congressional seat. >> with the control of congress in question this election day, see the competition for yourself on c-span. watch the debates from key house and senate races. make c-span your primary source for campaign 2018. >> today white house press secretary sara sanders held a briefing. prior to taking questions from reporters, small business administrator linda mcmahon thanked the president for donating his salary@eightcy. and john bolton spoke about the withdrawal from the treaty with iran. ms. sanders: the president continues to donate his salary

, today he'sly basis proud to donate his salary to small business administration. linda mcmahon is here to accept the check. >> thank you very much, this is awesome. i would like to thank the president for his generosity and for his support of the small business administration. he clearly understands the value of small businesses, there are approximately 30 million of them in this country and i'm happy to be their advocate. this money will be used in our veterans program. we're going to establish a seven-month intensetive training program called emerging leaders, it's an adaptation of the program for our veterans, helping them transition from military life into private sector if they desire to start their own jobs, their own companies and be entrepreneurs. once again, we thank the

president very much for this and it will be put to very good use. thank you all very much. >> thank you, administrate orr mcmahon. -- administrate orr mcmahon. now i'd like to bring up john bolton to speak about the withdrawal from the treaty. he'll take some questions and then i'll be uh up to take questions for the tai. mr. bolton: thank you, sarah. earlier today, sec retear of state pompeo made an important announcement regarding the president's decision to terminate the 1955 treaty of amity with iran, a treaty iran made a mockery of with its support for terrorism, provocative ballistic missile proliferation. today decision at the international court of justice was a defeat for iran.

it correctly denied almost all of their requests. we're disappointed that the i.c.j. failed to recognize it has no standing about any sanctions. instead the court allowed iran to use it as a forum for propaganda. the iranian regime has systematically pursued a policy of hs tillity toward the united states that defames the central premise of the treaty of amity. the regime cannot prackity -- practice animosity and its conduct and then ask for amity under international law. in addition to the treaty of amity, i am announcing that the president has decided that the united states will withdraw from he optional protocol and dispute revolution -- resolution to the vienna agreement, this is in connection with a case brought by the so-called state of palestine naming the united states as a defendant, channeling our move of our embassy from tell avive to

jerusalem. to stress, the united states remains a party to the underlying vienna convention on diplomatic relations and we expect all other parties to abide by their international obligations under the convention. our actions today are consistent with the decisions president reagan made in the 1980's and the -- in the wake of the politicized students -- politicized suits by nicaragua to comply with the optional jurisdiction of the international court. it's also consistent with the decision president bush made in 2005 to withdraw from the optional protocol to the vienna convention on consular relations following the i.c.j.'s interference in our domestic criminal justice system. so our actions today deal with the treaties and current litigation involving the united states before the international

court of justice. fwiven this history and iran's abuse of the i.c.j., we will commence a review of all international agreements that may still expose the united states to purported binding jurisdiction dispute resolution in the international court of justice. the united states will not sit idly by as faceless, politicized claims are brought against us. that concludes the statement, i'd be happy to try to answer a few questions. >> in response to the actions you've announced, iran's foreign minister called the u.s. an outlaw regime. i wanted to get your reaction to that and i also wanted to ask you, if i may, mr. ambassador, about north korea with the announcement that the secretary of state will be traveling to pyongyang. do you trust kim jong un? do you personally trust him? mr. bolton: with respect to

questions outside the scope of our withdrawal from these two treaties i'll pass on those because we want to focus on the steps the president thorsed with those two treaties. iran is a rogue regime. it's been a threat throughout with theast, not only ballistic missile programs but it's acted for decades as a nker for terrorism and its style in the retoday is a breach of agreels. i don't take what they say seriously at all. are you re really -- of erned about the people ran, having -- that this is an avenue the iranian government

can use? mr. bolton: our dispute with the ayatollahs who have taken iran from a respected place in the international community to a rogue state. our dispute has never been with the people of iran. we wish they had the ability to control their own government. it won't have any effect on that >> gambling those two treaties, i'm trying to figure out what are the open path or potential blocks you still have with iran and actually the palestinians? mr. bolton: this has less to do with iran and the palestinians than with the continued consistent poll sthoif united states to reject the jurisdiction of the international court of justice which we think is po lit siced and ineffective. it relates obviously in part to our views on the international criminal court and the nature so-called purported international courts to bind the united states.

>> closing doors in the en, you won't -- mr. bolton: closing doors that shouldn't be open, that politicized abuse which is what we have consistently seen in the i.c.j. john? >> thank you, mr. ambassador. as you know yesterday the french government denounced the iranian government for a terror plot in paris against the national council of iranian resistance a leading group opposing the ayatollahs. were you aware of that? was that a factor in any of the decisions you have made withdrawing from these two protocols? mr. bolton: these decisions were made before we were aware of the french decision. i have to say what the french have done is exactly the right thing they arrested, and other european governments arrested, acredited iranian diplomats, accredited iranian diplomats, for conspiracy to conduct this attempted assault on the rally

in paris. so that tells you, i think, everything you need to know about how the government of iran views its responsibilities in connection with diplomatic relations and i hope it's a wakeup call across europe to the nature of the regime and the threat that they pose. >> what about the tension between the united states and iran and what's our intelligence regarding our nuclear weapons etc. at this moment? mr. bolton: i'm not going to get into what our intelligence states but the issue is protecting the united states against the politicized use of these international institutions. as i said this goes back now close to over 30 years, really, in connection with u.s. policy of rejecting jurisdiction of these courts. and it's a continuation i think in the interest of the american people.

end any s going to effort -- any attempt on trying to work together. mr. bolton: their bringing a lawsuit against us has nothing to do with trying to bring us together, it was a politicized action. >> is this driven by regime change? mr. bolton: i'll say it again. our policy is not regime change but we do expect substantial change in their behavior. that's why the president directed all of us in the government to come up with steps to reimpose the economic sanctions and to do whatever else is necessary to ensure we bring maximum pressure on the regime to stop its malign behavior across the board, not just in the nuclear field awe ut across the board.

>> does this make the united states' effort to try to force iran to abandon or at least dismantle its nuclear program any easier? how much leverage do you have? mr. bolton: i don't think iran is dismantling its nuclear program. if anything, recent reports it's increasing its activity. i think we're going to apply the maximum amount of leverage we can. we're working with our european partners, the british, the french, the germans and other, they have chosen to remain in the iran nuclear deal. as i said to them it's like a book that was written several decades ago in this country called something like the six stage os grief. first denial, anger, eventually you get to acceptance. i think that's the direction the europeans are moving in. i can tell you european companies in droves are fore swearing business opportunities

in iran because they don't want to be caught up in the pressure campaign that we're applying. >> you just addressed palestine and said it is the so-called state. mr.hat in the productive -- bolton: it's abrat. it's not a state. >> does the president, in new york city, recommitted his goal to achieving a two-state solution. mr. bolton: that's right. >> so is using that sort of language productive in his goal? mr. bolton: sure, of course. it's not a state now. it doesn't meet the cust mir test of statehood. doesn't control defined boundaries. doesn't fulfill the normal functions of government. there are a whole host of reasons why it's not a state. it could become a state. but that requires diplomatic negotiations with israel and others. so calling the so-called state of palestine defines exactly

what it has been, a position that the united states government has pursued uniformly since 1988 when the palestinian authority declared itself to be the state of palestine. we don't recognize it as the state of palestine. we have consistently, across democratic and republican administrations, opposed the admission of palestine to the united nations as a state ecause it's not a state. >> the iaea is saying it doesn't take at face value netanyahu's claims that iran is harboring a secret atoll -- atomic ware house. co-you agree with the israeli prime minister that there should be an inspection? and what's your reaction to those comments? mr. bolton: i haven't seen those comment. we have been, our intelligence community has been reviewing the material that israel extracted from iran and going over it in

quite some detail. it's extremely impressive and we've been very supportive of the israeli effort and supportive of the iaea taking new steps to follow up on it. the senate just confirmed a few days ago ambassador jackie wolcott who will be taking up her new position as u.s. ambassador to the u.n. agency in vienna, specially the international atomic energy agency, and she'll be on the job shortly making our case there. >> when the president came out in support of a two-state solution at the u.n. last week, prime minister netanyahu said he's confident israel would maintain security control of the west bank. is that correct? are you open to a palestinian state with no security presence from israel inside their boarders? mr. bolton: we have been working, as you well know, on a peace plan involving israel and

the palestinians. we'll be rolling it out in due course when we decide it's the most appropriate time to do it and i'm sure that'll answer your question then. i'm sorry, i actually did try to recognize this gentleman. i guess i didn't point accurately enough. >> thank you, mr. ambassador. former secretary of state kerry said yesterday he has not met with the iranians since the u.s. pulled out of the deal. but he has met with them before. mr. bolton: i think secretary pompeo addressed that previously and i'll stick with his remarks. thank you very much. ms. savenders: thank you, am bass doctor bolton. a couple of reminders. fema will conduct a nationwide ibt grated public alert and warning system test of the emergency alert system and the wireless emergency alert later today. this will take place in two parts, the w.e.a. portion at

2:18 p.m. eastern followed by the e.a.s. portion at 2:20 p.m. eastern. this is the first nationwide will assess the operational readiness for distribution of a national message and determine whether technological improvements are needed. looking ahead to monday, president trump will travel to orlando, florida, to address the international association of chiefs of police. as the largest gathering of police leaders, the president will speak about the work of the administration to protect american communities by restoring law and order, supporting local law enforcement and securing the border. lastlien the night president trump nominated judge brett kavanaugh, senator schumer declared democrats would oppose this nomination with everything they have. before a single document was produced a single meeting with the senator, senator schumer and others telegrap graphed a

strategy to throw a the kitchen sink at the judge with no respect for process. they're not opposed to his judicial view, they're trying to undercut the pow or of this american people. they've casually toss around vicious accusations of perjury. now they've sunk lower as they spring 11th hour accusations -- accusations on judge kavanaugh's -- chuck schumer said there's no presumption of innocence or guilt. chris coombs who sitz on the committee said kavanaugh bears the burden of disproving the allegations rather than dr. ford and ms. ramirez. mazie hirono said judge kavanaugh doesn't preserve the presuppings of innocence. democrats want to block kavanaugh and hold the seat open until the 2020 election.

this is about politics. and this is about power. pure and simple. and they've destroyed judge kavanaugh's reputation, undermined dr. ford's privacy and tried to upend our -- tried to upend our traditions of innocence until proven guilty in the process. it's a complete and total disgrace. we'll receive and update the background on his nominate to the senate. judge kavanaugh deserves a prompt vote and we expect him to get one. with that, i'll take your question. >> the three people most important in this process are senators mruczkowski, collins an flake. two of those senators, flake and collins, were extremelyup set about how the president described christine blasey ford in that rally in mississippi. knowing how sensitive this issue is and how important it would be if the f.b.i. shows no other compelling tode keep judge

kavanaugh from the court, these people need to be comfortable voting for him, why did the president say what he did last night in the way he said it ms. sanders: the president was stating the facts, facts included in special prosecutor mitchell's report. the senate has to make a decision based on though facts and whether or not they see judge kavanaugh to be qualified to hold the position on the supreme court. every single word judge kavanaugh has said has been picked apart, every singled were, second by second of his testimony has been picked apart. yet if anybody says anything about the accusations that have been thrown against him, that's totally offlimits and outrageous. this entire process has been a disgrace and the only reason that it's been that way is because senate kems didn't do this the way it should have been done and they circumvented the entire system and frankly they've undermined our entire judicial branch by the way they've act and the inappropriateness with which they conducted themselves.

>> pointing out inconsistencies in is one thing but the tone with which the president did it last night clearly had an effect on two key swing votes for his nomination. is the president concerned that he may have put those votes in danger by doing what he did last night? ms. sanders: i don't think so. the president is confident in his nominee as he stated time and time again and we expect the senate to vote and hope they do that soon. >> what has been the response to e report -- is the president briefed on the investigation? ms. sanders: the president has been made aware but i refer you to u.s. secret service to respond to those. >> do you have anything on the president's meeting about rosenstein that was supposed to be held last week? ms. sanders: we don't have any updates on that front. at this point they continue to work together and both show up

every tai and do their job. tissue you blame democrats for undermining ford's -- dr. ford's privacy. but then the president on stage last night mocking her. ms. sanders: we're pointing out that hypocrisy, none of this would be taking place if democrats had done this in a normal order and not exploited dr. ford and attacked judge tave nau in such a public matter. all of this could have been handled completely differently. the senate democrats hold all of the responsibility for that process. >> "the new york times" reported yesterday that the president engaged in outright tax fraud throughout the 1990's with tax screams and basically get manager money from his parents than he said, you rebutted the story, can you explain what is

inaccurate about the story if there's anything that's inaccurate about it? ms. sanders: it's a totally false attack based on an old recycled news story. i'm not going to go through every line. one thing the article got right, it showed the president's father had a great deal of confidence in him. in fact the president brought his father into a lot of deals an they made a lot of money together, so much so his father went on to say that everything he touched turned to gold. the president's lawyer addressed some of the specific claims and walked through how the allegations of fraud and tax evasion are 100% false and highly defamatory. there was no fraud or tax evasion by anyone he went on much further and i would encourage you to read every word of his statement which completely undercuts the accusations made by "the new york times." >> are the president's taxes still under awe did? -- audit? ms. sanders: i know a number of them are.

>> will he provide any taxes? ms. sanders: i'm not aware of plans to do so. >> it was just a cupful days ago the president called christine blasey ford a very credible witness, very credible, very compelling. now he's making her out to be a liar. which is it? ms. sanders: certainly the testimony by dr. ford was compelling. but you can't make this decision based on emotion. it has to be based on fact. they have to determine what the facts are of this case. that's one of the reasons that they asked and begged for the f.b.i. and delayed a hearing vote is so they could get more facts on this case. we expect the f.b.i. to turn those facts other to the senate and they can make a determination based on that. that's all we're asking for. -- you said was he was stating a fact at the campaign rally. but this was more than stating a fact, this was full-scale campaign rally assault on a

woman who says she's a victim of sexual assault. what do you get out of that? is that to help kavanaugh's nomination? is it to rally the base? is this going to help with mid terms? what's the point in doing that? ms. sanders: i dispute that. it wasn't anything other than the president stating facts, facts that are laid out in the prosecutor's memo she put forward to the senate. each of the thing he is called out were things laid out in that memo. >> there's conflicting feelings on capitol hill right now over whether the f.b.i. investigation into judge kavanaugh should be made public or not. does the white house commit to transparency on this effort and let the american people see the full range of the investigation regardless of the findings? ms. sanders: we've been open and transparent through the process. the president is the one that ordered the f.b.i. investigation to take place and has athroid senate to actually control and dictate the terms and scope of the investigation. we're continuing to do that. and allowing the f.b.i. to actually do what it -- do what

they do best, their job to do this investigation. >> another question if i may on declassification. since we haven't spoken in a while. the president said -- the president said that he would refer the declassification process to the d.o.j. inspector general but he wants to see that happen quickly. what does quickly mean? are we going to see the documents before the mid-term elections? ms. sanders: i'm not going to walk through a timeline. we're continue to work on that process and when we have an update i i'll let you know. >> whide did you see michael cohen was acting on his own in arbitration prosealedings to prevent stormy dabbles from doing television interviews when the president directed that move. ms. sanders: i'm not going to get into a back and forth. that's an issue for the president's outside counsel and i direct you there. >> three questions, first impact and meaning of the president's comments in mississippi

notwithstanding, it is a fact collins, rs mruczkowski, flake, and manchin are the undecided votes critical to the nomination. are there planners in president to call any of them and make one final pitch, perhaps explain his remarks a little more? ms. sanders: i'm not aware of any scheduled call but we've been in contact with a number of mens and will continue to do so. >> the president's early supporters in the house, collins in the new york and duncan hunter of california are running urn indictment. there are rule os they have national republican congressional committee barring support for members who are under indictment. does the president still support both of them for re-election? ms. sanners: i can't get into a lot of details, one for hatch act violation, but also with an

ongoing investigation i'm not going to be able to comment on that front. >> as the briefing was beginning, broomberg put out an article about the background information and bloomberg is reporting that the f.b.i. hasn't interviewed judge kavanaugh or dr. ford because the white house hasn't given investigators clear authority to do so. is that indeed the case? ms. sanders: as we said several times the president has indicated that whoever the f.b.i. deems necessary to interview, he's fine with that. but he's also asked that the senate be the ones that determine the scope of what they need in order to make a decision on whether they vote kavanaugh up or down. i can also tell you that both kavanaugh, judge kavanaugh and dr. ford were questioned in the most public way possible by the members of the senate who are ultimately the one who was to make the determination on whether or not they vote for judge kavanaugh. if they had adegreesal questions for either one of them, they had the time and opportunity to ask those.

>> does the white house believe it's appropriate? ms. sanders: we're going to allow the senate to determine the scope. >> president trump talked a lot yesterday about the issue of being concerned about men being guilty before -- being thought guilty before proven innocent and this idea of due process but in the past with the central park five, he put out an ad basically calling for the death penalty before they had been found, convicted and even after they were exonerate he still basically said that they may be guilty and even as president he's talked about, presided over rallies where people say lock her up, talking about hillary clinton. so i guess is there a disconnect between when the president is interested in due process for some, but not for others? ms. sanders: not at all. the president encouraged the

senate to hear dr. ford's testimony in the samey he encouraged them to hear judge kavanaugh's. he's stating the fact that we are a country of law and order. we are a country that still believes you are innocent until proven fwlt and we want to see the process go through in its entirety and it should be on a fair playing field. that's the only statement he's making. >> he said the central park five were guilty, does he feel that now? ms. sanders: i'll have to get back to you. >> the president has take then moment to say he's been affected personal by -- personally by all these allegations and he's picking and choosing, he said the central park five was guilty and then he has made bill clinton guilty. has he decided to change his mind on the central park five because they have been exonerated? to sanders: it's interesting bring up bill clinton. >> but the president -- ms.

sanders: i have addressed this. >> several times in the last week the president tried to reassure vetters -- voters he'll protect people from pre-existing conditions from losing their health insurance. is that a sign he's worried that republicans are losing the argument on health care in this election? ms. sanders: i think it's a sign that the president wants to protect people with pre-existing health conditions hsm esaid he supports that, wants to make sure that's not something that gets lost. >> let's go back to this, it was obvious the president was mocking christine blasey ford, he said how did you get home? i don't remember, how did you get there, i don't remember, where is this place, i don't remember, he seemed to be to the delight of the crowd there in mississippi, mocking her repeatedly. isn't there something wrong with the president of the united states mocking somebody who says she was sexually assaulted. ms. sanders: it seemed to me he was stating facts, that dr. ford herself laid out in her testimony. once again, every single word

judge kavanaugh has said has been looked ating examine, picked amart by most of you in this room but no one is looking at whether or not the accusations made are corroborated, whether there's evidence to support them. every person she named has come out and said either they didn't recall it or it didn't happen or they weren't there. every single bit of evidence and facts we have seen in this moment have supported judge kavanaugh's case and the president simply pointed out the facts of the matter and that is what the senate will have to use to determine whether or not they vote to support him or not. >> are you saying judge kavanaugh is the victim in all this? ms. sanders: i think dr. ford and judge kavanaugh are victims at the hands of democrats. i think it's disgrateful what they've doning exploited this process, exploited dr. ford, exploiting all the women that have come out to make any type of accusations. this isn't the process that should have been done and certainly everybody deserves to be heard that includes judge kavanaugh that should be part of

this process. and the facts have to be looked at and i think you have to look at the prosecutor's memo. those are where you see all those facts laid out and she makes a very compelling case. >> do you have any problems defending him. ms. sanders: i don't have any problem stating facts. i know that's something you probably do have a problem with, but i don't. >> we do state the facts and i think there have been many occasions when you don't state the facts. >> thank you, sarah. five day ago on friday, the president when asked about dr. ford's testimony before the senate said that she was a very credible witness and we saw a different tone last night in his remarks to that campaign rally audience in mississippi. why the change in tone? and is the president still -- does the president still believe what he said on friday that she was a very credible witness? ms. sanders: i've addressed this a number of times. the president said she had a

compelling story and nobody disagrees with that. >> but the credible part. ms. sanders: but the president is simply stating the fact she is laid out in her own testimony and that the prosecutor laid out in her memo. at the end of the day the senate has to make a decision on where they stand. >> does he still -- does the president still believe that dr. ford's testimony was credible when she testified under oath? ms. sanders: the president believes judge kavanaugh should be confirmed and he'd like to see a vote to see that happen. >> the president seemed to link the credibility of a claim with how much time has passed since the individual made it. president trump has also called the sex abuse scandal in the catholic church very sad but many of those victims waited decades before coming forward. why does the president seem to assume men who are claiming abuse but wait to come forward are telling the -- are telling the truth but not women?

ms. sanders: that's completely untrue. the president has supported, again, throughout this entire process, dr. ford's ability to come forward and tell her story. he's the one that ordered the f.b.i. to do a background -- further supplemental background check to look into each of the accusations and allegations that the senate deems necessary before making a vote. he's also been more than happy to give a platform to the accusers that have come out against then-president bill clinton. to say he's never sided with women is just ridiculous. >> but he has implied their coming out of the woodwork all of a sudden and cited that as a reason why even though he called for a -- for an investigation -- ms. sanders: saying that because after judge kavanaugh has been in public service, that this is the first time you're hear og of any of these allegations the fact that through all those background checks in the even an

inkling of those thing have come up despite the fact that he was one of the top prosecutors and in a major public position, none of these things came up, when he was nominated to be on the federal bench, none of these things came up. he's been a public figure and there's been a lot of opportunity for people to raise this issue an it never has and now at the 11th hour, the democrats have exploited the process and done so publicly and it's a shame and he is simply calling that out. thanks so much guys, see you soon. >> what's the president's message to victims of sexual assault, sarah? we asked him yesterday? >> this week on c-span we bring you campaign 2018 debates from around the nation. live today at 7:00 p.m. eastern, virginia democratic senator tim kaine faces republican challenger corey stewart in the second of two town hall events. and coming up live friday at 8:00 p.m. eastern, iowa republican congressman rod blum debates his democratic challenger, a state congresswoman. that's also on c-span.

again at 8:00 p.m. eastern. and then saturday, montana republican congressman greg gianforte faces his challenger, kathleen williams, for the state's at-large seat. that's live on c-span, your primary source for campaign 2018. >> with the control of congress in question this election day, see the competition for yourself on c-span. watch the debates from key house and senate races. make c-span your primary source for campaign 2018. >> next, the pennsylvania governors' debate between governor tom wolf and his republican challenger scott wagner. the debate court sthoif pennsylvania cable network is being moderated by jeopardy host alex trebek. from hershey, pennsylvania, this is an hour.