one is that this wave of children are coming and not allowed to legally enter or stay in the united states and thus are subject to being returned to their country of origin. that's what vice president biden said, former secretary of state hillary clinton. that's what -- that's the law of the land. but think about what -- if the president doesn't step up and use his bully pulpit to send this message in a way none of us can, because people pay attention to him, and not as much to us -- i think that's a fair statement -- then this wave is going to continue and it's going to get worse and worse and worse. but here's the other part of it, i would say to the senior senator from arizona and the senior senator from illinois, both of whom i know passionately care about fixing our broken immigration laws. we've had our differences but i know you're committed sincerely to trying to fix our broken immigration laws. it is -- how will the american people let us do this if they've lost confidence in the executive branch's willingness to enforce the current law? i think it makes it much, much, much harder

and yet the united states has done so little to really help the syrian opposition the united states spent only a little bit more than two billion dollars on this struggle so far and when we compare that to what united states spent in afghanistan or iraq at the height of the fight there fight that is a less than one week spending but professor land is the big death toll is significant despite the fact that the united states hasn't invested all that money in syria you know and still how few around the civil war has so many people being killed i wonder if it's not that actually an example of leading from behind intervening a country from the backs of your allies in the region where you're right you know that obama was very clear he said assad had to step aside he called the regime had to go and and he he has supported the rebel opposition as as well as the united states from the beginning of this organize the international community in a friends of syria getting the europeans on board trying to get the arab league to condemn syria trying to get turkey and saudi arabia to intervene with

if the soviets were building nuclear weapons, more importantly, missiles to launch them at the united stateswe were flying a spy plane over the soviet union called a u-2. >> i'm bill fox. day cable editor for united press international in new york. a single engine u.s. air force plane with one man aboard went missing today not far from the soviet border in the rugged mountains in southeastern turkey. >> to a stunned and startled audience, khrushchev announced that an american u-2 spy plane had been shot down in the soviet union. >> he made the records a public exhibition. to the soviet union, this wreckage was a national cause. national outrage over the violation of soviet boundaries. >> and so, out comes the cover story. >> the department has been informed by the nasa. a u-2 weather research plane piloted by a civilian has been missing since may 1. >> eisenhower had said, no, that didn't happen, et cetera, et cetera. he had been drawn into a trap. by khrushchev. >> the soviet leader was able to show not only that they shot down the plane but they had the pilot. >> francis gary powers, an or

second that it wants to deter foreign attacks, an attack from israel or the united states and 30 iran and sleet is explicitly say they want iran to be the most dominant state in the middle east. of those are your goals acquiring nuclear weapons make a lot of sense, it allows you to the turf for and tasks to retaliate nuclear war, acquiring nuclear weapons help to become the most dominant state in the middle east. avenue clear energy program, having a few nuclear facilities doesn't help you to do those things, i believe iran's leaders want nuclear-weapons and are close to having them. we have a problem. what are the options we have for addressing the problem? in the book i go through all the options and i see three options as the most viable. first, diplomacy. second, deterring a nuclear-armed iran, third, taking military action. these are the only three options. before i get to those options i have a chapter on the nonstarters that sometimes people put forward but won't work. because some people get the three options and say diplomacy might not work but these other options of military

russia alerted the military forces and warned that the united states is playing with fire. >> at a specialtions security council, the united states, cuba and russia offered separate resolutions and traded bitter charges. >> do you, ambassador, deny to the ussr has placed and is placing medium and intermediate range missiles and sites in cuba? yes or no? don't wait for the translation. yes or no? [ laughter ] >> i am not in an american court room, sir. therefore, i do not wish to answer a question that's put to me in the fashion in which prosecutor does. in due course, you will have your reply. >> i'm prepared to wait for my answer until hell freezes over if that's your decision. >> each side didn't know what the other side was doing and there was a lot of room for miscalculation. >> we believe there are about 25 soviet ships moving toward cuba. if the vessel does not stop, refuses to heed the instructions, force will be applied to assure that it does stop. >> nikita khrushchev said soviet ships will never submit to the united states blockade. >> the next few days are critical. who is going

this is when the iraqis need the united states. we got a fascinating window into some of the past negotiations when he said the iraqi government was resistant to accept u.s. offers of any kind of help military training and thip things like that. when they have now face this d crisis, they actively seek american help. so the president is saying we now have leverage, so we'll ask you to make some of the political deals and political compromises that you have not been willing to make. unless you you make those, don't expect major american assistance. it feels as though he is putting the pressure on maliki and staying pretty cool in the face of this very turbulent situation. >> and achristiane amanpour, he expressed concern that these terrorists, he call it is the isil, islamic state in iraq and lavant, others call it the isis. it's the same thing. different names called by different people. but he clearly is concerned also about a potential sunni terrorist attack on shiite shrines which could further explode the situation. >> well, th

what i do about slavery, i do to save the united states. by the third year of the war, lincoln and the majority of the people in the united states had come to the conclusion that restoring the union was not enough. they would never be a permanent united states so long as slavery was allowed to exist. as horace greeley observed, slavery is the cause of treason and everywhere sustains it. slavery had to be destroyed and the nation was to be reunited. otherwise, slavery would continue to threaten the long-term stability and security of the united states. if the united states and not eliminated what had caused the war it would only be a matter of time it would have to send troops to suppress another rebellion. by ensuring lincoln's reelection and the united states' victory in the war, the fall of atlanta sounded the death knell of slavery and rescue democracy from the threat of secession. each time we recite the pledge of allegiance we reaffirm the civil war established united states as one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

. >> hillary clinton spoke with us about her decision making process, the perceptions of the united states around the globe and some of the decisions she had to make as is secretary of state. the full interview airs on booktv saturday, july 5th, at 7 p.m. eastern and sunday, july 6th, at 9:15 a.m. eastern. >> solicitor general donald verrilli discusses his role as the government's top lawyer including his relationship with members of the president's cabinet and the process for deciding how to argue cases before the supreme court. supreme court justice elena kagan, who also served as solicitor general, introduces mr. verrilli to the seventh circuit judicial conference in chicago. [applause] >> well, diane, as i recall, that was a lot longer than the introductions that frank used to give me. [laughter] no, it's such a pleasure to be here. it's always a pleasure to come. you schedule these dinners at the worst time of year, i have to say, but i wouldn't miss them. and, so thank you for inviting me once again. and thank you, diane. this is, of course, diane's, might be diane's first year and m

we the people of the united states, in order to form a more perfect union. no state could secede and resume its former sovereignty because the states only existed as a part of the united states. having never been states in substance or a name outside of the union, whence comes this magical omnipotence of states rights, asserting a claim with power to lawfully destroy the union itself, asked president lincoln in his message to congress. the states have their status in the union and have no other legal status. the union is older than any of the states, lincoln said, and the union created them as states. for unionists, secession was dangerous and contrary to the concept of democracy. if democracy is to work there must be acceptance by all parties in the results of an election and majority rule. secession allowed citizens to overturn the will of the majority and shut down a process of give-and-take between competing interests as envisioned by the founders. under such a system, general sherman wrote the u.s. constitution would be a mere rope of sand that would bre

the united states no longer does that. it doesn't have the troops on the ground to really put the pressure on maliki. and that gets to chuck's point which is why this is so difficult. what is the ultimate end game? if you get to the turks who have a big stake in this. if iran has a big stake in this, how does the united states very effectively say we're about counterterrorism. we don't want isis to succeed without really coming to the defense of maliki. who is so disenfranchised sunni toss the point you have not just former baathists and saddam adherents but the sunni who's live in that country say i'll join up with this nihilist terrorist group. >> david, as we part ways on this, how do you think the president sells this to the public, given that the actors he's deal with there are so imperfect in the ways you describe? >> it's got to be about counterterrorism. it's got to be about beating an islamic state. the american people know he does not want to get back into iraq but he's going to face, obviously, a bumpy ride just

is the united states needs to be heavily involved diplomatically and perhaps as well. helping the iraqi forces because these i.c.'s people you know they are not interested in just iraq they are interested in the rest of us as well and so i think we as a civilization if you will need to be prepared to deal with organizations such as isis it's an interesting idea i wonder how much support it would have among the american public i gather that the appetite for the american involvement would be extremely limited and probably for good reasons if i could concentrate on all my like a bit longer i heard many western commentators. blame for this whole crisis saying that he failed to build a functioning democracy in iraq that he disenfranchised many sunni's but i wonder if that's really fair to put all the blame on. whether he was efficient or not he was handed the country in a very very poor state and the united states was a very very big player in this whole quagmire trying to dislodge the governments in both iraq and in syria i wonder what will it take for the united states to

three buddies interests united states russia and many other countries to calm the situation down and for now i think it's going to be difficult if difficult to disagree with you on that you mentioned tens of thousands of americans serving in iraq and i just want to mention that four in the have thousand americans lost their lives there but the question is what for i mean president obama takes credit for winding down these two very unpopular wars one in afghanistan and one in iraq but i wonder if the same very rapid advance of isis is said jast the base self-congratulatory rhetoric on the part of the white house was a bit premature well i think it's very clear that president obama has wanted to extract the united states from these wars and he has done so over the course of his administration he did however try to see that there would be a residual u.s. force in iraq that was not finally accepted by iraqi politicians there are those who say this was maliki who opposed that and perhaps maliki did oppose it but everyone else also opposed it so i don't think it was something that would ha

united states embassies and the like around the world? >> that would be the definition of the continuing imminent threat. it would be to the united states, whether to personnel deployed overseas, embassies, diplomatic facilities, or whether to the homeland. all of those constitute threats to the united states. >> the president seems to be articulating a point of view around the world and the world is changing, as he said in that speech, and he said this a couple of times. the most important thing i can do is not screw it up and not make huge mistakes, because i think he perceives iraq and afghanistan as serious mistakes that drained the united states. >> i would not put it that way. i don't think that is how he put it yesterday, either. the president affirmed yesterday his view that what we have been doing in afghanistan has been absolutely essential to our national security. it was necessary after 9/11. from yesterday, the surge that he ordered in 2009 was necessary. we think it serves our interest to bring the war in afghanistan to a re

people used to blame the united states. a decade later they also blame their own politicians. >> with cities falling to rebel fighters, some want to set up an islamic state. many iraqis feel there is no space for them. a scientist and writer. she said these days she's confused and afraid. >> for a woman like me, i love my freedom. >> here for a while people can forget about the threat of war. but with the region in turmoil they're not sure how long the street will be in an oasis of culture. >> the temperatures are rising. the electricity is failing. people are bracing for a difficult few weeks. >> look, i don't even know how long you've been in that country, but you've been there for a long time. i'm wondering, the people you speak to on a regular basis who believe there is a chance, and how much of a chance that there will be an unity government formed to governor that country? >> you know one thing that i've learned covering this country and learned it recently hope is not infinite. people have high expectations of what wo

come to the united states under the age of 16 and continuously resided in the united states for five years. what child can imagine that they would fit under daca? it is clearly an issue of devastating human smuggling and human trafficking, something my colleague, my chairwoman mrs. miller, myself have looked at and included this language even in our authorization bills some few weeks ago. so i ask these questions as long as we can keep the facts. it is not an issue of the wilbur force bill. it is a question of detention facilities, as well the need for diplomatic interaction as we've done with the crisis and the leaders of guatemala, el salvador and honduras. they are in crisis. they are violent. i ask you about creating more processing centers, and as well, the senate passed about a 2 billion out of their labor hhs, is this what you need, about $2 billion to $3 billion to make sure we can respond to this? i also ask if someone would address the question, and i thank the border patrol for the work they've done, the suggestions that there have been some form of abuse. i think we shoul

to compete with high wage countries such as the united states. the chinese government to its credit recognizes this pitfall and i think recognizes that in order to cope with it, in order to escape the middle income trap it needs a new economic strategy that will require the kinds of political changes that i discuss in the book, whether they can make those changes we don't know. >> thank you professor mandelbaum. i really enjoyed your presentation but i was struck by your lack of commentary in your presentation on institutions because it seems to me there are two institutions that underpinned the first wave of globalization. the first of course are the bretton woods group the imf and the world tank and the second is what is now a really a series of agreements on free trade primarily among the west that allowed this prosperity to be expanded, first and foremost in western democracies. can we actually regenerate and improve these institutions in ways that they can benefit us going forward or is really the wto kind of the pinnacle of a global trade o

we the people of the united states, in order to form a more perfect union. no state could secede and esume its former sovereignty because the states only existed as a part of the united states. having never been states in substance or a name outside of the union, whence comes this magical omnipotence of states rights, asserting a claim with power to lawfully destroy the union itself, asked president lincoln in his message to congress. the states have their status in the union and have no other egal status. the union is older than any of the states, lincoln said, and the union created them as states. for unionists, secession was dangerous and contrary to the concept of democracy. if democracy is to work there must be acceptance by all parties in the results of an election and majority rule. secession allowed citizens to overturn the will of the majority and shut down a process of give-and-take between competing interests as envisioned by the founders. under such a system, general sherman wrote the u.s. constitution would be a mere rope of sand that would break

the united states, germany, and japan. the larger the country is in general, the smaller the share of its economy that is involved in international trade. whereas if you're a singapore or finland, you have much higher share and you're much more dependent on foreign trade. when it comes to multilateral regimes, if you are china, india, and united states, which according to most projections in the year 2050 will be the three largest economies by gdp, a trilateral deal among them will open up more trade and investment, you know, than any kind of doja round. or anything like that where you have to line up dozens or hundreds of lesser states. so while it's the conventional wisdom that we want a rules based international trading system, the fact is a results-based system in which a few large economies, including the european union just cuts deals with each other can accomplish a great deal of economic integration by a less involved bureaucratic means. let me finish by quoting ambassador jean kirkpatrick whom i quote in my articl

almost the the design of the the intelligence agencies in the united states the support for a lot of the radical groups came from the intelligence and and and if what was called the deep state in the united states whether or not the white house agreed with that i have no idea i mean that is one of the great contradictions in washington there's always a great deal of competition and there's a result the white house was made to look rather foolish over syria. it's take the law. the allegation that the assad regime have used chemical weapons well according to seymour hersh they didn't use chemical weapons and they don't a great deal of evidence to suggest they did use chemical weapons there is evidence to suggest that those whom the americans were supporting used chemical weapons so you know into this contradictory and confusing and rather tumultuous situation. the almost the black and white of u.s. foreign policy doesn't work doesn't work in their own terms since most are talking about syria the issue of syria has been completely eclipsed by ukraine lately no one since to mention it any

of military weaponry against unarmed civilians. 100%ld venture to say that of the people of the united states and 100% of members of congress are united in their repulsion of what is going on within china. the question is whether we are going to speak in unity. whether we are going to speak with one voice against the happenings in china or whether we are going to do what we so often do in some -- in washington and that is dissolve into a game of one upmanship, of fine-tuning of resolutions, offering a variety of proposals. senator dole said in his remarks that there is a long list of options that is available. while all of us agree in our general view of what is happening in china, my guess is aat if 100 people look at long list of options, we would come up with about a 100 reviews of what options should be used. we can debate forever on the floor of the senate those options. we could come up with packages and we can come up with lists 45 weybe by a vote of 55, can decide that one alternative is better than another alternative. that should not be the position of the congress of the united sta

how does that speech look like from outside of the united states? >> i think there will be disappointment and disagreement. let me say what i think the disagreement is going to be about. i think the selective use of force will be very useful, and as john said it's nothing new. but the media based on the white house leaks had set up an expectation that there would be a rebought here. we really didn't see a rebought here. the president says very uniformly that the united states must, all this lead in the world. because if it didn't, no one else would. i think a lot of people diswe with that. the chinese, the indians, the south africans would disagree with that. they would like to see the united states--nobody objects that the u.s. lead. but they cannot lead. people would object to that. it requires forces. we've seen in many cases where the u.s. could not lead. so i think of people that u.s. will lead in some areas, and let others lead in other areas. including like india and china. we didn't say that. to say that if we don't lead nobody else will, i

but, madam president, the threat posed to the united states and our allies by non-state terrorist organizations whether isil or al qaeda or boko haram or others is very real. st's quite different from the old notion of nation state military power. in a speech in may of 2013 to the national defense university, president obama recognized that the administration and congress have to work together to examine and update the 2001 oumf in order to narrow its scope, clarify when it allows and make it suitable for the new challenges buffs. i heard many of my colleagues say exactly the same thing. but, madam president, there has been no progress on this necessary update. the administration has made no proposal. there is no aumf revision under active consideration in either house. strangly while all okay knowledge that we need an update, we drift from crisis to crisis, syria, iraq, p.o.w. exchanges, without grappling with the underlying document that initiated our entry into war. we cannot afford further delays. as i conclude, i encourage all of u us, let's embark on the wok of updating the reauthorizatio

house of representatives, members of the united states senate, the speaker of the united states house of representatives, and the vice president of the united states. [ applause ] >> ladies and gentlemen, the speaker of the united states house of representatives, the honorable john boehner. >> mr. vice president, members of congress, ambassadors, members of the diplomatic corps, ladies and gentlemen, welcome this morning, and welcome to the united states capitol. since the days of the american revolution, every congress has had one humbling privilege. that of awarding a gold medal for extraordinary contributions. the highest honor that we can bestow. the first recipient in 1776 was george washington. the father of our country. today under his gaze, we will present the gold medal to another founding father, the 9th president of the state of israel, shimon peres. mr. president, welcome. [ applause ] like general washington, shimon peres has served his life serving his country, even before there was a country to serve. he is the great brougprototype israeli statesman. a record 48 y

a lot of this is fueled by our drug use in the united states.nsume more illegal drugs than anywhere on earth. 80% of the cocaine from latin america is being funneled through honduras. you have the cartels and the gangs vying for those routes. that is fueling a lot of this violence in honduras. >> and a comment of some republicans, for example, the hill saying some republicans allege lacks enforcement of immigration laws by the obama administration is wanted more more illegal immigrants to send their children and that the deferred action for childhood , is up foraca renewal, prompting republicans to link it to the surge of child migrants -- i think it was senator rubio in florida saying the rumor is out that only children will be able to stay. so they're trying to get their children here, sonia? >> it is certainly true the smugglers will use anything to pump up their business. they are certainly telling thele, once you get into united states, you're home free. they're lying to people. that may be helping to generate business for them. senator rub

al qaeda is determine to attack the united states. we constantly face new plots looking to murder america like the may 12th plot to put an ied on a u.s. bound aircraft. this plot luckily didn't materialize but we will not always be that lucky. we know al qaeda in the arabian peninsula represent one of the biggest threat to the homeland. they are continually plotting against our interest and seeking new recruits. especially among the own citi n citizens and former detainees. explosive experts continue to roam free posing a threat to the safety and security of u.s. citizens. the proposed closure of guantanamo bay presents significant risks of the united states and yemen efforts to counter aqap inside yemen. a portion of the detainees remaining are yemen citizens. transferring them to a country plagued by prison breaks, assassination and open warfare at this point could prove catastrophic. they would join other gitmo detainees and worsen the security situation. the most example of a failed and dangerous policy on the part of the administ

and recovering him and returning them to the united states. -- returning him to the united states. the fact of the matter is, as i've noted before, if you look through our history, there are ample precedents of this kind to this decision, because as chairman dempsey said, we don't leave our men and women behind. we don't qualify the decision about leaving them behind or not leaving them behind based on who is holding them. >> how does the president view to gete, or his leverage journalists asan distinct as an option to him as ? >>sed to freeing military i think that is a good question. it is absolutely the case that this it ministration, unlike previous administrations, in order toessively recover americans being held against their will in other circumstances. and that includes americans being held in iran, cuba, or elsewhere. i think it is important to note that as we find relief in sergeant bergdahl's recovery, our thoughts and prayers are with other americans whose release we continue to pursue, and with their friends and family. when it comes to a member of the military who is

come to the united states under the age of 16 and continuously resided in the united states for five years. what child can imagine that they would fit under daca? it is clearly an issue of devastating human smuggling and human trafficking, something my colleague, my chairwoman mrs. miller, myself have looked at and included this language even in our authorization bills some few weeks ago. so i ask these questions as long as we can keep the facts. it is not an issue of the wilbur force bill. it is a question of detention facilities, as well the need for diplomatic interaction as we've done with the crisis and the leaders of guatemala, el salvador and honduras. they are in crisis. they are violent. i ask you about creating more processing centers, and as well, the senate passed about a 2 billion out of their labor hhs, is this what you need, about $2 billion to $3 billion to make sure we can respond to this? i also ask if someone would address the question, and i thank the border patrol for the work they've done, the suggestions that there have been some form of abuse. i think we shoul

if nouri al-maliki wants the united states the united states we are positioned to dictate terms or maimst: should he go? >> guest: what he has to go. he's been unable and unwilling to put a coalition together so this wouldn't happen and that was kind of a given and that was understood and that's precisely by the way the reason one of the major reasons the united states should maintain presence in iraq. not necessarily only for counterterrorism but to make sure the pressure was applied to maliki and make sure he did the right thing to secure the gains that america wanted in america paid for and the world was relying on. we walked away and let him do that on its his own. he was unprepared and unwilling. >> host: the united states, when the united states won and in 2000 three-part of the demand was to set up a democratic government. they did so. no re-al-maliki is democratically-elected. can the united states say now you have to go? >> guest: we can say it and he can say no. we are not really in a position from where we are to force anybody to do anything. we were in a position at some poi

and then when they get to the united states to be abundantly clear, the laws of the united states donot allow them to stay here if they arrived illegally. whatever it is they're hearing, it's not accurate. what can we do through our embassy to help make that clear so that we can prevent this mass migration? i think this is a question to ask of our posts in el salvador and guatemala as well, but you're going to honduras. what can we do to make it clear that this is not something they should do, it isn't wise, and it puts their children in grave danger? >> senator, thank you very much. as i said to chairman menendez, i share your very deep concern for this situation. i'm not sure that i have any wisdom to add to what i already said to the chairman, except i can say that the honduran government is running public service ads in honduras to counter the kind of rumors that you described. obviously -- >> do these rumors come from? why are they -- what are the perception that they can come and stay if they arrive -- where's that coming from? >> senator, you unfortunately, m not in the positi

the protests here in the united states, a real sense that the united states needed a new strategy. and there was a willingness, perhaps, of a very experienced president with strong advisers around him to think about alternatives. and looking ahead, i just don't see that emerging in washington. jacob, you called michael one of the most creative people in washington, but, you know, creativity in washington is sort of an oxymoron. [laughter] and i look ahead and look at, you know, both republican and presidential candidates for 2016, i don't see the likelihood of somebody necessarily challenging that consensus. so how realistic is it to argue or believe that we're likely -- short of another kind of iraq-style debacle -- to see a new strategy emerge in the near future? and i just, would just simply say it's striking to me so soon after that iraq experience and afghanistan that you have an administration that's pursuing the same strategy as you argue it is, that it's coming under real criticism from both parties as being too weak, too prudent and not strong enough. >> well, when you put

in yoursome training united -- in the united states. i was in the united states as a professor. my training was in france and in london. i started my career as a professor at m.i.t. >> you were different, though. you are not interested so much in the way that economics was being written about, you were interested in history. yes? >> that is right. sees curious, i could not mathematicalg research, economic models. which everybody else was doing. and then i realized i knew very little about the basic facts about inequality. there was all of this data sitting out there which nobody had collected. hadn american economist started doing that. together the data from the federal income tax in the u.s. from 1913-1948. been doingly had too work because it was economical for historians. after the you to go data you are looking for. >> in a way all i have been doing is to extend this kind of historical work on income to a larger study. it is easier to get other large volumes of data. >> including records. >> tech records, inheritance records, sometimes dating back to the early 19th century.

it's not only in the united states. apparently, it did not generate the same kind of -- >> charlie: but one of the arguments -- >> yes. >> charlie: you finish. one of the arguments is what you have seen may change in its own evolution because of the rise of technology, may provide a way so that there will be a lessening of income inequality. >> the rise of technology will lead to a lessening of income inequality? >> charlie: yes. maybe, maybe not. you know, it depends. >> charlie: how could it lead to lessening of income inequality? >> lessening of income inequality? well, the technology benefits and allows everyone to be more productive and even more so for the lowest productivity groups, then you would have a lessening of inequality. i think positive outcome is possible. we want to put technological and marketing forces in common interests and to make sure they always act in a common interest and every group benefits from growth and globalization in a balanced manner, then, you know, we need an adequate democratic ins

united states -- u.s. senators took to the floor just days after the event to do not -- condemn the actions and support protesters. speakers included george mitchell of maine and bob dole of kansas. this portion is about a half hour. >> mr. president, people the world over watched with admiration for weeks as millions of chinese people, led by a group of brave young students, staged the largest peaceful demonstration in all of human history. but people the world over watched with disbelief and horror over the past few days as the chinese people's liberate. -- liberation army brutally suppressed the demonstration, killing, wounding, and beating their unarmed fellow citizens. this cruel suppression has been the chinese government's answer to the modest demands of the chinese people for a voice in their own future. the chinese people have provided a dramatic demonstration of the human freedom. it is a universal desire, not limited in time, place, or people. it is a desire for which thousands of courage u.s.a.

may god continue to bless and keep strong the united states of america. mper fi. >> the president of the united honor exposure present in for conspicuous gallantry of the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty while serving as an automatic rifleman with company f second battalion regimental combat team one, forcemarine expeditionary forward in helmand province afghanistan in support of enduring freedom afghanistan. and corporal carpenter was the member of a platoon-sized coalition force with two reinforced marine rifle squads partnered with an afghan national army squad. smallad gathered in a village in order to disrupt enemy activity and provide security for

and her reception that bad of new gets her mother is worried about her visit to united states so she ulls a state department isi and has a meeting and says madam knew really should not come near. i've want all the vietnamese to throw tomatoes at her and if they see her to run her over with their car. this is her mother. she does get tomatoes thrown at her. she gets egg thrown at her and she gets standing ovations from fordham from georgetown and a lot of catholic education. >> she really mapped out the kalat -- college itinerary and her catholicism was also very important part of her political ideology if you would call it that. what she seen in that light in 1963 in the united states? i assumed to the extent that she was hitting places like florida and georgetown and they were very much self-conscious of that but with that part of her reception as well? >> i do think so and part of the political philosophy of the south vietnamese government was based on something called personalism reaches this philosophy that started in france in the 20s and it was a catholic philosophy. it was supp

god bless the united states of america. thank you very much for allowing me to speak with you today, and god bless the great state of iowa. thank you very much. [applause] [applause] >> thank you. thank you very much. back in great to be iowa. i am actually on vacation, and when i was asked to speak your today, i talked to my wife, and she said, "it's right in the middle of our two-week vacation," and i said that chuck grassley has always told me i should vacation in iowa more often, so here i am. i am honored and happy to be here. [applause] admit, i will not be here long. i have a book i will be signing which you will be hearing about in a minute because -- because i want to talk to you about what is in that book. if you cannot make the book signing, i will be at my friend's reception later this afternoon. hope i get a chance to see .verybody i feel like i'm coming back home in many respects. had a wonderful experience a couple of years ago. i can tell you that it changed me. it changed our family. we have a very special p