the united states is committed to making the united nations more effective and accountable. i have said many times that the united nations has unlimited potential. as part of our reform effort, i have told our negotiators that the united states will not pay more than 25% of the un's peacekeeping budget. other --ing courage this will encourage other countries to get involved and share in this burden. we are working to shift more of our funding from contributions to voluntary so we can target programs with the best record of success. only when each of us does our part and contributes our share can we realize the u.n.'s highest aspirations. we must pursue peace without fear, hope without despair, and security without apology. looking around this hall, where so much history has transpired, we think of the many before us who have come here to address the challenges of their nations and of their times and our thoughts turn to the same question that ran through all of their speeches and resolutions, through every word and hope. it is the question of what kind of world will we leave

and the united states that's the kind of cooperation that the they've been running you know in an area of military the united states is trying to advance its regional design are now at the expense of the regional states the arab states i doubt if there would be any meaningful or all influential in significant military move against iran but in area of economy as well as security in. politics there will be moves and there have been many moves underway in the last at least two years just of for example the united states use the billions of dollars of some of the op ed for the hollers in order to meddle with iran's foreign currency market in the u.a.e. iran has announced that it wants to move its foreign currency market to a number of countries first and foremost to qatar and china now as you see as far as of the saudis were supposed to leave this of quad lieschen or nato or whatever it is against iran the catteries were never subdued and the they had relations improved but now that the us has picked up their role in order to coordinate the first because it's a major war powered the catego

with respect to alleged war crimes in afghanistan in fact arguing that if that were to happen the united states would take swift action today on the eve of september the eleventh i want to deliver a clear and unambiguous message on behalf of the president of the united states. the united states will use any means necessary to protect our citizens and those of our allies from unjust prosecution by this illegitimate court we will not cooperate with the i.c.c. we will provide no assistance to the i.c.c. and we certainly will not join the i.c.c. . committee as john bolton said that the united states is not part of the i.c.c. they didn't sign on to the rome statute so when they talk about sanctions against the i.c.c. what exactly do they mean. well it has a very specific definition and with regard to that it would mean essentially that individuals could face sanctioning by the united states that could mean prosecution under the u.s. criminal justice system it could mean banning entry into the united states so it's it's sort of got a multi-pronged effect sensually this is we should point out for anyo

olsis a fact that p experienced, back then, a lot of good from the united states. and from the president of the united states. there are no other words to it.ribe it was reinstated on the map 100 years ago in 1918. i am delighted today i can be here in washington and which is -- and said at the same table as the president of the united partnershipind a and renewing that partnership. i am talking about the agreement on the partnership of the agreement that was signed into back then it was signed by the thousand eight. ministers of foreign affairs. today, the renewed aversion, the version that had been updated, a lot has changed over 10 years. partnership was signed personally by myself and president trump. i would like to express my deep gratitude to you for that fact. this agreement indicates the most important aspect ever -- of our cooperation and friendship. it also sets up a new future. the possibility of tightening our cooperation and also in the energy business p tightening our in the broadly understood business. aspects of the already mentions as part of those

bolton: do i think the united states is a threat to the other nations' sovereignty? no, i don't think there is a threat to anybody else's sovereignty. i think it has been so important for the united states to appreciate the significance of a government that has the consent of its own people that it has in contrast to every other major power in world history that i'm aware of has not sought permanent -- permanent -- a permanent empire all across the globe. after we expanded across the continent, that was pretty much it. that makes -- that's a demonstration of, if you will, american exceptionalism. and i think we're very conscious of the importance of sovereignty. we can't and don't attempt to control what other nations do. as i said before, if the european unions wants to desolve national sovereignty into the bureaucracy in brussels, that's entirely their prerogative. others are free to do it as well. but we don't push anybody in that direction. and in fact, i think we're conscious of it even as we renegotiate a lot of the trade disputes we are talking about today. the

bush authorized the united states to. the rome statute because it was fundamentally illegitimate if the i.c.c. and its prosecutor had been granted potentially enormous essentially unaccountable powers and alongside numerous other glaring significant flaws the international criminal court constituted an assault on the constitutional rights of the american people and the sovereignty of the united states in no uncertain terms the i.c.c. was created as a free wheeling global organization claiming jurisdiction over individuals without their consent according to the rome statute the i.c.c. has authority to prosecute genocide war crimes crimes against humanity and crimes of aggression it claims automatic jurisdiction meaning that it can prosecute individuals even if their own governments have not recognized signed or ratified the treaty thus american soldiers politicians civil servants private citizens and even all of you sitting in this room today are purportedly subject to the court's prosecution should a party to the rome stat

that the united states is an unwelcoming hostile place. so recent dramatic cuts to the resettlement program have been predicated on this notion that they pose an undue risk into the united states. the vetting procedures do not work. all of the evidence suggests that this claim is unfounded. this is almost 40 years of history here. not a single refugee has been involved in a fatal terrace act on the united states. that includes the tens of thousands of refugees that we had resettled from syria and iraq. over 70% of the refugees a very small number relative to the 6 million that have been displaced so the 2% are women and children under the age of 14. and a single one has been involved in a terrorist attack. so slashing the program not only runs contrary to american values and commitment to human rights and democracy but it's also counter to our national security interests. it also helps fuel the idea that the united states is a hostile unwelcoming place which promotes the extremist narrative that the united states is hostile to islam. to peo

the united states and the i.c.c. have had a rocky relationship since the court's inception the united states is not a member it doesn't it refuses international jurisdiction over its nationals but following the prosecutor's decision to open a case and to investigate alleged war crimes by u.s. military personnel and u.s. intelligence personnel in afghanistan that relationship has worsened and that's when we heard john bolton really use very harsh language against the i.c.c. it's not really the first time that john bolton has used such language he was an official in the bush administration and since then he has been trying to undermine the credibility of the court now the i.c. i c c did not react to following john bolton speech but when x. excerpts of his speech were released by the media they did send us a statement now in their statement of the courts of mentions that it benefits from the membership of of some one hundred fifty parties from from across the world trying really to defend its credibility even though the

other governments, but not the united states. there are no mechanisms to hold the court and its personnel accountable or curtail its unchecked powers when required. icc proponents argue that corrupt or ineffective judges can be removed by a two thirds vote of parties to their own statute and that a prosecutor can be removed by a majority ote however, i ask everyone in the room today, would you consign the fate of american citizens to a committee of other nations, including venezuela and the democratic republic of the congo, entities that are not even states, like the palestinian authority? you would not appear i would not. this administration will not. the icc is an assembly states party and cannot supervise the court anymore than the united nations general assembly can't supervise bureaucracy. recent allegations of mismanagement and corruption among icc personnel make this perfect clear. the first prosecutor elected by the states parties attempted to protect a high-ranking government official from prosecution, assisted a business

the secretary of state revealed that the u.s. had actually allowed eisel to grow in order to put pressure on assad so i think the united states is actually in no position to accuse iran of terrorism in the region hillary this is a complex landscape i'm in could have been why did defeated in places like syria and iraq but they're being pretty much of it places like the yemen or also north africa and subsaharan africa so the funders of the report itself could be misleading to the international audience in a way or another a yes and i mean the the entire reason the united states has these terrorism reports is a political one these reports started in one nine hundred seventy nine with iran as a charter member of this what we call these states sponsors of terrorism and the reason was was that president carter back in the in the one nine hundred seventy s. started to focus more on human rights in countries and had mandated state department to produce reports on human rights in countries those focused uncomfortably on american allies particularly on israel and saudi arabia there are a lot of their friends their lobbyists. when washingto

the united states has evidence of many more ships we have uncovered providing oil illegally through ship to ship transfers. just this year, the united least 148cked at instances of oil tankers delivering refined petroleum products obtained through illegal ship to ship transfers. we estimate that at least north korea has obtained over 800,000 barrels of refined petroleum products in the first eight months of this year. the 2018 annual cap of 500,000. in reality, we think they have obtained four times the annual quota in the first eight months of this year. we presented evidence of these violations to the 17 18 committee that tracked violations. but russia prevented the committee from declaring that north korea exceeded its oil quota. korea continues to illegally procure refined petroleum products with the help of russia. , when we pursued u.n. designation of the patriot and other north korean -- russian -- and other country flagged ships that have been found to illegally transfer oil, russia consistently blocked these designations in the sanctions committee. it's not just on the high seas

the united states has launched a campaign of economic pressure. to deny the regime the funds it needs to advance its bloody agenda. last month we began reimposing hard hitting nuclear sanctions that have been lifted. under the iran deal. additional sanctions will resume nov fifth and more will follow and we are working with countries that importer raney in crude oil. to cut their purchases substantially. we cannot allow the world's leading sponsor of terrorism. to possess the planet's most dangerous weapons. we cannot allow a regime that chance death to america and that threatens israel with annihilation to possess the means to deliver a nuclear warhead. to any city on earth. just can't do it. we ask all nations to isolate iran's regime. as long as its aggression continues. and we ask all nations to support iran's people as they struggle to reclaim. their religious and righteous destiny. this year we also took another significant step forward in the middle east in recognition of every severin state. to determine its own capital i move the u.s. emba

go do now believe that america is going the wrong when two of the closest allies not only to the united states but once upon a time to president trump himself think america is going rogue you can imagine what the chinese president and the russian president and others are thinking of the united states and its policy now having said all of that the problem with that with dealing with the united states is that it is probably the most influential power in the history of humankind so here we have a dichotomy we have a paradox we have in the one hand a president who watches t.v. and speaks out of the bible of fox news and his temperament of the day and certain things he believed in when he was a child and the rest of the american administration and the american government the american studies went to think otherwise that sink in terms of strategy firms in terms of leadership things in terms of international norms that america helped created after the second world war it's been seventy years of those norms that the united states created so really all in all we are stuck in this in this prism of one a

the secretary of state revealed that the u.s. had actually allowed eisel to grow in order to put pressure on assad so i think the united states is actually in no position to accuse iran of terrorism in the region hillary this is a complex landscape i'm in could have been why did defeated in places like syria and iraq but they're being pretty much active in places like the yemen or also north africa and subsaharan africa so the funders of the report itself could be misleading to the international audience in a way or another a yes and i mean the the entire reason the united states has these terrorism reports is a political one these reports started in one nine hundred seventy nine with iran as a charter member of this what we call these states sponsors of terrorism and the reason was was that president carter back in the in the one nine hundred seventy s. started to focus more on human rights in countries and had mandated state department to produce reports on human rights in countries those focused uncomfortably on american allies particularly on israel and saudi arabia there are a lot of their friends their lobbyist. and washing

>> translator: phaps many in the united states during the past h such wishes. to be dealing with the regimen i iran that would be completely beholden the united states as was the case prior to the revolution but such an objective was never reached. and it will never be reachedl unch time that the iranian government rises from the will of the people in result of the ballot box and the vote of the people through whichss their leadership and the representatives are chosen, that means that the people are governing and are in charge and no power and no government can standn front of and face down a nation, and the iranian government is not separate from the people. so overthrowing that government means overthrowing the will of the people of iran. and this shows a great mistake in their calculus, just as this mistake unfortunately has been repeated over and over again in the past by the united states government. >>ould i ask you this then? because you were brought before parliament in iran when the president pulled out of the iran nuclear deal, when president trump di

that message that the united states is not only championing human rights and democracy rhetorically but is also willing to put resources on the table when needed encounters extremists narratives that the united citizen on welcoming and hostile place. thent dramatic cuts to refugee resettlement program have been predicated on this that refugees put an undue risk on the united states, but all the evidence suggests that claim is unfounded. since the passage of the 1980 refugee act, so this is almost 40 years of history here, not a single refugee has been involved in a fatal terrorist attack on the united states and that includes the tens of thousands of refugees that have resettled from syria and iraq, often not to post the most risk, , a very the refugees small number of the refugees relative to the 6 million who have been displaced. about 20,000 refugees have done. are women and children under the age of 14 and not a single one has been involved in a terrorist attack. slashing the program not only runs contrary to american values and american commitment to human rights and democracy, but

states. this is the second bank of the united states. if you recall from earlier in the semester, there was a first bank of the united states. 1791, alexander hamilton pushes through congress a bank of the united states. this bank a private bank with stockholders and dividends. this bank, hamilton says, will benefit not only financial interests, but will benefit the country, the public. how will it benefit the public? because the u.s. treasury will deposit money in the bank coming in from taxes and the treasury can borrow money from the bank. it has a 20-year charter but lots of opponents. the chief opponent, thomas jefferson hates the bank. the bank, jefferson believes, is an imperils american liberty by elevating to power a wealthy financial elite. jefferson opposes it. jefferson comes to power in 1800, the first banks charter expires, but one year later, a war iraq with britain. a very expensive war -- a war erupts with britain, a very extensive war. thomas jefferson charters a second bank of the united states and this bank, much like

they stay in the united states. at one juncture, it was up to the 1970's, 90% or more stay in the united states. they are mostly coming to the united states but something happens in the 1970's, because by the 1970's, taiwan's economy has started to develop and it is moving into an advanced economy stage. part of it has to do with the trickle of students that go back help to set taiwan on this path toward development, another significant component is that the united states, between 1950 and 1965, investing a lot of capital in taiwanese agriculture, and it is sending experts over to advise taiwan on infrastructure. the united states contributed to their stabilization. in the 1950's, 1960's, there were not that many jobs for highly trained technicians, engineers, and scientists. by the 1970's, it has changed. there is more incentive for people to go back. this is something to think about in terms of, if we are thinking about how to manage immigration flows, and if we help certain countries to advance economically, we ca

i'm sorry. >> well, i think you're correct to an extent you know, really the united states is hoping to be able to, of course, negotiate a bilateral agreement with the united kingdom. and so we're optimistic that, you know, separation from the eu will allow the uk to have more ownership over the way in which it does the trade policies and so, you know, if there's -- if there is some similar interests with other countries in the eu, of course, the president's going to be open to that but really what this is about, i think, in the trade concept is the u.s. and eu continue to work together against the mutual concern which is china we're seeing that hopefully come to fruition with some of the bilateral talks. >> let's face it duda just last week called the eu an imaginary community. i mean they are part of the eastern expansion of the eu of some years ago but they feel like they're still, you know, an adopted child in all of this they don't feel like they're getting the benefits of being members of the european community. so i wonder any talks that president has with this particular presi

and i'm convinced that for the interest of the united states, also pertaining to the security of the tates itself, the presence of the u.s. forces in our country is important also to protect american interests. mr. president, once again, thank you very much for this meeting. thank you once again for this joint cooperation that we're able to sign today. thank you for also adding to this your splendor to the poland celebrating independence and 10th anniversary of our strategic partnership. >> thank you. a tremendous amount of lng will be exported to poland. we are giving them a pretty good price. they are buying a lot of it and that's going to be great. >> i do want to say while we are together shown in north carolina, south carolina, virginia and the area that was so horribly hit by hurricane florence. i got some clips of some of the things that the coast guard is doing and getting people to safety and horrible, holler conditions. i want to just salute all of the people that are working so hard, the first responders, the law enforcement. military, fema, the job they are doing is incred

it would be a very important partnership to the you -- united states. -- [indiscernible] >> the trade deal with south korea has been renegotiated. that was a terrible deal for the united states. now it is a fair deal. thank you very much, everybody. we appreciate it.

in its first report to the security council on the operation of the command, the united states informed the security council that on july 25, 1950, the unified command was established in the security council first use the name united nations command on november 8, 1950. notwithstanding its name, the united nations command is not a body, nor does it come under control of the nations. furthermore, it was not established as a subsidiary of the security council and not funded into the united nations budget. there are no reporting lines between the united nations command and secretariat. madam president, the secretary-general in the upcoming high-level week of the united nations general assembly will discuss how he and the united nations system can for the support the party and how steps can be taken for peace, security and verifiable denuclearization of the korean council resolutions. it's a hope that the korean summit starting in a few hours in the plan summit between leaders of the united states and the dprk will further contribute to this process, thank you. i thank miss decarlo for her

right now in this moment in the united states senate, while the president of the united states is saying a woman can't be trusted because she was drunk, while he was tweeting that dr. ford can't be trusted because if it were really as bad as she said, she would have reported it back when she was 15 when it happened. well, republican leaders are saying they will, quote, plow right through this. well, they are desperately trying to distract people by pointing to the process and the timing -- anything but the substance. -- while they hire a woman they are calling, quote, their female assistant, the lawyer they found to ask dr. ford the questions they can't trust the republican men on the judiciary committee to ask, well, they're already creeping past this hearing and scrambling to line up a committee vote right away, while they are planning to stay through the weekend to rush through a vote on the senate floor that their leader says they are, quote, confident to win, before dr. ford as hurricane katrina a chance to be heard and a vote that doesn't need to be rushed for any good reason. mr.

do we want to encourage jobs to come to the united states or go overseas. i think the answer is we do not want to encourage jobs to leave the united states but we do want to make sure our economy works in the best way to possibly can so it creates as much prosperity to as many people as possible. in certain cases, it make sense to produce he things united states. in other cases it does not. the recent conversation over stilling aluminum tariffs is a great example of that. by opposing aluminum tariffs and trying to bring jobs back to the united states, which everybody was taking would be a wonderful thing. you have raised the price of steel and aluminum products, which has impacted upon factoring which is going to cost jobs in the long-term. try to take a bigger, more posted approach to this end we needed an integrated world. we want to keep jobs in the united states. maybe that is done in a more effective way by allowing the free flow of goods and services in and out of the nine states, particularly as we see the economic transformation. guest: it is a fine

welcome to all of you around the united states and the world. i'm fareed zakaria coming to you live from new york. today on the show. president trump spent much of his week at the united nations general assembly criticizing iran. >> the regime is the world's leading sponsor of terror and fuels conflict across the region and far beyond. >> iran's leaders sew chaos, death and destruction. >> i'll talk to one of those leads about the president's charges. iran's foreign minister javad zarif joins me in a moment. also, how to fight back against vladimir putin. lessons from petro poroshenko, the president of ukraine. his nation is literally on the front lines of russian aggression, and how to handle immigration from across the globe. i'll talk with mexico's president, switzerland's president and new zealand's prime minister on their views about one of the most divisive issues today. >>> but first, here is my take. president trump's speech on tuesday at the u.n. was an intelligent, at times eloquent presentation of his america first world view. he laid

the united states will not be taken advantage of any longer. united states opened its economy, the largest, by far, on earth, with few conditions, we allowed foreign goods from all over the world to flow freely across our borders. yet, other countries did not grant us fair and reciprocal access to their markets in return. even worse, some countries abused their openness to dump their products, subsidize their goods, target our industries, and manipulate their currencies to gain unfair advantage over our country. as a result, our trade deficit ballooned to nearly $800 billion a year. for this reason, we are systematically renegotiating broken and bad trade deals. last month, we announced a ground-breaking the u.s.-mexico trade agreement. just yesterday, i stood with president moon to announce the successful completion of the brand-new u.s.-korea trade deal. this is just the beginning. many nations in this hall will agree that the world trading system is in dire need of change. for example, countries were admitted to the wto that violate every sin

he takes care of the united states. his interest in the country to have trade exchange. -- to have a balanced trade exchange. this is something you have to take care of. there is a clash of interests. objectively looking, it is hard not to understand it. there is always a competition of interest. every business is a competition of interest. i represent polis interests. president trump represents american interests. the whole thing is as follows, on important matters committee have to strike an agreement to make sure that each country loses as little as possible. then we have an agreement. then we can say we are cooperating with each other on equal levels. i believe this is the kind of cooperation that mr. president -- cooperation that mr. president would like to have at the european union. i would not be surprised with that. i am listening calmly to that. i would like pollen to be such a -- i would like poland to be such an economic superpower that it would be very important to the united states. i said jokingly in the b

i came to the united states from the university, which is built by the united states in 1953. hat was the university of us working. my first english teacher was a peace corps gentleman. i love him dearly [inaudible] the good of people. i deeply think the united states for their help in thank you for that question. and now we have some question of support. it is not because the united states support this are people who are bad on the top of the government who are given not support to the wrong direction. suggesting any help, it helps somebody in that country who needs help. the united states support we appreciate. i am thankful about. thank you. >> thank you, mr. said, how do you think -- how do the united states, but how do you think the people of ethiopia right view the united states? >> thank you so much. it is a great question. let me start it from this, from the member of congress. representative mike coffman and the representative chairman, your names are household names in the ethiopian people. not just me, the cairo supreme, who made these days possible believe that the

the united states will guarantee that peace. we're going to broker talks that will lead to a lasting settlement and out of the settlement, out of this horrible, horrible war which had already killed millions of people maybe we can have a better world come out of it, a better world be created. this was the beginning of this wilsonian idea. how did the germans react? this is the next slide, please. they reacted by declaring unrestricted submarine warfare in the atlantic ocean. they were prepared to sink even american ships, american merchant vessels headed for england or france. in late february it also became clear that they had sent the famous zimmerman telegram to mexico asking the mexicans if in the event of war will you join us and by the way, will you invite the japanese to join us in fighting against the united states? let's go to the next slide. some people you may recognize this guy. some people felt that this in itself was an act of war and that american honor was at stake, that american softness was being challenged, and

i have been here 26 years, in the congress of the united states. think the lasti couple of weeks are demonstrative of that, that i helped create an immigrant movement in the united states of america, and in the democratic caucus and the democratic party, and in many areas and places, economic, business spaces, educational spaces, and in this political space that is the congress of the united states, a genuine support and the majority for immigration reform. i have done, now that, now let me elected president that will implement immigration reform. secondly, the tragedy of puerto rico. there was always something special about the birthplace of your parents, just something. i wasn't born in puerto rico but my mom and dad were, and it has always held a special place in my heart and the hearts of my children. and i saw the devastation. i saw the terrible, poor, miserable, lame response of the federal government, the richest, most powerful, most technologically advanced nation in the world. and now we know thousands of people die from hurricane maria, an

of the united states. use there are no other words to describe the fact that that great state indicated to poland and defined poland as the country who should be back on the map and was reinstated on the map 100 years ago. and i'm absolutely delighted that today as polish president i can be here in washington at the same table with the president of the united states and sign an agreement which is deepening our strategic partnership and renewing that strategic partnership. i'm talking here about the agreement on the strategy partnership, such agreement signed in 2008 between our two countries. back then signed by the ministers of foreign affairs and today this renewed version, the version which has been updated because a lot has changed over the ten years, this renewed version of the strategic partnership was signed personally by myself and president donald trump. and i would like to express my deep gratitude to you, mr. president, for that fact. this agreement indicates the most important aspects of our coo

comes up from the profession of the command with then the department of state who believes that it is enough to be away. from the reality that the united states does need its own alliances in the region and they need to see more involvement. from within the region with it afoot to isolate iran for this season i see that the administration this is an attempt from the bottom to the state to be active and in isolating iran and make sure that most of the players within the region are on board taken into consideration the fact that. you know there is sort of. as you know there is the gulf dispute the does affect the whole thing and it to me it basically controlled the removal of the not the state and the possibility to see success of all of this efforts mustapha in tehran there have been various iterations of something not dissimilar to this didn't get off the ground before why should or could it succeed this time. well as a matter of fact mccall that was right this is not the first time actually there in similar moves made by. you know solve the arabia in the region in order to establish a front against iran under various names like the re

not because of the united states. came to the united states from the university which is -- built in 1953. that was the university i was working. it was built by united states. my first english teacher was a peace corps gentleman. i love him dearly, and they showed us the good of people. so i deeply thank the united states for their help, and thank you for that question. and now in the short past we've had some questionable support. it is not because of the united states support. it is our people who are bad on the top of the government who are using that support in their own direction. so i am thinking, you know, suggesting any help, even if it's bad, it helps somebody in that country which needs that help. so if united states support, we appreciate. i am thankful of that. thank you. >> thank you. mr. said, how do you think, or how do you view the united states but how do you think the people of ethiopia right now view the united states? >> take as much. it is a great question. let me start from this, from the member

it is a phenomenon that is unique to the united states. there is no other country in the world that is so fixated that it is constantly creating images of those people. in the united states, this started before the country was even founded. it started with the countries most ardent patriots. there is something else that a significant about the phenomenon in this country. although imagery of american indians is pervasive with american life, it does nothing to bring non-natives closer or to understand the nature of the history of they had shared with american indians. this actually masks who native americans really are. we open this curtain and he looks what stands behind this imagery. this imagery is the intersection between native and non-native. the american exhibit ends with a very clear presentation of the fact that non-native americans and native americans share a deeply entangled history. this is the unique history of the united states. it is a shaped national consciousness. when i would like to show you is one that really fascinated m

then, the united states, among those various competitors of the world and washington. has the point of departure with the united states and north korea. but, it is dealmaking, the temptation to choose among a number of perspectives that are basically rivals, increasingly rivals of one another and each of them have something to offer. the attempt at looking at the question to address more directly, i think it is a problem. we could be moving. we could see the shadows of offshore balancing, where the united states protects and chooses the options that it has and looks for the most attractive short run prospect. that said, of course, as i say, we do have an alliance. we have a good personal relationship between prime minister abe and president trump. looking at this for years, i think one of the most sensitive aspects of the relationship, certainly on the economic site is really on security. but we have a good ambassador, at the working level. as i say, i don't say that, as people know, from any point of view, but that working level, we have some good people involved. i t

it is a deal not with the united states, but with the u.n. security council, plus the european union represented by germany. in trump violated that treaty. he withdrew from it and has put the united states on a war to the extentran members of his a administration are openly admitting that they are the great state. we always took that as an insult. john bolton seems to enjoy that. of course, the iranians don't want to meet with trump. and what good would it do -- does he want to renegotiate the deal that already has taken years and years of diplomacy, and trump just withdrew from it? why wouldn't they expect him to withdraw from the next deal? if you have to make a judgment of who is riright here, it is obviously rouhani. but the other thing to say is that it is dangerous to have somebody who lies like this in charge of we are nuclear power. we're doing diplomacy. we are relationship with other countries. this can go to war. amy: we want to thank you, juan cole, for joining us. professor of history at the university of michigan. his blog, "info

leadership in space and why canada works well with the united states? >> well, when you look at the relativeness of each one of our countries clearly you have the united states up here, and canada down here. same goes with respect to space. our relative economies are quite different, and our national priorities can also be slightly different as well. so what the relationship allows us to do, those that are at a lower status in terms of budgetts and what not. the cooperation with the u.s. allows us to get into submissions that we would never have been able to participate before, and the way that the models have evolved over time, typically we have a barter arrangements for each one of these collaboration, so canada would have a northeast of expertise, and we would provide that in exchange for data that canadian scientists would have access to in a privileged fraction. so that kind of quid pro quo is clearly a win win proposition. but it also from a canadian position allows us to get access to data in science that we would not have had before. it provides

you think of what stephen saying they said basically these nations knows that everyone needs the united states but again i go back to the point that the united states seems to be pulling back from elise other countries. couple of things to note in terms of of the speech and the direction is the fact that the president came about. being responsible for the actions of the people so what we've seen yesterday and also on on these points on our nato are clear is is a businessman and he comes to the bottom line if an institution or group is basically squandering the money of the u.s. it will stop funding it. it's playing to its base and we've seen that time and again but at the same time he works on on his own logic that america is not there to be not only. if you were of the world but also. the bankroller of filling institutions so that that is not the at all a surprise when it comes to the alliance remember as well that you mentioned the kind of arab nato and think a lot of the commentators are not looking at that so it is not fully against all alliances and what he said about the original nato it

mostly the united states. the united states was always more global, far reaching and they have got along by agreements that set up institutions that take politics out of the management of the relationship. we sound a treaty that created an international commission that looks at management of the great lakes, water quality. invasive species and presidents don't need to worry about that at all. it is coming along below the surface. we have and air defense agreement set up in the early cold war to protect the shared airspace because we feared they would come over north america and we needed the institution. when it is needed it is not necessary to go back to the president -- of the united states as in 9/11 when we needed to do something because we did not know. the canadians ordered american and canadian fighters to secure the airspace. they were not trying to get around the politics. nafta is the most central institution in the relationship. what is unnerving them is shaking up of something foundational that they

the united h.ions, by you and -- u.n. e.r., the high commission for refugees, and after all of that setting takes place, they are referred by the u.n. to the united states. once the referral happens, it triggers all of the security and health checks for the united states. so it is actually a long and laborious process. they are extensively vetted. they are the most vetted travelers to the united states out of any category of foreign traveler to the u.s. host: and what about for sensitive countries like syria or anything else, is there enough vetting from countries especially of those type of countries? adam: one of the arguments from that --nistration is and i believe secretary pompeo made reference to it -- is that refugees represent an elevated security rest to the united states. the data simply runs the other way. the cato institute ran a study last year that found the chance of being killed by a refugee terrorist in the united states is about one in 3.6 billion. just for context, you have a better chance of being struck by lightning twice than you have a being killed by a refugee terrorist, or it is obvious that the setting works. what we see is tha

or a danger to the presidency of the united states. this situation is far more dangerous and that's what we know now. we have seen pieces of this on the air, many people have reported on pieces of this including descriptions that perhaps all of us have used on the air from our sources saying the president is unhinged. >> sure. >> here we see and hear his aides by name day after day after day say, the president is unhinged, he is a rage-a-holic, he is a danger to our national security. that's what we're dealing with here. also i want to say one thing about general kelly. >> sure. >> it would seem to me that general kelly in the interest of the country needs to resign. >> really? >> and with a statement that says the presidency can no longer be entrusted to this man. we now have a picture of what we've all been dealing with here. i will be happy to appear before committees of congress, whether in executive session or whether in open session, and tell them what i have seen about this president of the united states and whether or not he is