it's not just pl olicy agreemen but principles. >> we have work to do. >> david wrote this and this is a joe moment and people are judged by where they stood at the time and those that walk with him are tanted forever after the standards and then the general election and then the slaughter. do you see it that way? >> i am not looking at it like that. i don't think that it's right to think about 2017 and beyond. i want to focus on 2016 and getting us back on track. i am focused on the here and now and tomorrow. as one that shares the value all of my life, i want to see them celebrate the principles of our party apply the problems and appeal to all americans and run a principle solutions campaign that we're proud of. i do believe that there's work to be done for that to happen. that's the point that i'm trying to make. i'm not worried what's after the election. this election right now is what we have to focus on. >> just tuberculosis clear and i hate to be that guy, but you're still ruling out. >> you asked it like three times. >> no, this one. just to be clear, you're ruling out you acc

but also, the dual track olicy, which kim jung-un has described.are going to continue to progress on the nuclear side. rishaad: they go hand in hand. he got this new title. >> yes. it is chairman of the workers' party. that is something shared with his father and grandfather and absolutely puts him in the center of power that has been cons tated here. another thing to make note of, it is going to be very difficult for him to do that economic development along with nuclear development at the same time. noish we will -- rishaad: we will see if he makes an appearance. a bumpy road ahead for china. e will discuss the latest data and the forecast. >> from our studios in new york city, this is "charlie rose." charlie: brett is here. he is a special presidential envoy for the global combs to fight isil. he presley held a number of policy roles on both the obama and busch administrationles. he served as a senior viedors to three ambassadors in bag baghdad. a u.s. navy seal was killed by isil

we know hillary clinton's ,olicies, at least on our side are wrong for the future of the country andgn policy. illie: what could donald trump possibly say in the weeks or months to you on a phone call or meeting that would convince you he is a true conservative? i have serious policy concerns. i would like to see those addressed. i mentioned money to pay off the national debt. targeting women and children, bringing back torture, i don't think it is necessary to secure the border. we should have a security test but not religious test. i would like to see movement in that direction, but also in a very credible way. one of the reasons i have withheld support as of today is to really see who is donald trump in november? you asked me and may i will support a candidate in november not knowing what the platform will be, i am not prepared to do it. am i going to stand in the way? .o, he has won the nomination we should begin to look for leadership. i hope it is leadership i can support in november, but i am not there yet. mark: you made one of your signature issues something we talked about,

divisions and not just guerilla forces and lyndon johnson saw he was carrying out the spirit of the olicy that had been started by president kennedy when he ordered the increase of our i must say he was an anguished person because he notions of but his peace were that you made a compromise. >> i attended a scientific conference in europe and at that conference there were two individuals who talked to me because they knew i had been in weeks earlier ew that year at the invitation of the ambassador. well, one of these two people chi minhthe host of ho when he was in paris to negotiate peace and he offered to go to vietnam and call on his acquaintance on behalf of peace for the united states. i called up secretary macnamara to tell him about this. the secretary discussed the matter with president johnson. and amazingly president johnson entrusted a professor at harvard, which was not the favored ncy which most him. [laughter] > being an intermediary to two frenchmen that no one ever heard of before. d there was a message from minh dent johnson to ho chi under the circumstances to which he wa

>> i think that this is in some ways a deliberate fed olicy, putting the inflation in the system being a healthy thing after years of low inflation. with so many other central banks able to trade inflation, i don't think that they then have to slam the brakes later on. they can move to a more normal tightening path later. start off slow, let the economy build more, get the unemployment rate down and later moved to a more tightening cycle. i don't see them slamming the brakes anytime though. oliver: this sounds like a psychological game. if this is their intent, why not come out and make it clear to the market? >> the problem is the environment we are in right now. whatever they do is under a microscope. legislation in congress is designed to reduce fed independence. this is not a time to come out and make old statements. i think that this is more of a quiet, more technical policy change where they tend to overshoot the target. for good reasons. not because they want high inflation, but because we know that inflation is cyclical and if you are going to have it early and a recovery you n

second, although university olicy in doe was badly flawed, it seems clear that the school acted in good faith, at least i believe it's clear. the issues the university faced were real. they were significant and they demanded some kind of response. similarly it seems clear to me that the plaintiff in that case acted in good faith. if i had been teaching at the university of michigan when the challenged policy had been in place, i would have had concerns, too. these days when those on each side of the debate are so eager to caricature those on the other as clueless or even villainous, it seems refreshing to consider a case where i think both sides had a point. third, the passing of 25 years provides an occasion for calling the question, are we thinking about these issues now better than we were thinking about them then. it does seem fair to expect some forward movement over a quarter century span. so have we seen any, i have three theses, the first is that since doe was decided, we have indeed seen significant change in how we think about and discuss the conflicting values of speech and e

explicitly called for the use of tasters to be included in a policy, we take their suggestion that the pbe olicy combined as one policy, is not just something that would be rationally sound for the department, but as a passive endorsement of the inclusion of tasters in the policy and reject that completely. secondly, i like to point out that in their commentary on section where i go, special considerations, specifically comment number 21, they say what if any evidence supports the notion homeless individuals may be more susceptible to adverse reaction if you sounded however, the word homeless does not appear anywhere in the draft policy which is evidence of the department of justices implicit assertion that they believe it's okay to use lasers on homeless people, which is an assertion we the people reject innocent entirety this is exactly the kind of bigotry, exactly the kind of derivative need your residence by the scandal by sgt.-earlier in the week that we are opposed to and exactly why teasers present such a dangerous option for the san francisco police department with its current culture an

is a real worry here on the part of a lot of us which we are entering a phase of national security .olicynk this is the most they dress time we have ever seen, with not just the russians but , koreans, jihadists, latin america, these are all problems where there are serious problems for national interest and a national security as well as here at home. these sorts of things that are required the a steady hand and i'm hoping that donald trump will provide it. >> if you want to talk to frank gaffney. i wonder, since you had left the cruz campaign have you had conversations with the donald trump campaign? cruzm sorry to say the campaign left all of us. i have had conversations who are working for the campaign, yes. >> you think you will work for donald trump? pieceby jindal has a today which is indicative of my view. i am very much opposed to hillary clinton and her positions. , andpeaking personally personally i believe a continuation of the kind of program that she and barack for theve engineered past eight years will be disastrous for the national security of the united states. my hope is

government and the canadian parliament to make the combatting of anti-semitism in domestic and foreign olicynumber three, it abstracted, it said criticizing israel is not anti-semitic and saying so is wrong, but sing willing israel out for an indictment, denying israel's right to exist, let alone calling for israel's destruction is hateful and discriminatory and not saying so is dishonest and i believe, scholars, this is a see him plate that we can invoke and apply. number six, we need to combat the delegitimatization of srael. not as something that is prejudicial to israel. frankly if you talk about did he legitimatization of israel, it should be did he legitimate side. what we have to say that the real phone no, ma'amon is that the seem ping of it and to make it clear this is not just rejudicial to israel, but it erodes the integrity of the united nations under whose protect tiffer cover it covers. and international law which is invoked in its favor and corrupts the culture of human rights and demeans the struggle against the real racism and the real apartheid and we have to say what is at