practice, but our adherence to a common creed. a belief that all people are created equal. a belief in free speech and freedom of assembly and democracy and pluralism and tolerance and rule of law. and we have observed those ideals imperfectly at times. but in each successive generation, we've got a little bit better at it. we've come closer to our ideals. and the notion that somehow we'd stop now on what has been a tradition of attracting talent and strivers and dreamers from all over the world, that would rob us of the thing that is most special about america.

and i don't think it will happen. now people are genuinely concerned about immigration that is not orderly. people pouring across borders without having gone through some sort of process, it adds to people's sense that things are out of control. and that's why we've invested in securing our borders, and we've made unprecedented investments. it's part of the reason why illegal immigration to the united states is actually at its lowest level since the 1970s. it's why we so value the cooperation we've obtained from the mexican government in making sure our borders work to facilitate legal trade and legal immigration and commerce, but

discourage discourages illegal immigration. it's why i'm pushing very hard and will continue to push until i leave this office and expect the next president to push for a comprehensive immigration reform plan that can fix those aspects of the system that are broken so we remain a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants. and that's ultimately, i think, where people in the united states will land. we've had times throughout our history where anti-immigration sentiment is exploitsed by demagogues. it was directed at the irish. it was directed at poles and italians and you can go back and read what was said about those groups and it's identical to what they're saying about mexicans or guatemalans or muslims or asians. same stuff.

they're different. they're not going to fit. they won't assimilate. they bring crime. same arguments. you go back to the 1800s. the language is identical. but guess what? they kept coming, and they kept coming because america offer ed possibility for their children and grandchildren and even if they were initially discriminated against, they understood that our system will, over time, allow them to become part of this one american family. and so we should take some of this rhetoric seriously and answer it boldly and clearly, but you shouldn't think that that is representative of how the american people think.

>> now our third question from the united states, reporter roberto rampton from reuters. >> i should point out that roberta is also secretly from canada. >> not so secretly. >> so canadians are now getting an extra question. >> thank you, mr. president. given how the brexit vote shook the stability of the global economy, do you feel that you need to do more to calm the markets quickly and perhaps encourage a quick exit rather than something that's long and drawn out? do you still feel the uk should be at the back of the queue for a trade deal with the united states? are you going to make a full-throated pitch for the tpp, for your prescription when on the campaign trail stumping for secretary clinton? prime minister trudeau, both -- i mean, you seem to be quite careful when you talk about mr.

trump. renegotiating nafta or tearing it up would be such a disaster for canada. why not come out and say that forcefully? and president pinieto. i'm wondering if you still stand by that and how worried are you that this time next year there will be a wall up on your border? >> okay. excellent questions, roberta. canadians are a little more subtle. i'm actually going to help out my friends a little bit on your last question even though it wasn't directed at me and just say, when i visit other countries, it's not my job to comment on candidates in the middle of a race just because they may end up winning. and the relationship between governments tend to transcend

whoever is in power at any given time. so it's a tough question. i'm not saying they shouldn't answer it. i'm helping him out a little bit. because there's no doubt when i visit countries there's times i've got preferences, but i rarely express them. with respect to brexit, first of all, i think seen the markets settle down a little bit over the last couple of days. i didn't follow the markets today. but we're monitoring very carefully whether there's any systemic strains on the system, and so far what you've seen is reactions in the market, stock prices, currencies, but i think the preparations done by central banks and finance ministers, our treasury secretary indicate the degree to which the global economy in the short run will

hold steady. i think there are some genuine longer term concerns about global growth if, in fact, brexit goes through and that freezes the possibilities of investment in great britain or in europe as a whole at a time when global growth rates were weak already, this doesn't help. when we attend the g20 summit in china later this year, one of the major topics, which is something i've continually advocated for during the 7 1/2 years i've been president is we all have to look at what we can do to boost global demand. whether it's the united states adopting a more robust budget for infrastructure improvements

and fixing water systems in flint, michigan, or repairing airports that are not as efficient as they should be, or rebuilding our power grid so that it can take advantage of clean energy. whether it's germany, a country with a surplus doing more in terms of spending or europe as a whole lifting some of the austerity constraints placed on them, whether it's china shifting to more consumer based as opposed to trying to export its way out of problems. there are going to be a whole host of measures that all of us can take to fortify the global economy. and that should be a top priority of ours. with respect to the actual brexit negotiations, my main message to david cameron, angela merkel and others is everybody

should catch their breath, come up with a plan and a process that is orderly, that's transparent, that people understa understand, and then proceed understanding that both sides have a stake in getting this right. and i think that will be a difficult, challenging process, but it does not need to be a panicky process. i think it can be a steady, sensible process. obviously, leadership issues in great britain will need to be resolved for it to move as crisply and as effectively as it needs to. but that, i think, is recognized, and that should happen fairly quickly. and i know that speaking with

chancellor merkel that her interest is not in retribution. her interest is in making sure that the process works. and i have a lot of confidence in people being able to do that. and we will help in any way that we can to facilitate that. and the last part of your question is with respect to the uk and any trade agreement with the united states. frankly, we will be the least of their problems right now because their first order of business is going to be to address the market where they sell half their goods which is europe. and these things are not easily negotiated, particularly because we've been spending our time trying to negotiate with the european union and so to suddenly go off on another track will be challenging. but i think their first and

primary concern is going to be to try to figure out how they interact with the european union and european market, if -- and when in fact they leave. i have emphasized throughout, though, that the special relationship that we have with great britain does not change. the ties of affection and family and language and institutions and culture and the business relationships that exist, those are so deep and so long lasting. the cooperation we have on security issues and on global challenges, those are so fundamental that our relationship with the uk fundamentally doesn't change. we are concerned that their absence from the european union

and potential disruptions within europe make it harder for us to solve some of the other challenges that have to be solved. >> one of the things that's easy to forget amid the inflated rhetoric of an election campaign is that the relationship between our three countries goes far deeper than any individual leaders. and if the three of us get along, it's not just because we're aligned in many different values and priorities. it is very much because we serve citizens who are they themselves tremendously aligned in terms of priorities, in terms of hopes and dreams, in terms of desire for success and ways to reach it. so when you look at the level of integration, of our supply

chains, of our markets, of the flow back and forward across borders of goods, of people, and the tremendous benefits that have come from proximity and strong relationships to individual citizens across this continent, it's essential that we understand that regardless of electoral rhetoric, canada, the united states and mexico will continue to have tremendously close relationships, economically, culturally, familialy and historically toward the future. as i've said many times and i'll say again, i look forward to working with whomever the american people choose to elect as their president in november.

i know that we will always be able to find shared priorities and challenges we want to work together to overcome. and i know that our commitment to doing what's right and what's best for our citizens will lead us to much more alignment than differentiation. >> roberta, i'll go straight to the point to describe the stand of my administration and my own very personal point of view. i've said it, and i'll say again. my government will respectfully, the domestic electoral process in the united states. i don't think i've said anything different from what i'm stating once again here. what i have said is that today, and i did not make reference to

a specific place, my words reinforce what i believe. i believe that in this global scenario, and i'll use president obama's words, and as he said, he gave us a hand to address this question. we are facing a global reality. we have a populist world, an interconnected world with its own challenges. what i have said is that in the world we're living, in different places we have political leaders, political stakeholders that use demagoguery and have a populistic slogan that want to eliminate and destroy what's taken decades to build to come back to problems of the past.

and, yes, it is true, all the benefits have not reached society as a whole but those leaderships, those political actors by using populism and demagoguery, they choose the easiest way to solve the challenges of today's world. and things are not as simplistic. it's not as easy as that to lead a country to take on a responsibility to rule a country. it goes beyond giving the easiest answer. it is complex, and it is difficult to lead a country. and i just said it. what we have reached so far, the level of development, the level of well-being that we have in the world, without a doubt, makes contrast with what the

situation that will leave 30 years back. never before, a global society, or the societies at least of our three countries have lived the level of development and world being that we enjoy today. never before have our countries had a high life expectancy as we have today. never before have we had the opportunity to have access to the knowledge of the world as fast and as easy as we do today. never before were in such a level of connection between society and the possibility of having access to any product from any corner of the world as we do today. and that was built throughout the years by using the model based on openness, free trade, trade agreements, and the

biggest challenge today is to make sure those benefits reach out to every single citizen but the solution proposed by some is not by destroying what we have been built. it is not taking a different route to choose the road towards isolationism and destruction. what we need to do is to keep up the pace towards development. and when i said that, i mentioned that most of what some people say it is very similar that in the past, and president obama said it even years back, in the past, some leaders address their societies in those terms. hitler and mussolini did that. and the outcome, it's clear to everyone. it resulted in devastation. and it turned out to be a tragedy for mankind. and we saw it last century. that was my message when i made

reference to this event. my message was about to value what we have and also to be aware of the road that we need to walk still but that's the benefit that we're looking forward to. take the benefits to our societies. >> last question. >> translator: mr. trudeau, with the goals that you have said are ambitious for clean energy, does this mean the u.s. will import more hydroelectricity? >> with this agreement to produce more clean energy does it mean the united states will have to import more hydroelectricity from canada? >> certainly the agreement that we've concluded today values our shift towards cleaner, renewable energy.

canada has a tremendous amount of energy that comes from clean sources right now, and we're always looking to create more. >> good afternoon. you're watching msnbc live. the so-called three amigos. president obama holding a joint press conference with the prime minister of canada, justin trudeau and the president of mexico, pena nieto. they reaffirmed their commitment to working together. extending their condolences to the people of turkey and touting some of the work done at this conference. particularly on tpp, the trade deal which donald trump has vowed to break up. all three leaders peppered with questions about donald trump and his policies. you heard from obama strongly rebuking some of the protectionist policies that donald trump has been touting, saying that globalization has already happened. if the u.s. doesn't get engaged, china will write the rules.

also rebuking some of the controversial comments trump has made about various minorities saying that type of rhetoric has existed since the 1800s. with that, we want to transition to donald trump who is speaking at a raucous rally in bangor, maine. and we understand there have been some protesters who have already been escorted out. let's take a listen to donald trump. >> we had a protest. ten vets were outside. i'm giving 100,000 here, 200,000 here, 250, one got a million. one got 75. one got 50. one got 25,000 to all these groups. i said wait a minute. there's vets outside that are protesting. the money went $5.6 million, i think. the money went to the vets, right? i gave a million-dollar check. it goes to the vets, but there were people outside protesting. and there were vets. and they went out and found out they were sent by hillary clinton. that one i couldn't understand. no, no, think about it.

you're give away almost $6 million. money like these groups haven't ever seen before. great groups. great people. i hope. we try and vet the vets. you have to be careful. and who knows. i think, great. but i think great people. and some of them are great. we know that for a fact. and yet people outside that were sent by the opponent. why would anybody do that? it's dirty stuff. so i went to scotland. and it was right after the vote, which, by the way, i hate to say, but they asked me what do you think? i said i think it's going to pass. i think they'll seek independence. i think they're going to seek independence. and it doesn't affect me much, i don't think, but i think they're going to seek it, and that's it and hillary and obama called it totally wrong. and he said if it happens, we're going to put them to the back of the line. that's a hell of a statement. i think they might have lost because of that statement, if you want the truth. so what happened is i go there and it's like nine hours after

the vote and now they know. so we have all this press. we had so many press, it looked like the academy awards. and we're standing on this beautiful tee in turnberry with the ocean and the lighthouse in the background. i said i'm here to support my son n i'm going to go right back. i was going to spend one night in scotland. and i said specifically, i will not put a golf club in my hand. i said, nope, nope, i'm in he middle of a campaign. i don't want that picture. this is a so true story. you know what i'm talking about, paul. so i say, no way. they were trying to get me to hit the first ball. i don't want to hit anything. i'm here to support eric trump who did a plus ten job. he was great. okay. i'm here -- i'm here to support my son, and he did a great job. by the way, ahead of schedule and under budget. is that great? can we use, with our

infrastructure that we have to rebuild in our country, could we use those words? ahead of schedule and under budget? wouldn't that be nice? and i own 100% of it and i don't have a mortgage on the property. wouldn't that be nice? no mortgage. no nothing. i'm standing there with all these reporters. one of them says to me about the pound. what would happen if the pound goes down. so the question if the pound goes down, i'll do well because more people are going to go to scotland. here's the headline. "donald trump grandstands about the pound." the guy asked me a question about the pound. what would happen to this place if the pound goes down. the beauty of all, i didn't want to play. so the next day, crooked hillary clinton does the commercial. i think she put about the pound but they don't put questions. they just put answers. so i didn't like that.

but they show me hitting a shot. i said they have me playing and all the reporters said i played golf. i didn't play. i swear, i didn't play. so they have me hitting a shot. and you know what it was? they took the footage from one year ago, a year and a half ago at a different place and put it into a commercial that donald trump went to play golf in the middle of this thing. so i sent it to the press. not one press report. they have a commercial out now where i'm talking about the pound and hitting a golf ball. although the swing didn't look terrible, i must tell you. if i was going to do that, at least i would have put a bad swing in, not a good swing in. they have me hitting a ball at a difference location. the whole thing is so crazy. here's what it is. it's totally dishonest. it's not a big deal. i don't think anybody cares. i'll give you the good news. i get a call -- they take a

commercial and put turnberry in it. i get a call from the head of turnberry. sir, did you take an ad? i said, no. he said we're inundated with phone calls of people that want to come to turnberry. so hillary, thank you. it's a free ad. so -- but i watched her yesterday and she was saying, and they talked about the trump phenomena. bill o'reilly and i'm on his show tonight. watch his show. watch his show. i just watched it. i said i've got to go. i've got these people waiting. you never keep a person from maine waiting. the governor told me that. right, governor? never. you never keep a person waiting from maine. but i'm on bill o'reilly. but i saw tonight and saw the last few days, people are talking more than ever about this phenomena that's been

created. and it's really an amazing thing. even pundits that truly, truly hate me they're saying it's a movement like i've never seen in this country before. it's bigger than bernie sanders. it's big thaern bernie sanders. and yet -- and yet, bernie, i have to say one thing about bernie. he'll be nasty and say i'd never vote for trump, but that's okay. i know what he thinks inside. he hates her. he hates her. he cannot stand her. bernie sanders cannot stand hillary clinton. but i'll tell you something. you wouldn't think this. you wouldn't think this. but there is one thing that bernie sanders and i are in complete accord with. and that's trade. he said we're being ripped off. i say we're being ripped off. i've been saying it for years. he's been saying it for years. i am saying it even louder because i've been really saying i understand how bad it is

because i have travelled to more places where we have factories that prior to nafta were booming. and bill clinton signed nafta. remember that. that was his baby. he signed nafta. nobody else signed it. bill clinton signed it, and they drained businesses out of maine, out of all of new england, out of new york. you have to see new york state. it's a ghost town. what's happened because of nafta. we've lost our jobs. we've lost our manufacturing. i have people that do statistics for me and they come up to me and i'll take a place. i'm not going to say maine because the governor is here and i'll not talk badly, although you did lose a plant yesterday but it wasn't your fault. i understand why. i mean they put you in an impossible position. but it's at a federal level where we make it so easy for countries to come in and steal our companies. to steal our jobs and to steal

our money. we owe $19 trillion, soon going to be $21 trillion and we've got to get smart. we've got to get tough. we've got to get tough with terrorism, with jobs. we've got to be so vigilant. we've got to be so careful, so strong. and -- >> trump! trump! trump! >> thank you. and you know, today, i was just reading where the united states chamber of commerce is upset with me. they usually go the republican way. they're upset with my statements on trade. and i said let me ask you a question. why? why would you be upset? i'm all for free trade. the problem with free trade is you need smart people making deals. we don't have good deals. free trade is killing us.

somebody asked me, one of the moderators. how do you describe your view, mr. trump, on trade? by the way, i know every form of trade. there's hundreds of names. so i never really thought this way but now i'm doing it and we are doing so well together. by the way, am i doing a good job? letting the word out. we started with 17. and all of these people were professionals. and they had 218 years of experience. and when they did this stat, i had ten months. so they said trump has ten months of experience. they have 218 years of experience. that's like if you add up on their political years together. and here we are. here we are. not only that, most importantly, in the history of the republican party, more than ronald reagan,

richard nixon, more than dwight d. eisenhower. he did win the second world war, in all fairness. we have more votes than anybody in the history of the republican party. think of it. think of it. and we won 37 states. so you go down the line and you look at what we've accomplished togeth together. and i said to myself, why would the u.s. chamber of commerce criticize what i'm saying. here's what i'm saying. very simple. i'm all for free trade. it's fine. but i want carl icahn negotiating for me. i want the greatest businesspeople negotiating my deals, not hacks. but i'm all for free trade. the u.s. chamber of commerce is controlled by the special interest groups. there's special interest that want the deals they want to have. they want to have tpp,

trans-pacific partnership. one of the worst deals. it will be the worst deal since nafta. no it will be the worst deal -- it will drain the rest of your businesses out of maine. it will be the worst deal since nafta. and i said to myself, and i talked about it. i gave a speech in pittsburgh, in pennsylvania yesterday, and it was very well received. then you had the tragedy in turkey and that was the end of that speech, which was fine. that's the way it's supposed to be because that tragedy is a disgrace. we can allow that to continue to go on whether it's turkey or anywhere else. that's a disgrace. i said to myself, why would anybody be against what i'm saying. here's what i'm saying. we have to make great deals for our country. and i said to the announcer who asked me this question, to the reporte repo reporter, what's your definition of free trade? well, i'll tell you what i really want. very simple. i want to make great deals for our public. i want to make great deals for the united states. >> yes, but you want free trade? fair trade? what's your definition?

>> i want great deals. i don't care if they are free, fair, good? i don't care if they are horrendous. i just want great deals. i'll do it all different ways. i didn't understand. but it has to be free. the conservative way. remember when jeb would say he is not a conservative. i said who cares. by the way, i am a conservative. i'm more conservative than they are in many ways. to be a conservative you have to want free trade. but if this country is being drained of its jobs and money because we have stupid people making bad deals, and in some cases smart people who are basically corrupt making bad deals for us, doesn't matter. same thing. then what i want to do is correct that situation i spent $55 million in the primaries of my own money.

now i'm raising money for the republican party. and we've raised a lot of money. wait until you see the numbers start to come out. they said donald trump's numbers -- i don't why i need so much money. i go around, make speeches. i don't even need commercials. why do i need these commercials? don't forget when i ran in the primaries, when i was in the primaries, everyone said you can't do that in new hampshire. you have to go and meet little groups. you have to -- because i did these big rallies with 3,000, 4,000, people would come into high schools. we didn't have any great arenas there. we had high schools or big auditoriums and we'd pack the places. and they said, wait a minute. trump can never make it because that's not the way you deal with new hampshire. you have to go into people's living rooms, have dinner, have tea, have a good time. i think if they ever saw me in

their living room, they'd lose total respect. i've got trump in my living room. this is weird. and we would pack the arein as. we'd pack the places and everybody said you can't win because you can't win in new hampshire that way. and i won by a landslide and spent very little money. then they said he can't spent money on commercials. same thing i'm hearing now. i haven't spent, i don't think, $1 on a commercial. so the quinnipiac poll just came out. we're essentially tied. crooked hillary -- crooked hillary has spent on commercials, some people say more than $100 million. i've also heard $68 million on negative commercials. really negative commercials. now in the old days if somebody -- oh, the other thing. she has 900 people. i have 73. no, i actually have more, i must

tell you. she's got 900. i have 73. she spent $100 million or something. i have friends calling me from other states. man, the air waves are blanketed with negative ads. we don't believe them. she spent over $100 million in some form on negative stuff. i spent nothing. here's the thing. in the old days, if i spent less and had fewer people and was leading or tied they'd say he's a genius. now they say, hillary clinton has more people, has spent more money and they are essentially tied. that's not good. i'm not going to knock them because it's useless to knock them. these people signed the pledge. they all wanted me to sign the pledge. i signed the pledge and they did, too. they don't honor the pledge. amazing what can happen when you lose. no, i have people in all fairness, whether they like me

or not. and it was a rough campaign, and i wasn't nice. but they weren't nice either. jeb spent $15 million, $18 million on negative ads. am i supposed to say i like him? but they signed a pledge. there were -- there were people that honored it that would have loved not to honor it. we got great backing. ben carson. we have a great relationship. n chris christie. rick santorum just signed on. we have great people. we have great people. we have amazing people and endorsements. but when you sign a pledge, this isn't, am i changing my mind? this is like legally binding, you want to know the truth. i don't care. i don't think it matters. i don't think i'll get two more votes. but you sign a pledge and you're

supposed to honor the pledge. i have guys out there, and they are really sore losers. it was a rough campaign. they say it was the roughest campaign ever. might be superseded by this, but we'll see. they say it was the roughest campaign ever in the history of republican politics and maybe in politics. i've heard a lot of the so-called walking heads they call them walking heads or talking heads. usually they're walking heads to me because there's nothing up there with most of these guys. and it was rough. but what you do is you go to sleep for a couple of days and wake up n say, i honor the pledge. i would have honored it. there are people i don't like n people i love on that stage. there's people i don't particularly like or respect. i wouldn't have gone crazy, let's yell it from the loudest building, but i would have honored the pledge. but we have people that have not honored the pledge.

and that's a terrible thing. i don't care who you are, what your position. you can say what you want. they all signed so that i'd sign because i was the one that was negotiating a little bit. i'll always negotiate for you people. i love to negotiate. just remember this. they signed a pledge saying they will abide, saying they will back the candidate of the party. and now they sit back and the pledge is out there and the press doesn't even go after him on that. they broke their word, in my opinion. they should never be allowed to run for public office again because what they did is disgraceful. so i said when i saw the u.s. chamber of commerce again controlled totally by various groups of people that don't care about you whatsoever, i said why would they -- i even

tweeted @real donald trump, but i tweeted, i said why would the chamber, and i have nothing against the chamber. don't know them too well. why would they complain when all i'm saying is this. that if china doesn't make this horrendous deal that we have with them, which is sort of a nondeal. it's only a one-way, one-sided deal, i want to renegotiate a deal. i want to terminate the deal and do a good deal. and that's all i want. i want to bring jobs back to our country. i want to bring money back to our country. i want to get rid of the deficit and start paying off debt. and they're against it. they're saying, how can donald do that. and how can he jeopardize free trade? if you have, think of this. if you have a country where you have a deficit of hundreds of billions of dollars a year forever, it's going to go on forever. it's going to get worse. then they say we're going to lose a trade war?

we're already using the trade war, folks. we lost the trade war. nothing worse can happen than what is happening right now. we're getting killed. and then you question the chamber. i'm not going to say we'll never deal with china. when china devalues its currency -- they are at 7% gdp. 7%. we're at almost nothing. it's hard to be at nothing. but we're at almost nothing. we have a real unemployment rate that's sky high. we have so many people that can't get a job. you know it up here. but why would anybody fight when somebody says, hey, i want to make the deal better. all i'm saying, i want to make a better deal. why are they against that? they don't us to make a better deal. they don't want us to have more jobs, make some money. let's say we're going to do something. why would the united states chamber of commerce say we

should leave everything the way it is. i don't understand it. if you think about it, if you think about it, it's pretty s sini sinister. so yesterday in making the speech, i did a few things and made a few points. i'll save some of the points. number one, i'm going to withdraw the united states from the trans-pacific partnership, which has not yet been ratified and which is a total disaster. right? number two, i'm going to appoint the toughest and smartest trade negotiators to fight on behalf of the american workers and the american people. number three, i'm going to direct the secretary of commerce to identify every violation of

trade. all of the agreements that a foreign country is currently using to harm our workers. and there are many of them. i will then direct all appropriate agencies to use every tool under the american and international laws to end these abuses. we are being abused as people. we are being abused. number four, i don't know how anybody can have anything against. we know how bad nafta is signed by clinton, and they don't do anything about it. obama said he was going to do something about it. he doesn't do anything about it. and the reason is that the special interests will not let him do anything about it. it's very simple, folks. hey, i've been on the other side of it. believe me. i go better than anybody. i'm going to tell our nafta partners that i intend to

immediately renegotiate the terms of that agreement to get a better deal for our workers, okay? and by the way, i don't mean better. i mean a lot better. if they do not agree to a renegotiation, then i will submit notice under article 2205 of the nafta agreement that america intends to withdraw from the deal, okay? no more nafta. no more nafta. no more nafta. number five, i'm going to instruct my treasury secretary to label china a currency manipulator. something that should have been done years ago. they beat us on currency

manipulation. they are grand masters of currency manipulation. nobody has ever done it better. japan does it well. nobody has ever manipulated currency like china. any country that devalues their currency in order to take advantage of the united states will be met with very, very sharply and swiftly. and sadly, that will include tariffs and taxes for their goods coming in. i'm sorry, folks. that's what we have to do. that's what we have to do. you know, some of the -- some of the stupid people said, oh, he's going to charge tariffs or taxes to china. if they devalue their currency, you ever notice we're starting to do better and then all of a sudden, china has a big devaluation, boom, sucks the air right out.

it happens all the time. it's happened for years and years and years. some of the biggest devaluations they've ever done have happened not so long ago. so we have to protect ourselves and very simply, you know, i see where this country where they try and keep companies in our country so they offer all sorts of incentives like interest-free loans and low-interest loans. that's not what that want. there have to be consequences if a country, as example, like mexico. great respect for the leaders. they're outsmarting our leaders, like china. oh, we're going to build a wall. don't worry about it. we're going to build the wall. we're building the wall. and by the way, the latinos, the hispanics, this poll that came out today, i was at 33%. the latinos that are here legally, they don't want people pouring into our country taking their jobs and taking their

homes. believe me. so remember they said i'll be in the low whatever numbers, right? and i'll be way, way down at nothing. so it comes out today. well, this is a surprise. with the latinos, i employ thousands of latinos. i employ thousands. tens of thousands over my lifetime. they're phenomenal people. and let me tell you, the people here legally want protection. a man who owns a radio station in new york, all hispanic calling in. they call in. he was in television a month ago. he said i don't believe these polls because everybody that's calls me and they're all hispanics calling up, latinos, he said they're all hispanic calling up. they love the guy. and i feel that, too. remember, thousands and thousands i have. i do business with them. but they don't want people

pouring in illegally to our country and taking their jobs and taking their homes. so the poll comes out today, and i'm not at 6% and i'm not at 3% and i'm not at 1% i'm at 33 which is six or seven points higher than mitt romney. they were saying mitt romney had 27. that's a sad situation. but let me just tell you, i'm higher than romney. everyone is saying, look how high he is with the hispanics. i was not surprised. when i won the state of nevada, they have a high hispanic population. and they did exit polls. and i won the exit polls. so i wasn't surprised. everybody else was. we're going to do great with hispanics and latinos. we're going to do great because they want jobs.

i'm going to bring jobs back to this country. we're going to do great with the african-americans. they want jobs. they want jobs. african-american youth has a 59% unemployment rate. 59%. obama has done nothing for african-american youth. we are going to do great with african-americans. you watch. you watch. these people want jobs. i want jobs. latinos want jobs. everybody wants jobs. we got to bring jobs back into our country. and we've got to bring safety -- safety back to our country. make america safe again also. okay. number six, i'm going to instruct the u.s., very important. i'm going to instruct the united states trade representative to bring trade cases against china both in this country and at the wto level.

you can get him out. get him out. ] you have the nicest protesters in mean. i said get out and he just said, yes, sir, and left. we don't even need our police. can i tell you? we should give a special round of applause to our police. they have done an unbelievable job in this country. unbelievable. they're not appreciated like they should be. i tell them all the time, you have no idea how much the people

love you. they don't get treated properly. china's unfair subsidy behavior is prohibited by the terms of its entrance to the wto, and i intend to enforce those rules. they're already there. now seven, very important. if china does not stop its illegal activities. i'm not going to stop trade with china. but if they don't stop their illegal activities, we're going to do a number. i've done very well with china. made great deals with china. we can do great with china. i don't have anything against chinese leadership. i don't have anything against the leadership of japan or mexico. they're just so much smarter than our leaders and they're taking advantage of us. i have a lot against our leaders because they're grossly incompetent and don't know what they're doing. so if china -- right? so if china does not stop its illegal activities, including

its theft of american trade secrets, they're stealing $300 billion a year, some people say, of trade secrets, i would use every lawful presidential power to remedy trade disputes, including the application, excuse me, of tariffs, consistent with section 201, consistent with section 201 and 301 of the trade act of 1973, and section 232 of the trade expansion act of 1962. now think of that term. think of that term. the trade expansion act. you know what? we got the joblessness and they got the expansion. there's no expansion. there's no expansion. so the story is this. i love you people. so important in november. you get out and vote. we're going to make this thing into something that nobody has

ever seen before. they've already said it. they've already said it. >> trump! trump! trump! thank you. i love you people. i love this. we don't win anymore. we don't win. and i say this. when i was young, we won everything. they used to brag, america's never lost a war. we lost -- since then, we only lose. we are going to start winning again. our military is depleted. it's going to be rebuilt.

we have old obsolete equipment in our military. our jet fighters. we get our parts from the plane graveyard and museums. that's how bad it is. seen that. we're going to take care of our vets properly. our vets are not being taken care of. we're going to win at the border and build the wall. it's going to be built and paid for by mexico, by the way. we're going to win at the border. we're going to have a wall. we need the wall. we have to stop the drugs from coming in bad deal. we get the drugs. poisons a lot of people beyond our youth. so we get the drugs. they get the cash. not a good deal. do we agree? and it's pouring through our border. we're going to win with common core, which we're going to terminate and bring our education local. we're going to repeal and

replace obamacare. repeal and replace obamacare. we're going to save our second amendment. so important. we are going to make the greatest trade deals in the history of our country and maybe beyond that. we're going to go from the stupid people that don't know what's happening to people that are thriving again. we're going to bring back our jobs. we're going to bring back our wealth and our money. we're going to bring back our pride. we're going to make america great again. thank you, everybody. i love you. thank you. thank you. >> you're watching donald trump in bangor, maine, delivering his characteristic stem winder, taking aim at everyone from his former 2016 rivals to hillary clinton, touting himself, patting himself on the back for being right about the brexit vote saying mexico will pay for the wall that he plans to put

up. and saying that he's a lot like bernie sanders when it comes to trade and trade deals. and this, of course, comes just after we listened to president obama at that press conference in ottawa, canada, essentially defending tpp, that trade deal that they are working to make happen. a stark contrast to what we heard, of course, from donald trump. almost like a point/counterpoint. obviously, donald trump likely not able to hear what president obama was saying, but it really underscores the differences that these two men have when it comes to trade. i want to go now to hallie jackson. you were listening. i want to pick up on that final point about trade. donald trump clearly trying to capitalize on the fact bernie sanders is still in this race. this is his new big talking point. trade. this is the point he's trying to draw a sharp contrast with the current administration. talk about the headlines you heard today. >> apologies for how loud it is

in here. i think you're talking about trump's comments on trade in this speech. an interesting moment where he said he completely agrees with bernie sanders on this. what we've seen from trump is a real focus on his trade policies and drawing distinctions with the rest of his party. he is now in a war of words with the u.s. chamber which over the years has donated millions and supported conservative candidates, republican candidates but has gone after trump for his position on nafta. trump going right back after the chamber, which is a really interesting and striking split with where his party is. another split with his party on tpp. that major trade deal shep herted through by speaker ryan and others. trump today doubling down on his positions that go against some of the republican orthodoxy. trump doesn't seem to mind. he seems to think it's working for him. he mentioned some of these polls out there. talked about a quinnipiac poll

that shows him a couple of points behind hillary clinton. trump seems to believe this is a sign that he is coming within striking distance of clinton. in swing states, doing okay in ohio and pennsylvania. here in maine, it's a blue state. hasn't vote forward a republican candidate for president since 1988. trump's strategy here is to try to steal a couple of, at least one, electoral vote given how maine's system works. the big headlines from the speech today, his emphasis on trade. his one oblique passing reference to the attack in turkey was commenting on how coverage of that basically blew up coverage of his speech on trade. that's why you're seeing trump talk about that. seven action steps we heard yesterday when he delivered that trump speech. >> it's tough to hear me. i also thought it was interesting that he went after his former primary rivals over

that pledge. fascinating timing. he's just weeks out from his own party's convention. this is when he needs to unify his party. what did you make of that? >> this is something we've heard from donald trump, relitigating what happened in the primaries, going after former rivals but also those who competed against him. trump has done this since he became the presumptive republican nominee. a couple of weeks out from the convention. he's doing anything but essentially saying people who have not endorsed him should not run for public office again. and ax aging the fact that for a little while during the primaries, he himself wouldn't commit to endorsing the republican nominee if it weren't him. >> my fellow road warrior reporting from bangor, maine, as

we track these two stories. president obama's news conference and donald trump. we'll have more coverage. "mtp daily" with chuck todd is up next. stay with us. if it's wednesday, with every response to a terror attack and every speech about the economy, it's clearer and clearer that's trump and clinton see the role in the world in dramatically different ways. one believes america should set the rules n essentially lead the world. the other believes that america can lead the world by simply looking inward and setting its own example and putting america first. it's "mtp daily" and it starts right now. good evening. i'm chuck todd. one thing about this presidential race, it's not as if the choice isn't clear. it's pretty stark these