that the united states adheres to as a rule-making body. >> in the hundreds somewhere. >> do we need world court. ? >> there are world courts. there are 16 international -- when the lawside of iran are different than the loss of the united states? problem.s the kind of nuancesan give me the of it because you are thinking about it and write a book about it. greenhouse gas commission. it said the united states could use some of its supply of greenhouse gases because it was a special need. there is a statute that says you have to have an environmental and peck statement, and does that statute apply? it depends on an interpretation of the word law in the statute. it sounds pretty technical. it sounds as if it might be dealt, but it is terribly important and not so technical. what i want to show is that these kinds of cases are there. it is not something that is going to happen. it is happening. that weree world referring to beyond our borders, not the political debate you begin with. >> the death penalty? , the deathsent penalty is by definition cruel and unusual punishment, for you. >>

the number of institutions, when you said maybe -- i think you said, what, that the united states add heres to -- adheres to as a rulemaking body. >> about 100, somewhere. >> rose: do we need a world court? >> well there are world courts. there are 16 -- >> rose: how do you decide between some of these issues in which the laws of iran are different than the laws of the united states? >> do i have a direct answer to that? >> rose: i don't know. that's the kind of problem you're talking to. yeah, yeah... >> rose: you can give me the nuances because you're thinking about it and write a book about it in part. >> it's something called the greenhouse gas commission. >> rose: yeah. as i said, the united states could use some of its supply to hav --supply of the greenhouse s because it was a special need, but there are stoochts that say you have to have an environmental impact statement and does that statute apply and it depends on the interpretation of the word "law" in the statute about whether a meeting of the commission constitutes law. it sounds technical, dull and terribly important and it isn't so technic

terrorist groups taking the opportunity of this human tragedy to in filtrate their own adherence into the united statesand it is so dangerous >> mike, starting with you with the idea of how we did or did not handle isis, not just america but our allies. we could have led that but didn't. >> most of the world waited for us to lead, we didn't, and no body stepped up. that is our job and we may not like it. we are tired of iraq, afghanistan and war on terror but at the end of the day we are the only ones going to get ahead of this. the fact we didn't take on isis and defeat them -- and we could. but is the public up for it? if this is defined as a national security issue we have to solve this. >> what is interesting is you hear in some of the reporting this is mostly from syria. and this is an outgrowth of the syrian war but that is not true. many are coming from iraq and afghanistan. it is isis-related. >> it is a rough part of the world to be in. imagine the chaos where there is all out civil war and the united states has been committing militarily billions of dollars, obviously it is not an inexpensive

likely to flow because it is in the hands of foreign banks that would not be compelled to adhere to the united states' wishes at that point, is that correct? secretary lew: we do have sanctions that we could impose in other ways. we cannot lock it up directly. we need the cooperation of other government, other central banks, other banks in order to give this money from iran. just to add one more detail, i think the notion that somehow a $50 billion, $60 billion check gets written is wrong. doingare already using -- transactions in some of these countries, using therefore reserves as exchange. they will still need to buy things overseas. they cannot just spend this money or their ability to connect international commerce goes away. haves i said before, they hundreds of billions of dollars of competing domestic needs. while i cannot say a penny will go to malign purposes, i think the magnitude of research available is highly exaggerated by the notion of thinking into some $50 billion transfer. mr. nelson: secretary moniz, can you explain to the committee the insight that you, we, the united states gove

if these restrictions are not adhered to, the united states can at any time revive the sanctions currently in place. congress should be able to conduct close oversight to ensure the terms are implemented d iran is living up to its obligations. it isn't about trust. secretary of state clinton today echoed the words distrust and verify. she supports the agreement. more broadly the united states ust signal to iran that it condemnable record of human rights will not be tolerated, nor will we hide with disagreement that action and our response to it. quite the opposite. we will redouble our efforts to stop them and that egregious behavior. mr. speaker, in closing, article 1, section 8, clause 11 of the constitution, vests congress with the duty to authorize war. implicit in that text, congress' additional responsibility to exhaust all reasonable alternatives before committing the american people and our men d women in uniform to such a fateful path. the plan of action represents our best endeavor to provide just that alternative. it is the product of earnest diplomacy and congress should put as

effect, the other countries that negotiated this deal along with the united states would not support the continued sanctions. so if iran adhereso the deal, and if iran would not adhere to the deal the u.s. would have options down the road. he is making this case as the administration has just secured what appears to be the crucial 34th vote in the senate that assures the president would be able to override any veto or disapproval of the bill in congress. now the administration would like to get 41 votes in the senate, so that the bill -- the resolution to disapprove the iran deal could be filibustered and never actually make it to his desk. this is coming right at the same day it appears the president has won the legislative victory that he is looking for in congress, but securing the pledges of enough democratic senators to ensure that he has enough -- that they -- that he can veto any disapproval of the deal, and republicans would not have enough support to override that veto. >> of course the president would also like some bipartisan support for this major international agreement. any chance he is going to get any republica

terrorist groups taking the opportunity of this human tragedy can infiltrate their own adherents in europe and the united states: thank you very much, good to speak with you. bill: a muslim flight attendant responded for refusing to serve alcohol and now she is suing saying she should not have to choose between her religion and her job. how is that different from kim davis in kentucky? our panel debate that today. martha: a squatter breaks into a family's home and takes out an ad for all their stuff on craigslist. >> money is not the issue. it is violation, to take over like that and blatantly live in that house and have our yard sale. is getting relief. only nicorette mini has a patented fast-dissolving formula. it starts to relieve sudden cravings fast. i never know when i'll need relief. that's why i only choose nicorette mini. or the freedom to choose what doctor you want to see. so if you have medicare parts a and b, consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, these let you choose any doctor w

>> when has president obama ever adhered to any law that he has signed to include the rule of law, the united states constitution. you're absolutely right. not having disclosure of these side deals with the iaea in iran, which we have come to know somewhat that it deals with the military complex iran says they will be able to inspect themselves, this agreement should not go forth. the fact you had 42 senate democrats by way of the filibuster block the resolution for disapproval of even coming to the senate floor, you have to start asking, are we getting very close to a sense of treachery and treason against the united states of america. >> what are you saying, colonel? >> i'm saying very simply, who are these people putting forth? are they putting forth the united states of america or political interest of one president obama. if you're putting the president's interest above this country -- >> i'm running out of time. how does obama benefit by this? >> i think the only thing he gets is an exhibit in his presidential library that says he did something no one else did. i have to tell you, it is a very

law, and we also want to make sure that we are adhering to the laws here in our country and cybersecurity is an increasing challenge in the united stateswe are going to do everything possible to control it. >> on monday, the president's going to be addressing the united nations, the same day as president rouhani of iran and of course, vladimir putin and raul castro. are we expecting that president obama will have a substantive conversation one-on-one with vladimir putin? >> i don't have any specific plans to announce to you at this time. i know this is the 70th occasion of the u.n. general assembly. the president has addressed it each year since he has been in office. he's looking forward to taking this opportunity to talk about the progress we have made, but the work that lies ahead on the global stage as well as having various other meetings in the course of his time there. it is, as you said, a big week welcoming pope francis, having the state visit with china and then going to new york for the u.n. a lot of important business to get done. >> you're not ruling out meetings. you're just not announcing them yet? >> we have no announce

life and all rules and procedure is do everyday life, adhere to new set of ruse, your boss's set of rules but not the institution of the united statesovernment. that is very conflicting. david: judy, there weren't even sets of rules but hillary ad-libbing her way through this with sharing emails on one server, with a state department server some which were classified and on one hand sharing emails with sid blumenthal for latest political theory. >> she said this is interesting. i will pass it along. i will send it to x, y, z, how these were not given to the committee is a very interesting question. you know, does this really affect her? i think the effect so far is political more than legal. it affects trust people have in her. she lost 1/3 of her support -- david: even if proven some of the classifications on emails were changed to make it look like think weren't classified in the beginning. that is a pretty serious charge. >> that is a pretty serious charge. we don't know who did it and what she knew about what was done. david: all right. >> you can never get inside of an investigation when it is ongoing. it is trick -- david: nom

adhered to in iran. there will be no difference between iran and the other countries. >> critics of the nuclear deal here in the united statest it doesn't grease address the fate of prisoners in iran. three americans are known to be held in iran. a fourth american vanished in 2007. the president says the door is open under certain circumstances to their return. >> let's move on to something concerning to the people of the united states. you hold four americans including our colleague. i would like to know whether you as a government feel that this legal process is expedited so these people can be freed. i speak particularly of my own colleague. >> translator: now, being imprisoned in iran has nothing to do with the nuclear negotiations and subsequent agreement. but there are a number of iranians in the united states who are imprisoned, who went to prison in result of activities related to the nuclear industry in iran. and today the u.n. security council has agreed to lift those sanctions. once these sanctions have been lifted, why keep those folks in american prisons. so they must be freed. if the americans take appropriate

cannot forget that al qaeda, especially its affiliates in yemen and adherence in syria remain a transregional threat to the united states and other interests around the world. your insights with respect to what would be done to keep the pressure on al qaeda, both the senior leadership and organizational structure would be deeply appreciated. once again, thank you for your service, your accomplished service, and thank you for joining us today. >> general petraeus, welcome back. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it's good to be back. >> mr. chairman, senator reid, members of the committee, thank you for this opportunity to discuss the situation in the middle east. as you noted, mr. chairman, this is the first time i have testified in open session before congress since resigning as director of the cia nearly three years ago. as such, i think it is appropriate to begin my remarks this morning with an apology, one that i have offered before but nonetheless one that i want to repeat to you and to the american public. four years ago i made a serious mistake, one that brought discredit on me and pain to those closest to me. it was a

negotiated twi executive of the united states of america, we don't like it so we're just throwing it away, you know, one of the hall hallmarkf american power is our willingness to adhere to treaties and agreements that we sign. we are stable. we are not bipolar in that way. so if you go do that, who's going to negotiate with america thinking whatever they negotiated is going to stand over time. that is a serious problem. therefore, i think that a responsible republican president would say, you know, well, i could bust their chops a little bit more on iran, i could watch what they're doing, have zero tolerance for violations, but i just can't throw out this entire deal arranged by the international community. >> rose: there is also the idea that if there's a split between what the deal does and the rest of iran's conduct. that's what hillary spoke to, that's what the republicans are speaking to and is what the ayatollah spoke to. >> his statements betray a very nervous man. i mean, that man is very nervous about the consequences of the deal, which should give some kind of comfort to americans who are worried. if the ayatollah is worried, that's a good thing. he said, w

adhere to the oath i took. that was that i would support the constitution of the united states and the constitution of the commonwealths commonwealth says marriage is between one man and one woman. section 26, i suggest people take time to look at section 26 of the constitution. >> that's been overruled. it's been overruled by the supreme court's decision. >> that is, however, our state constitution in section 26 clearly says that no higher power, no higher authority shall interfere with what is in our state's constitution. anything that they do rule on that's contrary the state's constitution shall be deemed void. that is the language. and i think that needs to be looked at. house bill 279 that was passed 2013 says that the government has a duty to when someone has a ko conscientious objective, has to find a way that they don't go against their conscience. >> we'll follow what happens when you do return from your bike ride. we appreciate you being on "new day." casey davis, thanks so much. >>> kanye west says the darnedest things. he announced he wanted to run for president in 2020. plenty of fodder for the late nigh

adherence to any kind of islam disqualifying? >> dr. carson would not -- today, yesterday, or next week -- advocate having a muslim in the white house as president of the united statesit is that simple. it is that clear. there's nothing else to discuss. >> one thing we heard from cair right now is they would like everyone to learn more about the faith rather than hearing it in sound bites and hearing what they clearly disagree with. do you think there's anything that dr. carson or you could hear from cair or could learn or study in the koran that would change your views? >> we're no longer interested in the rhetoric of cair and what they say. when they change their actions and their behaviors, what's going on in this world, in the -- isis, beheading people, treating women like animals, disregarding life, beheading and killing homosexuals because of their choice. are you kidding me? show us this by your action and what you teach your children and how you respect life and how you respect individual freedom. there is not one christian church, jewish synagogue, that could be not in the middle east but yet they come to our country and build them. saudi arabia wants to bu

united states is free to resort to unilateral use of military power, even for such purposes as to ensure uninhibited access to key markets, energy supplies, and strategic resources. let alone security or alleged humanitarian concerns. and adherence this doctrine is very well confirmed and practiced as need hardly be discussed among people willing to look at the facts of current history. "the washington post" editors also make clear why the united states should be prepared to take such extreme steps in its role of international primacy. if the united states is not prepared to resort to military force, they explained, then iran "may escalate its attempt to establish hegemony over the middle east by force [captioning made possible by democracy now!] that is what president obama calls arends aggression. which we have to contain. for those who are unaware of how iran has been attempting to establish hegemony over the middle east by force or might even dream of doing so, the editors do give examples -- two examples. it support for the assad regime and hezbollah. i won't insult your intelligence by discussing this demonstration that iran has been seeking to establish hegemony over the region by force, however, on a aggression, there is

adhered to for centuries. but when we -- when diplomats, for instance, run a stop light, right, we don't, we can't, they're not subject to the jurisdiction of the united statest is not a crime, they can't get a ticket. >> an illegal immigrant -- >> i thing we should call them undocumented. if you as a party, if anyone's going to call undocumented immigrants illegal, by the very nature you're calling them illegal, you are suggesting they are breaking the laws of the united states and thus saying they are subject to our jurisdiction thereof. so the very fact -- right there, right there. >> illegal immigrant, whether you use it or don't use it, suggest they're break a law here, therefore they are subject to the jurisdiction. it is really sort of this strange irony. >> the more profound thing here is, look, you have this phenomenon where republicans as of late have liked to say, you know, we're the party of lincoln. we're the party is that stood up once upon a time before there was a shift in the ideological matchups of the party. we are the party that fought to end slavery. that fought to do the right thing in this country. this amendment, the 14th amendment, s

if these restrictions are not adhered to, the united states can at any time revive the sanctions currently in place. congress should be able to conduct close oversight to ensure the terms are implemented d iran is living up to its obligations. it isn't about trust. secretary of state clinton today echoed the words distrust and verify. she supports the agreement. more broadly the united states ust signal to iran that it condemnable record of human rights will not be tolerated, nor will we hide with disagreement that action and our response to it. quite the opposite. we will redouble our efforts to stop them and that egregious behavior. mr. speaker, in closing, article 1, section 8, clause 11 of the constitution, vests congress with the duty to authorize war. implicit in that text, congress' additional responsibility to exhaust all reasonable alternatives before committing the american people and our men d women in uniform to such a fateful path. the plan of action represents our best endeavor to provide just that alternative. it is the product of earnest diplomacy and congress should put as