could use to increase their staffing levels it was under the clinton administration we we reached the 2 million person level of the overall incarceration in san francisco. is there a correlation of the size of the police department and people getting arrested yes there is. i don't think that is something we want to go through again i talked about the concept put furt by michelle aloha exender called the new jim crow that is not to the extent in san francisco as other peoples but here where we reflect attitudes about race but our laws disproportionally effect african american people in our jails so if we talk about increasing overall level of incar raegs system specifically african americans and latino people this resolution is going to get out of this committee it's go going to need amendments the way it's written now as if population growth is the only way we can think about what our staffing level should be is an absurd notion. i would like to propose we table or continue this resolution to me it makes no sense we engage in this when we're engaged fully as a city versus the quality

i can also tell you there were a tremendous amount of grant dollars from the clinton administration back in the mid 90s there was a huge augmenting that's when the cops office was established back in washington d.c. you mentioned overtime our overtime budget is half what it suz ten years ago even though we have less officers so at some point you reach a tipping point you can't conserve and you have to spend just to stay where you were again i don't know what the staffing levels were in particular but i know with regard to the violent crime certainly >> it's much less than it was -- >> yeah but we went back there again in the mid 2000 so we do this up/down staffing thing rather than gettinger nest staffing for a down tourn in violent crime to invest in the young people to get them the education they need so we don't have an uptake later on. >> i know the clinton administration where our overall prison population across the entire country got to over 2 million people. that's the concern when we do this level of increase and put our efforts into policing than other things we fill up our jai

. >> well, a public health review was instituted by the clinton administration, just to find out the effects on things like driving pregnancy, or post traumatic stress. >> aaron hind is one of them, they came pretty close to my own position a couple of times. a couple of people in my company got killed. >> after turning to alcohol and prescription drugs he turned to pot and found peace. it allows me to focus. but for decades they could not prove or disprove the effectiveness. now the department has lifted it's publish health review. the move has been hailed by supporters and opponents of legalization. marijuana has been the only so called drug prohibited by as our own jacob ward found out, that was a source of great frustration for researchers like brad budger. that's it. all we have to do is get the study drug and start the study. for marijuana, we into into a whole other series of reviews. >> bill piper office of national affairs released the following statement, this announcement shows that the white house is ready to move away from the war on medical marijuana and enable to perfo

first understand the history here, a public health review requirement was instituted by the clinton administrationand researchers have had to jump through often impossible hoops just to find out the effects of marijuana on things like driving pregnancy, or post traumatic stress. won't million americans are regular pot users. a couple of people in my company got killed. >> after turning to alcohol and prescription drugs to cope with his anxiety he turned to pot and found peace it allows me to focus it allows me to enjoy my life. >> but for decades they could not prove or disprove, pot's effect iness now the department of health has lifted it's public health review. a process that made it much more difficult to study than other drugs. the move has been hailed by support is and opponents. marijuana had been the only so called schedule one drug from being produced by private laboratories for research. as our own jacob ward found out that was a source of great frustration for researchers like brad budger. >> for studying aspirin or l, isd that's it, all we have to do is get the drug and start the study

. >> my friend from new jersey rightly pointed with pride to the clinton administration surpluses and rightly criticized the bush administration deficits and impact that he had on the economy, but reminds me of churchill's description of clement at lee that carries on as if nothing that happened. isn't it true bill clinton's administration cut 4% of gdp, reduced entitlement spending, in his words, ending welfare as we know it, approved the biggest capital gains tuck in american history. george bush comes along, increases federal spending two% of gdp, approves the biggest expansion of entitlement spending since the great society, started the entire era of stimulus spending. mr. obama came in increased it by another 2% of gdp. further expanded our entitlement obligations, drove stimulus spending through the roof. what do these experiences tell us? >> well, i don't know about those experiences in particular but let me say that right now the end result from 2007 to now, having the debt double, nearly double gdp is something of real concern and it handicaps us going forward. >> in the rema

>> a public health review requirement was instituted by the clinton administration, and researchers haveo jump through impossible hoops ever since just to find out the effects of marijuana. 20 million americans are regular pot users. aaron is one of them. he was 18 years old when he went to fight in iraq. >> a couple of people in my company got killed. >> reporter: after turning to drugs and alcohol to cope he found pot and was allowed peace. >> it's lous me to enjoy my life. >> reporter: but for decades scientists could not conclusively prove or disprove pot's effectiveness. now the health review has been lifted. the move has been hailed by both supporters and opponents of marijuana legalization. marijuana had been the only so-called schedule one drug prohibited by the drug enforcement association from being produced by private laboratories for research. as jacob ward found out that was a great source of frustration. >> for studying aspirin, prozac or lsd, all we have to do is get the drug and start the study. for marijuana we go into a whole other series of reviews. >> reporter: the fo

the debt worse is a problem. >> my friend from new jersey rightly pointed with pride to the clinton administration surpluses and rightly criticized the bush administration deficits and impact that he had on the economy, but reminds me of churchill's description of clement at lee that carries on as if nothing that happened. isn't it true bill clinton's administration cut 4% of gdp, reduced entitlement spending, in his words, ending welfare as we know it, approved the biggest capital gains tuck in american history. george bush comes along, increases federal spending two% of gdp, approves the biggest expansion of entitlement spending since the great society, started the entire era of stimulus spending. mr. obama came in, increased it by another 2% of gdp. further expanded our entitlement obligations, drove stimulus spending through the roof. what do these experiences tell us? >> well, i don't know about those experiences in particular, but let me say that right now the end result from 2007 to now, having the debt double, nearly double gdp is something of real concern and it handicaps us going forward

clinton camp. what is more troubling that the obama administration, originally told mrs. nton she was not allowed to have sidney blumenthal anywhere near the state department. but what did she do? she defied her boss, the commander-in-chief defieded his orders. sandra we already know from the emails we have been able to see that she hasn't deleted, she was listening to him on intelligence on the ground in libya instead of top intelligence officials like david petraeus, who at the time was running the cia. if i were the administration specifically the president i would be pretty ticked off about this. if he is not it makes me wonder, sandra if they knew that he was defying the president's orders and she was communicating with one of her old political hacks anyway. they're yawning and only way to nail blumenthal on this to have the doj get involved and i just don't see that happening. >> bernie, as this deposition continues, as we know it is happening right now, we can speculate and certainly some politicians are speculating pretty heavily right now including mike pompeo, re

she has taken positions to the left of the last clinton administration on criminal justice, marriage lity and trade. she's also trying to explain away what has been described in the political world since the 1990s as clinton drama. >> we're back into the political season and therefore, we will be subjected to all kinds of distraction and attacks, and i'm ready for that. >> some of those distractions though, were self-inflicted from for donation to the clinton foundation and reliance on a personal e-mail system conducting government business. >> looking back it would be better to use a second e-mail account and carried a second phone, but at the time this didn't seem like an issue. >> to the exat the particular time hillary clinton appears to be playing by her own rules, it could remind voters of her husband's scandals and the actions that led to his impeachment by the u.s. house of representatives. there's the key issue for hillary clinton and jesh bush both 2016 candidates fair or not have a last name that brings potential promise and peril. the challenge is leveraging what voters li

to the left of the last clinton administration on social justice, marriage equality and trade. and explaining away what has been described as clinton drama. >> we are back into the political season and therefore we will be subjected to all kind of distraction and attacks and i'm ready for that. >> some of those distractions though were self-inflicted from foreign donations to the clinton foundation to exclusive reliance on an e-mail system while conducting official business. >> looking back, it's clear i should have used a second e-mail system. but this didn't seem to be an ire. >> husband's scandals and what led to his impeachment. and there lies both hillary clinton and jeb bush, both candidates fair or not have a last name that bring potential promise and peril. leveraging what voters like about their family's presidential history and breaking away from history people cannot forget. >> gentlemen thanks for being with us this evening and we simply ask you to keep the talking points to a minimum. i know you're both going to try hard. mr. parasutti, i'll begin with you. there ar

i had some experience while is in the clinton administration. we had inspectors on the ground even though there were being blocked in various places you remember that cat and mouse game nevertheless we had a much better insight into the iraqi nuclear program. in fact, at that time we were thinking about retiring because we were persuaded because of the inspections that on their front as opposed to chemical and biological we actually knew what they had a knew there we were able to monitor and control it and prevent them from getting nuclear weapons. weapons. i think that was an interesting example of the way in which both give us an ability to know, and in this case the inspectors are going to be at the minehead at the milling at the enrichment process, the stockpiling and the plutonium reactor heavy water reactor. we are going to have full visibility on the program command that goes on for 25 years, that kind of inspection. that will give us a degree of assurance that we will know if that she. >> thank you. i will interject. that was a good line

international backing that stretches into the '80s and '90s hampering efforts by the reagan and clinton administration to isolate iran over its nuclear ambitions. >> a lot of iran's neighbors were eager to do business with iran and didn't have the bad history with iran. >> reporter: but by 2006 a global consensus started to stay shape. after hard line president mahmoud ahmadinejad. in december 2006, the u.n. security council passed its first round of sanctions against iran. binding all member-states to enforce them. in june 2010 iran's oil profits and banking sectors were added to the u.n. sanctions list. paving the way for washington to up the anteand black list foreign banks this did business with iran np. in 2012, europe filed suit, game changers that decimated iran's economy and pushed you iran to the negotiating table. hasan rouhani iran disagreed to curb portions of its nuclear program in exchange for lifting economic sanctions. the thorny issue now is when and how to do away with the rest. iran wants all sanctions annulled as soon as a deal is implementwhile the u.s. wants them suspended increm

number one, some of the most biting sanctions going back to the clinton administration in 1995 and 1996 were executive orders. that's number one. executive orders can be changed and can be waived. number two, it's been traditional in congress to provide waivers to the white house so that the president would be able to waive certain elements of sanctions. i'm not sure they ever expected that they would have a commander-in-chief who would become so disassociated from the national security protection of the united states that he would waive those willy-nilly. ultimately that is willy-nilly. ultimately that is what we are seeing. ultimately the question is what lessons learned will congress have so when new sanctions are put in place at such waivers aren't there. the last quick point i would mate is just the irony that the sanctions which president obama and the statehouse now praise and now seek to take credit for, they opposed and the congress had passed 100 to zero over their opposition. >> we have time for one more question. the gentleman the back. >> hi my name is constantin and i stud

. >> she was talking about the health care fight in the first clinton administration there. d talking about how there was a victrow when then president clinton signed into law help for the children. and they point out hillary clinton had little or no role in the later fight and it was not something that was a major part of her biograpy. and american crossroads are asking voters is hillary clinton trustworthy. 54% disagree she is honest and trustworthy. it was done in key battlegrounds like iowa where she needs to do well. and given that trust issue, it is no wonder we have seen former president clinton likely to fwief up the pricey speeches and may step down from the clinton foundation. >> if she tells him to. >> she will be the boss. >> and that is hillary clinton's story going into the weekend. on the gop front jeb bush next week the former florida governor will announce his plans on monday where he is going to be giving a speech some describe as hopeful and optimistic. and jenna easton is the edouter. and jamie is a editor for the daily caller. we have a few hot day of pol

international backing stretches into the '80s, and '90s hampering effort by the regan and clinton administrations to isolate iran over nuclear trance mission. >> a lot of our neighbours were doing business with iran and didn't have the bad history. >> reporter: by 2006 a global sensis was taking shape after president defied an order to stop the nuclear programme. >> that caused a lot of concern not the community as a whole. >> reporter: in december 2006 the u.n. security council passed a first round of sanctions, binding up member states to enforce them >>> in june 2010 iran's oil proists were added. in 2012 europe followed suite, cutting iran off from official channels for moving money in and out of the country. game changers decimating iran's economy and forcing them to the nuclear negotiating take. in 2013 under the leadership of reformist president hassan rouhani agreed to curb portions of the nuclear programme in exchange for a park lifting of sanctions. >> with negotiations in the final stretch. the thorny issue is when and how to do away with the rest. iran wants all actions annulled. the

that goes back to the clinton administration.u get long-term movements in your trade -- in a currency, it affects your trade. company decided this was not good for the economy and so the country put in a policy of, we do not talk about it. markets are still very sensitive to the idea that some countries may intervene in currency markets, and if you get the president saying a dollar -- the dollar is a problem maybe they will do something about it. they react. not good for people on the other side of trading and not something the administration .ants to have happen her scarlet: they do not want to play such a pivotal role. the stronger dollar has hurt our trade balance. michael: it has. we have seen exports decline. it is a real problem for other countries when that happens, and they do not want to see a lot of volatility that will affect their market. the big concern has been with the fed raising interest rates, that will attract money out of those other countries and create volatility. the strong dollar reflects what people think

he said that the clinton administration did focus on al qaeda. al qaeda declared war on the united states in 1996. they repeated the declaration in 19 98th. in the meantime, you have the two embassy bombings in africa. you have u.s. is: the fall of 2000. you have the uss cole in the fall of 2000. there is plenty of blame to go around. both president clinton and president bush in that interim period did not give al qaeda the attention it was due. and to be honest i think a field in a very critical role which the president has to play, which is to educate the american public. the fact was this group was determined to strike the united states and kept escalating, and look how many americans were surprised when 9/11 happened. that should not have happened. it should not have been a surprise to anybody. >> can i ask a question of director goss -- rather, of mr. negroponte. mr. goss said if we knew then what we know today, we might have done things different which i think is a very reasonable thing to say. do you think that mr. negroponte, that knowing

has only allowed fast track to go into effect for five of those years, but just during the clinton administrationresident clinton only had fast track for two of his eight years they did 150 trade agreements. only two of them had fast track. so you need fast track for really unpopular agreements that are overreaching that you need to luge run through congress. but if the majority in congress is happy with they doesn't need fast track. >> that's a strong argument i think. genevieve do you think the trade supporters are losing the political message war? >> i'll be honest with you, i don't think we've had a very good debate on this whole trade deal. the reason why is because people like me who are ardent free traders who would be opposed to where lori is on this deal haven't come out vocally one way or the other. the reason is we haven't seen the deal. those who have seen it are members of congress who have had to view it behind closed doors. frankly, many conservatives in congress who i talked to because they don't trust this president on a whole host of things things like immigration and others tha

right now that are unemployed, young college graduates and that's double the rate since the clinton administration. staggering 44% of college graduates are unemployed. this isn't captured in the unemployment statistics for what it means is they're working in jobs where they didn't need to go to school and become $27 -- the $7000 in debt in order to get. we have ideas on how we can move forward but i think the main thing we need to do is evaluating everything through the prism of how it affects the youngest americans. how does this regulation affect new entrants to the work horse? how does making this promise without paying for it put a burden on future generations? these are the questions we need to be asking me help by writing the book we can bring this into the debate. young people are extremely energetic. people say they are apathetic but look at their current push for fossil fuel to investment colleges. if we could get young people to have the same passion they have for fossil fuel -- meant for washington we would see real change. thank you. [applause] thank you diana and jared. those who take

he was senior director for asia on the national security council in the clinton administration and nowor fellow at the brookings institution. and michael auslin, a resident scholar of asian studies at the american enterprise institute he also writes a column for the "wall street journal." gentlemen, thank you for being here. kenneth lieberthal, i'd like to start with you first. how significant are china's action now? this is obviously more than a few acres of sand in the middle of the sea. >> it is but it's something less than moving populations off land. it's not the occupation of the sedatin land, nothing like that. building platforms in the c i think so in part to reassert china's claims to disputed territory but also potential military use in the future. i think the real danger will be if they put a lot on these islands that give them especially an air force capability that may lead them to declare what's called an air defense identification zone over the c. over the south china sea. they have the potential to become more worrisome. >> brangham: what does china want, mikele? >> i t

years when the national archives were sending emails to each other about the problem with the clinton administration, right. david: i will read one. there are or may be plans afoot for clinton, talking about hillary, taking her records from state to little rock. we need to discuss what we know and how we should delicately go about learning more about clinton's departure from state. they have known about this for 2 1/2 years. >> they have known a long time, david. guess what, if you had access to the server, which hillary said i turned over emails, i want emails out there, she deleted half of them. those are gone. they play us for fools. does the clinton camp really think we believe she turned over everything, wants everything released and didn't tried to hide everything. i want that server, david. david: michael, all of this is really reflecting what people think of the clintons and hillary clinton in particular. 55% now of americans now disapprove how clinton handle the questions about the emails. of course the whole issue of trust is now front and center in this election coming up. >> right. 57% d

from day one of an administration, first term, i think it is incumbent on the president to build trust and relationship some both side of the aisle. bill clinton did it to perfection and so did ronald reagan. there are very few trusting relationships right now between the obama administration and the congress. in the senate on tpa, trade promotion, the top three senate leaders all of prose the president -- all opposed the president. harry reid, chuck schumer, dick durbin. it says something. when you are trying to rely on the republicans to carry the senate, but also put up approximately 200 votes in the house on trade promotion authority, and obama can only produce somewhere between 18 and 25 -- there's something fundamentally amiss as far as relationships on both sides. not just with the republicans. some of that is a result, i think of the first two years of obama being so overwhelmingly democratic in the house and the senate. 60 votes in the senate, a huge majority for nancy pelosi in the house, so the obama administration did not have to work at the way bill clinton did or president reagan did. building those trusting relationships, i thin

and if you remember under the clinton administration, we moved forward on nafta, the beginning of disastrousde policies that have cost us millions of jobs. bill clinton was wrong. we moved forward to deregulate wall street so we could be more competitive in the global economy, blah, blah, blah. that was a terrible disaster which led to the wall street crash. so i think there is a lot to be said. he did a lot of good things but he certainly made some serious mistakes. al: do you consider obama a more progressive president van clinton? bernie: yes. al: if hillary clinton upset you to become the democratic nominee, what steps could she do to clarify the sanders base? bernie: it is not just a question of this issue or that issue. it is a question of tone. the reason that the middle class is disappearing -- and we have 45 million people living in poverty, is because, for the last 30, 40 years, there has been a well-planned and determined attack on the middle class. trade policy, sending our jobs abroad. not raising the minimum wage. tax breaks for the wealthiest people in this country. a variety

. >> my friend from new jersey rightly pointed with pride to the clinton administration's surpluses and rightly criticized the bush administration's deficits and the impact that he had on the economy but he reminds me also of churchill's diskrim mission as a man who occasionally stumbles over the truth and then carries on as if nothing has happened. isn't it true that bill clinton's administration cut federal spending by 4% of gdp, dramatically reduced entitlement spending and in his words ending welfare, as we know it and approved the biggest capital gains tax cut in american history. george bush comes along, increases federal spending by 2% of gdp and approves the greatest expansion since the great society and started the entire area of stimulus spending. mr. obama came in and increased it by another 2% of gdp. further expanded our entitlement obligations and drove stimulus spending through the roof. >> what do these experiences tell us? >>. >> i don't know about those experiences in particular, but right now the end result from 2007 until now, having the debt double, nearly double as

number one, some of the most biting sanctions going back to the clinton administration in 1995 and 1996 were executive orders. that's number one. executive orders can be changed and can be waived. number two, it's been traditional in congress to provide waivers to the white house so that the president would be able to waive certain elements of sanctions. i'm not sure they ever expected that they would have a commander-in-chief who would become so disassociated from the national security protection of the united states that he would waive those willy-nilly. ultimately that is willy-nilly. ultimately that is what we are seeing. ultimately the question is what lessons learned will congress have so when new sanctions are put in place at such waivers aren't there. the last quick point i would mate is just the irony that the sanctions which president obama and the statehouse now praise and now seek to take credit for they opposed and the congress had passed 100 to zero over their opposition. >> we have time for one more question. the gentleman the back. >> hi my name is constantin and i study

the clinton administration has said they think this is a secondary issue for their voters. national security is certainly a vulnerability of hers. host: let's talk about the republican field as well and the strategy overall in the campaign. i have a straw poll that has been canceled. where are republicans going and campaigning right now? what sort of strategy, it used to be put your efforts into iowa first in the new hampshire. guest: right. that was the traditional, go to iowa, that would be the momentum and give you an early sense of popularity and strength with the republican base, then you move on to new hampshire, then you move south to florida. pete in south carolina, people spending time in nevada now. but i think the game is changing a little bit. the fact that the straw poll has been dismantled for lack of interest suggests that people do not want what they consider to be a false test. it may be a commentary or a calculation about iowa's role in setting benchmarks and primary politics. that may be a consideration. or maybe it is, you know, a bigger picture issue ab

i did it with the clinton administration and we got it done. on the armed services committee and involved in military reform, including the most significant reform of the military that many say in 50 years with the goldwater nichols bill. i went into the private sector and i was governor of ohio. we've gone from a state that was dead to a state optimistic and growing. we just announced on friday amazon locating a big facility here in the midwest. we are growing jobs. we've cut the most amount of taxes. with that resume national security, success in washington and success as an executive i think it's the best resume and a terrific record. >> let me ask you something that happened this week in other midwestern states. the state of nebraska decided to stop the death penalty all together. there's different reasons why they did it. you have had a temporary moratorium in ohio. want to read you something that a former predecessor of yours wrote bob taft wrote this december last year. "the death penalty is very costly to administer, lengthy trial be ap

the big stumble early on in the clinton administration, he tried to allow gays to sort of openly in thee. >> 20 years, a lot has changed. you can say what clinton did on health care and don't ask, don't tell laid the foundation blocks that led to what obama was then able to accomplish. boy, we start ranking clinton versus obama and a potential other clinton. these -- pitting these people against each other to me is really -- really high stakes. but i must say, obama, if you look at his eight years and look at the cultural change in america from health care now being a right for people and same-sex equality which was once seen as somewhat of a perversion, now seen as perfectly acceptable, normal everybody is like everybody else it's an extraordinary transformation. and you can argue how many specific policies he actually did. but he is presiding over that change. and i think that's what gets him to transformation. >> how do you think about that i wonder too. the sweep of history and cultural change, how much of it is driven by political leaders, driven by how they use the bully pulpit an

the clinton administration forces the cia and the fbi who are rarely good friends to pull together in south -- in counterspy operations. they want to keep an eye on jim, essentially, is what they're doing. and i'm just going to start off with a small reading from chapter five which is actually kind of my favorite chapter. langley, virginia, summer 1996, and i'm going to introduce you to the man who got that job. john mcguire sat in a cubicle village on the second floor of cia headquarters, a clean well-carpeted place full of file cabinets and misery. after 14 years of exciting spy work he now labored in utter obscurity in a pool of human resources mopes. mcguire had spent most of his years in the agency on the front lines of the cold war, although more recently as a counterterrorism operative in the middle east. he had served in el salvador honduras lebanon and iraq, but now it was abundantly clear that at 42 his once-promising career in espionage was over. mcguire had gotten crossways with his boss for refusing to take an overseas posting in karachi, pakistan. his penance was a posit

we go back to the experience of the clinton administration. we have real concerns about what saddam hussein was doing to his people. we were constantly looking at what we needed to do to prevent that. but we were always constrained by the concern that we had that if we took him out, we would open the gateway to the influence of iran in iraq. that was a major concern during that time. that's what happened as a result of taking saddam hussein out. i was in favor of that war, but i was also in favor of doing a whole lot of things that would have prevented that from happening. that's what happened. once the gates of babylon were opened to ron -- two iran, that open the way for them to exert their influence across the region. they were already in lebanon. but iraq was of big price for them. it was done courtesy of the u.s. army and the u.s. taxpayer. sen. udall: ambassador jeffrey do you have the same view? mr. jeffrey: certainly going into iraq was a benefit to iran but he didn't have to be as bad as it turned out to be. there were steps we could

i had introduced the previous november the clinton administration's healthcare reform bill.oint chief republican senator, a terrific guy and close friend of mine introduced the republican response. we had 24 co-sponsors, 24 republican including senator dole, who was the republican leader, and chafee and i thought we could put these two together. when obama passed his bill, the republicans said it's terrible why? because it has an individual mandate. that's big government telling a person they have to buy insurance. when clinton introduced his bill, it had an employer mandate, so the republicans scrambled to come up with a response and came up with what? the individual mandate. it was in fact a republican idea first put into legislation by 20 republican senators including the republican leader. and chafee and i thought if with we could accept -- we democrats could accept the individual mandate which the republicans wanted, they might be able to make other concessions. i didn't work out no tot any fault of chafee's. he was a great guy and a very good friend. the politics was s

at least the clinton administration people could say they did not have a nafta before to look at butve 20 years of experience with nafta and we know a lot about what these trade agreements do. i think -- by the way, the american people are overwhelmingly opposed to the agreement, not just these constituency organizations. they are opposed, specially because they understand the impact of nafta because they have seen it in a community seen factories close and they understand how the threat of a factory closing her job moving overseas diminishes the bargaining power and reduces their wages. so why this a administration would choose to replicate and expand that model is very, very hard to understand. i think it has to do a lot with the people who have surrounded the president, people who come from wall street. i think it has a lot to do with a long investment of big business, especially in washington d.c. and think tanks and advocacy groups who have created a sense, which is confined to the beltway that serious people believe in so it misnamed, free trade. and that the people outside of

they were told things in the '90s by the clinton administration about nafta that did not turn out tohen you see the elizabeth warren wing the progressive wing of the party, it's not a surprise that this would be a heavy lift. what is a surprise is that president obama did such little apparent lobbying and big effort to get something passed that he saw as a legacy item. >> it was a legacy item. this has been -- you know we covered the white house together and you would go on these trips with him to so many asian countries. he's been trying to have this pivot to asia away from the mid-east region and he's really wanted to beef up the u.s. economy by doing that. so this is something that he's put in so much time to not just his visit to the hill. it makes you wonder if the visit to the hill today, was this just a hail mary? did he really have a shot here? >> look everybody who covers this has known this bill was going to be in trouble with democrats defecting specifically because of democrats defecting. we should point out, there were enough votes to get the whole thing over but when it

of distance themzselves from their last name we know how this economy was doing under the clinton administrationants to distance herself because you have people saying we're not a dynasty here. this is not, you know england. bush needing to distance himself, even though his brother's approval ratings are high right now, we know iraq carries that name. >> it's clear that bush has the higher hurdle and bigger challenge overcoming the last name. all the polls show that bill clinton is more popular than george w. bush and if 2016 turns into a general election where it's clinton versus bush even the public has conceded that's a dynamic that doesn't end up benefiting them at all. but i was struck by hillary clinton, and she is the former first lady former secretary of state, but she was really trying to come across in her big kickoff rally as hillary rodham talking a lot about her work before bill clinton was president, her defense fund talking about her mother who was abandoned at the age of 14. this isn't someone coming from this big political dynasty where your father was a former president and you