decker al-jazeera gaza khaled a hindi is a fellow at the center for middle east policy at the brookings institution who says neither side is close to a peace process we used to talk about a failed peace process. for five years ago now there is no peace process whatsoever there is no international community or mechanism that can intervene and attempt to find a political resolution and a pathway out of this this crisis that simply doesn't exist and you also have a vacuum on the palestinian side the palestinian authority in government in ramallah is. pretty much completely disengaged from the situation in gaza they are bystanders for the most part but also i think complicit in the crisis the humanitarian crisis that exists there because of the sanctions imposed by mahmoud abbas and the new attempts begun to get around the gaza blockade for boats loaded with a don't know in their way to gaza from the italian port of palermo the freedom flotilla coalition says it wants to bring a peaceful end to the israeli blockade it expects to take just over a week for the boats to reach israeli waters after unloadin

helsinki summit i'm joined by my guest michael o'hanlon in washington he's a senior fellow at the brookings institution also in washington we have daniel ferrazzi he is the director of grassroots political consulting and in london we cross to marry the chef ski she is a columnist for the independent and guardian aren't cross-talk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want i always appreciate mary let me go to you first in london i guess we are the most important take away impression of the of the summit in helsinki and what was accomplished two points go ahead mary. well i think the most important thing was that it happened a tall i was one of the people who was actually quite in favor of it happening and felt the to should have happened much closer to the beginning of donald trump's presidency and i'm sorry that it wasn't as to what it to achieved i think that's probably best summed up in a phrase that president putin used in his initial statement where he talked about first steps and i think it was probably unrealistic to expect anything other than the thing more than first steps but

posted by the brookings institution, this is 90 minutes. jason: good morning, everyone. i am pleased to welcome you and those will be watching on c-span to this morning symposium. my name is jason rhody and i'm a program director at the social science research council. i direct the digital program and i codirect the media in democracy program, which is the program sponsoring this morning's activities. we are privileged to be joining our friends and collaborators at the brookings institution to host this event, the consequences of misinformation. a symposium on the history, circulation, and management of misinformation, which are on troops circulated without the circulatede untruths without the intent to deceive and disinformation, untruths circulated with the intent to deceive. we would like to thank the participants -- e.j. dionne, who serves as codirector of the media advisory board. we are also grateful to the brookings institution staff who helped to put this together and e.j. will be naming them in his remarks. we are grateful to the funders who helped make this pos

moser is with the brookings institution. think you for being with us this morning. just meltzer, i will start with you. only have a trade deficit with china, canada, mexico. what is the definition? shows the u.s. is buying more imports. president--the president has used this as an woman tariff against the country and others. is this a fair thing to do? not think it i do is. we benefit from imports as well as exports. we run a surplus from canada. even by his mentor, our trade relationship should not be a problem. even if they are not biting our u.s., they invest in the so the flipside of a trade deficit is a capital surplus that we run year after year, money coming into the u.s. that keeps interest rates low and investing in automotive factories across the u.s.. trade is a win win. >> just meltzer, when the federal government put a tariff on something, we does that mean? mr. meltzer it means as goods cross the border at customs, a tax or terra is levied on those goods. the tax is the most straightforward way. have we seen in nations responding? where are we in the a

joshua meltzer from the brookings institution. i will start with you. when we are saying we have a trade deficit with china, with canada, with mexico, what does that mean? guest: the trade deficit calculates the difference and servicestips o sold between the two countries. host: the president has used that trade deficit argument as one of his reasons for implementing tariffs against these countries and others. is that a fair thing to do? is not the right metric for judging trade. we benefit from imports and exports. or you run a surplus with canada when you factor in services. by his metric our trade relationship with canada shouldn't be a problem. even if they aren't buying our goods, they invest in the united states. the flip side of the deficit is a capital surplus we run year after year. money coming in by treasury bonds that keeps interest rates low, invests in factories across the united states. trade is a win-win. meltzer, when the federal government puts a tariff on something, what does that mean? guest: it means as goods cross the border, an ac

the brookings institution in washington, d.c., talked with political science professors and journalists. in addition speakers discuss the media technology and how false information has been spread throughout history. . >> good morning, everyone. i'm very pleased to welcome you and those who will be watching on c-span to this morning's similar pose yup. my name is james rowde. the median democracy program, which is the program sponsoring this morning's activities, we are privileged to be joining our friends and collaborators with the brookings, the misinformation, a symposium of the history, circulation and mismatting of information -- mismanagement of information. disinformation, which are untruths circulated with intent to deceive. src advisory board, who helped us shape today's event and active participants. aj dion here at the brookings institution and of course a regular columnist with the washington post and also serves as codirector as the median democracy advisory board and john sites, political science in georgia washington, and also washington post. and thankful to the staff wh

josh meltzer is with the brookings institution. gentlemen and, thanks for being with us. josh meltzer, i will start with you. when we say we have a trade deficit with canada, china and mexico, what does that mean? a trade deficit calculates the difference between goods and services purchased in both countries. sellinged states is less exports and buying more imports from the countries. host: the president has used the trade deficit argument is one reason to implement these tariffs against these countries. ?s that there right thing to do >> host: i don't think it -- >> i don't think it is. we run a surplus with canada. tradey his metric our relationship with canada shouldn't be a problem. our even if they are buying goods with the money they make in exports, they invest in the united states. so the flipside of the deficit is a capital surplus we run, money coming into the united states to buy treasury blondes bonds that keep interest rates low, investment in factories that provide jobs in the united states, so trade is a win-win. host: a tariff, what does that mean? >> it

i'm alice, a senior fellow at the brookings institution. i am delighted to be chairing this panel, which will take us more deeply into what is going on in particular states. >> this has been mentioned as the father of this kind of field research. he recognized when the aca passed that this was going to be a huge opportunity to observe a national experiment. an experiment in expanding health insurance coverage to a large group of uninsured people in a novel way of the expansion. medicaid was not novel, but what was is the creation of these exchanges or marketplaces on which people could go and look for what options they had for buying health insurance. they could also see what subsidies they would get under the new act, and what it would cost them to buy health insurance. a very modern and interesting idea. >> the states are very different in this country, in case you haven't noticed. insurance regulations is a state function. the federal government has not been a regulator of insurance. it was clear that this law was going to play out very

and the president suggested they blow up the brookings institution. somebody on the staff who had the sense to stop it. but that was rare. i learnedo had what later, you had a president who frankly was drunk a lot of the time. a very heavy drinker and he slurred his words. medicationalso on a called dilantin, which was really for convulsing. for depressiont but somebody had given it to him for depression. enhances the effects of alcoholism. so he would pick up the phone at 3 a.m. and call david cohen. cohen, this is the president. fire everybody on the sixth department. state this is an order. slam! and then call him back and say, this is the president calling again. order is not appealable. slam! people likeup to dean and such folks to decide hisher or not to carry out orders. this was a scary thing. time.n't know it at the so we learned a lot later. passiond you, i have a about the subject of impeachment. it is shown around so easily now it is very, very dangerous. it's a very serious business. and serious people went about it seriously. and he woul

you gave a short speech at the brookings institute regarding the decisions in citizens united. -- in light of that, such ask the case citizens united and the second amendment holdings are not as salient in time and unanimity are deserving of important questions? hasou think judge kavanaugh what you would call a functioning brain? he has a functioning brain. he has a distinguished record. i do think those cases are worth asking about. the three you mentioned. they are significant decisions. the decision in citizens united has led to this incredible inflow of dark money into campaigns which has made a significant impact in terms of what our elections are like today. i do think those are worthy subjects to probe and i think you should indeed answer them. not the tipugh is of this beer. he is the spear for the federalist society and others on the right to have been working since the early 1980's to change the supreme court and move its agenda far to the right. give thes the goal to hard right control of the supreme court. judge kavanaugh is the final speed are in that effort. caller.depe

posted by the brookings institution, this is 90 minutes.

we join this brookings institution event in progress. >> we thought we needed a fourth state and he had worked on all of them. so let's go to louise first. >> good morning. so colorado, we have a pretty stable market. we did have some significant rate increases this year, but we have seven insurers in our exchange and that's the same as we had last year. enrollment was slightly higher for 2018 than it was in 2017. so, the reason i wanted to talk about what colorado has done both long-term and more recently to facilitate that market stability, so, colorado does have a hands-on proactive approach to health care reform and that has been long-term before the aca required maternity coverage and banned gender rating. colorado had already done that via state legislation. for many, many years, colorado limited short-term plans to no more than six months, nonrenewable and you can't get a short-term plan if you've had more than one in the previous 12 months so kind of preventing people from stringing together a series of short-term plans to substitute for regular health insurance. as soon as the

and perhaps most importantly of all, the brookings institution believes that of the next billion people to come into middle class economic status, 88% will be in the indo-pacific region. secretary gutierrez: absolutely, absolutely. i think, as secretary pompeo was saying, its the largest and fastest growing. so pretty special. so, many of us in the business community had quite a bit of anxiety when we pulled out of tpp and were left with three trade agreements in the area, in the region. does this commercial strategy as part of the indo-pacific strategy, does that substitute for what would have been tpp? is there another way of thinking about our commercial strategy going forward? secretary ross: well, when we withdrew from tpp, we withdrew from a potential agreement with which we disagreed. it was not a withdrawal from the region. to the contrary, one of vice-president pence's first trips, which i had the honor of accompanying him on, was through japan, and he then went on to other countries. i went on to thailand, to laos, to a whole bunch of countries. and so people should not misint

. >> and in the weeks i ahead we'll hear from -- >> a new report by the brookings institution looks at insurance markets in ten states and how the affordable care act is implemented in different parts of the country. >> if you could take your seats. i would like to get started now. i'm very pleased to welcome you to this conference, which we call destabilizing the aca's insurance market. and you know, in washington we tend to think of the aca as a national program. but individual and small group insurance varies a great deal by local market and by states, particularly by states and the important role that state regulators play. and we know that the aca is playing at differently in different part of the country. so to understand how the aca is playing out, you need to go out to selected states and localities, and not only look at their data, but importantly to talk to the people there. such field research is the essence of the project that's the focus of this conference, led by mark hall and funded the project, the research by the robert wood johnson foundation. and this event by the us

founded by the robert foundation and the brookings institution for health policy. in addition to the extensive national document research, this project tapped into the research network at the rockefeller institute of government. so interview leaders involved in the individual and small group insurance markets in 10 carefully suggested states. i want to give particular mention to richard nathan who created and leads the research network. he has played an important role in this project. he could not be here in person but is watching on the webcast. finally, before i introduce our lead speaker mark hall, i want to mention that we've been busy running meetings and we have two of them next week. on wednesday we're having a conversation with scott gottlieb, education commissioner about biosimilars and have an outstanding panel of three experts to react to his remarks. that's going to be on wednesday afternoon, 1:30. also at the end of the week, we have a conference on the experience with mips. i can't remember what mips stands for. but those who are interested know is ver

you gave a short speech a couple years ago at the brookings institute regarding the decision in citizens united, quoting a snippet of justice kennedy's opinion asserting that anyone with a functional brain could discern how wrong a statement was. so in light of your recent op ed, do you think that the holdings in cases such as citizens united and hobby lobby as well as the second amendment holdings are not as salient in time are also deserving of important questions regarding upholding a precedent and do you think that judge kaefvanaugh, i guess, has what you would call a functioning brain. >> i think he certainly has a functioning brain. i mean, he has a distinguished record. i do think those cases are certainly worth asking about, the three you mentioned, hobby lobby, heller, and citizens united are very significant decisions. i mean, this case -- the decision in citizens united is one that really has led to this incredible inflow of dark money into campaigns, which has done a -- made a pretty significant impact in terms of what our elections are like today. so, i do think those are ve

access to gym facilities and shorter public hospital waiting times on the business side the brookings institute has reported that business that pay tax on time and abide by government demands will get better loan conditions and easier access to public tenders non-compliant businesses will face more difficult business conditions so look at our system whereby a certain banks get free access to cheap credit zero percent interest rates and the government the treasury will actually take all your bad debts off your books if you behave in a certain way if you provide basically a financial system that favors them and the people who are the elite the fear of money system is dying and so people are going to take money out of fear after and see and put it into crypto and they're going to have two broad passages they can put their cash into obedience going which would be this china social networking score and hope to get more frequent flyer miles and a freeway ending down at the jang or they can go down the big claim path which is individual sovereignty and used opting out of state control and that's the w

. >> and there are some studies -- there's one from the brookings institution and others -- that suggesthat, actually, the larger deterrent to people participating in the economy is the demarcation point of whether one has a college education or not having a college education, rather than college debt. i think about in 2015, there was one study i read that said the amount that people are spending -- the average family is spending on student debt is roughly equivalent to the amount the average family spends on entertainment costs per year. in other words, it's not always so crippling, but that the worse, the more crippling factor is whether you have a college education or not, because your earnings are so much higher if you do have a college education. >> yeah. i would -- you know, i would counter because, first of all, when you look at the rising amount of student debt and then the fact that wages are largely remaining flat in the -- real wages are remaining flat in the united states -- some families may cost -- you know, some families may be spending as much on entertainment as they are

access to gym facilities and shorter public hospital waiting times on the business side the brookings institute has reported that business that pay tax on time and abide by government demands will get better loan conditions and easier access to public tenders non-compliant businesses will face more difficult business conditions so look at our system whereby a certain banks get free access to cheap credit zero percent interest rates and the government the treasury will actually take all your bad debts off your books if you behave in a certain way if you provide basically a financial system that favors them and the people who are the elite the fear of money system is dying and so people are going to take money out of fear after and see and put it into crypto and they're going to have to broad past which is they can put their cash into obedience going which would be this china social networking score and hope to get more frequent flyer miles and a free waiting down at the gym jang or they can go down the big claim path which is individual sovereignty and used opting out of state control and that's

helsinki summit i'm joined by my guest michael o'hanlon in washington he's a senior fellow at the brookings institution also in washington we have daniel ferrazzi he is the director of grassroots political consulting and in london we cross to marry the chef ski she's a columnist for the independent and guardian aren't cross-talk rules in effect that means you can jump in anytime you want and i always appreciate mary let me go to you first in london i guess your most important takeaway impression of the of the summit in helsinki and what was accomplished two points go ahead mary. well i think the most important thing was that it happened a tall i was one of the people who was actually quite in favor of it happening and felt the to should have happened much closer to the beginning of donald trump's presidency and i'm sorry that it wasn't as to what it to achieved i think that's probably best summed up in a phrase that president putin used in his initial statement where he talked about first steps and i think it was probably unrealistic to expect anything other than the thing more than first steps but i t

we are privileged to be joining our friends and collaborators at the brookings institution to host this event, the consequences of misinformation. a symposium on the history, circulation, and management of misinformation, which are untruths circulated without the intent to without the deceive and disinformation, untruths circulated with the intent to deceive. we like to thank the art is a pence -- e.j. dionne -- we would like to thank the participants -- e.j. dionne, who serves as codirector of the media advisory board. we are also grateful to the brookings institution staff who helped to put this together and ej will be naming them in his remarks. we are grateful to the funders who helped make this possible. there may be some of you who are less million or with the social science research council. an independent, nonprofit, international organization founded in 1923. our mission is to foster social science research. we supported several thousand fellows in our 95 year history universities,ith policymakers, and think tanks, we seek to mobilize social science on critical issues to the pu

with daniel griswold of the mercada center and joshua meltser of the brookings institution. also the national review's obert verbruggen talks about redefining what disability means and looks at available programmers in community. c-span's "washington journal" lye beginning at 7:00 a.m. eastern on saturday morning. join the discussion. our next guest is a member of the judiciary committee for the house and also the republican conference vice chair. he is representative doug collins from georgia. good morning. from the takeaway, what did you walk away with from that hearing with peter strzok yesterday? aest: we walked away with better understanding of the concerns we have had. there is always concern of bias and text messages. frankie, they should raise concern both on republicans and democratic sides. ithink some of the issues looked at yesterday and some of my line of questioning and others are what are some of the policies that were in place that maybe were not being followed in -- effector general's report inspector general's report? we saw information about people that sh

access to gym facilities and shorter public hospital waiting times on the business side the brookings institute has reported that business that pay tax on time and abide by government demands will get better loan conditions and easier access to public tenders non-compliant businesses will face more difficult business conditions so look at our system whereby a certain banks get free access to cheap credit zero percent interest rates and the government the treasury will actually take all your bad debts off your books if you behave in a certain way if you provide basically a financial system that favors them and the people who are the elite the fear of money system is dying and so people are going to take money out of her and see and put it into crypto and they're going to have to broad past which is they can put their cash into obedience going which would be this china social networking score and hope to get more frequent flyer miles and a freeway being down at the jingjing or they can go down the big bad which is individual sovereignty and used opting out of state control and that's the war of t

he's a fellow at the brookings institution center for middle east policy he joins us live now from washington. how do we explain the false equivalence here that some people it would appear to me want to apply to what's going on to israelis in israel and also to palestinians in places like gaza. well of course there is no equivalence israel is not being besieged by palestinians israel the palestinians are not imposing an air land and sea blockade on the israeli people or any portion of the israeli people whereas as the others have mentioned two million palestinians in gaza live under an almost hermetic seal. closed off not only from jobs in israel or. health care or other services beyond its borders but also cut off from other palestinians in the west bank. and they are not able to export not only that israel controls what comes in as a matter of security there is an effective. virtual ban on exports out of gaza and so you have no economy and so for for many years. humanitarian aid workers the united nations and others have said that. gaza is becoming unlivable if if we don't do something to a

is a fellow at brookings institution's a center for middle east policy and he says both sides are nowhere near making steps towards any peace process. we used to talk about a failed peace process. for five years ago now there is no peace process whatsoever there is no international community or a mechanism that can intervene and attempt to find a political resolution and a pathway out of this this crisis that simply doesn't exist and you also have a vacuum on the palestinian side the palestinian authority in government in ramallah is. pretty much completely disengaged from the situation in gaza they are bystanders for the most part but also i think complicit in the crisis the humanitarian crisis that exists there because of the sanctions imposed by mahmoud abbas for boats loaded with aid are now under way to gaza from the italian port of palermo the freedom for the tiller coalition campaign says its goal is to peacefully end the israeli blockade of the palestinian territory it's expected to take just over a week to reach israeli waters they'll then hand over one boat to gaza fisherman fif

introduce mordecai lee, and he served as the -- in washington, dc as a guest scholar at the brookings institution. he was elected to three terms and the in the wisconsin legislature state assembly and two terms in the state senate. lee began his academic career in 1997 as an assistant professor at the university of wisconsin, milwaukee. his research is focused on public administration and american history and government public relations. he has written eight books including promoting the war effort. 1938 to 1946. which he is presenting on today. his next book, get things moving, fdr, and the office for emergency management 1941 to 1943. will be published and available this october. join me in welcoming professor mordecai lee. [applause] >> thank you very much for coming. wasn't sure how many people would be here but certainly enough for a minion. those who aren't jewish you need ten jewish adults for service. it's an honor to be invited. it's an opportunity for me in a sense to give back to the fdr library to reciprocate for all they've given me, as you heard i've written eight books and my ninth

earned a phd from syracuse university and served as the washington dc as a guest scholar at the brookings institution he was elected to three terms y in the legislated state assembly and two terms in the state senate. lee began his academic career in 1977 as an assistant professor at the university of milwaukee and promoted to professor in 2006. his research has focused primarily on public administration, american history and public government relations. these written books including promoting the war effort, robert working and propaganda which he's resenting on today, his next book get things moving, fdr, winkle and the office for emergency management will be published by sq and y press and to be available this october. join me in welcoming professor mordecai lee. [applause] >> it's an honor to beinvited . it's an opportunity for me in a sense to give back to the dr library, to promote reciprocate or all they given me. as you've heard i've written books and my night is coming out this fall. of those nine books, seven were researched here at the library and really could not have been written without

joshua meltzer from the brookings institution. i will start with you.n we are saying we have a trade deficit with china, with canada, with mexico, what does that mean? guest: the trade deficit calculates the difference and servicestips o sold between the two countries. host: the president has used that trade deficit argument as one of his reasons for implementing tariffs against these countries and others. is that a fair thing to do? is not the right metric for judging trade. we benefit from imports and exports. or you run a surplus with canada when you factor in services. by his metric our trade relationship with canada shouldn't be a problem. even if they aren't buying our goods, they invest in the united states. the flip side of the deficit is a capital surplus we run year after year. money coming in by treasury bonds that keeps interest rates low, invests in factories across the united states. trade is a win-win. meltzer, when the federal government puts a tariff on something, what does that mean? guest: it means as goods cross the border, an actual

a former colleague of yours at the brookings institution said that at least two thirds of the russiano not care that the u.s. president donald trump is visiting russia -- or visiting the russian president in finland. from russia,data one side, vladimir putin's popularity is fairly strong but a good bit less than after he sees crimea four years ago. down to about 60%. a majority of russians think russia is moving in the wrong direction. a poll taken by the center in april said that a majority of russians, a large majority, want to see an improvement of russia's relationship with the west. benie: donald trump will only spending a few hours there but he did mention at a news conference that he will bring up the issue of meddling. he says there will not be pairing mason references -- perry mason references but he may say something to vladimir putin. how dangerous is it for the leaders to spend -- speak openly about it? >> good politics for the president to bring this up in a series way and if he does, president clinton will -- president putin will tonight. i hope he brings it up -- will d

from the brookings institution, this is two hours. >> thank you all for being here. i'm a professor in the political science department at george washington university. it's okay. my students talk when i talk anyway. [laughter] >> i'm used to it. we're really gratified to have three excellent scholars to talk to us today and to think about the spread of misinformation beginning with the professor at the university of california davis who said to me before we gathered here today i love being in d.c., which made me wonder if

he now is a senior policy fellow at the brookings institution and he comes to us from washington. have you with us >> great to be here. it looks like this is going to happen. the chinese have said they will retaliate right away on an amount of imports. if it does happen, what comes next? >> i think we are now locked and loaded. if the u.s. tariffs will go into effect in china is committed to retaliating proportionally. they have a list of 106 products that they will remove on -- move on. these amounts are not very large. this is still a dark day for economists. we have seen freer and freer trade since world war ii and now we seem to be reversing that. this is a significant amount of protection. you asked the right question, what happens next? if it stops now it would be a minor irritant but the trump in ministration has indicated that in the face of chinese retaliation they will come up with another $200 billion last. to awill be subject smaller 10% tariff but that is very significant. there will have to be a 60 day comment. there seemed to be no plans for the two sides to negotia

ed: joining me live is a foreign policy fellow at the brookings institution joining us from washingtong us. >> a pleasure. ed: let's dispense with this question about nato. the president's critics have been saying that some of his verbal barbs that germans and others was an attempt to split nato because that's something vladimir putin wants, to see a weak nato. the president tweeted no, we have never been stronger. i'm not trying to split the alliance. but he has tough words for the e.u. where do you come down on what he's really doing here? >> there are both sides to this issue. on the one hand all of the media coverage focused on the president's hard line on the european allies defense spending. most european allies are not hitting the 2% park but they plan top hit it by 2024. but nato accomplished a lot of things. they recommitted to article 5. they committed to opening two new structures that will have an eye toward russia and try to deter russian aggression. on the e.u., i think the president sees the e.u. in transactional terms. he sees them as a trade partner and he doesn't thin

a senior fellow at governing studies at the brookings institute. he's also an msnbc legal analyst., what's going on with the back and forth with lanny katie watching this closely a seismic shift. truly a seismic shift from where cohen was a few months ago to where he is and what his thoughts are now. i mean, think about it. this was the guy, this was a tough lawyer, a fast ball to the head lawyer litigator who came in and said what, i would take a bullet for the president of the united states. there was no mention of cooperation. there was no indication that he was going to roll over and start cooperating with mueller or anybody else for that matter. these -- his interview with abc and these tweets and the follow-up clearly lead me to believe that there is but one conclusion, he's having conversations. his lawyer's having conversations. remember, his lawyer used to be a -- the chief of the criminal division for the very office that's investigating him. that's his new lawyer, cohen's new lawyer. there's clearly some communication going on. i expect fully that cohen's going to flip a

for analysis, we'll go to michael oh han lanolin -- o'hanlon from the brookings institute.k? >> i supported the singapore summit because i thought president trump was trying to build a relationship with a nasty guy. but trump didn't say anything wrong or factually incorrect. he didn't give the north korean leader any kind of cover for things that he had done wrong. but contrast, in helsinki today, i thought president trump made a big mistake. he seemed to essentially condone or at least whitewash what the russians had done in the 2016 electi election. doesn't take away that president trump won that election. maybe we need to keep saying that so he doesn't get so paranoid that his legitimacy is being taken away. our country's sovereignty is at risk for future elections regardless what we think about 2016. mr. trump cannot whitewash that russian behavior. singapore, things up. helsinki, thumbs down. >> shepard: chuck schumer will wonder if the only explanation for this dangerous behavior is if vladimir putin holds dangerous information over president trump. when asked today,

which is i wonder what we should do about x leaving 25 really bright staffers three from the brookings institution and three from the young america's foundation fighting over the paper for seven weeks and finally da'ish his answers i think i will call the presence of three in the prime minister japan and see how it feels. the volume of information he takes him is astonishing. his willingness to be tough. this is not a guy who is afraid. it's not necessarily his courage. john paul ii is to say be not afraid. didn't say have courage. trump operates a lot like that. i have no idea what's going to happen in singapore but i think it's possible that they love a very successful meeting. i think it's also possible that morning about at this time they will walk out. that's a range of options. we did a movie that was mentioned earlier shots at the ranch about the life of from oregon. we went to iceland and it was his little house where reagan and her child met in 1987. it's this great scene we had in the movie straight out of the news real where reagan was holding out for missile defense. gorbachev was at h

i was at the brookings institution for two or three years. aso i took 12 years off to be college president. in while alege wallet, washington. that experience. being a college president at a small college is still being a teacher in a way. your teaching teachers and alumni and students at the same time. my wife and i are -- have strong ties to that town and that college. in colorado springs for most of the past four decades. host: which of your books has sold the best western mark tom: i have the good fortune to be the co-authors of the american leading government textbook. i joined them as a third partner. we had a spinoff on state and local politics. a million copies when i was involved in them. also the state of the presidency, that was widely used in presidency courses. i cowrote a book that one the best book award for the year 2013. i love writing about elections, i wrote a book on direct democracy. i have done a lot of textbooks. this new book i have is a new venture for me. political science and it is a combination of literature and po

brookings institution -- working age adults who don't know english well they earn 25-40% less than thoseknow english. >> tucker: what were the numbers among african-american voters on the question of speaking english? were they supportive or did they think it was racist to ask people to speak english? >> i think it was 7 out of 10, it was quite impressive. >> tucker: there is no racial divide on that question because it unifies us to speak the same language obviously. thank you, great to see you. >> i think it's unfortunate that some politicians would want to be demagogic. in reality, the support for t english is very broad-based and it's going to be very important, you are talking about spanish speakers. >> tucker: great to see you,sh thank you. we've invited in the name of news the creepy porn lawyer, he has a few preconditions before he will come. will tell you what they are next. (vo) i was born during the winter of '77. i first met james in 5th grade. we got married after college. and had twin boys. but then one night, a truck didn't stop. but thanks to our forester, neither did our

let's go to michael o'hanlon from the brookings institute. hi, michael. >> nice to be with you, shepard. >> shepard: aside from the rhetoric is there anything here? >> i don't know. you mentioned the word "counter measures." that's a benign word. i hope what we're seeing is a deescalation of the rhetoric. the real deal is the economic sanctions and the trump administration. that will kick in two weeks. that's where we're hoping to put the pressure on iran primarily, this is probably not going to be a military confrontation. hard to see that is in either side's interest. i welcome the des escalation of the last one or two exchanges but i get nervous when you hear the bluster and the brinkmanship. i don't expect to it result in anything. it's unsettling. >> shepard: we're alone outside the iran agreement now. can sanctions from the united states not supported by others in the agreement, can they have an effect? >> yes, they can. we're trying to force countries to choose between doing business with us and doing business with iran. so the extent

alina from the brookings institution, thanks very much. >> pleasure.ke: stay with fox for complete coverage of the president's summit, tomorrow chris wallace anchors special edition from fox news sunday from helsinki, finland, airs on fox news channel, on monday chris sits down for exclusive interview with vladimir putin for instant reaction to his meeting with president trump. >> i think when he comes back on monday hopefully we will get all of the rest of the questions answered and i think strzok testimony really left a lot of americans frustrated because he was not honest. he was not credible in explaining his actions. >> sharper over supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh as he makes rounds on capitol hill in quest for confirmation, we will have update. plus former fbi lisa page answering questions behind closed doors on capitol hill a day after peter strzok's fiery hearing, why one leading republican says she was forthcoming. jardiance asked: when it comes to managing your type 2 diabetes, what matters to you? you got a1c, heart, diet, and exercise

from the brookings institution, this is two hours. >> thank you all for being here. i'm a professor in the political science department at george washington university. it's okay. my students talk when i talk anyway. [laughter] >> i'm used to it. we're really gratified to have three excellent scholars to talk to us today and to think about the spread of misinformation beginning with the professor at the university of california davis who said to me before we gathered here today i love being in d.c., which made me wonder if perhaps she wasn't well or something was wrong? [laughter] >> last time i was in davis, california, it was about 88 degrees and perfectly sunny and here we are. she's a scholar of political communication. also joined by a political scientist at the london school of economics. he has done a great deal of interesting research about social media and in particular this thing called twitter which you may have heard of, and then finally a research director at harvard's center for the internet and society and robert has been involved in a lot of different

evitis and iason fellow atsident brookings institute. lead a cvious life i implementation -- aca implementation at the treasury department. and mar -- in mark's presentation on the panel we heard about the federal landscape and what a selection has states -- of states have done. this will take a step back and look at the bigger picture of the individual market and provide more context and analysis. with that i present you some of the biggest and best thinkers on health insurance markets today. each of them will give a short and then we will try to reserve most of the time for discussion, and for audience questions. so first you would hear from m a fiedler. economistformer chief for the white house council of economic advisers. he will delve more deeply here today into the federal policy landscape that states are facing with analysis of how the different moving pieces may affect individual markets. second you will hear from rlette, a research professor at the georgetown university center on health insurance reforms. she is a leading exper