the group held a lengthy discussion about investing in the american worker to prepare for the future, and the key role of vocational schools and training the work force of the 21st century. the ceos and administration officials agreed that public-private partnerships will be the cornerstone of a plan to rebuild the nation's crumbling infrastructure. the president committed to streamlining and permitting processes that is holding back so many key projects. at the end of the discussion, the group expressed their excitement for having a true partner in commission growth in the white house and the ceo of dow chemical said this is probably the most pro business administration since the founding fathers. the president conveyed his intentional to assemble leaders to discussion problem towards these goals. a full list of the participants is available. this afternoon the president spoke with canadian prime minister trudeau. we'll have a read-out on that

call soon. right now many of you just came from the president involved in another listening session with leaders in the fight against domestic and international human trafficking, including representatives from international justice mission and united way. their expertise will be invaluable to the president as he engages with members of congress to raise awareness about and push through legislation aimed at stopping the buying and selling of human lives. human trafficking is a dire problem domestically and internationally and solving this academic is a huge priority for the president. dedicated men and women from across the federal government have focused on this for some time. the president has committed to continue working with these organizations and departments. a participant list for this listening session will be available. the president will attend a dinner with the business council. today in mexico, secretary tillerson and kelly had productive meetings at the cabinet level with officials

from the mexican government. they were forward-looking looking at finding common ground, ways to advance our security and well-being. both sides had a candidate discussion on the breadth of challenges as part of the u.s.-mexico relationship. the conversation included energy, legal migration, security, education, exchanges and people-to-people ties. the parties reiterated our joint commitment to maintaining law and order at our shared border by stopping potential terrorists and dismantling the criminal network that are moving drugs and people to the united states. under this president, there's no mistaking the rule of lawmakers along both sides of our border. both secretary tillerson and kelly are meeting with president nieto this afternoon. it will be a continuation of the dialogue that is sending our two countries down a path of security and prosperity. tomorrow, the president will

welcome president from peru. he is in town for a separate visit and requested meeting with the president. there will be a spray at the top of that. further guidance will be provided later today. the president will speak at cpac tomorrow. i know the president is looking forward to addressing this group of conservative committed individuals. our nation's governors are starting to gather in washington for a meeting of the national governance association. the president and first lady will welcome to governors to the white house sunday evening. the vice president and members of the cabinet will also be in attendance. while the governors are in town, they will meet with members of the cabinet, white house staff and other secretaries including kelly, price and secretary chao. the vice president will have a business session of the nga winter meeting that takes place monday morning. next week, the president will give a joint session address before both houses of congress. he's currently working closely with the speech-writing team

with presenting his vision to congress and the american people. a few updates as we're a few days out. the theme will be the renewal of the american spirit, the address will particularly focus on public safety including defense, increased border security, taking care of veterans and economic opportunity including education, job training, healthcare reform, jobs and tax and regulatory reform. with that, i'll take a few questions. >> two questions. first, the white house said previously that that travel ban was pushed quickly out of necessity for national security. now we're hearing there's these repeated delays while the new one is being drafted. how do we reconcile those two talking points? that's question one. secondly, the president said deportations taking place under his watch are a military

exercise. >> the president misspoke on that. it's acted with precision. we made it clear when secretary kelly reiterated that. the president was describing the manner in which this was being done. just to be clear, on his use of that phrase. i think the way it's being done by all accounts is being done with very much high degree of precision and a flawless manner in terms of making sure the orders are carried out and it's done in a streamlined and efficient manner. the first -- >> about the travel ban. >> look, we've made it clear we believed the first one was done in compliance with u.s. code and the authority granted to the president. this time the order is finalized. what we're doing is now in the implementation phase of working with the respective departments and agencies to make sure when we execute this, it's done in a manner that is flawless. so it's not a question of delaying. it's a question of getting it

right. we have taken the court's opinions and concerns in the consideration. but the order is finalized. it's now awaiting implementation. what we want to do, make sure we're working through the departments and agencies so that any concerns or questions are on the front end. we're acting with appropriate haste and diligence to make sure that the order is done in an appropriate manner. yep. >> i want to ask about a comment that the treasury secretary made today. he was asked if we should assume tax plan that the president is about to allow will take effect in 2018. he said, and i'm quoting "i think we're looking at that." my question to you is, will the president accept a tax proposal that deals with a timeline of limitations in 2018 but not 2017? >> so secretary mnuchin said his goal is to have this wrapped up by august and implemented. the question is, are what you're

referring to is what year it takes place. whether it's retroactive to 2017 or fiscal year 17. as details get -- we'll have more details as it moves forward. two issues. fiscal 17 and calendar 17. for taxpayers it's obviously calendar year 2017 that they're probably most concerned with. the president as we work with congress will have those details to be able to flesh out. i want to go to our first describe. here's neil with connecticut media group. >> good afternoon, sean. thanks for taking my question. connecticut's governor directed police chiefs across the state wednesday to avoid taking any special action against undocumented immigrants including immigration detainees from ice. what will the question be from federal funding it receives from the trump administration and secondly does the president's executive order on sanctuary

cities apply to those that are uneclaired sanctuary cities? >> well, neil, i think there's a couple things. the idea that governor malloy would not want the law followed as enacted by congress or the connecticut legislature in any fashion seems to be concerning. whether you're a governor, mayor or the president, laws are passed and we expect our lawmakers and law enforcement agencies to follow and adhere to the laws as passed by the appropriate level of government. so it's obviously concerning. i think -- it's troubling that that is the message that he would send to his people and to other governors. because we are a nation of laws. i think that people need to understand that whether it's the laws that he passes as the governor of connecticut or the laws that are passed through congress and signed by the president, there's a reason our democracy works.

the people speak, our representatives at every level pass a law and the executive in that particular branch of government signs or vetoes it and we live by those rules. the idea that you can decide which laws to agree or not to agree with or follow or not follow undermines our entire rule of law. so i would suggest that that is not a great sign to be sending to the people of connecticut and the people of this country. that a particular governor choses not to follow the duly passed laws of this nation. with respect to sanctuary cities, this is an area that the american people by huge amounts support. they recognize their tax dollars shouldn't be spent supporting programs and activities people are not entitled to. the president has been very clear on this. if you're a sanctuary city, declared or undeclared, if you're providing benefits or services, we have to make sure that the states follow the law.

>> sean, there was a different comment from the president about, you know, if people -- what has happened -- >> just to be clear, the president was asked -- caitlyn . he says that's great. that's entirely what he believed. if a state wants to pass a law or rule or organization wants to do something in compliance with the state rule, that's their right. it shouldn't be the federal government getting in the way of it. if you look at this, the law that was passed in 1972 did not contemplate or consider this issue. number 2, the procedure for this guidance letter done through the obama administration was not properly followed. there was no comment period, input from parents, teachers, students or administrators.

none. we think how this was implemented the last administration. there was zero input, zero comment offered, teachers and students never had any say in this. number 3, there's a reason that the texas court had this matter enjoined. it's because it didn't follow the law and it had procedural problems. four, as i mentioned, it's a state's right issue. five, we have to recognize that children do enjoy rights from anti-bullying statutes in almost every state. there's a difference between being compassionate for individuals and children struggling with something and wanting to make sure they're protected and how it's being done. the president has a big heart as we talked about in a lot of other issues and there's a big difference. personally he addressed this when it came up with respect to one of his properties. he believes that's not a federal -- it's not a federal government issue. it's an issue to the state. there's a reason in august of

last year that the court enjoined this. they didn't follow the law and the procedure and the solicitation of opinions and ideas wasn't followed. it was jammed down the process. so we're actually following the law on this one. that's the way it's to be done. >> human rights campaign -- >> i wasn't finish. i'm sorry. >> i'm following your question. >> let's let april follow along and then john, kristin and -- >> i have one on another issue real fast. on the hbcu executive order, we understand the executive order coming out sometime later this month, you're working out the issues of opening an office to take the initiative out of the department of education and bringing it under the purview of the white house. who will be heading that? have you figured that out? have you figured out how you

will build that office out? that is one of the big pieces of this. >> respectfully, we're working it through the process. obviously that is something that we're committed to getting done by the end of black history month. so our days are numbered. there's a commitment by the president and is the staff to focus on this issue and give it the proper respect it deserves. if you'll bear with us a couple more days, i promise you'll have more to say on that. >> it will be a department with the full -- >> i want to be clear. i'm not going to get into the details. my blanket on nonexecutive order. there's a commitment by the president and the staff that he has been very clear with us that he wants that done by the end of the month for obvious reasons. john? >> let's get back to where we were. the human rights campaign and responding to rescinding guidance last night. this is not a state's right issue, a civil rights issue. do you disagree?

>> it's a question of where it's appropriately addressed. there's a reason. we have to remember this guidance was enjoined last august by a court. it's not been enforced. there was no comment period by anyone. by the human rights campaign, by teachers, parents, students. nobody had any input in this. it seems to me a little interesting that if this was any other issue, people would be crying foul the process wasn't followed. the reality is, when you look at title 9, it was enacted in 1972. the idea that this was even contemplated is preposterous on its face. that doesn't mean the president -- the president obviously understands the issue and the challenges that young children face. he just believes this is a state issue this needs to be addressed by states as he does with a lot of other issues we talked about. we're a state's right party. the president on a lot of issues believes in these various issues

being state's rights. it's not just -- it's the legal basis on which it was ordered. it fell short on a lot of stuff. it wasn't us that did this. it was the court that stepped in and said they hadn't followed the procedure of the law last year. >> i understand that. does the white house disagree with this position that this is a civil right? >> it's not a question of civil rights. it's where it's appropriately addressed. at the state level. kelly. >> does the president personally believe that any student that is trans-gender should be able to use the bathroom of their choice, his personal belief? >> the president believes it's a states right issue. i understand what you're asking. as april pointed out, when the issue came to 1 of his own properties, he was very clear that -- again, what he doesn't want to do is force his issues or beliefs down -- it's a state's right issue --

>> the president wants to know where the president stands -- >> i understand that. he's sympathetic with children that deal with that. >> you mentioned that this -- there was a process that went through the courts. that criticism has been levied on the first executive order with the travel ban. can you say why you're relying on that same -- enjoined by a federal court criticism of the process for one but not the other? >> i think there's a big difference. i mean, there's no way that you can lead title 9 from 1972. anybody. and say that that was even contemplated back there. nobody is possibly suggested that the law was passed in 1972 did that. number 2, there was zero comment

period put forward. that was in violation. so hold on. let me answer the question. there's also a strong reading when you read 1182, u.s. code, that it is very clear that the president does have the authority. so they are very much apples and oranges issues. one it's very clear that the president is told by congress in u.s. code that he has the authority to do what is necessary to protect the american people. that is -- there's no way that anybody above a fifth grade reading level could interpret that different. there's a difference between looking at a statute in 1972 and saying something was complicated back then. not only that it's a multifaceted thing. you look at how the guidance was issued. there was a zero comment peered yo. nobody was able to weigh-in on that situation back then. so when you're talking about forcing schools to make a huge accommodation from the federal level and schools, parents, teachers, kids were not able to have any input in that decision from washington, i think it's a

very, very clear difference. john. >> thank you, sean. just going back two weeks. in a story that got relatively little attention at the time. chuck cooper, a distinguished lawyer, asked that his name be withdrawn when he was on the periphery of being named u.s. solicitor general. my question is a two-parter. first, can you confirm or deny the administration is now vetting mr. mr. estrada, a former nominee to the court of appeals as solicitor general before the visa delay case gets to the course and second, mr. cooper said he didn't want to go through the same experience that jeff sessions, his good friend did, when he had the confirmation hearings in the senate. does that make the president discouraged about getting the nominees he wants for very

important positions? >> thanks, john. on the first part, as you know -- i'll give you the same answer on executive orders. we don't comment on personnel decisions until they're made-finalized. nothing for that. on the second part, what i would say, the president is confident that we have a deep bench of folks that during the transition we talked about this a number of people that have expressed a huge interest in joining the president in fulfilling this agenda. that list is robust and long. however, that being said, i think for folks that have to go through the senate confirmation and to watch what has happened in some of these fine individuals, the delay tactics, the tearing apart of their personal lives, it is discouraging for some of these people in terms of mr. coopers and others that are looking at the process saying i'd like to be part of the administration, helpful fill this vision and agenda but this is what i have to go through. so while this is an isolated case, i definitely understand

what he's talking about here. those are few and far between. but i think when you realize what is happening largely at the expense of senate democrats in terms of dragging these people through a very, very delayed and arduous process for purely political points, you know, i think there's some people that can look at that process and potentially say i don't want to serve. luckily we have not come to that. largely people have a huge desire and willing to make great sacrifice finally and personally to serve in the administration. i think they understand what potential change this president is bringing to this country and to the city. so -- but i understand his point. >> this morning the president talked about some really bad dudes. you talked about decisions. the homeland secretary said there won't be mass

deportations. is it's the president's wants and desires that people are hear illegally that with a traffic violation they will be deported? >> everybody is in this country for obvious reasons. if you overstay a visa, commit a crime, but the very nature of you not being legal, you can be subject to deportation. that's by definition. being in this country is a privilege, not a right. if you're a visitor. we have a right to make sure that the people in this country are here for good, peaceful processes. as i've said over and over again, there's a big difference. the president recognizes that there's millions of people in the country that are not hear legally. we have to have a systematic and progmatic process of going through those individuals to make sure that the people that have posed a threat to public safety or criminal record are the first that are gone. what we've done to be clear is untie the hands of ice and border patrol agents and say your job is to enforce the law. first and foremost, to figure

out who poses a threat to us. in the previous administration, their hands have been tied. there was exception after exception. the fact of the matter is, we're a nation of laws and we have to have a system of legal immigration that is respected. so i'm not going to be prescriptive in terms of what ice's job is. their job and mission is to protect the country and enforce borders and immigration laws. the president has basically uninstructed them to carry out their mission. so the priorities as we discovered over and over again, is to do that in a way that is in accordance with the law but also prioritize people that pose a threat. i'm going to roby from arkansas. >> hi. thanks, sean. we talk business and politics here in arkansas, the home of the rowdyest town halls in america. i have a question on medical marijuana. our state voters passed a medical marijuana amendment in

november. now we're in conflict as federal law as many other states are. the obama administration kind of chose not to strictly enforce those federal marijuana laws. my question to you is jeff sessions and the department of justice and the a.g., what is the trump administration's positions on a state conflict like this? >> there's two distinct issues here. medical marijuana and recreational marijuana. i think medical marijuana, i said before, the president understands the pain and suffering that many people go through who are facing especially terminal diseases and the comfort that some of these drugs, including medical marijuana, can bring to them. that's one that congress through a rider in 2011 -- looking for help -- put an inappropriations bill saying that the department of justice wouldn't be funded to

go after that. there's a big distinction between that and recreational marijuana. when you see something like the opioid addiction crisis blossoming in so many states around this country, the last thing we should be doing is encouraging people. there's a federal law that we need to abide by in terms of the medical -- when it comes to recreational marijuana and other drugs. there's a big difference between medical marijuana, which states have a -- the states where it's allowed in accordance with the appropriates rider have set forth a process to administer and regulate that usage versus recreational marijuana. it's a very different subject. shannon? shannon. glen, this isn't a tv program. we're -- shannon, okay. you don't get to yell out questions. we raise our hands. it's not your job. please go, shannon. >> on the manufacturing summit, was the aflcio invited and yeah,

i did want to follow up on the medical marijuana question. so if the federal government going to take some sort of action around this recreational marijuana in some states? >> that's a question for the department of justice. i believe you'll see greater enforcement of it. again, there's a big difference between the medical use which congress has during an appropriations rider in 2014 made very clear what the intent -- what their intent was in terms of how the department of justice would handle that issue. that's very different than the recreational use, which is something the department of justice i think be further looking into. i'm sorry, shannon. the first part. >> was the aflcio invited to the manufacturing meeting today. >> yeah, this was just focused on people that actually -- they were not, i don't believe, part of this one. as you know, we've had union representation at other meetings. this was specifically for people

hiring people and the impediments that they're having to create additional jobs, hire more people. obviously while the president values their opinion and that's why they have been involved, this was specifically a manufacturing, people who hire people, people who manufacture and grow the economy, grow jobs. that is a different situation. andre? >> thank you, sean. yeah, i specifically -- thank you. the general had meetings with russian counter parts. is the president pleased with the respects of the meet something. >> yes. >> and what comes from there? >> yes. both had an opportunity to meet with their counter parts in different locations ironically on the same day. i believe that was yesterday. they both had very, very productive discussions. the president was very pleased with the outcome of that. so i would refer you back to

secretary tillerson on that. yes. >> and can you discuss where and when for the summit for the leader's meeting? >> i don't have any updates on that. i'll look into that. >> cecilia. >> you said you will see greater enforcement of it? >> i will refer you to the department of justice. that's what i said. i think the department of justice is the lead on that. it's something that you should follow up with them. i believe that they are going to continue to enforce the laws on the box with respect to recreational marijuana. >> a real question, if you don't mind. >> the first was real. >> ivanka trump was in the white house for a meeting on human trafficking. she had this meeting on ceos. we saw her in a smaller session at the white house. what is her role here? >> her role is to be helpful and provide input on a variety of areas that she has deep passion

and concerns about, especially in the area of women in the work force and empowering women. she is someone who has a lot of expertise and wants to offer that, especially in the area of helping women. she understands that. because of the success she had, her goal is to figure out any understanding she has as a business woman to use her expertise and understanding to empower and help women have the same kind of opportunity and success that she's had. >> a formal role? more than whae seen now. last night the meeting she had in baltimore is one that she had done on her own. there's areas that she's cared very passionately about before her time in the white house or before her father coming to the white house, rather. and now that her father is in the white house, she continues to seek a platform that helps empower and lift up women and give them opportunities and think of ways that they can

be -- >> sean, thanks. on human trafficking meeting today, the president said, well, when you talk about solving this kind of problem, that's a nice word, but it's really -- he suggested that more likely he could just help out on that problem. what is his definition of success? what is his goal? he's looking at stronger criminal penalties -- >> as i ready earlier, the president understands this is a serious problem for adults and particularly for children being sold both domestically and internationally. that's why we brought the groups in. how do we make that number as close to zero as possible. and institute policies domestically and a broad to how do we combat the trafficking of people. so it's things that we can be forceful in terms of the rhetoric the president uses and the enforcement tools he uses domestically and internationally.

>> has the president been briefed at all on the situation in standing rock? is he concerned a standoff with protesters could slow down his executive orders on the pipeline? >> our team has been involved with the tribe and the governor. we're not -- we're constantly in touch with them. we feel confidently we will move forward to get the pipeline moving. so we'll have a further update on that we're in constant contact with the officials there. kristin? >> 82% of trans-gender children report feeling unsafe at school. isn't the president leaving some of these children open to vulnerable to being bullied at school? >> no. there's bullying laws and policies in place in almost every one of the schools. >> the children not being able to use the -- >> you're missing the point here, kristin. the president said literally it should be a state decision.

he respects the decision of the states. so therefore -- >> it's a states right issue -- >> you're trying to make an issue out of something that doesn't exist. it was the courts that stopped this in august of last year. where were the questions last year in august about this? it wasn't implemented correctly, legally. the procedure wasn't followed because the court found at the time they didn't have the authority to do that. so you're asking us why we're following the law that wasn't followed. the reality -- hold on. we're not reversing it. hold on. we're not reversing it. that is a misinterpretation of this scenario. the court stopped it. it enjoined it in august of last year. because it wasn't properly drafted and it didn't follow the procedures and there was no legal basis for it in a law instituted in 1972. that's not how it happened. so to talk about us reversing

something that was stopped by the court. >> i understand. but you're sending a message -- >> we're not. it's state's right issue. when this circumstance came up at one of the president's own properties, she was very clear about his position on this. for you to turn around and saying what message is the president saying, where was it when he sent it last year? the message is he's a guy with the heart and understands the troubles that many people go through but he's believes the proper legal recourse is with the states. he believes in the state's ability to determine what is right for their state versus another state. >> i understand what you're saying. but the lgbtq community -- >> i understand. there's a difference with what people may or may not feel and the legal process and the law. the law right now doesn't allow for it under title 9 that was passed in 1972. the procedure wasn't followed. the court saw this in august of last year for a reason.

all we're doing is saying that the proper place for this is in the states. so for you to suggest what message its sending is different. the state should enact laws that reflect the values, principles and will of the people in their state. that's it. plain and simple. >> and obamacare very quickly. former speaker john boehner predicted a full repeal and replace of obamacare is "not going to happen." he went on to say most of the frame work of the affordable care act be there. do you think he has a point? are you going to -- >> no. i think -- look, what we're going to end up is something that i've talked about over and over again. we're going to end up with a more accessible plan that will allow people to see more doctors, have more providers and drive costs down. those are the two guiding principles that we'll have and what the president will work with congress to put forward on. >> and roads and highways in the united states, in many places

around the country, potholes. the president said he would fix these issues. what is the status on that and has the president spoken with the dot -- >> the president is talking about that. that plan will be out in mid march. the infrastructure projects that the president talked about, air control and airports and the roads and bridges will be something that he's going to work with dot, but also talk about in his budget and you'll see more in his joint address to congress. with that, lauren staples of keci nbc in montana. >> montana has hundreds of miles of border with canada. according to the u.s. department of transportation, almost one million people come across that border into montana each year. what are the administration's plans to increase security in the canadian border. does the administration have any plans to build a wall there?

>> we're obviously concerned -- thank you -- all sorts of immigration in this country, whether it's from the northern border or the certain border. our president understand the southern border is the bigger concern with the type of activity coming over there, in terms of cartel and drug activity. that doesn't mean that we're not paying attention to our northern border as well and we will continue to both monitor and takes steps necessary at the northern border to ensure the safety of all americans. yes, sir. >> one question and i'll try to follow up on the dakota access pipeline. this week was the first week that the trump administration launched navigation operations in the south china sea. can you give us a sense how frequently you'll be doing those. and the dakota access pipeline, president trump said he was working with a negotiation with

the standing rock sioux and the pipeline officials. why hasn't the president -- >> our team has been in contact with all parties involved. they're working and communicating back and forth. there's been work at the staff levels between the parties. then on the second -- the first part, i've got no further update in terms of the frequency. alexis? >> [inaudible]. can you describe what the president has in mind and the time frame? >> yeah. let's be clear. what he was say -- what he was very clear on, the united states will not yield its supremacy in this area to anybody. that's what he made very clear in there. if other countries have nuclear capabilities, it will always be

the united states that has the supreme -- supremacy and commitment. he was worried about others growing stockpiles. our goal is to make sure that we maintain america's dominance around the world. if other countries try, we don't allow them to grow theirs. franchesca. >> couple questions. you said yesterday that the president had named a task force on the voter fraud probe. when did he name that task force specifically? >> i think two weeks ago he announced that vice president pence would lead that task force and that the vice president and his team were starting to look at members -- >> you're referring to the interview in which he said there would be a task force. not that something has happened. >> that's correct. >> on foreign policy, the president said in his saturday campaign speech that the gulf

states would be paying for the safe zone in syria. have any states committed to paying for that? >> if you look at the read-outs in the foreign leaders, that's been brought up. he's talking about the financing of the safe zones and the compliment that they need to make to those. by and large, we've had widespread commitment. when we have an update on -- that's an issue ongoing at the secretary state level as well where you saw secretary tillerson follow up on that with numerous folks. we'll have further updates on the funding of safe zones as we go forward. there has been a general commitment by most of these heads of government to share in the president's commitment to help fund them. let's grow to wjim in admonimic. >> thanks, sean. president trump on the campaign trail talked a lot about tax policy and tax reform. that hasn't happened yet as we know. i want to talk about the border

adjustment tax with the manufacturers at the white house again today. states like michigan, pennsylvania, wisconsin have a great concern about this tax and seems to be a disconnect between the ceos, the republicans on capitol hill and the president as to whether or not this is appropriate. the question is, could this tax have a chilling effect on manufacturing at a time when places like ohio and michigan and the upper midwest are trying to jump start the economy with manufacturing jobs. i want for you to clarify if you could the president's position. >> yeah, steve. the president has been very clear from the beginning that there is no tax if companies manufacture in the united states. we're one of only a handful of countries that doesn't tax the imports that come into our country. almost every other country operates their tax code under that system. so what happens is, we have a system by which companies abroad can send their products -- tax our products going into their

country but an import tax and their products come in with no import tax. that gives a disincentive to companies that stay in the united states, hire in the united states and goes against the american worker. so the president is looking at tax policy that encourages manufacturing and job creation in the united states. >> where is he on this border adjustability tax? where is he specifically? >> i understand that. what he's doing, he met yesterday with his team on the budget. he's talked to secretary mnuchin and others that are working on a comprehensive tax reform plan. remember, steve, this isn't something that has been done since 1986. >> i understand. >> so as we look at it, part is that is to make sure we lower the corporate tax rate, make it more attractive to manufacture and grow jobs in the united states and make our jobs more competitive overseas that have

better tax treatment than our own companies that stay in the united states. so creating a playing field that encourages manufacturing and growing and creating in the united states, but make no mistake, if a company is in the united states already and expanding in the united states, it will be only to their benefit. if you think about it right now, the way the current tax code works, it almost incentivizes for companies leaving the united states, manufacturing and expanding overseas and sending goods and services back to the united states which undermines our economy and workers. >> the question is about components coming -- >> i know you're on the describe. we only like one or two follow ups. the answer is he's working towards comprehensive tax reform and the plan will address that. >> the administration rescinded it, but sent a letter to the supreme court talking about the

related case. does the termination on the -- [inaudible]. >> i'm sorry. removing the guidance does. the guidance put forward by the obama administration which hadn't been done in a proper way in terms of how they solicited or -- the guidance it puts forward obviously sends a signal to the court on where the administration stands on this issue. >> can i ask you about sear i can't say? the peace talks have started talking in geneva. the man convening them has said he's not had a clear track from the administration. what is the president thinking on that and in particular, what is his thinking on the future of president assad and whether he can -- >> i refer you to the state department. that's one of the things that the president, whether it's safe

zones or house we deal with syria and the problems -- >> speaking on the future. the key points. >> i understand that. thank you. >> one other question on syria. the fall in northern syria, an important development on the battlefield. creates some space for the turks and the opposition. is that sort of space that this president would like to see a safe zone? >> we're not trying to be prescriptive in terms of the geographic location of the safe zones. it's something that right now the president's goal is to get commitment from other world leaders in terms of the funding and the commitment to share in how we do that. so i don't want to get -- we're not looking to be prescriptive and how it's done. overall, we need a greater commitment in the region to make sure that people are committed to a strategy and to safe zones to allow that to stop some of the human suffering that is

going on and create -- while the rest of the conflict ensues. i think we have to duel track this. deal with the conflict as a whole and how we address it, how we deal with isis and combatting it and a humanitarian piece as well with respect to the safe zone. we're looking at both pieces of this as well. >> since the election, secretary of state rex tillerson has talked about the terrorist agreement and climate change and the president has heard from some world leaders about that. can you tell us, is the president still committed to pulling out of the climate change agreement? >> i'll leave that to secretary tillerson. he's having a conversation on where we are on that. >> i want to follow up on syria. do you have a timeline when he wants the safe zones being built

and back to the executive order on immigration. talk about the duel tracks and the new executive order and continuing to fight that in court. can you give us a status update on where that legal fight is and what should be happen something. >> so with respect to the executive order, there's several courts that this is being fought in, ten or so, and we continue to deal with that in all of those venues. and then again, the only way to say this, obviously on the duel track side, we have the additional executive order that we talked about earlier that will come out and further address the problems. we continue to belief that the issues that we face specifically in the ninth district, ninth circuit rather, that we will prevail on. the other venues and challenges that we feel equally confident in massachusetts and other venues. it's not a single track system. i'm sorry. >> about the supreme court taking it there and the other

question on the safe zones. >> with respect to the supreme court, we've got to continue to work through the process. so right now it's at the ninth circuit. that is the primary problem that we're addressing. then we don't have any time lines that i can announce today on syrian safe zones. >> i want to follow up, the president said that he gave authorization to a couple of countries to buy military equipment from the united states. which countries was he referring to and has he gone to congress to ask for permission -- >> we'll follow up and get a list for you on that. >> if i could ask again about the delay of the executive order until the next week is. the administration still trying to craft a legal argument towit? why the delay? >> i think i answered this earlier. >> i don't understand the delay.

>> the president this time, we were very careful to understand what the the court's concerns were and address them in this follow-up executive order. with respect to when we're going to announce it, part of this is to make sure that we work with the appropriate departments and agencies on the implementation to make sure it's executed in a flawless manner and that it meets the intent it serves. we understand the challenges that may come. so we want to do this in a manner that makes sure that the hill, members of congress, the appropriate agencies and departments are ready to implement this when issued. that's it. nothing more to it. >> and there is concern inside the justice department and in homeland security by some officials this afternoon that were reporting that the white house is looking for them to help build this legal argument to find a conclusion here. >> no, that's not -- basically you're saying that we did our due diligence. we looked to the departments to

ask them to review certain things. so last week we rushed stuff. this week you're saying we're taking our time. >> it's more difficult than you thought -- >> that's not true. i think you using continued unnamed sources. it's being -- it will be i implemented flawlessly because we've sought feedback and guidance and done this in an unbelievably comprehensive way to ensure that the departments and agencies executing and implements this fully are aware of what is happening. this has been done in a very, very comprehensive way. >> former labor secretary puzder said that he illegally i'm employed a housekeeper. is this administration going to crack down on illegal aliens and

how do they plan to do so? >> that is some information that mr. puzder was forthcoming on. when he recognized the situation, he paid the taxes and tried to help the individual go through the proper process. so yeah, we're going to continue to make sure that we hold individuals in compliance with the law. he did the right thing then, but whether it's companies or individuals, i think we're committed to making sure that people do what is right. >> two questions. janet ivanko sang the national anthem. she requested a meeting with the president. her sister is trans-gender. is he going to take that meeting -- >> i think the president would be welcome to meet with her. >> the second question. steve bannon today called the media the opposition party. last week, lots of conversation about the fake news and us being the enemy of the people. some have said this is a branding of the media of where he did that in the primaries,

branding little marco and lying ted. >> that was the president. >> is this a branding strategy -- >> absolutely. of course it's real. i don't think he would go out -- steve has been very clear about his position on the media and how he believes they distort things. >> the whole administration -- >> i just said that that is -- what steve's view is. he made it several times. he's very clear on this. sarah? >> thanks. back to the border adjustment tax. president trump told reuters that he supports some form of a border tax. how does the president respond to critics saying the border adjustment tax will be passed on to lower income and middle class families in the form of higher prices for goods? >> the first thing is, there is no tax if you're manufacturing in the united states. so there can be no higher costs. if you think about it right now,

we have to look at this in a holistic way, which is when a company chooses to leave our country and shed american jobs so they can move overseas and sell back to us at a lower price, there's a big cost that comes to our economy and our workers. so we've got to look at this comprehensively. if a company chooses to stay and grow in the united states, it will be a net savings. it will be the companies that are overseas that have chosen to move out that will face a higher cost under these kind of plans. that's a big difference. it will actually benefit consumers, benefit workers and our economy. when you really think about the economic impact of that, that benefits our economy, helps our american workers and grows more jobs, grows the manufacturing base. again, we are probably one of only a handful of develops countries that don't have a tax system that looks at this. so right now it's america and american workers and american manufacturing that are at the

disadvantage of the current regulatory and tax system, not the other way around. thank you, guys. have a great day. we'll touch base tomorrow. tune in to cpac to see the president. >> sean spicer with the daily briefing from the white house. a little late today. normally earlier in the day. late today because of the cpac. we had a lot of stuff coming from out there and speeches. so sean spicer decided to go late. let's got to john roberts who is live at the white house. john, highlights from you. >> hey, shep. good afternoon to you. yeah, this probably was the longest one that sean spicer has done. he typically wraps them up after 20, 25 minutes. almost going a full hour here this afternoon. one of the highlights is the immigration executive order that has been pushed back until next week. they want to make sure they have the is dotted and the ts crossed. they're taking a look at the

opinions that came from the ninth circuit court of appeals and making sure they have the concerns addressed before they come out with a new one. they do not want to lose again in court. they know there's going to be a lot of lawsuits lined up against it. a lot of similar things that the visa ban will apply to the same seven countries, a temporary ban on all refugees but removing the language about an indefinite suspension of refugees from syria and put in specific language to say people like legal permanent residents and other current visa holders will be exempted. so taken awhile longer than what they thought initially. >> sort of recycled old school spin on this bathroom issue. one we've been hearing when rights are removed for centuries. >> yeah. they put out the guidance or rescinded the guidance that the obama administration had implemented. it was tied up in the courts. a big supreme court case about

this next month. the president believes that this is not an issue for the federal government. it's an issue for the states to decide. the human rights campaign, the largest lgbtq organization in the country believes this is indeed a civil right and as such it belongs in the purview of the federal government. i asked sean spicer about that. he said it's not whether it's a civil right. it's the appropriate venue. that believe it's the states. >> thanks, john roberts. about 20 years ago or so, a small group of brand new employees of the about-to-launch fox news channel got to together in the meeting of this sky scraper that is our home. our bosses told us about our prime time line-up on launch. the o'reilly report, the schneider report, the debate show with sean hannity and ltbd.

liberal to be determined. that line got quite a chuckle in the basement newsroom. that we had had a conservative atlanta talk show guy from long island and some liberal who had not been hired to do a left-right cross fire kind of hour. that liberal was alan combs. he got his start at a comedian back in the day and did morning drive talk here in new york city. he came to us at fox news as a sort of lanky guy with a unique pair of glasses that would often be derided by the right as a token liberal in our conservative line-up. >> sometimes all you have to do is show up. bob dole did that. >> sometimes he had a good tan. that was alan on launch day here in fox news channel. it wasn't his politics at all but his kind and gentle way that really struck me. he was friendly and unpretentious with everybody.

if guy next door that never hurt a flea and had something nice to say to everybody. occasionally even sean hannity. after weeks covering the columbine massacre in colorado, i came back home to new york city and saw him in the hall. he went on and on about how we interacted with the children who had been so traumatized by that horrible event. his concern for the teens was very real. he asked about how they were doing, what they needed psychologically and otherwise and how all of us could help them. over the years we spoke daily here at fox. alan looking up over the trademark glasses to offer a smile and a comment about the news of the day. i saw him frustrated occasionally but never saw him angry orbiter. he wasn't that kind of guy. alan was the happy man about our tv house. he would return to fox radio after his tv stint ended. his profile somewhat lowered but

not his spirit. alan colmes was a good guy in a industry where every 1 -- everyone is not. he died this morning after a brief illness. i'll miss him. rheumatoid arthritis. before you and your rheumatologist move to another treatment, ask if xeljanz is right for you. xeljanz is a small pill for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well. xeljanz can reduce joint pain and swelling in as little as two weeks, and help stop further joint damage. xeljanz can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections, lymphoma and other cancers have happened. don't start xeljanz if you have an infection. tears in the stomach or intestines, low blood cell counts and higher liver tests and cholesterol levels have happened. your doctor should perform blood tests before you start and while taking xeljanz, and monitor certain liver tests. tell your doctor if you were in a region where fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections.

xeljanz can reduce the symptoms of ra, even without methotrexate, and is also available in a once-daily pill. ask about xeljanz xr. when i was too busy with the kids to get a repair estimate. i just snapped a photo and got an estimate in 24 hours. my insurance company definitely doesn't have that... you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance

come close, come close. i like that. [ all sounds come to a crashing halt ] ah. when your pain reliever stops working, your whole day stops. awww. try this. for minor arthritis pain, only aleve is fda approved to work for up to 12 straight hours with just one pill.

thank you. come on everybody. aleve. live whole. not part. >> our time line is we're going to try to get this done by august. it's aggressive but we're focused on an aggressive timeline. >> neil: that is aggressive. if you're looking at getting the tax cuts done and get them done by the end of the summer, some might express disappointment in that. obviously that telegraphs that the administration is serious about comprehensive tax reform. now the devil is in the details and keeping to that timetable. welcome. i'm neil cavuto. you're watching "your world." a busy watching the world today where the trump administration is making it clear that a generational change in taxes in this country and how we go about taxing and