secondly, it is a team sport. select people that know each other and have each other's confidence and can work together. , for me, i have worked for vice president cheney known bobears, i had gates for 40 years, i had known condi for 20 years. peoplee a comfort with and you have confidence with them and there is a presumption of good faith and it really helps that things done. secondly, i would say the president and the national security advisor, the interagency process is the 's process and if it is not working, the president needs to fix it because no one else will be able to. thirdly, i think i would say to consensus ifget you can on lower-level issues among the principals but take it check president as a because the president may not agree with the consensus. the national security council again does not make decisions. it prepares decisions for the president to make. who the country has elected to decide. work on consensus at the lower levels but on the big issues, bring him or her options. let us have the pre

who can beat her, and secondly, who could be president? because then is gets to be serious on your shoulder. see, then it gets to be a serious issue about what you want this country to look like and who can really run it. so that's kind of my view about this. you'd be a good candidate maybe. >> do you think that you could do more in the white house than you could as governor of ohio? >> as vice president? >> no, as vice president sitting in the west wing -- >> i would the worst vice president anybody ever had, okay? trust me. >> how have you been able to govern ohio while campaigning full time? >> there's these things, chuck, it's really amazing, they're called cell phones. >> no, i understand. but, i mean, where has it been difficult, though? something you cannot do -- is there initiatives you haven't gone after? >> no, not really. we're, you know, we're preparing a whole series of things right now. i meet with my staff when i'm at home. i'm on the phone with them constantly. my number one job is to make sure ohio is taken care of. runnin

who can beat her, and secondly, who could be president? because then is gets to be serious on your shoulder. see, then it getses to be a serious issue about what you want this country to look like and who can really run it. so that's kind of my view about this. you'd be a good candidate maybe. >> do you think that you could do more in the white house than you could as governor of ohio? >> as vice president? >> no, as vice president sitting in the west wing -- >> i would the worst vice president anybody ever had, okay? trust me. >> how have you been able to govern ohio while campaigning full time? >> there's these things, chuck, it's really amazing, they're called cell phones. >> no, i understand. but, i mean, where has it been difficult, though? something you cannot do -- is there initiatives you haven't gone after? >> no, not really. we're, you know, we're preparing a whole series of things right now. i meet with my staff when i'm at home. i'm on the phone with them constantly. my number one job is to make sure ohio is taken care of. runn

and secondly, i'm the only one that can win in the fall. look at those polls. >> these are process -- >> did you see those polls, though? >> how did they look? >> have you to win states -- >> how do the polls in the fall look? >> that's fine, governor, if you're not the nominee, you can't beat that -- >> that's what the delegates will take into consideration. who can win in the fall? >> what happens to the trump people, they evaporate? >> no, i get involved with the trump people just fine. there's a lot of people that come down, and they try to decide, am i for trump or kasich? look at those polls? you can't just pick this poll and that poll. it doesn't work that way. >> these are states voting. i want to talk one more question about the process. you're competing there, you have an add up saying mitt romney is supporting you. this is the ad. >> he has a real track record, you want to see that balanced budget, you want to get rid of obama care, we have to turn out and make sure we send a signal loud and clear. america's counting on you, a gr

secondly i don't know where they're going to sue us. cuba has free elections, cuba stops putting people in jail for speaking out, it kicks out the chinese listening station, it stops helping north korea evade u.n. sanctions, and they take the fugitives from justice, including the cop killer and send her back to the united states, that's a good deal. >> senator cruz, if you become president, would you reverse course and once again break diplomatic relations with cuba? >> yes, i would. i think this highlights a choice for republican primary voters. when it comes to foreign policy, do you want to continue on the same basic trajectory as the last seven years as the obama foreign policy? when it comes to these deals, cuba and iran, they were negotiated by hillary clinton and john kerry. there's a really difference between us. donald supported hillary clinton and john kerry. and what he said right now is that he agrees in principle with what they're doing. the only thing he thinks is at that they should negotiate a little bit better deals, th

and secondly, it could become a security issue, which we don't want.for you at this point you're a student and i don't know what the path would be, maybe you get a green card, i don't know. but we don't want to go around grabbing 11 million people out of their homes, shipping them across the border and having their kids sitting on the porch crying that mom and dad have been taken out. i believe this can work. once the wall is done, if anybody comes in, you gotta go back. no excuses, because we have to get beyond this situation. i think the proposal i have is reasonable, a path to legalization, but never to citizenship for those that jump the line is, i think, something that the people can accept and something that can pass the congress. we need to lower the rhetoric on this and just get it done. let's be americans first before we're fighting with one another down there all the time. >> governor, what's the distinction there? you said you don't believe in a path way to citizenship, but a path way to legalization. for people at home, what's the differenc

secondly, curb the military budget and use military sources to help end the deficit and revitalize the america. they do not represent a new direction. that affects everybody. the voting rights act is the most pivotal act of the century. unless they have a plan to enforce the voting rights act to win the primary, they do not deserve the vote. so the questions of social justice and peace and sharing power with women are critical to my agenda. >> thank you. mr. mcgovern, you have been critical of gary hart recently. he was your campaign manager inn you ran for president 1972. [laughter] john: is his talk about the future, about the opportunities for a new generation, much different than what you were saying in 1972? mr. mcgovern: first of all, i think i trained gary too well. let me say, as one who is great special affection for gary hart and who will certainly support him if he is the democratic nominee, that i do think some legitimate questions have to be asked when the issue is posed. he says the election as a contest between the past and the future. now, i am not sure what the past me

secondly, it is a team sport. select people who know one another, have each other's confidence and can work together. and i would say in the -- you know, for me, i had worked for vice president cheney for four years. i had known bob gates for 40 years. i had known condi for 20 years. you know, you have a comfort with people and you have confidence with them and there's a presumption of good faith. and it really helps things get done. secondly, and i'd say the president, and i'd say the national security adviser, the inner agency process is the president's -- the president has to take responsibility for it. if it's not working and it's dysfunctional, the president needs to fix it. because nobody else is going to be able to fix it for him. thirdly, i think i would say to them, yes, get consensus, if you can, on lower level principles but take it to the president as a check because the president may not agree with the consensus. again, the national security council does not make decisions. it prepares decisions for t

european area can be maintained and that we step by step can step away from the border controls and secondly also because of the security concerns because we need to know who comes to europe and greece there has an important position as a country with an external border and also the sea or maritime border with turkey and therefore the summit on monday was certainly focused on the meeting with the turkish prime minister amed and we will certainly inform each other on the process of what is europe doing on a humanitarian basis and how will we implement the three years that have been set aside for turkey and secondly if we achieve it what do we still have to do in order to control the influx of refugees, the nato mission really has to start, they are still on the prefary stage and hoping for progress on monday and glad to see france is also willing to provide one's ship an order to control the aegean sea better. the corporation with front text and the turkish coast guard is important here and we will talk now in the following talks about the readmission from greece to turkey of those refugees t

secondly, i don't know where cuba is going to sue us. but if they sue us in a court in miami, they're going to lose. third, on the issue of a good deal, i know what the good deal. i'll tell you what the good deal is already codified. here is a good deal. cuba has free elections, cuba stops putting people in jail for speaking out. cuba has freedom of the press. cuba kicks out stops helping north korea evade u.n. sanctions. cuba takes all the fugitives of american justice including that cop killer from new jersey and send her back to the united states and jail where she belongs. you know what? then we can have a relationship with cuba. that's a good deal. >> thank you, senator rubio. >> senator cruz, if you become president, would you reverse course and once again break diplomatic relations with cuba? >> yes, i would. you know, i think this engines exchange actually highlights a real choice for republican primary voters. when it comes to foreign policy, do you want to continue on the same basic trajectory as the last seven years as the oba

and secondly, don't be surprised if i go to that convention with more delegate strength than anybody else. we have a long way to go with half the delegates still to be chosen about a thousand. >> all right. >> so fasten your seat belt, neil. >> as always, thank you very, very much, governor kasich, good chatting with you. >> thank you, neil. >> john kasich, he is governor of the state hosting the convention. keeping everyone safe. in ohio, we're waiting for donald trump to address crowds. what jack welsh thinks is at stake and what the donald might have to say. and jack welsh, one of the greatest ceo's ever on ted cruz and why he thinks he's the guy with the right tone and the right approach. jack, next. this little guy is about to make his first deposit. we'd like to open a savings account for him. yes yes. great thanks to mom and dad and their safe driving bonus check from allstate. oh. look at this. safe driving bonus. are you a safe driver? lucky little fella. only allstate gives you two safe driving bonus checks a year for driving safe. see how much more an allstate agent can do

secondly we talk about nato. that was another thing i talked about.tion but an intelligence gathering and also a policing organization that works across boundaries. all of us together, fighting together, working together, destroys isis, have the good human intelligence -- >> donald trump says nato's obsolete. is it? >> of course it's not. that's absurd. obsolete, okay. [ applause ] it's really important that we get these countries to pitch in and do more. they'll never do as much as we want. i mean i lived through a whole time we would push them, pressure them. part of the problem is the governments over there are too much socialism, too much political correctness. that's why they didn't even catch this stuff in brussels. you know the screwups that we saw with the intelligence but here's the thing, no, nato has an additional role now and that is policing and intelligence gathering. you see, we need to have the muslims working with us and the west -- >> that's critical? >> absolutely critical. let me tell you, anderson, if we wanted to get information

secondly secondly, the question here is what's going to happen at airports inside the united states. airport zurt at the perimeters, before you get in, before you get to the point where you check into an airplane is the responsibility not of tsa or homeland security, but individual airports in the u.s. so far we've been told by yet given any guidance to airports in the united states on what they should do. if past experience is any guide, i think you can expect larger airports in the u.s., new york, los angeles, perhaps miami, will respond on their own by putting additional security -- additional people -- sometimes in the past we've seen where they even restrict car travel at the front of airports in response to specific threats or perceived thrts. that's something american authoriti are going to have to work out in the coming hours as we come up to the same time of day where this bomb occurred in belgium which is roughly 8:00 a.m. no word on that yet. they're assessing the situation. they're certainly aware of these reports. the european authorities, you can imagine, are a little b

and secondly, start shooting down or tearing up the pieces of it one by one. >> the desert storm air campaign would have four phases. phase one had three goals -- gain air superiority, destroy saddam's stroo teategic capabil, namely scuds, and disrupt his command and control. the allies estimated the first phase would last 20 to 25 days. phase two would be short. the allies planned on taking one day to suppress mobile air defenses in the kto or kuwaiti theatre of operations. during phase three, allied air power would continue to hit the targets of phase one, but they would shift their attack to the iraqi field army and the kto, totaling close to half a million men, over 4,000 tanks, and 3,000 artillery pieces. >> one of the main missions was preparing the battlefield. he called it shaping the battlefield. he had to defeat those elements of his ground forces capable of mass casualties, artillery, armor. >> an important part was the republican guard. saddam was depending on them to drive back the coalition ground forces if they attacked his dug-in army. >> one of the centers of gravity

secondly, even after spending $650 billion in the last three years, the pentagon admits we have fewer combat ready divisions than we had in 1980 under the carter administration. that means ronald reagan is plundering the readiness counts of our conventional forces for a procurement those up which will make as weaker. >> before we go on, maybe we can find a way to make this more understandable. you present is asked for a 13% increase this year in allocations for defense? that is a 13% increase? what would your figure b? in that context? >> minus three point 5%-4%. >> if we can keep it to that, it will make more sense. >> not to argue with senator hart -- >> why not? >> he wrote a dissenting opinion in which he seemed to say he wanted as much or more military spending as mr. reagan. but we make my point. one of the realities of the modern presidential leadership is that as much as we want to bring the defense budget down, and i do, as much as you want to get rid of weapons systems that don't buy us defense, as much as we need a tough system of testing and warranties, as much as we need

and secondly, i understand what you said. makes sense. fewer workers. but couldn't that money come from somewhere else like foreign aid or how about the perks for lifetime in senate and representatives get that we still pay for and they're not doing anything? they're not doing anything now. >> you know, it's sort of like -- first of all, we could take it out of waste, fraud and abuse. don't know whether you know this or not but if you walk into the government and you say, hey, can you show me where the waste, fraud and abuse office is, that doesn't exist. number two, foreign aid is a tiny little piece. i'm just going to give you the real story and not tell you what you want to hear. it's tiny. if we took away all the salaries of all the members of congress, it would be like a spit in the ocean compared to what we're facing. so we're still trying to figure out exactly what those income levels are. but it is vital that those who really depend on it can get it, and those who have had the ability to accumulate wealth over time will get less. they'll not get

secondly differently but related is the energy budget. i believe it's a good step forward to more clearly identify the r&d and infrastructure of budget lines at atl which were previously impossible to find and i would just add that the director was really a driver of wanting that kind of structure to allow her to strengthen the r&d. >> i appreciate that any segue nicely for me to my neck question. we were going through this budget in the fossil energy r&d account to get change a lot of the names and maybe this is a result of what you just said to more clearly identify that made it a little bit difficult for us to interpret where the money is and what that could mean. the rationale you gave me previously is that the rationale specifically? >> wewe will be a losing more clearly with the funding is. the budget request with a particular piece driving it might be finally addressing the computer upgrade needs. >> i guess what i would like to have is a commitment from you that the d.o.e. would work and we can more easily parse these and understa

and secondly, i've got the record, the experience, and the vision and the ability to bring president. that's why i'm doing this. >> we saw the evidence of what people in and two anti-trump candidates split the vote. missouri and illinois. delegates. if you go about this in new york and pennsylvania and some of these other states, you and cruz could end up handing more delegates to trump inadvertently. >> maybe ted ought to get out, fall. maybe these people that are hot it. they try to tell me to get out of the race. how many times, chuck -- and now they should be thanking me for staying in, because if trump had won ohio, it would be over. i have a record of accomplishment, a record of bringing people together, a vision for the future of this country. and guess what? in the grassroots, people are getting it. now, they didn't get it because, frankly, you put me on the tube a lot, but trump got $1.8 billion worth of free media. i got like none. >> not all of it was positive. >> people are starting to hear look at what our numbers are. >> if you thought your candidacy were helping trump,

because i can win in the fall, and secondly, because i have the experience and the record to lead this country. and chuck, if i didn't think that, i wouldn't be running. >> yesterday, earlier in n the week, you totally ruled out ever being donald trump's running mate. >> under no circumstances. what are you people, kidding me? >> what about ted cruz? >> no. i'm not going to be anybody's -- >> that's just as sherman-esque with ted cruz as it is with donald trump? >> you pundits have to get out of washington. you don't understand me. a lot of people just can't figure, how could this guy mean what he says, how is it that he's no different than what he appears? you can't figure that out. people are like, what's his calculation, what's this or that. folks, i don't have time for her that. >> as you know, ted cruz is going to use two issues to try to wedge, if it's even a delegate fight, and that's common core and immigration. >> well, let me just say this. is in my state. our state board of education has proved high standards. and our local school boards are the ones that devise the curricul

secondly, there was just an article where israeli were learning to rain underground in combat because hamas is digging tunnels trying to come in under israel. they're coming at them from above, trying to come at them under the ground. i don't believe there is any long-term permanent peace solution. i think pursuing that is a wrong thing to do. i think everybody day supporting them with our 100% backing is the way to proceed in the middle east with regard to israel. >> senator cruz, i want to stay in the region. just this week there was a central command general lloyd austin essentially said it's going to take a lot more troops on the ground to fix -- to end the isis threat in syria and iraq. from the beginning of this campaign, you have said you will follow the judgment of military commanders and the pentagon. here's the commander saying a lot more troops are needed on the ground. will you follow that advice and inject americans again into what is in essence is metastasizing shi'a/sunni war. >> we need to do whatever we need to do to defeat isis. right now we're not using a fraction o

secondly, on immigration, i ho not believe it is practical or doable to search in the nehborhoods and yank the people who came here illegally, and have not committed a crime since they've been here, and ship them out of the country. that is not going to happen. the plan that i support, finishing the border, making sure you have a guest worker program, and having the 11.5 million who came here illegally who have not committed a crime, pay back taxes, pay a fine. have a path to legalization and not citizenship. and any other position than that just isn't going to work, chuck. i haa to tell you that. it isn't going to work. >> you talk about yourself as a consensus builder. i'm curious, what do you make of the republican senate strategy on the supreme court pick, merrick garland? should the senate at least hold hearings? >> you know, chuck, look, this is one i'm not going to actually answerdirectly, because i don't think the senate is waiting there with bated breath for my opinion. i don't think the president should set it up. they can go ahead and meet with him, the senators can meet wi

. - and secondly, he didn't have authority from the u.n. and we were trying to create a world in which people were willing to come together as a coalition to fulfill the commitment that's made that brought 'em in and no more. - it's charming to think that there was a time when we didn't have authority from the u.n., was not something to be cheering about, right? i mean, the idea today. - yes. - the politics of the world are so different today. the idea that you would go to the u.n. for support or ratification or anything, we hate the u.n. that's the big picture theory. - it was hated before. - it was hated before. - yeah, right. - and what bush did with his relationship with all the people at the u.n., he had been our delegate to the u.n. he knew them all. - he knew them all personally. - and knew the way the process worked. he got, if you will, the cover for the u.s. to use force for the first time since vietnam. use force to kick saddam hussein out and create it in such a way that the american public was comfortable that it was the right thing to do. - now, i mentioned the politics h

secondly, again, we are not pulling the plug on the technology. the third, we absolutely still need a national security-based capability sometime probably in the next 20 years or so. if we had several billion dollars now we could start building that national security train. the current machines as we've discussed before will not be part of that. it's not like they are the beginning of it. they are not part of it. and the problem right now is that we have passed the useful -- the useful life of that cluster. but we do need a national security train. and right now, i've said it before, today, certainly, the only american technology that we have is the acp -- is the acp. >> is that project. >> yeah. >> let's talk for a second about the cleanup. as you know, in 2008, president obama made all kinds of commitments that he was going to clean it up. your self have made commitments. d.o.e. in 2009 said they were going to accelerate the cleanup to complete the work by 2024. this is for the old technology, for those that don't have to follow it as closely as

secondly that you have a outreach record that is long-standing, not just from the current cycle. >> one thing i would add as a caveat, while i use hispanic and latino interchangeably, i do not not use latino and immigrant interchangeably. >> .. >> >> that there was no outrage to the latino community that all is why i did the a comparison to the harry reid campaign not because he is a democrat but that is what you do to attract the voters. the positions never end you will still do not reach. >> so it can pain will say we have limited resources. we have to look for the equation to get us over the top. very enough. but even if you look at latino voters highly likely put the levels of our reach from the party's is very low. less than 50% tended to get the our region and even lower from the republican party. cry with say it is lackluster overall and varies in is intense with the battleground states but there is a lot of first-time voters with that data mining to create a profile of the habitual voters. >> something i found interesting and correct me if i misrepresent but one of the interesti

mondale: secondly, i talked about your $10 a barrel tax. that is the worst idea in this campaign. sen. hart: that was a carter-mondale initiative. mr. mondale: oh, no. i have had nothing to do with that, it is the worst idea. carter is not for it. nobody except you is for it, and you are not talking about it anymore it is so bad. half a million people lose their jobs. america will become the highest cost producing area in the country. talk about intrusion and destruction of jobs and entrepreneurship and position in international trade. this is a disaster. i do not think you thought it through. sen. hart: let me respond. mr. mondale: let me finish my point. rev. jackson: this is a bad idea. [laughter] mr. chancellor: i am terribly worried. you either have a choice -- i am sorry, but the clock is inexorable -- of having a chance to say what you want to say at the end or squeezing it at the very end. so senator, can you say it in 25 words or less? sen. hart: less than that. i voted for a carter-mondale tariff on imported oil. i was only one of 15 senators who had the courage to suppo

and secondly, whether or not if i did, who that would be. for me, just looking at all these facts, but just on a personal level, i have to tell you, in a way i think a don't think a lot of americans have seen, i got a chance. i didn't know ted cruz well before the campaign this past year. i dot to see him and know him in a lot of events, not just at debates, but we would bump into each other at campaign stops and events across the country, and i think the media doesn't give him all the benefit of what i found personally interacting with him. that's he is a decent man. he loves his family. he loves his wife. he adores his children. he loves hicountry. he and i are both preachers' kids. i certainly can appreciate and feel strongly about the impact that his father had on him. as a minister. i think for the two of us having grown up in both in our 40s, he's a couple years younger than i am, but we're both in our 40s, and just the sense, as i did, and others did like paul ryan, we all came of age. we weren't political forces. we literally came of