of the united states. against donald john trump, president of the united states. in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high misdemeanors committed as president constituting harm to american society to the manifest injury of the people of the united states. article 1. in his capacity as president of the united states, unmindful of the high duties of his high office and the dignity and proprieties thereof and of the harmony and courtesy necessary for stability within the society of the united states donald john trump has with his statements done more than incite individuals and groups of americans, more than insult individuals and groups of americans. he has harmed the society of the united states, brought shame and dishonor to the office of , esident of the united states sowing discord among the people of the united states by associating the imagine industry dignity of the presidency with causes rooted in white supremacy, bigotry, racism, anti-semitism, white nationalism or neonewt s

how united was of the united states towards this war effort? >> it is a good question. a difficult question to answer. there is no question that the divisions we were discussing earlier persisted. in that march to war, and the first several months of 1917, when you had the acceleration of these events happening -- i agree it is not just one thing that sets off the war, but it is the cumulative effect. it helps put those who are opposing war or intervention on the background. it is difficult to sustain that argument over time. that being said, there are still divisions. if you look at the votes in congress on wilson's war message, they are fairly decisive. there are a few dissenting votes in the senate and congress and house. it is still a decisive vote. the opponents of intervention had drawn the line in the sand earlier. the local is sample is senator stoner from missouri who was for wilson in 1912, but opposes the war measures in the run uup to -- run up to 1914. the last stand for the senators in that time was the decision to arm those merchant ships was an admission

the united states to support the resolution 470. in his remarks, then secretary of state said the following. the draft resolution before us today is illustrated with a preoccupation that has produced a series of unbalanced and unrealistic text on middle east issues. specifically regarding the provision on diplomatic missions the secretary said in our judgment this provision is not binding on it is without force and we reject it as a disrupted attempts to dictate to other nations. it does nothing to promote a resolution of the difficult problems facing israel and its neighbors. it does nothing to advance the cause of peace. that was in 1980. it is equally true today. the united states will not be told by any country where we can put our embassy. buried even deeper in the jargon of the resolution is the accusation that the united states is setting back the prospect of peace in the middle east. that is a scandalous charge. of those who are making it should consider that it only harms the very palestinian people they claim to speak for.

the united states owned 1/5 of its capital stock, $7 million, and the president of the united states with senate consent appointed five of the bank's member of the board of 25 directors. it was to be the federal government's own banker. it performed some of the functions of today's treasury department. it brokered federal loans, it receipt, stored, transported and paid out government funds. and it issued bank notes, which where the country's only paper currency. but the bank was also a commercial business. it loaned money in competition with other banks. it made profits, and it paid dividends. clothed by its charter with -- and these words are in the charter -- exclusive privileges and benefits. operating throughout the land when every other bank in the country was confined to a single state and most to a single city. at a time when the treasury department itself consisted of a few dozen washington clerks on a scattering of land offices and customs offices throughout the country. the bank of the united states was literally the only national financial institution in the country. it he

that's analogous to what's happening the united states and this best case scenario here in the united states has fifty odd sites with communities schools that i looked at that are a mile from burnside it's also similarly being exposed to these clouds of toxins and you know there's a long fight to bring attention to the issues of the burn pits overseas there's been no fight to do this similar so you know take any sort of action here in the united states no measurement of what is in the pollution that's you know dead. that's touching the school grounds or the residential areas around these bases no statement from the department defense or my reporting that that was worthwhile or something that they should do and really i mean and that's with laws that are supposed to limit this and promise that it's not and say so i'm glad that you mentioned the really lack of some might say accountability others might say recognition i do want to share this because as we mentioned the department of veterans affairs declined to join our show today but this is what it says on their website at this time r

however was vetoed by the united states. to get out of the beat ups truck to the security council and made unable to perform his duties and do decades of work of the international community it is considered a blatant violation of the rights of palestinian people and if you shameful that this meeting is even taking place must be resolved through negotiation between the two parties are un members they threatened or the other members this is bullying and this jabber will not bow to the word that you know it as stated just there ahead of the vote the us try to apply pressure on un member states with threats ranging from cutting funding and aid to taking the names of those supporting the resolution however washington's efforts fail to bear fruit and now reports. in the lead up to the voting we heard in the assembly hall nikki haley she remarked that the usa has the right to put its embassy wherever it chooses and she went on to say that the usa will not forget the upcoming vote show this is nikki haley in the assembly hall the un

or two states wednesday blue state that's not up to me i'm from the united states i don't live there but with israel having now sent six hundred fifty thousand illegal settlers into palestinian territory there is no contiguous territory available to create a state so the notion that there's going to be a state there's going to be two capitals for two states is simply not such a given it's one of many possibilities and it's by far not the most likely right now so i think that we have to go back to international law that says jerusalem is a separate body it's not part of the there is it's a lionel a palace that is an issue it is a corpus separate i'm mr mood of that is issue exactly mr melbourne i mean if you look at the situation right now i mean if there's been this attempt to create a deal a conventional way led by joe but you see of the backlash in the arab and muslim world people now no longer believe the americans are honest brokers there is a new dynamic in the region there is turkey which is seen as spearheading first to save the palestinians isn't this something which is likel

ambassador took to the floor and she defended the actions by the united states the united states has been the primary supporter of israel and when she spoke she said that the united nations should be ashamed of this proposal that was put forward she was ashamed of the vote which had taken place she accused the united nations of not being supportive of israel of being anti israel and she was harshly critical of the international community for the proposed resolution what we witnessed here today in the security council is an insult it won't be forgotten it's one more example of the united nations doing more harm than good in addressing the israeli palestinian conflict now in response to the united states we have seen a statement from the palestinian authority the palestinian authority has accused the united states of essentially mocking the international community with their decision to move their embassy and recognize jerusalem as israel's capital and now at this point even though fourteen members of the u.n. security council supported this resolution this single vote from the united

the bank of the united states and this is the second bank of the united states because as 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 -- private financial interests but will benefit the country, the public, how will it benefit the public, because the treasury, the u.s. treasury, will deposit money in the bank, money coming in from taxes and the treasuries, can also borrow money from the bank. this bank has a 20-year charter but it has lots of opponents. you remember, that chief opponent, thomas jefferson, hates the bank. the bank jefferson believes is an institution that imperils american liberty by elevating to power a wealthy financial elite, nonproductive elite. jefferson opposes it and jefferson comes to power in 1800, so does his party the bank of the united states the first bank the charter expires in 1811, but one year later a war erupts with brita

and china and the united states have to work together on this. >> right. and to that end, i want to play this sound bite from secretary of state rex tillerson who discussed what might happen in the case of a conflict or a collapse of the north korean regime. listen to what he just said this last week. >> the most important thing to us would be securing those nuclear weapons they've already developed and ensuring that nothing falls into the hands of people we would not want to have it. we've had conversations with the chinese about how might that be done. we have had conversations that if something happened and we had to go across the line, we have given the chinese assurances we would go back and retreat back to the south of the 38th parallel. >> ambassador, that's an extraordinary public description of very, very detailed conversations that they're having with you. what conversations are you having with north korea about this? >> i think the real job for china and the united states is to do whatever we can to prevent any armed conflict from happening on t

united nations because the united nations spends so much money in the united states in new york so in so many ways the united nations among other global institutions serve american interests even if sometimes in the case of israel they continue to criticize or to condemn israel simply because the united states continues to defend israel and reject and veto any criticism or condemnation of israeli occupation and violation of international law so really this more than blackmail there's a certain. type approach when the american president goes like this and says you will pay and we will make a lot of money off you that's not that's not the global system that america built i don't know how my naive thinking oh start rethinking that this goes ahead happens behind the scenes anyway it's just an extraordinary thing for the president to say it publicly but there are just tuning in for in this diplomatic channels where people say make sure you vote the right way surely that's been happening for other yeah but i mean there's also something to be said about. going public with intimidating leader

of the united states. they come in but a lot of them us" ands is not for leave. it needs a lot more study. the american to policy of not wanting african-american soldiers to be societyequally in the over there, how far up the change of command and that really start to be concentrated? wasn't mostly a military policy or did it go all the way up to wilson himself? prof. faulkner: that is an interesting question. wilson basically takes his hand matters.ary in fact, pershing has more than probably aef any other military commander. policies came from pershing and his staff. and that secret memo, they are not able to figure out who shot john on that. it is coming from the highest reaches. the army has a weird way of doing things. with a four-month fences the when they form- what becomes known as the 92nd whiteon, the officers are . most of them are white southerners and the idea is the army says, these guys know how to lead. it will lead to a lot of problems with more out in the morale in the-- division. without

i think i want to start with the united states and the united states resilience. it does relate to the legal realm. in some sense we need to be legally resill yenlt as well as being resill yenlt as a culture to false information and to cyber operations. and ready to also take action. but in terms of building resilience, it's easy in the swedish context because it's a small country. you all more or less can find some common ground -- >> you mean the finnish -- >> you said swedish. >> almost the same. >> that was a terrible mistake. i'm so sorry. on the finnish case. and when we're talking about the united states today, we have a very divided political arena. we have unfortunately -- i would argue although i haven't seen any data on this, but i have seen reporting indicating that our civic literacy, if you will, is lower than -- certainly than it should be and perhaps lower than it has been in recent past. so you're dealing with a landscape that is perhaps not similar enough to finland's landscape. can you comment on a little bit about what lessons you might draw fr

the united states would be taking names in fact and the president of the united states donald trump also reiterating backing up those claims saying that the u.s. would in fact reduce eight of those countries who voted in favor of this rejecting the u.s. moving its embassy from tel aviv to jerusalem recognize interesting as the capital carson just tell us briefly is this to be taken seriously these threats from the united states the strong language. a kind of rule that the u.s. not seeing of the few countries to make an example of them and actually reduce it but if you look at most of the countries and have pushed this vote here countries like egypt like turkey like jordan the u.s. is not supporting them because the us is so nice in this regard it's because the united states has strategic interests in supporting these countries militarily and otherwise so once again i'm not sure that this will do a lot but irritating a lot of allies of the united states on the world stage karsten tell us a little bit more about the domestic situation there in the united states and why these words mig

i would like to point out, as president of the united states, we have to remember that the united states itself has such an important relationship with this country in terms of keeping us safe as well. before we rush to make those urge alli would honorable members to keep that in mind. i hope he has heard this morning tout how seriously we take make sure all is illegal and extreme content is taken down from twitter and other online platforms and that they take more of an active role themselves in making sure this material does not stay up there. attempt, the -- sought to organize a march. nine people showed up, but that is nine to many. there is still work to do to make sure that the views of bdl and britain first do not represent this country and disabuse those who hold those views and do more. >> absolutely right. they in no way represent the views of the british people as he and i and the rest of the honorable members know them to be. as has been pointed out in the house today, the real danger of encouraging activity and extremism is increasingly online and that is where we are focusi

states or the united states is only talking to north korea and not including soul. >> to see the united states vulnerable to a play to divide us away from the south koreans. >> guess that's the part that surprises me the most. i would say he was very good at doing that very strategic, his father was very strategic in getting incentives for giving up his program and of course we all know that he didn't give up his programs, that's pretty obvious. i was surprised with the election of south korean president that equifax didn't make an overture word toward them to divide them from the united states. it doesn't seemed like that has happened yet, certainly it could be something he winds up doing. i think unfortunately, i think jean's right that they would prefer to have a different north korea policy then he has currently. his policy, in his view, unfortunately is aligned with a tougher policy than the united states wants now, whether it's deploying or making statements about strongest sanctions. i think you would much prefer talks about reopening the industrial complex and we can talk about

shall not accept any role for the united states in the peace process. on the other hand you have president trump and you're always vaunting this ultimate deal as they called it supposedly in the pipeline and will be revealed next year if and when such a proposal comes forward from the united states what will happen to it if the palestinians are prepared to negotiate first there will be no deal without a palestinian partner i mean this is i mean this is the strongest point that. can hold true. so if he threatens that he will not be part of any sort of peace process if he's not he's not going to be in this. vision i think that it will be no deal this is why we believe that the weakest side in this equation might also be moved to be the strongest one because of course you can all sort of brush up on me you can actually sort of decisions against me but you cannot actually have this process without me so it's it's me who is going to legitimize your efforts in order to build peace in this in this region or to solve this almost seventy years or conflict now so

the united states is at a breaking point. in august, the world bank looked at 50 countries and found that america will have the largest unmet infrastructure needs over the next two decades. look in any direction. according to the american road and transport builders association, the united states has almost 56,000 structurally deficient bridges, about 1,900 of which are on interstate highways and all of these are crossed 185 million times a day. there is no better indication of the u.s. government's myopia than the decline in funding for research. research and development top ten percent of the national budget in the mid 1960s. it is now under 4%. this is happening in an environment where other countries, from south korea, germany to china, are ramping up investment in these areas. a new study finds that china is on track to surpass the u.s. as the world leader in biomedical research spending. i came to america in the 1980s, i was struck by how well the american government functioned. i would hear complaints about the irs or

of the united states. jackson kept a private memorandum book in which he jotted down occasional notes to himself. into this private memo book he copied hamilton's entire memorandum on the bank, 6 1/2 pages long. parts of it are traceable in jackson's own veto of the bank of the united states two 1/2 years later. well, in january 1832, four years before its charter was due to expire the bank formally applied to congress for a renewal. this timing was not accidental. a presidential election was coming up in the fall. jackson had declared against the bank in three annual messages. his opponent, henry clay was an advocate for it bank. and clay and bittal, president of the bank who were in communication with each other, calculated the bank was so obviously if had dispensable to the country that jackson would not dare to veto a charter and if he did, they'd make anni iss out of it. some of jackson's counselors favored rechartering the bank and that has fooled historians if had to thinking there was possibly some

around a table of dialogue with the united states? because they will think that, perhaps, after years of talks and potential agreement, the next u.s. administration could step over or pull out of the agreement achieved. so such potential action by the trump administration will block such potential roads to success in resolution of regional problems around the world. >> if you were to meet president trump, what would you say to him? >> [ speaking persian ] >> translator: the way in which, currently, thus far, the u.s. administration has chosen to stand against iran and the jcpoa has been the wrong one. and the proof has been experienced by previous administrations in the united states, and the conclusion is natural to reach, that what the obama administration did in order to achieve success in this engagement, vis-à-vis the jcpoa and iran, drew upon the unsuccessful experiences of previous administrations. however, the path undertaken today by this u.s. administration is a return to the past, to a distant past that goes all the way ba

the united states is no longer an honest broker of peace. we have palestinians, arabs and muslims cannot accept any more that the united states be a peace broker because one of the basic requirements faced to be honest and neutral and not to be biased for one side or another to go through the peace and security council to make this decision nolan voight on the united nations charter. there is a provision that enables us to present to the peace and soul for which the united states would not be allowed to vote and we will go to the general assembly regarding the membership of israel because its membership is not in line with the international resolutions. we will go to the peace and security council to consider the question of the full membership of palestine, the most important issue is what can the islamic omar present to al-quds. how can we al-quds and then try to protect it. how can we support the position of the people? i know there are people who talk about the difference between normalization and the question of al-quds and people who d

their social media if they want to say the president the united states or canada candidate for the united states presidency trump he's an idiot that's fine with me that's a personal opinion but when you start talking about an insurance policy that's when i start getting concerned because these are an elected officials meddling in the election. and these are these people are supposed to be apolitical it least nominal p. there is a really high time for a new church commission to be instituted to investigate the crimes committed and the we want to remind your viewers what the church commission is all the church commission was a commission existed in the seventy's after the water great their great crisis it was obvious that during watergate and long before that the f.b.i. and other special series a certain kind doctor. on the us territory against us citizens that were eagle that were unlawful and there was widespread. feeling of distrust there were towards. be icy and other special seriousness and the church community was setting the westie those crimes and set new standards for how the. over

a citizen of the united states and europe. and we have not figured out how to counter that in any way. and we are not doing it effectively. this is part of the ideological struggle. we have xi jinping in china that says is state capitalism, and alternative for the western democratic premarket model. and vladimir putin certainly seems to believe the same thing. and we are actively trying to convince the world Ãthey are trying to convince the world that this is a superior model. and we are not responding in a sensible way. before i turn this to the audience for your questions. i'll ask one last question of my own. pull the camera back of the well to a basic to the basic question we were struggling with last august. in aspen. every member of the group grew up in the shadow of the world that was created after world war ii. the idea of american power that was embodied in the work of president truman, george marshall, the liberal american order. liberal international order. as we describe it. and so i want to ask as a final questio

you can't produce in the united states profitably those like japan. they haven't done it in the last five years or since 2011 or 2012. not necessarily the attention to the content but with a mass of quantitative easing that dwarfs the quantitative easing in the united states during the great recession. so, i would argue that it was a good start and i complement the administration for making that a part of their trade agenda but they were addressing some of the biggest challenges that we have and as a consequence just like today, i think it would have been just as possible to become a source of irritation and friction in the relationship i think it would have been better to separate and move forward in the agreement. those that don't support free trade let's bring them on one at a time and deal with the issues that they are using to subvert global trade because it is indisputable that the global trade has been subverted with tactics like this in a manner that makes participants in the american economy the obvious question. i'm doing everything right, b

the united states they say that the united states are totally discredited by this move by trying to recognize through some of it in many ways i think that what we're seeing is a release of the pent up frustration over many years of what many palestinians are many arab superleague. in the region to see that washington isn't an honest broker and whether the united nations can play that role is very difficult to say given the fact that israel has been very reluctant had any dealings with the united nations and it does take two countries to make peace but going forward the message from mahmoud abbas and many other leaders including the turkish president is the united states has no role in resolving the conflict in the middle east so muslim nations get together they get they convene this extraordinary meeting they make this declaration then what's do we expect action. well in fact you're right to many people for this this summer we just be tough rhetoric and little else but what it seems is the message from this meeting going forward is that there is going to be a concerted campaign to s

the united states is by far the single largest contributor to the united nations and its agencies. we do this in part to advance her values and interests. when that happens our participation in the un produces great good for the world. together we see, close, and educate desperate people. we hold out machines accountable. we do this because it represents who we are, it is our american way. but, we will be honest with you, when we make generous contributions to the un, we also have a legitimate expectation that are good willis recognized and respected. when a nation is singled out for attacking this organization, that nation is disrespected. what's more, that nation is asked to pay for the privilege of being disrespected. in the case of the united states, we are asked to pay more than anybody else for that privilege. unlike in some un member countries, the united states government answers to its people. as such, we have an obligation to acknowledge when our capitals being poorly spent. we have an obligation to demand more for investment. if our investment fails we have an obligation

situations or give to a vote against the united states they do so at their peril. ten times more iraqi civilians may have been killed than previously thought to in the u.s. led operation to liberate mosul from islamic state now this is according to new research carried out by the associated press news agency obtained data from iraqi morgues as well as from non-governmental organizations and it says that as many as eleven thousand civilians may have died during the nine month operation nearly a third of them allegedly died during u.s. led coalition bombing raids but just a fraction of the number has been acknowledged by the coalition. human rights group amnesty international has joined calls to investigate the liberation campaign and to reveal the true cost in civilian deaths it added that the numbers cited in the report came as no surprise artie's has visited the city of mosul both during and after the fighting. see the press is bodycount surprise anyone who's actually been to mosul and who has seen what has happened to the city you can also argue that the death co

the united states would support a two-state solution if agreed to by both sides. in the meantime, i call on all parties to maintain the status quo at jerusalem's holy sites, including the temple mount, also known as haram al shareef. above all, our greatest hope is for peace. the universal yearning in every human soul. with today's action, i reaffirm my administration's long standing commitment to a future of peace and security for the region. there will of course be disagreement and dissent regarding this announcement. but we are confident that ultimately, as we work through these disagreements, we will arrive at a peace and a place for greater in understanding and cooperation. this sacred city should call forth the best in humanity lifting our sights to what is possible, not pulling us back and down to the old fights that have become so totally predictable. peace is never beyond the grasp of those willing to reach it. so today we call for calm, for moderation, and for the voices of tolerance to prevail over the purveyors of hate. our children should enherit our

russia was supportive of the united states. from two thousand and one from the born conference. held with the under the auspices of the united nations russia and the entire region were supporting the russian leaders have told me personally that the us is doing the right thing in afghanistan the time must cooperate with them so have the chinese so have the indians even the even in scope quite in spite of the different ways general mattis saying rescuers were and i'm coming to the point the russians were supporting the inner cities the russians were allowing us supplies when pakistan became difficult . to go true true true true russian territory thousands of things of supply convoys went through russia to come to afghanistan they supplied the afghan police they gave us training they were cooperative the russians. began to suspect things that afghanistan when exactly as we did extremism did not end that increased the violence did not end but spread and on top of it then or isis also emerged so like us the russians of questions now how come who's doing it. in response to that the am

the united states and japan isimed that north korea provoking, but the united states has come all the way over to do military exercise in close proximity to north korea, so it appears to me, rather, that it is the united states frank: provoking more. i want the united states to stop provoking, but instead, work to create the conditions to make dialogue possible. of people ina lot japan might feel differently. they have seen north korean missiles flying over their territory. there have been air raid drills. glyn: where else could they go? todd: let me get the question out. people in japan have seen north korean missile tests flying over their territory. they have had air raids, sirens going off. what do you make of what mr. tanaka has to say? i have little sympathy for mr. tanaka. why have they got air raid sirens going off? be was to get-- a rid of the constitution. the only way to do that is to frighten the japanese people. him 6 percentput behind, and he's going to call a referendum, so japan's interest is to make every phone ring. every time there is a north korean missile within 1

there are more than 300 ports of entry here in the united states. so, the union that represents these officers is saying before you talk about sending more people abroad, let's make sure we have the people here to actually make sure that we can make sure drugs don't come into the country, or that other threats don't make it through the ports of entry. e.a. drugok at the d. reports, the majority of drugs that come to this country actually come through the ports of entry. amy: you write about a situation in tanzania where eyes investigators were accused in may of using mafia-style tactics. what happened? ron: there was this international drug organization based out of tanzania and also operated in south africa. the leader of it, they sourced heroine from pakistan, and afghanistan, got cocaine from south america, and sold it internationally. one of their members was caught at one of the houston airport smuggling heroin. overce has jurisdiction any kind of international crime that crosses the border. this guy who ran the organization was placed on the t

nations or the united states? what does success look like right now to you? >> look, part of the peace process, the peace process was a sham from the beginning. during the period of time i was involved in the negotiations, every proposal that palestinians had ever put on the table was summarily dismissed. things sump as international law laughed as by the israelis. any regard to any framework in relation to international law was also dismissed outright, and this was the fundamental problem, that we were negotiating with a very powerful party. so the people under military occupation negotiating with their very occupiers. that's why this process didn't work in the first place, and it will continue to fail in the future. i believe instead success will look like, the international community upholding international law. placing sanctions on israel for defying international law, whether for building settlements, expanding settlements, stealing more palestinian land or demolishing palestinian homes. for me what success l

we regret the decision announced by the president of the united states to recognize jerusalem as the capital of his room for in the glory of the midst of the arab league the arab republic of egypt denounces the u.s. decision to recognize jerusalem as the capsule of israel. china is highly concerned about the recent developments regarding the status of jerusalem. it was good to be out in. washington's decision with serious concern. now when nikki haley took the floor at the security council chamber she emphasized that trump's decision did not really have any direct impact on any borders or ongoing territorial disputes it was simply a recognition of the israeli capital being in jerusalem the united states has not taken a position on boundaries or borders the specific dimensions of sovereignty over jerusalem are still to be decided by the israelis and the palestinians in the negotiations the united states has not advocated changing any of the arrangements at the temple mount hareem serif the president specifically called for maintaining the status quo at the holy site. finally and criti

really against the interests of the of the countries of area and the united states and that it will create a situation of instability that adds to the instability of the area i mean this is basically. what took place in the beat in the telephone k. are you getting the impression or do you get a sense that this is part of a broader policy jarret cushion the son in law of the president and middle east envoy has been in and out of the region and do you have an idea of of what could be emerging that could passes as a policy for the israeli palestinian conflict. well and i really don't want to go into the. pointing responsibility to the advisors of mr clinton mr trump i mean he in the final analysis has to make the decision he is the person that said that he is going to get the deal of the century and get a peace that nobody else was willing to do he suggested themself as the the the honest. advisor and. the intermediary between the two parties and by saying that he is really but what he's doing is violating all of that you cannot really be an honest broker in such a difficult problem and then

the united states no longer had to battle international economy. all they had to do is set the rules of the road a bit so it t incredible success you want to build on. >> again, i'm somebody i think all three of us are in the group of people who think that the last 70 years, some things went better than others on a whole in trying to build this global order was trying to do the right thing and the best thing under the circumstances and i m m ima the question is how to adjust and go forward rather than how to throw in the cards and walk off and go find another planet that we enjoy more. so so far, so good. i do think that actually had we been looking more carefully in the 1990s while russia nor china was prepared to actively challenge this american, this post cold war order, both of them concluded a, that they weren't going to join the party and b, that this liberalization that the united states was pushing was a threat to their domestic order and security and so what we saw is kind of a gradual move on the part of those countries picking up what he

god bless the united states of america. [applause] so many of us have been working on this issue for a long time and as a warmer chairman of the house ways and means committee, i have to tell you how so many men and women here have not for this moment. i want to echo what kevin brady said. i want to thank all of the staff for their hard work. i want to thank george from our staff who came to help us and summoning other people to make possible. we come to these jobs to try to improve the lives of the people we represent. in this bill more than so many other things we have tried to do does that and so we are very and very helpful. we can see on the horizon a great potential are our people and for our economy. we know this is the greatest country on earth and we know that merrick a has better days -- we know that america has better days ahead. this bill passed that potential. i just looked at the state of wisconsin, the average family of four will get an average of a $2000 tax cut. we are heartened that hours after the bill pa

states now a letter was circulated to one hundred eighty different countries by the united states that indicated that donald trump would quote take it personally the way countries voted at this upcoming vote. when we make a decision about where to locate our embassy we don't expect those we've helped to talk it tends to be a vote criticizing our choice the u.s. will be taking names. in favor of the draft resolution piece read. those against. foods in favor well votes. against. as you consider the vote i want you to know the president and the u.s. take this vote personally he will be watching this vote carefully and has requested i report back on those who voted against us thank you for your consideration. it's the right thing to do it is absolutely the right thing to do so it appears that this is a repudiation of the united states largely by the international community one hundred twenty eight countries around the world voted against the united states and against its decision to move the sea to jerusalem this is a condemnation of the united states by the international community in big

states that he had lied every other time he had mentioned the unemployment rate in the united states. >> the jobs report is fiction, because all of the people -- >> it's total fiction? you don't think there's been improvement from the crash? >> i would say it's 90%. don't believe those phony numbers when you hear 4.9 and 5% unemployment. the number is probably 28, 29, as high as 35. the 5% figure is one of the biggest hoaxes. >> america has had presidents who have lied. some of them have told very big lies. but we've never had a pathological liar who is willing to lie about anything and everything, from the size of the crowd in front of him on inauguration day to criminal conduct by the previous president. the american news media has never been confronted by a challenge like this before. it is an historic challenge. it comes a year after the historic challenge the american news media failed, the challenge of covering a pathological liar as a presidential candidate. vigilant patrol of the trump administration lies has already yielded some important results, including the resignation o

there are threats to the united states. our own vital interests are at stake when it comes to this part of the world. but getting back to your point, do we have a construct, a strategic construct by which all the interests of all -- at least these four stakeholders and there are actually more than i've listed, but at least these four proud stakeholders, do we have a mechanism by which the interests of these stakeholders are harmonized? the answer is not yet. there is some work underway to try to create what i've just described, but it is very early. we have a long way to go. but until we do, the idea of having an effective international partnership for dealing with this incredibly complex region that often beggars description it's so complicated is going to prove very difficult. three last things. i'm going to take the liability of referring to some of the things my colleagues have said because i think they relate to the question you've asked. i think north africa, the maghreb is going to be a test case of whether or not th

and that is plainly unacceptable for the united states. i would argue it should be unacceptable for everyone one that we would suggest that we would accept north korea as a nuclear power as an end goal. that's not naive suggesting they don't have nuclear weapons. of course they do. sh but i think we have to think -- you know, north korea experts have this, you know -- most of us have this flaw of, you know, thinking about it in silos.rt if we accept north korea as a nuclear weapons power, a iranian regime will stand up and say, of course, let's renegotiate that nuclear deal and you know what i want, i want the north korea deal. wh i want the deal where i can get a nuclear weapon. ll so we have to be careful about the precedence that we're willing to set here with regard to global nonproliferation. >> one moment. ng in just a few minutes i want to tell our audience here at the institute for peace, we're going to open it up to q&a to all of o you. that's coming in ten or 12 minutes. i'm telling you now so you can get the juices flowing, star

establishing a strong and fair trading relationship with the united states i think it's fair to say that chinese officials are going to be studying every word of that sixty eight page report before giving their official response but let's hear more about what the foreign ministry spokesman had to say about president trump's remarks or meeting in the forum and we're all willing to work with the u.s. to build a strong stable and sound bilateral economic relationship it is in line with the two countries interests and the expectation of the international community and she also reminded journalists that china's two way trade with the united states last year amounted to some fifty five billion dollars and that some two point six million american workers were dependent on that trade so her message was almost why would the united states want to jeopardize any of that but overall as i say nothing here that's going to concern chinese officials too much trouble also singled out north korea promising to take all necessary steps towards achieving to nuclearization on korean peninsula kathy novak

first family of the united states. ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states and mrs. trunk. ♪ >> mr. president and mrs. trunk, merry christmas and happy holidays. trump: thank you very much. we want to wish everybody a merry christmas, a happy new year, unbelievable holidays, and we are now going to light a very beautiful tree, and i will ask our first lady to get ready and maybe we will do a count down from 10. 6, 5,will go 10, 9, 8, 7, 4, 3, 2, 1. [applause] ♪ [applause] >> what a special treat to have these next guys with us. >> please welcome one of the most iconic groups in american music history, the beach boys. [applause] ♪ ["little saint nick" playing] >> please welcome command chaplain from the united states naval academy, father francis foley. >> ladies and gentlemen, please feel free to join me. let us pray. dear lord, fill us with the spirit of kindness. may the message of love and mercy proclaimed by prophets and saints across the centuries remind us to embrace and share all that is g

policy which has been destructive of the united states in this particular case. you have to ask what does the united states and what do americans get out of this they don't get anything out of this essential or this is going to create a lot of problems having been a diplomat overseas myself i can tell you that at the security is going to have to go through the roof of embassies and military installations around the world american tourists are going to be potential targets of terrorism much more so than they are now american businessmen are going to have to consider the security costs of setting up a business overseas so there's going to be a whole lot of downside to this decision this is not just a simple decision about where somebody puts an embassy this has a lot of consequences to it and if you read the media to that that's coming out after this story explaining how it came to to be you'll find that there was a lot of pushback from people in the administration who didn't want to do this but trump and says that he would do it ok greg and same question i mean an

states the united states is not going to be the indispensable nation as madeleine albright presented it's going to be a nation that is looking at regional strategies for its national and international security driven by a very very strong economic currency not only on the dollar now when we have a twenty four thousand plus market going to twenty five thousand by the end of this year but also look at new networks types of currencies in the big come market which is now pushing beyond twenty thousand we're changing how we do money but also we're also changing how we do the guns because ultimately. bulk of the present truck is the national security instrument and it's about the guns and money ok scott let's bring you back in all of his laid out an argument that he used and interesting with the co-op co-operative and i think it was is it more one all of the the other what do you make of that argument or again if you cut through all of his campaign rhetoric he proves my point cooperative competition was the exact phrase used by congolese arise back in two thousand and two thousand and one