but if you look historically and go administration to administration and look at the examples, and i go through each administration and over the key events and how the key assumpti assumptions drove responses, one thing you will see is typically what drove arab leaders was their preoccupation of what mattered to them. i am not saying the relationship with israel was immaterial to them but it never drove what they did toward us. it never drove how they decided how close they should be, from their standpoint, the one thing that was critical especially among those who were traditional american friends in the region was how reliable are we? were we going to be the source of their security which mattered more than anything else and they would not do anything to put that at risk. so their relationship with us was a function of their priority. not a function of what our relationship with israel is. i demonstrate this in one administration after the next. one thing i do throughout the book is show the echoes that reverberate over time and how you see not just the same arguments reflect on th

the bill increases the numbers of administrative law judges but not the oversight. i'm not sure that many in this body are aware that some of the administrative law judges in this country have an overturn rate of 95% or higher and we're adding more but not increasing the oversight. there's no opportunity given for greater accountability or even to improve the judicial code of conduct here, a basic element of reform that should be in this. that's where the claimant representative, according to the social security administration office of inspector general in 2013 the top ten claimant representatives made $23 million. remember that the payment for the claimant representative comes directly out of the money that should go to the disabled individual, not from another fund. it's from the individual that should have received that money as disability. so the more the reps, the less the tax money gets to the disabled. there's no change in this model. it continues to provide continuing funding for claimant representatives and attorneys and continues to leave those in disabil

where the administration refuses to work with local officials. sheriff cummings in cape cod, massachusetts, recently explained his frustration with immigration custom enforcement when an immigrant who had overstayed his visa was arrested for battery with a dangerous weapon and child pornography. sheriff cummings said that he -- when he learned that this individual who had a long criminal history was in the country illegally, he asked immigration custom enforcement for a federal immigration detainer -- quote -- "so that if someone came up with a bail, we would then turn him over to immigration custom enforcement and we wouldn't release him back into the community." end of quote. now, what happened? i.c.e. -- immigration custom enforcement -- never issued the detainment. chaichairman cummings noted that immigration authority would issue detainers pretty quickly, but not anymore. so he comments -- and i have a long quote here -- "it

he is talking about the kennedy administration, the johnson administration, those in the white house. this must have been amusing for nixon. and he is very effusive in his praise for the shah. he makes a very problem entry speech -- complementary speech on the shah and it lays groundwork for once nixon resumes -- assumes the presidency. host: after he does become he goes toin 1969, the -- and pronounces his foreign-policy. there are only news reporters ,here and here he articulates and again when he rally support , can wecy in vietnam queue that up? >> a leader of another country expressed this opinion to me when i was traveling in asia as a private citizen, he said, when you are trying to assist another nation to defend its freedom, u.s. policy should be to help them fight the war on but not to fight the war for them. in accordance with this wise guam thei lay down in future for american policy toward asia. first, the u.s. will keep all commitments. we shall provide a shield if a nuclear power threatens the freedom of a nation allied with us, or of a nation whose survival we consider

this was new to end of the bush administration. everybody have been talking about why bush and cheney wanted to go to war in iraq. and they did this cartoon. it's amazing we all do our cartoons on the same topic. and that's the problem. what you try to do is find something unique or special or some way of putting this across. i had been sitting on day trying to come up with some idea to explain why i thought they went to war. the thought of this and i thought surely someone is done this so i checked the internet trying to find it. i could not find anything. sent with the cartoon was trying to see if someone else it done it. and it said why bush and cheney went to war and it was a connect wasdots and i thought that yellowstone's undoing the perfect cartoon was doing a cartoon in 20 minutes. and i did this in 20 minutes. i was happy about it. no one also done it. this next one is kind of another reason. what i thought, this was in bush's second term i think. thoughts the underlying message that bush and cheney were giving all during

does this tamp down that division or that divisiveness between this administration and the canadian administration now that trudeau will be moving into power? >> well, again, i, my sense is that the strength of the u.s./canada relationship is based on all those areas where we've been able to effectively work together to advance our shared interests. whether that's making commitments to the climate process in paris, to fighting isil in iraq and in syria, or, you know, working cooperatively with ten other nations in the asia-pacific to advance our economic interests in the transactions of the trans-pacific partnership. each of those represents areas where the u.s. and canada have been able to pursue our interests. all three of those other things i just mentioned are a much bigger deal. and ultimately, you know a decision will be rendered on the keystone project. but, you know, i'm confident that the, regardless of what that final decision is, i have confidence and will continue to have confidence in the strength of the u.s./canada relationship. >> jim webb steps out of the race in the democratic sid

this is at the same time the obama administration administration and the state department were talking about the inflammatory video, trying to show difference there. there has been a lot of focus and discussion on this issue of whether or not secretary clinton was disengaged in the security issues surrounding the benghazi compound. we heard one exchange by a member of congress, pushing her on whether or not she had taken security seriously enough. >> no one ever came to me and said we should shut down our compound in benghazi. >> i'm saying shutting down, i'm saying protecting it. >> there has been talk that the committee's work was on the point of boiling over. what did we see. >> they set the tone take it's not about politics or hillary clinton, it's about getting to the facts. democrats pushed back saying the structure of the committee, and the tactics that the chairman has been using are, by their nature, political. there has been a lot of fighting here, but secretary clinton managed to stay above na, and a lot of big moments are between committee members. clinton needs to come out

card had worked in -- two run administrations and knew those kinds of rhythms. then you need a knowledge of the washington community. how does the media work? how do -- what are the relationships on the hill like? for example, with news organizations, their needs are the same no matter who is president. so when you come in, as president and your press staff comes in, they have to be familiar with that. what are those routines? you can't just do what you want and have everything on your terms because if you want to get good publicity, you have to understand what the dynamics are of the media. >> host: you're speaking of someone who has made a very careful and full study of the presidency for a number of years now, martha. you're exactly right. but you really, i think, highlighted there -- it's so men stakeholders and constituencies when a new president comes to office. you have congress, who feels like they are the most important group on the block, so to speak, because that's where your legislation is going, in many ways they are. you have the press that particu

scores there are very few metrics to say his administration has done well what is the deal? >> he changes the metric he talks about the deficit it was the highest we have seen when he first took office. and he just changes the metric. to say i am happy he is stepping down i have my doubts began -- of his successor i have no faith in a common core. absolutely none were no child left behind your race to the top. it is a way to purchase education to be successful. >> i don't understand us a new mass -- math to improve on basic arithmetic. >> it isn't it is nonsensical ask any mother or father or any para ince facebook page with the incomprehensible formulas to say this is what my kid is supposed to be doing for homework. that is the legacy not only the secretary of education but also of jeb bush who was running for president. also priority would get the agenda of your school board and they're not arguing how to raise test scores but how the administration is putting pressure on them to give full access to transgendered high-school students to go to the opposite gender locker ro

the kennedyg about administration, johnson administration, and those still in the white house. it must have been music to .ichard nixon's ears he is effusive in his praise for the shah. he comes back to the united states and makes a complementary speech about the shah. that lays the groundwork for the kind of relationship that will exist once richard nixon assumes the presidency. he assumesis: after the presidency, president nexen watches an astronaut splashdown in the south pacific. on july 25, 1969 he goes to guam foreignounces his first policy, articulates it. reporters,nly news no television coverage, but he react to take you way to the vision on november 3, 19 69 when he rallied support for his policy in vietnam called the silent majority speech. troopsre any american were committed to vietnam, a leader of an american country expressed this to me. when i was traveling in asia as a private citizen, he said, when you were trying to assist another nation defend its freedom, u.s. policy should help them fight the war, but not to fight the war for them. in accordance with this

public statements by the administration did not reflect that fact. sharyl: the benghazi committee documents and unearthed the ntroversial set up w wre clinton conducted government business on a private e-mail server. the fbi has now taken possession of it. is there anything that you feel the committee has learned or done to expand the knowledge? >> we have a ton of e-mails her that none of the committees have access to. we have talked to seven eyewitnesses that the other committees did not talk to. we intervieweded1 different folks whwhhad information abou that tragic night. sharyl: the committee's chief critic is chief democrat elijah cummings, who is defending the administration's interest. he accused the republican >> this benghazi select commitite has become the committee to investigate hillary clinton -- period. sharyl: witnesses interviewed behind closed doors include sidney blumenthal and former top clinton aide cheryl mills and jake sullivan, who share the same lawyer and were allegedly present at a benghazi document sorting session. state de

this is tamp down that division or that divisiveness between this administration and the canadian administrationow the trudeau will be moving into. >> my sense is the strength of the u.s. canada relationship is based on all those areas where we have been able to effectively work together to advance our shared interest whether making commitments to the climate process in paris, to fighting isil in iraq and syria are working cooperatively with 10 other nations in the asia-pacific to advance their economic interest in the context of the transpacific hardener should. each of those represent substantial areas where they sit in canada have been able to pursue joint ventures. >> is not a big deal. is that we were staying? >> all. those are the things that i just named very much bigger deal and ultimately a decision will be rendered on the keystone project but i'm confident that regardless of what the final decision as i have confidence and will continue to have confidence in the strength of the u.s. canada relationship areas. >> jim www.steps out of the race on the democratic side. you feel like his vo

particularly with the war, but also in the last part of your administration, you don't have a lot of persuasion -- able to persuade congress to do something that you might want them to do. so you're not spending a lot of time there. then you spent a lot of time on the road, traveling, and i think it's natural to be thinking about a wrapup on your administration, and i think it's very useful to establish a narrative of what your administration accomplished, how it all fit together, particularly with the president's vision, and -- because sometimes people will look at a presidency in part, and individual actions -- >> host: as posed to he whole. >> guest: right. this gives you an opportunity to pull it together. that was something that reagan did, that i think worked to his benefit, and eisenhower did it. i study white house communications, and that -- >> host: going to ask you about that later if we have time here good ahead. >> guest: i've gone through all the files of james haggerty, the press secretary for eisenhower, and he -- his office performed the jobs of about 60 people today

in our administration.the types of things that were challenged for the government of mexico at that time were primarily sort of the heart of law enforcement type of activities, sort of the dea's nba defense. that type of engagement was particularly challenge. we were facilitating commercial

two charges that i flare this administration that are -- i hear from this administration that are completely untrue and i want to dispel this. one is this notion that i hear all the time, that raising the debt limit merely enables us to pay the bills that have already been incurred. how irresponsible, they tell us, not to raise the debt limit. after all, these bills have already been incurred. that's nonsense. it's completely untrue. however many times they repeat it doesn't make it true. i can prove it very simply. if we started running balanced budgets tomorrow and we kept running balanced budgets, we'd never need to borrow any more money. it's as simple as that. if we didn't spend any more than we took in, we wouldn't need to borrow more money. we wouldn't need to increase the debt limit. the precise reason you need to raise the debt limit is because you need to borrow more money because you intend to spend more than you're taking in. that's what the president is planning. that's what he wants to do. that's what his budget calls for. so let's not pretend that this is about -- we haven't c

that's exactly what the obama administration wants to do with the internet. this white house is moving closer to giving up american protection of a free and open internet that it designed and created. this administration is trying to give control of what it calls global stakeholders. principal among them china and russia, two countries better known for censorship than freedom of speech, let alone stewardship of any asset so valuable and precious as the world wide web. >>> a group of skydivers setting an incredible world record before camera. 202 skydivers from 30 nations simultaneously jumping from nine different aircraft and forming the largest sequential skydiving formation ever. in what looks like a giant star as you see there. extraordinary! the daring group accomplishing the fete on their seventh attempt. wow. spectacular. >>> up next, a few thoughts on the president's failures in the middle east and a little bit of why. >>> and shocking video captures the devastating impact of california drought. you will find this video incredible because of what happe

it's not unique to this administration. it's been in every administration from truman until today. and one of the things i tried to highlight in the book, that perspective that sees that if you don't partner with israel, somehow you're better off, is one that i try to show analytically and repeatedly actually doesn't serve your interests. it doesn't serve your interests with the arabs. it doesn't benefit you there. it makes the israelis more suspicious and the behaviors frequently we don't want to see. one of the things that is repetitive throughout history is an unease when the israelis act unilaterally. you make those actions more likely if the israelis have many more doubts about you and about the nature of your readiness to work with them and what's driving you in the region. and so what tom embodied, as i said in my mind, an exemplar of how the most senior officials ought to be working with the israeli counterparts and the great irony i show is ironically that also pays off in terms of affecting those israeli behaviors you would prefer not to see. >> very good. and just lastly

, and what i do is go through each administration and go over the key events in those administrations and how the key assumptions drove responses to those key events, one of the things you'll see is that typically what drove arab leaders was their preoccupation with what mattered to them. and i'm not saying that the u.s./israel relationship was immaterial to them, but it never drove what they did to us. it never drove how they decided their ties should be, how close they should be. from their standpoint, the one thing that was critical was how reliable were we? were we in fact going to be, in fact, a source of their security, which mattered more to them than anything else. and they weren't going to do anything that put that at risk. so their relationship with us was a function of their priorities, not a function of what our relationship with israel was. and i demonstrate this in one administration after the next. one of the things i do throughout the book is show the echoes that reverberate over time. and how you see not just the same arguments reflected on the inside, but the same be

i worked for the clinton administration and bush 43 administration. i'm not blaming them. i'm identifying a certain reality. you give me those three factors and i'll put you on the road to a two-state solution. >> we have seen barack obama and benjamin netanyahu and overtures from vladimir putin and benjamin netanyahu. who is supposed to manage this? what is the united states' role at this point. you brought up a valid point that we saw some activity, and we saw more activity in the bush one administration. what is the right road for the administration now. >> well, you have to set your priorities. governing is about choosing. you asked me about the united states. this analysis does not start in the middle east. the point of departure of this analysis is washington. right now you have a year and change left in the obama administration. i would argue to you that there are at least two priorities which right now concern the administration much more than what to do about the problem of the much-too promised land. number one, seeing the implementation of this administration. i

, a wonderful, wonderful administrator of federal railway administration. thank you very much, mr. president. i would yield the floor. mr. thune: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from south dakota. mr. thune: mr. president, i -- the one thing that the senator from california and i share and that is a commitment, long-standing commitment to getting a multiyear highway bill through here. and i hope that that's going to happen here in the next few weeks. we did need to move on a positive train control extension and i want to get into the reasons for that here in just a minute, but i think probably the most important fact as we look at this particular issue is that nearly every railroad in the country, including every major freight railroad, will not meet what is an unrealistic december 31, 2015, deadline for implementing positive train control. positive train control, or p.t.c., when working as intended is a critical safety technology that will prevent certain types of rail accidents and save lives. we have the ability to make rail transportat

control. >> sorry policy failure explain what you mean. >> the administration engaged in libya and hillary clinton say we have conflicts and people on the ground and this could be viewed as well i gave al-qaeda a target and they seized it. on the other hand if this is a film that some independent film maker has made and inflaming the internet because of anti-muslim you can make the argument the up risings in the middle east is not because of obama or hillary clinton and it's because of the film maker and that was important for the obama administration to make 56 days before an election because they didn't want people to think there had been a policy failure in libya or that somehow the administration had provoked or allowed and al-qaeda attack, they wanted before the election people to think well the jerk who made the film, it was his fault. >> circumstances in libya that the united states helped create did not give rise to a terrorist event, right? so that terrorism was on the way in and we were beating terrorism and libya was one of the forefront areas we were doing this. you know, the d

we take up the obama administration's weak response to russian aggression, join by lieutenant colonel robert mcbegiguinness. and clinton campaign releasing a new ad, features comments by the man vying to be speaker, kevin mccarthy, last week boasted that the benghazi select committee hurt clinton's poll numbers, i take that up with a man along with senator chuck grassley today called for homeland security to take action against this country's sanctuary cities. congressman bob goodlot. and in south carolina, the rain has stopped but the devastation remains. so does the prospect of more destruction, more flooding, a dozen dams have breached, officials warn that rivers have not crested, 11 people have been killed, thousands are homeless, and without party and power -- without water and power, damage estimate more than a bill yoon dollars across the state, some call a thousand year rain, vebt. rain. event. our top story, russia escalating this syrian civil war beyond any level anticipate by either president obama or the pentagon. vladimir putin has order more russian ground forces to syri

obama defended himself and flat foot the administration trying to spend the russian military intervention is an act of putin's weakness, not obama's. we'll discuss why russia does appear to be the stronger not weaker state actor in the middle east, and whether putin intends to extent russia's power and influence around the globe? >>> former pentagon official fox national security analyst k.t. mcfarland is with us tonight. also tonight president obama reflexively pushing gun control after the tragedy at an oregon community college. the president reiterated that he wants to politicize the issue because he said he had to contend with the national rifle association stirring up fear and scaring, scaring politicians. the president also dismissed a change in mental health treatment in this country because he said 99% of disaffected young men grow out of it. we take up his analysis, his diagnosis and the politics of gun control tonight with real clear politics reporter caitlyn huey burns and the weekly standard's fred barnes. >>> millions of residents and businesses bracing for historic rainfall

for example, the bush administration andrew card worked as secretary to new that. and then a knowledge of a washington community. with these news organizations so when you come in as president with the press staff what are those your genes? you cannot just do what you want with everything on your terms because you have to understand the dynamics. >> you're speaking to someone a number of years now but that highlighted their in constituencies when they come to office the most important groupon the block that is the of press and he is not well known as the governor ran not a senator obama had some exposure but you have leaders the you have to be very attuned a and respectful with campaign staff to help you to get elected and bring you to the dance there is seldom did things to do in such a short period of time to make the point the first 100 days is your window of opportunity for the best prepared time to take a vantage as you start early on the transition how did obama do? >> he did well. he had to deal with the american recovery act to make early statements to do e

let's assume that the administration for once in secretaries right.and they use that for the majority of their community. so i'll pick $100 million but they they use 95% of their money for the economy, 5% goes to export of terror around the world. so my mouth that is that's $5 billion, the leading operations of tear runs from a budget of probably a little bit more than $5 billion. anybody want their budget doubled in the fbi. or anywhere else. this is an extraordinary amount of money for terror to have their money on. engaging with shia militias who have now gained the fight there. whichever organization and whichever place whether it's south america or some other place where tara they will not have free reign to do it and resources for company. it is a frightening proposition. the tear component of the agreement where the u.s. sits by and watched eu and un sanctions be lifted on men with blood on their hands, it is the morally reprehensible action i've seen the administration tank and my four and half years of congress. >> to add what both of you hav

the obama administration long ago left this reasonable objective in the dust.t the administration won't tell you is both republicans and democrats in congress oppose many of these regulations, including the new rules on waters of the united states. senators joe donnelly and joe manchin, all democrats, joined us to change these regulations. yet commonsense changes to this rulemaking are being blocked by the president and liberal democrat leaders in congress. even the courts have dealt the obama administration serious setbacks to its regulatory rampage. but by the time's the courts act, the damage is done. those jobs are gone and , communities suffer. the head of the epa bragged that it didn't matter if the obama administration lost in court. the rules had already been in effect for three years. that's outrageous. meanwhile the fines against andy , johnson continued to pile up and could exceed $16 million. his family can't afford to fight anymore, and just like the johnsons in wyoming, the american people can't afford the overreach and onslaught of new regulation

this was near the end of the bush administration. aboutody had been talking why bush and cheney wanted to go to work in iraq. i did up this cartoon. it's amazing -- we all do cartoons on the same topic. and that's the problem. what you try to do is find something unique, something special, or some way of putting this across. i had been sitting all day trying to come up with some idea, trying to explain why i thought they went to war. and i thought this, and i thought surely someone has done this. so i checked the internet trying to find this. i could not find anything. i even said with the cartoon was, trying to see if someone else had done this. and it said, why bush and cheney went to war. it said, connect the dots. a great cartoonist who passed away a few months ago, saying a perfect cartoon was doing one in 20 minutes. that was is perfect-- i did this in 20 minutes. how cool is that? i was happy about it. and no one else had done it. next one is another reason -- this was in bush's second term. thought was the underlying message

what did the administration officials know? know only from documents and testimony and so on that the state department, the obama administration, the people on the ground, the people have said they all knew immediately us was a preplanned terrorist attack. there was no doubt in anybody's mind. that was exchange in e-mails. sharia claimed responsibility. that and operated on that internally. and yet externally, we were told something different. the first statement that came out from secretary of state clinton that night a vote the idea that maybe there was a video that had motivated this spontaneous protest. that's kind of where the controversy begins. and it was followed by weeks of what happened behind closed doors? congress was getting briefings from the cia that were different from what was being said publicly. and now you can put together a very clear timeline. the u.s. told libya the very next morning, an islamic extremist terrorist group claimed responsibility, help us go after them. but we told the public, we don't have

i think administration has lots of decisions to make. make. >> what are the chances, both of you, but a collision in the air between the u.s. and a russian aircraft or a cruise missile? they were working towards a very general our weekday confliction strategy but it hasn't happened yet. how dangerous is this right now? >> i think it's always dangerous when ever there is military operations going on, and with such a confounding array of both targets and forces involved on both sides. it's interesting that one of the first things that they did in terms of reaching out to the military was to deconflict come to make sure that there was some kind of protocols. i'm not sure they quite hammered those out at this point, but i have a friend who worked for longtime, a diplomatic friend who worked for a long time in russia and she put it to me, this is sometime ago before this conflict, that we have decades of experience of avoiding a hot war with the russians. i think that is going to carry through know. i don't have a sense that this administrati

because of what the administration decided to do. and then, of course, once they decide to go to war with iraq, we have so many different issues to deal with. we are cartoonist but i think a common what we discover this is we don't take ourselves very seriously but we certainly take what we do seriously. it's a very, i know the word cartoon brings up the image of something just funny, but editorial cartoons by their nature are visual. we have to have an opinion first. we just happen to do it with pictures instead of words. >> mr. peters? >> sorry spent after i just finished that explanation spent i'm sorry. there was this lady who i met in 2003. that we started going to iraq. is that when iraq started, 2003? real pretty and i met her at a cocktail party. and i was saying, i can't freaking believe that they're taking the troops out of afghanistan and go into iraq. and i said, afghanistan are the guys who did the bombing of 9/11. and she said, mike, mike, surely the president and vice president knows a little bit more about what is goi

and every thing that marked the bush and administration, wooden the most transparent administrationactually be a whistleblowing administration? wouldn't they say, this is messed up, it is against what we claim are our core values? instead, we see edward snowden, an analyst, chelsea manning, a private -- when are we going to have anyone of significant public importance that actually is going to be about the business of transparency? why does it have to come from whistleblowers? otheryou also quote former military people who talk about the criticism of why the obama administration has chosen this route. flynn who iso mike no one's liberal. he is one of the mussununga expansion of the covert operations around the world. he has his own view. these guys are very powerful clique of people within the national security state that are advocating a return to extraordinary rendition, enhanced interrogation techniques, snatching people. and their criticism of obama is, this guy doesn't want to stick these people in guantÁnamo, so he just kills them. and when he does that, we can't interrogate t

supporters make and those inside the administration, outside the administration, is it's reality, the lot of influence on what's going on in syria, the iranians have a lot of influence there. you've got to bring them into the talks if you're going to resolve this thing, this fight against isis, whether or not that bolsters bashar al assad or not. >> well, the difficulty is that some of the administration's actions have, in fact, empowered the iranians in this theater of operation, and now they've cut a deal with the russians and invited them in. so, this is not good news for the region and not good news for u.s. foreign policy. i hope we can do some damage control over the nature of the situation that we now find the region in. >> because i know the rebels, the opponents of bashar al assad, the rebels who have been working with the united states, they're deeply disappointed that the iranians are brought into the negotiations. so are the saudis and some of the other sunni arab states. >> right. >> the implication of the announcement, though, that iran will participate friday in the tal

should we feel as a today as we did during the bush administration?> he focused everybody's attention on 9/11. i think he made sure it stayed in focus and his direction to the intelligence agency was to do what needed to be done within the limits of the law. intelligence gathering was right at the top of a list of -- a list of priorities. there was a lot of legal back-and-forth with respect to that. of the about how much objection of what he did was well-founded. at any rate, the intelligence gathering was a high priority, both electronic and human. we've gotten to the point where le is about how intrusive it is and how it can be abused. as far as gathering human intelligence, we don't do that anymore. we don't capture people. we kill them and that is one way to get rid of the problem. on the other hand, this is not get you a lot of intelligence. said gathering electronic intelligence was like trying to put together a jigsaw pieceswith about 1000 when the actual puzzle is comprised of about 500, you do whereas what is needed human intelligence is like

elizabeth: back to administration at the white house. what is the administration's best scenario over the next year for what its doing now getting arms to the kurds, airstrikes -- karen: hopefully they will make progress against the islamic state and they can push the parties in syria into some kind of negotiation. that's been their strategy for a number of years. elizabeth: what do you think the chances are of a settlement before obama or beginning of talks before obama? karen: i think the chances are probably less favorable than they've been in a long time. i mean you have the opposition group, the political opposition put out a statement about ten days ago says no way. we'll never talk to assad. we'll never agree to anyway that includes him. you have the americans, excuse me and the europeans say, well we're not saying he has to go immediately. they've basically sort of said that from the start. everyone refers to the geneva agreement which is an agreement that the russians signed. and the iranians in the summer of 2012 that said that

we republicans and democrats, administration and administration and congress by backing away from doing a definitive met military blessing and syria in 2013 when we have the opportunity. there is a clear line that had been drawn in the sand. i understand the need to do diplomacy and i prefer diplomacy over war. i lose everywhere i lose with my wife. i think it is important to have a diplomatic solution. it only works only works when there's a threat of force otherwise. yesterday in the armed services committee general done fourth and secretary carter said the door was open for more indirect action for isil. that's the eyes of the beholder type statement. it sends a signal they may be looking at other options in terms of isil. isil is the focal point upon which a military action and expansion of military action is not only appropriate but instructive in helping with diplomacy everywhere else. the war and isil has one in terms of the refugee issue. people are flowing through greece trying to get through europe, we we see a crisis of immense proportion through the country of sweden. it wil

thank you aba administrative law section for hosting this institute. i am happy -- always happy when i can do anything with theed administrative law section. it's great to be here this afternoon. my task is to fill you in very f quickly on one of the most controversial immigration aspects of the last year or so and that is the president's starting of two things called doca and dopa. i have to stop and think if you don't think about immigration law all of the time, that must sound funny. doca, deferred action for childhood arrival and do pflt a stands for deferred action of americans and lawful americans. i'm going to explain quickly what deferred action is in immigration law and move into how this ended up in headlines. so deferred action is a temporary reprieve from removal. it's an exercise with prosecutorial discretion in immigration law. and it's a signal that an individual is a low priority for removal. it's important to note that it's revocable and it doesn't provide a lawful immigration status. it's a revocable statement from the government to a

this is a policy issue that the bush administration struggled with with hutto and the obama administration has struggled with. the criticism i think pretty striking. last question for you, greg. do you -- sometimes you see congress up here. congress has stepped in a couple of times and tried to move responsibilities around between agencies. there has also been disputes about what appropriate funding level would be and a question of right to counsel and paying for right to counsel for children. is this just a multi-faceted issue? or is there a silver bullet that's out there for congress to deal with on a third try? >> there is the silver bullet. i can trumpet a couple suggested ideas. sorry. couldn't resist. [ chuckles ] >> i thought i would lighten the topic a little bit. a few things given what you mentioned. one, the congressional attention to this as gary mentioned is -- during the past summer there was a letter signed by about 160 or 170 members of the house and i think about 30 -- might be getting that a little bit wrong -- 30 senators calling attention to the concern about family det

jost ernest gave a lot of reporters very curious about how the administration sees its administration afghanistan going forward. of elements tole that. 25 u.s. summer's been killed this year. they are not out of danger, they are not sitting in a green zone horrendous where they are not in harm way. but the president ok was that there would be u.s. presence in multiple places. that is something that is going to need to be explained. david: now press conference is getting underway. president obama: good afternoon. in salt and o soul, south korea, she will continue to the blue house and i will convert to the white house. during her last is a here you addressed a joint section of -- session of congress which is reserved for america's closest friends. he noted that the founding documents of both countries enshrine our commitment to our people with the same words. to their pursuit of happiness. for more than six decades americans and koreans have stood shoulder to shoulder in that endeavor. now visit our korean veterans war memorial. we are very grateful for that. your gestures mean a great

i don't know if there are words to describe what this administration is doing.t has been prescribed for some 40 years, and i don't think this administration gives one whip that it has done so. >> i think you're exactly right. this is a huge set back for the united states. we have no counter strategy to what the russians are up to, and they're aims go well beyond syria. they're selling arms to egypt. they providing sophisticated information to iran. this is a fir bell in the night. i think our adversaries around the world can see this weakness and our allies can, too. i think this is a historic moment, i'm sad to say, a historic moment where power in the middle east is passing from their weak hand. >> and this power shift, and i happen to think he is right, don't you? watching a power shift that will have -- i personally fear horrific consequences. >> particularly in the middle east, and i'm looking at the next 48 to 72 hours. we're now flying in the same air space as the russians are flying in. what happens if there is an snx wh accident? >> there is no conclusi

and a hillary administration?fathers will be able to say to their daughters, you, too, can grow up to be president. >> secretary clinton, how would you not be a third term of president obama? >> i think that's pretty obvious. i think being the first woman president would be quite a change. i can't think of anything more of an outsider than electing the first woman president, but i'm not just running because i would be the first woman president. lou: sure sounds like that's the reason she's running, doesn't it. ed rollins: probably said that four or five times during the course of the night. lou: that's what she's saying, i'm a woman, vote for me. ed rollins: we've had 44 men in the white house, and many have proven any man in america can be president. lou: some of them have proved any fool in america can be president. ed rollins: i think the rationale for her running has been i worry more about a third term not just of obama but clinton, and i think to a certain extent that cast of characters on the stage, and i g

i doubt many of us will be indifferent to the events over the remainder of this administration.believable! >> donald trump is dom nationaling the polls in early primary states, but trump isn't primary states, but trump isn't former governor john.ú.úññññ is on the calendar. introducing a new day of the week... someday... want to retire someday? you'll want a my social security account to help you get ready. get yours at socialsecurity.gov. >>> benghazi collect completeco blasted the committee saying the committee was designed to go after hillary clinton. quote, mr. hanna has never asked for a briefing by the committee staff. recently mr. hanna and i talked informally about the committee and he raised neither questions with the scope or the approach of the committee. it is unfortunate when claims are made by those who do not know what the committee has done, why highwhe has done it o results of its work. our next guest has also defended gowdy's work and he's served on the government reform committees and he's a member of the house freedom caucus, congressman, good to have you

the clinton administration was sort of seen as an administration that helped like people, but it was clinton administration that paved the way for the end of the social welfare state and the end to any black folks ability to not be completely criminalized. your view, she has not taken responsibility for that and not gone far enough for that accountability. patrisse: it is less about if she has gone far enough and more about if she gets into office, will she commit concretely to those changes? she can say everything she wants right now. she is a candidate. but that moment she gets into office, we want to see concrete change. john: in the meeting that took place on friday, do you feel as , i know you weren't there because you been in california, do you feel like that meeting was a step in the right direction? any meeting with the candidate that is pressuring them around a certain agenda is an important next step. john: toni morrison said bill clinton was the first let president, in a particular context. that was 1998. in thef years later, light of history and perspective, when you read

the obama administration inherited it from the bush administration and it would be nice for the next administration to inherit the same ten year mlu. that would be a good want to get off the table. you know, i hope that on the peace issue with the approach of the administration, it is going to be rooted in what i call what is possible. i think that it would be aa big mistake to adopt a posture that our choices are to do nothing or solve everything. if we doif we do that we will end up doing nothing because we can't solve the whole thing right now command when you do nothing you create vacuums. if are going to be doing something command i hope we will, we take practical approach. we focus on how you restore calm, how you can do different things on the ground, how you can begin to try to restore believe between the two sides because it is the level of disbelief that i think is so problematic. we need to think about whether or not you can bring the arabs into this, whether it will be possible i don't know, but the palestinians are at a point of such dysfunction and weakness that they ca