from washington, "the mclaughlin group, the american original -- for over three decades, the sharpest minds, best sources,

john: issue one, obama trumps trump. >> the notion that we're going to track every western union, you know, bit of money that's being sent to mexico, you know, good luck with that. john: following donald trump's loss to ted cruz in tuesday's wisconsin gop presidential primary, president obama highlighted mr. trump's plan to make mexico to pay for its u.s. border wall. the centerpiece of mr. trump's plan is the threat to cut off the $24.8 billion a year in remittances sent to mexico from the u.s., much of it from undocumented workers. also, mr. trump proposes to expand the patriot act purview beyond banks to include wire transfers by firms like western union and moneygram international. mr. trump is not the only wall lover.

crisis, europe has built walls covering an equivalent to 40% of the 2,000-mile-long u.s.-mexico border. the cost? about $570 million from european taxpayers. mr. trump believes mexico will choose to pay $5 billion to $10 billion for the wall, before losing $24.8 billion a year in remittances. question. who is right about how mexico would react to the cutoff of remittances? trump or obama? pat: mexico would react badly. what trump has done very effectively is raise a legitimate issue. what the mexicans are doing is using the united states as a safety valve for the social welfare problem. they push their own folk into the united states. these folks send back remitances. you know, others get jobs in the united states of america. at the same time, mexico does not really control folks coming in from central america and

the border of the united states. so what i think trump has got going for him is a real sense, john, of exasperation with the mexican government and i think a tough policy against the mexican government, quite frankly an easier thing to do would be put a 10% tariff on all mexican goods entering the united states. you could get tens of billions of dollars, you could build the fence and tell the mexicans, look, folks, if you want to build a secure fence on your side of the border as well, we'll get rid of the tariff. john: but why -- pat: that's what we should do. john: why is obama attacking trump now? eleanor: i don't think he's attacking trump. i think he's taken aback by some of the proposals trump has out there. president obama deals with leaders from around the world. the throfse world is looking agast at trump's policies. john: are they scared to death trump will be the nominee? eleanor: i think they're wondering if the republican party has lost its mind and

candidate and i think the republican party is having soul search, strenuous efforts to try to stop him. he looks at everything as an opening bid, he's thrown this out there he knows this is totally unworkable. you cannot track all these western union transfers as the president said. you have to distinguish between legal transfers and those that are made from undocumented immigrants. he wants to open the patriot act to sort of write a law that can cover this, that would never stand up in the courtses -- courts as constitutional. plus the fact that it would make a situation -- actually, immigration has slowed to a trickle. actually more people are going back to mexico than coming here at the moment. but you would really worsen the situation because people in mexico depend on this money and you would really hurt their life circumstances and there would be a lot more pressure for mexicans

so he -- his policy makes no sense. it's unworkable and would not achieve the end that he seeks. john: your thoughts on this? tom: i think what president obama is trying to do, obviously he's taken -- taking the role of preach for the chief, that final year, pushing the lib rah ral advocacy, wins favor with democrats by criticizing donald trump. i think the practicalities trump proposes, i think it is something functionally you could do. the problem is it would not represent good policy. more broadly, it has this idea that trump, with the wall, almost kind of like a game of thrones dynamic, he's john snow and it's the mythology that beyond the wall everything is bad and by simply building it, you can deal with all these issues, whether it be trade, crime, immigration. the reality is, the way you're ultimately going to deal with it

government and secure the border. how do you do that? it's the digital frontier. you have electronic guidance, you see people coming across, send border patrol there and get them. that's why his support is so fervant, he can say anything about anything else but as long as he sticks to the immigration line, his supporters will be beside him. john: trump lost wisconsin. what were the unique -- what were the factors involved? clarence: i'm going to go to immigration. that's -- that's what we've been talking about here. i think the -- well, frankly, the question being does trump know what he's talking about with this immigration policy that he's proposing and the answer is no. it is an opening bid so to speak. it's kind of a solution in search of a problem. because half of our undocumented workers are coming in, not

we have had virtually zero immigration from mexico, as you mentioned. netzero. and trying to cut off the remitances is going to cause havoc with our economic policy and interdependency our two countries have. a lot of american companies and people have a lot of money invested in mexico. we have a lot of the stability that we have right now is based on the current system and trump hasn't really thought this through. pat: i think tom's term, exiss ten rble crisis, is exactly right. what's happening is the third world is invading the first world. part of it coming through mexico. up through mexico into the united states. in europe, they're coming from the middle east, africa will have 2.5 billion people by mid century. they are coming across thed me ter ranian and people are not going to start shooting them. right now -- tom: we don't have that problem. pat: we will have, we'll have it

eleanor: we have a country where many of the citizens pride the diversity that we're seeing. and the way you phrase it, the way you phrase it, like it's something terrible, being taken over -- pat: when you have people -- eleanor: immigrants in our midst who do a lot in our country. pat: if you have 12 million who walked into the country illegally or overstayed their visas, you've got an invasion. clarence: germany doesn't have enough population growth to pay for their own senior citizens. pat: merkel could be thrown out of office because she went south on the immigration issue. john: ok. ok. clarence: over one aspect of immigration over there right now but we have the same situation. our immigrants coming in are helping social security. pat: why is trump doing so well? eleanor: he's using immigration as a scapegoat and telling people their lives aren't as good as they expected and they can't afford college because all

pat: is he shilling the people? john: ok. eleanor: he's exacerbating the problem. pat: the people are listening to this guy. john: ok, mid segment. what's the story on sanders? and his momentum? and what impact is it making? tom: the clinton campaign is concerned because of the populous feel sanders has with millenial with that sense he's the genuine candidate fundraising from low income donors. there's a narrative of the new liberal enlightenment as they would say. but the clinton campaign, you think the key problem is the issue of trust. people because of the f.b.i., because of the corporate deals, because of the changing of tone, because of the way the country --

hillary's mo. where's hillary's mo? pat: she doesn't have momentum right now she might get it back in new york. sanders is doing well. the democratic party is moving dramatically to the left. what sanders is offering, quite frankly is a lot of free stuff. that somebody else is going to pay for. the big banks or the rich or the 1%. and he's -- he's a character in his own right and he has touched into this issue which is maybe a fourth of the country agreed with him and believes him and he's riding it. eleanor: and he hasn't fully thought through how to fully accomplish any of this and that's catching up to him. but he does get a lot of energy and enthusiasm in the democratic party. hillary clinton needs those voters. the math works in her favor. she's the likely nominee. and she can have her fight with bernie sanders but she's got to embrace his voters. and he's not going to go away. he wants a continuing revolution. he wants a protest movement that continues beyond this

and that could help a democrat in the white house so she needs him more than he needs her right now. clarence: what's interest, the similarities between sanders and trump. they're both playing to a discontent out there in the populous. you get phantom issues like immigration. immigration is not the source of people's problems. but it is easy to demagogue and scapegoat. bernie sanders does the same with millionaires and billionaires. but they're not dealing with the details. pat: what trump is doing and you're missing, he's wired into nationalism. we defend our borders, bring our troops home. stop paying other people's bills. stop fighting other people's wars. this is nationalism. all his issues, trade, immigration, foreign policy -- clarence: issues that always pop up when people feel discontent. pat: nationalism is alive in europe, it's what is breaking

these are very large issues. cant you see what's happening worldwide? john: the next question is trump's wisconsin loss a one off or a sign of things to come? tom: i think he has a challenge in the sense that the predictable prince -- brilliance as he would call it of his electoral success up to now was punctured in a state where you'd expect him to do well. it's giving fuel to people who don't like trump. eleanor: the governor and everybody were against him in wisconsin. i think he'll do well in new york and the neevet. cruz wovente beat him in the neevet. pat: i think trump will do well. john: one-off? it's a perfect storm of unique factors unlikely to be replicated in the coming primaries. we're moving on. pat: i think that's exactly right.

when he does cruz will fade a bit and kasich will come up. tom: cruz needs kasich to drop out.

will be one of the three. john: issue two.

know that you had an offshore company which held claims in -- >> what are you trying to make john: two days later, sigmundur gunnlaugsson resigned as prime minister of iceland. why? the so-called "panama papers" companies and 14,000 clients is why. the papers outline offshore tax avoidance schemes and include at least 33 people or businesses that have been blacklisted by the u.s. government. but others named also include the presidents of argentina, ukraine and the united arab emirates and king salman of saudi arabia. and note this. china's president xi jinping -- who has sought to portray himself as an anti-corruption campaigner -- has been embarrassed by the appearance of his brother-in-law on the list. and note something else.

u.s. dollars held by allies of russian president vladimir putin. that may be held on mr. putin's behalf. what's the biggest story here, using shell companies to dodge taxes or using shell companies to hide political corruption? eleanor: i think it's mostly to hide money and whether that money is legally gained or gotten through nefarious means, it all ends up being green and it gets passed to panama. i think we should give president obama some credit this week because the treasury department has tightened some rules and they did stop a big inversion that was under way between pfizer, the drug company and allergen a company in ireland. i think maybe we should take some solace that there are not any 1% americans on this list, but this is only one law firm

places to hide money and americans to end hide their money in the cayman islands and you can even use delaware, it companies. the system is rigged and that plays right into the messages of trump and sanders. pat: i'm waiting for the other shoe to drop because there were no americans on there they hit the chinese, hit the russians, hit the fellow in ukraine. but this is very significant, john. what it looks like even at its most innocent is that all these world leaders have rainy day funds in dollars and they're moved them outside the country and they've got them all locked away for their future. how did they acquire this kind of money? what does it say about their confidence in the world system? secondly as you mentioned, the fact that there are no americans in there doesn't tell me we are better than anyone else. it tells me we haven't gotten

eleanor: it's not new, either. this has been going on for quite some time. tom: i think it does know we are better to a degree because it shows the importance of having a robust government that has independent -- the f.b.i., for example, corruption. in other countries that doesn't exist. putin, that's putin's money. everybody knows that. china, jinping prosecutes who he doesn't like. there's nothing conservative about not paying taxes you owe. but there is something conservative and good for the country in terms of having a lower corporate tax rate that gets rid of deductions. efun -- the unfortunate tax rate is if we don't have those low tax rates we'll have this exodus of wealth pat and i debate about. clarence: i was going to -- the lower tax rate means less incentive to want to hide your money overseas because you can

there's a lot of reasons. but we only found the first of many disclosures here with this international banking story. it's quite possible more americans will pop up. eleanor: congress needs to close this loophole and why aren't they doing it? because we have the best congress that money can buy. john: issue three. nato and national guard. >> north america and europe is able to deliver when we stand together in a strong nato alliance. john: meeting with nato secretary general jens stoltenberg this week, president obama reaffirmed u.s. support for the north atlantic treaty organization, nato. but a leading contender to replace president obama disagrees. donald trump. the g.o.p. presidential frontrunner says, quote-unquote,

is regarded as sympathetic to russia's president vladimir putin. mr. trump also believes other nato members ask too much of u.s. taxpayers. and here at least, mr. trump would seem to have the statistics in his favor. note that after all the vast majority of nato members fail to meet nato's 2% g.d.p. target for annual defense spending. still, others fear that russia remains a serious threat. and perhaps signaling new plots on the horizon, president putin has set up a new militia force under his direct control. is nato obsolete? i ask you, tom. tom: i don't think nato is obs lute. but donald trump he, absolutely has legitimate points, one robert gates and multiple presidents have made behind the scenes, europe doesn't spend

what you say to germany as the best example, spend more in this timeline or the bases go to poland and you lose that revenue there absolutely is -- clarence: not a great time to be attacking nato. now we can talk about europe, pat work the kind of problems they're dealing with right now as well as what's happening in the middle east. tom: that's a two-way street. clarence: that could be worked out. it's always awkward, not spending enough on defense. pat: clarence, look, it is seven years after world -- 70 years after world war ii, 25 years after the end of the cold war. why do 600 million europeans, rich, fat, and prosperous, need the united states of america to defend them from a middle class country of 147 million? why is it not time for the europeans to man up, put on their big boy pants and defend themselves? eleanor: why don't you go over and talk to some of the people

ask them how they feel about russia and -- pat: they don't like it then -- eleanor: and russia is newly assertive plus -- pipe why do we have to defend them? eleanor: we have knitted together this community with europe, with australia, with japan, and that 60% of the world's economy and we've had peace in europe. pat: why don't they defend themselvess? eleanor: we have a lot to do with that. pat: why don't they defend themselvess? eleanor: the sust still considered the leader in the world despite all your yelling about nationalism. they look to us and i think it's a leadership role that most americans are proud of. clarence: we need to look at our relationship though. there are strategic reasons why you may not want americans under european command if we are allies. pat: let me agree with you a lot

trump raised the issue, he's put it on the table. it's time it's addressed. they have been acting like deadbeats since the end of the cold war. eleanor: don't act like trump invented the criticism. president obama was quoted complaining about the free riders. this has been tension. but we need nato and the threats they're facing now with cyber threats are -- it's a whole new generation of threats. john: exit question. without nato, would the world be more stable or more unstable? pat: undeniably, i think the europeans will not man up and defend themselves but they're going to have to. eleanor: without nato, the world would be unstable and we have a big role to play in that too. tom: unstable, we do have a big role to play but we need our allies to do more. clarence: in today's world we need our allies to do more but we need to renegotiate who is in charge. that's part of the problem.

big boy in command of the whole situation but the others need to pay their fair share. john: without nato, europe would revert to collective security tax and they would be characterized like alliances on the eve of world war i. it would be far more unstable. is that a reflection of your thinking? clarence: i agree 100%. clarence: we'll --

predictions. john: position, bernie sanders will upset hillary clinton in new york's primary, tuesday, april 19. yes or no? pat. pat: come close but won't quite make it. eleanor: hillary clinton wins new york. tom: hillary clinton wins new york. clarence: hillary clinton wins, etc., etc.

bye-bye. uh, hello geico?... yeah, i was just talking about your emergency roadside service and how it's available 24/7 and then our car overheated... what are the chances? can you send a tow truck please? uh, the location? you're not going to believe this but it's um... it's in a tree. i wish i was joking, mate, but it's literally stuck in a tree. (car horn honking) a chainsaw? no, no, all we really need is a tow truck. day or night, geico's emergency roadside service is there for you. >> announcer: the following is a paid commercial program proudly brought to you be prosvent. do you make frequent trips to the bathroom... suffer from urgency... hesitancy? do you get up more than once a night? can you even sit through a movie? or, worse, have a diminished sex