of this threat and what doesn't get a lot of attention is how many cases and how many incidents have been prevented. again, there's been an average of more than one arrest per week.

pretty significant numbers in the tempo this year and it has gone out. host: we will hear from jerry in little rock, arkansas. independent. , since we question is have troops overseas that are fighting this force, what are we doing home? what is tsa, homeland security, what are their methods? is --t question thank you, i didn't catch that last part but in terms of the overseas domestic, the reality is we are dealing with a hybrid threat. at the end of the day, we are going to have to push back overseas. if we don't remove and denied we cannot win,

this purely by building higher walls and bigger gates. there's a lot that needs to be done where we integrate the foreign and domestic components. there's a military component. think of suppressive fire. the more they are looking over their shoulder, the less they are executing and plotting attacks. and have made in 10 clear with the metrojet plumbing, the russian airplane not too long ago -- they made intense clear with the metrojet bombing. as far as these programs depend on, how much is us-based and how much depends on intelligence from other countries. here is the issue. when you look at syria, we have limited intelligence on the ground. this gets into the refugee settlement program. at the end of the day there is limited data with hotspots in the past like iraq. there's a lot of data in terms

of intelligence, given u.s. cedence, their finger print i have been on improvised explosive devices. we don't have that. there is a blind spot in terms of syria. at the end of the day, intelligence is the lifeblood for our campaign. in ae not ever going to be position to have all of that data and if we do, to know how to marshal and mobilize it. it is going to be a bit of a challenge. the fbi has the lead on counterterrorism issues. internationally, there are a number of agencies that play a significant role. we need to work with our allies. we are seeing significant improvement. or theyou think of mali u.s. influence

is limited but france has a think about your presence and they have the ability to collect information in a way we cap. pakistan and the u.k. have a unique insight and have strong intelligence in that region. you are starting to see pooling of that intelligence and information. intelligence is not clairvoyance, it is an estimator. at the end of the day it is critical but it will never be 100%. host: one of the issues out of 9/11 was information sharing by domestic agencies. is it your sense that is getting better as far as agencies are involved? guest: the sharing component is a forever. you don't get that right and you can go home and do another job. at the end of the day that's as much of a journey as it is an end state. that is improving, ultimately domestically, we need to get to the point where that is not only going to be the federal entities that will have insights into

fromts that are emanating our own country but it will be state and local law enforcement. there have been a number of improvements there, a number of the states with fusion centers. the fbi joint terrorism task force has integrated a number of major metropolitan police departments. it has improved. again, it will be 100% but it has improved. was the formert white house special assistant for homeland security from 2001 to 2003. ofis currently the director the george washington university cyber and homeland security center. vicki from florida, you are next. republican line. caller: good morning, i read an article on the internet and i wanted the guests three aston -- reaction. i read there were several missouri muslims buying up husband -- hundreds of cell phones from missouri walmarts. a man later on was camping and

was setting his tent and camp gear and found suspicious things under the ground and they turned out to be explosives. ied's and pipe bombs. they are saying some of these middle easterners are going from walmart to walmart, buying over 200 disposable throwaway cell phones. i wondered if the gentleman would care to comment on internal threats such as this. guest: i am not familiar with this specific circumstance but if accurate, that would trigger the attention of law enforcement, not only in missouri but at the federal level. unfortunately, i don't have any more information than what you just shared. if, in fact, that is accurate, i hope law enforcement is reading that story. from new york, the

democrats line. caller: good morning, thank you for taking my call. and it's tim. it's no problem, on behalf of us, i am side for the previous caller. -- i am sorry for the previous caller. is anyone looking at them as people and not potential terrorists, to put a map in front of them and where are these guys, that is my first question. the second one is have a great day. think younk you, i do raise an important point amidst all of the terrorism discussion and the fact that isis will attempt to exploit any vulnerability they can, to project their distorted views and cause. at the end of the day, it is heartbreaking because a

number of these people are escaping the ones attempting to exploit that. i think you do raise a significant set of questions. onlynk it is one that not the united states but europe and others are struggling with. how do you ensure you can fulfill your humanitarian priorities while simultaneously making sure all that can be done is being done to ensure the safety and security? president obama: good morning everybody. today, the united states and our armed forces continue to lead the global coalition in our mission to destroy the terrorist group isil. as i outlined in my speech to the nation must weekend, our strategy is moving forward with a great sense of urgency on for france. fronts.

iraqi andand training syrian forces to fight them on the ground, stopping i souls operation by interrupting propaganda and recruiting, and insisting on diplomacy to end the war so everyone can focus on destroying isil. with my security council as an effort to review and strengthen our efforts and i want to thank secretary carter, chairman dunford, and vice-chairman sold out their leadership of our men and women in uniform. we heard from general austin who is leading the military campaign in the region as well as general the boutel. i want to provide all of you with a brief update on our progress against the isil core in syria and iraq. as we squeeze its heart, we will make it harder for them to pump terror propaganda to the rest of the world. even before the revolting

attacks in paris and san bernardino, i ordered new actions to intensify our war against isil. these actions include more firepower and special operations forces are well underway. this continues to be a difficult fight. isil is dug in even in urban areas and they hide behind civilians. using defenseless men, women, and children as human shields. we have to be smart targeting them surgically with precision. at the same time, our partners of the ground are ridding them out, town and never had an neighborhood. -- town by town and neighborhood by neighborhood. thane heading the harder ever, coalition aircraft, our fighters, bombers, and jones have been increasing -- have been increasing the deer strikes. we dropped more bombs on isil in september than any month since the campaign started.

isil we are also taking outisil leaders, commanders, and killers. since this spring, we remove one of their top leaders. command, andnd in a top online recruiter along with the man that brutally murdered americans and others and in recent months the finance chief and senior extortionist. also there weapons trafficker. the list goes on. frome going after isil their stronghold in downtown raqqa to libya where we took out the leader there. hide andders cannot our next message is simple, you are next. every day we destroy more of their forces. they're fighting positions, bunkers, and staging areas. weapons, compounds, and training camps.

in many places they have lost freedom of maneuver because they know if a mask to forces, we will wipe them out. summer they have not had a single successful nature often -- single successful major offense. we have unleashed a new wave of strikes on their oil structures, destroying hundreds of tankers, trucks, wells, and refineries. we will keep hammering those. losealso continues to territory any rock. iraq. they have lost a strategic highway, oil refinery, support in many provinces. have -- sergeant joshua

wheeler made the ultimate sacrifice to prevent this. the have lost many of their populated areas. they will lose more. deeperorces are fighting working to encircle falluja and sul.s into mo our fighters on the ground face a tough fight ahead and we will continue to back them up with the support they need to ultimately clear isil from iraq. isil also continues to lose territory in syria. we continue to step up our air support and supplies to local forces. syrian kurds, christians, turkmen are having success. after assaulting them at kobani, they have pushed isil back from almost across the entire border region at turkey and we are working with turkey to seal the rest. has lost thousands of

square miles of territory it once controlled in syria and it will lose more. the special forces i ordered to syria have begun supporting local forces they pushed south, cut off supply lines, and eze onn the sque raqqs. more people are seeing them as the thieves and thugs that they are. others have tried to escape and been executed and the rate of brutality on extortion continues to repel local populations and helped fuel the refugee crisis. so many people are migrating, said one syrian refugee, isil will end up all alone. this said, we recognize that progress needs to keep coming faster. than theows that more countless syrians and iraqis living under the terror of isil as well as the families in san bernardino and paris were grieving the loss of their loved ones. just as the united states is doing more in this fight, just

as our allies in france and germany and the united kingdom, australia, italy, are doing more. so must others. that's why i've asked secretary carter to go to the middle east. he will be part after this press preaching -- press briefing to work with coalition members to work getting more military touch beaches to this fight. secretary kerry will be in work ass we continue to part of the process to end the syrian civil war. butwhile at home, department of homeland security is updating its alert system to help the american people stay and safe. our extraordinary men and women in uniform continue to put their lives on the line. and to keep the rest of us safe. onceof our troops are again far from their families and on behalf of the american people and as your commander-in-chief, we are thankful and proud for everything you do. you, the america we

know and love and cherish is leading the world in this fight. because if you i am confident we will prevail. thank you very much, everybody. >> president obama following his meeting with security council earlier today at the pentagon on progress against isis. holding this briefing as we approach the holidays. if you missed what the president had to say it will be available shortly on our website on c-span.org. we will likely hear more about the president's remarks on the fight against terrorism. today's white house briefing a set to begin charting with live picture from the briefing room. we will have coverage on c-span and a couple of minutes. while we wait we will bring you this conversation from today's washington journal. host: joining us from boston is john, the polling director for

the harvard institute of politics and one of the products they put out is a poll of what is known as millennial's. good morning. guest: thanks for having me. host: millennial's, exactly who are they? guest: we refer to them as individuals born between 1980 and 2000. it's actually the largest generation in history of america. i often think about it more or less as the sons of daughters of baby boomers, the previously largest generation. our survey at the institute of politics isn't necessarily of every millennial. we focus on the youth vote, individuals between 18 and 29. host: as far as the information on topics you took in, what were you looking for? guest: that's a great question. the polls started back in 2000

before september 11. this is our 28th edition, it was released last week. oftentimes, we are focused on the disconnect between community service and political activity or political service or engagement. that was a genesis of the survey back 15 years ago when we started. with aemester, i worked couple of undergraduate students from the institute of politics at harvard to put a fresh look on public opinion and public attitudes toward this generation. both in public service and the ways they engage in activities associated with making the community and country better and also their views of government. and of course, in an election year, we asked questions about the top issues like isis, domestic policy issues, the american dream, the economy, etc.. also we ask a series of questions about the republican primary and democrat primary.

about the poll and questions asked and responses received but if you want to ask our guest questions about these types of issues that he is discussing, here's how you can do so. we divided the lines differently. between 18 to 29, call 202-748-8000. if you are between 30 and 50, 202-748-8001. 15 -- 50 and over, 202-748-8002. one of the headlines receiving a lot of attention was about the american dream. when you asked your's to talk about it, 48% of them thought it was dead. did that surprise you? host: it did. let me tell you about how even came up with that question. we were fortunate enough to host over 50 students from 27 universities and colleges here at harvard a few months ago. i was having a conversation about politics and i was struck

by a young undergraduate, a young woman who is from tennessee. we were talking about politics and she said talk about the american dream. she said for her it was dead because she was african-american. that struck me. we had an interesting conversation with undergraduates at that point. our studyt back into group where i worked with the undergraduates to develop the questions, we decided to ask that question directly of american millennial's. is the american dream for you personally alive or dead? sayingoted, we saw 48% it was dead for them personally, 49% said it was alive. to me, that was one of the more sobering accounts of not only this story but any survey conducted in the last 20 years. guest: i know you don't put results in the questions but it was it because of economics, student loans, can you put some color to the responses?

we do conduct a lot of quality research and focus groups and things and interviews. i think there are several reasons behind this. one of which is there's a lot of of young the heads people, especially those in college. they are incredibly concerned not just about finishing college and being able to pay for it, but that first job. i'm a member of generation ask and i know we had stress at that age but we were never as concerned as this generation about finding a job. we know the and employment rate is in the double digits close to 20%. that is kind of one key factor. it's connected to the stress and difficulty of finding a job as well as paying for student at debt and other issues.

caller: over time i have heard you ask these questions. i am 22. why exactly do you think the millennial's would assume that the american dream instead? what did you actually defined as the american dream? what were the factors you considered in defining the american dream, the term? my last question, is there any hope, i guess, because i know we grew up and we experienced the financial crisis and all, but moving down the line is there any hope for us? i live in d.c. sea, the hunt of everything going on. -- in hub of everything going on. do we look for a greater future or don't? guest: those are outstanding questions. i actually one of the most optimistic people regarding this generation.

i think there is a tremendous amount of hope, especially of sheer numbers and volume of people who live in this demographic group. in order for there to be hoped i think young people need to participate, not just in civic activities in making their community and country better, but also by voting, especially in national elections. we purposely allowed the definition of the american dream to be left to the young men and women who answered this question. i will tell you that i think the definition has evolved over the last couple of years. not too long ago, i conducted some research in new hampshire. we were talking about the american dream. the idea for this one individual, a young man in his early 20's, he was inspired by a social studies teacher he had in high school in new hampshire. his version of the american dream was to be a schoolteacher.

not only to be a schoolteacher but a schoolteacher in the community where he was raised in new hampshire. the problem for this young man was there were not enough jobs based on the population centers of new hampshire's for him to realize his dream of being a schoolteacher. he had to move to another city or town, where he had a younger demographic group that was hiring more teachers. likely the sun belt. i do not think the american dream today is about having a big car, a big house, and a bunch of kids. i think the american dream today is having the opportunity to do what you want to do, where you what to do it. having some flexibility, having some opportunity to give back. doing it well, if not better than your parents. i think it's a relatively modest version of the american dream. host: your poll also identified those as republican supporters showed a high percentage of seeing the american dream was alive, but donald trump supporters and hillary clinton supporters and bernie sanders supporters were lower.

can you give context? guest: we asked a series of questions where we had crossed commonality. -- crosstab analysis. we looked at the people who were indicated they were voting for, example donald trump. individuals who support other candidates, we found that those who supported donald trump were most pessimistic about their future. they believed that the american dream was desperate week looked -- was dead. question tothat supporters of hillary clinton and bernie sanders, and we found similar results. bernie sanders, a majority of his supporters thought that the american dream was dead, personally. what we found is support for the populist candidates, their constituencies are the most frustrated, the most pessimistic

about the future for them individually on a personal basis. host: here is tom from paul --palm city, florida, for those years old and older. >> good morning. i think the american dream is over because of wages not going up, they didn't keep up. i think it is because of illegal immigration. i was a construction worker for 20 years and i had a nice home made off and everything. but the last time i called by union hall, i said how is the work? and my business agent said illegal aliens are doing it all. i talked to my democratic congressman, and i said what you going to do about illegal immigration? and he said they are doing the work that americans will not do. and i said bs. you tell that to the construction workers who need work. obama is encouraging it because

when they become citizens they are going to vote democratic. a lot of republicans are encouraging it because they are in bed with the national chamber of congress -- commerce who want cheap labor. that's my spill for this morning. host: those participating, the idea of building a wall, 43% of those respondents said they would support building a wall. go ahead. guest: that is another one of the big headlines from the survey. 43% of the members of the 18-year-old to 29 euros hub ---year-old sub, support building a wall between the united states and mexico. however, when you peel back that headline and we look at it by party identification who we see a very different picture. we see that 70%, seven out of 10 of young republicans in this country supports that wall, yet less than half of those, 31% of democrats support that wall.

not surprisingly, 90% of trump voters support that wall. host: there are the results. you can find these online. including graphics that show these results from the harvard institute of politics. roswell, georgia, in the age 30 years old to 50 years old calling. caller: i can hear about -- i came here about 19 years ago and decided to go to school when i was 35. you can imagine going back to school when you are 35 because i believe in the american injury, -- in the american dream it is , still out there. but what i find interesting with college students, is the outlook -- there is a disconnect between being an american is and is not. for example, getting a job, doing this.

but most aspirations they have is not defined like their father's generation. i think that is a disconnect that comes from lack of critical thinking. that is my point. thank you. guest: thank you for your comment. i think you raise an interesting point around the value of education. one of the most significant predictors of whether an individual within this age group believed the american dream for them was alive or dead was the level of education they retained. we see that 58% of young americans who have a college degree or more are optimistic about the american dream. less than 45%, 42% of those who have a high school degree and no more education are optimistic about the american dream. 58% to 42%. it's that was a predictor to allow us to predict whether an

individual thought the american dream was alive or dead, much more predictive than race. we saw not as many differences as we would have expected. host: when it comes to career choices, 50% said they would rather work for a business. only 17% saying they would want to work for government. 22% said nonprofit, 8%, other. guest: 50% of this generation of what's to work for business. -- wants to work for a business. that means that 50% to not want to work for a business. 39% want to work in the public sector, whether that is in government or whether that is in a not-for-profit or other kind of similar industry. i think that is a tremendous opportunity, especially for washington dc. we are about 70 million individuals or 75 million

individuals within this age in america. there are tens of millions who choose not to work in the private sector, but the public sector where they can make an impact that benefits society. whether it is locally in their community, with plenty of examples that we see every day across america, or something that serves the country or the world more generally. host: tyler from dallas, texas. hello. caller: you mentioned the female from tennessee. i wondered if you had any other geographical revelations that came out through this study? i know a lot of millennials can put satellite locations in different areas. i wonder if they are any geographical revelations, any kind of sick and forget -- significant geographic locations that they came from during this study?

guest: that is a great question. for the record, all of our research is available online. you can go to iop.harvard.edu. we do look at opinions of millennial's by region and across the country. regionally, there is more of that connecting people and separating people from what i have seen. i have a hard time talking to a group of people who is not committed to making community better. i was talking to seven or eight young men in tennessee who were trying to finish up high school,

thinking about what they want to do next in their careers. i remember, before we can even talk about politics, they were talking about how committed they were to making their community better through community service. community service is something well over two thirds or so of college students tell us they are engaged in. that goes all the way -- all of those activities started high school. it doesn't matter where you live, whether california, the middle of america, or the east coast. young people committed to making the communities better. what i hope and what i wish for is that some of these other questions, how that translates to politics, we find more direct connection. but unfortunately over the last several years we have seen more disconnect between community service and political activity i think a lot of it is due to the fact there is less trust between washington dc at many institutions that are responsible for governing this country.

host: you asked the respondents, do you consider yourself to be politically active? in 2011, 20% said yes. in 2015, 78% said no. guest: we have been doing this for 15 years, we were able to make some direct comparisons between where we are in this election cycle compared to the last. 25% in 2011 indicated to be politically active. today the number is just a little bit lower, 21%. we actually follow up and say if that individual asked you to do more, engaged in that campaign,

whether through volunteering or attending a rally, or donating money online or on a cell phone, how likely would you be to engage? that was a secret of the obama campaign in 2008. he empowered individuals across america to take a the campaign. -- to take a part in the campaign. what we are seeing today, regardless of who people are supporting, we see the interest in participating in political activities waning. on a decline even compared to 2011. host: from california, a millennial. hello. caller: hello. how are you doing? i think what they need is more jesus. they need god in their lives. i go to the store and see these guys hanging out. they need jesus.

they have not got god in their lives. that's all i have to say thank , you. host: does religion play into what a millennial believes? guest: one of them most consistent responses we have seen, we as individuals want their religion is. -- we ask individuals with the religion is and then we asked them regardless of their religion, the role that religion plays in their life. doesn't play very important, dachshund does it play very important somewhat important, or , not very important role in your life. as long as you indicate that you connect with one religion or another. we find that consistently, over 15 years, over 70% of millennial's in our survey, 18 years old to 29-year-old, saying that religion plays a very or somewhat important role in their lives. when you look at some of the more successful campaigns and candidates, who have connected with the millennial's, oftentimes they are not afraid

to talk about religion, spirituality, those sorts of issues. one of the best speeches i have seen in the last decade or so that resonated with them people -- with young people was barack obama's speech at the 2004 democratic convention. he was not afraid to talk about religion. that was where he was making a significant connection with this generation. host: new jersey, good morning. caller: i was going to tell you how about an experience i had on the freeway coming home. -- on the three-way coming home. i stopped at a restaurant and i heard this great big commotion. there were about 50 people around. it was a democratic congressman talking, and he was being called every name in the books. people were angry, and it was about the american dream. people were upset -- they said the american constitution were

being against people to hurt us. they did not like the american civil liberties, that's for sure. they did not like that congressman, that is for sure. it all takes a toll on the economy, on the jobs, and their dreams. it was so bad that some of the people -- more middle-class than anything else, i would say, the anger was unbelievable. they could have tarred and feathered him. they called him major bank, the nicest of the names -- dirtbag, the nicest of the names. i won't even say the other names. guest: there is a lot of passion. young people want to have conversations like that. they want to have them in a respectable way, but i think young people talk about -- care

about this country, they want to have a conversation like that. they are highly connected and impassioned. they are not feeling the love from the other side. they want to see more of this campaign that is directed to them. we're not just talking about voters, we are talking about volunteers and the largest generation in the history of america. i think we will see more votes cast by the people under the age of 30 and people over the age of 65. host: one of the statistics you have is that 46% of those polled are following the campaign. guest: that is right. we will see viewership beyond record numbers for the republican debates so far. you get less than half paying attention to this point, but i'm sure that will increase as we get closer to the election. we asked a series of questions

about media habits, but particularly social media habits. the reason we asked these questions as we are trying to help campaigns who are interested in finding ways to connect with young people where they are. without question the role of traditional media feels very important, mainstream news, on tv, on cable, on newspapers, etc. but we are also seeing an important rise in platforms like snapshots, and platforms like instagram, clearly twitter and facebook have been part of the discourse over the last couple of cycles anyway. we are trying to create an opportunity and framework for individuals around the country to connect with young people where they are most comfortable connecting. oftentimes, that is social media. host: john della volpe of the harvard institute of politics in our guest. ohio caller, go ahead.

caller: just a couple of observations. first of all, your guest does not indicate anything in the survey about these people's willingness to work for success, and work to achieve the american dream. it also does not indicate what level of college student they were talking to. were they talking to ones that breezed through school? having a good time? or were they talking to the ones who worked all day, went to school at night, managed a family, and try to get ahead in that way? i do not think the american dream is dead, i think the leaders of this country have deadened our love of this country, unfortunately. i think your guest should go back to the field and start

talking to the kids that are going to school because they want to pull themselves up by their bootstraps because they want to do the right thing, because they believe in this country and they believe in that constitution that was written for their behalf. host: thank you. guest: i guess the only thing that i would say in response to that is we conduct 5000 interviews every single year. this past save a -- survey we conducted 2000 and 11 interviews with a representative sample of all americans. we conduct interviews of the 20% of young americans who classify themselves as latino, hispanic. we have the opportunity to take it in english or spanish. we talked to african-americans, blacks, whites, men, women, every age within 18-year-old to 29-year-old. we talked to young people who

were focused on working hard, and those who do not want to work as hard. we talk to everybody, 5000 individuals every year. half of those people, regardless of where the are around the country have a problem thinking that the american dream for them is not a real option. what they are saying is they are not going to give up, they are staying in the workforce, but they are also telling us through surveys like this and other surveys from other organizations that they want to engage in a political dialogue with elected officials and government to help change the course of the american dream. that is it. they wanted to take responsibility for themselves, but also asking for some help and empowerment from government, private sector, etc. host: millennial in georgia, here is david. caller: i just wanted to call. i'm fresh out of college. my thought on this a lot of

young people my age, their parents and grandparents especially has been part of the greatest generation, and have been asked to serve, and i think a lot of people do not believe in the american dream because they do nothing -- do not think they can affect the american dream anymore. civil servants draft, not military, but sweeping the streets, or doing menial tasks for a couple of years to get a couple of tuition benefits. what do you think about that? guest: i think that's a powerful idea, the idea of some sort of opportunity for individuals for a year of national service as one example. i know there are a lot of individuals in washington with in advocating for this for some time. specifically as a way for young people to offer up some sort of leniency when it comes to repaying student debt.

it is hard for me to find a group of young people across america who are not already giving back, whether it is their church, helping a neighbor, and through a national service program. it is something i am in favor of them deserves more discussion. hopefully we will see candidates, democrats and republicans, discuss this during the debate portion of the 2016 campaign. host: you asked about the fight against isil. the question was, the united states needed additional troops, how likely would you be to serve? the majority said they would not join in. guest: there was a disconnect. let me put this in context. the survey that we released before this survey was actually conducted in march will released in april of this year. at that point, after the videos of the gruesome and horrific

beheadings, we found that 57% of this generation supported sending boots on the ground to combat isis. a lot of people asked us if we could react that question, but follow-up in the fall with would you be willing to serve, yourself? what we found was in the days before the paris attacks, that support for sending boots on the ground was actually lower from 57% to 47%. we react that question after paris as it increased to 60%. we then said would you be willing to serve yourself personally? and a 62% said no thank you, almost no circumstances. and 16% indicated that they were already serving, or planned to serve or would consider serving. essentially, about 80% were not interested, and about 20% or a

few points less than 20% said they would be interested in serving. host: are next call is from janet, in michigan. go ahead. caller: thank you for c-span. a couple of questions. have they looked at how the media influences the millennial's in terms of the way they see the world? because i believe the media has a larger impact on this group than any other previous generation. and then the other question i had was in light of recent reports about the decline of the middle class, if you were to go back out and do that poll again, do you think we would get a different response from millennial? guest: a couple of points. we just finished this poll a few weeks ago.

we are tracking things every six months or so. i do not think, big picture wise, the things we are talking about regarding the american dream, isis, isil, some of the other large questions, i do not see that that would change dramatically over the last several weeks. but that is why we ask the questions a couple times a year. part two, in terms of the role of the media, we ask about levels of trust in the big institutions from the supreme court, local governments, including media. and unfortunately for the media, it is trusted on the lower end of that list. we typically find high single digits or lower double-digit of young people saying they trust the media to do the right thing. good afternoon, everybody.

based on the president coming to the pentagon, he has taken care of an opening remarks and might've had.we can just ivan to questions. we can just dive into questions. the white house is routinely engaged in active dialogue with faith leaders across the country. there are a number of engagements today. to president is not plan escape the meetings that are planned. they are to take place the staff level. the first is a conference call arranged with the audit our way of faith-based organizations across the country. this is a call that will be led by valerie jarrett and the

executive director of the faith-based partnerships, melissa rogers. this will be a conversation to discuss efforts to combat discrimination and highlight the need for welcoming all faiths and beliefs. it seems a timely topic for a conversation like that. they will be an in person meeting here at the white house today convened with a smaller group of muslim american leaders. these are individuals who will meet with valerie jarrett, z and then roads. the third meeting is a meeting will leadia munoz with representatives of the sikh community to discuss how the administration is supporting the committee and discussed ways to work together to address concerns and challenges. additionalome

meetings over the course of the week including one here at the white house on thursday. these are all slated to be staff they aretings but representative of the kind of ongoing dialogue the president maintains with religious leaders of all faiths across the country. is there a reason the white house is concerned about that clash? remarked -- he didn't raise that issue but came down on leadership for not pushing back against extremism. line.k a harder to take arage you look. he talks about how important the muslim community is to the broader international community. the current plan is for these to

be meetings at the staff level. change over the it seems like the next step now, that they concern for you all looking ahead is whether or not they are receptive to the term limits. they are talking about pairing i wonder what your strategy is. >> i think what you will see from the administration's commitment from day one. many of the commitments of the united states have made in the context of the parish agreement are commitments we made some time ago and started implementing some time ago.

this is an ongoing effort. was a commitment on the part of all the countries who participated to subject themselves to a periodic review. that as is essentially our economies begin to orient towards a low carbon future, that it will start to see import investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy. there will be a much more powerful economic incentive in those new types of technologies. it is not just recognition on the part of governance, of the need to reoriented our economy. this also represents an that there is an opportunity for significant investment in this field.

there are a couple of examples i can give you. the president has long recognized reaching an agreement can be a ultimately powerful benefit for the u.s. economy. ultimately you have companies here in the united states that have made important investments theymportant gains. now have customers all over the world because we have countries all over the world who are seeking to invest in those technologies that will allow them to meet the goals they have laid out. in light of the significant commitment, to essentially cap their omissions in the years ahead. it means they are going to have to significantly scale up alternative sources of energy. to have they are going to consider something other than

power plants. of the areas, one of the technologies they hope to tap into our nuclear power plants. china has actually already signed a contract with an american company to build four nuclear power plants. that is an example of how one american company is going to benefit. there a company called first solar. this is an american company developing and constructing solar projects around the world. many of them the largest in their region. including latin america, middle .ast, australia as we see companies deciding how they are going to meet these commitments, they are going to turn to investment in solar energy. going to create enormous opportunities for american companies already leading the way in these kinds of innovations.

we come back to your question, which is we will see in the years ahead that there is a powerful economic incentive in the united states for us to follow through on our commitments and make sure other countries are doing the same, because that will create a tremendous opportunity for american businesses. i was following up on the climate issue. does the white house see the irony in the fact that the president has gotten a late -- gotten a major legacy achievement that will be presented in the next a or two with a spending bill that will approve lifting u.s. oil exports? >> i don't want to speculate what will be included in the final budget agreement. that is extensive discussion. and i've described why that is

a policy we don't support. a bipartisan budget agreement to consider, you will go againopportunity to without weighing on any sort of specific proposal. i anticipate there will be some elements of the budget bill that are not consistent with the kinds of policies we have long supported here. that is the essence of compromise. the president is only going to support the budget agreement if he does believe it is the best interest of our economy. once there is a budget agreement put forward we will have an opportunity to consider the merits of it. and primarily because this is something they are actively negotiating. assuming the congress meets the deadline for producing this agreement, that should give us ample time over the course of this week to discuss it. we will make sure we have the opportunity to do that.

>> you believe that deadline will be met? >> i continue to be optimistic about the fact that there appears to be some bipartisan , thatition in congress this kind of deal needs to be reached, that it needs to be compromised. there is a far better alternative than shutting down the government. we will have to see what timeline they are operating on. i do continue to believe -- this is based on my limited knowledge of the negotiations, that completion of the agreement would be hastened if we got republicans to relinquish their insistence about the inclusion of ideological writers and the budget agreement. i think we have made some progress but we are not quite done yet.

>> is the white house concerned about the de-escalation effort that the president calls for? >> since the first day that the news broke about the turkish shooting down a russian military leaders has urged the of both countries to deescalate their rhetoric and take actions that will deescalate the tension between two countries. i think it is fair to say there is work both sides need to do in that regard. it is notable we have not seen any tangible escalation at this point. that is a glimmer of optimism in that situation.

i am confident this is something secretary kerry will discuss with president putin, he is in moscow tomorrow. again, the continuing need to deescalate the tension with the turks. one good way they can do that is actually integrate the russian into thegainst isil broad coalition that united states has formed. russians touire the invest heavily in the counter angle efforts. that is something we have seen them do to our satisfaction. >> last time the president went to the pentagon and asked for the security advises over the summer, secretary carter announced -- the update of that review in the pentagon. believe that item was on the agenda. this was focused on our counter iso-efforts.

i don't believe that meeting will occur this week. secretary carter is heading to to middle east later today continue conversations with our partners and allies. you should check with them on their timeframe. , he said today -- >> he said today they cut off the bylines and tightened on the top. is he at knology special forces on the ground? >> what the president was acknowledging is the work the president has been given to our

special forces in syria has begun. no updates in terms of where or any additional operational details. the president did confirm his remarks that this work has begun. >> this is different from just advising from afar. this would seem to be a decision or a movement forward to be acknowledging today that the operators are in place. >> this is an acknowledgment that the intensification of our efforts inside of syria, by more closely linking operators with american special operators and local forces on the ground has begun. there were a number of weeks where there were questions about that. i can tell you that work has commenced. >> in talking about this review and the screening, does the

warehouse have a view on whether social media should be part of that process? >> this process is under careful review by the department of homeland security and the state department. they will have to consider a range of things, including the amount of resources allocated. the president has asked the tea of agencies responsible for tolementing this program review it and come back with a howof recommendations about these can or should be tightened, and the president will consider their recommendations. we should take a close look at that. ,> is it a question of that

because others have raised someonebout whether expressing opinions online should be used in a judgment for or against them. and whether it would impact the decision to clear them through a background. with thed leave you impression that resources are the only consideration. they are certainly an important one when talking about a program. the processes is tens of thousands of people in the united states each year. >> speaking with a constitutional lawyer and having spent time thinking about the feature or not, does that question way into this decision? pearl -- or is it purely in a different category? isi think the top priority the national security and safety of american people. it is effectively implemented,

consistent with the values. >> any timeline on that? >> i don't have a sense of what that timeline is. i'm confident the officials at the agencies were responsible for caring and share that sense of urgency. >> it seemed to make sense if you are an employer, you would check the social media footprint. can you at least acknowledge that would be a decent idea to consider that, not just for the visa program for any other program. this is something they are taking a look at.

because they are responsible for implementing the program i want to defer to their expertise in terms of how they render a judgment in terms of what is the new and effective way for them we fillially process .he president's top priority them instead of letting the free market work its will. policy makers doing anything to take advantage of the historic plunge in oil prices to ?xacerbate the problem is that happening from the u.s. policy perspective? >> maybe they have some ideas.

>> nothing you have heard of? if we can drive down oil we can really squeeze russia or other states. >> i have been asked questions about the inordinately high price of oil and high price of gas. i have been quite forthcoming in the u.s.ging that government had very little impact. that is going to be at the price of oil -- the president is going to be at or near all-time lows. >> let me ask you about an update. defenestration's do you .2

from that? i know the conversation we had with the iranians and the nuclear deal, can you give me an update on that? and how the white house views those ballistic missile tests? >> there have been a couple of different reports about our bomb testing the listed missiles. that i run report .asically came forward the unit states went to the united nations secure the council. many of the individuals are implicated in that test and subject to significant financial sanctions put in place by the united states.

many focused on how the united states could work jointly with the partners of the region. in our interest and allies and partners and region. something on the radar screen for quite some time. all of that there are more recent reports about a potential iran ballistic missile test. this is not something iran has announced publicly. and i don't believe it is something we have confirmed at this point. awaree said that we were of those reports, and taking a look at those reports. a letter last week written to the president, asking how the administration plans to respond. are you aware of that letter? >> i wouldn't be surprised if it has been received here at the white house.

if they are referring to the more recently reported ballistic missile test, i would tell them what i tell you, which is we're looking into those reports. >> i just wanted to tighten this up a little bit. the department of homeland security had that secret policy, if you will allow me, to not allow immigration agents to profile.cial media does the white house support something like that? >> i think the department of homeland security has pushed back against those reports. for true fidelity i refer you to the department of homeland security. whati can tell you is that the president has asked for is a review of the program to determine what measures are in place to allow the program to operate so we can allow the

soividuals -- but to do based on the need to protect the american people. that is what the department of homeland security takes a look at. they are going to come back with a set of recommendations about how this program can be ouremented to achieve goals. >> that wasn't something the white house said maybe you shouldn't do this? >> i can confirm that is not the case. for what policy that was actually place -- actually in place, i encourage you to check with them. >> they go to the middle east. would you say the campaign -- the president's

overall satisfied with it. implies step definitely this involvement on the ground. >> the president is not going to be satisfied until the president until it is ultimately -- clearly important work needs to be done. the president assembled a national -- assembled a national security team about what we are going to do to build on the momentum we have built up in some instances. it may create some additional opportunities for the united states and coalition partners to further intensify our efforts against isil's leadership. i think probably the most interesting data point was a reference to the fact that counter iso-coalition we have assembled took more strikes in the month of november than any

previous month of our efforts. that is a reflection of a couple of things. it is a reflection of the ramped up commitments we have seen from our european counterparts. it is however an indication of the increasing flow of intelligence that our coalition is benefiting from. we have the intelligence around our oil infrastructure. stationary objects or tanker trucks that move around a lot. obviously being able to destroy that infrastructure. we know the illicit sale of oil is one related to financing their reign of terror. we continue to be vigilant about taking those strikes. the president ran through a compelling list of senior iso-leadership taken off of the battlefield.

that is a testament to the increased flow of intelligence that our military operation has benefited from. we have seen a greater commitment from our partner -- from our partners. intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance, especially from drones that can monitor movements on the battlefield. in some cases our coalition partners were by local fighters on the ground, who have been able to obtain significant troves of intelligence based on rate of individual facilities. the united states special operators carry out the raid in syria. the mastermind of the iso-financing effort.

there was significant intelligence material. file fortis, laptops, other hardware. taking strikes against isil leaders, but also taking strikes against isil infrastructure. the more information and knowledge we have about the way isil conducts business on a day-to-day business, the more effective we can be. obviously that is a priority. margaret asked about the special operators assisting local forces inside of syria. the president has also recently

announced standing up of these task forces that will be based in iraq. these will be special operators essentially at the ready to carry out raids when it is determined that those rates can be effective. not just be to leaders,tain or kill but also to capitalize on opportunities to exploit troves of intelligence. that continues to be a priority. >> understand that the coalition has been doing well. , doing better -- doing better. different kind of stuff that the middle east allies could take? there are certainly things we would like to see. you touched on one example. there is some indication we have discussed publicly before that some of our partners appeared to

be distracted by the sectarian conflict. we have discussed publicly that we can assure you something that has been raised on a number of occasions. i'm confident this will be some discussion with secretary carter traveling in the middle east later this week. there are other things we would like to see done. there is more we could do when it comes to ramping up our counter messaging campaign. that is the most challenging part of this effort but critical to the success. there are some things we need to do as well. for example congress can confirm the financial expert -- he is

responsible for leading our counter finance efforts paid he served in the republican and democratic administrations. shutting down iso-'s financing is a core component of our efforts. -- andan individual to vigil nominated to serve within a leadership role. republicans refused to confirm him. in terms of talking about things that can be done to bolster our efforts against isil, congress is far from blameless. >> we've got this. is that the message you are trying to convey? the president and his team do great work.

they made a lot of important progress. they are important communities. the iraqi forces with the assistance. iraqi forces are able to retake the town. they did that by backed coalition military airstrikes. isolate. effectively there is important progress that has been made. there is more that we can do to try to advance or -- try to advance the diplomatic process.

>> i know the president said to iso-leaders you are next. the deliberations that go on -- do you have a sense that perhaps the president -- that you needed to ramp up a little bit? because of the level of anxiety with the american people right now. >> i think people are keenly aware of the sense of urgency that the president feels about this. thatt is also important

people understand the progress that has been made thus far. success in taking the leaders off the battlefield is one important way to measure our progress. i think the president's words today are not new. i recall his words where he talked about how proud he was that men and women in uniform have taken to take terrorists off the battlefield. is president walking to this debate because it is part of our strategy to ssury significant prec

to isil' leisure, not only to carry outs attacks around the world, but more difficult to engage in the campaign they are pursuing to radicalize others. >> there are political animals to crunch numbers -- have they been able to decipher with the poll numbers showing that 60% of the people do not think the president has an effective strategy? se numbersok at tho and say -- mr. earnest: when he meets with his national security team, the president is not looking at opinion polls. he feels a responsibility to make sure he has communicated clearly to his team he is

interested in all ideas they have for intensifying our campaign against isil. that has been his approach to this. we have a strategy to degrade isil. many of the republican colleagues are suggesting we should be devoting many more resources to train and equip syrian rebels. that effort did not work out well. what we have been doing and what has shown some fruit is to equip some moderate fighters inside syria that are already having success in pushing back against isil, so we have intensified efforts to supply greater amounts of equipment to forces fighting on the ground. special forces operations are another example. some operations have succeeded in exploiting intelligence.

that is the essence of our strategy, and that was the discussion at the pentagon our strategy, at consider the elements that are showing the most promise and the discussedess, and ways to intensify and put more resources behind his efforts that are yielding some progress. >> the closing arguments in the thel in baltimore's running death of freddie gray, is there a message from the white house to the people in baltimore this week, that those decisions may be coming down soon? obviously, there is a judicial process underway, and i want to be careful not saying anything that could interfere with that process or those deliberations when they occur. the most relevant thing i can say is that president comments

after the video of the police shooting in chicago was released just a few weeks ago, he noted he was proud of the way the community responded, that that video prompted obviousant concern for reason, and there have been a display oft peaceful concern by the community in chicago. the president described how he is proud of the community for the way they responded, and was helpful that as activists and individuals and other communities have things to express them that they do so peacefully. >> and asked to a decision to go to san bernardino? i do not have an update, but we will keep you posted. matterhe question, no the city or whatever, there seems to be a ripple effect when

we hear these verdicts. [indiscernible] does the president need to come out with a stand in these areas thatare poverty stricken are seeing this increased or invisible issue with police in black communities? does the president need to stand summer, and what you say to the effect that could happen? mr. earnest: the first thing i would observe is something you recall, about six or eight months before this tragic death occurred in baltimore, the president traveled to baltimore and spent time for the community talking to people about the kinds of investments in the therey that could be made about the impact of the affordable, care act from the job training programs that have been advanced to the

administration, what impact it has had on the community. the president has had the occasion to travel to communities to talk about the challenges they are facing, including baltimore, and those were important visits. >> what is the ripple effect? -- there is a ripple effect. where do you say to the nation -- [indiscernible] mr. earnest: the president's respond has been characterized by the formation of the task practiceserve as best in limited by agencies across the country. oft will have the effect building trust between local law enforcement and the communities .hey are sworn to protect this is an issue that the president has spoken about powerfully in a variety of settings. i am confident this is something we look forward to the next year that we will continue to be on

the president's radar. >> this is the third anniversary of the -- shooting, and there are people protesting at the nra in virginia. if this protest on this anniversary does not change the -- mr. earnest: i do not think one protest will be enough. to president continues encourage the people to make their voices heard on these and he continues to believe the only way we will see the change in congress we need to see in order to get these is forense bills passed those who are in favor of more un safety speaking out and making sure they are electing representatives that make this a priority.

i spoke on friday about the pull of new hampshire republicans, conducted at the beginning of last week, but it noted 75% of likely participants likely voters in the republican primary a new hampshire support federal law requiring universal background checks for anyone seeking to purchase a gun. that is an indication there is a building omentum behind common sense gun laws, but one protest is not going to make a difference. more people speaking out like those protesting today is going to be what is necessary for us to see that legislation that is so strongly supported by americans, democrats, republicans, gun owners, non-gun owners across the country. >> understanding the dynamics of this battle and understanding

in this left administration, is it realistic to say that with this protest, if there were a groundswell, but [indiscernible] moneyck-and-forth and the and the strength of the nra, is the possibility or is there no possibility that anything could happen before the end of this president's term? mr. earnest: the president has not given up. >> can you talk about the faith-based meetings you are having today. were these recently scheduled? of theey the result campaign rhetoric going on in the republican primerica and can you describe how hurtful that has been to the u.s. interests and image abroad? >> let me follow up with you. you can get back to you on the details. as it relates to the u.s. image

people in world, other countries look to the state as a nation that is built upon the values of tolerance and acceptance and freedom, and that is a reputation that we wear with pride. the president has talked in the past in a different context about how our commitment to those values actually advances our national security interests around the globe. and from secretary kerry to secretary johnson and others, including national security experts who served in the previous administration, have observed the kind of offensive, hateful, divisive rhetoric that we have seen from a handful of republican candidates for

president is damaging and dangerous. what i would anticipate be the subject of some discussion in the meetings you asked about will be the commitment of this administration to standing up and continuing to speak out and supporting of the values that are central to the founding of our country, but also critical in terms of advancing our national security interests. >> in the campaign in syria and iraq, there has always been this tension between achieving military objectives and protecting the civilian population. as the military campaign ramps up, using to be getting closer seem to be getting closer to killing civilians. you are now going after the oil infrastructure, trucks. a lot of these are driven by --

there are other targest. targets. your hearing republicans talking about making the sand club. civiliand mean serious casualties. talk about your objective militarily, while also protecting civilians. are you gradually moving toward fromer, riskier operations the civilian standpoint, or have you kept your criteria in terms of judging the risk of the same throughout? for arnest: i think precise answer, i would refer you to the department of defense. that is an operational question you're asking about, how they factor in the risk of civilian casualties. they are operating under guidance from the commander in to do as much as they can

to avoid those civilian casualties. our cause is not advanced by inling innocent civilians iraq in syria who in many cases are victims of isil. as the president noted in his usingts come to isil are humans as shields. that is obviously not a behavior condone, in the values on display as we conduct this ways to are one of many highlight the difference between the values that isil is trying to impose on innocent people and the values the united states coalition partners are going at great lengths to defend. >> you answer the question on whether the president will visit and bernadino. he has visited all the sites of recent past shootings.

to go to sangoing bernardino, why? what would be different about this? mr. earnest: standby for that. >> [indiscernible] against terrorists and isis, but today said that we recognize that progress needs to keep coming faster. is that a change in tone or a change in light of what happened in paris or san bernardino? it is a recognition of the conclusion he will not be satisfied until i sold is degraded. sil is degraded. >> it seems to be different from what he is saying. mr. earnest: what he wants to do is built on the momentum we are already seeing in iraq in syria,

and there is a long way to do, but if we were to capitalize on the momentum that has been built up, we need to quickly reinforce henry intensified our efforts behind those aspects, and that means the united states taking a look at our strategy to determine what aspects of our strategy can we intensified. it means we need our partners to ramp up their assistance. we have seen good news in the form of additional equipment from our allies in the u k and france and germany. we need to see a greater and more sustained commitment from our partners in the region as well. improvedeed to see performance from iraqi forces. there have been some important gains they have made. the president noted they had ramadi,o progress around

but we believe there is more that can be done there to make sure that the iraqi forces are building the capacity that they need. >> you mentioned earlier the ramping up of the messaging. specifically, what is on the wish list that ash carter is taking with him? what is he looking for, hoping for in terms of commitments? mr. earnest: in terms of the meetings he will have this week, we will be in a position to talk more about them specifically as the week goes on and as more details about the secretary's travels are announced. the secretary will be meeting with the leaders of other countries who have made important commitments this in mind, and he had some additional steps we believe they can and should take to support our efforts. we will be able to talk about this later this week. >> is there a sense -- [indiscernible] was it more informational?

the last time in july when he was at the pentagon, there were some tangible things that came out of this, including special ops forces. there were a series of recommendations. can you give us an idea of what was in that meeting? mr. earnest: it was for the president to be briefed directly in person by our nation military leaders about the strategy they are carrying out. of thes another element strategy, but the reason the meeting was at the pentagon and you had general austin commander of central command, give the president a detailed briefing of the operations underway and had been for some time now. there was an opportunity for the president to get a detailed update from his team, and the president has interested in

getting detailed updates because he wants to hone in on those elements of the strategy that are showing progress so we can intensify our support of its elements, that in some cases it may be by providing additional resources, we can see an additional progress. in each case, that is the kind of order of the president has given to his team. let's take a good look at our strategy, see what is working, and be creative about how we can capitalize on opportunities that have been created by those elements that are showing important progress. ok? andrew. >> the president putin to the idea that the iraqis' progress more support.ires what are we talking about here? i have no new

announcements in terms of new approvals that the president has given in that regard. -- let me take one step back and say so much of the progress we have been able to cite about the advances that the iraqi security forces have made on the ground as then because we unifiedn iraqi forces and acting under the command and control of the central governments, they are benefiting from training provided not only by the united states, but by the coalition members. there are a number of countries like australia and italy that had important resources to devote to those trainings. what we believe is necessary to see further intensification on the part of iraqi forces as they build up capacity, build up their numbers, and i am somethingthis will be

that will be discussed over the course of secretary carter's trip to the middle east. a specific focus on killing leaders of the of islamic state group. is there a renewed focus [indiscernible] going after baghdad -- [indiscernible] mr. earnest: for the resources devoted to that aspect of our strategy, i would refer you to defense. our interest is in applying significant pressure to everyone in isil that is in a leadership role. ofs does have the effect disrupting isil's operations in two ways. if you are taking those leaders off the battlefield, it means isil needs to go through the effort advertising them and have somebody else fulfill that responsibility.

the second thing is that we are applying in august pressure to isil's leaders, and to those who are still living, they have to go to great lengths to protect themselves and to provide for their own security, make sure they are careful about their travels and careful about the communications, and that makes it harder for them to plot and acts of carry out violence. it makes it harder for them to engage in the other day-to-day operations of running their organization. we will make sure that pressure continues to remain in place. it is also why the exploitation of this intelligence information is so critically important, that there could be information that is obtained that could give us a better sense of how these isil leaders move around the country, they can give us a better sense associate, andey e collection of

intelligence is an important priority. a gooder reason that is example is it gives you an example of how integrated the strategy is. they do not just have people in intelligence working in this chargeand the folks in of the military strategy summerhouse. that our campaign benefits from the careful integration of all these different elements. that is true of our counter , and it is anrts important part of the strategy the president's team has implemented. the ban -- how -- are a story engaging on this issue. they are talking about concessions such as additional federal assistance for -- or some assistance for refiners.

is the white house comfortable with this kind of horse trading? q you think i could yield a policy that the president could support? mr. earnest: i am not going to get into the deep. the ongoing opposition into the and of the exporting of opposeude will you do because we believe that legislation is on this however, we do of course believe there is do to increase investments in renewable energy, and i just will as early invest in been critical not just our economic growth, but also because the tremendous opportunity that appears to be in place down the line for american companies that

are at the forefront of this kind of innovation government that there is a global market as solar energy, for example countries consider how they meet the commitments they have made in paris. thiswill have to consider kind of new technology. the more success american businesses have the more likely as. are to win that that will be good for the economy at home, good workers, and one of the reasons we continue to be optimistic that climate agreement that was reached in historic fashion in paris over the weekend is not just an important step in saving the planet, it actually create some important economic opportunities for the united states and american workers back home. >> regarding the concessions, lifting the ban would not be a dealbreaker for the white house? mr. earnest: these are the kinds of things that if you and me were kind of willing to work it

out, we could reach a good budget agreement in the next couple hours. unfortunately, there are a lot of other people who feel they should have a say on. they are still working through gives and takes, and i decline to weigh in on one side of the other in terms of d rawi conclusions about what the president should veto. administrative or procedural reasons, we oppose legislation that would lift the ban on exporting of american crude oil, but these are the want to see congress and hopefully they will in the context of the budget agreement make the kinds of investment in renewable and clean energy that are good for the economy and have the potential to create good american middle-class jobs down the line.

>> by linking these two issues, it sounds like you are comfortable with them being related. to earnest: i do not mean leave you with the impression that i am condoning or opposing any sort of potential trade. i am trying to be as explicit as i can about our position. lawyedahl's --idrs mr. earnest: am limited as to what i can say. person for the commander in chief, there is a lot of potential for influencing the outcome of that military

justice proceeding. i am not able to react even in the most general terms to the latest twists and turns in the case. there is an established process whereby the military will investigation and consider the results, and i do not want to say anything that will influence the process in any way. whether u.s.y security interests have been impacted either way, whether it has made the country safer doing whether it has made our interest more in danger given a lot of people out there -- mr. earnest: those individuals that were transferred from one guantanamo are

individuals that are still in q atar and they are there under a series of safeguards that limits their ability significantly to cause any harm to the united states or our interests. the bottom line for this matter bergdahl, anant american citizen who put on the uniform of the military, was rescued by the united states military. feelse commander in chief a responsibility that we will not leave them behind. and the way that sergeant bergdahl was rescued is a testament to the president's commitment to that principle. >> to follow up on the question about visa issues. you are to make sure

saying correctly that the white house did not pressure the department of homeland security either way when the policy was initiated like a year ago? mr. earnest: that is correct. >> did the white house way in in in iny at all -- weigh any way at all? mr. earnest: these are experts responsible for determining the proper way those programs should be conducted consistent with national security interests of the united states. given the fact that we are in a situation where an individual has entered the united states through that program, there are questions whether those safeguards are in place. that is what the department of state and the department of homeland security are looking at now. >> [indiscernible] are they going back and reviewing -- if that were the

case, i would not be surprised. weekend, 45 area, much of thebombings area in syria not controlled by isis, contested by other rebel groups. soft regime air campaign coupled with some resistance. the president met with vladimir putin twice since russia began their air campaign. he has tried to jawbone him and every other means possible to get russia to change course. that is obviously not going to happen and the president talked reputedly about the need for a solution on the diplomatic front in the vienna talks. but russia has so far been not willing to go ahead. whatever the representatives at the talks? shot down that id

over the past few days, is my understanding. what are the prospects for the talks as they stand right now, and the goals for the cease-fire, given the context of what has happened? for a detailed update of where things stand, i would refer you to the state department, but let me give you a sense of my standing. it will give any details from over there. progress we have made on the diplomatic front this farm would not have been possible without the participation of the russians. the progress that we have made has been to lay out a timeline for a cease-fire and for a set of political talks. i recognize time is meager, but when you consider the chaos that has reigned in syria for five years, that is an important step, and a step that was only possible because secretary kerry showed american leadership in bringing all of the relevant parties to the table, like iran, saudi arabia, who are

figuratively, and in some cases, literally, at each other's throats. it also requires the constructive precipitation -- participation of russia. the only military base in the world outside of the former soviet union is in syria. the russians are quite concerned about what the future of syria looks like, because of their own investment in that country. what has also taken place, there was a meeting of a substantial .umber of opposition groups for years, we have been trying to work through a u.n. process to organize the syrian opposition. that has been a difficult effort. bringing hundreds of them into the same city of the same time to have a conversation about engaging the political process represent some progress. is, think what i would say we have benefited from russia's constructive participation in , and i'm so far confident it will be part of the

discussion that secretary kerry has with president putin he is in moscow tomorrow. >> what is the reality of a cease-fire, in principle, being agree to? mr. earnest: we will work hard to achieve that goal and we will have a better sense of the prospects at the conclusion of the december 18 meeting that secretary kerry has scheduled. last one. >> somebody had to ask, so i will. you may know donald trump's dr. just put out a statement on his behalf and said, if elected, i can state, unequivocally, will be the healthiest individuals ever elected to the presidency. that president obama is not as healthy as donald trump? mr. earnest: is the suggestion that donald trump's doctor has conducted a thorough medical examination of president jefferson and president adams? >> [laughter] mr. earnest: that is a lot of

work to do, 44 presidents to look at. what health issues of president obama have you kept from us? mr. earnest: none that i'm aware of, you have gotten regular updates about the president's health as well. the health and medical examinations of individual candidates is part of do not have, but i a specific comment on the findings of mr. trump's physician. >> [inaudible] mr. earnest: from here, i would not call on the pretensions -- credentials of somebody doing a medical exam of mr. trump. that would've been interesting. your administration supported a swap for bergdahl? up at the white

house briefing room, many questions on the president meeting with the national security team on combating isis. tweetedrter mark noller out today, president obama completing his meeting in the pentagon conference room, flanked by the vice president and secretary of defense at carter. the ap also reporting president obama said the was like is making progress against the islamic state militants in both iraq and syria, saying airstrikes have increased. they have knocked out key figures in the group's leadership one by one. a look now at the presidents briefing with reporters after that meeting at the pentagon.

our strategies moving forward with the great servers of urgency, hunting down and taking out these terrorists, training and equipping iraqi and syrian forces to fight by a sale on the stopping isi' provisions by disrupting the recruiting, financing, and propaganda, and finally, persistent diplomacy to end the civil war so that everyone can focus on destroying i assail. to meet with my national security council as part of our regular or two review and strengthen our efforts. i want to thank secretary carter , chairman dunford, and others for hosting us and for their leadership of our men and women in uniform. we heard from general austin who is leading the military campaign in the region as well as the special operations forces general. i want to provide all of you a brief update on our progress

against the isi alcor in syria squeeze because as we its heart, we will make it harder for i assail to pop it terror propaganda to the rest of the world. before theeven revolting attacks in paris and san bernardino, i ordered new actions to intensify our war against i assail. these actions, including more firepower and special operations forces are well underway. this continues to be a difficult fight. dug in, including in urban areas, and they hide behind resilience, using defenseless men, women, and children as human shields. even as we are relentless, we have to be smart, targeting isil surgically with precision. at the same time, our partners on the ground are rooting i saw out town by town, neighborhood by neighborhood, like by block. that is what this campaign is doing. we are hitting isil harder than

ever. coalition aircraft, fighters, bombers, and rounds have been increasing the pace of airstrikes, nearly 9000 as of today. last month in november we drop more bombs on isil target than any other month since the campaign started. we're also taking out leaders, commanders, and killers on my one. it's the spring, we have removed one of the top leaders, and the isil second in command, a top the man whoiter, brutally murdered americans and others, and in recent weeks, the finance chief, senior extortionist, and weapons trafficker. the list goes on. we are going after i sold from their stronghold right in downtown rock to libya, where we took out the leader there. the point is, isolators cannot hide, and our next message to

them is simple to you are next. every day, we destroyed as well more of our soul's forces, fighting positions, bunkers, staging areas, heavy weapons, compounds, and training caps. cases, isl has lost their freedom of a maneuver because they know if they mask their forces, we will let them out. has not had asil single successful offense of operation on the ground in either syria or iraq. in recent week, we have unleashed a new wave of strikes on their lifeline, their oil infrastructure, destroying hundreds of tankers, trucks, wells, and refineries, and we will keep on hammering those. i saw also continues to lose territory in iraq. irkukhad already lost k province and tikrit, recently

losing sinjar, a strategic highway, they lost their oil refinery. we saw during a raid supported by special forces which rescued dozens from isil, and which master sergeant joshua wheeler made the ultimate sacrifice. has lost 40% of the populated areas it once controlled in iraq, and it will lose more. wreck you forces are now fighting their way deeper into ramadi. they are working to encircle falluja and cut off supply routes into muscle. again, these are urban areas were isil is trenched. partners on the ground face a tough fight ahead. upwill continue to back them with the support that they need to ultimately clear isil from iraq. i also continues to lose territory in syria. we continue to step of our support and supply to local forces. syria kurds, arabs, christians, turkmen, and others are having success.

after robbing them in kobani and other areas, they have pushed isil back almost across the entire border region with turkey , and we are working with turkey to seal the rest. milesas lost thousands of of territory in syria and will lose more. special forces that i ordered to syria have become supporting local forces they pushed south, couple supply lines, and tightened the squeeze on rock. meanwhile, more people are seeing isil or the thugs and killers that they are. we have seen instances of fighters defecting, others trying to escape have been executed, and the rain of brutality and extortion continues to repel local populations and helped fuel the refugee crisis. so many people are migrating, ,aid one syrian refugee, isil she said, will end up all alone. thathis said, we recognize progress needs to keep coming faster. no one knows that more than the

count of syrians and iraqis s terror, as isil' well as those families in paris and san bernardino grieving the loss of their loved ones. just as the u.s. is doing more in the fight, just as our allies in france, germany, the united kingdom, australia, italy, are doing more, so must others. that is why i asked secretary carter to go to the middle east right after this press briefing, to work with our coalition partners on securing more military contributions to this fight. on the diplomatic front, secretary kerry will be in russia tomorrow as we continue to work as part of the process to end the syrian civil war. meanwhile, here home, the department of homeland security is updating its alert system to help the american people stay vigilant and safe. as always, our children are in men and women in uniform continue to put their lives on the line.

in this campaign and around the world, to keep us safe. many of our season, troops are once again far away from their families, and as your commander in chief, on behalf of those people, we want to say thank you. our proud of everything you do. because of what you do, the america that we love and cherish is leading the world in this fight. because of you, i'm confident that we will prevail. thank you very much, everybody. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] the attorney for sergeant bowe bergdahl, who was released in exchange for five taliban detainees from guantanamo bay, says the soldier's case has been referred to trial by a general court-martial. the conveningays authority did not follow the advice of the preliminary hearing officer. he recommended the case be moved

only to a special misdemeanor level at military court. he said in a statement that he hoped the case would not go in this direction. bergdahl was charged in march with the relation and this behavior before the enemy. a quick reminder and, coming up at 3:30 eastern on c-span3, live coverage as the atlantic council panel talks about the possible nuclear deal with pakistan. you can see that live in about 45 minutes on our companion network c-span3. the foreign minister of mexico takes part in a discussion this afternoon on migration matters in u.s.-mexico relations. it takes place at the mexican migration policy institute. live coverage of that starting at 4:00 eastern. all persons having business before the honorable supreme court of the united dates are admonished to give their attention. >> tonight, on c-span's landmark cases --

anyou have the right to attorney. anything you say to us can be used against you in a court of law. are you sure you understand? >> ernesto miranda was 28 years old when he was arrested in phoenix on suspicion of kidnapping and raping a young woman. after two hours of police questioning, he confessed and signed a statement saying his confession had been given voluntarily. at trial, randa was convicted to 27 years in prison, but his lawyer argued that he was not told about the right to an attorney or the right to remain silent. the case went all the way to the supreme court. follow the case of miranda versus arizona and the evolution of policing practices in arizona with our guest jeff rosen. cosell, university of utah law professor. and former u.s. district court judge.

that is live tonight at 9:00 eastern on c-span, c-span3, and c-span radio. for background on each case while you watch, order your copy of the landmark cases companion book, available for $8.95 plus shipping. the new america organization here in washington, d.c. recently held an event examining the humanitarian implications of the syrian refugee crisis. a panel with leaders from advocacyian and groups. good afternoon, if everybody could take their steeds, we are about to start. these are all great conversation but they will have to cease. >> thank you and welcome to new america.

welcome to you and our viewers on c-span, which is covered us live. >> when we first started this idea, kati marton, others, including myself, back in september, the political context around refugees was different. in the paris attacks, two people served as syrian refugees. it was the worst terrorist attack in the west since the madrid attacks of 2004. then we had the san bernardino attack where one of the perpetrators came in on a so-called fiancee visa. the house overwhelmingly passed a measure that basically would pause all syrian refugees from coming to this country even though we take so few already. as a factual matter, no refugee

has been involved in any violent jihadist attack in this country. it is simply a myth. the last thing you'd want to do as a terrorist is come here as a refugee because it would probably take you for you to get through the process. first you have to do to a refugee cap outside of syria, then you have to be selected by the united nations, who are then referred to the u.s., then you have to spend two years going through the american system in which you would be subjected to a battery of interviews and biometric data collection. the wayy, that is not that terrorists have tried to operate in the country. the political context has changed. trump is calling for the banning of all muslim immigration. what we hope to do today is to try and explain what is the scale of the problem and also what to do about it. understand it is a problem but what can we do, what can the

u.s. to, what can the international community do? we will get some answers from some international exports. to the stageng anne-marie slaughter, who does not need much of an introduction , but i do want to mention something that is relevant to this discussion. when she left the administration as the policy and planning director of the state department, she was one of the syriato publicly say that was going to hell in a handbasket, and we needed to do something about it, including no-fly zones, safe zones were refugees, and engage militarily in syria. when she first wrote about it, it seemed like an outlandish idea. now it is with the u.s. is doing. i also want to invite kati board, will our longest member here. critical to the growth of new america. we started in 1999 with a dozen

people and now we are almost 200 people. she was instrumental in that growth. to this country from hungary, so she speaks with a great deal of personal experience. she has also been a leading human rights activist. author of her night book which is about to come out. anne-marie will talk first and then kati. you,l hand it over to anne-marie. thank you. i should add, my mother and her mother, and her brother, france, from belgium to switzerland. then before the last wave of the nazis overrunning the south of france to madrid, finally to

lisbon, and then by plane to london. it took six months. i am not a refugee, but i would not be here if my mother and her family had not been received as refugees in world war ii in britain. i'm going to say just three things. we will have a rich conversation. of thist is, the title is after paris, the refugee crisis. indeed, in most americans lives right now, terrorism and refugees are linked. as i will say in a minute, i don't that is the way we should think about the refugee crisis. linke extent there is a between terrorism and refugees, terrorists taking over large swathes of country give rise to refugees, rather than refugees give rise to terrorists. so the causal direction is not

the one that most americans are currently assuming, as peter laid out, that bringing in refugees can give rise to terrorism. it is the other way around. although it is not just terrorist groups that give rise to refugees, and that's my second point. well before san bernardino, issued a report that said there are 60 million refugees in the world. just think about that. my family is from belgium. belgium is roughly 10 million. there are six belgium's worth of refugees in the world. belgium is a pretty decent sized country. france, france is roughly 6 million people. when we think about the crisis ,f refugees, we have to think we have 194 nations in the world. actually, it is 199, or add

another power the size of france. that is the scope of the problem. that is not a problem that is going to be addressed by thinking about letting in 10,000, 20,000, even 50,000, against 60 million. will be point -- and we talking about this later in the panel discussion. i actually think we have to think about refugees in terms of opportunity, rather than in terms of a problem to be solved. i wrote recently for project syndicate in a column that talked about the ways in which the national democratic institute is beginning to think about refugee caps, not as places of squalor and despair and waiting to return home, but as places where you have concentrations of talented ,eople, entrepreneurial people driven enough to get up and leave for a better place for their family. but also places, if you think

about it differently, you are creating potential cities. you are creating a place where you can educate young people different way, where you can create different habits of political participation, where you can jumpstart entrepreneurs who want a different kind of economy. thinking about refugee caps more in terms of refugee cities. similarly, we have not been nearly created enough. there is an egyptian billionaire who is negotiating with the greek government to buy islands to resettle refugees. you might think that is preposterous. there are 1500 greek islands in the mediterranean, and they are for sale to billionaires as resort destinations. there is a website called my island online. if a billionaire can buy an island for private vacation, why

can't we actually be far more creative about places where we can resettle large numbers of people, who then can create a place they want to be? not that they will never want to go home, that is not the point. but when you have 60 million people around the world, thinking simply putting them in camps are resettling tiny numbers will not get the actual problem we face. so with that, i will turn it over to kati and then our first panel. thank you. kati: thank you, anne-marie, peter. ladies and gentlemen, thank you for the honor of speaking to you this afternoon on a subject that is very close to my heart, as peter mentioned, i'm a refugee, and should be close to the hearts of all americans. if we are not a nation of refugees, i don't know what we are. anne-marie's hone sacca confirms

confirms that.a if i could ask for a show of hands, those of you that our first or second generation, i assume many hands would go up. ladies and gentlemen, we are betraying our very core values in not stepping up to this enormous humanitarian crisis that is engulfing the world. and it is beyond a humanitarian crisis. it is also a crisis of national security, frankly. and start byn saying that i was one of 200,000 hungarians who was processed in a matter of weeks after the soviets crushed hungary's uprising. i was a little kid and i was swept from my country to this country in a matter of weeks, processed at an army camp on the

new jersey turnpike in a single day. the marine who processed me noticed it was my birth day -- don't ask which one because i won't tell you. but it was my birthday, so the marine gave me a silver dollar. by the end of the day, i had six silver dollars in my pocket, and that was my first introduction into the big heartedness of my new country. that big heart somehow seems to be missing today. having made a trip to hungary on behalf of the international rescue committee and the committee to protect journalists in recent months, or have to tell you, the family that i hungarian at the serb- border, and at the train station in budapest, where they were waiting to board trains for likeny, looked very much my family. my pregnant mother, my older sister, myself and four sort -- suitcases.

that is all we had. america took a chance on us. i do not think that it is a big said, to allow, as amory not 10,000, but several hundred thousand more of these people who are refugees as a result of a war that we either started in frankly, have neglected far too long, the war in syria. it is not as if we had no responsibility beyond the human responsibility, which i think is what the statue of liberty is about, isn't it? give me your tired, your richard, your poor. do we not believe that anymore? at the moment, the country that is being the best international citizen, ironically, given its history, germany. 800,000 syrian and other refugees have been processed and

through germany's doors to a very warm welcome. germany, the home of the third reich, should be teaching us lessons about how to deal with this humanitarian crisis -- there is a bitter irony in that. i think all of us have a role to play in this because our politicians are letting us down. washington's voice has been very faint in this. after i made my trip to the hungarian-serb border, i went to the eu headquarters in brussels. of course, i'm sorry to say, the eu is a study in dysfunction. out the balkan wars broke and then head of the european commission said the hour of europe has dawned, well, it did not turn out that way.

and it is not turning out that way today. there is simply no coherent european policy toward refugees. it is each country for themselves. that is partly what has set up the hispanic race for borders before they close, because there is no coherent unified policy. this is something that we, the united states, know how to do. even if we do not open our gates, as i hope that with pressure from every single one of you we will, we can collaborate with the eu and partner with them. you can only lead by example. words are not enough. the united states is not in a position right now to say to any other country in the world actually, you must do this, you have to let in more refugees. because we are not. words are no longer enough. i mentioned that this is also an

issue of national security. we are all a jittery after san bernardino. this conference could have been called after san bernardino. we came up with the name after paris, after paris. tragically, there will be other san bernardino's. that is almost inevitable. the most powerful counter narrative that we, the united ,tates can submit to the world which now sees as as a nation -- thank you, donald trump, but not only donald trump -- virtually the entire republican field, , who prefers bush christian refugees to others. and how little outrage that has provoked. who are we? the counter narrative we need to put up for our own security, if for no other reason, is that this is a nation that welcomes

muslims. and that these muslims who are escaping jihad have to be decoupled from jihad. since 9/11, the united states has admitted close to 800,000 refugees from the region, from the greater middle east region. do you know how many of them have been implicated in terrorist activity? three. sense,s absolutely no but of course, demagogues don't need to make sense. they just need to persuade that fear is more important than humanity or reason. a sorry chapter in our nation's history. we have been here before. the internment of japanese during world war ii is a stain

on our history, as is, frankly, president franklin delano roosevelt's in action vis-a-vis jewish refugees from hitler. those are teen dark chapters from our history, and i fear we are about to repeat a dark chapter. i don't think we want to do that. i don't think we want to buy the fear mongering version of events. i think we need to assert our right as americans and our humanity as citizens of the world, and do what our nation is really all about. thank you very much. [applause] >> thank you. we are going to move to our first panel. suzanne, qutaiba.

you have their bios. let me say a little about each of them. zaher is the president of the syrian medical society, which does american -- great work. a group of syrian american physicians going into syria to provide medical service. they provided services to around 1.5 million syrians during the course of this incredibly dangerous conflict. zaher has gone in several times at great personal risk. he was just in greece regarding medical services to some of the refugees. he is also frequently in touch with people in the white house about refugee policy. zaher. is married to she is also an amazing advocate. immigration

organization that helps syrian immigrants settle here in the u.s. is an immigration lawyer who is also a syrian american. she came to a conference and i saw her speak. i thought you did a brilliant presentation about the necessity of changing the way we do business on this issue. is aly, qutaiba idlbi syrian asylum seeker who came to the country recently. almost impossible, by the way, to find a recent syrian refugee because we have let in so few people, and almost impossible to find one that speaks english. we have a great panel. we will start with zaher. good morning and thank you very much for having me. to new america foundation to have the first .peaking panel, syrian refugees

i just want to give credit to the syrian americans for what they have done over the past four years. this is something that many of us know. we have at least 18 relief organizations that were founded by syrian americans. more than $400 million in neighboring countries to provide humanitarian assistance and medical aid to the people in syria and in neighboring countries. without that contribution, we would have seen a much worse situation. the heavy lifting to my wife, as i will usually took her to. , we try to give people inside syria by providing them health care and education, assistance, key people who are displaced from leaving syria, also providing people who are refugees in lebanon and jordan and turkey. suzanne has been trying to take care of them when they come here

to the u.s. as refugees. in the of you know, many refugee can't come it will take maybe a few years to go back to syria. we are talking about long-term. whether we like it or not, we will have to take some of the refugees. the number of 10,000 is very low. 60,000 tier for 100,000 to be accepted in the u.s. i want to start by dispelling some of the myths that peter and suzanne said. there was no searing implicated in any terrorist act. the media coverage of the terrorist attack that implicated one or two w syrian nationals is wrong. that turned out to be wrong. that was a guardian report a third person who was implicated in the attack was also -- actually a french national, not a syrian refugee.

terrorists took the pathway of the syrian refugee, but they were not syrian refugees. i want to make sure that is clear. the second thing, syrians who -- and i justria, came into contact a couple weeks ago with a greek island -- they are coming from inside syria. not from the may ring countries. these are not people who have been refugees in turkey or jordan for some time. who are leaving syria because of the bombing, the russian attacks, the chemical attacks, because of the brutality of the regime, and some are leaving because of the isis attacks. the majority, according to the studies done in germany, are leaving before the aside regime. now with the russian bombing of some areas in aleppo, damascus, we have seen intensifying exodus.

about doctors, lawyers, businessmen, teachers leaving syria. leaving foreople europe have a college or university degree. 40% are high school graduates. these are people who are educated and syria is losing its human resources because of this crisis. the super majority of people leaving are sunni muslims, not christian. i want to make sure this is not clear. 85% of people who are reaching greece, according to the records are sunni muslim. 60% are only christian. this goes against what some of the people in the republican party have been talking. if we need to accept people in proportion to the need, then we need to accept more people who are implicated as sunni muslim. i just want to say, we go into

the syrian dsr. syrian americans have contributed to this country. 1% of our doctors are of syrian origin. healing and treating millions every week and so forth. steve jobs, as you know, is the son of a syrian immigrants. some of the republican governors were descendents of syrian immigrants. i think we have to say -- and re-mentioned -- we have embraced these refugees because they will be the engine of the recovery in some of these areas. these are people that contribute to the welfare of our society. , and some ofhlight them are graphic, so i will warn you. this is a drawing of a second grade children in aleppo. of the most

dangerous cities in the world. the largest city in syria. studenta second grade who is drawn bombs. bombs, amputated children, children who are crying. instead of what children usually is the sky, rivers, and so forth. many of the syrian children are traumatized because of the situation. we don't have many mental health specialist who are addressing the humanitarian situation and his psychiatric trauma of syrian children. l bombs.ct of barre they say there is no need for a no-fly zone. intervention,ian 3800 barrel bombs were thrown on civilians in aleppo and other civilian areas. only in the last month we had

only 1000. so it continues to happen, causing a lot of destruction. it is the main driver of exodus outside syria. this is what you see. children that are pulled from the rubble. you have doctors and nurses struggling to meet the needs of the over one million people who are coming with trauma related to barrel bombs. this is a picture i took of myself in aleppo. iss is a fellow dr. who trying to salvage some of the medical supplies. their building was hit by double barrel bombs. i was planning to visit the hospital but he called me in the morning and said do not come. we had a barrel long and had to evacuate. he said, if you want to come, come in the afternoon after there are no more bonds. i took this picture. i'm sorry, this is very graphic. this is what we see on a daily basis. children who are killed.

20,000 children were killed in syria in the crisis. it is not only a man who died in syria because of the crisis. this is just one of the children who died, and are dying every day from the attacks. these are some of the children in the city of duma, which is under siege. despite that, they have been bombed every day. they are trying to heal each other. picture, aopeful picture of a child who was born only last week. ,fter his mother was killed reportedly as a russian attack in the city of duma, one of the doctors at the hospital was able to deliver her by c-section and the child survived. this is what we do, to prior to protect doctors and patients. we have sandbags in the emergency room.

sometimes we have to do a hospital underground. cave.ne is in a this one is in a city of aleppo that is or meters underground. most of the houses that we are building right now in syria are underground. 102 hospitals in syria. last year, 67 were targeted by barrel bombs. we tried also to connect the usingals over there telemedicine with physicians. we have satellite internet inside the icu in syria with specialists in the u.s. this is from last month in new york. i think all of us agree that targeting a hospital is a war crime, but this is happening.

85% of syrian refugees are not in camps, by the way. this is just one of the few in jordan. greece a couple weeks ago. i took this picture of one syrian refugee who had made it to the greek island. he had this picture of what to do after you get to greece. it tells you when you take a train or walk to macedonia or over to hungary, and how much it costs. by the way, if you are a refugee in syria going from turkey to the greek islands, you have to pay between 1000 and 4000 euros to the smuggler. in the islands, they tell me now, it has been raised 800 euros, because the risk of dying or drowning is higher. capsizedne of the

boats near the island. this was two weeks before i arrived. about 300 people who were in that vote. 30 of them drowned. i spoke with some of the doctors who resuscitated them. most of them were traumatized. they could not save many of the children that drowned on that island. i did not take this picture but i'm sure you are familiar with this. still 800 people arriving every day in the last few months. this is what they leave. they have life vests, but they do not save them. when the book capsizes, many , they have double or triple the number of people alone on a boat. when this one capsized, the children drowned because they

were stuck underneath, and that he had hypothermia. camps, they are there for about one day before they are moved to the capital of the island, and then to athens, where they are kept in three holding caps, before they are transported to the border with macedonia. these are some of the refugees. 50% of them are from afghanistan, 25% from syria lately. and of them are from iraq iran. this is our clinic where we provide health care to the refugees. i want to end with this picture, the person of the year as chosen by "time" magazine was angela merkel. i agree. we really want to thank the german government and the leadership of government a --

germany for embracing the refugees. i have read reports that the economy has improved over the last year because of refugees, the spending of refugees. i think many other countries can attest to that. these are the people that need to be recognized, excluding myself. we have a physician from norway, a physician from palestine. they went to the islands because they want to help. 90 different ngos in the islands trying to help refugees from syria and afghanistan, iraq. they are providing very good help right now. without their help, the situation would have been much worse. thank you very much for having me. [applause] suzanne: good afternoon,

everyone. always difficult to follow him when he gives his talks. thank you to the new america foundation, peter, and marie, or your invitation. i am proud to be here to talk about our small organization and the families that we have helped resettle in chicago. our organization is syrian community network. 2015, when the board appointed me to be the resource coordinator to understand the process, when refugees come to the u.s., we took this on as a project. the syrian network community was born out of that. our vision is to empower syrian refugees in achieving a seamless transition into their life. i have to say, when we started the organization, i kept having flashbacks to the time when i first came to the u.s. at the age of 10. in the 1960's to study engineering in chicago. she met my mother who is canadian.

she is the daughter of an irishman and scottish woman, so i am kind of all over the place. i started having all of these memories about how difficult it was to come after my father and mother were married, they went back to syria. just to have those stories and remembering the difficulties as a child, to acclimate to a new culture, and to learn a which. we were privileged to learn mylish in syria because mother was canadian, and we were always speaking english. now having to jump in and learn a new culture, a new learning style, quite difficult. we remember those stores, so we try to help our families go through them, so they do not suffer as much, some of the trauma that we went through. my sisters and i always joke, we never got over the trauma of moving here. things get better.

we wanted -- we know that syrians have been coming to the u.s. for about 100 years. we imagine this third wave to be refugees coming in. we work with several agencies in chicago, other agencies on a national level, and we try to include the families in the larger communities so they do not feel that isolation. forave done some programs them, dental hygiene workshops, we do a drive after ramadan, including them in events -- i'm losing some of that because i want to get through my time. one of the things that we try to do is connect them to the larger community. we try to do cultural understanding of syrian culture and what our faith is, whether we are muslim or christian, a lot of the groups -- this is a unitary group that invited us for syrian culture 101. they wanted to learn about the

culture, the do's and don't. they were going to be receiving this family the next day at the airport, so they wanted to make sure that they were receiving ,hem in a way that is welcoming and to make the family feel secure and safe. this was a really nice group to be with. these are some pictures of some of the families we had at community events. right now he in chicago, we have 22 families, about 100 individuals. mainly kids. 51% of them are children. women andre between men, but we do have some single moms also are caring for their children. them, include them in the community, make sure they are supported. we do volunteer training as well so that when we have volunteers go into their house, we mentor them, we are trying to launch

our mentorship program, so that our volunteers are trained and ready to do a great job, mentoring the families. we do a back to school drive. there is a story i want to share. blue was amonge the first family that we met this year. her father was killed by a sniper in syria. she is one of six children. syriaere displaced from and her home was. she sustained an injury and to this day, she still has shrapnel in her body. we registered her with a summer camp for girls. in the summer, she got the award for most improved english learner. we were really proud of her. whener to show a smile -- she first came in, she would not smile. no matter how much we try, she was not smiling.

to see her smile is really heartwarming. she drew this picture. i look funny, but she said, the asked her to draw a picture of someone who has helped you are infected you. she put our organization's name and me, because i'm the one that visits her all the time. it is nice to feel that you have helped someone. part of our advocacy, one of the things we want to focus on, with everything going on with the rhetoric coming from our lawmakers or governors, advocacy plays a key role in getting the stories out. we are proud to work with all of these organizations, state partners, to help bring the stories of syrian refugees. --s was an event impacted held by impact and sam's.

we flew them to washington, d.c. and they had the chance to speak in front of the white house and ask president obama to increase the numbers of refugees. really a proud moment to see them speak, to take leadership, and to experience american civic engagement. we think that was very powerful for them. we hope that they remember and cherish the memories. this is in front of the white house. they were excited, because it in syria, you cannot stand in front of the white house. it is on top of a mountain with many guards. it was very empowering for them. part of our advocacy effort, in chicago, senator dick durbin wanted to visit with our syrian families. these are my board members. we had a senator, out and meet with the refugees. thethen in chicago,

governor making those statements that refugees are not welcome in illinois -- the chicago city council came up with a resolution to welcome syrian refugees. resolutiona recognizing syrian refugees, asking for them to come into the city council meeting. they got a standing ovation. it was really a powerful moment, a symbolic moment. they were feeling very anxious and upset, that they were feeling unwanted. with our advocacy also with the city, this is mayor rahm emanuel. they hosted a think skipping dinner for the refugees. serving.im he went to every person and served them turkey and stuffing. it was really nice. he and the other elder men as well. it was really a beautiful moment.

these are the refugee families. we had over 90 people in the room. all the children were there, and they all got gifts from the city, and it was very nice. also, another organization, move on, has been hosting small dinners for community members, inviting refugees all over the u.s. this was a dinner that they hosted just before thanksgiving. this is the director of the chicago chapter, representative jan schakowsky. invited the refugees to be there. my colleague was also there. czajkowski was talking about the story about in st. louis, refugees were dropped off, but they were pushed away. she was adamant about welcoming the refugees. she was asking them to speak as

well. this is part of the dinner. efforts with civic and religious groups that we help to engage, getting the refugees to get the word out and speak on their own behalf. again, more pictures of the dinner. these two boys i wanted to highlight. yesterday, we were at a dinner with move on. senator dick durbin and al franken were there, and other syrian refugees. she is a violinist and she got to play for everyone. this picture got blown up in their living room. senator dick durbin said, are we afraid of these two boys? this little boy who is two years old, the other who is nine. it does not make sense.

i just want to end with a story. i wish i had her picture. one of the refugees, a syrian kurdish refugee. she did not want to be photographed, but she used to be a seamstress. we wanted to get her project going, where you can buy her a get herachine and having her own business. her mother is 80 and has to take care of her and her brother had leukemia. today, we were scrambling to think, how can we help her? womana phone call from a in the north side of chicago who said i will do anything. i am a marketing specialist. i said, would july to market her sewing business? times, we scramble to see how we can help people, but then there are people reaching out to us. for every one negative donald trump, that we receive, we get hundreds of comments of support and love. so thank you all for inviting me here. [applause]

>> thank you to new america for inviting us, myself, other panel members. oftentimes we listen to pundits listen to syrian refugees, are they isis are the top, and we feel they are talking around us. it is nice that today you are talking to us, more importantly, listening to us. thank you for the opportunity. we are one of six organizations that are the coalitions for a democratic syria. our focus is on advocacy here in washington, d.c. to get what we think is a better policy on syria and so far that's not happening. first, the syrians wondered why the world had abandoned them. then they wondered why the world

hated them. terms of our advocacy work is treat the symptom, stop the cause. we understand there is refugee we are learning about it in the u.s.. the rhetoric is about security and who should be let in, should we not let in. really what is missing from this discourse is what is the cause of this refugee crisis? this, one may think there is earthquake happening or there is a hurricane. when in fact, there is an intentional displacement and killing of syrian people by the syrian regime. this is something that i think we need to focus on. togress scrambled quickly say, let's block syrian refugees.

where have we been for four .ears to scramble there is a crisis. as americans, it is our responsibility, our heritage. we have to take our responsibility in that. what we also need to do is help people stay in their homes. help them stop leaving syria. refugees that are going to europe are not the one sitting in camps. enough, for the u.s., the view that have come in so far are the ones that are sitting in the camp's. they are basically the ones that have been sitting in the camps before isis existed in syria. the ones showing up in europe are the ones that are still fleeing, so why are we not talking about why syrians are still fleeing syria? butave 4.1 million refugees we have half the country

displaced internally. , they arender siege besieged, they are being bombed by assad, and there being bombed by russia, being attacked by iran, hezbollah. they have all of these forces against them. the main focus is on civilians. syria? happening in i'm sure many of you know, the doctor mentioned barrel bonds. bombs are the great tool that the assad regime explosives.re with tnt and the advantage is simple. can be dropped from nonmilitary aircraft. they had the ability to be

targeted. they land.ey land, the regime is focusing on civilians. bombs are civilians. and, of course, we knew about the chemical weapons that the regime used. and these same barrel bombs in a used to drop chlorine bombs. and turned in the gas thought the chlorine was easier to use. after the u.s. security resolution, saying chlorine bombs can't be used, they were used. surprise. what happens? a group of rebels take over the area. the regime comes and barrel bombs them. civilians and makes them feel like those that are

defending syria are somehow the culprits. it also knocks out basic supplies. electricity, and they target hospitals. regularly targeting hospitals. and if they can, the regime tries to surround the area. surrounds the area, it does not allow any humanitarian aid. the resolution says humanitarian aid can go in without the regime but they have blocked overwhelming. areas just outside of damascus where it is upwards of 700,000 people that a been under siege for years to come. they don't have food. they can get food but they can

only eat which that they can grow which is seasonal. there is a lot of hunger that happens. it is the systematic use of starvation. so then they say, let's do what the regime says and do these local cease-fires. hand us over your weapons and get out. that means civilian population. there is an intentional displacement of syrian population from within syria. camp that is the overwhelmingly palestinian refugees who are in an area in damascus under siege for about 18 months. finally, when they negotiated a cease-fire, they were basically doors only being

opened for a very limited time. we will shut the door and you're going to starve, or please get out. they ended up fleeing and many of them made it to lebanon. i have several of my cousins that made it to germany, and they have her rent this cease-fires that are also an intentional way to displace the syrian population. i don't even know if i should talk about international law. i think they just keep happening and there are powers to continue. onlyow the intervention further emboldened and empowered the regime.

i'm going to conclude with this. there is no solution to the refugee crisis. without a primary focus on civilian protection. that means a no-fly zone. to stay within syria and be protected from this constant aerial bombardment out of the regime and out of russia. it has to be a political transition. you cannot reclaim legitimacy. that.n't create it is a nonstarter. he has to go. , the international community feels that our solution is let's give money to keep posting these -- keep

posting these refugees. it's go to the peace talks. nobody really knows where they are going and where they are coming from. miniscule numbers of refugees. they have ongoing civilian protection and without that, there will be no solution to the refugee crisis. together.t thank you so much. [applause]

>> i want to thank tear and david from new america for having me. i have been raised in syria almost all my life. english because i was fortunate enough to know taylor swift. and backstreet boys, also. that helped. life forved in normal . kid i have been politically involved since i was 12. blood. of runs in the started insolution 2011, i was a senior in college. with everything going on in the , that's what i did

at that time. fox news, telling them what is going on. why people are out in the streets and risking their lives. it led, at some point, for me to be detained by the government. it is really hard to describe being in the thoughts prison -- in assad's prison. it is in human. and i also barely survived it. and the question was if i should stay or if i should leave. the government did not give me a choice. 10 days later, they tried to arrest me a third time. i managed to escape.

they tried to kidnap my 17-year-old little brother. but not only about myself also about protecting my family. we decided to leave because the government kept asking about us. we left first to lebanon. lebanon was different. relatively, it is safer than syria but you still have the risk of militia and thugs all around. lebanon.nment invaded that support the revolutions, it wasn't truly helpful. months, we had to leave

to egypt because i wanted to get my brother back for high school. i had to do his high school and we left for egypt. at the same time, the egyptian government did not allow me to have residents. i am a youth syrian politically involved back in syria. i have to leave every three months to be legally in egypt. time, my mom would go to egypt. the government wanted to arrest my other brother. there was no choice for her to get by. my brother escaped from the

suburbs of damascus. we kept thinking it would be this year. it will be different. everything will change. politically, it is really depressing. nothing is really changing. it was not really helping. i was invited to the state department leaders for democracy. and i managed to get here. i was trying to decide if i should stay or not. the question in my mind was the that i did my interview.

it was so strong in my mind. started a couple of weeks before. thinking, someone why we would ask people to come out to the streets. and remember, i was the youngest. simply because the international community was not allowed to have it. they demand freedom and democracy. in that time, to make reforms. we do not know what is going on

in syria. two years after i realized it's , i don't see it in the future. , it's like any they apply for asylum. it is like a process with a number of refugees. some people tell me that. with relativese

back in syria. i am working with the red badge on my head. the main reason for me to come here, i do want to be labeled like that. i'm still syrian. i did not want to be labeled just because of this. i remember the officer asked me like why did you choose to come here? here in this country, we are born and live in this atmosphere.

without actually looking back or seeing if anyone is listening to you. this means a lot. started, weolution wanted the american dream to have the fancy cars, the fancy houses. economically, things are really good. it is not that hard to find a job. the social environment is really supportive. you are not able to breathe.

you are not able to have what you have here. this american dream was for me. you still look down as a citizen. in egypt, we are allowed to work. it will be sent back not to the but on the borders from the syrian side. it was hard at the beginning.

they can attempt college, actually. .hey can start a small business you're able to live your life here. these things don't matter because it doesn't matter as much. youn come here and speak to about what i feel.

i was speaking it princeton university. kept saying our american history. as a nation of refugees about who we are. you're not even american. , i may not have the green card or the id. americanlly being an is not only about having the paper. is being ablecan to live the freedom and be able to express yourself. to live freely without any interference. that is what being american is for me. thank you.

[applause] >> thank you for the brilliant presentations. if you have a question, razor hand. if anybody has a question, raise their hands. no questions? >> the question has to do with the parallel goals. there are millions of refugees on the other. which one do you think takes precedence? which one is more important? should one wait for one to happen for the other to be possible.

thank you. >> i can maybe address that a little bit. >> i think there was another study. syria if go back to the sod stays in power? you have to have a political solution. course, most refugees are going to take them 15 to 20 years to go back to syria. many of them were completely destroyed. the refugees, providing them with health care.

students in lebanon and jordan , many of the areas for extra ms. him. they have no education. they will not be a participant in the economy. it is a huge problem. they are developing countries around syria that should be a priority. there is a middle east investment initiative. i think they have a plan for , withloping the country jobs and education. it should go hand-in-hand with the political resolution.

>> a ukrainian american or an american ukrainian -- what you said about refugees saying close to me because the same thing happened in the ukraine. we are living in an endangered world. all of that brainwash was in use. [indiscernible] visitation ishe affecting people but i would like to ask you about the children. what they are doing to help children. how you focus on children and how you actually help the children in this situation. >> many that are working are health care and trying

to provide education to syrian children. there is not enough emphasis on it. it will provide housing and food. but this is something the international community has to pay more attention to. there are not the resources or expertise. that is the example of tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands that are completely traumatized. not only syrian children but syrian women and elderly and disabled are traumatized because of what they are seeing in the acts they are witnessing by the international community. it is something that has to be addressed. >> where running a little bit over time you need to move along to the next panel.

thank you, all of you, for a brilliant presentation. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> tonight on "the michael powell, president and ceo of the national telecommunications association joins us to discuss challenges to the fcc open internet regulation orders. set-top cable boxes. the upcoming spectrum auction and the impact of ltu technology on wi-fi. technology on wi-fi. >> we argue quite forcefully that the commission dedicates effort and attention to carving out some amount for wireless use.

and how extensive the same thing goes on in congress. are there things that are happening that can destroy wi-fi and unlicensed. the samet guaranteed way that a licensed spectrum carrier is guaranteed exclusive use. but let me tell you something. they would have a hard time getting with consumers if wi-fi stopped working in some significant measure. >> all persons having business before the honorable supreme court of the united states are to go in there and give their attention. cases."ht on "landmark >> you have the right to an attorney. it you have the right to remain silent. anything you say can and will be used against you in the court of law. do you understand?

>> yes. >> are you sure you understand? >> that's right. ask arrested on suspicion of kidnapping and raping a young woman. his confession had been given voluntarily and brenda was convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison. his lawyer argued that he had not been told of the right to an attorney for the right to remain silent. the case went all the way to the supreme court. aranda versus arizona and the evolution of policing practices in america with jeff rosen, resident and ceo of the national constitution center and pau gasol -- paul cassell. former u.s. district court judge. on c-span,e tonight c-span three, and c-span radio. for background on each case while you watch, order your copy of the landmark cases companion

book. >> and we are live here at the wilson center in washington waiting for remarks in just a moment or two on the foreign minister of mexico who remarks m the foreign minister of mexico. she will talk about current u.s. relations with our country. our live coverage under way right now on c-span.

if you just joined us, we are live from the wilson center, just waiting for the foreign minister from mexico to come out and talk about current relations with her country and migration issues. our live coverage here on c-span.

>> good evening and welcome to the woodrow wilson center. it is a particular honor for us tonight in the presence of c-span2 welcome the foreign minister of mexico. claudia ruiz-massieu is a returnee to woodrow wilson.

she was here in 2013 as the minister of tourism. she was also with us in september of that same year when we gather the women leaders in public service, a presentation undertook with barnard college. it is a re-welcome to madam thister for returning to institution. we also welcome doris meisner, the director of u.s. policy at the u.s. migration policy institute, otherwise known as mpi. is the host of tonight's event and she will carry out the interview with the foreign minister. it is with great pleasure that the woodrow wilson center welcomes both of you to our stage. doris: well, thank you, diana

and thank you to the wilson center for our continuing cooperation and friendship as institutions. i am pleased also to welcome everyone in this audience today, watching on tve or listening on the radio or live stream. this is the leadership visions series. speakers program, that gives individuals migration policy portfolios to lay out the mission for their work as they were embarking on new responsibility. minister today, claudia ruiz-massieu, is the perfect example of that kind of person. she was appointed to be foreign 2015.er on august 27,

a range ofved in other executive posts in government and various positions inan elected official mexico's house of representatives. , ands a lawyer by training academic and frequent political analyst in the mexican media. i have the pleasure of meeting her recently and was very impressed by the scope of her knowledge and ideas for this critical and complex situation she is now in. i am particularly pleased to host her during her first visit to washington, d.c. as mexico's new foreign minister. the way we will do this is as follows. the secretary will come to the podium to make remarks. then she will join me at the table. we will have a conversation for a little while, and finally we will open to the audience for

audience q and a. -- please joinme me in a warm welcome for foreign secretary minister claudia ruiz-massieu. [applause] minister ruiz-massieu: thank you, diana, thank you doris, for your introduction. thank you all for being here. it is an honor to be here, my first visit to washington as the mexican secretary of foreign affairs. establishre tompi this conversation because migration is one of our top policy priorities. about 232 million people migrate globally. this means one in seven people are migrants. and then flows increase

phenomena and is occurring with significant new challenges. he increased factors from arendi, syrian refugees fleeing a civil war that has left devastation in his wake, and cuban citizens are traveling kilometers to reach the united states, etc. the migration flows are being triggered by the same push and pull factors -- social strife, political turmoil, and the political map is shrinking. one part of the map holds all sorts of migrants. we are struggling to understand the diversity and complexity that comes with each flow of

newcomers. you will immediately be thinking of europe, but the americas have been experiencing this reality for decades now. this condition has unfortunately be met in some places by an irresponsible and dangerous narrative of xenophobia and exclusion that wrongly portrays immigrants as security concerns. it is our obligation to stand up to this trend and think of proactive policy solutions rather than hatred and resorting to rash statements. these narratives are simply unsustainable and these sell due to misinformation about the impacts of migration. it is easier to focused on the cost rather than the countless contributions immigrants make every day. the contributions mexican

immigrants make to the united states is just one case in point. just to give you some daily facts of life -- 12% of immigrants who are business owners in the u.s. are mexican. more than one in 25 businesses in the u.s. are owned by a mexican immigrant. these businesses generate $17 each year.revenue immigrants are also entrepreneurs. mexicans int of 10 the united states have their own businesses. the 33 million mexicans living in the united states, including second and third generations, represent 8% of the country's gdp. 11.8 billion dollars. this is the amount of dollars that undocumented immigrants pay to state and local governments in 2012. and the list goes on. we open our eyes to this

crafty, it compels us to 2.0 or perhaps 5.0 policies. we need to embrace immigration as an opportunity. we need to change our mindset. today, it is even more critical to unmask stereotypes of international migrants and find solutions tailored to each context, prioritizing the well-being of migrants and making sure they are fully respected. as a country of origin, destination, return, and transit of migrants, we have been forced to come up with a wide, deep, and innovative toolbox of migration policies. we have to put our strength to a smarter use. i would like to outline three of the main principles that underline this toolbox we are

resorting to. these are cooperation, adherence is- incorporation, mexico involved in a multifactorial approach to migration. regional is pivotal to both local and local impacts of migration. the new realities have post us to look at the reinsertion of migrants. mexico has been a regional leader in addressing these challenges. the conference is a multinational consultative firm that looks at migration from a regional perspective. generatedence has comprehensive results with partners in the region including mexico and the united states,

under the auspices of return and reinsertion. we are learning from one another on how to best address these issues. we have to learn how to use sources, particularly in areas such as emergency management and services, and also including a safer culture. is becoming a valuable asset. such an example is the creation in 2014 of a binational repatriation strategy and executive coordination team,

also known as respects, with the goal of analyzing needs and .esigning fresh public policies we also created the border violence prevention technical working group to put a renovated emphasis on preemptive protection and transcultural awareness to refute violent incidents at the border. there has been a 26% reduction in incidents at the border region from 2014 until 2015. among some of the highlights, these new guidelines issued by -- for border control agents. the other principle for our migration policies is coherence. it has a street

our immigrants the same way we expect others to be treated abroad. program seeks to achieve secure and orderly flows of migrants, while at the same time recognizing the intrinsic nature of community life at the border. with this program, mexico has expanded opportunities for ourants to live -- in community safely, but has also willd on initiatives that be given inside our territory. as expected, we have seen a very significant increase in the number of migrants at our southern border. almost three times the number from two years ago. we need to read this number in a

wider context. we have also renovated infrastructure between mexico and guatemala and belize. we have detained more than 500 people and 50 vehicles associated with crimes like human trafficking and smuggling and we have issued over 800,000 visas for regional workers and visitors, increasing central americans opportunities for legal immigration. mexico will not stop repeating its mantra. governments should work, not to create -- close borders, makes increasent efforts to safe and secure migration flows. balanced between the need for greater mobility and security concerns and interest is an attainable goal. -- allen is between the need for greater mobility and security concerns and interest is in attainable goal.

the drive ofring human migrants. for peopleo the case seeking refuge. mexico has historically opened its doors to refugees, and for some, it seems we have shut down our doors, and that is not the case. the international community might be focused on syrians, but i would like to remind you hundreds of central americans for allrs answer mexico southern border everything will day. today, the administration has communicated to keep the doors open. in the case of syrians, if they apply for refugee or asylum, mexico will stand ready to welcome them, but it seems they are choosing other destinations. our third principle is

innovation. we are embracing innovation on four fronts. how can we improve ties with them? improving our policies -- regarding policies that will aid returnees in the reintegration becomeety and help them active economic agents and their societies and a home. in the past few years, mexico has improved. servic that we offer at our cancel it -- consulate. mexicandocuments for citizens in the united states. we have set new service standards for all of our operations, which have enabled wait times by 80%. we also added technological improvements to our main safer and making them

tamperproof, with the ultimate goal of facilitating their acceptance by local authorities. we have also modernized our diplomacy efforts to improve the opportunities of free nationals. consulates worked tirelessly. we are looking for accommodations to be enacted that will allow them to integrate better into the communities they live in. if we zoom out, we can observe that governments around the world are increasingly adopting immigration policies. 91% of countries in developed regions in 2011. ed how weo innovat build ties with mexicans abroad. we empower people by designing programs aimed at reintegration, health, education, financial

access. for example, we have a health information,vides counseling, and referrals for mexicans and their families in the united states. and we truly want to innovate tools to protect vulnerable populations and we are making headway. , we work inexample cooperation with the. this is now in operation with all of our counsel its. consulates. accurateake an assessment of the risk they might face and determinate outcome on a case-by-case approach. for example,en mexico has developed better policies to serve migrant women abroad. a couple weeks ago, i signed a protocol created jointly with

you and women to improve retention mechanisms to identify any gender-based violence and contribute to the comprehensive well-being and development of women. equality and nondiscrimination are the corner of our actions. and finally, we are innovating at home. we're taking a fresh look at the nationalsffered to returning to mexico. we know the challenges that they face. they may feel distant. this is why the mexican worked to improve their return to their home and our and the policy of implementing policies that will help them thrive in all areas. ladies and gentlemen, cooperation, coherence, and innovation. this will help us in the space with the increasingly phenomenon migration

and its multiple dimensions. we are committed to serving our population outside our borders, to improve well-being. we are fully committed to working together. states,al authorities, and other countries to explore, share, design, and develop the best possible solutions to common challenges. there is a margin for working hand-in-hand while paying to the attention sensitive spaces of this phenomenon. it is only together that we can achieve great things. we are also fully invested in treating all migrants, mexicans and others, in the same, humane way. and finally, we are betting on the future through innovation, working closely to bring down,

rather than build, the wall of racism and fear, exclusion and extremism, that has become so in manyd -- fertile contexts. in thistruly hunger for area is courageous leadership to accomplish these goals. it is our responsibility to it knowledge immigrant contributions working closely across borders and spread a message of tolerance. i thank you all for being here today. i look forward to your dialogue. [applause] doris: well, thank you so much. you have put lots of topics on the table. -- and people in the audience should be thinking of

questions they want to ask. by i would like to start looking at some much of what you have talked about, the u.s.-mexico relationship, because obviously that ties us together, not only geographically, but as so many levels in both of our societies. what is so important is the way is, inat relationship fact, changed. as you know, there has been a profound shift in the numbers of people who come to mexico from the united states in an unauthorized status. the flow now is a north to south flow. there are more people returning to mexico than coming to the u.s. this is something that is not well understood in the united states at all, and it is not

reflected in our political conversation. is it understood in mexico? do mexicans understand -- what is the debate in mexico about the way this shift is taking place, which is an historic shift after about 40 years? i think ruiz-massieu: this is in fact one of the greatest challenges we have, how to keep on providing protection, accompaniment, and avenues for , the mexican population that lives in the united states, and continue to have that as a cornerstone of , and foreign policy toward the united states, while making it visible that we have increasing numbers of migrants returning home? programs inerent

different windows within the federal government to welcome those migrants that are returning back, but we have not up until now a focal point. that is what we want to change. we want to make our delegation in mexico, inside of mexico, we have 44, our representation throughout the country, we want to make them the first point of contact for our people coming back, and ideally, we want to have our consulates in the united states mirror those delegations in order to know who is coming back. what are his or her challenges? how can we better help them assimilate back into communities? how can we save them the time of knocking on the many different doris that the federal for treatings

specific challenges. we want to help them integrate into our financial system. we want to help them know what their potential social benefits are, what their job opportunities are. .nd we want to help them we can sort of help them complicated process of assimilating into their populations. but i do not think this has been, up until very recently, part of the immigration conversation in mexico. we know that the trends have reversed, that we are seeing more immigrant -- mexican immigrants than we are sending, but it is so part of the what wetion regarding

are doing vis-à-vis the united states and not necessarily how constructing, designing, implementing public policies here to better receive them and to better help them become a productive source and our economy and social change. this is starting to change. this is on the instructions of the president himself. of course, we are working with government, because everyone has a point of contact, and a point of aid. thester ruiz-massieu: multiple role -- doris: the multiple roles you talked about about being in origin country, a destination country, a transit country -- do you see a need or is there likely to be a need for changes in your own laws given

those changes? they are profound. minister ruiz-massieu: well, we have a fairly recent immigration .aw that needs to be revised by theed to be looked at secretary of the interior. but we in fact have changed. our policiesed internally, and we've changed our policies in the way we the united only to states, but to our neighbors in the south. we have increasingly underscored the importance and the contributions migrant populations make to their countries of destination, but also to the countries they aansit, and we have made

cornerstone of our international foreign policy with central immigration requires a collective effort andther to ensure safer to focus on flows the causes of immigration. we are working together. we have worked with the united states to build actual infrastructure to ensure a safer and more orderly every day crossing, but also invested together to create better job opportunities, more social infrastructure, better help become more capable to ensure more

opportunity for their people. we know that immigration is not going to stop. we know that immigration has had and should have a positive impact on the countries. it has destination for transit , and the phenomena in our together, and we should also be talking about human rights, , and that entails investing in institutions, investing in human capital, investing in changing stereotypes as well. doris: on the subject of central america and countries to the south, you have talked about you are doing considerably more

enforcement. we know there is enforcement along the southern border of mexico. realally, there is a criticism of that in the united states, that says the united states is outsourcing the enforcement to mexico and mexico doing a pressured into greater degree of enforcement. talk about that. talk about that criticism and your own interests as a nation, in a way that you touched about -- touched on a little bit in your remarks about border and respect -- border enforcement. minister ruiz-massieu: we have been working in our southern border because it is in our and in the do so interest of our neighbors that we work together, not only

insuring the region becomes more secure, but more prosperous, and we know we cannot have a more we areregion -- and talking about the southern border of mexico or the southern border of the united states are indeed the whole region -- we cannot have a secure region if we do not have a prosperous region. in building together the legal framework, the human resources to ensure that, it is an everyone's best interest. it has been a very successful approach. we have an every day, productive cooperation. regarding sharing information, sharing best practices, building

together, but also regarding building actual infrastructure. towe have the resources build it, we build it. if we have to go in together to build roads, we do it. if we want more prepared human capital, we extend cooperation mechanisms, and we talk about this, not only with our partners in the united states, but indeed inh all of our partners south america. we are increasingly coming to therstand that we share ambition of security and safety and that can only be achieved if we find common ground and we find our commonalities and consensus, rather than emphasize

our differences and the things we do not like about each other. let's focus on what we like about each other and share and build from that. take you to a variant of that, which is your consular network in the united states. mexico has made a significant investment building services throughout the united states really, for decades now. one of the main things that you --that you talked about is which, as you know, has taken some attack, particularly in texas, and the unwillingness to use it in issuing birth certificates. tell us about that. tell us about the consular network and why that is important, and what would you say to those officials in texas who are questioning it minister ruiz-massieu:?

-- who are questioning it? minister ruiz-massieu: first of all, i would say our responsibility as the ministry of foreign affairs, whether in the united states or elsewhere, is protecting our people. protecting them means making them aware of their rights, , and ensuring that they can become part of the communities they have chosen to live in. thathe id is a document has the highest standards regarding security, regarding procedures,afety and provides our people with an identification card. this is who they are. become a muchm to

more visible part of the communities where they live. increasingly, many states are accepting the consular id to let our people who have them obtain a driver's license, pain medication, obtain certain health services, and it has proven to be an identification instrument that is really helpful that helps them become safer and also to ensure safety for all the people that live in the community with them. there are some states where that we look atpted, and that the way the legal system in the united states allows us to do so. issuing theinue consular id. not only with the highest levels of safety and security, but also

within the vienna convention regarding mandates. think it is useful and increasingly more banks, more institutions, more universities, more employers are coming to see it is useful also for them. doris: ok, let's go to the audience. we have microphones, i believe. in order for you to be heard, you need to wait until we get a microphone. let's go over here. are and thenho you your question. >> [indiscernible] crossover the border into mexico -- [indiscernible]

my question is about education on the part of the mexican government. does the government ever advise a port ofhat there is entry? [indiscernible] minister ruiz-massieu: part of what we do is making it known to mexicans in general about these specific procedures and requirements to enter any country. we do that through our offices, our webpage, our consulate, our embassies all over the world. u.s., we also make the effort to educate the public but there are procedures, there are rules, there are requirements if .ou meet that criteria

however, we have the immigration of undocumented people. we also make the effort with agencies in the federal government to tell people that they may face certain challenges and we also make it known we have consular offices and are they are to provide them with assistance. like any other country, we discourage illegal migration, but we do not -- and i think that is a very important principle -- offer immigration law -- we do not criminalize migration.d we tried to educate, we try to help, we try to assist. we try to help people assimilate to their communities and face , butequirements they need

i don't think any country in the world really encourages undocumented migration. we certainly don't, but we do not criminalize undocumented migration. ok, up here in the front. madam minister, i wish to stretch you from the issue of migration to the transpacific partnership. last week, the leader of the u.s. senate advised president obama not to present the treaty, november inned in atlanta, until after our elections. what impact does that have on mexico, on mexico's trade policy, and your conversations with the peruvian and chilean ministers of foreign affairs whom, who alsoth

must face the consequences of this advice? minister ruiz-massieu: mexico, for some decades now, has made aee-trade agreements cornerstone of our foreign policy, but also of our vision for constructing prosperity, long listing -- long-lasting prosperity. for us, the transpacific partnership is in agreement that complements the wide range of agreements we have with over 45 markets all over the world. we are committed to the tpp. we signed the tpp and atlanta, when i say we, i mean my

colleague, the minister of the economy, but we held discussions with specific industries, specific economic groups that helped our stakeholders, in fact in these industries that are going to be potential, because we see this as a good thing, potential lies with the tpp. inare very much committed senate congress, the ratify to could the next year. like i said, we think it is important. to otherain us access markets, but i think it would a region, as the north american region, because the united dates in canada are also part of tpp -- it will open up as a region to wider markets and it will help -- if we

continue as we have been for the past 20 years, since nafta, to integrate better and open up comparative -- i mean competitive advantage vis-à-vis the region of the world that looks it will be growing the most in the next coming years. but we are also a part of the pacific alliance, and we look forward to working with the on all of ource strengths and their strengths. question, we your are committed to tpp. it will complement what we already have. thatpe every other country is committed can pass it through their respective congresses, because i think it is a good thing. it is what nafta used to be. think it wasid not

going to work out, and i think successargely become a story. like many people said in mexico is a good, is it bad, i don't know. but if we passed up the opportunity, i do not think we would be where we are now, the 15th largest economy in the world. but we have the right tools to face those challenges. let me see some hands in the back. how about right here on the aisle? hi, on from the roosevelt institute. i have cheated questions about how mexico's history supports the children of nationals born abroad. the first question -- [speaking spanish]

december 1998, my understanding there was a reform to the constitution that assured citizenship for children of nationals born abroad, but there was a move by the mexican senate to somehow express that explicitly? so i'm not sure. that legislative move, was that a change in policy? was that a better articulation of existing policy? what does that say about the policy of 1998? the second question is about -- a brief the mexican government filed in support of undocumented whose childrenas were being denied citizenship. can you talk a little bit more about what is the goal of that brief and how it's meant to support children of undocumented

-- i'm sorry, of mexican nationals born abroad. thank you. yes.ter ruiz-massieu: one of the responsibilities we have is helping mexicans abroad become more empowered. one way to become more empowered is to have full access to every right , forave. for some people millions of mexicans and mexican americans or children born here that are born to mexican parents, that entails kneeing eligible for citizenship. consciously made a policy decision to help those people become aware of the possibility of becoming an american citizen, and to help aid totain the legal pursue that process, because we

have come to understand, and we -- and that if you have that is why there was a constitutional reform a couple to allow mexicans to hold a double nationality. before that it was not possible. but today, it is. you can be mexican and american britishan and a citizen, and that does not make you less mexican. that does not in our as ansibility to you mexican citizen, and that in assistanceprovide with the possibility to access more benefits and more right. so, our commitment as a andrnment is to our people for many people, that entails

the option to follow the process to become an american citizen. we fully endorse whoever is that position pursue that if they want to. the brief, we filed that because we can. we can do so as a means of making our case to the courts that we think these children and these suits filed by texas and should -- thates is our priority under american law. and we did so. and we hope it will be taken when, if the supreme court decides to hear that. but we are a third interest party. ok, let's go to the side

of the room. any hands? all right. back to the woman on the aisle -- ok, there. >> thank you. question --ask a you mentioned, and the president, when he launched the program talked about working to protect migrants as they travel, and yet documentation, organization of migrant shelter's in mexico suggest crimes and abuse against mexicans in transit continue. registered enough sick of 32% of complaints since the program was started. i wanted to ask you, can you describe more what the government is doing to focus on that area of protections for migrants? thank you. one way ruiz-massieu: to look at it is since the

program started, violations came up by 30%, but the other way to look at it, since the program started, we have built a mechanism for people to be able denounce when they are violations. and i fully and very truthfully think that is what has happened. we do face many challenges, because we have large swarms of people traveling through mexico, but we have tried to build safer and more ordered and secured border by modernizing our infrastructure, by having cooperation agreement. our southern neighbors, by training better. shelters that

, by cooperating more and more with society that has been essential for building a much more modern and sustained and trustworthy for the migrants infrastructure throughout the and the program has all of these components. the infrastructure regarding the capabilityng, sharing, and the sharing of and almost every other component of real cooperation for society and also building the framework for violations to be denounced and violations and infractions being

punished. so, i think we have built the legal framework, the physical framework, and we are slowly changing the mindset of the officials that are in charge of immigration that are there at theborder and of communities. there are points along the way to help them and to add cooperation, their abilities, their resources to the so we can better serve and protect those migrants. --want them -- like i said we want the migrants to pass through mexico to be fairly treated and with as much dignity as we expect our migrants to be treated elsewhere. so, it is a process. doris: any other hands? here in the front.

hi. i am from george washington university. in a meeting with the president said that he wanted to transform mexican american officials in the u.s. to become the largest lobbying organization in the u.s. do you have more information about his goal? minister ruiz-massieu: i-20 say what i think he meant. [laughter] minister ruiz-massieu: and afterwards you can talk to him. no, what we mean as a government is what i was saying before. it is our responsibility to ensure that our people have better tools to become productive members of the communities, to make sure they have access to benefits they

have a right to, and to have a better access to the rights they have. ,oth migrants, and some of them many of them, as legal residents, and many more as people that are eligible for citizenship. communicating their rights, the possible benefits that they have access to, and helping them get in touch with organizations that provide those tools, that access, as part of our everyday consumer work. we have, in our counsel it, we have 50 consulates. in our consulate, we have evolved. we are engaging. we do different populations, mexican, mexican american populations.