this sunday, that special forces raid into syria that killed an isis commander. how big a blow is this to the terror group? also, the amtrak crash. >> i thought i was a goner. most of us did. it was so violent. >> does this tragedy spark a bigger debate on rebuilding america? plus, jeb bush's terrible, horrible, no good very bad week on iraq. >> would you have authorized the invasion? >> i would, so would have hillary clinton. >> it's haunting jeb bush's future. and republican candidates suddenly all opposed to the iraq war.

leading the charge, rand paul. he joins us exclusively. >> finally, go like a bee and sting like a butterfly. mitt romney's fight with evander holyfield. i'm chuck todd. joining me is senior adviser to president obama david axelrod. helene cooper, sara fragen and tom friedman. welcome to sunday, it's "meet the press." >> announcer: from nbc news in washington, this is "meet the press" with chuck todd. good sunday morning. a fierce battle is raging for the iraqi city of ramadi, capital of that city's biggest capital of the troops and isis. the terror group continues to make advances despite 11 months of u.s.-led air strikes. but, this weekend, the u.s. has been heralding a blow against isis, announcing the killing of an isis commander and the capture of his wife in a special

forces mission in eastern syria. richard engel has been assessing the significance of this raid into syria. >> reporter: isis got used to fighting u.s. troops, when they attack from the air. for months, washington led an air war against isis in iraq and syria. but, this was very different. a bold raid into syria into an isis stronghold with u.s. boots on the ground. u.s. officials say americans delta force commandos took off in blackhawk helicopters with helicopter hybrids like these and flew deep into isis territory in eastern syria. it was friday evening. syrian time. no allies on the ground. if u.s. forces were captured, they rising unthinkable horror. a jordanian pilot captured by isis was burned alive in a cage.

u.s. officials say the americans target abu sayyaf was a money man. he managed the oil and gas income and was personally close to the isis leader, al baghdadi. >> the fact that the united states was willing to mount a capture mission to grab him shows he was a really important person in the infrastructure itself. >> reporter: the target did not go quietly. there was a gunfight, even hand-to-hand fighting. abu sayyaf was killed along with other fighters. >> if you take out the money man, it can dent the organization's capability to do things. >> reporter: the u.s. commandos left under fire, but unharmed taking with them abu's wife umm sayyaf. they freed a yazidi woman held by the couple as a slave.

it was a bold a risky operation, and could yield intelligence. but it is unlikely to change the course of the war on isis. this week, the group attacked the center of the iraqi city of ramadi with car bombs and took control of a government compound. isis is fighting its way into the historic syrian city threatening to destroy it the way it has other historic treasures. this week, it was washington that took the initiative, going into the isis heartland and making it out alive. >> joining me live is richard engel. how significant is sayyaf? can you say this was fully successful if we didn't get him alive? >> reporter: a lot of counterterrorism analysts never heard of sayyaf. i personally never had before. some refer to him as al capone's accountant. he is significant, but will be replaced.

the most significant thing is the simp -- symbolism. that the u.s. special operations went into the heartland, grabbed someone, sayyaf's wife, killed other militants on the ground and left successfully. it is a psychological blow or attempted psychological blow against isis. that is one of the most important missions here. was it a complete success? they wanted him alive. they got his wife. the idea of rattling isis by going into their heartland was successful. >> is it fair to say this was a test case for u.s. intelligence? almost testing, they're now getting better intelligence in syria about isis so they acted on this. it's successful, so that means success will beget success, and we'll start to see more raids because they trust their syrian intelligence? >> reporter: maybe. maybe.

once you put your toe in the water, there might be a temptation to put another toe or foot in. this is only the second time u.s. special operation forces have gone into syria. the first was a rescue attempt to rescue hostages that turned out to be a dry hole, nobody was there, the hostages had been moved. this time, a snatch and grab operation. but, the white house wants to be very careful about ordering up lots of these. imagine what would have happened if it would have gone wrong? if a helicopter had been shot down. terrible consequences for the commandos and terrible political consequences. >> richard engle in istanbul. thank you very much. we are going to turn to the latest investigation into the amtrak train in philadelphia killing eight and injuring more than 200. earlier, i spoke with the ntsb and asked about reports of the fbi to investigate whether or not the train was hit by a projective before it crashed. >> i have seen it reported that

the fbis investigating. that's a misnomer. we are investigating. we asked the fbi to come in and provide technical expertise to help us resolve and figure out what was a particular damage pattern on a windshield. we are investigating it at this point. we asked them to come in and help us out on identifying the fracture pattern. >> bring in tom costello, just outside the 30th street station in philadelphia. tom, it seems the ntsb is trying to tap the brakes on this growing story that maybe some outside entity or force caused this accident. >> reporter: well, here is why they're concerned about this. they had the train hit by something. the train conductor thought he was shot. another train was hit by a brick or something and this amtrak train 188 hit by something on the windshield. nobody knows the answer to this

right now because the engineer says he doesn't remember. the question is, is it possible when the brick or whatever it was hit amtrak 188, did it so rattle the engineer that he lost situational awareness? he forgot he was supposed to start slowing down because the train at that point was speeding up? keep in mind, that engineer was only on that stretch of these tracks for three weeks. that's it. they had been having problem with rock throwers on this stretch of the track for more than 100 years. teddy roosevelt's train was hit by an iron plum in 1905. the federal railroad administration ordered emergency steps for amtrak to take. they have to put up more speed limit signs. believe it or not, there aren't that many. they have to add automatic train control, which is automatic braking. amtrak says it's doing all of the above. >> thanks very much. i'm joined by corey booker of new jersey. senator booker welcome back to

"meet the press." >> good to be here. thank you. >> i want to start with the isis raid then infrastructure, which i know you've been focused on with the amtrak derailment. what you have heard about the raid, do you feel, a, it's a success from what you understand about it now and, b, the overall campaign against isis is more successful than failure? >> certainly, this raid looks like it was a success. a lot of the information we pulled out could be very, very valuable. the computers and other data that was recovered that is now beingage analyzed. this is going to be a long effort. isis is a terrible threat in that region as well as american security. we are going to be involved in a many month, if not longer effort. we have seen some gains from the recruitment of foreign fighters going down and their territory. then we see things like this week, where we end up losing some ground. i'm encouraged by the progress, but we have more work to do to

eliminate the threat. >> let me move to the amtrak derailment. some house republicans have been criticizing democrats -- not you by name -- but other democrats for policeticizing the derailment. do you think that's a fair critique? >> it's a distraction. the united states of america is falling behind in terms of the quality of infrastructure. we have trillions of dollars of infrastructure debt right now. the accident we saw happen, which the ntsb says could have been prevented should we have had positive train control, we should not be skimping on public safety. what's more important to understand this, as china invests 9% of their gdp in infrastructure, japan 6%, europe 5% america is only doing 1.5%. by withholding this investment, in what america used to dominate the globe in, the number one

infrastructure globally now out of the top ten, now number 12 or 18. we are losing economic competitiveness. let's leave that argument aside conservative thing to do is invest whether it's a company in your physical plant, a homeowner and your roof. as a nation, we have fallen out of pace with where we were in previous years. in terms of overall investment. >> do you think it's a fair implication that the lack of infrastructure spending is to blame for this accident? >> i think it's costing us lives in america. it's costing every commuter, in my region especially. commuters are paying $1,000 a year, in terms of damage lost productivity. it's costing us economic growth. it's costing us jobs. the safety of our roads and bridges, we already know, unequivocally, months i have been working on this. our safety as a nation, air traffic, aviation

infrastructure, rail infrastructure, roads and bridges is inadequate. we should invest more. it's une kwifacceptable. to me it's what we should be working on. >> let me focus on amtrak. i want to put up a couple graphics to show why it is hard to get support for amtrak on capitol hill. ridership by congressional district. 2014. look at this. democratic districts versus republican districts in use of ridership on amtrak. then look at the 25 busiest amtrak stations in 2013. almost all of them concentrated on the two coasts, which, frankly, are very democratic, very blue and you are struggling over winning support. amtrak isn't thought of as a feasible part of transportation in the middle of the country, where there's much more republican representation.

is that a challenge for amtrak? >> in a political way, very likely. i'll tell you this, i'm a pro-growth guy. we know in the northeast corridor, 1/6 of the population wants economic growth. the fueling of gdp doesn't just go to republicans or democrats, it benefits this country as a whole. in my negotiations over the past few months on the senate side, we are seeing movement in the idea we must invest in this precious asset that creates so many jobs, so much economic dynamism. it's a political fight, yes. but, in fact, those folks who are fiscally conservative. any wall street investor, for every dollar you invest, you get $2 back in economic growth and activity. any investor will take that. if we are stewards of american dollars and caretakers of this great infrastructure we have inherited, we don't want to pass

it on to our children with an infrastructure dead. we want to make those investments and reap those dividends. >> when you were running for senate in 2013, you said this. you know how to be a disruptive force in washington. in washington, on day one, i'll be able to have an impact that a freshman senator usually won't have. a year later, dana millbank asked what is booker afraid of. this paradox has puzzled many since he arrived in the capital last year after a special election. how could he use his star power to do almost anything, yet acting like a conventional paw. are you being too conventional? >> i'm not paying attention to one columnist or critic. the reality is in the short time i have been in the senate, i have been able to join together in a bipartisan manner working on issues that may not be pap -- popular or capture the interest of columnists.

we have an incarceration problem. 5% of the population and now working with everybody from rand paul to ted cruz to mike lee, we have started forming bipartisan movement in this country to correct an injustice. i'm going to continue working on both sides of the aisle on pragmatic issues. fiscal conservatives can join me. from infrastructure investment to criminal justice reform to try to push our country forward. we are being devastated, in my opinion, by too much partisan talk and a failure to come together. and solve problems. >> easier to be disruptive as a mayor than senator? are you finding that out? >> i disagree. i think in both areas there's different types of work that are necessary. in washington, i'm not going to be necessarily doing the same kind of work, it's a different job. in washington, there is a huge space for which we can work together, find commonalities and move things forward. that's the kind of disruption we need. i'm happy to see those on both sides of the aisle more on more.

they're coming to that conclusion. >> optimistic there at the end. thanks for coming on "meet the press." >> thank you for having me. >> let me bring in the panel, how confident are you in the government's story line here? >> i think there's certainly a lot we don't know. the initial reporting in all these cases is very incomplete. there's a lot we don't know. for instance, one of the questions i was most fascinated by, because talking to military officials yesterday, when they said the guys were using women and children as human shields and they freed a yazidi slave. how did they differentiate thaems themselves from the women and children being used as human shields? that's something we don't know yet. what she tied up?

did she go running to them? there's so much we haven't found out. it's still, i think, a fairly significant -- a fairly significant operation. face it, wars -- a lot of wars are about the war of public opinion and propaganda. it looks good for the united states to say we sent in highly trained delta force commandos in there. they snatched one of these guys. they killed him, took his wife. the laptops they seized could yield a lot of intelligence. so, from a public relations angle, i think this is not a bad deal. >> do you think we could have done this without assad's acquiescence of some sort? >> oh, yeah. i don't think he has much control there at all. that's the first thing i would say. the second thing i agree with helene, you take down a key financial guy like abu sayyaf. that's good, you rattled them. we have penetrated them. >> we have real intel. it's a big deal. >> it'll require them to deploy

assets to protect that. but i'll tell you i can't tell you how many times i reported israel killed the number two man in hamas. i mean the number two. >> you never want to be number two. >> there's always another number two. the only way to defeat isis is on the ground, door-to-door, getting other sunni's to do that. in the same week, isis took a major urban area -- ramadi this is not a small town -- tells you what's going on on the ground. it is not a small town. that tells you what is going on on the ground. that is where the war will be decided. >> david, you believe your party should be trying to take political advantage? >> no. i agree with corey booker, the lack of investment and infrastructure has been scandalous, particularly in an era of low interest rates. the fact we haven't taken advantage of that is scandalous. i also think americans get fed up when they see -- i mean, before the bodies are removed from the crash, people are rushing to blame each other for

it. they are looking for our folks to find out what happened and address it. no, i don't think it was the right thing to do to leap in there and politicize it. >> at the same time, republicans are going to have to be more open. >> well, perhaps. democrats have been shameful this week on that. if amtrak was a corporation, you would fire the ceo and replace the board. reality is it loses money every year. the reason is because it fails to prioritize. there are needs in the northeast. you could argue along the west coast. much of amtrak, you know, is spread out throughout the country. there's nobody riding it. >> right. tom, if i'm talking infrastructure, it would be weird not to ask you a question. you spent a lot of time on this issue. should it be run as a full profit enterprise or the way every other transportation system is run, government subsidy? >> i'm for government subsidy if it's being spent wisely.

china, 2.5 million people a day on high speed rail. everyone who travels in and out of this country knows when you fly from hong kong to l.a.x. it's like going from the netson's to the flintstones. it can fit one narrow body. our infrastructure -- >> they do close the second elevator gate. >> it's a travesty. we should be discussing it without this tragedy. it should be a top priority. >> we'll pause there. we'll be back. we have more to discuss. coming up, my interview with republican presidential candidate, rand paul. first, we'll ask rand paul about this, why did jeb bush need five takes to answer the question he had to know was going to be coming. if you knew then what you know now, would you have invaded iraq? >> yeah, i don't know what that decision would have been.

that's a hypothetical. how much protein does your dog food have? 18%? 20? introducing nutrient-dense purina one true instinct with real salmon and tuna and 30% protein. support your active dog's whole body health with purina one. >>who... is this?! >>hi, i am heinz new mustard. hi na na na na >>she's just jealous because you have better taste. whatever. >>hey. keep your chin up. for years, heinz ketchup has been with the wrong mustard. well, not anymore. introducing heinz new better tasting yellow mustard. mmm!

♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] you wouldn't ignore signs of damage in your home. are you sure you're not ignoring them in your body? even if you're treating your crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis an occasional flare may be a sign of damaging inflammation. and if you ignore the signs, the more debilitating your symptoms could become. learn more about the role damaging inflammation may be playing in your symptoms with the expert advice tool at crohnsandcolitis.com. and then speak with your gastroenterologist.

as you know, a saturday doesn't go by without republican hopefuls gathering somewhere. yesterday, they gathered in des moines, iowa at the lincoln dinner. 11 hopeful republicans were there. again, they focused on foreign policy, not social issue. here is a sampling. >> if i'm president of the united states, and you are thinking about joining al qaeda or isil, anybody thinking about that?

i'm not going to call the judge, i'm going to call a drone and we will kill you. >> i got news for you, mr. president, we need a commander in chief that calls it what it is. radical islamic terrorism. it's a threat to us all. >> if you know me as george and barbara's boy, for what i'm proud, some of you may know that w. is my brother. i'm proud of that too. whether people like that or not, they have to get used to it. >> jeb bush acknowledging his rough week there. perhaps he has the most on the line. still trying to untangle as many answers on iraq. we'll have that story next. right now, verizon is offering unlimited talk and text. plus 10 gigs of shareable data. yeah, 10 gigantic gigs. for $80 a month. and $15 per line. more data than ever. for more of what you want. on the network that's #1 in speed, call, data, and reliability.

so you never have to settle. $80 a month. for 10 gigs. and $15 per line. stop by or visit us online. and save without settling. only on verizon. i've smoked a lot and quit a lot but ended up nowhere. now i use this. the nicoderm cq patch, with unique extended release technology helps prevent the urge to smoke all day. i want this time to be my last time. that's why i choose nicoderm cq.

welcome back. it's possible months from now after jeb bush officially announces his candidacy. lets us know he's outraised his competitors. we'll look back at this dreadful week for him and say, remember when we thought that was relevant? for now, it is relevant. he's answering a lot of questions about his inability to answer a simple one, were we right to invade in iraq. >> arriving for the second visit this year, jeb bush was trying to put a bruising week behind him. >> if you are looking for a perfect candidate, he probably existed 2,000 years ago. >> hoping to launch a campaign focused on the future, jeb bush

has been struck reminding voters he's a throwback to the past bundling an obvious question over four days. monday, answer one. >> on the subject of iraq, obviously controversial. knowing what we know now, would you have authorized the invasion? >> i would have. so would hillary clinton, just to remind everybody. so would everybody with the intelligence they got. >> he went on conservative radio to do clean up saying he misinterpreted the question. tuesday answer two. >> in 20/20 hindsight, you would have made a different decision. >> yeah, i don't know what that decision could have been. that's a hypothetical. >> that didn't work. the answers kept coming. >> going back in time and talking what would have or could have happened. of course, given the power of looking back and having that, of

course anybody would have made a different decision. there's no denying that. >> finally, the full retraction, thursday, with answer number five. >> we are all supposed to answer hypothetical questions, know what we know now, what would you have done? i would not have engaged or gone into iraq. >> bush has been slammed by conservatives. >> you can't think going into iraq now was the right thing to do. >> lampooned by late night. >> when people ask about iraq just be honest and say it's weird to talk about it because george is your bro. >> corrected by 2016 rivals eager to talk about the war. >> there's no way we would have gone to war with iraq. >> if we knew then what we know now and i was the president of the united states, i wouldn't have gone to war. >> his brother said in his own book he would have done something different. i don't know how that was a hard question. >> eager to remind voters of his

last name, and lug around george w. bush's unpopular iraq baggage. >> let's bring back the panel. sara fagen, you handle this first. the impression i got from this was that jeb bush was not prepped for this question and didn't think about it and there wasn't a conversation with the senior advisers. how you going to answer that question? >> i don't think that's the case at all. if you look at his answer, his final answer, he says exactly why this was a difficult question for him to answer. it was, when you are a commander in chief of the national guard in your state which he was at the height of the iraq war and made many many phone calls. it's hard to come back and say we should have done something differently. interestingly enough, mike huckabee had a similar answer. these other folks didn't deal with that. >> i get that. there is a difference. david, you must be having ptsd going back to '07 and '08.

watching jeb bush deal with this reminded me of hillary clinton dealing with her vote on iraq. here is a montage of that. >> you refused to say it was a mistake. why? >> obviously, it was wrong to believe this president. using coercive diplomacy was not an unreasonable act. this was not a vote for pre-emptive war. >> it is absolutely unfair to say that the vote, as chuck hagel, one of the architects of the resolution has said was a vote for war. it was a sincere vote based on my assessment at the time and what i believed he would do with the authority given. >> all of that in 2008. by 2014, six year's later, in her book, "hard choices" she finally says this. i thought i acted in good faith and made the best decision i could with the information i had. i wasn't alone in getting it

wrong. i got it wrong, plain and simple. what can jeb bush learn from hillary clinton's mistake? >> the thing i find bewildering is this was the most obvious question you could anticipate. i appreciate what you are saying. he certainly had a lot of time to think about what he wanted to say. he whiffed four times on a question he should have anticipated. as you pointed out we're eight months before anybody votes. 18 months before the general election. >> john mccain's candidacy was dead at this point. >> we shouldn't do what we always do in this town and make every day election day. there's something that pushes this forward, which is not what you would have done, but what you learned. he has paul and the cheerleaders and architects of the policy on his advisory should give people pause. that's something he should address. >> this elect is not going to be decided on iraq, it's going to be decided on the world the candidates would take over as president, which is syria, that is a mess.

isis on the rise and iran getting a nuclear weapon. >> hypotheticals matter. it tells something about judgment. >> all those things you mentioned are, you can argue direct results of the war in iraq. >> also they're direct results of president obama prematurely pulling out of iraq as well. >> tom, there's been debate here. what is the right question to be asking about iraq. you have other ideas. >> going forward, we decapitated iraq to a disastrous effect. we did libya, also. to disastrous effect. the syrian people decapitated their own government and the yemeni people decapitated their government. they have been governed by top down authority. the problem for the next president is going to be the fact that we are in a post imperial era. no one wants to go in control of it. we are in a post colonial period and a post athor tear yan era.

unless they learn how to live together, this region is going to be a human development disaster area for the next president. >> what is the right question for the next president? >> basically, i mean you heard lindsey graham say i'm going to drone them. good luck with that. frankly, i think we are at the cusp of an incredibly new problem. post imperial, post colonial. post authoritarian. i haven't heard anybody who's got an answer for that one. >> can't buy diplomacy anymore. >> the thing we should think about iraq, why didn't people ask the question what next. if you remove saddam, barack obama said before the war, we are going to release sectarian strife. you have to think beyond the next step. what lessons have we learned? >> and with libya, i'm going to pause it there.

this question is coming up in my interview with republican rand paul. he has thought on jeb bush but also on libya iraq and on this question. first, i want to tell you a surprising statistic this week. the fastest growing religious affiliation in this country is no religious affiliation at all. why that should make one political party very nervous.

♪ ♪ the beautiful sound of customers

making the most of their united flight. power, wi-fi and streaming entertainment. that's... seize the journey friendly. nerd screen time. this week, it's about church and politics. hard to separate them these days. the rapid rise in increase in the number of americans who say they aren't religious at all. this could be good news for democrats. the number of americans not affiliated with religion rose seven points from 2007 to 2014. essentially, in the age of obama. these are self-described atheists and agnostics. those who have no firm affiliation at all the

religious nones. they now make up a quarter of the population. that's about equal to the catholic population in this country. at the same time, the number of americans who identify with major religious, catholics evan evangelicals, they have declined. the religious none category is second in self-identification after evangelicals. seven years ago, they ranked at the bottom of this list. why is this good news for democrats? the religious nones are young and ied logicallydge idealogically liberal. median age of those affiliated with religion is rising, getting older, 50. nonaffiliated 36 and prosperous. in 2012, the religious none voted overwhelmingly for president obama. another demographic change that is favoring the democrats. the country gets less religious, bad news for the republicans. let's talk about the nonwhites helping the democrats.

here is another one. these religious nones. coming up, my interview with republican presidential candidate, rand paul. see ya in a minute. so was the 100% electric e-golf. and the 45 highway mpg tdi clean diesel. and last but not least the high performance gti. looks like we're gonna need a bigger podium. the volkswagen golf family. motor trend's 2015 "cars" of the year. congratulations. you're down with crestor. yes! when diet and exercise aren't enough, adding crestor lowers bad cholesterol up to 55%. crestor is not for people with liver disease or women who are nursing, pregnant, or may become pregnant. tell your doctor all medicines you take. call your doctor if you have muscle pain or weakness, feel unusually tired have loss of appetite, upper belly pain, dark urine or yellowing of skin or eyes. these could be signs of serious side effects.

i'm down with crestor! make your move. ask your doctor about crestor.

welcome back. welcome back. moments ago, we talked about jeb bush's challenging week. joining me now is a chief rival, senator rand paul of kentucky, who has a brand-new book coming out, "taking a stand moving beyond partisan politics to unite america."

it'll be released in over a week. we got a first look on it. we will talk to the senator about it. welcome back to "meet the press." >> thanks, chuck. thanks for having me. >> let me start with the issue that got brought up by -- with governor bush, the war on iraq. are you satisfied after his answer on this, saying he wouldn't have gone to the war in iraq knowing what we know now? are you satisfied he would not be going back to bush politics. >> i think it's an important question and i don't think it's an historical anecdote or a hypothetical question. i think it's a recurring question in the middle east. is it a good idea to topple secular dictators, and what happens when we do? when hussein was toppled we got chaos and still have it in iraq.

it emboldened iran. we have the rise of radical islam as well. the same ought to be asked of hillary clinton, if she ever takes questions. they should ask her, was it a good idea to invade libya? did it allow radical islam and isis to grow stronger? the war in iraq is a good question and a current question, but so is the question of should we have gone into libya. >> senator marco rubio asked the same question about iraq gave this answer. presidents don't have the benefit of hindsight and the fact of the matter is the world is a better place because saddam hussein is not around. you're sort of implying that you disagree with that. do you believe the world would be better if saddam hussein was the strong man in iraq? >> that's not how i put it. i would say that i think we are more at risk for attack from people who are training organizing and fighting in iraq

than we were before. for example, isis is more of an aberration than hussein was. so you have this radical brand of jihad, a radical brand of islam that is strong and growing stronger because of the failed state that iraq is. the same thing going on in libya. this is a valid debate. we have to have this debate not only in the republican primary, but the general as to whether or not it's a good idea. is intervention always a good idea or does it lead to unintended consequences? >> you laid out in your book your foreign policy, a peace through strength foreign policy. saying, you know what? intervention, making a strong case against intervention that intervention over the years is only served to create more problems than it was designed to stop. i guess, let me ask you this, would you consider going after a country that was trying to put together a nuclear weapons program?

that was the reason to go into iraq as far as george w. bush was concerned. that's a reason we might have to have that military option on the table with iran. is that a viable reason to go to war, to stop another country from starting a nuclear weapons program? >> we have to have the threat of military force behind diplomacy. i prefer diplomacy. i think we can still have negotiations. we negotiated with the soviets for 70 years. we ended upcoming to a peaceful outcome. i think with iran, we need to be steady and firm that they cannot have a nuclear weapons program. there has to be the threat of military force. my hope is that negotiations continue. some in my party say i don't want negotiations, they are ready to be done with it. once you are done with negotiations, the choice is war or they get a weapon. i don't want those two choices. >> you imply in your book, a

fascinating quote, connecting libya and iraq. the problem is we've already sent the wrong message. the last time a leader gave up his desire for weapons of mass destruction, we bombed his country and took him out. you are referring to gadhafi. you are saying the iranians shouldn't trust the united states in these negotiations, are you not? >> i think it's a criticism of hillary clinton. she should have thought through the repercussions of the invasion and toppling of gadhafi. hillary clinton made the decision to do this with president obama's consent. what you have is now it does send a signal to iran, and it makes them question whether or not we will honestly be a good broker, or a good negotiator, with eliminating of nuclear weapons. gadhafi did give up his nuclear ambition and was toppled anyway. it's an argument for not doing what we did in libya.

>> let me move to the patriot act. we have reauthorizations coming up before june 1st. it's unclear if it will get authorized at all before the memorial day reset. senator mcconnell talking about a two-month extension. you want to filibuster any patriot act extension. would you support a two-month extension? >> the court ruled that the bulk collection of all of our phone records, all of the time is illegal. really, it ought to stop. if the president is obeying the law, he should stop immediately. we shouldn't be doing this. i don't want to replace it with another system. i think we could get along with the constitution just fine. we did for over 200 years. you can catch terrorists. judges will grant warrants. if you look at the history of our country, judges are very much, it's not a difficult lift to get a warrant for most activities you want to investigate. the warrant should have someone's name on it. it shouldn't say verizon and

collect all the customers. that's a general warrant. that's one of the things we fought the revolutionary war over. we want an individualized warrant. >> you are so critical of the nsa in your book. i have to ask, would you eliminate it if you were president? >> no, i would keep them before -- i'd have them target more and more towards our enemies. if you are not spending so much time on innocent americans, maybe could have have known one of the tsarnaev boys went back to chechnya. we didn't know that, even though we had been tipped off by the russians. we interviewed him and still didn't know that. same with the resent jihadist from phoenix that traveled to texas and the shooting in garland. we knew him. we investigated him and put him in jail. i want to spend more time on people we have suspicion of and probable cause on instead of innocent americans.

it distracts us from the job of getting terrorists. >> one last question here. the idea that is in your book, perhaps the most intriguing idea i found reading your book. you say, if you find the best teachers on a subject, perhaps in the country, the idea is we shouldn't have smaller classrooms. we should have a classroom of one million students meaning the best calculus teacher ought to teach to anybody who wants to learn in america. the teacher on the ground implements the curriculum. it's an intriguing idea, but two pages later, you say there shouldn't be a national curriculum. how is that not in contradiction of common core and naturalized teaching like you described? >> what i'm talking about is something truly extraordinary. one of the big leaps forward for america is when everybody was open for education. there's still some people in america, particularly other countries trapped in poverty and don't have access.

when the internet expands this access and someone in the recesses of the jungle can learn from the best calculus teacher on the planet, we are going to discover genius that allows progress and mankind to improve. i think it's going to be a huge leap for technological progress. it's by having larger classrooms that's counterintuitive. they will be virtual classrooms and extraordinarily cheap. i'm not saying it comes from government. it comes from the innovators you meet in silicon valley or the innovators you meet in austin, texas. i think that's where it comes from, not the government. >> not local control. >> i'm not advocating against something that is transmitted worldwide or international. i'm not arguing against any kind of national communication or national testing. i took national tests when i was a kid. i'm arguing against centralized

control in the body of one government. i'm arguing for something where someone in madagascar who is a genius in the street living in poverty and we never discover that genius is going to be connected to someone at harvard or m.i.t. or a great university and they are going to have that knowledge and awaken something in their mind that we haven't seen before. that's the beauty of the internet. we aren't quite there yet. people misconstrued that intelligence is going to come from smartphones. it's going to come from connecting intelligent people to intelligent people. great teachers to the masses. there's extraordinary possibility for progress. >> i have to leave it there. a lot more in your book, including your tax plan. other things in there. hopefully i'll get you on again, and we'll go through that. stay safe on the trail, sir. >> thank you, chuck. coming up in the end game segment, the clinton who is doing the most talking to the media. here is a hint, it's not

hillary. here is a hint, it's not hillary. if you have play dates at your house. be ready to clean up the mess. the kids have fun, but it's pretty gross. (doorbell) what's that? it's a swiffer wetjet. i can just grab this and just go right to the mess. that comes from my floor? now that's disgusting. i want friends over! you want friends over? >>who... is this?! >>hi, i am heinz new mustard. hi na na na na >>she's just jealous because you have better taste. whatever. >>hey. keep your chin up. for years, heinz ketchup has been with the wrong mustard. well, not anymore.

introducing heinz new better tasting yellow mustard. mmm! right now, verizon is offering unlimited talk and text. plus 10 gigs of shareable data. yeah, 10 gigantic gigs. for $80 a month. and $15 per line. more data than ever. for more of what you want. on the network that's #1 in speed, call, data, and reliability. so you never have to settle. $80 a month. for 10 gigs. and $15 per line. stop by or visit us online. and save without settling. only on verizon.

bring us your aching... and sleep deprived. bring us those who want to feel well rested and ready to enjoy the morning ahead. aleve pm. the first to combine a sleep aid... plus the 12 hour pain relieving strength of aleve. for pain relief that can last until the am. so you... you... and you, can be a morning person again. aleve pm, for a better am. the panel is here. you got a hint of the graphic here. i'm starting with a retort that's familiar with republicans.

when is hillary clinton going to answer questions from the media. we did our own math. what's amazing, since hillary clinton became an official candidate for president, there has been a clinton that has taken quite a few questions on camera. bill clinton has taken 39 questions on camera, that includes includes letterman, our interview and a cnn interview. hillary clinton is up to nine. >> part of that is because a lot of the questions were about the clinton foundation. they made a decision to let him handle those. look, she has to get out there and answer questions. she has to do it routinely so it's not a major news event. >> it makes a press conference irrelevant. >> she has to get into the rhythm of a campaign where she's out there, she's answering questions, making speeches. it would be a terrible mistake to not do that. >> it does make bill clinton, right now, the face of the

clinton campaign, in an odd way. he hasn't been helpful. >> he hasn't been helpful at all. he's fed this notion, youinauthentic. >> i'm sorry, sara, go ahead. >> you talk about, oh, we have to pay our bills, we have a different standard, it's unfair. you guys marched into the white house on charge you can believe in because you knew she was dishonest. it's the same problem she has today. >> we learned in 2008, bill clinton, a brilliant politician is not necessarily a brilliant politician when his wife is involved in the campaign. maybe it's better to keep him in the background. >> tom friedman, do you think this matters? over the last year 104 speeches the two clintons gave. they made over $25 million for these speeches. it seems as if, you know, do you

have to do all of that? it's paid speech. it's all -- she wants to talk about income inequality. do you think that's going to lead to a tone deafness? >> i don't know, chuck. money and politics is big. i don't know how long that lasts. i go back to what david and sara said. it's going to last a long time if she doesn't come out and talk about her real vision she has for the country. i covered one campaign, bill clinton's. i knew why he was running from the beginning. he was a conservative democrat. he had a take on the world. everything was connected to that. what hobbled hillary last time is the same this time. what is your take on the world? what do you believe? how is this connected to that? until she fills that void money, everything else is going to jump in there. >> helene, you are not a political reporter. you covered her as the national security leader. do you feel you got a sense of what her vision is for the world? >> i don't think i have a good of sense as i could have.

i'm perplexed. she's been through this before. the weird thing is i see her making a lot of the same mistakes as 2008. i find that perplexing. we have seen a lot of hillary clinton on the defensive, not on the front foot going forward. i'm very perplexed why we are not seeing that. she should be coming out more in particular so it's not as big. as big of a news event. >> hypothetical for her, if you were secretary of state and negotiated a transpacific trade agreement, would you support the trade deal and nuclear deal? >> it seems as if -- >> encouraging her -- >> tentative on that. >> rand paul had the right question, knowing what you know now, would you have gone into libya? >> the old basketball manager said, no risk baseball is second

division baseball. >> let me tell you about risk. this is a guy taking risk after he ran. mitt romney. any 68-year-old man who takes his shirt off in public is running a risk. look at mitt romney boxing evander holyfield on friday night. by the way, wait until you see this. >> it's been enhanced. >> you think? we should all -- look evander is a professional athlete. look at romney. he's 68 years old, not 48, not 58, david. >> i know. >> would you take your shift off and box? >> appearing in public without your shirt at our age, that's frightening. >> i think he looks great. i think he's sucking his gut in but he looks great. >> i would have, too. >> what a tough audience. >> he's had one of the best posts of any candidate who failed. >> amazing. >> he's done well. >> always good in hindsight. that's all for today. we'll be back in two weeks. enjoy your memorial day weekend. if it's sunday, it's "meet the press."

is that kid okay? >> who wouldn't want to believe you could walk on water? it's sort of goofy and it's sort of silly but what's that makes it funny. >> and their bags full of tricks. >> by the end of it, it was like pulling my hair out. i started having nightmares about the machine. >> how do they do it? >> a good magician doesn't give away his tricks. >> but we do.