for the workforce, it is difficult to attract workforce to the federal government. in turn, folks that we do train in the federal workforce go to the private sector and make more money. what attracts people to the federal government is the ability to focus on a mission. whether you're working for the department of energy or transportation or dhs or nasa. people are excited about the mission, that is what draws people to the federal government. as a cio, i've had experience with that where people want to come on board. i've had some incredible talent. other cios have had the same experience. to your question, it is hard to get people in. once you get them in and the people want to come in, they want to stay. they loved what they do. when people leave the federal government, they might go back to private industry and get more experience. maybe they make more money and then turn around and come back to the federal government. but again, we continue to explore flexibilities in a hiring, compensation and looking at ways to build skills. as i said in my opening comments, w

given the fact that you are the hr agency for the entire federal government and, as mr. nch mentioned, really sensitive data on federal employees, on people seeking security, a breach there, what could go wrong with that? sadly, we had the biggest single breach in the history of the federal government with your agency several years ago. there was a sense, not about you personally, but that the agency remains surprisingly less then driven by a mission to make sure that never happens again and we are the exemplar for the federal government as opposed to a lay guard. i heard you like your team and they are committed and you feel good about where you are headed, but a "c-" is not a great overall grade given your mission and maybe put more positively, as we look to the future, what will it take to get to an "a" from your point of view? >> we are a "c+," so a slight correction. with the mainframe platform migration we just completed and the coming data center closures that that will trigger, we had a failing grade in software inventory, but through the covid supplemental, we we

cooperate, the court has suggested that if this comes out of obamacare if anything that the federal government can try to use ivory to get state and local officers to cooperate with federal immigration or drug enforcement or whatever subject, to me even though trump attacked mears and governors, when it comes to time to actually moving state policy and the federal direction, he seems to rely on the traditional tools, if you don't cooperate with me, we will not give you so much money as we did before, the court said it is okay and the obamacare case as long as it's not a huge amount of money, were not sure what that level is but the amount of the trump administration has been using has not been that high, trump is not really tried to order governors or mayors with this program, for the most part even the state of california, the city and state and from opposition of trump policies nothing has really happened to them, the meeting to subject the border wall, the controversial use here i want to address the president of the department where he did not get the full appropriation from congress that

the federal government -- the federal government top ic -- top i.t.providers sourced its materials from china since 2012. i want to ask if you think this poses a significant economic and national security risk? >> yes, sir this is significant risk. we have work ongoing related to the i.t. cyber supply chain and the vast majority of agencies have not instituted proper supply chain internal controls. this is a major issue. we're going to be making more than a hundred recommendations and associated with this, but it does pose a significant threat to our nation. >> i bring this up, mr. lynch made the question about the breach at opm and i think there are still issues with that. with a personal identification information that is still out there. what would be the budgetary impacts of shifting federal technology acquisitions away from china? toi'm not in a position answer that question. we have not done work specific to that, so i'm not in a position to answer that. >> would you have an idea at omb about that? >> no, sir, i do not. is something we need to g

so the goal is for the federal government to compel compliance take money away from the suburbs that ve every right to receive. because they pay into the federal till. so my question to you is given how massively significant this is, to the nature of the country. to millions of people who live in the suburbs and millions more who want to live in the suburbs. which are quite diverse more diverse than ever before in american history. why is it so quiet? why doesn't the media record it. why is it on the front page of "the new york times" and washington post? >> well that is a great question mark, and at one level the answer is blindingly simple. they don't talk about it because they understand perfectly well that all of the things i've been describing would p completely pt off suburb voters. and suburban voters are both democrat andot republicans are trying to appeal to. so what they've done instead and by the way, the way the way you should handle that if you really believe in the policy is to pass a law. you remember passing law you remember civic. you go before personal public and you

but the constitution doesn't give the federal government that power. the constitution is one of limited federal integrated powers, and we've long had the understand thing that public health -- understanding that public health and safety is primarily a state and local issue. the federal government can come in as support, but the front line in the trench warfare of it, fighting a pandemic or disorder, is going to always be city and state, local authorities. so i think the federal government has been doing what it's supposed to do. it can provide money to the states, it can provide equipment and personnel and resources. it can fund a vaccine, it can fund technical research, it can spread information. but the federal government doesn't really are are the people, it doesn't -- have the people, it doesn't have the actual mechanisms of government to take care of a nationwide pandemic. you think about how many people does the federal government even have. how could they even enforce a pandemic social distancing system. the entire fbi, its entire work force is s

i'm wondering, mister president, if there will be a retreat in the federal government on the governmentsor affirmative action programs, generally and in federal hiring of blacks and hispanics, specifically? >> there will be no retreat. this administration is going to be dedicated to equality. i think we have made great progress in the civil rights field. i think there are some things, however, that may not be as useful as they once were or that may even be distorted in the practice, such as some affirmative action programs becoming quota systems, and i'm old enough to remember when quotas existed in the united states for the purpose of discrimination. i don't want to see that happen again. >> when and how do you see the control of natural gas prices? >> we have not dealt with that problem yet. we thought oil would do for a starter, but i cannot really answer your question. that will be a matter for discussion and future cabinet meetings. >> mister president, during the campaign you repeatedly talked about the unfairness of the grain embargo as you saw it. do you have second thoughts now

we expect action from the federal government. when it became apparent the allocation -- we began preparing on our own. to date, oregon has received only 15% surgical masks and 5% of the gowns we were expecting. while a major disaster declaration was appreciated, oregon requested 75% months ago. at least 44 other states are also -- this lack of commitment added to already uncertain financial landscape in this national crisis. we also await confirmation and guidance regarding the use of crf powers and critical response process. this lack of guidance leaves states in limbo, nervous about improper spending, and slows our recovery efforts. our experience in oregon is shared by many of my colleagues across the country. it has led to six initial recommendations for improving the capacity. we need to understand this. as keepers of the sns, the federal government -- state and local emergency plans rely on sns support. states need to know what they can or cannot expect from sns. rather than only making a large stockpile -- >> we support th

so the court has suggested that this comes out of obamacare cases that the federal government can use bribery to get state and local officers to cooperate with drug enforcement or whatever subject. a little trouble attacks governors, when it comes time to actually moving state policy and the federal direction, he seems to rely on traditional tools. if you don't cooperate, we will give as much money as we did before which the court said was okay so long as it's not a huge amount of money. we are not exactly sure what the huge amount is the amount they have been using have not been high. trump had to really try to order governors or mayors to follow his program. the most part, the state of california here, city and state, they've been come sanctuary cities and states in opposition to trump policies and nothing has really happened to them. >> may change subjects, the border wall. one of the controversial uses among the most controversial forces, here i want to address president shifting funds out of the department of defense to pay the wall when he did not get the full appropriation from

the federal government right now is. there is no money going out anymore to people in extra unappointed benefits. i frankly am terrified about what is going to happen. >> with talk about that. what are some things you think the government should be doing right now? >> right now extend the $600 per week extra federal unemployment benefits. it is outrageous that they stopped. people are worse off than they were before. the coronavirus is really behind all of this economic downturn. the virus is surging across america and that means a lot of the economic activity we began to see upturn in june has actually gone down again. this is intolerable and the government must act. the fact that the republicans went off for recess and did not come up with any agreement at all i think is frankly shameful. >> if the government does not act how much further do you expect the economy to tumble? >> i would expect because these $600 per week checks are now no longer being distributed people don't have money in their pockets. 30 million peop

projects in the federal government. one or two year appropriations, complicated program budgeting, ,iring delays, data center cultural nuances, even technology procurement decisions outside the i.t. organization. while i did witness the obstacles mentioned, within a short time, we were able to make progress at the v.a. how were we able to do it? we had one strategic tool i could rely on. it is the law and regardless of what other obstacles i encountered, i had a law i could leverage. i want to thank the committee for giving us that law and the authority to act accordingly. of all mainframe i.t. modernization projects fall -- fail industrywide. the primary reason is complexity. many organizations develop new technology to enable a process or solve a problem well before they understand how the solution will be supported or how the process will work. trying toses, you are make something new work on something old. integrating new technologies on top of old infrastructure is always a risky proposition. the old infrastructure

but the stimulus money from the government is the one thing the federal government really should be doing and statesare impacting . so we had a commitment from the administration early on back in april for a $5 billion stimulus package state and local governments which was not in this latest proposal so the state are taking quite already now the most recent iteration is they also have to pick up the tab for a orson of the unemployment benefit. we're taking a close look at but our early estimations are this will cost our small state somewhere between 120 two $180 million a month. and we're already in a situation where we are having a multibillion dollar shortfall. you have state and local governments laying off 6 million people. and states are in the same situation many businesses are. revenues are down 20 to 30 percent range depending on the state so we're all making very difficult choices. let assistance from the federal government and, help us with the economicrecovery number one . states are putting more people on the unemployment line and 2, the people that we're trying to provide the

it's a pretty big deal because the federal government had done it.'m not sure it's the best way to do it but it was a lot better than each person going out there scrounging around trying to find their own supplies and it's probably other things that we could do with respect to ppe, protective equipment and other types of things. out of necessity, we kind of had to form these coalitions, and maybe is a framework and a future about how states can form either regional and/or just partnerships with a larger group of states. to sinkingu be open up reopening processes with let's say with virginia and other states in your region, is that something you contemplated doing? >> with all the governors, i think i lead the some calls on videoconferences like the one we're doing today with all of the nation's governors. thirtysomething with the president or vice president, the other with governors, so there was a lot of talk and cooperation with among the governors, but also we did regional meetings. so i talked on a regular basis in our area with the governor of v

comparing it to the performance of other federal systems it's different with so many other state governments to. trump is appointing justices and has been pushing this federalism revolution a lot. as you point out, it is slow. if you figure out the right policies, why do you have to go through 50 states to do it, the state system is more risk adverse and almost dubious that we will get the right answer right away. it is actually trying to make an affirmative mistake and the definitions for the experimentation. it was posed immediately on the country. and more prone to make mistakes by omission and failing to act. although we are not going to make mistakes but ownership by making the wrong choice either. >> one of the federalism issues that came up and continues as the sanctuary city the president tried to withdraw federal funds from those localities. do you care to comment on that as it asa review of the federald how it works with his deep respect for the institutions of the state and local level to have their autonomy dealing with these issues. >> guest: it's interesting and i think to sepa

he hasn't tried to compel state and local officers to do the federal government's bidding. the supreme court has issued a series of decision anti- commandeering that officers cannot enforce federal law because they are not within the executive branch so the president can't tell them how to enforce federal law. so the court has said this is why state officers are their own government don't enforce federal law and don't have to cooperate. so what comes out of the obama care case that the federal government can use bribery to get them to cooperate with immigration or drug enforcement and so when it comes time to move state policy and the federal direction he seems to rely on the traditional tools. if you don't cooperate then we will not give you as much money. the court said that is okay in obama administration not just a huge amount but the amounts of the trump administration has not been that high. . . . . to try to override the decision that this was a convenient way of executive power. what happened is that congress gave the president quite a bit of power. once there is a n

>>host: are properties governed by state regulation are there any federal regulations and protections in place nationwide? >> one of the moratorium was put in place under the cares act and they expired two weeks ago. there are some state and local eviction and moratoriums in place but they are expiring rapidly. >>host. >> i'm having a hard time the only time when the president and canada and i can't find a place to live. my husband died 2004. i am 80 years i old. had will pay for it. so what do we pay taxes for? the common care destruction. nobody wants to help nobody black or white. and you cannot get no help. >>host: diane yentel? >> i'm so sorry to hear about the loss of your home. that's terrible. i hope you can find someone locally with assistance. and that eviction crisis i'm thinking of right now and we have that shortage because the federal government is keeping people housed for the long-term. one out of every four households are in need of housing assistance. 75 percent of people who need affordable housing assistance don't receive any. and the tremendous challengesat that c

the federal government -- the federal government exists to serve the american people. [applause] on january 20th, we are going to re-establish that truth. also on that date we're going to initiate action to get substantial relief for our taxpaying citizens and action to put people back to work. [applause] none of this will be based on any new form of monetary tinkering or fiscal sleight-of-hand. we will simply apply to government the common sense that we all use in our daily lives. when we deprive people of what they've earned, or take away their jobs, we destroy their dignity and undermine their families. we can't support our families unless there are jobs; and we can't have jobs unless the people have both money to invest and the faith to invest it. [applause] these -- these are concepts that stem from an economic system that for more than 200 years has helped us master a continent, create a previously undreamed of prosperity for our people, and has fed millions of others around the globe. and that system will continue to serve us in the future if our government will

the federal government send troops to protect federal buildings, federal law about organized crime or guns or drugs but the federal government doesn't have a larger role with peace and safety unless -- hope it doesn't come to this, on the cities and states are incapable or unwilling to protect the constitutional rights of their citizens in maintaining law and order. in that limited area can the united states send law enforcement, troops into cities. >> host: what would qualify for that last category? >> guest: a hard question. you can look at historically how it happened, the rodney king riots in 1992, you can look at desegregation in riots that occur in the assassination of martin luther king and bobby kennedy will go further back, the reconstruction experience, southern states step aside and let the ku klux klan attack freed slaves, and they criticized president grant and the ku klux klan act that was used to send federal troops to protect the constitutional rights of citizens when they decided. the courts have never weighed in really about what constitute sufficient grounds to send

but the federal government has been ignoring science and scientific evidence and has not issued federalguidelines to help the states get through this pandemic. in this sense, the federal government is to blame and president bolsonaro himself sets a terrible role model for the country, and confuses the population. but you have to be realistic, don't you? i notice you comparing brazil unfavourably with germany and new zealand. you said, "if we'd implemented a proper quarantine, as those countries did, we would have saved at least half of the 100,000 deaths. we'd be in the same place as them, with a near—normal life." are you seriously suggesting that brazil, with its population of more than 210 million, many of them living in poverty, can be directly compared with germany and new zealand? of course not. and that's not what i meant. what i meant is that if we followed their role model, we'd be in a much better place. but the point is, you couldn't. it's not possible in brazil. it's not possible to be exactly in the same place as more developed countries with better economies, that's for su

but the federal government has been ignoring science and scientific evidence and has not issued federalelines to help the states get through this pandemic. in this sense, the federal government is to blame and president bolsonaro himself sets a terrible role model for the country, and confuses the population. but you have to be realistic, don't you? i notice you comparing brazil unfavourably with germany and new zealand. you said, "if we'd implemented a proper quarantine, as those countries did, we would have saved at least half of the 100,000 deaths. we'd be in the same place as them, with a near—normal life." are you seriously suggesting that brazil, with its population of more than 210 million, many of them living in poverty, can be directly compared with germany and new zealand? of course not. and that's not what i meant. what i meant is that if we followed their role model, we'd be in a much better place. but the point is, you couldn't. it's not possible in brazil. it's not possible to be exactly in the same place as more developed countries with better economies, that's for sure.

to say that's the way it should have always been and the blame isn't on the president or the federal government. it's on the states for not figuring this out sooner? >> no, there are two reasons why we should have gone with a federal response first. you could argue states maybe should have given up on the federal government a little earlier, but the money sits with the federal government. they have the purse. they also have a bunch of powers. they have the dpa, the defense production act. and so while states can do this, i think everybody acknowledges this is plan b. this is the second best choice. i think at this point it's incontrovertible, the deal would have been the federal government doing it. they couldn't or didn't so now the states are. >> let's talk brother to brother here for a second here with schools. i can't in good conscience -- it's not my job to do this anyway. we've been proxies sometimes. they see me talking to people like you who know what they're talking about and by osmose, i i might know something. i can't tell people in good conscience to send their kids back to school.

and say hey help us out we need to rebuild and how is the federal government going to respond. well you looked at the minneapolis mayor saying please stay out of the state we don't want the national guard coming into the state do not try to help us do not do anything we can handle this and that's what happened in portland that's what happened in seattle do not bring in the national guard and then what happens there is complete chaos and then in minneapolis they send the federal government a bill for 500000000 dollars after they said don't try to help us they want you and i we don't live in minneapolis we don't live in seattle we don't live in portland because of their failed leadership now they want to go to taxpayers all around the country and say bail us out thankfully president trump said no we're not going to fund any of the concert reconstruction in these cities you guys are the ones that created it you guys are the ones who are going to have to deal with this problem. well that's the thing to having politicians say one thing but obvious there on election time just magical

the department says it's simply unrealistic that the federal government can manage the supplies of everyexcellent reporting from drew. thank you for that. >>> president trump signing executive actions to extend the enhanced federal unemployment benefits but leaving a big chunk of the bill to states. many of which probably simply won't be able to pay. more on that next. if you're 55 and up, t- mobile has a plan built just for you. we want you to get the value and service you need to stay connected. saving 50% vs. other carriers with 2 unlimited lines for less than $30 each. we know that connection is more important than ever. and we're here to help, when you're ready to switch. call 1-800-t-mobile or go to t- mobile. com/ 55. hey allergy muddlers... achoo! ...do your sneezes turn heads? try zyrtec... ...it starts working hard at hour one... and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. zyrtec muddle no more. to give you the protein you need with less of the sugar you don't. [grunting noise] i'll take that. woohoo! 30 grams of protein and 1 gram of sugar. ensure max protein.

how much is the federal government's failure on this issue, testing, hurt your state? h there had been a better federal testing strategy. in north carolina we worked very hard to get testing out. we find problems with supply chain. we find problems with personal protective equipment. so, as governors, we've had to step up and do the job. we've done that in north carolina, and now we're bonding with other states here to try to use our collective power to do this. it would be better if we had a strong national strategy that would get ahold of the supply chain. and, you know, it's hard to trace when there is so much time, turn around time, in the testing. we've got to do better here for sure. >> so, the rnc was criticized over the weekend. they were saying the events in north carolina could be closed to the press. obviously there was the whole thing the president called you backward and tried to move as much as he could to florida. there are still some parts happening in north carolina. the chairwoman of the rnc said said the whole issue of the press is not on them, it is

money sits with the federal government. they have the purse. they have a bunch of powers that states don't. the defense production act and so while states can do this, everybody acknowledges this is plan b. this is the second best choice. it's really the idea would have been the federal government doing it. they couldn't or didn't. now states are. >> brother to brother for a second. with school. i can't in good conscience. we become proxies sometimes. they think i may know something. i can't tell people to sen kids back to school. i don't know if i'll do it. this hybrid sounds stupid. to me. that we'll put them sometimes. it's like you're only putting my kids hand in fire sometimes? if they are exposed to a classroom and can't count cases. it's too much. obviously at home has issues and problems. that's not public hell. i guess it's better than going every week in terms of exposure. don't you have the same problem if you can't count cases then you're not ready to have kids in the places. >> i'm a big believer in testing in schools as a way of c

so there's a lot of waste in the federal government. what federal agency is running well? i cannot point to one. host: brian in pennsylvania. independent line. , tony in tampa. go ahead. caller: i just want to say to andrzejewski, in your opinion, has nancy pelosi destroyed trump on every budget that has been signed including the shutdown? trump is collecting all this money from tariffs and selling our oil over the world and nato paying their fair share to europeans. that debt hasy grown under this president. it's almost impossible to believe and then printing money to boot. i just don't think he's done a good job at all with this spending and when you look at it , we hired him to do two things. build a wall and get rid of obama care. and with the house and senate for two years and the amount of money he spent to be bragging about 300 miles of wall which 197 of it was rebuilt, i just -- i voted for the guy and i'm just saying i don't see him as the smashing success all my friends and a lot of trump supporters see him as. guest: i think your characterization of the first tw

didn't do that much about federal government. it was largely controlled by some southern members who are not really that favorable to african-americans. not until the civil rights revolution in the 1960s did washington get more interested in actually trying to change these things. is that when it came about, when the civil rights revolution came along, that the federal government officials said, we have to do something to change the laws in this country in the 1950s and 1960s? >> what you have, washington, d.c., again, because of howard university, was really at the forefront of demanding fairness in the 1920s, 30s, '40s. so it really wasn't that they waited until the 1960s, but the pressures on the federal government, the leadership that the civil rights movement did, the visibility that it received utilizing the media and television put pressure on the federal government to change. >> so in august of 1963, there's the famous march in washington. the federal government at the time didn't want it and president kennedy thought it

the federal government at the time did not want. it president kennedy thought it might lead to violence. there was a lot of concern about it. but it actually went forward. it turned out not to be violent at all, the people were still afraid. schools were closed. stores were closed. martin luther king was the last speaker that they. he was the last speaker because ... >> in some ways he was considered the leader of the community and they wanted to give him the best spot. >> i thought they were afraid he was so articulate that if he spoke first, the others would not look as good. (laughter) >> john lewis said that but ... >> okay, that's not true. but he gave his famous speech. me i have a dream speech. was that something that was written out for him the night before? was it a speech writer who had given him that text? where that speech come from? the text he actually had -- departed from. it why did he do? that >> he had said portions of that speech and other places around the country -- the story is that as he is giving his speech,

unlike the federal government state and local governments are operating with finite amounts of dollars without a edlimited line of credit. to require a balanced budget by the end of the year it's one thing for states and counties and municipalities to juggle and survive a few months using cash flow management relying on a rainy day fund but they can't do that forever by now many have burned up their reserves and the bill is due and the decisions they are making akffright now, the official poly is to force millions to be laid off in the worst pandemic in 100 years it's not just cruel that bad economic strategy as much as 34 percentage points from real gdp. there are some things that are not within the united states and its control as it relates to gd gdp. but this is a choice we are about to make to lay off public service workers. we passed the ppe program keeping people employed and expanded unemployment insurance we said stay home and we will take care of you and now the official public policy of the republican conference is to lay off firefighters and nurses k and teachers and accuse

but the federal government doesn't really have the people. doesn't really have the actual mechanisms of government to take care of a nationwide pandemic. you think about how many people do they even have? how could they enforce a pandemic social distancing system? the entire fbi, entire workforce is smaller than the new york police department. the real agencies of government, the real arm of public power in this kind of spread pandemic has to come from the state and local. think the president who is not conscious of the constitutional limits of the power would try to go beyond that. to his political detriment is stayed within his boundaries. >> is it a fair question to ask can you imagine fdr in a situation like this, this is for the states. we are not a shipping clerk. i think that's a bother so many people. they expect the president to be big and powerful and authoritative. and how difficult is it to say wear a mask? [laughter] which is what he could've done. >> misses why the founders created the presidency. why even have an independent exe

the federal government has a responsibility to protect federal buildings. federal government exists in almost every major city across the united states. that's just how it works. you can't go in and burn down a federal building, and when i say burn down, the fireworks that you heard about being aimed at our personnel, those are commercial grade. those are equivalent of the fourth of july fireworks that go hundreds of feet up in the air aimed directly at our personnel. there is not a federal martial law response. this was doing a job that we're clearly responsible for not just authorized, but responsible to do. gerry: coming up, we're going to take a quick break, but coming up i'll talk further with chief scott about law enforcement in portland and elsewhere and what we've learned in the course of the last few weeks. the last few weeks. stay with us. if your gums bleed when you brush you may have gingivitis. and the clock could be ticking towards bad breath, receding gums and possibly tooth loss. help turn back the clock on gingivitis with parodontax. leave

telemedicine, we finally have woken up to what the federal government should've been doing for a decade and embraced telemedicine as part of normal office visits that don't have to happen in the office as part of behavioral health, our bill says that the cms determines how medicare money is spent, you cannot go back on what they allowed in the last few months ever'v and some of the things tt they allow they cannot go back for a significant period of time to see how this works, broadba broadband, we can deal with this, picking up telemedicine until a behavioral health and that as well as other health medicine, you need to have access to broadband. it kids who are learning remotely have the same opportunity the other kids who are learning remotely, you need to have access to broadband and you need as soon as you can get it whether that is assistance to get hooked up which is a little easier than just access and we've been working hard in the senate and in our state legislator in our state to get the missourians that don't have access toig high-speed broadband to get the access. , there ar

. >> how much money did the federal government give you for that? >> we had one staff, no collections, no money, no idea where the museum would be. the smithsonian had $1 million to get started. i spent that in like two weeks. ultimately, you have got artifacts given by citizens of the country. how many were given to the museum? 70% came from people's basements and attics. we realized that the idea of the culture and history still available, we felt the only way we could do it was to get people to share with us stories and histories through the collections. >> you have mel turner's bible. harriet tubman's shawl. what is the most popular item? >> a red cadillac that i did not want and did not think was important, which shows you! >> how many people have been to the museum since it opened? >> 7.3 million. >> what is the average time someone spends going to this museum? >> 4.5 hours to 5.5 hours. it tells you people will spend the time to understand and think about and debate. we are pleased this has become the kind of site that in some ways almost a p

we are working with the federal government. the admiral who leads the testing effort announced a sort of effort to do exactly this program. but specifically from nursing homes. what they see is a constraint in industries capacity to scale up production. what we're suggesting is by bringing together those who have demand for the tests and frankly setting a new mind set in our country using screening tests in far more manner we can get industry to over come constraints, get to 30 million. >> i love the aim. i think you're being too -- in the understanding of the motivation. by the boss. we know what the answer is here. it's an out put contract. i don't know the industry can scale up tla fast. give them the money to scale up. do what you did with the wall. find the money. find the will. find people to build it. they can do the same thing. go to the companies, you know who they are. go to chemical companies and say we'll give you the money. find the reagent. tell us how to do it. we will buy all that you can put out. we'll buy it h

every issue i just mentioned, if it is ovevercome, it is likelyy inconsequentialbe to the federal government. it would be the equivalent of a handful of seven hours of expenses. that is how immaterial this money would be. u.s. officials have been setting national security concerns, worried that the chinese government is exploiting the data connected to this app. if a lot of money changes hands, does that meaean this issue woud somehow disappear? as unpredictable as the u.s.s. president is, it is potentially likely the white house may have to walk back from this proposal. we have a lot of hurdles between now and september 15. tiktok has been banned in india just last montnth. potentially in the u.s. depending on what donald trump does. what does this mean for donald -- fourfuture in europe tiktok's future i i europe? >> t the money comes from the security issues i talked about earlier. they have been raised by european governments. they have not actually gone as far as saying they will ban tiktok. the governments i'i'm talking about our the rich and wealthy economies. they try to adopt an int