>> reporter: good morning, everyone. i'm tamron hall coming to you live from our msnbc headquarters in new york. right now we're waiting for donald trump to hold a rally in the battleground state of virginia. a state president obama won by a narrow margin in 2012. virginia is the home state of democratic vice presidential candidate, tim kaine. it is also home to case khazir and humayun khan. the khans' emotionally charged plea to donald trump at the democratic national convention has arguably proven to be a major turning point in this presidential race. we are waiting to see if donald trump will address the khans in virginia, given it's their home state. but last night, trump continued to play defense. >> i was very viciously attacked, as you know, on the stage. and i was surprised to see it. and so all i did -- i have great honor and great feeling for his

son, mr. khan's son. and, you know, as far as i'm concerned, he's a hero. but horrible things were said about me. i think it was frankly very tough. so all i did is respond. and i will always respond. >> i can say this. if i was president, because his son died 12 years ago. if i were president, his son wouldn't have died, because i wouldn't have been in the war. if i was president back then, there would have been no war for iraq. i think it's ridiculous, the whole thing. >> reporter: mr. and mrs. khan went back on the last word with lawrence o'donnell yesterday to talk about the case against donald trump. >> i don't really care what donald trump is saying about me or about anyone. because i respect myself. i respect my fellow muslims, americans, or all the religions. i respect all human beings. so i'm not going to say anything for donald trump any more.

>> this person lacks sense of empathy. he cannot empathize with the people and their feeling that he wishes to lead without empathy, a leader is no leader. a leader cannot become a leader. and lack of his empathy is an indication of his disqualification. >> now trump's running mate, mike pence, was confronted by a mother of an active duty air force staff sergeant at an event in nevada last night. where she was booed. >> time and time again, trump has disrespected oh our nation's armed forces and veterans, and has disrespect for mr. khan and his family is just an example of that. [ booing ] >> there will never be a point in time where you can look trump in the eye and tell him enough is enough. >> it's all right. it's all right. let me just say, first, i want to honor your son's service to the country and your family's service to the country. i truly do. captain khan is an american

hero. and we honor him and honor his family as we do all gold star families. donald trump supports our soldiers and supports our veterans. like no other leader in my lifetime. >> the question at this point, is this now having an impact on the numbers? this morning, our new nbc news survey monkey tracking poll shows donald trump trailing hillary clinton by eight points nationally. secretary clinton getting a post convention bounce. the results are similar to two other national polls out yesterday. a gallup poll shows more view hillary clinton favorably than viewed the republican party favorably following the gop convention. let's go to katy tur at the trump rally in ashburn, virginia. you get the sense donald trump wants to avoid talking about the khan family, however, he does intend to go in safe territory. last night in an interview, for example, where he was given an

opportunity to present himself as the victim of these vicious people who have attacked him. >> reporter: and that's what he's trying to do. he's saying that he is a counter puncher. and when somebody goes on the offensive against him, he will attack back. that's the narrative he's had this entire campaign and it's part of his playbook. also to extinguish one controversy with another controversy, and we have seen him throw out a number of lines in the past few days to try and move away from the khans. one of those, he's now calling the system rigged, trying to set up what could be a loss in november by saying the system was rigged against him all along. this enables him to inoculate himself from the idea that he lost, the fact he may lose in november. as you're talking about those national polls, do not show donald trump up right now. but it is important to remember, tamron, that those are national polls, and they are snapshots of the race at this time. the polls that really matter are the battleground state polls

where donald trump believes he is in a much closer race with hillary clinton. right now they're focusing on four states. they're in virginia today, which they want to be a battleground state. but in reality, pretty locked up for hillary at the moment, especially since she's brought on tim kaine to her ticket. but they're focusing on four states. florida, ohio, north carolina and pennsylvania. they're going to try and get voters in those states to come out for donald trump in large numbers. the voters are looking for specifically white working class voters, ones that probably skew a little older. right now trump's unfavorables are very high in all sections other than that section when it comes to women, minorities, when it comes to younger voters. so in order to mitigate his losses with that, the trump campaign is trying to find a way to appeal to those voters. as of now, the only thing we have seen, though, tamron is donald trump saying he loves those voters, he loves hispanics, he loves african-americans. there has been no real outrage.

but when you're talking to supporters here today that come out to these trump rallies and you ask them about the latest controversies and what could potentially sway their support for donald trump, there's nothing that donald trump could say,ccording to voter after voter here that donald trump could do or say. they believe that any attacks against him are attacks from hillary clinton, be it from the media, be it from a gold star family or be it from anybody else, for that matter. if they're against donald trump, they're against them. >> and katy, i note behind you, the audience looks incredibly young, at least those immediately behind you there. they actually look like they're students. who is making up this group of people? because especially virginia, a military town, a lot of military families go there to retire, as well. tell me a little bit more about the composition of the people behind you. >> reporter: well, there are a number of veterans in this crowd. they're veterans of the iraq war, veterans of vietnam, korea. veterans of the -- the cia, frankly. former cia agents, who are here

to see donald trump and they say they believe that he's going to be a great commander in chief. there's also students, as you were noting behind me, local students who said they wanted to see donald trump. they haven't seen him in person. they're not necessarily supporters, but they're still making up mare mind. one student said this is the first time he's felt like a minority in this city, in ashburn, virginia. there are also a number of mothers with their children here. it's a diverse cross section of donald trump voters, a majority of which are here fervently supporting trump. but there are pockets of students here who are just trying to see what it's like to be at a donald trump rally. >> the reason i ask, they are so close to the camera, you can clearly see they're young people who look like student age in that audience. thank you very much, katy. so more gold star families are signing on to the letter, demanding an apology from trump over the way he has treated the khans. 23 families of fallen service members are now calling trump's comments repugnant, offensive

and anti-american. they say in part, quote, when you question a mother's pain by implying that her religion, not her grief, kept her from addressing arena of people, you are attacking us. and we must speak out and demand you apologize to the khans, to all gold star families and to all americans. here's what eric trump had to say about his father and his apology. >> i think that's a great question for him. and i think he has by calling them a hero. in terms of the one question, whether you've made a sacrifice, i think my father has. now, that's certainly not the ultimate sacrifice. the ultimate sacrifice ask is a soldier dying for this nation. i think he was attacked the other day and viciously. and by the way, that's politics. you're going to get attacked. i think this was something honestly blown hugely out of proportion, because he first of all said the khan family looked like amazing people in that interview, which for whatever reason never wants to get reported. he called him a hero on so many -- so many different times.

and, again, he's not -- he wasn't talking -- this isn't a muslim thing. this is an isis thing. >> and joining me now is karen meredith, a gold star mom who lost her son. first lieutenant ken ballard in iraq. karen serves as a military family coordinate. she organized the letter that was sent to donald trump on behalf of those more than a dozen families. thank you so much for joining us and our thoughts are with you and con doidolences in the loss your son in 2004, karen. >> thank you. >> let me start with -- i think an observation some people have had regarding how a president reacts to criticism from a grieving family. you had pat smith at the rnc. she lost her son, sean smith, in benghazi. she called on hillary clinton to be locked up, referred to her as a liar. there was no response from secretary clinton. going all the way back to cindy sheehan. she protested outside president bush's crawford ranch after the

loss of her son in iraq. kasie died the same year your son, 2004, president bush never attacked cindy sheehan directly. what is different here about the temperament of donald trump that you see when you compare how hillary clinton handled pat smith and how george bush handled cindy sheehan? >> you're right. it is different. and i think we have to look at the candidate. he doesn't seem to have any filter in terms of what he says to people and does not understand the sacrifice that our families have made to support this country. >> when he, donald trump, says he was viciously attacked and you saw the speech from mr. khan, where he asked the question, have you read the constitution, here is a copy of mine.

in your mind, how does someone process that as a vicious attack, when you hear donald trump call that a vicious attack? what's your reaction to that? >> well, donald trump and now his surrogates are using those same words too. so i think we need to give donald trump a dictionary, because vicious attacks is not what you and i would agree that happened at the convention. and when donald trump was asked about did he sacrifice, what were his sacrifices, he was talking about his business plan. he wasn't talking about sacrificing anything. hopefully he made money. that's why he's in business. but i don't know. he's working off a different dictionary that most of us use. >> karen, i know it's very important to you to talk about what happened with the military mom in nevada. mike pence, who has a son that's

in the marines was at this rally. a woman stood up to talk about her son, and talk about the tone and remarks from donald trump when she was booed herself. and she eventually held her son's photo up with that crowd, some of them booing her. what was that like to see that as a military mom who has lost her son? >> i was shocked. i was shocked that people would attack a mother who was asking a reasonable question. and to me, that just demonstrates the civilian military divide that we have in our country. that most people don't have any connection with the military. but we worry about our children. we worry about our loved ones when they're deployed, as her son was. and i have seen nothing from donald trump, except disrespect for our military, our veterans, our p.o.w.s and now the gold star families. and as other people have said,

gold star families are sacred. we gave the very best of us to this country. and we deserve respect. >> i want to play a little bit of what donald trump said last night regarding the war in iraq, as i've noted, your son lost his life in 2004. here's what trump said to hannity -- sean hannity last night. >> if i were president, his son wouldn't have died, because i wouldn't have been in the war. if i was president back then. there would have been no war for iraq. i can tell you that. >> your reaction, karen. >>ness >> isn't life good in trump world? i believe he did support the iraq war, at least once or twice back in 2001. so i'm just starting to get not shocked at whatever he says any more. and i don't believe what he says. >> do you believe more gold star families will join the list already calling for this apology? >> of we consider this document a living document, and we are

updating it as we speak. just -- i just want to make sure that everybody understands, we are not speaking for all gold star families. that there are some people that support trump, but we don't look at it as a partisan issue at all. we look at it as respect for gold star families. and so, yeah, we are continuing to add names as more people hear about it, and hear about their ability to stand against the disrespect that mr. trump is showing to the military. >> what do you make of the reaction from gop leadership? you have speaker ryan and senator mcconnell coming out saying that captain khan was a hero and that all of our heroes certainly should be respected as well as their families. but not naming donald trump by name. senator john mccain came out with a much stronger statement yesterday. he still continues to endorse donald trump. as you said, this is not politically motivated for you, but would you like to see

stronger words from our leadership, particularly on the republican side? >> oh, absolutely. the -- quote, leadership of the republican party needs to come out and either disassociate themselves with donald trump's comments, donald trump -- even as -- i'm concerned that somebody with such an imagination that he has would think that he could be a commander in chief. if you don't understand the sacrifice of gold star families, then how do you -- how do you lead the general population in the military? i'm just so disappointed that ryan and mcconnell have not called out donald trump on his language. it's unbelievable to me that they think that calling captain

khan a hero is going to make it go away. that is not under dispute. >> ms. meredith -- >> the apology is the lack of respect is. >> ms. meredith, we thank you so much for your time. we really appreciate it. our thoughts remain with you, and we appreciate you coming on to express your views of this. thank you. >> thank you so much. >> absolutely gno. president obama is holding a news conference with singapore's president, one of our strongest, closest and most reliable partners. the u.s. and singapore are partners in the trade agreement. >> advancing regional security and stability. our defense relationship remains one of the closest in southeast asia with hundreds of american ships and aircraft rotating through singapore each year. as i told the prime minister, we welcome singapore's interest in purchasing the f-35 aircraft.

and we'll also explore the possibility of singapore in troops training on guam. at the same time, we'll continue working to strengthen regional institutions like asean in line with the principles we agreed to at sunny land's earlier this year. and we reaffirm our shared commitment to building a regional order where all nations play by the same rules, and disputes are resolved peacefully. including in the south china sea. we agreed to do more to encourage economic growth. and innovation among our economies. with a little over a decade, trade between our two countries has grown more than 50%. . we're collaborating to jump start creating digital innovation, including research and development into technology and data to prove and promote smart cities concepts that can improve the daily lives of our citizens. we'll do more to connect our vibrant startup communities so that an engineer in singapore

can collaborate more easily with an entrepreneur in silicon valley or austin, texas. with respect to trade, there is an issue that stirs great passion, globalization means the economies around the world are more integrated than ever, and jobs and capital move across borders. automation means that goods and products can be produced with fewer workers. and these forces of globalization and technology have not always benefited everybody evenly. there are fears and anxieties that people may be left behind. and these anxieties are legitimate. they can't be ignored, they have to be taken seriously. as i have said before, it means we have to do everything we can to make sure that everybody shares in prosperity. that we have strong rules to protect workers, to promote high wages, to make sure our citizens are getting the education and the training that they need. but the answer cannot be to back

away from trade and the global economy. it is here to stay. it's not possible to cut ourselves off. given how integrated our economies are. and trying to pull up a draw bridge on trade would only hurt us and hurt our workers. so the answer is to make sure that globalization and trade is working for us, not against us. and that's why today we are reaffirming our commitment to the trans-pacific partnership. i am a strong supporter of tpp, because it will reduce terrorists' taxes, basically, on american goods from cars to crops and make it easier for americans to export into the fastest-growing markets of the world. tpp levels the playing field for our workers. and helps to ensure countries abide by strong labor and environmental rules. so this is an opportunity to grow our economies and write the rules for trade 21st century in a way that's equitable. it gives us a chance to advance american leadership, reduce economic inequality, and support

good-paying jobs. all while strengthening critical strategic relationships in a vital region. so i think not only is tpp important, but the prime minister and i agreed that we need to extend our partnership beyond just regional efforts. we have work to do on a global scale. singapore was the first country in southeast asia to join the global coalition to destroy isil. and we're grateful that singapore is making new contributions to this effort by providing valuable medical support to coalition forces. as two nations on the forefront of digital innovation, we recognize the growing threats of cyber attacks, and we're going to continue to work to strengthen cyber security and to promote peaceful norms on how nations should operate in cyberspace. singapore, the garden city, helped to achieve the paris climate agreement last year, and

mr. prime minister, thank you for your commitment to work towards joining the paris agreement this year. we're also working closely with the international community to reduce harmful aviation emissions. and phase down hfcs. and our two countries will continue to work together to advance global health security so the world is better prepared to address the threat of pandemics. last point. we agreed to keep promoting people-to-people talks between our two countries. we're expanding our trusted travelers program to make it easy for americans and singaporeans to do business together. i welcome the new exchange program which includes scholarships for opportunities of our two countries. and through our young southeast asian leaders initiative, we continue to support young people across the region to become the leaders of tomorrow in their own communities, in business and in civil society. i'll note that i had a chance to meet one of those young

singaporean leaders at a summit in kualalum pore last year. of she talked about coming together with young people from across southeast asia. she said we bonded in our common endeavor to seek, to understand and learn from one another in pursuit of our aspirations to a better world. young people like carrie give me hope, and prime minister, based on our work together, i'm confident that singapore and the united states will continue to advance our shared aspirations for a better world for many years to come. with that, let me turn it over to you, mr. prime minister. >> well, thank you, president obama. president obama, distinguished guests, i am very happy to be here on an official visit for the 50th anniversary of our diplomatic relations. i would like to thank president obama for his gracious hospitality, and for his attention to our bilateral relations, and specifically also

for his good wishes on the condition of our former president. the president and i had a substantial conversation on a wide range of issues. we affirmed our strong multifaceted and long-standing partnership of strong economic ties under pinned by the u.s./singapore free trade agreement. when the u.s. is singapore's largest foreign investor. and many american companies run their regional headquarters in singapore. and many singapore companies also which are in america. and their relationship deepens year by year. in the defense area, we have robust cooperation under the mou in 1990. and the strategic framework agreement which we concluded in 2005. last year, we concluded the enhanced defense cooperation agreement which extends into new

areas like humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, cyber defense and counterterrorism. we are also deepening security cooperation between our agencies in areas like counterterrorism, cyber crime, corruption, transportation security and a list of trade enforcement. and expanding into new areas like cyber security while agencies are signing an mou to work together to protect national security and economic interests against cyber attacks. we also share an interest in smart cities, so we have discussed how cities can use technology to tackle problems from are health care to transportation to delivery of public services. and there's a lot of interest from companies on both sides. underpinning the ties between the two countries are the friendships and the relationships between our peoples. thousands of american students are studying and working in singapore. thousands of singaporeans are studying and working in america.

and last sunday, i hosted the national day reception for singaporeans in our embassy here, and 600 people showed up. it's fitting to mark this special occasion of our 50th anniversary that we are launching a scholarship for singaporeans and americans to enable undergraduates to do some exchanges in each other's country and draw our young people closer together. and to get to know each other's societies, cultures, strengths and opportunities to cooperate together. we've recently implemented a trusted traveler program that will also facilitate travel by singaporeans to the u.s. the president and i also discussed the tpp and just now you hear the president give an eloquent explanation of why it is important to america and also to asia. of it's an integral component of america's rebalance to asia. apart from the economic benefits, trade, market access,

standard-setting, it's also vital from a strategic point of view. and a strong signal of the u.s. commitment to continue its deep engagement in the region. we greatly appreciate the efforts of the president and his team to push for the tpp, which grew from a small fta, which singapore started together with chile, brunei and new zealand. and now the tpp will be a free trade agreement, encompassing 40% of the world's population and one-third of the gdp. we are near the finish line and we hope the countries, particularly the u.s., will be able to ratify the tpp as soon as possible. finally, the president and i discussed our partnership in tackling global challenges like counterterrorism. it's a problem for all countries. every day in the newspapers, you read of new attacks somewhere. america, europe, middle east, closer to home in indonesia and malaysia. we in southeast asia are very

concerned about this, because the terrorists are active in many countries in the region. several hundred, perhaps 1,000 from southeast asia and the middle east fighting isis, and we have witnessed attacks in both indonesia and malaysia mounded by isis followers under orders from isis operatives in the middle east. to launch attacks in the home countries. so the efforts to counter isil or isis are crucial, and that's why singapore is a member of the coalition, and we are making a modest contribution to the effort. and we're going to be sending a medical team to iraq. we have already been participating with fueling, image interpretation and other ways and now we're going to send a medical team into iraq. it is also important to fundamentally address a root source of violent extremism in order to encounter the underlying etiology of isil, as well as to address the issues of

extremists being propagated by isil. these are major issues amongst other two countries. and we look forward to working together and taking our relationship even further forward. >> first question is margaret brennan. >> thank you, mr. president. given the republican nominee's recent comments about the khan family and his statement that if president he would consider recognizing russia's annexation of crimea, does it make you question his fitness to be president, and secondly, sir, on libya, you've said in the past that the worst mistake of your presidency may have been your failure to plan for the aftermath of that 2011 nato intervention in libya. do you see your new decision to bomb isis there as a direct result of that? >> yes. i think the republican nominee is unfit to serve as president.

i said so last week. and he keeps on proving it. the notion that he would attack a gold star family that had made such extraordinary sacrifices on behalf of our country. the fact that he doesn't appear to have basic knowledge around critical issues in europe, in the middle east, in asia means that he's woefully unprepared to do this job. and this is not just my opinion. i think what's been interesting is the repeated denunciations of

his statements by leading republicans. including the speaker of the house and the senate majority leader and prominent republicans like john mccain. and the question, i think, that they have to ask themselves is, if you are repeatedly having to say in very strong terms that what he has said is unacceptable, why are you still endorsing him? what does this say about your party that this is your standard-bearer? this isn't a situation where you have an episodic gaffe. this is daily. and weekly, where they are

distancing themselves from statements he's making. there has to be a point in which you say, this is not somebody i can support for president of the united states. even if he purports to be a member of my party. and, you know, the fact that that has not yet happened makes some of these denunciations ring hollow. i don't doubt their sincerity. i don't doubt that they were outraged about some of the statements that mr. trump and his supporters made about the khan family. but there has to come a point at which you say somebody who makes those kinds of statements doesn't have the judgment, the temperament, the understanding

to occupy the most powerful position in the world. because a lot of people depend on the white house getting stuff right. and this is different than just having policy disagreements. i recognize that they all profoundly disagree with myself or hillary clinton on tax policy or on certain elements of foreign policy. but you know, there have been republican presidents with whom i disagreed with. but i didn't have a doubt that they could function as president. i think i was right in mitt romney and john mccain were wrong on certain policy issues. but i never thought that they couldn't do the job. and had they won, i would have been disappointed, but i would

have said to all americans, they are -- this is our president, and i know they're going to abide by certain norms and rules and common sense. will observe basic decency. will have enough knowledge about economic policy and foreign policy. and our constitutional traditions and rule of law. that our government will work. and then we'll compete four years from now to try to win an election. but that's not the situation here. and that's not just my opinion. that is the opinion of many prominent republicans. there has to come a point in which you say, enough.

and the alternative is that the entire party, the republican party, effectively endorses and validates the positions that are being articulated by mr. trump. and as i said in my speech last week, i don't think that actually represents the views of a whole lot of republicans out there. with respect to libya. you know, i have said on several occasions that we did the right thing in preventing what could have been a massacre or bloodbath in libya. and we did so as part of an international coalition and under u.n. mandate. but i think that all of us collectively were not sufficiently attentive to what had to happen the day after and the day after and the day after that in order to ensure that

there were strong structures in place to assure basic security and peace inside of libya. the good news is, we now have the -- the beginnings of a government and the government of national accord. they are serious about trying to bring all the factions together to start creating a basic security structure, to begin to monitor libya's borders and cooperate internationally to deal with issues like isil penetration on their territory. and at the request of that government, after they had already made significant progress against isil, and had

essentially pushed isil into a very confined area in and around sirte, is it is in america's national security in our fight against isil to make sure they're able to finish the job. so we're working in partnership with them to assure that isil does not get a stronghold in libya, even as libya begins what is going to be a long process to establish a functioning government and security system there. so, you know, the good news is that they recognize these -- this terrorist organization in their midst is contrary to their national interests, as well as the world's. and, you know, we're hopeful that having completed this process of driving isil out,

they will then be in a position to start bringing the parties together inside that country. and not only us, but the europeans and other countries around the world have a great interest in seeing stability in libya, because that -- the absence of stability has helped to fuel some of the challenges that we have seen in terms of the migration crisis in europe, and some of the humanitarian tragedies that we have seen in the open seas between libya and europe. >> nicholas? >> thank you. first question for prime minister lee. you have spoken about the continuation of the u.s. rebalance being a significant part of peace and stability in asia. how do you envision this continuation of proceeding in the next 50 years, and what role do you see singapore playing in this context? what are some of the hot-button issues they would like you to face as the u.s. hopefully

continues its rebalance? second question, you have mentioned the strong bipartisan links that singapore has had with nine different u.s. presidents from both sides of the political divide, very strong record there. how would we address a u.s. leader which adopts the stance that's more closed off, more integral organization, for example, that we see in november? president obama, i have a question about the military collaboration, which has been a cornerstone of the relationship between singapore and the u.s. especially coming on the heels of the latest announcement of the medical team to the global coalition against isis. with the rising threat of terror in asia and indeed the rest of the world, the potential for military confrontation in the south china sea, how do you see singapore featuring in u.s. plans to address this going forward? last question. four more years is a phrase that i think you are hearing a little bit in the past few weeks and

months. and while that's not possible, if it were -- [ laughter ] how would you continue developing relationships with singapore? what would be your key focus going forward, maybe the next 50 years, as well? thank you. >> reporter: well, 50 years is a very long time. 50 years ago -- 50 years ago, nobody imagined what the world would be like today or what singapore would be like today. and that we would have such a deep and broad relationship and so many things to do together. we would like to build on this for the next 50 years. it depends on how we -- each of our countries does in singapore where they will be able to remain stable, prosperous, open, successful. in america, whether you remain one of the dynamic, vibrant leading economies in the world, in a world in which there are other powers, other centers of creativity and technology and science and progress.

but yet its unique participant with a history of contributing to the world, not just for your own interests, but because you believe that the world should be a better place for all countries. and if america can do that, and if singapore can maintain our success, then i think there are many opportunities for us to make common calls together. and then the rebalancing, which your president has nunsateded and executed, will sustain for many years to come. it will be a very different world. the countries will grow, other countries will slow down. demographics will have a big factor to come. i mean, if you look at japan, the population has been shrinking and they will have to do something somehow to turn it around, otherwise 50 more years of population shrinking and you have a very small country left. in terms of economy, in terms of influence internationally. singapore, too, has demographic issues.

america has a demographic change. the population is not shrinking, but the composition is changing. in this situation, we have to address to a new world, maintaining our position and our ability to compete. and yet knowing that is not going to be the same as it was in 1946 when america was half the world's gdp. so one quarter of the world's gdp. so that's the crucial factor over the next 50 years. as for what we do over bipartisan links, if there is a u.s. leader who is more closed off and wants to turn inward, i don't think this is the right forum, or indeed there is any right forum for me to talk about u.s. politics in public at this moment. we will work with whoever is a u.s. administration, whichever party. we have worked with five republican and four democratic administrations. and our experience of american elections, presidential elections, has been that many

pressures build up during the election campaign, and after the elections, and in a calmer, cooler atmosphere, positions are rethought, state strategies are nuanced. and a certain balance is kept in the direction of the ship of state. it doesn't turn completely upside down. the americans take pride in having a system with checks and balances. so that it is not so easy to do things, but it's not so easy to completely mess things up. [ laughter ] no. and we admire that and sometimes we depend upon that. [ laughter ] >> he's absolutely right. the wisdom of our founders. with respect to military cooperation, obviously,

singapore is a small country, but as i've said before, punches above its weight. because so much of our work in the asia-pacific region is not a matter of active conflict, but rather creating an architecture, a framework of rules and norms that keeps the peace. and that has underwritten security for the region and for us. for many years now. and singapore is so often the adult in the room. the level head. that can help us work with a wide range of countries around certain issues. help diffuse tensions. in many ways, the diplomatic work and collaboration that we do with singapore is as critical, if not more critical,

than the work militarily. but what is also true is the nature of threats today. when you think of cyber threats or our concern about enforcing sanctions against north korea, to ensure nonproliferation of nuclear materials. or being able to counter message isil in a place like southeast asia. and ensure information-sharing with countries where there may be a budding terrorist threat. those are all issues of military finesse. and intelligence. and precision. and that -- those are areas where singapore excels. to in addition to being a very important logistical hub and

center for our operations, the partnership that we're able to maintain helps us to work with a whole range of other countries, much more effectively than we would if singapore weren't there and we were having to just try to gather up all these countries individually. and that's where the asean and east asia summit is important. because it is institutionalizing many of these practices in ways that hopefully avoids conflict in the first place. which would be in everybody's interests. as far as where the relationship goes, i think the prime minister is absolutely right. 50 years from now, it's very hard to anticipate where we're going. but there are certain trends that i think are inevitable. the asia-pacific region will continue to grow, and will

continue to account for a larger share of the world's economy. there are going to be countries in the southeast asian region that look to follow the path of singapore into a mature advanced economy. it is going to be a big market, and the united states is still going to be a massive interest in maintaining itself as a asia-pacific power, and in maintaining strong bonds of trade and commerce and scientific exchange and educational exchange. and given the close strategic interests, but maybe even more importantly, the close people-to-people ties between america and singapore, i think we can anticipate that that will

be just as strong 50 years from now as it is today. singapore has to take into account not just american interests, china is a big neighbor. and there are strong commercial ties and cultural ties there, as well. and in that sense, singapore actually can serve as a useful partner with us and with china to assure that the u.s. signover relationship moves in a productive way. which i think would be in the interest of both countries. so, you know, this is going to be a central engine for world growth and if we do a good job in maintaining stability, ensuring a rules-based order, continuing to promote greater transparency and reducing corruption in the region, so that all people are benefitting from the rapid growth that is

taking place, then i think the future 50 years from now will be bright. jordan fabian. >> thank you, mr. president. you're here today touting the trans-pacific partnership but hillary clinton is against it, her vice presidential nominee, tim kaine is against it. donald trump saying the next president is opposed to this deal. so my question is, if you take both candidates at their word, how do you plan to get congress to pass this deal during the lame duck, and what's your plan to convince the members to do so, given the opposition i just described? and secondly, security officials inside and outside the government have said they are almost certain that the hack of the democratic national committee came from russia. does it look to you like russia is meddling in the u.s. election, and what impact should that have on the relationship with moscow? >> right now, i'm president. and i'm for it.

and i think i've got the better argument. and i've made this argument before. i'll make it again. we are part of a global economy. we're not the reversing that. it can't be reversed. because it is driven by technology and it is driven by travel and cargo containers and the fact that the demand for products inside of our country means we've got to get some things from other places and our export sector is a huge contributor to jobs and our economic well-being. most manufactured products now involve a global supply chain where parts are made in all

corners of the globe and converge and then get assembled and packaged and sold. and so the notion that we're going to we're going to pull that up root and branch is unrealistic. point number one. point number two, it is absolutely true the evidence shows that some past trade deals had not done all the benefits that were promised and had very localized for communities that were hurt because they were rooted out. people lost jobs. jobs were created because of those trade deals, but jobs were also lost and people who experienced those losses, those communities didn't get as much help as they needed to and what's also true as a consequence of globalization and

automation, what you've seen is labor workers losing leverage and capital being mobile, being able to locate around the world that has all contributed to growing inequality both here in the united states and many advanced economies. so there's a real problem but the answer is not cutting off globalization. the answer is how do we make sure globalization, technology, all those things work for us, not against us. and tpp is designed to do precisely that. number one, it knocks out 18,000 that riffs that other countries place on america's products and good. our economy is more open than many of our trading partners. so, if everybody agrees we're going to have lower tariffs,

that's good for american businesses and american workers, and we should want that, we should pursue it. the complaint about previous trade deals that was labor agreements and environmental agreements weren't enforceable the way you could complain about tariffs and actually get action to ensure that tariffs were just as enforceable. people take them so seriously that right now for for example, vietnam is drafting and presenting unprecedented labor reforms in vietnam. changing their constitution to

recognize worker organizations in vietnam for the first time. so what we're doing is we're raising standards for workers in those countries which means it's harder for them to undercut labor standards here in the united states. the same is true for environmental. the same is true for things like human trafficking. where we've got a country like malaysia taking really serious efforts to crack down on human trafficking. why? because tpp says you need to. it gives us leverage to promote, things that progressives and people here in country, including labor unions say they care about. so if you care about preventing abusive workers, child labor, wildlife trafficking,

overfishing, you know the decimation of forests, all those things are addressed in this, in this agreement. i have not yet heard anybody make an argument that the existing trading rules are better for issues like labor rights and environmental rights than they would be if we got tpp passed. and so i'm going to continue to make this case. and i've got some very close friends, people i admire a lot, but i just disagree with them. and that's okay. i respect the arguments that they're making. they're coming from a sincere concern about the position of workers and wages with in this

country. but i think i've got the better argument. and i've got the evidence to support it. and hopefully after the election is over and the dust settles. there'll be more attention to the actual facts behind the deal and it won't just be a political symbol. or a political football. and i will actually sit down with people on both sides, on the right and on the left. i'll sit down publicly with them and go through the whole provisions. trade authority to even present is this before congress. somehow muddled through and got it done.

spg are that was a long answer. the fik is still doing an investigation. there's been assessments made that this might have been a russian hack. what i can tell you without commenting on the specifics is that there are a lot of countries out there that are trying to hack into our stuff. and this is why we've stood up such and aggressive effort to strengthen our cyber security. and we have provisions in place where if we see evidence of a malicious attack by a state

actor, we can impose potentially certain proportional penalties, but that requires us to really be able to pin down and know what we're talking about. and so i don't want to get out ahead of the legal evidence and facts that we may have. in order to make those kinds of decisions. more broadly, we're trying to promote international norms and rules that say there are certain things that states should not be doing to each other when it comes to cyber attacks, there are certain things that are out of bounds. and those norms, i think, are going to slowly build and get more, more adherence over time, but it's -- we're still early in the process. some way us the explosion of the internet and it's importance to our communication systems has

far outstripped it the legal architecture to protect it. and we're playing catch up. but we're going to have to keep on, keep on at it the. in terms of how it affects our relationship with russia, i think we've already got a lot of differences with russia on a whole bunch of issues, but i think that we've been able to try to stay focussed on those areas where we still have a common interest understanding that we have deep disagreements on issues like ukraine, but perhaps potentially we have an interest in bringing an end to violence in syria. how do we balance those issues? that's pretty standard state craft at this point with russia.

if in fact russia engaged in this activity, it's just one on a long list of issues that me and mr. putin talk about. and that i've got a real problem with. and so, i don't think that it wildly swings what is a tough, difficult relationship that we have with russia right now. but it's not going to stop us from still trying to pursue solutions so that we can, for example, implement the minced agreement and get russia and those separatists to lay down arms and stop bullying ukraine. that's not going to stop us from trying to make sure that we can bring a political transition inside of syria that can end the hardship there. >> can i say something about the tpp? i don't want to wait until your domestic politics, but -- weigh into your domestic politics,

looking at somebody who has been intimately involved and in fact triggered the whole process because we started the p-4. for little fda on which the tpp fall and just become this important initiative. if the economic arguments for the tpp in terms of trade i think the president has presented them eloquently, what the benefits are to american companies, it's a deal which the countries have negotiated. each one providing market access on their side in return for gaining market access on the other side. each one committing to rules in exchange for the other side committing to rules. it's a hard fought, hard fought bargaining process. the negotiators spend many trips, many nights, many dawns, and fought it out, but actually at the end of it, everybody must decide, is it a plus or a minus for them? and i think in your case