nationals because of this traitorous revolt against abolition in the united states of america. you might ask yourself parenthetically how and why it is that a failed regime, the confederate states of america, which revolted against the united states government and led to the slaughter of thousands probably have more monument in many states of the united states of america and the folks who were victorious. it is very strange and unusual when those who lead a revolt in her squashed and defeated wind up somehow have a more monument than the people who helped to squash them. i think you can now begin to understand this conundrum unless you understand that those are revolted against washington in 1861 thought that they were walking the footsteps of those who revolted against london in 1776. that is to say revolting in order to continue that insidious institution known as slavery. in any case, after the u.s. civil war and permit the united states government looks around its neighborhood, notices can do is under british rule. cuba is under spanish rule. most of the caribbean, barbados,

the united states yielded to the global pressure, returned paul robeson's passport. he immediately left and returned to london. paul robeson always said that if you want to understand attraction of socialism, rather than look to moscow, you should look to london, that is to say he was very close to left-wing sources in london, even though he reportedly told the investigating authorities in the united states that he was not a member of the u.s. communist party, i speculate that he may have been a member of the british communist party because he was very close to the british communist while he was living in london in 1920's and 1930's, he resumes to london, he also begins to travel all throughout europe, he is in some ways like a famish man who is confronted with the banquet that is to say he overdoes it in terms of his travel and his attention to adoring audiences, et cetera, his held has been deteriorating for various reasons, not least the kind of pressure that he was under while under virtual house arrest in the united states of america and so, after his wife passe

it is suspected they use cuba as a gateway into the united states or canada. and without objection, i ask unanimous consent that this article be inserted into the record. what this article reflects is truly frightening, given the fact that cuba currently has zero document verification machines at any of its airports. they do not have any electronic means of trying to verify whether any of the documents being presented to them are, in fact, what they purport to be and authentic. so, there you have it. these are the concerns, and they are multifaceted and serious. we are here today not to elaborate on the merits of the administration's rapprochement with cuba, but to take a serious look, as is our job, at the national security implications of a policy that has been pushed through at breakneck speed with seemingly minimal regard for the security and safety of the american people. with that, i now recognize the ranking member of this subcommittee, the gentlewoman from new york, ms. rice, for any statement she may have. representative rice: thank you, mr. chairman,

carriers to offer scheduled service between the united states and cuba at the third round of consultationsm of understanding in february february 2016. added four more nonbinding treatment delineating the terms between the two countries with respect to scheduled service to provide for u.s. carriers to operate 28 daily round-trip frequencies into each of those other cities with the international airport for gore also provides for charter services to continue to operate without limitation but the reaction of the carrier's they are eager to offer scheduled service to cuba and the universally welcome and have submitted application to the department of transportation to operate flights on its pacific routes to havana and other cuban cities in the case of a van applications for u.s. carriers far exceed the limit of 20 frequencies per day the deity is conducting a frequency allocation proceeding to determine which u.s. carriers will receive frequencies based on public interest. we believe they will support the objectives for authorized travel between united states and cuba and will generate new b

it's meant to reinforce the leadership role the united states plays in asia. it's meant to extend the fact that the united states has been, has provided the platform for asia social economic development for three quarters of a century. the president came into office, believed we were underinvested and has gone about increasing that investment. the vietnam piece of it is an important part of rebalance. rebalance involves as you said at the opening, investing in and paying a lot more attention and engaging with our allies but also with emerging nations in asia including vietnam, and it involves a rebalancing of overwhelming emphasis on northeast asia to southeast asia as an important part of our interest as well. vietnam we have had for the last 20 years an increasingly close relationship. this takes it, as the president said, to the new level and really points it towards kind of fully engaged and normtallized relationship. essentially i was in vietnam in the summer of 1995 on the trip where we reestablished relations with vietnam and raised the flag over the emb

the united kingdom? idn't join the eurozone in 1999. and only 19 of the 28 member nations of the eu have so far adopted the euro. only two nations, us and denmark, are not committed by treaty to do so and the rest recommitted to joining euro two months ago in brussels in the agreement that david cameron reached with other leaders. it's true we don't need to join the euro. we don't need to join the passport-free area of europe that's caused so many debates during the refugee crisis. we can opt out of some justice and home affairs measures. but the deal that our prime minister did in brussels in february cemented those opt-outs it gave us a few extra protections against being sucked into a european super state but didn't change things. the eu will still make laws for us in the same way. we can still be outvoted on almost anything and we are regularly. the european court of justice will still act as our supreme court. all of those same areas of our laws will be made in brussels. for example, it's the job of

mexico will honor this, so they will depend on the united states. ot to honor this, the penalties would be severe, that they would face. >> avery, sounds like you disagreed on some of that. >> i do. i have to tell you, i think this thing drips in political implications. the fact is, there's an ironclad relationship between mexico and the united states. and if there were ever an effort to get a guy like el chapo out, it is right now. and it's going to prove that our system of justice works and we've worked with mexico and believe me, any politician that's talking about building a wall is going to have to explain away the extraordinary effort of two sovereign states working together to get a bad guy to the united states. i think it's a profoundly political case. >> and nick valencia, you're still with us on the phone. you've covered this extensively, when he escaped and then when he was busted. and so can you refresh our memory and the chronology. because there are a number of events that happened prior to today ease movement and potential now extradit

for the best interests of the united states. wn proceedings in their own court that puts the united states at risk. >> are you concerned that those who oppose the bill. >> look, we oppose the bill so obviously we don't want to see a move forward in the senate, but we are going to see if we can ensure that we can move legislation forward. >> do you encourage them not to proceed because it has ramifications? the fact that it's now pass the senate, are there ramifications to bow alone? >> i think as we discussed when he traveled to saudi arabia, he had a long bilateral bilateral meeting with the king of saudi arabia on this issue and the issue of this legislation was not raised. i think it is an indication of the fact that right now this legislation is not interfering with our ability to coordinate with the saudi arabia government on a range of issues of mutual concern, but our broader concern is about the potential unintended consequences at the passage of this legislation would bring about and that is basically giving other countr

in the same way, that the united kingdom should respect the big decisions taken here in the united statesso the verdict on the future of the united kingdom must be won by the people of the u.k. although. on the inside or the outside of the eu, britain's relationship with the united states will and must remain strong. neither of us should ever be at the back of the line when it comes to working together. if britain chooses to leave, our partnerships in defense, intelligence, counterterrorism, in trade, and in culture should remain strong and unchanged. neither of us would benefit from growing apart, and neither of us should want that to happen regardless of how britain chooses to shape its future. we have a unique and special relationship that has survived changes in government, and changes of circumstance. that relationship will and must stay strong regardless of how the british vote in june. as david cameron himself has said, he believes our best days together at lie ahead. ladies and gentlemen, our friends here in washington and across the united states should understand the challenge w

the united states wants to be a part of that. we want to make sure that as vietnam grows and achieves greater opportunity the young people of vietnam have a chance to partner with the young people of the united states, trading, working on scientific projects, starting businesses together. i think that will be good for both countries. and we think that it is important from our perspective that as a lead er that we engag vietnam bilaterally because we want to continue to strengthen our cooperation with the multilateral organizations like the east asia summit where we think we have seen very real progress over the last several years on everything from commercial issues to disease control to humanitarian issues. one of the things that we increasingly discover is that it is harder and harder to solve problems by ourselves. it is much easier to tackle big problems like climate change or the outbreak of disease. or responding to humanitarian disasters when we have architecture of cooperation already established. on all of the fronts we h

the whole architecture is at risk. a united states that disengages faster than europe integrates, or disengages as europe integrates, and the european integration has been made possible highest relationship with the united states. if that relationship begins to fray it is connected to the crisis in europe. we have our work cut out for us. we won't find the solution if we don't work jointly, europeans and americans, on this issue. >> he describes the meta-problem we have. the frameworks we live with for some many years are falling apart, in part because there is a challenge to the status quo. we found that real challenge is focused in particular in that part of europe where the security status of countries like your own and georgia are being contested and are in some ways uncertain. there is a desire on the part of georgia to be a member of nato. there is a commitment of nato to have georgia as a member. we are not there. how does it look from george's perspective? this continued uncertainty about the security status of a countr

awkward in may be the united states, but it is not in the rest of the unite the world.: that was michael ratner in 2006 in iceland as he was awarded by yoko ono the lennon ono grant for peace. we only have one minute. your remembrance, your fond remembrance? >> michael and his wonderful wife sharon were at the center. their children, j, an activist with a motley workers and a performance artist, the only july 4 softball game in which everyone ended by singing the internationale now. they were the center of a community. amy: michael smith? >> i took a singing class. anyone can sing with michael's children. we put them on face time. and we sang the international now. michael was in a barca whinger 's barco lounger in hi living room. he sang it in french. amy: i want him with a clip to mark michaels 60th birthday. many of his friend's were asked to briefly describe him. >> michael is unfaltering. >> tenacious. >> effervescent. >> decent. >> relentless. >> generous. >> got to be some kind of tremendous optimism to keep going at the pace that he goes. amy: friends and family

thousands of french, white and colored fled into the united states. there were people pouring into the west, french people pouring in during these years of the 1790's. host: so you said that the french revolution had become too radical for these men. what about what was happening in the french revolution? why do you call them refugees? or do they see themselves as white? prof. furstenberg: technically they were integrated that way. -- or do they see themselves that way? prof. furstenberg: technically they were emigrated. they viewed -- some were reactionary emigrees who fled, opposed to the french revolution. they were reactionary and wanted to reinstall the old regime. these were liberals. i think of them as centrist, but they were pro revolution. they wanted to install a constitutional monarchy based on english model. in similar ways, based on the american model with checks and balances. when the jacobins came to power, they were forced to flee. they would have been imprisoned or executed. one frenchman had to flee under threat of imprisonment. one's

and the second theme is the role of the united states. let me start with the first one and it just open it up to press a little bit. and perhaps, secretary-general, you want to start reflecting on this? lamberto: we have airplanes flying wing tip to wing tip. we have airplanes flying over the front and back of ships. if a millimeter difference would have clipped a ship and fallen into the baltic sea. we see it all over the place. we have airplanes being shot down because they crossed territory of a nato country. that is how wars start. what procedures, we called for procedures in the report, but what procedures in the onc ? is there something in the onc that focuses on the day after or the moment after an accident has occurred? how do you make sure that accident does not escalate to a war that no one wants? what kind of processes and procedures might we put into place specifically within vienna, or outside of vienna, that you think might be able to work? all sorts ofre are things that can be done. first of all, we have in vienna all of the

does the united states have to send 90% of the military might, bombs to fight isis? where are the other arab nations pitching in? >> well, and i think they should. look, i think military relationships, it's complicated, it's con that lewded, and, ultimately, the united states does what's in the best military interest. i agree to a agree with trump on the nato premise in the fact that, you know, people should be paying more, you know, in these sort of partnerships, and, too, you look at a relationship where, you know, a lot of people are questioning what is nato do, and looking at maybe reforming that relationship or reforming the importance of nato when nato was formed, obviously, after world war for to defend against the soviets and their aggressions, so -- >> things have changed. we have to have our priorities aligned correctly. yes, we have to do everything we can to fight isis and be all in when it comes to that, but on the other hand, are we going to interfere in ukraine? i mean, those are the questions that we need to be posting right now, and what we herd from

tom: they expect the united states to be present. ey expect them to keep their alliance obligations. they expect us to continue to provide the nuclear umbrella we have provided. -- in the region, for three quarters of a century. this is a thought experiment. think about what it looks like absent the u.s. engagement here. ther the prime minister, alliance has been deep end as intense as it ever has been. the president will also visit the memorial at hiroshima. an attack on japan, south korea, and any other country, that will be met with what kind of response? at that point, we would stand together to defend against any attack and what is that do? that makes the likelihood of any such attack much lower. the fact that you would have to face the united states in a situation like that makes the percentage chances of such an attack much lower. it keeps stability in the region at a much higher level than it otherwise would be. there is one thing clear. no military in asia, including the chinese military could ever , hope to take on the unite

what's in -- in other words, what's in it for the united states? because we're going to give up some of our information. best practices, like for me, quite honestly, as a layman who has just used this -- this system and i've never worked in the system, but what best practices is cuba using that -- that we need to get to use in the united states? mr. fujimura: cuba is a member of icao, the 191 members. perry: right. fujimura: as a member of the international -- international aviation community, we have a shared goal in -- in security of our passengers around the world reaching their destination safely. that's a shared goal we have with the -- with the cubans and the 189 other members. rep. perry: i understand the shared goal. i'm looking -- it says "best practices," and it says that we talked about technical information on -- on -- on security and -- on aviation security and best practices. rep. perry: i want to know some examples. i want to know what we're getting that we wouldn't get otherwise. we're giving them access to our airports -- new york,

section 702 is aimed at surveillance of foreigners outside the united states. it sweeps up a sizable amount of information about citizens in american art medicated with foreigners. so the authority to require strong oversight and transparency and protect the american people did in 2008 and in 2012 i oppose the fisa amendment act because it lacked safeguards. despite these concerns are americans communications are being swept up we still do not know how much is collected under this authority. i understand intelligence community is now developing methodologies to estimate that figure and it's long overdue, i applaud that it is happening. it is all the more significant because both intelligence and law-enforcement agencies search this data for information about americans, without judicial approval the backdoor searches i think ray some serious constitutional questions. i asked consent to enter the record with testimony from several organizations that raise the initial concern including. >> without objection they will be included. >> i just want to conclude this. i

that is still the law in the united states. need an additional strategy for changing the laws as some of the indian nations that i was representing pointed out that they had never relinquish their rights as nations to participate in the international community and so we began to look to the international community, to the united nations, for ways to challenge the laws in the united states and elsewhere. the then, relative newly-emerging law of human rights at the international level was promising. because it contained -- in 1976, we had the opportunity to go to the home of human rights in geneva, switzerland, to the home of the united nations there. and i suggested to the indian nations that i was working with at the time that they consider proposing to the united nations a declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples. i wrote a draft for them to consider. they did consider it, reviewed, modified it and took it to the united nations in 1977 and proposed it to the united nations for adoption. our strategy was that by creating

i always thought it was to the united states, not to a foreign. f we make the standard that a threat to an imminent city around the world would be okay for the president to unilaterally begin a war because any city around the world was under imminent threat, i think standard that's absurd. wouldn't you recognize the standard at least to be to the united states or to a military base of ours or to some sort of asset of ours? you look at, but if article 51 of the un charter, it says that any country that feels they need assistance can call on nother un member state to assist them, and that's exactly into appened when we went kuwait and kick iraq out of kuwait. it wasn't an imminent threat to states.ted there was no threat to the united states at all. we went in, you know, the surest of a great power is if you have to act unilaterally, you do so. lways best to act multilaterally. i know we'd agree on that. that's the best test of a great power, if it has to act unilaterally. we went into panama with okay, they nsent, were brutalizing our service men do

our world is getting smaller, but is it a good idea for the united states to get smaller? t year, vladimir putin tested his missiles against nato. >> it was one of several such will such incidents, and it was very much like the drill you're seeing right now. >> because of the vast distances here in alaska. >> this colonel pilots this s-22 stealth raptor, fully armed and ready to go it a moment's notice. >> we can get closer and identify whatever is out there. >> what they have seen out there, russian c-2 barrier bombers, capable of carrying nuclear weapons. these encounters have become common enough lately, that error n norad places red plaques on the wall when there's an intercept. >> russia represents the greatest threat to our national security. >> russia is the only country on effort that has the ability to destroy the united states. >> we're confronting a russia that has now entered a new chapter in the cold war. >> last summer, rush that september five warships to alaskan waters. >> we had to prepare for any event that might happen understanding that the president wou

taiwan is now the united states' ninth largest trading partner and it is in the u.s. interest to have a stable and a prosperous taiwan. it is an exciting time in taiwan. in january, a free and fair election once again demonstrated the strength and vibe bransy of die wan's democratic system and in three days we expect the null elected president to be inaugurated in a peaceful transfer of power from one party to another. the people of taiwan should be proud of their prosperous, free and democratic society and what they have been able to accomplish despite having to face countless challenges outside of their control. mr. speaker, when the u.s. established plementic relations with the peoples republic of china on january 1, 1979, the u.s. congress acted just 100 days later to pass the taiwan relations act, which would ensure that the united states maintained a robust and enduring relationship with taiwan. three years later in 1982, president reagan deepened the u.s. commitment to taiwan by issuing the six assurances to taiwan which included treating taiwan as we would tre

and the size of unit i'm not sure. >> the biggest it diversifies between a condo and co-op i can sell the condo to anyone in a co-op i can't do that. >> i understand the board has to approved purchase by a new party of a unit or units that someone may own someone mentioned the fontana the stock was a co-op. >> they're true in california they run across from its on california and jones. >> and then the 1 across the street on california and jones is on the corner then he knew of two on the vallejo the two high-rise i believe those are also condos no their co-ops. >> but entirely different situation in terms of ownership and the fact you know an approval process by the members is not the same situation as it would be the case of condo unit and can't get individual loans for if you wanted to sell to a person the bureau can't get their own loan you know without the co-op you the reason he know the the two buildings on california street are co-ops when i represented the neighbors in both the - having the live i

>> a big mistake for europe, the united states and for the world. ited states and for the world. >> announcer: that and more listerine® kills 99% of bad breath germs. united states and for the world. >> announcer: that and more this is 100% useful for a 100% fresh mouth. what's it like to not feel 100% fresh? we don't know. we swish listerine®. as do listerine® users. the very people we studied in the study of bold. people who are statistically more likely to stand up to a bully. do a yoga handstand. and be in a magician's act. listerine® kills 99% of bad breath germs so you can feel 100% in life. bring out the bold™. anthony: we are in las vegas with former treasury secretary larry summers. what is the secular stagnation. >> people want to save more than businesses want to invest which means there is downwards pressure on interest rates, always the prospect of bubbles in existing assets because people don't want to create new ones. a tendency toward slow growth and low inflation. it's a defining malady in the industrial world. the word secular means

today vietnam and the united states are partners. i believe our experience holds lessons for the world. at a time when many conflicts seem as if they will never end, we have shown that hearts can change, and that a different future is possible when we refuse to be prisoners of the past. we've shown how peace can be better than war. we've shown that progress and human dignity is best advanced by cooperation and not conflict. that's what vietnam and america can show the world. now, america's new partnership with vietnam is rooted in some basic truths. vietnam is an independent sovereign nation. no other nation can impose its will on you or decide your destiny. [ applause ] the united states has an interest here. we have an interest in vietnam's success. our partnership is in the early stages. by the time i've left i want to share what i believe can guide us too the decades ahead. first, let's work together to create real opportunity and prosperity for all of our people. we know the ingredients for economic success in the 21st century. i

year, the past nations, canada, the united states, and the u.k.ibuted over 90% of the dollars spent on actual -- four nato. sort of obvious that putting the united states interests first does not mean abandoning all of our allies. it simply means that our allies should be doing something for the alliance. why should the united states risk a nuclear exchange for the russia for the sake of the baltic states unless there is also portuguese -- standing on the line in the baltic states? the portuguese and the french and the spanish also commit themselves, then the united states can feel guilty about being tough on our allies. until that time, i think we need to at least listen to that much of what the man said. in the first place, the european union collectively has the second-largest defense budget in the world after the united states. they have a substantial ground force which protects europe and american interests as well. the key point i want to make is the reason we have troops in europe and troops in south korea and japan, it is not a favor for t

the united states stands against terrorism. so do certainly would have similar facility located in charleston south carolina, leavenworth kansas, or colorado. parents have chosen to wage -- terrace have chosen to wage war on the americans because of the fundamental meetings in which you bring ourselves. the september 11 attacks occurred before there was ever a guantanamo bay facility. as did the first world trade center bombing. and numerous other attempted attacks on united and interest around the world. operations from a secure facility outside of the continental united states and into charleston well not stop the propaganda. this line of thinking is giving the terrorist too much credit and too much validity. terrorists do not need a deal to hate us. they hate us on their own. second, the president contends that the presence of the facility and guantanamo bay is somehow a major impediment to our relationship with foreign nations. governor, my principal engagement outside the united states is admittedly on the economic developm

that are serving here in the united states. we take that obligation seriously. and we obviously expect that other countries around the world take that obligation seriously. but of course at u.s. diplomatic facilities all around the world, there are united states marine corps service members who are standing guard. and the president takes that security quite seriously. but that certainly does not be a solve local governments of the responsibility that they have to ensure the safety and security of our diplomats as well. reporter: one more. on this issue of the president and the press that's been out there lately. the american presidency project in santa barbara did an analysis that shows that president obama's had fewer press conferences, on pace to have fewer press conferences, than his previous two predecessors and the monthly and average rate he's been doing these at are less than his three previous predecessors. is that correct? mr. earnest: i think there are a lot of different ways to slice and dies these number. obviously -

reporter: the united states concerned about the security at airports in the united states and are you concerned about reports that islamic state militants have infiltrated that airport and others? mr. earnest: united states does have a relationship through t.s.a. and d.h.s. with those airports around the world that are the last point of departure to the united states. so we have -- the united states has successfully worked with security officials to ensure international flights are subject to more exhaustive security and screening procedures. to ensure the safety of the american traveling public. again, at this point, it's too early to say what potential factors may have contributed to this particular incident, but it is fair for you to observe and for the american people to understand that over the last 18-24 months, department of homeland security has made some important enhancements to those international airports that are the last points of departure for international flights and that includes expanded screening that is supplied to a variety of items that could be transport the on

win veryect would little new continuity to the united states. the primary object was to targets inply buried various countries. according to the chinese muchigm, china worried so for important reasons. because a nuclear penetration d is aad -- warhea technical weapon. hurt the nuclear taboo against use of nuclear weapons. it would lower the bar of nuclear weapons use. that would hurt china's national interests, especially its commitment against use. for that reason, china worried. another consideration is technical issues. china always worries that other -- technical lagging. most chinese believe that would inviteging aggression by other countries. another -- a lot of chinese research seeks to understand new technologies. china has a plan -- china does not have a plan to deploy these technologies. the goal is to understand the new technologies. chinese believed the neutron bomb is the third generation nuclear weapons. -- first generation was the bomb. the second generation was the fusion bomb. totally newe technology for the third generation. sci

so this is a big economic issue for the united states. infrastructure is always a safety issue and certainly that's the primary consideration that civil engineers have when they design and build these systems. but this is a profound economic issue. >> when you think of then conditions of roads and bridges you may think of issues like potholes or bridges that have been around for a long time and collapse on occasion. is it just that when it comes to the current state of how our roads and bridges are, or is there more to it as far as their condition and what your talk inspires, the funding needed to fix these things? >> if you look at the transportation space, roads, bridges, and transit, and that's what we mean by surface transportation, we look at this issue, right now we're looking at an annual funding gap of somewhere around $100 billion a year. the nation is investing about half of what it should be in the transportation area. and we're not saying this is a federal issue. the feds, the states, and the local governments are all involved

what -- in other words, what is it in the for the united states? we're going to give up our information. best practices for me as i layman who used the system -- never worked in the system -- but what best practices is cuba using that we need to get to use in the united states? >> cuba is a member of a 191 members. as a member of the international aviation community, we have a shared goal in security of our passengers around the world reaching their destination safely. that's a shared goal with the cubans and the 189 other members. >> i understand the shared goal. it says best practices and says we talked about technical information on security and aviation security and best practices. i want to know some examples. i want to know what we're getting we wouldn't get otherwise. we're giving them access to our airports. new york, jfk and miami, fort lauderdale and tampa, atlanta, all listed here, and they came to america. they're interested in collecting information. i'm not dumb and knee their are they. they know we're interested in collecting informat

today the atlantic ocean unites us more. the nation open to trade with the world and committed to developing our fish, gas and oil resources. the norwegian coastline reaches to the north keeping a close eye on the development and the key priority for us for serving stability and predictability is in our own region that benefits the entire alliance and as close allies, we share common values and that is of course no coincidence. look for the inspiration and trusting the norwegian constitution. our common values remain steadfast. freedom, democracy for a quality and human rights. our values protect the nature of friendship and partnership that we hold dear. today it is a strong reminder of what we've achieved together but you know if there is more to be done. the countries have different roles to play in the international arena but you can achieve great things and to pursue the same good. mr. president, i would like to commend you on your leadership. your commitment to achieving progress in climate change was essential for the

why the northeastern united states? why so much? why not the western united states? and the reason why is that fentanyl is so easily mixed into the powdered heroin which is preferred in the eastern united states as compared to the black tar heroin, which is preferred in the western united states, and so those are the preferred markets in the united states. being introduced into powdered heroin landed in the united states and we are increasingly seeing it being pressed into pill form. but fentanyl has found a market in the eastern united states probably because of those two reasons. mr. rubio: i spent some time in new hampshire in the last year and from that experience, found myself in a lot of small townships throughout new england that face an overwhelming problem, all of them that were specifically targeted perhaps because trafficking networks knew that they had smaller police departments. if you are a small township, you are not going to have a 1000 officer department. is that what they look for, in essence, looking for a place where they can set up where they can

i think we need to get better in the united states. demand reduction and treating the health issues of addicted people. it is a shared responsibility that is no longer just a supply-side issue. >> i listened to your response, everything that we are doing, more significant effort on demand reduction, but it is not suggesting that there is anything that we are not doing, and all i can look at and say, if you're spending billions and instead of the trend going the opposite direction it is rising, you have to raise the question, what is it that we are either doing wrong or what is it that we are not doing that we need to do in order to meet the challenge because otherwise we can appropriate billions and billions and still find ourselves in a trend that is undesirable. the only thing i heard from you in your response to me was doing more in demand of reduction, which i, which i certainly believe is true. but i did not hear about anything else. you know, you have to question whether or not the continuation of this type of expenditure in this

an and the -- and the second is the role of the united states. let me start with the first one and just open it up to -- to press a little bit and then perhaps you want to reflect on this. >> we have airplanes flying wing tip to wing tip. we have airplanes flying over the front and back of ships that if a millimeter difference would have clipped a ship and fallen into -- as we saw in the baultic sea, we have airplanes being shot down because they cross territory of a nato country. that is how wars start. what procedures -- we call for procedures in our report, but what proceed oars, particularly in the -- procedures in the osc, is there something that we could do in the osc that focuses on the day after or the moment after. an accident has occurred. how do you make sure that that accident does not escalate to awar that nobody wants. what kind of process and procedures might be put into place specifically within vienna or outside of vienna that you think pay -- think may be able work. >> there are all sorts of things that could be done. first of al

it's the right balance for the united states to strike. keyave an obviously strategic interest in asia and southeast asia in particular. we've a strategic relationship and across the board. an opportunity here to use the leverage of potential additional security relationships to leverage further progress on human rights. i'm not here to defend the human rights record. i do think informed about it could but it does provide us with additional leverage going forward. and really important is that this is a strategic step that takes into account's all those elements i mention >> to we raise the question of human rights. >> toiling can has said in a speech in may last month that there has been some progress on human rights. anywhere in relationship condition on more progress in human rights. >> a has been some progress but i don't think we should overstate that progress with respect to the regime in vietnam . the has been progress in terms tween theationship unstated vietnam and the security economic and other areas which are important to us. we

when he comes to the united states, this is another reason for celebration. again, these are spontaneous outpourings of interest and of admiration for the revolutionary war veteran. we were discussing, when developing this expedition, was this an instruction. did people get instructions on lafayette is coming, you need to do this, you need to have a parade. the president didn't send out letters to the governor saying, you need to do something. word was sent out, and it was encouraged, but this outpouring a feeling and sentiment, of people coming in wanting to see lafayette was very much an unplanned, spontaneous kind of celebration. one of my favorite items relating to lafayette, and his visit here in the united states are these slippers. these slippers were worn to a ball that was held in new york city. they are very fragile. you can see that from the picture. they are linen and silk, with a leather sole. probably worn just to the ball to dance in and nothing else. then put away and saved. we know who wore these slippers. her name was angelica james. it's won

and allies of the united states. w.h.o. are supposedly convey -- who are supposedly conveying these sentiments and concerns to the white house and the state department and so on. put very simply, does president obama view that the election of donald trump to the presidency would constitute a direct threat to the national security of the united states? mr. earnest: let me say it this way. president obama has been asked on a number of occasions to weigh in on mr. trump's candidacy and i think more often than not, the president has shared his opinions on this. what i have tried to do is to choose my moments carefully. d making a point about the impact of the election on the ability of president obama to do his job. i've also made clear that president obama's priority is focused on protecting the important progress that we've made over the last seven or eight years. and his interest in the election is rooted in the idea that he wants his successor to be somebody who is committed to building on that progress and not tearing it do

soalist parties here in the united states and the communist party of the united states were powerful. they had a lot of people, and they worked together with the c.i.o. and together, they went to the government at that time, and they said 2 things: "we represent the mass of working people, and we don't want to suffer the way we're suffering in this breakdown of capitalism. you gotta do something." and they addressed themselves to a kind of middle-of-the-road democratic politician who had just gotten elected president on a program of a balanced budget-- franklin roosevelt. and they said to him, "you've gotta do something for the people." and the socialists and communists said, "you gotta do something for the people," but they added a little barb, "because we think that there's a better system, an alternative system, to capitalism. and if you keep performing as badly as you're doing in the depths of the depression, we're gonna try to establish that alternative." and they pointed across the ocean to the soviet union, said, "see? like them." that scared folks. and mr. roosevelt was a good

but the united states and in its ability is in decline. with the national balance sheet a strategic strength no nation can match our comprehension of the enduring strength in resilience of our economy economy, the resources, a global network, the culture of entrepreneurship and a long recognition of leadership. and a leads to poor policy choices of the rise but i will list for five challenges for the next president. first economic growth. there is not a lot of laws by one of those certainly no nation can maintain the diplomatic privacy without the vitality. since the 2008 crash where the economic insecurity calls for retrench bit of global leadership to weaken our economy. there are a number of things that we can do it in national labor structure to support the long term demographics but the bottom line is the most important national security challenge for the next president is to maintain the growth and prosperity in the united states. second. terrorism we have significantly reduced and are pressuring isis in syria and iraq. but overall th

we smend time, energy and resources and defending the united states in foreign courts. that isn't a good use of our diplomatic capital. this would serve as an exirble irritant with other countries around the world. again, we believe these kinds of concerns are the kinds of concerns that should be taken into account by every member of congress. reporter: the big difference here, dissecting the arguments. the u.s. doesn't support terrorist organizations that organizations. and you look at the arguments that these families are making, is that a huge risk that somebody would do something similar, targeting civilians on our soil? and obviously, democrats in the senate don't agree that that is, did you know dosh mr. earnest: the concern is out potential unintended consequences. there are count tries that unings.accuse the there are count tries that make their accusation and if they have a precedent for establishing their own in bringing the united states into court and putting at risk u.s. , sets that are held at seas hat's not a path we want to go down. the other concern is e

and the size of unit i'm not sure. >> the biggest it diversifies between a condo and co-op i can sell the condo to anyone in a co-op i can't do that. >> i understand the board has to approved purchase by a new party of a unit or units that someone may own someone mentioned the fontana the stock was a co-op. >> they're true in california they run across from its on california and jones. >> and then the 1 across the street on california and jones is on the corner then he knew of two on the vallejo the two high-rise i believe those are also condos no their co-ops. >> but entirely different situation in terms of ownership and the fact you know an approval process by the members is not the same situation as it would be the case of condo unit and can't get individual loans for if you wanted to sell to a person the bureau can't get their own loan you know without the co-op you the reason he know the the two buildings on california street are co-ops when i represented the neighbors in both the - having the live i

the united states wants to show it was the world leader. the soviet union wanted to show it was a world leader. neither side would want the other side to have more nuclear weapons. otherwise their allies would not listen to them. would not respect them. so this kind of epidemic encourages the united states and soviet union to have more and more nuclear weapons. when the chinese talk about nuclear arms race, it is always about some kind of arms race. arms race fueled by the ambition of global hedge money. china has a commitment that is not to have a nuclear arms race with any other country. this is my interpretation of this commitment that is china would not seek quantative nuclear parity with the united states that does not mean that china would exclude responses. the united states, developed missile defense and china feels that is a threat to china. china would develop more nuclear weapons or consider the option. china does not consider this kind of dynamic as an arms race. china does not exclude that option. now, i'm going to explain the