when i hear tina talk about that talk about the amf the 2001 aumf is not the obama administration. a blanket delegation of authority to go after persons organizations person's organizations and nations who conducted 9/11. asked my foreign relations class could be obama's administration attack people in saudi arabia under the 2000 amf on the fact that they'd help the hijackers may think the answer is yes. the 2001 aumf is incredibly broad. and when i look at the proposed aumf administration this is a deeply cynical document because it doesn't repeal the 2001 aumf and it has all these constraints. no one during offensive military operation under this new aumf but when this expires the 2001 aumf is still operative. there's a three-year limit to this proposed aumf of the obama destination which is relevant because the 2001 aumf is a backdrop. i don't see a major difference in outcomes. i thought we were still taking prisoners. one reason we are not taking prisoners is because the present is biting this war with drones and there are prisoners to take. this is not meant to be criticism.

also says once to see the amf to stop dealing in european affairs. he wants europe to have its own european monetary form. >> karen, one of the problems is a possible knockdown effect. what sort of political pressure is actually on president hollande? what would mr. cameron do over again? course, the pressure is high because the next presidential election, 10 months from now. havee next year you will elections in both germany and france of the eu leaders of these two powerhouses might be replaced. latest polls show than counselor hollande would be eliminated in the first round of next year the matter who is running against him. has about 27% in the polls. even though all the polls, of course, actually showing she would lose in the second round. >> thank you. joining us from paris. coming up, a look at the huge moves in the currency market. biggestd suffered its drop on record. could volatility be here to stay? more bloomberg is coming up next. >> will the pound continue to underperform? we are joined at from new york. rude to have you with us on

. >> the point i'm making is, the only amf we find unacceptable ties the hands of the military. >> let him veto it i think americans are angry. i think they want action. >> i hear. >> you they don't want to hear we can't, we can't, we can't. pass the declaration of war. if reid tries to filibuster in the senate we will all know he is the big villain again. you have to show the american people that you guys really feel the way they feel that these people have to be dealt with. we 2001 and 9/11 and now it's 15 years later. it's september. and we still have to deal with these pigs. and these savages. and i think that people, american people are as angry as i have ever seen them in my lifetime. i think that congress has to reflect that now. >> talk about anger. we passed a bill last year calling for the president to give us a plan to defeat isis? what did he do? he sent us a few pages of talking points. is he phoning in on the war on terror. trust me when we say we share that frustration. >> he is only president for a few more months. and you guys have got to mobilize. now, you and i have

. >> the point i'm making is the only amf he says he will accept is one that we find unacceptable whichnds of the military. >> let him veto it. you see what i'm talking about? i think americans are angry. i think that they want action. and they don't -- >> -- i hear. >> you they don't want to hear we can't, we can't, we can't. pass the declaration of war. if reid tries to filibuster it in the senate. then we will all know again that he is the big villain again. you guys have got to show the american people that you really feel the way they feel. that these people have to be dealt with. >> and i would encourage to you go to better dot gop. a better dot gop we released a national security strategy last thursday before orlando, 67 recommendations on exactly what we should be doing to confront islamic radical terrorism and. >> deck declaration of war is huge. nato would have to come in. you know that that is a game changer. it's gone on too long. you no he that mr. speaker. we got hit in 2001. >> 01. >> 9/11 and now it's 15 years later. it's september. and we still have to deal with these p

. >> the point i'm making is, the only amf we find unacceptable ties the hands of the military. >> letit i think americans are angry. i think they want action. >> i hear. >> you they don't want to hear we can't, we can't, we can't. pass the declaration of war. if reid tries to filibuster in the senate we will all know he is the big villain again. you have to show the american people that you guys really feel the way they feel that these people have to be dealt with. we 2001 and 9/11 and now it's 15 years later. it's september. and we still have to deal with these pigs. and these savages. and i think that people, american people are as angry as i have ever seen them in my lifetime. i think that congress has to reflect that now. >> talk about anger. we passed a bill last year calling for the president to give us a plan to defeat isis? what did he do? he sent us a few pages of talking points. is he phoning in on the war on terror. trust me when we say we share that frustration. >> he is only president for a few more months. and you guys have got to mobilize. now, you and i have talked bef

. >> the point i'm making is, the only amf we find unacceptable ties the hands of the military. >> lety want action. >> i hear. >> you they don't want to hear we can't, we can't, we can't. pass the declaration of war. if reid tries to filibuster in the senate we will all know he is the big villain again. you have to show the american people that you guys really feel the way they feel that these people have to be dealt with. we 2001 and 9/11 and now it's 15 years later. it's september. and we still have to deal with these pigs. and these savages. and i think that people, american people are as angry as i have ever seen them in my lifetime. i think that congress has to reflect that now. >> talk about anger. we passed a bill last year calling for the president to give us a plan to defeat isis? what did he do? he sent us a few pages of talking points. is he phoning in on the war on terror. trust me when we say we share that frustration. >> he is only president for a few more months. and you guys have got to mobilize. now, you and i have talked before about kate's law. and this ties into te

on the amf question -- on the aumpf question, that is a domestic question and i am not qualified to answer. i would defer to my colleagues appear. up on theking question of soft power tools and how to move the iceberg am i think that is where a lot of our effort ought to go on the next ministration. simple stuff, but the non-flashy stuff that we will spend a lot of time on. rebuilding relationships and a sense of trust in the united states of our gulf arab friends and partners, so that with a believe us when we say we are going to stand with you and they trust that they can rely on that assurance. it's simple. you say those words very easily. but actually getting back and several trust and a sense of real commitment on the part of the united states is going to take a lot of effort. it is going to take a lot of commitment of resources. derek spoke about the four prongs on the military side. it will take more people. people interactions. it will take refreshed diplomat can or actions. a sense that between the united states and our partners in the region may have differences of view, but they

on the amf question -- on the aumpf question, that is a domestic question and i am not qualified to answer. i would defer to my colleagues appear. up on theking question of soft power tools and how to move the iceberg am i think that is where a lot of our effort ought to go on the next ministration. simple stuff, but the non-flashy stuff that we will spend a lot of time on. rebuilding relationships and a sense of trust in the united states of our gulf arab friends and partners, so that with a believe us when we say we are going to stand with you and they trust that they can rely on that assurance. it's simple. you say those words very easily. but actually getting back and several trust and a sense of real commitment on the part of the united states is going to take a lot of effort. it is going to take a lot of commitment of resources. derek spoke about the four prongs on the military side. it will take more people. people interactions. it will take refreshed diplomat can or actions. a sense that between the united states and our partners in the region may have differences of view, but they

two, i don't agree with you on the amf issue.matters to congress to dictate what the president does you guys should debate it and come up with it. that's the only place where i see some hypocrisy in what you're saying versus what you're doing. >> he has the authority it's already been given to him. what we're doing in congress, we could give him new authority but we didn't like what he sent over, but point well made. >> you can debate it any time you want. >> this is a conversation about terrorism and you don't hear anyone on the house floor talking about how we defeat the threat of rising terrorism. this is -- they've been wanting to talk about guns for decades and they're trying to use this issue to talk about guns instead of the real threat and in middle america where i come from, that really frustrates people because they want to address this threat. they want to feel safe in their homes and in their countries and in their schools and they know that you can take away guns but you're not taking away the real cause of the viole