captioning sponsored by cbs >> dickerson: today on "face the nation," tension overseas as president trump and putin meet face to face and trust warns of a strong response to north korea's breakout missile test. the g-20 conference of world leaders saw violent protests as it has in the past, but the rounds of photo ops and meetings that usually mark unity among the leaders could not mask the silver to to tone of the countrs gathered. >> ( translated ): our world has never been so divided. sen terrific gal forces have never been is powerful. >> dickerson: for president trump, a series of crucial meetings. first, a meeting with russia's president vladimir putin. >> it's an honor to be with you. >> dickerson: an honor that the russian president extended to accepting putin's claim that russia did not meddle in the u.s. election.

>> ( translated ): he did accept what i said. >> dickerson: american officials did not challenge that claim. so what consequences do the russians face? we asked u.n. ambassador nikki haley. >> i think they're -- you're going to have to ask the president. >> dickerson: not on this trip. the president returnedded to white house without holding the end of summit news conference presidents usually hold. he did tweet, though, "i strongly pressed vladimir putin twice about interfering in our elections. he vehemently denied it. it is time to move forward with working constructively with russia." president trump also met with president xi of china to do more with north korea's nuclear program after the first successful test of a missile that could travel as far as am bers fly over the north korea peninsula as a show

of force. what are the options? we'll talk with chairman of the armed services committee john mccain. back at home, as predicted, republican senators got an earful over health care from their constituents. >> you come up with terms. it's a lie. >> dickerson: texas republican senator the ended the -- ted cruz thinks he has a solution. we'll talk to him. then on the one-year anniversary of the dallas police massacre, former chief david brown joins us to talk about his back on race and policing. we'll also have plenty of political analysis. it's all ahead on "face the nation." good morning and welcome to "face the nationen" i'm "dick van dyke show." there's a lot of news to cover. we begin with the u.s. ambassador to the u.n., nikki haley. when we spoke with her yesterday, we asked her if president trump accepted russian president putin's assurances that he didn't meddle in the u.s. election. >> i think we need to be realistic about what happened. you had two men walk into the room. you had two men who knew the

exact same thing, which is russia did meddle in the elections. i think president trump wanted to make sure that president putin was aware that he was acknowledging it, that he knew it. i think president putin did what we all expected him to do, which was deny it. and i think that is what it is. president trump still knows that they meddled. president putin knows that they meddled, but he's never going to admitted to it and that's all that happened. >> dickerson: given that the president knows the russians meddled, what consequences will they face as a result of that action? >> i think you're going to have to ask the president. that's one of the first things, confronting them, letting them know we know this happened, letting them know it can't happen again. i know they had quite a bit of cyber conversation in terms of cyber meddling and cyber abuse. they talked quite a bit on the cyber attack risk. and so i think we'll see what happens there. keep in mind, yesterday's meeting was all about talk. but at the end of the day, this is all going to be about

actions. we now have to see where we go from here. >> dickerson: that's right. on that question of action, the president has criticized his predecessor, president obama, saying he choked when he found out the russians were interfering in the election, so is it your expectation that president trump will take stronger action against the russians for interfering than president obama took? >> i think they're going to wait and see how all of the investigation plays out there. 's not anybody that thinks that russian didn't meddle in the elections. i think we're all very clear on that. i think we'll see what congress does. and i think president will continue to work on this going forward, but, yes, i don't think this is over. i think what this was was one leader telling another leader, look, we know you did it, don't do it again. >> so nobody should have the misimpression that the russians are going to go scott-free on this. they're going to pay a price, it's just a question of what that price is? >> i think president trump was letting him no, look, we know you did it. this is being talked about. i think president putin had to deny it, even though he knows that we know, and i this i we'll see where it goes from here.

when you put president trump in the room with any leader, we can kind of cut through all the diplomatic tape. i think that's exactly what happened. >> dickerson: during the campaign and during secretary of state tillerson's confirmation hearing, there was this idea that if russians are shown weakness on anything, that then that is an inveightation for them to act and to take advantage, and so on this question of what some people in the intelligence community say is a political equivalent of 9/11, what is the message in terms of the consequences to the russians for that action? >> well, i think the message is, look, we're not going to have you interfere, not just with our election, but with any part of how the united states functions. i think that's not just us. russia has been meddling in multiple ways in multiple countries. and so i think we don't just stand up for the united states and say it doesn't happen here. i think we stand up and say it shouldn't happen anywhere. and we have to keep that voice strong, and we have to keep that moving forward, because the one thing we never want is for any

country to think that they can cause chaos in our elections. >> dickerson: but it seems like it's just words at the moment. will there be any action? >> everybody keeps saying, what next, what next. first they wanted him to bring it up in from the of president putin, and he did. things are happening, and those things are taking place, but, yes, this is going to have the play out. this isn't something small. this is a big deal. i think you saw a big step when he brought it up to president putin first thing to say, look, we know you did. this i think we now see where it goes from there. i think first thing was face-to-face acknowledging the fact that we knew that they meddled and face-to-face looking them in the eye and saying, don't do it again. >> dickerson: let me ask you about north korea. you said this week that pyongyang was "quickly closing off the possibility of a diplomatic solution." what does that mean exactly? >> how many tests does it take and how many more times do we have to tell them no escalation? the fact that they launched an

icbm test is hugely dangerous, not just for us, but for so many of our friends in the world. and we've got to put a stop to it. so what we wanted to tell north korea is, look, we have told you, we're in the looking for ream change, we are not looking for war, but don't give us a reason to get involved in any of this, and so we're going to go ahead and push for a strong resolution against north korea. i think it will be very telling based on how other countries respond whether they want to hold kim jong-un's hand through this process or whether they want to be on the side of so many countries who know that this is a dangerous person, with the access to an icbm. we don't want to that happen. we're going to push hard, not justen north korea. we're going to push hard on other countries who are not abiding by the resolutions and not abiding by the sanctionings against north korea, and we're going to push hard against china, because 90% of the trade that happens with north korea is from china. and so while they have been helpful, they need to do more. >> dickerson: has china let america down in their work on

north korea that the president put trust in them on? >> i think they actually followed through on the things we asked them to in terms of whether it was coal, whether it was talking to them, whether it was dialogue, whether it was letting them know and condemning, they did that part. now we have to say, okay, clearly that's not enough. with this security counce resolution that we're negotiating now, we don't expect a watered-down resolution. it will be very telling as to whether china works with us, which we're hoping they, will and we'll know in the next couple days whether that's going to be the case, whether russia is going to stand with north korea and, you know, just oppose us for the sake of opposing us, or whether everybody is going to say once and for all to north korea, stop, this is reckless, it's irresponsible, and we're not going the take it anymore. >> dickerson: you said about china, or you seemed to be referring to china when you talked about country that do business with north korea. >> there are countries that are allowing, even encouraging trade with north korea. such countries would also like to continue their trade arrangements with the united

states. that's not going to happen. >> dickerson: are you saying that china is going to lose trade with the united states if they don't do more on north korea? >> i'm saying that ammunition comes with multiple options, and it's not always military. ammunition also comes with sanctions. ammunition also comes with trade. we this a lot of trade with a lot of countries. if there is a country that we don't think is looking out for our security and looking out for our confidence in that, then, yes, that is one of the ammunition options we have on the table. >> dickerson: you mentioned countries in general, though, but china is obviously 90% of the trade with north korea, so this is really a direct threat to china about their trade with the united states? >> this is encouraging and motivating china to say, look, we appreciate what you've done. this is a whole new level. this is an icbm test. we need you to not only do more, but we need the pressure on north korea, and china has the ability to do it. they know that. we know, that, and we need to see more action accordingly. i think the resolution will be a

big test on that. >> dickerson: ambassador nikki haley, thanks for being with us. >> thanks, john. appreciate it. >>. >> dickerson: we turn now to the senator from arizona john mccain. senator, i want to jump all every the world here. there's a lot of ground to cover. we don't have a globe, but let's start with russia. the u.n. ambassador said in terms of consequences for russian interference in the election, she suggested consequences could come, but the president is tweeting and he said the following, "now it is time to move forward in working constructively with the russians." that seems to suggest no consequences. >> well, so far the interesting aspect of 24 whole issue is we know that russia tried to change the outcome of our election last november, and they did not succeed, but there was really sis sophisticated attempts to do so. so far they have not paid a single price for that.

we passed a very good bill through the senate on sanctions, and we also have other proposals out there, but as far as a specific penalty for what they did, there has been no penalty. so if you were vladimir putin, who i've gotten to know over the years, you're sitting there and you got away with literally trying to change the outcome, not just of our election, the french election tried to overthrow the government of montenegro, a beautiful little country, i recommend it, and there's been no penalty whatsoever. time to move forward. yes, it's time to move forward, but there has to be a price to pay. >> dickerson: why does there have to be a price? >> otherwise he will be encouraged to do so again. obviously. i mean, does anyone doubt his intentions of undermining american supremacy, undermining democracy, the principles of

freedom and all of the things that have epitomized europe and the world since the end of world war ii. for the last 70 years, we've had a new world order, and this is now under severe stress, not only in europe, but all over the world. >> dickerson: the president announced and the white house says this is a significant achievement of their meeting. the president again tweeting this morning said, "putin and i discussed forming and impenetrable cyber security unit so that election hacking and many other things will be guarded." >> i am sure that vladimir putin could be of enormous assistance in that effort since he's doing the hacking. i think it's... look, i support this president. i did not support him, okay. but he is the president. i' each tried to work with him wherever i can. armed services, we passed a defense authorization bill, which maybe we'll get to later on, that is bipartisan, comprehensive, 27-0 through the committee, in the normal process.

we considered over 200 amendments. so instead we decide on this path where we're going the ram through a republican proposal that requires 60 votes for a number of important provisions of it. i don't understand that. what do we need to do now? go back to the beginning. introduce a bill, move it through, brick it to the floor, vote on it, that's the normal process. and if you shut out the adversary or the opposite party, you'll end up the same way obamacare did when they rammed it through with 60 votes, only guess what, we don't have 60 votes, john. >> dickerson: so what happens now on health care next week? >> i think... my view is it's probably going to be dead, but i am... i have been wrong. i thought i'd be president of the united states. but i think... i fear that it's going the fail, and then we should convenient a republican

conference and say, what are we going to do? introduce a bill, say to the democrats, here's a by. it doesn't mean they control it. it means they can have consideration. even when they lose, then they're part of the process. that's what democracy is supposed to be all about. >> dickerson: let me go back overseas. i want to ask you about syria. let's listen to something that secretary of state tillerson said about the russians who have interests in syria and the united states. let's listen to the secretary. >> by in large our objectives are exactly the same. how we get there, we each have a view. maybe they've got the right approach and we have the wrong approach. >> dickerson: do the russians have the right approach? >> you can't make that up. you can't make that up. these are the same people that use precision-graded weapons to strike hospitals in aleppo where sick and wounded people are. this is just... you know, i am preparing myself mentally to be

on this show. i said, john, you're not going to get upset, you're not going to get emotional, but i have met white hat. i know what the slaughter has been like. i know that the russians knew that bashar al assad was going to use chemical weapons. and to say that maybe we've got the wrong approach, look, i agonized over voting for or against tillerson for secretary of state, not that i didn't admire his success and all the great things he's done, but the things that he said in the past, he has divorced a fundamental of american democracy, the reason why we are the shining city on the hill, as ronald reagan used to say, is because they look up to us because of our principles and our beliefs and our advocacy of freedom, that's what america is supposed to be all about, not whether they're right and we're wrong. we know who is right and who is wrong here. >> dickerson: you regret that vote for tillerson? >> sometimes i do, but i'm still

torn by the fact that the american people chose this president, and he ought to be able to have his team. when barack obama won in 2008, in 2009 i voted for his team. because i think that the american people wanted him to have his team. but don't think i wasn't worried about it. really worried. >> dickerson: finally, you were just recently in afghanistan. what's your sense of the picture there? >> we have no strategy, and we are losing. when you're not winning, you're losing. and the ana, the afghan national army, is taking unacceptable losses. and we are going to have a new strategy. you know, they're coming to us and asking for additional funds for additional people and additional missions. we won't do that unless they give us a strategy. i've been asking general mattis, who i'm a great admirer of, general mcmaster of, where is

the strategy? where is the strategy? then we can have a policy. then we authorize funding and troops and tanks and guns. and, you know, we all know what the problem is. it's in the white house. they've got to get their act together, announce a strategy, that has to be done by the president, by the way, and tell the american people that you have to win there. don't forget 9/11. here's what we need to do to get there. unfortunately there's so much disarray within the white house, but i am confident the united states of america, the best and strongest nation on earth, can do it. >> dickerson: all right, senator mccain, thanks so much for being with us. >> dickerson: thanks, john. >> dickerson: and we'll be back in another minute with another key republican, texas senator ted cruz. (burke) at farmers, we've seen almost everything,

so we know how to cover almost anything. even a coupe soup. [woman] so beautiful. [man] beautiful just like you. [woman] oh, why thank you. [burke] and we covered it, november sixth, two-thousand-nine. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ >> dickerson: we want the turn now and again to health care. ted cruz has held several town halls over the break. senator, you're working on a

solution, welcome, but it looks like the bill is in trouble in the senate. >> john, good morning. it's good to be with you. no doubt this has been a rocky path to getting, there but i continue to believe we can get this done. i think there are a lot of senators who have been working in good faith, working collaboratively for a long time. six months ago lamar alexander and i breakthrough together a working group that ran the full spectrum of the republican conference. and i think we're making real progress. in my view failure is not an option. this has been a central promise voters have made for several years. the way the deliver what i have been urging more than anything else, the way to get this done, let's focus on lowering premiums. the biggest reason so many millions of people are unhappy with obamacare, is that it's made their premiums skyrocket. if we can fix that with common sense solutions, give people more choice, more option, more feedz and lower premium, that will be a win. that's how we unify our country. >> dickerson: but here's the challeng coming from senator grassley, your own party has worked on the

health care issue. on your plan he said this, and let's listen to the audio. i want to get your reaction. >> sure. >> there is a real feeling that that is trying the get around preexisting conditions. if it subterfuge and it has the effect of annihilating the preexisting condition requirement that we have in the existing bill, then obviously i would object to that. >> dickerson: your response, senator. >> well, chuck grassley is a i think it's important for republicans not to be deceived by the attacks that are coming out of chuck schumer and the democrats. chuck schumer this week blasted the consumer freedom amendment, which is i think --. >> dickerson: your amendment. >> yes. because chuck schumer doesn't want us to pass this. chuck schumer wants this to fail. so no republican should be deceived when chuck schumer... chuck schumer made the argument, he called it a hoax. look, i'll note that chuck schumer and obama know a lot

about health care hoaxes. obamacare was sold to the american people on a whole series of lies, if you like your plan, you can keep your plan. if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. so what we need to focus on is how do we actually deliver results for the people hurting under obamacare. >> but this is senator chuck grassley. he's not first run for him. he knows this issue, and he's a republican. so he's not... >> well, but we need to focus on the actual facts. how does the consumer freedom amendment operate? it operates as follows: it's designed to be a compromise that can bring together conservatives and moderates, that can unify the conference some what it says is, you the consumer, you the patient, should have the freedom to choose the insurance you want. it shouldn't be the government ding tainting what insurance you can buy, so if an insurance companies offers at least one plan that's consistent with the title 1 mandate, so it meets all of the mandates that you got to provide right now. >> dickerson: that are part of obamacare, including preexisting conditions.

>> all of that is there. if they offer one plan, they can also offer additional plans that consumers may desire. that means you're not taking away anything that is there right now. all of the protection for preexisting conditions are, there but what you are adding is additional options. all the people who can't afford insurance suddenly will have options of lower premiums where they're be able to ad for coverage they don't have now. >> senator grassley's critique, one obamacare plan you allow will attract all the sick people. the premiums there will skyrocket, so you may be offering people preexisting conditions in that single plan some the premiums will be so out of sight that in effect you're not really offering that. >> again, that argument is inaccurate. yes, it is true that some young healthy people may choose to purchase freedom plans at much, much lower --. >> dickerson: they'd be crazy not. to. >> so they'd get much, much lower premiums. millions of young people are

better off. they get hammered by obamacare. millions of young people suddenly get lower presume use. let's focus on the relatively small pool of preexisting condition, significant illnesses on the individual market. you're dealing with roughly four to five million people out of a country of 330 million. >> dickerson: but the sickest among us. >> in the individual market, yes. in every other market, in the group market, preexisting conditions are there. everywhere else the preexisting conditions are. there the individual market is a relatively small slice and this is abeven smaller slice. now, what i would say, and in congress, there is wide agreement that we're going to provide significant assistance to people with serious medical conditions and preexisting conditions. the question is how do we do it. what obamacare does is it takes millions of young people, millions of people just starting out their ca rar and it jax up their premium, it doubles or triples their premiums and uses that money not for those people but to cross subsidize those who are sick. i think that's unfair. if you have a 28-year-old woman

who just started her career, she's making $30,000 a year, trying make ends meet, i think doubling her premiums is wrong and it's unfair. my view is we ought to do it with direct tax pay funds. let's use warren buffett's taxes and not that of a 28-year-old woman starting her career. and let me point out, the senate bill has billions in taxpayer subsidies and stabilization funds so the premiums for preexisting conditions stay stabilized and well. >> dickerson: okay. it will be worked out this week. senator, thank you so much for being with us. we'll be back in a moment. comfortable you are in it.

so find a venus smooth that contours to curves, flexes for comfort, and has a disposable made for you. skin smoothing venus razors.

excuse me, are you aware of what's happening right now? we're facing 20 billion security events every day. ddos campaigns, ransomware, malware attacks... actually, we just handled all the priority threats. you did that? we did that. really. we analyzed millions of articles and reports. we can identify threats 50% faster. you can do that? we can do that. then do that. can we do that? we can do that. >> dickerson: you can keep up with news of the week by subscribing to the "face the nation" diary podcast. it recaps the week and sets the stage for our sunday broadcast. find us on itunes our your favorite podcast platform.

>> dickerson: we'll be right back with a lot more "face the nation," including an interview with former dallas police chief david brown. stay with us.

>> dickerson: welcome back to face fis. i'm john dickerson. it's been a year since 12 dallas police officers were shot by a sniper. five of them fatally. at demonstrations against the use of excessive force by police officers. tributes with were held around the country friday in honor of those lost. we're honored to welcome former dallas police chief david brown. he's written a book, it's called "called to rise." welcome, chief. i want the start with a year ago what you said after the shooting. you said that society is asking the police to do too much is. that still true? >> it's still true. when one third of our prison population suffer from mental health issues and basically the prisons aren't meant to be mental health providers, and that translates to cops having to deal with people who are mentally ill, who we don't have the training for that, and we just kind of by default take on

that task. >> dickerson: have any police answered this call that you put out a year ago or legislators? have they heard you? are there places where prison are getting the load lifted off of them because people recognize the point that you've made? >> john, it seems that every time we see some progress take a step, there's two steps we take back with another viral video or a court proceeding that didn't end in the way i think the public expected. and so we stay divided in this conversation about the role of policing in the 21st century, particularly in communities of color. >> dickerson: your book is such an insight into life as what a police officer is like. i want to get to that in a minute, but since you raised the viral videos or the news events, what do you say to those in the community, communities like the one you grew up, where people see these court rulings and say, well, the policeman seems to get off free from what of these incendiary events. what's your response to that?

>> that officers are willing to sacrifice their lives for these communities. they give their all, particularly white cops. still in many department, it's majority white officers on the police force, and they go into these communities and they risk their. lice. just this week we had a bad time for police officers in new york and san antonio being killed in the line of duty by ambush, by suspects. so there's no question that the cop on the beat is sacrificing and committing their life to protect all of us, including communities of color. at the same time, i don't think there a contradiction in saying communities of color do get treated differently by those few officers that don't deserve to be in the profession. and there is a small number, but for these communities, this becomes their world view. >> dickerson: one story you tell in your book about the mind seth of what it's like to be a

police officer, you see threats where regular civilians don't. i love the story you told about your mentor you still had lunch, with a veteran, a retired police officer, and why he chooses to sit the way he does. >> right. so cops can be perceived as very paranoid about what's happening, even in a restaurant at dinner with a friend, we want to sit where we're facing the. .. and can see who is coming in. even though retired cops, 80-year-old gentleman i have lunch work he's always the first inside so he can have that perfect seat. he's been retired long. it's a pair nowback almost a hyper vigilance that's required to make it through your shift to, stay alive as a cop. >> that's the mindset people need to learn that police have to do their job. how do police learn about the mindset of the community? what's the solution there in terms of getting to walk in the other person's shoes? >> i'm a big proponent in my book i describe how i transformed to a community-oriented policing type of police chief.

because without the community, we cannot be successful in the best ways to protect it because the community's priority should be the police departments priorities. we're public servants and we should be serving these communitiesment. >> dickerson: the operation kitchen sink, you consider sceptical about community policing. >> very much. so i went to a community policing assign. i was hired on in 1983. this was the war on drugs, the height of the mass incarceration. so i came into the profession believing that let's put them all in jail and let god sort them out. and what i understood later as i matured in the profession is there is only so much jail bed space and mass incarceration is not, first, affordable, nor is it smart, because you have to make a distinction between people who are mentally ill, drug adingted, so we can have space in jail for people who are truly violent and will hurt all of us and need to be in jail. but if you mix them all in the

same bag, you don't have enough jaci space. it's not practical to do that. >> dickerson: the only way to figure that all out is if you're there day to day having these relationships where you see people where they live before there is a crisis. >> right. i try to say things to cops and to citizens like this. policing is the people's business. it's not ten form business. if you take away people from this formula, you use a the very nature of what policing is supposed to be about. we're supposed to protect people. >> dickerson: the number of shootings of police officers is up. what's your sense of what's happening right now in the relationship that you write also in your book about how both after columbine and you own experience, i think it was arizona street. >> yes. >> dickerson: where the fire power you were facing was of a different kind. >> i think we've taken two steps back to when it comes to the safety of our police officers. they don't feel supported. i am also encouraged that there are number of citizens who

openly express that their support police officers. and that's not giving the cops who don't deserve to be in the job a pass. we still need to be held accountable, but the vast majority of cops do the job the right way and they deserve our support. >> dickerson: there was a pew study at the beginning of the year that found that 72% of police interviewed said their colleagues are now more hesitant because of that, what you described. before we go, i want you to tell one last story, which is about an experience you had that changed your life when you were young about a guy named mike. tell people that story. >> yes, mike shillenburg, in sixth grade i was parted of busing, desegregation. i was bussed to an all-white school. mike shillenburg was a white kid. you can tell i'm black. we were both 11 years old. he invited me home for dinner because he saw the difficulties i was having in school. that transformed my world view of race because mike's mom brought out two pot pies and we sat and had dinner and became best friends, we're friends today. god knows what i would be

thinking about people if mike hadn't invited me home for dinner. so again, my takeaway is see you at dinner. let's not be so divided. >> dickerson: chief brown, thank you so much for being with us. >> dickerson: thanks, john. >> and we'll be right back with our political panel.

>> dickerson: we're joined now by our political panel. margaret brennan is cbs news white house and senior foreign affairs correspondent. david ignatiusçó is a columnistt the "washington post," candy crowley -- michael crowley is a political senior affairs correspondent, and david nakamura is with the "washington post." margaret, welcome back from your trip. what was the administration's view of this meeting with russian president putin? >> well, the administration believes now that they've checked the box. they've handled the issue of russian hacking by speaking directly to vladimir putin. the only account of that meeting was described to us by secretary of state rex tillerson. he's the only other administration official in that very small meeting, and as

described by russian officials, in their on-camera press conferences, both from their foreign minister and vladimir putin, they said president trump accepted their denials. and agreed to move forward. secretary tillerson says, we agreed to move forward. the majority of the meeting went on, he says to, focus in on this first test of u.s.-russian cooperation in syria. and this limited ceasefire in the south of the country. that went into effect today. >> dickerson: we'll get back the syria in a moment. but nakamura knack, you wrote about other presidents who have met with president putin. continue to put this meeting in the context of history. >> well, you know, i think what's interesting is putin has sort of really soured on u.s. relations. we know that under president obama at the end of george w. bush they tried to get off the a better start, but he was very frustrated, and he was known to begin meetings with a litany of complaints about u.s. actions undermining russian cooperation. i think there was a little

different element here at play, where he sort of recognized challenges that donald trump is under politically, and to some degree it's interesting, we don't know who set up the terms of this meeting, because so few participants and the idea that beth sides came out spinning sort of proactively on their behalf, but what we do know is that president putin has gone on camera and had, as margaret said, a press conference, and foreign minister lavrov has, as well, the u.s. side has not done that, some on the record, some not, disputing some of putin's characteristics of this meeting. but this morning you have donald trump saying the russian leader denied the meddling and i donald trump have had what i had to say. 123450 nor mccain if you move on and the russians face no consequence, they'll be emboldened. that's certainly the way presidential candidate donald trump talked about it and the

way secretary of state rex tillerson talk about it. what do you make of the state of play with respect to this interference? >> sanctions against russia are still in place contrary the what senator senator mccain said. president obama did impose additional sanctions for the hacking on september 29th, expelling russian diplomats, closing two of their compounds. those are not, so far as we know, being returned. they're still in play. so there are no additional sanctions for now, but none were taken off as a result of this meeting. to see the u.s. in the form of trump so isolated from our political ally, the g-19 versus the u.s. on climate change and then this extraordinary rapprochement with vladimir putin, accused we our intelligence agency of attacking our elections and the president basically saying it's time the move on, we won't move on until

robert mueller has delivered his investigative report. that's what's going to resolve this, along with a conditional hearing. >> dickerson: go ahead, margaret. >> to your point, one of the best sort of contrasts to this would be to look at the french president when he melt with vladimir putin, who, yes, they had a meeting, let's talk about working together, but in public came out and directly said, "i don't like where they are on human right, persecution of gay, issues of election hacking, et cetera." and he stood up to at least say, here are our values that we don't like you undermining. secretary tillerson on the other hand described this meeting and chemistry between president trump and putin as positive, they couldn't stop talking, the first lady had to barge into the room to say, can you wrap up the meeting and then they kept talking for another hour. the optics are troubleing to our european allies are troubling because of that degree of positive creme industry. >> michael crowley is tweeting about this cyber security unit. it's getting some tough reviews.

senator rubio tweeted, "partnering with putin on a cyber security unit is akin to partnering with assad, the leader of syria, on a chemical weapons unit." >> one thought i had would be maritime security cooperation arrangement with the japanese after pearl harbor. they came in, the russians hit us really hard, it's not clear whether they were able to influence the outcome of the election. we know that votes were... there with was the sweght of the vote. votes were not changed, but i think despite trump's repeated assertions, you can't say for sure that the russian propaganda that made its way into the u.s. and the theft and release of embarrassing e-mails from the dnc and the hillary clinton campaign, you can't say they played no role. so i think that it's very troubling for a lot of people in washington, in the congress, possibly even in trump's own administration to see him... his response to this is we need to working together and, john, i would add that in that press conference, that secretary of

state rex tillerson had when he talked about, this he said that, as we move forward and we have this cooperative relationship, both sides are agreeing not to interfere in each other's affairs, which i think is a real concession to vladimir putin, who feels that hillary clinton helped to mastermind popular protests against him in 2011, and indeed many people believe that created a grudge where putin was out to get revenge against hillary. there is basically no evidence that the state department or the u.s. government whipped up those protests that. was genuine popular dissengts. this is a kremlin myth that tillerson and trump may have implicitly endorsed. >> dickerson: david, one thing that seems confusing in terms of the president's posture is on the one hand he blames president obama for having choked, having not held the russians to account. but now, the president would like the move on and is forming a cyber unit in cooperation with the russians. he blamed president obama on this trip for not doing enough. he wants to have it both ways.

that's not going to satisfy people on capitol hill or others in the media who really want to see not only robert mueller's investigation play out, but also whether the president will take accountability and follow up on some of the sort of additional sanctions that some in congress are pushing. >> dickerson: david ignatius, the syria agreement emerged. i want the get you take on this, too. so that is one of the things that came out of this meeting, but also we have what the secretary of state says about syria, which is, again, he said by in large our objectives, he's talking about the russians here, are exactly the same. how we get there, we each have a view, maybe they, the russian, have got the right approach, and we have the wrong approach. >> i have no idea what tillerson meant by that. it's a strange comment, senator mccain was right, the russians have been subject to a barbaric campaign of assad. tillerson also said the u.s. expects, it was implied that trust and russia expect, that

president assad will leaves as part of a transition and that the assad family will leave power as this transition moves forward. just been in syria two weeks ago, and what's of course si that there is movement with the u.s. and russia working together toward deacon politics, deescalation and identification, different parts of the country where th can be truth in effect, people stand down, that's real and it's been happening for weeks, and the reason that i have some confidence that this may have legs is because they've been testing it, you know, one that you could for the last three weeks, the agreement on the southwest, was reached about a week ago. they've been watching to see when it holds. when it held, they've decided to announce it. >> dickerson: what's your take? >> and negotiated by american diplomats, not necessarily in that room, between the two heads of state, but what i think is

interesting here is it's been presented as a test, but this is also a test of russia in terms of can they actually influence and control assad and the iranian forces that are on the ground, because weñr don't negotiate as the united states government with either the assad regime or with iran. so paper agreements are nice. let's see what happens. but as i was just saying, this has been tested. in some ways this could be a lifeline for the u.s.-backed opposition in that particular part of the country. it could also be something that allows them to hold on to the government structures that they've started to publish there. that might be a blueprint for the future, but it is so heavily caveated with can anyone actually enforce this. we'll have the see what happens. >> dickerson: we'll pause. there we'll be back in a moment with our panel on north korea and health care. stay with us. handballer 1: you know what i could go for?

some scrambled eggs and pancakes. lilly: we got a craving! go, go, go!! crashing cravings in the crave van! jack's gonna crash your crave! jack: hey, guys. try my jumbo breakfast platter with sausage or bacon, plus 8 mini pancakes, eggs and a hash brown for just $2.99. handballer 2: $2.99? how 'bout we play you for it. handballers: oooooooh. jack vo: you crave it, we serve it. try my $2.99 jumbo breakfast platter. crave van!

denny's your house.rries and cream pancakes are in the house. with new denny's online ordering, get whatever you want, whenever you want, now wherever you want. order at dennys.com >> dickerson: we're back with our panel. michael, i want to switch to the issue of north korea. where do we think the strategy is right now? >> i think it's still a work in progress. john, one strange thing about trump and north korea is there is some evidence that trump's own advisers and officials are following his lead, that he... a lot of this policy has been laid

out through his tweets, and jump will treat something, and it's not clear that these key players in his administration understand exactly what he means. for instance, recently, and he's done it now a few timeious trump tweeted that the chinese had tried, he has exerted pressure on president xi to do more to crack down on north korea economically, and now has said while the chinese tried and didn't work too, bad, we're going to have to do something else. i'm not sure that plan "b" is fully spelled out. it is clear that there are options for imposing more sanctions on chinese entities that do business with north korea, but this is... maybe that would have some effect, john, but this is something that the united states has been thinking about and talking about for many years, and the question is what price will you pay in your direct relationship with china to try to solve the north korean problems. and that relationship with china encompasses so many things -- economics obviously, stability, military issues, cyber issues, remember, russia is not the only country messing around with

computers. so there are not great options here. i guess i would say the last thing is when it comes to this question of what do you do with china, i think there is this sense in the united states if only we can convince the chinese that it's in their interests to do what we want them to do, then we can make some progress. they'll change their policy, and i just think the chinese have a sense of their own interests. you can't just persuade them to do something. it will require probably some kind of tough, economic measures that it's going to... they're going to exact a real cost. i don't know whether... >> dickerson: a couple things in play, though. >> the administration did follow up through the chinese bank. people in the bush administration i talked to suggested that is a significant step, a first step, maybe more. they don't know how quickly that will take effect. you also saw on the sideline, it was apparently overlooked in germany, but president trump had this try lateral meeting with president moonçó and prime minister abe of korea and japan. president obama took a lot of effort to get that dialogue started. these are two allies that we think are allies but they themselves are not often on the

same page. you have a korean president who came in running on more engagement with pyongyang. you have the japanese prime minister saying, no, we can't do that, we need tougher actions first. so to get them in the room talking on this, potentially on the same page is a start. >> dickerson: and china not in that meeting. >> not in that meeting. >> dickerson: david, what do you make of the u.n. ambassador saying countries that this trade with north korea, which means china essentially, you know, their agreements with the united states are not going to continue? is that right, a trade war over this? >> well, she was mildly threatening economic action. to me the take away of the last two days on north korea is that the trump administration has doubled down on his strategy of working with and through china to try to restrain north korea. a week ago we were all talking about military options and general brooks and south korea had us on the edge of war it seemed. after the summit, we've returned

to this idea that china is our partner, the president has said very nice things about china. the atmospherics of that meeting were very, very warm. i thought that was the heart of what ambassador haley had to say. she added a little bit that we may stick it to them, but i think where they're really going is to reanimate that diplomacy. >> and a lot of that is getting some smaller countries withñi guest worker program with north korea is to cut off any kind of financial lifeline. but the biggest checks come from beijing, which is why they're so relevant. secretary tillerson said that proposal, freeze for freeze, freezing north korea's nuclear program in exchange for the u.s. doing things like stopping the joint military exercises we have with south korea are something the u.s. administration is not receptive to at this time. they think it can be a freeze, it has to be a rollback, in other words, north korea needs to offer more before diplomacy gets under way. >> but we don't have the leverage the force them to

rollback unless we start dropping bombs essentially. and that's just a terrible... the options here are good, ugly and horrible. and again, i think we've heard people talk for years about we're going to convince the chinese to change their minds and we'll talk the north koreans into this. you can't do this unless you're willing to blow things up. a lot of things... people start dying, the global economy gets rocked. >> dickerson: david ignatius, you were in mosul recently. there are now reports mosul has fallen from isis. what's your assessment? >> i want to be clear. i was in syria and near raqqa, which is also leaning toward falling. john, the strongest emotional response i had was to see the faces of people who have been living under isis for three years as a coming out of a prison into the lights. and they can't quite believe it. there's a little bit of... you

can see how painful this has been. the u.s. has found allies that have helped clear this territory finally. americans who died in syria and iraq in the pass three years as isis has been chased out of the major centers. >> dickerson: that's got to be it. it. thanks to all of you. we'll be back in a moment. and we covered it, july first, twenty-fifteen. talk to farmers. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪

>> dickerson: that's it for us today. thanks for watching. until next week, for "face the nation," i'm john dickerson. the following is a paid program.

♪ upbeat guitar music playing ♪ if you've been waiting to go solar, waiting for that best price of the year. today is your day. it's solar insanity. we've got 200 solar powered systems drastically reduced. we're going to sell them all today, so you might as well call, get going. we've got solar, we've got roofing, we've got battery storage, we've got roofing and solar combos. you could actually pay less for a new roof and solar power system than you're currently paying for your electric bill. so, what are you waiting for? flip off your power company and flip on the cheapest power you can buy. right now, it's solar insanity featuring solar4america. so, if you already know what a solar power system is, just call the number right now. if you don't, i want to introduce you to the man who invented solar4america. the founder, the president, the ceo, jim petersen. how are we looking over there we selling systems already? - we've already nine in the pre-sales. when you've got these kinds of prices, john, and you know we've done this in the past. when you've got a limited number of systems and these types