Latest Breaking News On - Neil hurst - Page 1 : vimarsana.com
right now, many of you just came from the president who was involved in another listening session with leaders in the fight against domestic and international human trafficking, including representatives from international justice mission and united way. their expertise will be invaluable to the president as he engages with members of congress to raise awareness about and push through legislation aimed at preventing all forms of the horrific and unacceptable practice of the buying and selling of human lives. human trafficking is a dire problem, both domestically and internationally. and solving this epidemic is a huge priority for the president. dedicated men and women from across the federal government has focused on this for some time. and the president is committed to continue working with these organizations and departments. the participant list for this listening session is also going to be available. the president this evening will attend a dinner with the business council. today in mexico secretary tillerson and kelly had productive meetings at the cabinet level with officials from the mexican government. they were forward-looking meetings focused on finding common ground, ways to advance both of our countries' securities and well-being. they had a candid meeting on the breadth of responsibilities on the u.s./mexico relationship. it covered a full range of bilateral issues including energy, legal migration, security, education, exchanges and people-to-people ties. the parties also reiterated our joint commitment to maintaining law and order by stopping potential terrorists and removing drugs and people into the united states. under this president there is no miss taking the rule of law matters along both sides of our border. secretary tillerson and secretary kelly are meeting with president piento this afternoon. that's a continuation of the productive dialogue setting our two countries down a path of greater security and long-term prosperity. looking ahead to our upcoming schedule, tomorrow the president will welcome president peru. there will be a spray at the top of that. further guidance will be provided later today. the president will also speak at cpac tomorrow. i know the president is looking forward to addressing this group of conservative committed individuals. our nation's governors are starting to gather in washington this week for a meeting of the national governors association. the president and first lady will welcome governors to the white house sunday evening. the vice president, members of the cabinet will also be in attendance. while governors are in town they'll meet with members of the cabinet, white house staff and other secretaries, including kel y price and secretary chou have set up a series of meetings. they will participate in nga's winter meeting that take place moun monday morning. next week the president will give a joint session address before both houses of congress. he's currently working with speechwriting team on presenting his vision to the congress and american people. have i a few updates as we're a few days out. the theme of the address will be the renewal of the american spirit. the address will particularly focus on public safety, including defense, increased border security, taking care of our veterans. and then economic opportunity including education, job training, health care reform, jobs and tax and regulatory reform. with that, i'm glad to take a few of your questions. >> reporter: two questions. first, the white house said previously that travel ban was quickly out of necessity for national security. and now we're hearing there's these repeated delays while the new one is being drafted. how do we reconcile those two talking points? that's question one. secondly, the president said today that the deportation is taking place under his watch are military operation. secretary kelly said the military won't be involved in deportations. did the president missneak. >> i'll take the latter first. the president was using that as an adjective. it's happening with precision and in a manner it's being done very, very clearly. i think we made it clear in the past and secretary kelly reiterated it, what kind of operation this was. the president was clearly describing the manner in which this was being done. and so just to be clear on his use of that phrase, and i think the way it's being done, by all accounts, is being done with very much -- a high degree of precision and a flawless manner in terms of making sure the orders are kraerd out and it's dominated -- stream lined and efficient manner. the first part was? >> reporter: first was about the travel ban. >> look, we have made it very clear we believe that the first one was done in compliance with u.s. code and the authority granted to the president. this time the order is finalized. what we're doing is now in the em m implementation phase to make sure when we execute this it's done in a manner that's flawless. it's not a question of delaying. it's a question of getting it right. we've taken the court's opinions and concerns into consideration. but the order is finalized. it's now awaiting implementation. we want to make sure we're working through the departments and agencies so that any concerns or questions on the front end, but we're acting with appropriate haste and diligence to make sure the order is done and in an appropriate manner. yep? >> reporter: a comment about treasury secretary made today. he was asked if we should assume the tax plan the president is about to roll out will take effect in 2018. he said, quote, i think we're looking at that. so, my question to you is, will the president accept a tax proposal that deals with a timeline of implementation in 2018 but not 2017? >> so, the -- secretary mnuchin also made it clear his goal is to have this wrapped up in august. the question is, what you're referring to is what year it actually takes place? so whether it's retro active to tax year 2017 or fiscal 2017? i think as the details -- we'll have more details as it moves forward. two issues, fiscal year 2017 and calendar year 2017. for taxpayers it's obviously tax year -- excuse me, calendar year 2017 that they're probably most concerned with. i think the president, as we work with congress, will have those details to be able to flesh out. i want to go to our first skype of the day. neil hurst. >> good afternoon, sean. thank you for taking my question. appreciate it. c connecticut's governor addressed police chief across the state to avoid taking special action against undocumented immigrants, including detainer requests from i.c.e. what will the repercussions be for the state in terms of federal funding from the trump administration? secondly, does the president's executive order on sanctuary city apply to those who are only declared sanctuary cities? >> well, neil, i think there's a couple things. the idea that governor malloy would not want the law followed as enacted by congress or by the connecticut legislature in any fashion seems to be concerning, right? you -- whether you're a governor or mayor or the president, laws are passed in this country and we expect people and our lawmakers and law enforcement agencies to follow and adhere to the laws as passed by the appropriate level of government. so it's obviously concerning. i think -- it's troubling that that's the message he would send to his people and to other governors, because we are a nation of laws. i think that people need to understand, whether it's laws he passes as governor of connecticut or laws passed through congress and signed by the president, there's a reason our democracy works. because the people speak, our representatives, you know, at every level pass a law and the executive in that particular branch of government signs or vetoes it. and then we live by those rules. the idea you can decide which laws to agree or disagree with or follow or not follow undermines our entire rule of law. i would suggest that is not a great sign to be sending to the people of connecticut and the people of this country, that a particular governor chooses not to follow the duly passed laws of this nation. with respect to sanctuary cities, i think this is an area that the american people by huge amounts support. they recognize their tax dollars shouldn't be spent supporting programs and activities which people are not entitled to. so, i think the president has been very clear on this. if you are a sanctuary city, declared or undeclared, if you are providing benefits or services, we're going to do everything we can to respect taxpayers and ensure your states follow the law. april? >> there was a different comments from the president about, you know, if people in general wanted to use the bathroom in trump tower, she could. what's happened? >> just to be clear. the president was asked at one point, if caitlyn jenner was in trump tower, he said that's great. that's consistent with with everything he said. it's a states rights issue. that's entirely what he believes. that if a state wants to pass a law or rule or an organization wants to do something in compliance with the state law, that's their right. it shouldn't be the federal government getting in the way of this. if you look at this, the law that was passed in 1972 did not contemplate or consider this issue. number two, the procedure for this guidance letter that was done through the obama administration was not properly followed. there was no comment period. there was no input from parents, teachers, students or administrators. none. so, we think about how this was implemented last administration, there was zero input, zero comment period offered. teachers and students never had any say in how this was implemented. number three, there's a reason that the texas court had this matter enjoined. because it didn't follow the law and it had procedural problems. four, as i mentioned, it's a state rights issue. number five, we have to recognize that children do enjoy rights from anti-bullying statues that are in almost every state. there's a difference between being compassionate for individuals and children who are struggling with something, wanting to make sure they're protected and how it's being done. i think the president has a big heart, as we've talked about, and there's a big difference. personally, he addressed this issue when it came up with respect to one of his properties. he also believes that's not a federal -- it's not a federal government issue. it's an issue left to the states. i mean, there's a reason in august of last year that the court enjoined this because it hadn't followed the law and it hadn't -- the procedure, the comment period and the solicitation of opinions and ideas wasn't followed. it was jammed down the process. so, we're actually following the law on this one. i think that's the way it's done. john? >> reporter: the human rights campaign -- >> i wasn't finished. sorry. >> i'm following your question. >> i understand. >> why don't we let april follow on and then we'll get to john, kristen and -- >> reporter: i have something on another issue. on the executive order, we understand the executive order coming out some time this month is supposed to open -- you're working out issues of opening an office specifically to take hbcu issue out of the department of education and bring it directly under the purview of the white house. who will be heading that? have you figured that out? have you also figured out how you will build that office out? i understand that is one of the big pieces of this. >> respectfully, that's why it hasn't been issued yet. we're working it through the process. obviously, that is something we're committed to getting done by the end of black history month. our days are numbered. there's a commitment by the president and the staff to really focus on this issue and give it the proper respect that it deserves. so, if you bear with us a couple more days, i promise you, we'll have more to say on that. >> reporter: so, there will be a department with a -- >> no, no. i want to be clear. i'm not going to get into the details. my blanket statement on nonissued executive orders. i do know there's a commitment by the president and the staff that he has been very clear with us that he wants that done by the end of this month for obvious reasons. now john. >> the human rights campaign, responding to rescinding the guidance last night, it's not a state's rights issue. do you agree it's a civil rights issue? >> it's a question of where it's appropriately addressed. we have to remember, this guidance was enjoined last august by a court. it hasn't been enforced. there was no comment period by anyone, by the human rights campaign, by teachers, parents, students. nobody had any input of this. and it seems to me a little interesting that if this was any other issue, people would be crying foul that the process wasn't followed. the reality is when you look at title 9, it was enacted in 1972. the idea this was even contemplated is pretoss roupost its face. the president certainly understands the issues and the challenges young people face. he believes this is a state issue that needs to be dpraesed by states, as he does with a lot of other issues we've talked about. we are a states' rights parties. the president on a lot of issues believe on these various issues being states' rights. i don't know why this would be any different. it's how the guidance was issued, it's the legal basis on which it was ordered. it fell short on a lot of stuff. it wasn't us that did this. it was the court that stepped in and said they didn't follow the procedure of the law back in august of last year sxen joined the case. >> i understand all that. just wonder if the white house disagrees that this is a civil rights? >> it's whether it's appropriately addressed. as i noted, it's appropriately addressed at the state level. kelly? >> does the president believe, personally believe, that any student who is transgender should be able to use the bathroom of their choice? his personal belief. >> the president believes it's a state's rights issue. he's not -- i understand what you're asking. as april pointed out, when the issue came to one of his own properties, he was very clear. again, what he doesn't want to do is force his issues or beliefs down -- he believes it's a state's rights issue. >> the public may want to know where the president -- >> i understand that. he's very sympathetic to children who deal with that and this is up to states and schools within a particular district to address how they want to accommodate that and not be prescripted from washington. that's what the president believes. zeke. >> thanks, sean. you mentioned that it was enjoined by a court. that same criticism has been levied on the administration's first executive order, the travel ban. why are you relying on that same, you know, enjoined by a federal court criticism of the process for one but not the other? >> i think there's a big difference. i mean, there is no way that you can read title xi from 1972, anybody, and say that was even contemplated back then. there is nobody possibly suggesting that the law that was passed in 1972 did that. number two, there was zero comment period put forward on this guidance, which is in violation of how it was executed. so, there's a big -- hold on. let me answer the question. there is also a strong reading when you read 1182 u.s. code that it is very clear that the president does have the authority. so, they are very much apples and oranges issues. one, it's very clear that the president is told by congress in u.s. code he has the authority to do what's necessary to protect the american people. that's -- and there's no way anybody above a fifth grade reading level could interpret that difference. there is a difference looking at a statute from 1972 -- again, it's a multifaceted thing. when you look at how the guidance was issued, there was a zero comment period. nobody was able to weigh in on that situation back then. and so when you're talking about forcing schools to make a huge accommodation from the federal level, schools, parents, teachers, kids, were not able to have any input in that decision from washington, i think it's a very, very clear difference. john. >> thank you, sean. just going back two weeks in a story that got relatively little attention at the time, chuck cooper, very distinguished lawyer, asked that his name be withdrawn when he was on the periphery of being named u.s. solicitor general. so, my question is a two-parter. first, can you confirm or deny the administration is now vetting mr. mcwell estrada, former nominee for the court of appeals as solicitor general before the visa delay case gets to the supreme court? and second, mr. cooper said that he did not want to go through the same experience that jeff sessions, his good friend, did when he had the confirmation hearings and the vote in the senate. does that make the president a little discouraged about getting the nominees he wants for some very important positions? >> well, thanks, john. i'd say, on the first part, as you know, and i'll give you the same answer we give executive orders, we don't comment on personnel decisions until they're made, until they're finalized, so i've got nothing for that. on the second part, what i would say is the president is very confident we have a deep bench of folks who during the transition we talked about this, a number of people who have expressed a huge interest in joining the president in fulfilling this agenda. and that list is robust and long. however, that being said, i think for folks who have to go through the senate confirmation and to watch what has happened to some of these fine individuals, the delay tactics, the tearing apart of their personal lives, it is discouraging for some of these people, i think, in terms of mr. cooper and others, who are looking at the process saying, i would like to be part of this administration helpful fill this agenda, but this is what they have to go through. while this is somewhat of an isolated case, i definitely understand what he's talking about here. and i think, you know, those are few and far between, but i think that when you realize what is happening largely at the expense of senate democrats in terms of dragging these people through a very, very delayed and arduous process for purely political points, you know, i think that there are some people who could look at that process and potentially say, i don't want to serve. luckily, we've not come to that beyond a handful of folks. largely people have huge desire and are willing to make great sacrifice both financially and personally to serve in the administration because i think they understand what potential change this president is bringing to this country and to the city. so, but i understand his point. [ inaudible ] >> you talked about decision. the homeland security secretary said there won't be mass deportation. is it the president's intent or desire that people are here with a simple traffic violation, those people will be subject to deportation? >> i think everybody who is in this country for obvious reasons --fy you overstay a visa, if you commit a crime, you can't by the very nature of you not being legal you can be subject to deportation. that's by definition. being in this country is a privilege not a right. if you are a visitor. i think we have a right to make sure the people who are in this country are here foregood and peaceful processes. as i've said over and over again, there is a big difference. the president recognizes there are millions of people in the country who are not here legally. and that we have to have a very systematic and pragmatic and methodical process of going through those individuals to make sure the people who pose a threat to public safety or have a criminal record are the first that are gone. what we've done, just to be clear, is to untie the hands of i.c.e. and border patrol agents and say, your job is to enforce the law. first and foremost, to figure out who poses a threat to us. in the previous administration, their hands have been tied. there was exception after exception after exception. and the fact of the matter is we have -- we're a nation of laws and we have to have a system of legal immigration that is respected. i'm not going to be prescriptive in terms of what i.c.e.'s job s but needless to say, their job and their mission is to protect the country and enforce our borders and immigration laws. and the president has basically instructed them to carry out their mission. and so the priorities, as we've discussed over and over and over again. is to do that in a way that is in accordance with the law and also prioritizes those people that pose a threat. i'm going to robey brock from talk business politics in arkansas. >> hi. thanks, sean. robey brock, from arkansas, the home of the rowdiest town halls in the nation. i have a question on medical marijuana. our state voters passed a medical marijuana amendment in november. now we're in conflict with federal law, as many other states are. the obama administration kind of chose not to districtly enforce those federal marijuana laws. my question to you is with jeff sessions over at the department of justice and his ag, what's going to be the trump administration's position on marijuana legalization where it's in state/federal conflict like this? >> nanthanks. there's two distinct issues -- medical marijuana and recreational marijuana. medical mayrijuana, i said before, the president understands the pain and suffering that many people go through who are facing especially terminal diseases and the comfort that some of these drugs, including medical marijuana, can bring to them. that's one congress through a rider in 2011, looking for a little help, put in an appropriations bill saying the department of justice wouldn't -- wouldn't be funded to go after those folks. there's a big difference between that and recreational marijuana. and i think that when you see something like the opioid addiction crisis blossoming in so many states around this country, the last thing we should be doing is encouraging people. there is still a federal law we need to abide by in terms of the medical -- when it comes to recreational marijuana and drugs of that nature. i think there's a big difference between medical marijuana. states that -- the states where it's allowed in accordance with the appropriations rider have set forth a process to administer and regulate that usage versus recreational marijuana. that's a very different subject. shannon? shannon -- glenn, this isn't a tv program. shannon -- you don't get to just yell out questions. we'll raise our hands like big boys and girls because it's not your job to just yell out questions. shannon, please go. >> reporter: first, on the manufacturing summit. was the afl-cio invited? yeah i did want to follow up on this medical marijuana question. so, is the federal government then going to take some sort of action around this recreational marijuana incident in states? >> that's a question for the department of justice. i think you'll see greater enforce many of it. because, again, there's a big difference between the medical use, which congress has through an appropriations rider in 2014 made very clear what the intent of -- of what their intent was in terms of how the department of justice would handle that issue. that's very different than the recreational use, which is something the department of justice, i think, will be further looking into. i'm sorry, shannon, what was the first part? >> reporter: was the afl-cio invited to the manufacturing summit? >> i think this was just focused on people who actually -- they were not, i don't believe, part of this one. as you know, we've had union representation at other meetings. i think this was specifically for people who are hiring people. and the impediments they're having to create additional jobs, hire more people. obviously, while the president values their opinion, and that's why they've been involved in some of this, this was specifically a manufacturing, people who hire, people who manufacture, people who grow the economy, and that's a vastly different situation. andre? >> reporter: thank you. question on russia. general dunford have had meetings. is the president pleased with the meetings? >> yes. >> reporter: what comes next? >> both of them had an opportunity to meet with their counterparts in different locations, ironically o the same day. i believe that was yesterday. and they both had very, very productive discussions. the president was very pleased with the outcome of that and so i would refer you back to both general dunford and secretary tillerson on those. >> reporter: are you discussing the where and when for the summit for the leaders meeting? >> i don't have any updates on that. i'll look into that. cecilia. >> reporter: i want to clarify, make sure i understand what you said. you said you will see greater enforcement of it? >> i would refer to you the department of justice. i know what -- i know what -- i think that's what i said. but i think the department of justice is the lead on that. it is something that you should follow up with them. i believe that they are -- they are going to continue to enforce the laws on the books with respect to recreational marijuana. >> reporter: now my real question. >> the first one was pretty real. >> reporter: ivanka trump was in the white house today for a meeting on human trafficking. she had this meeting on ceos. we saw her in a smaller session here at the white house today. what exactly is her role here? >> i think her role is to be helpful and provide input on a variety of areas she has deep passion and concerns about, especially areas of women in the workforce and empowering women. she is someone who has a lot of expertise and wants to offer that, especially in the area of trying to help women. she understands that firsthand. and i think because of the success she's had, her goal is to figure out any understanding as a businesswoman to use her expertise and understanding to help and empower women, have the same kind of success she's had. >> reporter: a formal role? >> no, nothing more than you've seen now. i think last night the meeting she had in baltimore was one she did on her own. there's areas she's cared very passionately about before her time in the white house or, you know, before her father coming to the white house, rather, and now that her father's in the white house, that she continues to seek a platform that helps empower and lift up women and give them opportunities and think of ways they can be. >> reporter: thanks. on the human trafficking meeting today, the president said, well, when you talk about solving this kind of problem, that's a nice word, but it's really -- he suggested that more likely he could help out on that. what's his definition of success? what's his goal? is he looking at stronger criminal penalties -- >> as i read out earlier. the president understands this is a serious problem, both for adults, particularly for children sold domestically and internationally. it's why we brought these groups in, is to make sure we figure out, how do we make that number as clowe to zese to zero as pos. we institute policies domestically and abroad to work with our partners and figure out how to combat the trafficking of people. so, it's -- it's things we can be forceful in terms of the rhetoric that the president uses, but also the enforcement tools they use domestically and internationally. >> reporter: has the president been briefed at all on the situation at standing rock? is he concerned a standoff with protesters could slow down his executive order on pipelines? >> our team has been involved with the tribe and the governor there. so, we are not -- we're constantly in touch with them. and i think we feel very confident that we will move forward to get the pipeline moving. so, we'll have a further update on that. i think we're in constant contact with officials there. kristen. >> reporter: i want to start on the transgender directive. 82% of transgender children report feeling unsafe at school. so, isn't the president leaving some of these children open to vulnerable to being bullied at school? >> no. there are bullying laws and policies in place in almost every one of these schools. >> reporter: transgender children say their experiences not being able to use the bathroom they feel comfortable -- >> but you're missing the point here, kristen. the president said literally it should be a state decision. he respects the decision of the state -- >> reporter: it's a state's -- >> you're trying to make an issue out of something that doesn't exist. the court stopped this in august of last year. so, where would the questions last year in august about this? it wasn't implemented correctly, legally, and the procedure wasn't followed. because the court found at the time that it didn't have the authority to do that. so, you're asking us why we're following the law that wasn't followed. and the realities -- hold on. >> reporter: reversing -- >> we're not reversing it. hold on. we're not reversing it. that is a misinterpretation of the scenario. the court stopped it. it enjoined it in august of last year. because it wasn't properly drafted and it didn't follow the procedures. and there was no legal basis for it in a law that was instituted in 1972. hold on. for you to use those terms, frankly, doesn't reflect what the situation actually is and how it happened. that's just -- so, to talk about us reversing something that was stopped by the courts -- >> i understand that. you're sending a message -- >> notice, we're not. we're basically saying it's a state's rights issue. if the state chooses to do it, as i mentioned to april at this circumstance came up at one of the president's own properties he was very clear on it. so for you to turn around and say, what message is the president sending? i think the message is he's a guy with a heart, that understands the troubles many people go through. he also believes the proper legal recourse for this is with the states. he believes in the state's ability to determine what's right for their state versus another state. >> reporter: i understand what you're saying. but the lbgtq community said yesterday what -- >> i understand. there's a difference between what people may or may not feel and the legal process. and the law. and the law right now doesn't allow for it under title ix that was passed in 1972. the court saw this in august of last year for a reason. all we're doing is saying the proper place for this is in the states. and so to -- for you to suggest what message is this sending, it's very simple. it's a state's rights issue and the states should enact laws that reflect the values, principles and will of the people in their particular state. that's it. plain and simple. >> reporter: on obamacare very quickly. former house speaker john boehner predicted a full repeal and replace of obamacare is not going to happen. he went on to say most of the framework of the affordable care act that's going to be there. do you think he has a point? are you -- >> i think, look, i think what we're going to end up with is something i've talked about over and over again. we're going to end up with a more accessible plan that will allow people to see more doctors, have more providers and drive costs down. nose are the two guiding principles we're going to have in what the president is going to work with congress to put forward on. that's it. plain and simple. >> reporter: on roads and highways in the united states, in many places around the country potholes and other issues are affecting the way in which americans travel. the president said he would fix these issues during the campaign. what is the status on that? has the president spoken to heads of d.o.t.? >> i think the president is addressing that through the budget process. it will be out in mid-march. those -- the infrastructure projects and priorities the president has talked about, whether it's air control and our airports or roads and bridges will be something that he's going to work with d.o.t., but also talk about in his budget and you'll see more in his joint address to congress. with that, lauren staples of kcei nbc in montana. >> montana has hundreds of miles of border with canada. according to the department of transportation, almost 1 million people come across that border into montana each year. what are the administration's plans to increase security on the canadian border? and does the administration have any plans to build a wall there? >> well, we're obviously concerned -- thank you -- at all sorts of immigration in this country, whether it's from our northern border or southern border. i think the president understands our southern border is where we have more of a concern in terms of the number of people and the type of activity that's coming over there in terms of cartels and drug activity. but that doesn't mean that we're not pertaining attention to our northern border as well. we will continue to both monitor and take steps necessary at our northern border to ensure the safety of all americans. yes, sir. >> reporter: thanks, sean. one question and follow-up on dakota access pipeline. this week was the first week, i believe, that the trump administration launched freedom of navigation operations in the south china sea. can you give us a sense of how frequently you're going to be doing those? and then on the dakota access pipeline a few weeks ago, president trump said he would try to negotiate a solution between the standing rocks sioux and energy transfer partners. why hasn't the president intervened and tried to initiate those negotiations yet? >> so, on the latter, our team has been in contact with both -- all the parties involved. they have been working and communicating back and forth. so, if we have an update on that, but there has been work at the staff level between the parties. and then on the second -- on the first part, you know, i've got no further update on terms of the frequency by which we'll have stuff. alexis. >> reporter: in reuters, the president described again this -- [ inaudible ] can you describe what it is the president has as a time frame? >> let's be clear. what he was very clear on is the united states will not yield its supremacy in this area to anybody. that's what he made very clear in there. and then if other countries have nuclear capabilities, it will always be the united states that has the supreme supremacy and commitment to this. obviously, that's not what we're seeking to do. the question that was asked was about other people growing their stockpiles. i think what he has been clear on is our goal is to make sure that we maintain america's dominance around the world and that if other countries flout is, we don't sit back and allow them to grow theirs. >> reporter: domestic policy question and then a foreign policy question, if you will. you said yesterday that the president had named a task force on the voter fraud probe. when did he name that task force specifically? >> i think two weeks ago he announced that vice president pence would lead that task force and that the vice president and his team were starting to look at members -- >> reporter: you're referring to the interview in which he said there would be a task force and not that something has happened since then? >> that's correct. >> reporter: on foreign policy, the president said in his saturday campaign speech the gulf states would be paying for that safe zone in syria. what gulf states was he referring to? >> if you look at the readout he's had with several foreign leaders, that's brought up and mentioned in almost every single one of them. he talked about financing the safe zone and commitment they need to make to those. and i think, by and large, we've had widespread commitment. when we have an update on -- i think that's an issue that's going to be ongoing at secretary of state level as well, where you saw secretary tillerson follow up on that with numerous folks. we'll have further updates on the funding of safe zones as we go forward. but there has been a general commitment by most of these heads of government to share in the president's commitment to help fund these things. i'll go to steve of wjim in michigan. >> thank you, sean. i greatly appreciate it. i'd like to talk to you more about tax policy, if i may. president trump, of course, on the campaign trail talked a lot about tax policy and tax reform. that hasn't happened yet, as we know. i want to talk about something different, that's the border adjustability tax. with the manufacturers at the white house today, states like michigan, wisconsin, others have a great concern about this tax. there seems to be a disconnect between some ceos, some republicans on capitol hill and the president as to whether or not this is appropriate. i guess the question is, could this tax have a chilling affect on manufacturing at times when places like ohio, the upper midwest are trying to jump start the economy with manufacturing jobs? i wish for you to clarify, if you could, the president's position. >> yeah, steve, thank you. i think the president has been clear from the beginning, there is no tax if companies manufacture in the united states. we're only a handful of countries that doesn't tax the imports that come into our country. almost every other country operates their tax code under that system. so what happens is, we have a system by which companies abroad can send their products -- tax our products going into their country, institute an import tax, and then their products come into the united states with no import tax. which frankly gives a disincentive for companies to stay in the united states, to manufacture in the united states, to hire in the united states. and it tilts the field against the american worker. so, the president is looking at the tax policy that encourages manufacturing and job creation in the united states. and if -- >> where is he on this border adjustability tax? where is he on this tax specifically? >> i understand that. i think what he's doing is he met yesterday with his team on the budget. he's talked to secretary mnuchin and others who are working on a comprehensive tax reform plan. remember, steve, this isn't something that's been done since 1986. so, as we look at it, part of that is to make sure that we lower our corporate tax rate, that we make it more attractive to manufacture and grow jobs in the united states, to make our companies more competitive with companies overseas that, frankly, have better tax treatment than our other companies who stay in the united states. creating more of a playing field that encourages manufacturing and growing and creating in the united states. but make no mistake, if a company is in the united states already, and expanding in the united states, it will be only to their benefit. it actually -- if you think about it right now, the way the current tax code works, it almost incentivizes companies from leaving the united states, manufacturing and expanding overseas and then sending their goods and services back to the united states, which undermines our own economy, undermines our workers -- >> but the question is about components -- >> i understand that, steve. >> being manufactured. >> i understand you're on the skype. we only do one or two follow-ups. but the answer is that he's working toward comprehensive tax reform. we'll have a plan out within the next few weeks that will address that. yeah? >> reporter: sean, on guidance the administration not only rescinded it but sent a letter to the supreme court informing them about the change as it relates to another case. does it weigh on the way the supreme court should rule? >> i'm sorry o -- i'm sorry. removing the guidance clearly does. if the guidance that was put forward by the obama administration, which clearly hadn't been done in a proper way in terms of how they solicited or didn't solicit comments, the guidance put forward obviously sends a signal to the court on where the administration stands on this issue. yeah? >> reporter: can i ask you about syria. two quick questions. first, the talks are starting, peace talks in geneva. he says he's not detected a clear strategy on the political tra tract from the united states. what is the president's thinking on that? in particular, what is his thinking on the president of assad, whether he can stay on in a transition -- >> i would refer you to the state department on the status of the talks. i understand that. it's one of the things the president, whether it's safe zones or how we deal with syria and the problems -- >> reporter: but, i'm thinking on the key point -- >> i understand that. thank you. >> reporter: can i -- >> no. >> reporter: on other question on syria. northern syria, an important development on the battlefield, creates some space in that that town is full of turks and opposition. is that the sort of space that the president would like to see a safe zone? >> i don't -- we're not trying to be preciptive in terms of a geographic location of a safe zone. right now the president's goal is to get commitments from other world leaders, in terms of the funding and commitment to share in how we do that. so, i don't want to -- we're not looking to be prescriptive today in how it's done. i think overall we need a greater commitment in the region to make sure that people are committed to a strategy and to safe zones, to allow that to stop some of the human suffering that's going on and create, while other -- while the rest of the conflict ensues. i think that we've got -- we've got to dual track this. deal with the conflict as a whole, how we address it, deal with isis and combating it. there's a humanitarian piece to this as well with respect to the safe zones. i think we're looking at both pieces of this as well. >> reporter: thanks, sean. since the election secretary of state rex tillerson has expressed some disquiet about pulling out of the paris agreement and climate change and the president has also heard from some world leaders about that. can you tell us, is the president still committed to pulling out of the paris agreement on climate change? >> i will leave that to secretary tillerson. that's a conversation he's having with him as far as where we are on that. >> reporter: sean, thanks very much. just a follow-up to the syria question. do you have any timeline when it comes to when he wants to see the safe zones built? and i wanted to go back to the executive order on immigration. you talked about these dual track, where you'll doing the new executive order and still fighting that in court. can you give us a status update on where that legal fight is and what we should see happening? >> so, with respect to the executive order, there are several courts that this be is being fought in, ten or so. we continue to deal with that in all of those venues. and then, again, i guess the only way to say this, and obviously on the dual track side, we have the additional executive order we talked about earlier that will come out and further address the problems. we continue to believe that the issues that we face specifically in the ninth district -- ninth circuit, rather, we will reveil on the merits of that. the other challenges that have come in other ven use that we feel equally confident, as we did in massachusetts and other venues. it's not a single-track system. i'm sorry? >> reporter: have you made a decision about the supreme court taking it there and the other question was on the safe zones. >> yeah, so with respect to the supreme court. i mean, we've got to continue to work this through the process. right now it's at the ninth circuit. that's the primary problem that we are addressing. and that we don't have any timeline that i can announce today on syrian safe zones. >> reporter: i just want to follow up to this morning's meeting. and the president said that he gave authorization to a couple of countries to buy military equipment from the united states. which countries was he referring to? and has he gone to congress to ask for permission -- >> we're follow up and get a list for you on that. so, jeff. >> reporter: if i could ask again about the delay of the -- on the executive order until next week. is the administration still trying to craft its legal argument to this to withstand scrutiny or why again the delay? i don't understand. >> and i think i asked and answered this earlier. >> reporter: i didn't understand. >> okay. then i'll explain it to you. i think the president this time, we were very careful to understand what the court's concerns were and address them in the follow-up executive order. with respect to when we're going to announce it, part of this is to make sure we work with the appropriate departments and agencies on the implementation of it, to make sure it is executed and continued to be executed in a flawless manner, it meets the intent it was served. we understand the challenges that may come, so we want to do this in a manner that makes sure that hill, other members of congress, the appropriate agencies and departments are fully ready to implement this when it's issued. and so that's it. there's really nothing more to it. >> reporter: there also is concern inside the justice department and in homeland security by some officials this afternoon that were reporting that the white house is looking for them to help understand this legal argument to find a conclusion here. >> no, that's not -- we -- basically you're saying we did our due diligence. we looked to the departments to ask them to review certain things. so, last week it was, we rushed stuff. this week you're saying we are taking our time. >> reporter: it's more difficult -- >> no, that's not true. i don't think so. and i think you using continued unnamed sources, i think it's actually being impe -- it will be implemented flawlessly because we've done the right thing and gone to these individuals, sought feedback and guidance, and done this in an unbelievably comprehensive way to ensure the departments and agencies that are going to be executing and implementing this fully are aware of what's happening. but there is -- this has been done in a very, very comprehensive way. yeah, sorry. >> reporter: thank you, sean. melanie, cnsnews.com. former labor secretary puzder admitted for a few years he employed a housekeeper. is this administration committed to holding employers accountable when they employ illegal aliens and how does the administration plan to do so? >> i think that issue was something mr. puzder was very forthcoming on. when he recognized the situation that had occurred, he paid all the appropriate taxes and tried to help the individual go through the proper process. so, yeah, we're going to continue to make sure that we hold individuals in compliance with the law. he did the right thing then. but whether it's companies or individuals, i think, we are committed to making sure that people do what's right. yes, ma'am. >> reporter: two questions. janet sang the national anthem, she requested a meeting with the president, her sister is transgender. is he going to take that meeting or meet with anyone from the transgender community during this conversation? >> i think the president would be welcome to meet with her. >> reporter: the second question. steve bannon today called the opposition party last week there was lots of conversation about the fake news. some have said that this is really just a branding of the media, of where he did that in the primaries, branding little marco and lying ted. >> that was the president. >> reporter: but is this a branding strategy to -- >> no, i think that's what believes. absolutely. of course it's real. i don't think you go out -- steve has been clear about his position on the media and how he believes it distorts things. i don't think -- >> the whole administration. >> i -- i just said that that is what steve's view is. he has made it several times. he is very clear on this. sara. >> back to the border adjustment tax. president trump told reuters he supports some form of a border adjustment tax. they're saying it will be passed on to consumers. >> there can be no higher cost if you're manufacturing in the united states. we have to look at this in a wholistic way. when a company chooses to leave our country and shed american jobs so they can move overseas and sell back to us at a lower price, there is a big cost that comes to our economy and to our workers. so we have to look at this comprehensively. if a company chooses to stay and grow in the united states, hire more people, it will be a net savings if you think about it. it will be the companies who are overseas who have chosen to move out of the country who will face a higher cost under these kinds of plans. that's a big difference. it will actually benefit consumers, benefit workers and benefit our economy. when you think about the economic impact about that, that benefits our economy, it helps our american workers, it grows more jobs, it grows the manufacturing base. and, again, it's -- we are probably one of only a handful of developed countries that don't have a tax system that looks at this. and so right now it's america and american workers and american manufacturing that are at the disadvantage of the current regulatory and fax system, not the other way around. thank you, guys. have a great day. let's touch base tomorrow in some way. i will see you then. tune into cpac to see the president. >> has the president spoken to anyone in mexico? >> hello. you were just watching the white house press secretary sean spicer in the white house briefing room. gave a rather lengthy briefing. we'll get to it for the abbreviated 3:00 p.m. hour. coming out of the briefing is katy tur. donald trump said in exclusive to reuters he wants to expand the u.s. nuclear arsenal. says he wants to make it the top of the pack. a tweet he put out. he said the united states must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes. is this trump policy or trump unplugged? >> a little bit of both. trump unplugged is trump policy. remember he texted mika brzezinski a month or so ago and said let it be an arms race between you and russia. his nuclear position is much different than what we've seen with pretty much decades of past presidents trying to tamp down on nuclear weapons, trying to lessen the number of them around the world. there is the treaty between the u.s. and russia which puts a cap on nuclear weapons. donald trump already said he felt that was not a fair treaty and that he wanted to look into it again. so this is just an expansion of that. we have to wait and see the full interview from reuters. they've only so far released a few clips of it. sean spicer was asked about it, and he said that we are not going to cede our nuclear supremacy to anybody else. >> joining me as well this afternoon along with katy, kristen welker who joins us from the white house as well as jamaal simmons. charlie sykes and christopher matthews. you were in the room for the briefing. lots of stuff discussed. seems like the most questions that were thrown at sean spicer today were about the transgender bathroom order issued yesterday by the president. >> you're absolutely right, jacob. he got a number of questions about that very topic. i pressed him on that topic. and a couple of different points there. one, does the president see this as a civil rights issue. spicer went back to the talking point, the position of the president, which is that the president sees this as a states' rights issue. i pushed him on that point and said, look, more than 80% of transgender kids feel bullied in school. is the president not leaving those kids open to and vulnerable to increased bullying. sean spicer very defensive about that. he went back to that same argument that, look, this is a states' rights issue. it's something that has to be sorted out in the courts. so expect this to continue to be the topic of debate. obviously you had a lot of strong backlash yesterday from the lgbtq community, from the human rights campaign, which released a very strong statement essentially calling the reversal of the obama era directive an attack on transgender children. so i think that's why you saw so many questions here today about that very topic. another headline, jacob, that i thought came out of this briefing, sean spicer was pressed on comments that the president made earlier today in which he indicated that the military would help with deportations. that's something that his own dhs secretary has said is not going to happen. spicer clarifying that point and saying, look, what the president meant was more of an adjective. so i think that's an exchange that might ultimately need further clarification. and then one other thing that stood out to me, this discussion about medical versus recreational use of marijuana. spicer saying that doj was looking into potentially enforcing punishment for recreational use of marijuana. so those were a couple headlines that i think we hadn't heard prior to this briefing, and undoubtedly a couple of headlines that will be discussed as we have seen all across the country republican lawmakers getting pressed on some of the issues that have bubbled up here at the white house. so i expect this conversation to continue well beyond this briefing room, jacob. >> no doubt about that, kristen. kiff i want to go to you jamaal and everybody else for a quick lightning round. kristen talked about the transgender bathroom and the president saying deportations would be a military operation. sean spicer saying that was more of an adjective. is that an adequate response? >> what's clear is that you just can't trust anything that president trump says from one minute to the next. he said in the primaries about caitlyn jenner, he thought it would be fine if she used whatever bathroom she wanted to at trump tower. signalling to people this is something he wouldn't come down against and here he is as president coming down against it. everything is on the table with this president. you can't trust anything. >> also the border adjustment tax, tax policy for the trump administration. sean spicer, again, not particularly direct on the issue of whether or not things like components in manufacturing companies would be taxed and what the ramifications of that would be. you have reported this out a little bit. what did you make of the exchange? >> treasury secretary mnuchin was out today saying they want to have a tax bill out by august. this is the border adjustment tax in the house. senate has a different opinion. they don't want there to be differences between manufacturing taxes here or abroad. and then trump has really yet to come down either way. you saw that again today. >> to charlie sykes. on a day when two people i think rarely, if ever, have appeared together in public for a public conversation, reince priebus and steve bannon, took the stage at cpac. little discussion of it actually in the white house briefing room. i wanted to ask you about that because that dominated much of our conversation before this hour. what did you make of these two republicans, perhaps just in name only, they're so far apart on so many other issues. at least that's the perception. what did you make of them appearing together today? >> it's a high priority for them to try to knock down the stories about the rivalry and chaos within the white house. but the reality, of course, is that the white house is chaotic and there are rivalries in the white house. cpac. they had one job this year which was to cooperate with the trump administration but not allow trump and the trumpists to define conservativism. they haven't done that. when kellyanne conway said tomorrow cpac will be tpac as in trump-pac, i think she -- you know, she inadvertently stumbled on exactly what's going on with conservatives and cpac this week. >> kristen, back to you. in the briefing room at the cpac meeting earlier today bannon anticipated to hammer home the message of the media as the opposition party. >> right. >> he said that we're not talking about the message of economic nationalism, america first, that the trump administration wants to be talking about. what was your take on what we heard outside the white house briefing room today from inside the white house briefing room? >> sean spicer was asked about those comments and asked if he thinks that steve bannon really believes that, that the media is the opposition party. he said of course he believes it. look, this feeds into a broader narrative and thinking here within the white house, jacob, which is that the media doesn't understand them, underestimates president trump and has done so throughout the presidential campaign. i think they also see this as a way to fire up the base. so i think that this is the type of language that isn't going away and they're not apologizing for it. we saw that on display here with sean spicer. >> to kristen welker, my fellow member of the opposition party. jamaal simmons. kristen welker, charlie sykes. that finishes up things for me. i'll see you tomorrow at 3:00 p.m. you can look for me. i'm steve kornacki, live in new york. day 35 of the first 100 days. topping our agenda, a rare public appearance. >> in regard to us two, i think the biggest misconception is everything that you're reading. >> president trump's top aides, including the normally
New-yorkUnited-statesArkansasCanadaMontanaParisFrance-general-FranceTexasWashingtonTurkeyWisconsin