State of Hawaii v. Trump

Filing 171

MOTION for Leave to File BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER, Nickolas A. Kacprowski appearing for Amicus Parties American Muslim Health Professionals, Muppies, Inc., Muslim Advocates, Network of Arab-American Professionals, The National Arab American Medical Association (Attachments: # 1 Corporate Disclosure Statement, # 2 Main Document, # 3 Exhibit A, # 4 Certificate of Service)(Kacprowski, Nickolas)

Download PDF
ALSTON HUNT FLOYD & ING Nickolas A. Kacprowski 8627 1001 Bishop Street, Suite 1800 Honolulu, Hawai`i 96813 Telephone: (808) 524-1800 Facsimile: (808) 524-4591 E-mail: ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP Anton A. Ware (Appearing pro hac vice) Three Embarcadero Center Tenth Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 471-3100 Facsimile: (415) 471-3400 E-mail: Attorneys for Amici Curiae Muslim Advocates; American Muslim Health Professionals; Muppies, Inc.; The National Arab American Medical Association; and Network of Arab-American Professionals [SEE NEXT PAGE FOR ADDITIONAL COUNSEL] IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAI`I STATE OF HAWAI`I and ISMAIL ELSHIKH, Plaintiffs, v. DONALD J. TRUMP, in his official capacity as President of the United States; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; JOHN F. KELLY, in his official capacity as Secretary of Homeland Security; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE; REX TILLERSON, in his official capacity as Secretary of State; and the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants. 984086v1 \ NM ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. CV 17-00050 DKW-KSC MUSLIM ADVOCATES, AMERICAN MUSLIM HEALTH PROFESSIONALS, MUPPIES, INC., THE NATIONAL ARAB AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, AND NETWORK OF ARAB-AMERICAN PROFESSIONALS' BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER; DECLARATION OF ANTON A. WARE; EXHIBITS “1” – “38”; CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE [Dkt. No. 65] EXHIBIT A ADDITIONAL COUNSEL MUSLIM ADVOCATES Johnathan James Smith (Appearing pro hac vice) Junaid Sulahry (Appearing pro hac vice) P.O. Box 71080 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (415) 692-1484 Facsimile: (415) 765-1774 E-mail: 984086v1 \ NM TABLE OF CONTENTS I.  INTERESTS OF AMICI CURIAE...................................................................1  II.  INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................2  III.  ARGUMENT ...................................................................................................6  A.  The Motives for the Executive Order Are Not Immune From Judicial Review .....................................................................................6  B.  The Executive Order Is Animated By Anti-Muslim Bias .....................8  1.  2.  The Executive Order Reflects Anti-Muslim Bias on its Face ..16  4.  The Development of the Executive Order Demonstrates that its National Security Justifications are Pretextual ....................18  5.  IV.  The Context of the Executive Order Confirms that It Is the Same Basic Policy As the Revoked Executive Order.........13  3.  C.  The President’s Own Repeated Statements Confirm that the Revoked Executive Order Was Intended to Implement His Campaign Pledge to Put a Temporary Halt on Muslims Entering the United States ..........................................................8  That the Executive Order Halts Immigration by Many but Not All Muslims In No Way Defeats Plaintiffs’ Allegations of Animus ..................................................................................22  The Executive Order Disproportionately Impacts Muslims ...............23  CONCLUSION..............................................................................................24  984086v1 \ NM i TABLE OF AUTHORITIES FEDERAL CASES Access Fund v. U.S. Dep’t of Agriculture, 499 F.3d 1036 (9th Cir. 2007) .............................................................................. 4 Aziz v. Trump, No. 1:17-cv-116-LMB-TCB, 2017 WL 580855 (E.D. Va. Feb. 13, 2017) ......................................................... 5 City of Cleburne, Tex. v. Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. 432 (1985) ............................................................................................ 24 Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347 (1976) .............................................................................................. 6 Hunter v. Underwood, 471 U.S. 222 (1985) ............................................................................................ 19 INS v. Pangilinan, 486 U.S. 875 (1988) .............................................................................................. 8 Kerry v. Din, 135 S. Ct 2128, 2131 (2015). .........................................................................8, 18 McCreary County v. Am. Civil Liberties Union, 545 U.S. 844 (2005) ........................................................................................6, 19 Nguyen v. INS, 533 U.S. 53 (2001) ................................................................................................ 7 Pers. Adm’r of Massachusetts v. Feeney, 442 U.S. 256 (1979) ............................................................................................ 18 Shaw v. Hunt, 517 U.S. 899 (1996) ............................................................................................ 19 Shelby Cty., Ala. v. Holder, 133 S. Ct. 2612 (2013) ........................................................................................ 14 Statharos v. New York City Taxi and Limousine Comm’n, 198 F.3d 317 (2d Cir.1999) .................................................................................. 6 984086v1 \ NM ii Washington v. Trump, 847 F.3d 1151 (9th Cir. 2017) ..............................................................5, 7, 18, 19 Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001) .............................................................................................. 7 DOCKETED CASES Hawai`i v. Trump, No. 1:17-cv-00050-DKW-KSC (D. Haw. Mar. 7, 2017) ..................................... 7 Washington v. Trump, No. 2:17-cv-00141-JLR (W.D. Wash. Feb. 3, 2017) ......................................... 14 Washington v. Trump, No. 17-35105 (9th Cir. Feb. 16, 2017) ............................................................... 15 OTHER AUTHORITIES Fifteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution ....................................................... 13 Kambiz Ghanea Bassiri, A History of Islam in America: From the New World to the New World Order (Cambridge 2010) ................................... 24 January 27, 2017 “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States” (the “Revoked Executive Order”) ..........................passim Revoked Executive Order § 1 ............................................................................. 16 Revoked Executive Order § 5(b) ........................................................................ 12 Revoked Executive Order § 5(e) ........................................................................ 12 March 6, 2017 “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States” (the “Executive Order”) .........................................passim Executive Order § 1 .............................................................................................. 5 Executive Order § 1(b)(4) ..................................................................................... 5 Executive Order § 1(h) ....................................................................................... 20 Resolution 1327 (2003) of the Council of Europe................................................... 17 984086v1 \ NM iii Amici Curiae Muslim Advocates, American Muslim Health Professionals, Muppies, Inc., The National Arab American Medical Association, and Network of Arab-American Professionals (“Amici”) respectfully submit their brief in support of the Plaintiffs’ Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order, filed on March 8, 2017, Dkt. 65. I. INTERESTS OF AMICI CURIAE Muslim Advocates, a national legal advocacy and educational organization formed in 2005, works on the frontlines of civil rights to guarantee freedom and justice for Americans of all faiths. The issues at stake in this case directly relate to Muslim Advocates’ work fighting institutional discrimination against the American Muslim community. American Muslim Health Professionals (“AMHP”) works to improve the health of Americans. AMHP has three areas of focus: (1) health promotion and education; (2) professional development; and (3) state and national advocacy on public health issues. AMHP has been a leader in expanding healthcare coverage through teams of state liaisons and working with interfaith communities through its “Connecting Americans to Coverage” campaign. Muppies, Inc., also known as Muslim Urban Professionals (“Muppies”), is a nonprofit, charitable organization dedicated to empowering and advancing Muslim business professionals to be leaders in their careers and 984086v1 \ NM 1 communities. Muppies members are leaders in the fields of finance, consulting, technology, venture capital, healthcare, entrepreneurship and social enterprise. The National Arab American Medical Association (“NAAMA”) is the largest international organization of Arab American health care providers, trainees and medical students based in North America. Members of the association include well-trained clinicians, high ranking university professors, leaders of several medical societies, and scientists involved in cutting edge research and innovation. Network of Arab-American Professionals (“NAAP”) is a professional organization grounded in the notion that all Arabs in America need to connect to advance the community. NAAP promotes professional networking and social interaction among Arab-American and Arab professionals in the United States and abroad and educates both the Arab-American and non-Arab communities about Arab culture, identity, and concerns. II. INTRODUCTION Amici are business, education, finance, healthcare, legal, science, technology, and other professional members of the American Muslim community who are directly harmed and stigmatized by President Donald J. Trump’s executive order of March 6, 2017 titled “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States” (the “Executive Order”), which revokes and replaces the 984086v1 \ NM 2 January 27, 2017 Executive Order of the same title (the “Revoked Executive Order”). Amici urge the Court to grant the Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the Executive Order. Like its predecessor, the Executive Order is unconstitutional on its face. Its animating purpose is to reduce the flow of Muslims entering the United States, based on the odious and false notion that Muslims are more likely than others to commit or support acts of terrorism in America. This purpose was broadcast by Mr. Trump during his campaign for the presidency, when he promised “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” Ware Decl. Ex. 1, and proclaimed his belief that “Islam hates us,” and that it is “very hard” to make a distinction between Islam and “radical Islam” because “you don’t know who is who,” Ware Decl. Ex. 2. The same purpose animated the Revoked Executive Order, which President Trump’s advisor and surrogate Rudy Giuliani admitted was an attempt by the President to implement the “Muslim ban” in a way that would pass legal muster. Ware Decl. Ex. 3. And the same purpose has been carried through to the Executive Order, which President Trump’s Senior Advisor and one of the architects of the Executive Order, Stephen Miller, has admitted reflects the “same basic policy” as the Revoked Executive Order, Ware Decl. Ex. 4, merely repackaged to address some of the original Order’s more glaring due process concerns. 984086v1 \ NM 3 The Constitution forbids government action that discriminates on the basis of religion or that “conveys a message of endorsement or disapproval” of any religion or religious group. Access Fund v. U.S. Dep’t of Agriculture, 499 F.3d 1036, 1045 (9th Cir. 2007). From its inception as a “Muslim ban” through its failed implementation in the Revoked Executive Order and threatened re-implementation today, the Executive Order discriminates against Muslims and “conveys a message of . . . disapproval” of Muslims. One need look no further than the recent spate of hate crimes against persons perceived (often erroneously) to be Muslim immigrants to see the danger inherent in such an insidious message. See, e.g., Ware Decl. Ex. 5 (reporting the February 22, 2017 shooting in Olathe, Kansas of two Indian men mistaken for Iranians); Ware Decl. Ex. 6 (reporting the March 3, 2017 shooting of an American man of Indian descent in Kent, Washington, by a gunman who made statements to the effect of “Go back to your own country”); Ware Decl. Ex. 7 (reporting a March 10, 2017 attempt to set fire to a convenience store in Florida by a man who believed the owner was Muslim and wanted to “run the Arabs out of our country”); Ware Decl. Ex. 8 (reporting a March 11, 2017 attack against an innocent restaurant employee in Oregon by a man wielding a pipe, who had described the victim as a “Saddam Hussein-looking guy”). Ware Decl. Ex. 9 (detailing at least four incidences of arson in the first two months of 2017 targeting U.S. mosques). 984086v1 \ NM 4 Faced with damning evidence of its discriminatory motive, the Government first argued that its actions and motives are immune from judicial review. See, e.g., Aziz v. Trump, No. 1:17-cv-116-LMB-TCB, 2017 WL 580855, at *5 (E.D. Va. Feb. 13, 2017) (noting Government’s argument that national security judgments are beyond judicial review); see also Washington v. Trump, 847 F.3d 1151, 1161 (9th Cir. 2017) (noting Government’s contention that “the President has ‘unreviewable authority to suspend the admission of any class of aliens’”). The Ninth Circuit and other courts soundly rejected that argument. See, e.g., Washington v. Trump, 847 F.3d at 1164 (“[I]t is beyond question that the federal judiciary retains the authority to adjudicate constitutional challenges to executive action.”); Aziz v. Trump, 2017 WL 580855, at *6 (“If the president’s actions can be subject to judicial review when he is exercising his core Article II powers . . . it follows that his actions are also subject to such review when he exercises Article I powers delegated to him by Congress.”). Now, the Executive Order seeks to erase its roots as a “Muslim ban” by declaring by fiat that the Revoked Executive Order “did not provide a basis for discriminating for or against members of any particular religion,” Executive Order § 1(b)(4), and by elaborating on the supposed national security purpose of the policy, Executive Order § 1. But “the world is not made brand new every morning,” and this Court should reject the Government’s invitation to “turn a blind eye 984086v1 \ NM 5 to the context in which [the] policy arose.” McCreary County v. Am. Civil Liberties Union, 545 U.S. 844, 866 (2005). That context establishes that the Executive Order is rooted in animus toward Muslims. It also establishes that the articulated national security objectives have not, in fact, played a meaningful role in the Executive Order’s design and implementation. The irreparable harms threatened by the Executive Order’s enforcement are undeniable. “Because plaintiffs allege deprivation of a constitutional right, no separate showing of irreparable harm is necessary.” Statharos v. New York City Taxi and Limousine Comm’n, 198 F.3d 317, 322 (2d Cir.1999); Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347, 373 (1976) (plurality) (deprivation of constitutional rights, even for minimal periods of time, constitutes irreparable injury). If enforced, the Executive Order threatens to again break apart families, stymie travel for religious, work, family, and medical purposes, and destroy work and study opportunities, among many other irreparable injuries. And it will do so on the basis of invidious stereotypes about a minority religious group. Amici therefore respectfully urge the Court to grant the requested preliminary injunction. III. ARGUMENT A. The Motives for the Executive Order Are Not Immune From Judicial Review Plaintiffs allege that the Executive Order was “intended to disfavor Islam” and motivated by a desire to discriminate on the basis of religion and/or 984086v1 \ NM 6 national origin, nationality, or alienage.” Proposed Second Amended Complaint For Declaratory and Injunctive Relief at ¶¶ 108, 113, Hawai`i v. Trump, No. 1:17-cv-00050-DKW-KSC (D. Haw. Mar. 7, 2017), ECF No. 58-1. Contrary to arguments previously advanced by the Government in connection with the Revoked Executive Order, the defendants’ motives in promulgating the Executive Order are properly subject to meaningful judicial review even where the Government is acting in the immigration or national-security sphere. Washington v. Trump, 847 F.3d at 1161-64. The anti-discrimination commands of the First and Fourteenth Amendments, applicable to the Federal Government via the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause, apply in the immigration context. In Nguyen v. INS, 533 U.S. 53 (2001), the Court adjudicated a noncitizen’s Equal Protection challenges to gender classifications in the statutory frameworks regulating derivative citizenship. The Nguyen Court identified the “purpose of [the] statute” as the focus of the inquiry, and carefully evaluated whether “important governmental interest[s]” were furthered by the gender classification. Id. at 64, 67-68. The so-called “plenary power’ doctrine, moreover, does not extinguish this judicial scrutiny. See Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678, 695 (2001) (holding that so-called “‘plenary power’ to create immigration law . . . is subject to important constitutional limitations” in the treatment of aliens). The Supreme 984086v1 \ NM 7 Court has long looked to “the historical record” to determine whether “the actions at issue . . . were motivated by any racial animus.” INS v. Pangilinan, 486 U.S. 875, 886 (1988). As Justice Kennedy’s controlling opinion in Kerry v. Din directs, courts should “look behind” the government’s stated reasons for a visa decision if the plaintiff “plausibly alleged with sufficient particularity” “an affirmative showing of bad faith.” 135 S. Ct. 2128, 2131 (2015). Here, that showing has been abundantly made. B. The Executive Order Is Animated By Anti-Muslim Bias Even before discovery, ample evidence supports Plaintiffs’ allegation that the Executive Order is motivated, at least in substantial part, by negative and false stereotypes about Muslims. This evidence is manifest in the context of the Executive Order’s promulgation and on its face. 1. The President’s Own Repeated Statements Confirm that the Revoked Executive Order Was Intended to Implement His Campaign Pledge to Put a Temporary Halt on Muslims Entering the United States Prior to taking office, then-candidate Donald J. Trump made discrimination against Muslims a central pillar of his presidential campaign. On November 18, 2015, in response to terror attacks in Paris, Mr. Trump stated that “[w]e’re going to have no choice” but to close down some mosques in the United States, where “some bad things are happening.” Ware Decl. Ex. 10. On December 7, 2015, in the wake of the attack in San Bernardino, California, 984086v1 \ NM 8 then-candidate Mr. Trump released a written statement, entitled “Donald J. Trump Statement on Preventing Muslim Immigration,” which called for a “total and complete shutdown on Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.” Ware Decl. Ex. 1. The statement continued (emphasis added): According to Pew Research, among others, there is great hatred towards Americans by large segments of the Muslim population. Most recently, a poll from the Center for Security Policy released data showing “25% of those polled agreed that violence against Americans here in the United States is justified as a part of the global jihad” and 51% of those polled, “agreed that Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah.” Shariah authorizes such atrocities as murder against non-believers who won’t convert, beheadings and more unthinkable acts that pose great harm to Americans, especially women. The surveys cited in the statement had long since been discredited, see Ware Decl. Ex. 11, but the message was clear: Many Muslims bear hostile attitudes toward the United States and elevate violent ideology over American law. This proposed “Muslim ban” became a core promise of the Trump campaign, repeated by Mr. Trump and his advisors and surrogates at campaign events across the country. Asked during a televised debate on January 14, 2016 whether he had rethought his “comments about banning Muslims from entering the country,” Mr. Trump responded, “No.” Ware Decl. Ex. 12. On March 9, 2016, Mr. Trump stated in a televised interview, “I think Islam hates us.” Ware Decl. 984086v1 \ NM 9 Ex. 2. The full exchange between Mr. Trump and CNN’s Anderson Cooper is instructive (emphasis added): Cooper: Do you think Islam is at war with the West? Trump: I think Islam hates us. There is something—there is something there that is a tremendous hatred there. There’s a tremendous hatred. We have to get to the bottom of it. There’s an unbelievable hatred of us. Cooper: In Islam itself? Trump: You’re going to have to figure that out. OK. You’ll get another Pulitzer, right? But you’ll have to figure that out. But there’s a tremendous hatred. And we have to be very vigilant. We have to be very careful. And we can’t allow people coming into this country who have this hatred of the United States . . . and of people that are not Muslim. Cooper: I guess the question is, is there a war between the west and radical Islam or between the west and Islam itself? Trump: Well, it’s radical but it’s very hard to define. It’s very hard to separate because you don’t know who is who. Amid widespread outcry that the proposed Muslim ban would be un-American and unconstitutional, Mr. Trump and his advisors began shifting their rhetoric, all the while making clear that their goal continued to be some form of ban on immigration by Muslims. On June 13, 2016, after the attack on a nightclub in Orlando, Florida, Mr. Trump said in a speech: “I called for a ban after San Bernardino, and was met with great scorn and anger, but now many are saying I was right to do so.” Ware Decl. Ex. 13. Mr. Trump then specified that the Muslim ban would be “temporary,” and apply to certain “areas of the world when [sic] 984086v1 \ NM 10 there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies, until we understand how to end these threats.” Ware Decl. Ex. 13. As described below, the Executive Order ultimately adopted this framework. Next, in a July 17, 2016 televised interview, Mr. Trump was confronted with his then-running mate Mike Pence’s statement that the Muslim ban would be unconstitutional. Mr. Trump’s response made clear that the same purpose of stemming the flow of Muslim migrants would be pursued by other ends: “So you call it territories, okay? We’re gonna do territories.” Ware Decl. Ex. 14. A week later, in a July 24, 2016 interview, Mr. Trump was asked if his shifting rhetoric signified a “rollback” from his proposed “Muslim ban.” He answered: “I don’t think so. I actually don’t think it’s a rollback. In fact, you could say it’s an expansion. I’m looking now at territories. People were so upset when I used the word Muslim. ‘Oh, you can’t use the word Muslim.’ . . . And I’m okay with that, because I’m talking territory instead of Muslim.” Ware Decl. Ex. 15. And on October 9, 2016, during a televised presidential debate, Mr. Trump stated, “The Muslim ban is something that in some form has morphed into a[n] extreme vetting from certain areas of the world.” Ware Decl. Ex. 16. On January 27, 2016, President Trump fulfilled his campaign promise by signing the Revoked Executive Order. Among other things, the Revoked Executive Order temporarily banned entry from (initially) seven countries whose 984086v1 \ NM 11 nationals are overwhelmingly Muslim, temporarily suspended the entire U.S. Refugee Admissions Program, established a policy of prioritizing certain religious denominations over others upon resuming the program, and indefinitely barred entry of Syrian refugees. On the day he signed the Revoked Executive Order, President Trump stated that one of the purposes of the changes in refugee policy he was adopting was to favor Christian refugees over Muslim refugees. Ware Decl. Ex. 17 (claiming that “[i]f you were a Muslim [in Syria] you could come in [to the United States], but if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible . . . . And I thought it was very, very unfair. So we are going to help them [Christian refugees]”).1 This religious-based preference was reflected in Sections 5(b) and 5(e) of the Revoked Executive Order, which limited refugee claims based on religious-based persecution to individuals whose religion is a “minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.” Notably, the vast majority of the 38,000 Muslim refugees admitted to the United States in 2016 were nationals of the seven Muslim-majority countries identified in the Revoked Executive Order.2 Sections 5(b) and 5(e) of the Revoked Executive Order would have rendered them ineligible for the religious-based persecution preference. 1 See also Ware Decl. Ex. 18 (“Christians in the Middle-East have been executed in large numbers. We cannot allow this horror to continue!”). 2 See Ware Decl. Ex. 19. 984086v1 \ NM 12 The following day, January 28, 2017, President Trump’s advisor and surrogate Rudy Giuliani admitted that the policy implemented in the Revoked Executive Order resulted from an instruction by the President to find “the right way” to “legally” implement the “Muslim ban.” Ware Decl. Ex. 3. As of the date of this amicus submission, the Trump campaign’s December 7, 2015, press release entitled “Donald J. Trump Statement on Preventing Muslim Immigration,” remains on the Donald J. Trump campaign website3 and on President Trump’s Twitter page,4 which President Trump has continued to use regularly (and apparently in an official capacity) even after taking office. 2. The Context of the Executive Order Confirms that It Is the Same Basic Policy As the Revoked Executive Order The Supreme Court has consistently held that a state actor cannot circumvent the Constitution’s prohibitions on discrimination merely by rescinding and reenacting the same policy with slight or technical variations. For example, in a series of decisions called the White Primary cases, “the Court, in 1927, held unconstitutional a Texas law barring black voters from participating in primary election; in 1944, the Court struck down a ‘reenacted’ and slightly altered version of the same law; and in 1953, the Court once again confronted an attempt by Texas to ‘circumven[t]’ the Fifteenth Amendment by adopting yet another variant of the 3 Ware Decl. Ex. 1. 4 Ware Decl. Ex. 20. 984086v1 \ NM 13 all-white primary. . . .” Shelby Cty., Ala. v. Holder, 133 S. Ct. 2612, 2633 (2013) (citations omitted). The context surrounding issuance of the replacement Executive Order demonstrates that the Government here is attempting just such a circumvention of the Constitutional prohibitions against religious discrimination. By the Government’s own admissions, the Executive Order and the Revoked Executive Order reflect the same basic policy motivation. On February 3, 2017, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington issued a Temporary Restraining Order enjoining the enforcement of the Revoked Executive Order on a “nationwide basis.” Washington v. Trump, No. 2:17-cv-00141-JLR (W.D. Wash. Feb. 3, 2017), ECF No. 52. President Trump responded in a pair of Twitter posts that, as a result of the restraining order, “many bad and dangerous people may be pouring into” the United States, and vowed to have the decision of “this so-called judge” overturned. Ware Decl. Ex. 21. After the Ninth Circuit upheld the injunction on February 9, 2017, President Trump signaled his intent to continue litigating the validity of the Revoked Executive Order, posting on Twitter, “SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!” Ware Decl. Ex. 22, capitalization included in original. 984086v1 \ NM 14 One week later, however, on February 16, 2017, the Government sought to discontinue litigation over the Revoked Executive Order by notifying the courts that “the President intends in the near future to rescind the [Revoked Executive Order] and replace it with a new substantially revised Executive Order.” Appellants’ Supplemental Brief on En Banc Consideration at 4, Washington v. Trump, No. 17-35105 (9th Cir. Feb. 16, 2017), ECF No. 154. That notice notwithstanding, on February 21, 2017, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer told reporters that the President would be updating—rather than rescinding—the Revoked Executive Order. Ware Decl. Ex. 23. That same day (February 21, 2017), Stephen Miller, a senior advisor to the President and one of the chief architects of the immigration ban policy,5 Ware Decl. Ex. 24, explained in an interview with Fox News that, in the Administration’s view: (a) “nothing was wrong with the [Revoked Executive Order]”; (b) the Ninth Circuit decision declining to lift the injunction against the Revoked Executive Order was “flawed” and “erroneous”; (c) the President would 5 Mr. Miller has long espoused discriminatory views of Islam. In a column published in his high school newspaper, Mr. Miller wrote, “We have all heard about how peaceful and benign the Islamic religion is, but no matter how many times you stay that, it cannot change the fact that millions of radical Muslims would celebrate your death for the simple reason that you are Christian, Jewish or American.” Ware Decl. Ex. 24. Mr. Miller later as a senior in college established the “Terrorism Awareness Project,” an initiative, he wrote, aimed at educating students about the risk of “Islamofascism.” Ware Decl. Ex. 25. 984086v1 \ NM 15 nevertheless be issuing a new executive order that would address the “very technical issues that were brought up by the court”; (d) the new executive order would differ from the Revoked Executive Order only in “minor technical” ways; and (e) “the same basic policy outcome” would remain in place under the new executive order. Ware Decl. Ex. 4. 3. The Executive Order Reflects Anti-Muslim Bias on its Face The Executive Order purports to repudiate “animus toward any religion”—but manifestly fails. As was the case with the Revoked Executive Order, the Executive Order singles out countries that are overwhelmingly Muslim,6 while at the same time ignoring other countries, such as Colombia, the Philippines, and Venezuela, that have been designated by the U.S. State Department as safe havens for terrorist groups but whose populations are not majority Muslim. Ware Decl. Ex. 27. Moreover, key language evincing stereotypical beliefs about Muslims appeared in the Revoked Executive Order and is repeated in the Executive Order. Section 1 of the Revoked Executive Order stated in part (emphasis added): The United States cannot, and should not, admit those who do not support the Constitution, or those who would place violent 6 The countries singled out by the Executive Order include: Iran (99.5% Muslim), Libya (96.6% Muslim), Somalia (99.8% Muslim), Sudan (90.7% Muslim), Syria (92.8% Muslim), Yemen (99.1% Muslim), and Iraq (99.0% Muslim). See Exec. Order 13,780 §§ 1(f), 2(c), 4; Ware Decl. Ex. 26. 984086v1 \ NM 16 ideologies over American law. In addition, the United States should not admit those who engage in acts of bigotry or hatred (including “honor” killings, other forms of violence against women, or the persecution of those who practice religions different from their own) or those who would oppress Americans of any race, gender, or sexual orientation. This statement played off the false and bigoted notion, repeated by then-candidate Mr. Trump throughout the presidential campaign, that Muslims are more likely than others to place violent ideology over American law and to engage in “honor killings” and other forms of violence against women. See Ware Decl. Ex. 1 (claiming that “Shariah authorizes such atrocities as murder against nonbelievers who won’t convert, beheadings and more unthinkable acts that pose great harm to Americans, especially women.”). Section 11(iii) of the Executive Order reiterates this same invidious association by ordering the Secretary of Homeland Security to collect “information regarding the number and types of acts of gender-based violence against women, including so-called ‘honor killings,’ in the United States by foreign nationals.” The idea of honor killings is commonly and falsely associated with Islam and Muslims.7 By citing honor killings as the most noteworthy kind of 7 See, e.g., Resolution 1327 (2003) of the Council of Europe (“The Assembly notes that whilst so-called ‘honour crimes’ emanate from cultural and not religious roots and are perpetrated worldwide (mainly in patriarchal societies or communities), the majority of reported cases in Europe have been amongst Muslim or migrant Muslim communities (although Islam itself does not support the death penalty for honour-related misconduct).”) 984086v1 \ NM 17 gender-based violence, both Executive Orders suggest that Muslims as a group are more prone to such gender-based violence than other groups. This is consistent with the underlying false premise of the Executive Order that persons from enumerated Muslim-majority countries are more prone to violence than other groups.8 This is also consistent with Mr. Trump’s repeated claims during the presidential campaign that “large segments of the Muslim population” hate Americans and that many Muslims want to be governed according to a violent ideology that authorizes “beheadings and more unthinkable acts that pose great harm to Americans, especially women.” Ware Decl. Ex. 1. Accordingly, the text of the Executive Order itself contains evidence of invidious generalizations about a protected class that show “bad faith” and a discriminatory intent. Kerry v. Din, 135 S. Ct. at 2131. 4. The Development of the Executive Order Demonstrates that its National Security Justifications are Pretextual The Equal Protection Clause prohibits “a classification that is ostensibly neutral but is an obvious pretext for … discrimination.” Pers. Adm’r of Massachusetts v. Feeney, 442 U.S. 256, 272 (1979). Even when a law lacks a facial classification, evidence of “both impermissible . . . motivation and . . . 8 Following the TRO issued in Washington v. Trump suspending the Revoked Executive Order, 2:17-cv-00141-JLR (W.D. Wash. Feb. 3, 2017), ECF No. 52, Mr. Trump posted on Twitter, “Because the ban was lifted by a judge, many very bad and dangerous people may be pouring into our country.” Ware Decl. Ex. 21. 984086v1 \ NM 18 discriminatory impact” require a court to look behind the government’s proffered justification. Hunter v. Underwood, 471 U.S. 222, 232 (1985) (rejecting proffered legitimate purpose for felon disenfranchisement law as pretextual); see also Shaw v. Hunt, 517 U.S. 899, 932–33 (1996) (noting use of pretext analysis in discrimination cases “[i]n a variety of contexts, from employment to juror selection”). Similarly, in the Establishment Clause context, the secular purpose behind a policy “has to be genuine, not a sham, and not merely secondary to a religious objective.” McCreary, 545 U.S. at 864. “It is well established that evidence of purpose beyond the face of the challenged law may be considered in evaluating Establishment and Equal Protection Clause claims.” Washington v. Trump, 847 F.3d at 1167. Plaintiffs are likely to succeed in establishing that the purported legitimate justifications for the singling out of six countries in Section 2(c) of the Executive Order are pretextual. The Executive Order’s purposes remain the discriminatory and religious purposes that propelled the Revoked Executive Order. First, as noted above, the President’s own Senior Advisor, a key engineer of the Executive Order policy, has admitted that the Executive Order has “the same basic policy outcome” as the Revoked Executive Order and that the changes between the two Orders were limited to addressing “very technical issues that were brought up by the court.” Ware Decl. Ex. 4. 984086v1 \ NM 19 Second, the Government’s own analyses and data contradict the national security justification for singling out nationals of the six listed nations. In an analysis prepared at the request of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) leadership in the wake of the courts’ injunction of the Revoked Executive Order, analysts within the DHS analyzed data from the DHS, the State Department, and the Justice Department concerning the association between these nationalities and terrorism risk. The DHS analysts concluded that “country of citizenship is unlikely to be a reliable indicator of potential terrorism activity.” Ware Decl. Ex. 28, at 1. The Executive Order nevertheless seeks to create an association between the designated countries and terrorism risk by cherry-picking two past cases. Executive Order § 1(h). Tellingly, however, neither case supports the Order’s scope. The first case involved two Iraqi nationals—a curious choice given that the Executive Order removes Iraq from the original list of countries included in the ban under the Revoked Executive Order. Moreover, neither of the Iraqi nationals in question was planning an attack in the United States.9 The second case involved a Somali national admitted to the United States “as a child refugee” who “later became a naturalized United States citizen” and subsequently, as an adult, engaged in terrorist activity. The Order does not explain how increased vetting of 9 Ware Decl. Ex. 29. 984086v1 \ NM 20 refugee children, however, would or could identify those who may pose a risk of committing acts of violence many years later—as adults, and after becoming American citizens. The DHS’s analysis is corroborated by a number of independent analyses, including without limitation:  The Cato Institute’s analysis of terrorism conviction data demonstrated that “the chance of an American being murdered in a terrorist attack caused by a refugee is 1 in 3.64 billion per year.” Ware Decl. Ex. 30.  An analysis of Justice Department data by a former FBI analyst demonstrated that “[a]bsolutely nothing in the large body of data we have about real terrorist plots in the United States remotely supports either a focus on barring refugees or a focus on these particular seven countries.” Ware Decl. Ex. 31.  Another independent analysis demonstrates that the Justice Department’s own data also is inconsistent with claims that “foreign-born individuals have a greater propensity to commit terrorism, and that limiting foreign-born individuals’ travel into the United States on this basis will have a positive impact on national security.” Ware Decl. Ex. 32.  In a letter to President Trump dated March 10, 2017, 134 former high-ranking foreign policy officials in Republican and Democratic administrations stated unequivocally that “[t]he revised executive order is damaging to the strategic 984086v1 \ NM 21 and national security interests of the United States.” Ware Decl. Ex. 33, at 2 (emphasis added). Third, the manner in which the administration implemented the Executive Order belies any purported national security imperative of the ban. Contrary to the President’s rhetoric of “bad and dangerous people” supposedly “pouring” into the country as a result of court orders enjoining the Revoked Executive Order, Ware Decl. Ex. 21, the White House is reported to have repeatedly delayed signing the replacement Executive Order for political and public relations reasons having nothing to do with national security. Ware Decl. Ex. 34. 5. That the Executive Order Halts Immigration by Many but Not All Muslims In No Way Defeats Plaintiffs’ Allegations of Animus The fact that the Executive Order implements President Trump’s campaign promise to halt Muslim immigration to the United States partially, rather than fully, and does nothing to weaken the evidence of anti-Muslim bias described above. In no other context is it the case that a failure to discriminate against all members of a suspect class defeats any claim of discrimination. In United States v. Windsor, for example, the Court invalidated on Equal Protection grounds a federal statute “motived by an improper animus” against gays and lesbians. 133 S. Ct. 2675, 2693 (2013). The Court invalidated the statute even though it only applied 984086v1 \ NM 22 to the subset of gays and lesbians who chose to marry. Id. at 2683. A requirement that a discriminatory policy cover all and only members of a protected class would invite the circumvention of constitutional rights. Those motivated by unlawful purposes could easily avoid judicial review by simply tweaking the scope of their actions—as the Government has attempted to do in implementing its “Muslim ban” policy. C. The Executive Order Disproportionately Impacts Muslims If allowed to be enforced, the Executive Order threatens to again cause immediate suffering to U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents with family members excluded or exiled by the ban; to American civil society and religious groups wishing to invite scholars and religious leaders; to universities and businesses seeking to recruit the best available talent; and to nationals of the listed countries currently in the United States on single-entry visas or visas that may expire during the period of the ban; among others. 10 As American Muslims, Amici are acutely threatened by these injuries. 10 See e.g., Ware Decl. Ex. 35 (detailing the struggles of families with children affected by the Revoked Executive Order), Ware Decl. Ex. 36 (documenting the experience of individuals affected by the Revoked Executive Order), Ware Decl. Ex. 37 (discussing the complications suffered by children who had planned to seek medical care in the United States), Ware Decl. Ex. 38 (detailing difficulties caused by the Revoked Executive Order to medical professional working abroad). 984086v1 \ NM 23 Amici also suffer an additional injury as a result of the stigma that has attached to all American Muslims (and those perceived as Muslim as a consequence of their ethnicity), unfairly and irrationally, as a result of the Executive Order and the public pronouncements of the President and his advisors in connection therewith. Contrary to the misperception spread by the “Muslim ban,” the presence of Muslims in America is not a threat to American security. Muslims have been a part of America since its founding, when 10-15% of slaves forcibly brought to America were Muslim. Today, Muslims represent 1% of the U.S. population. Muslims have expended their blood, sweat, and tears building and defending the United States. In fact, today, more than 5,000 Muslims serve in the U.S. military, and many have given their lives in recent wars in defense of U.S. interests. They also provide necessary healthcare, educate our nation’s children, create jobs, and contribute innovation that is an essential driver of our nation’s economic growth.11 IV. CONCLUSION The Government has no legitimate interest in discriminating against Muslims or in exploiting “negative attitudes, or fear” toward Muslims. City of Cleburne, Tex. v. Cleburne Living Ctr., 473 U.S. 432, 448 (1985). The invidious 11 See generally Kambiz Ghanea Bassiri, A History of Islam in America: From the New World to the New World Order (Cambridge 2010). 984086v1 \ NM 24 stereotype that “Islam hates us”—or that Muslims, in the words of the Revoked Executive Order, “bear hostile attitudes toward [the United States] and its founding principles” and “would place violent ideologies over American law”—was not a legitimate basis for the Revoked Executive Order and is not a legitimate basis for the replacement Executive Order. The policy underlying the Executive Order is pervaded by an unconstitutional animus toward Muslims and, if not enjoined, will cause immediate and irreparable injury to numerous American Muslim and their families and loved ones. Amici therefore urge the Court to grant the requested preliminary injunction. Dated: Honolulu, Hawai`i, March 13, 2017. Respectfully submitted, ALSTON HUNT FLOYD & ING NICKOLAS A. KACPROWSKI ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP ANTON A. WARE (pro hac vice) MUSLIM ADVOCATES JOHNATHAN SMITH (pro hac vice) JUNAID SULAHRY (pro hac vice) Attorneys for Proposed Amici Curiae Muslim Advocates; American Muslim Health Professionals; Muppies, Inc.; The National Arab American Medical Association; and Network of ArabAmerican Professionals 984086v1 \ NM 25 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAI`I STATE OF HAWAI`I and ISMAIL ELSHIKH, Plaintiffs, v. DONALD J. TRUMP, in his official capacity as President of the United States; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; JOHN F. KELLY, in his official capacity as Secretary of Homeland Security; U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE; REX TILLERSON, in his official capacity as Secretary of State; and the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendants. ) Case No. CV 17-00050 ) ) DECLARATION OF ) ANTON A. WARE ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) DKW-KSC DECLARATION OF ANTON A. WARE I, Anton A. Ware, hereby declare as follows based on personal knowledge. 1. I am over the age of eighteen and competent to testify. 2. I am an attorney at Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP representing amici curiae, supporting Plaintiffs in this matter, Muslim Advocates, American Muslim Health Professionals, Muppies, Inc., and the National Arab American Medical Association. 984087v1 \ NM 3. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a press release published by the presidential campaign website of Donald J. Trump on December 7, 2015, titled “Donald J. Trump Statement on Preventing Muslim Immigration.” 4. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of a printout of the transcript of an interview by Anderson Cooper with Donald J. Trump that aired on March 9, 2016 on Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees and published by CNN. 5. Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by Slate on January 29, 2017, titled “Rudy Giuliani Admits Trump Asked How to Implement a Muslim Ban Legally.” 6. Attached hereto as Exhibit 4 is a true and correct copy of a printout of the transcript of an interview given by Stephen Miller to Fox News on February 21, 2017. 7. Attached hereto as Exhibit 5 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by the Washington Post on February 28, 2017, titled “Suspect in Kansas bar shooting of Indians apparently thought they were Iranians.” 8. Attached hereto as Exhibit 6 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by the Seattle Times on March 4, 2017, titled 984087v1 \ NM 2 “Sikh man in Kent says he was told, ‘Go back to your own country’ before he was shot.” 9. Attached hereto as Exhibit 7 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by the Washington Post on March 12, 2017, titled “A man assumed a store’s Indian owners were Muslim. So he tried to burn it down, police say.” 10. Attached hereto as Exhibit 8 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by the Washington Post on March 12, 2017, titled “̒Go back to your country, terrorist’: Man accused of attacking restaurant employee with a pipe.” 11. Attached hereto as Exhibit 9 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by CNN on March 2, 2017, titled “Spate of mosque fires stretches across the country.” 12. Attached hereto as Exhibit 10 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by Politico on November 18, 2015, titled “Trump: ‘Absolutely no choice’ but to close mosques.” 13. Attached hereto as Exhibit 11 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by the Bridge Initiative at Georgetown University on December 7, 2015, titled “Trump Calls for Ban on Muslims, Cites Deeply Flawed Poll.” 984087v1 \ NM 3 14. Attached hereto as Exhibit 12 is a true and correct copy of a printout of the transcript of the March 10, 2016 Republican Candidates Debate in Miami, Florida, published by the American Presidency Project. 15. Attached hereto as Exhibit 13 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by Politico on June 13, 2016, titled “Transcript: Donald Trump’s national security speech,” containing the transcript of then-candidate Mr. Trump’s June 13 speech on national security and terrorism in the wake of the Orlando massacre. 16. Attached hereto as Exhibit 14 is a true and correct copy of a printout of the transcript of an interview by Lesley Stahl with Donald J. Trump that aired on July 17, 2016 on 60 Minutes and published by CBS. 17. Attached hereto as Exhibit 15 is a true and correct copy of a printout of the transcript of an interview by Chuck Todd with Donald J. Trump that aired on July 24, 2016 on Meet the Press and published by NBC. 18. Attached hereto as Exhibit 16 is a true and correct copy of a printout of the transcript of the October 9, 2016 Presidential Debate in Miami, Florida published by the American Presidency Project. 19. Attached hereto as Exhibit 17 is a true and correct copy of a printout of the transcript of an interview by David Brody with Donald J. Trump that was published on January 27, 2017 by the Christian Broadcasting Network. 984087v1 \ NM 4 20. Attached hereto as Exhibit 18 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by MetroNews on January 29, 2017, titled “Trump remains defiant over Muslim ban in tweet.” 21. Attached hereto as Exhibit 19 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a research report published by the Pew Research Center on October 5, 2016, titled “U.S. admits record number of Muslim refugees in 2016.” 22. Attached hereto as Exhibit 20 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a Twitter post posted by Mr. Trump on his personal Twitter account at 2:32 PM on December 7, 2015. 23. Attached hereto as Exhibit 21 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a pair of Twitter posts posted by Mr. Trump on his personal Twitter account at 5:12 AM and 1:44 PM on February 4, 2017. 24. Attached hereto as Exhibit 22 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a Twitter post posted by Mr. Trump on his personal Twitter account at 3:35 PM on February 9, 2017. 25. Attached hereto as Exhibit 23 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by CBS News on February 21, 2017, titled “Sean Spicer press conference – live updates.” 984087v1 \ NM 5 26. Attached hereto as Exhibit 24 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by the Washington Post on February 11, 2017, titled “Stephen Miller: a key engineer for Trump’s ‘America first’ agenda.” 27. Attached hereto as Exhibit 25 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by CNN on February 15, 2017, titled “In college, Trump aide Stephen Miller led controversial ‘Terrorism Awareness Project’ warning of ‘Islamofascism.’” 28. Attached hereto as Exhibit 26 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a table published by the Pew Forum titled “Religious Composition by Country.” 29. Attached hereto as Exhibit 27 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a report published by the U.S. Department of State in 2015, titled “Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report).” 30. Attached hereto as Exhibit 28 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a leaked memorandum written by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, titled “Citizenship Likely an Unreliable Indicator of Terrorist Threat to the United States,” as published by the Associated Press. 31. Attached hereto as Exhibit 29 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a press release published by the U.S. Department of Justice dated 984087v1 \ NM 6 January 29, 2013, titled “Former Iraqi Terrorists Living in Kentucky Sentenced for Terrorist Activities.” 32. Attached hereto as Exhibit 30 is a true and correct copy of a printout of an article published by the Cato Institute on September 13, 2016, titled “Terrorism and Immigration: A Risk Analysis.” 33. Attached hereto as Exhibit 31 is a true and correct copy of a printout of an article published by Lawfare on February 7, 2017, titled “It’s Not Foreigners Who are Plotting Here: What the Data Really Show.” 34. Attached hereto as Exhibit 32 is a true and correct copy of a printout of an article published by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law on February 17, 2017, titled “What the Data Tells Us About Immigration and Terrorism.” 35. Attached hereto as Exhibit 33 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a letter to Mr. Trump, dated March 10, 2017, and signed by over 100 former U.S. government officials, including Former Secretaries of State John Kerry and Madeleine Albright, Former Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano, and Former National Security Advisor Susan Rice. 36. Attached hereto as Exhibit 34 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by CNN dated March 1, 2017, titled “Trump delays new travel ban after well-reviewed speech.” 984087v1 \ NM 7 37. Attached hereto as Exhibit 35 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published the Los Angeles Times on January 27, 2017, titled “Families hoping to make the U.S. their home scramble to rearrange their lives.” 38. Attached hereto as Exhibit 36 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by Think Progress on January 30, 2017, titled “Trump’s Muslim ban is tearing apart families.” 39. Attached hereto as Exhibit 37 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article published by ABC News Radio on January 31, 2017, titled “Children and Refugees Who Planned Medical Care in the US Stuck After Trump Executive Order.” 40. Attached hereto as Exhibit 38 is a true and correct copy of a printout of a news article from the New York Times on February 6, 2017, titled “Trump’s Travel Ban, Aimed at Terrorists, Has Blocked Doctors.” I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed this _____ day of March, 2017. ANTON A. WARE 984087v1 \ NM 8 EXHIBIT 1 2/6/2017 Donald J. Trump Statement on Preventing Muslim Immigration | Donald J Trump for President INSTAGRAM NEWS GET INVOLVED GAL L E RY ABOUT US - D ECEMBER 07 , 201 5 - DONALD J. TRUMP STATEMENT ON PREVENTING MUSLIM IMMIGRATION FACEBOOK SHOP TWITTER CONT R I B UT E C AT E G O R I E S VIEW ALL STATEMENTS (New York, NY) December 7th, 2015, -- Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on. According to Pew Research, among others, there is great hatred towards Americans by large segments of the Muslim population. Most recently, a poll from the Center for Security Policy released data showing "25% of those polled agreed that violence against ANNOUNCEMENTS ENDORSEMENTS ADS Americans here in the United States is justified as a part of the global jihad" and 51% of those polled, "agreed that Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah." Shariah authorizes such atrocities as murder against non-believers who won't convert, beheadings and more unthinkable acts ARCHIVE that pose great harm to Americans, especially women. Mr. Trump stated, "Without looking at the various polling data, it is obvious to anybody the hatred is beyond comprehension. Where this hatred comes from and why we will have to determine. Until we are able to determine and understand this problem and the dangerous threat it poses, our country cannot be the victims of horrendous attacks by people that believe only in Jihad, and have no sense of reason or respect for human life. If I win the election for President, we are going to NOVEMBER 2016 OCTOBER 2016 SEPTEMBER 2016 AUGUST 2016 Make America Great Again." - Donald J. Trump JULY 2016 JUNE 2016 Next Release: Donald J. Trump Announces State Directors in Massachusetts and Mississippi Previous Release: Donald J. Trump Announces Statewide Leadership Team in Oklahoma MAY 2016 APRIL 2016 MARCH 2016 FEBRUARY 2016 JANUARY 2016 DECEMBER 2015 NOVEMBER 2015 OCTOBER 2015 SEPTEMBER 2015 AUGUST 2015 JULY 2015 JUNE 2015 MAY 2015 APRIL 2015 MARCH 2015 1/2 2/6/2017 Donald J. Trump Statement on Preventing Muslim Immigration | Donald J Trump for President Paid for by Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. Contact The Campaign - Privacy Policy - Tel: 646-736-1779 *By entering your mobile number you are agreeing to receive periodic text messages from Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. Message and data rates may apply. Text "STOP" to opt-out. T&C/Privacy Policy: sms-terms/88022 2/2 EXHIBIT 2 2/6/2017 - Transcripts Home Live TV Transcript Providers Return to Transcripts main page ANDERSON COOPER 360 DEGREES Exclusive Interview with Donald Trump. Aired 8-9p ET Aired March 9, 2016 - 20:00 ET THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST, OUTFRONT: Thanks so much for watching live from Miami. We will be back here tomorrow night. AC 360 starts now. [20:00:24] ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: And good evening from Miami- Dade College. We are now just an hour away from tonight's Univision Democratic debate seen right here on CNN. Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton are going to take the stage shortly. She, of course, coming off a win in Mississippi, which was expected. What wasn't expected was his win in Michigan. There is no overstatement to call it a shocker especially considering he was down by about 20 points in the polls going in. So what happens on the debate stage behind me tonight has taken on a completely new level of importance in a race that's gone to a new level. First though, the Republicans who are going to be taking part in tomorrow's CNN debate at a nearby University of Miami. I sat down today with Donald Trump the frontrunner. And as you might imagine, he made headlines. He said that he expects a softer tone tomorrow night at the debate. However, he is still calling his leading rival lying Ted. We will bring you the interview in depth right after Sara Murray sets the Republican stage. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I was watching the news in one of the rooms, and every single advertisement was about me. And it was during my tournament. I'm turning my tournament. I go from tournament to horrible land. Every -- the most vicious. SARA MURRAY, CNN POLITICS REPORTER (voice-over): In the face of an onslaught of attacks, Donald Trump is triumphing, notching three more victims Tuesday night and nudging the party to rally behind him. TRUMP: The bottom line is we have something going that's so good. We should grab each other and we should unify the party and nobody is going to beat us, OK. MURRAY: The billionaire businessman celebrating with a surreal election night event, responding to a drum beat of criticism about his failed ventures with an evening designed to showcase Trump branded products. TRUMP: And we have Trump steaks. And by the way, if you want to take one, we'll charge you about what, 50 bucks a steak, Donald. MURRAY: According to news reports, Sharper Image no longer sells Trump steaks. TRUMP: You'll love Trump steaks. MURRAY: And Busch brothers provides steaks to Trump hotels and golf clubs. So it's unclear where the slab of meat Trump touted came from. Now that the fight for the nomination is looking more like a two-man race, Ted Cruz isn't letting up. 1/17 2/6/2017 - Transcripts Home Live TV SEN. TED CRUZ (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I don't have any steaks to sell you. I don't have any wine. I don't have any cleaning products. MURRAY: The Texas senator emerging with a victory in Idaho Tuesday and today getting another boost with an endorsement from former presidential hopeful Carly Fiorina. CRUZ: Carly's being with us today is just one more manifestation of what we have been seeing playing out over the last several weeks, which is Republicans uniting, coming together behind our campaign. MURRAY: But for Marco Rubio, a brutal night. Another winless evening and even steeper odds as he pins all his hopes on Florida. SEN. MARCO RUBIO (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: You believed in me once. I am asking you to believe again. We can win this election, and we will. I need your help next Tuesday because we are not just going to win the Florida primary. We are going to win Florida in November. MURRAY: Today John Kasich is still holding on. Outperforming Rubio last night and fighting for victory in his home state of Ohio next Tuesday. GOV. JOHN KASICH (R), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: And with those states that have not yet selected a delegate, basically, the three, Donald Trump, Ted Cruz and I, are dead even going into the last half of this whole match. So don't be thinking it's over yet. (END VIDEOTAPE) COOPER: Sara Murray joins us from the University of Miami which is the site of tomorrow night's CNN Republican debate. What can we expect from the GOP candidates at that debate? MURRAY: Well, Anderson, there is no doubt that Ted Cruz wants to turn this into a two-man race with Donald Trump. But as Donald Trump said to you, he want a kinder, softer, gentler debate and I think that is because he wants to come off as more presidential than perhaps he and others did in the last debate stage where they were comparing hand size among other things. And I think for Marco Rubio and for John Kasich, the stakes could not be higher. These two candidates need to prove to voters that casting a ballot for them is not a waste. Both of their states coming up March 15th. And it is pretty much do or die for both candidates, Anderson. COOPER: Yes. Sara Murray, thanks very much. And the debate is one of the things I talked to Donald Trump about today. Coming up right now, the wide-ranging conversation with Trump. How he sizes up his competition. His thoughts heading into tomorrow night and next week's winner take all Florida primary. I pressed him on specifics on his promise to reverse what he sees as this country's weaken position in the world as well as his evolving positions so it says on fighting terrorism that some military and legal analysts say could amount to war crimes. We spoke earlier today at his Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) COOPER: Huge night last night. Do you have any idea that you were going to win as big as you did? [20:05:02] TRUMP: Well, I felt good. I mean, Mississippi, I was in three or four times and it was like a love fest. And so, I felt very good about it. Michigan has been great. It has been great for me for a long time. I have so many friends there. I had no idea it would be that big. COOPER: Do you think it's the message on trade in particular in Michigan that was effective? Sanders winning as well there. You have a very similar message. TRUMP: I think they want strength. I think they want military. I think they want to take care of vets. I think they hate Obamacare. But I would say ultimately it's about jobs and the economy. And you know, Michigan has been stripped. You look at those empty factories all over the place. And nobody hits that's message better than me. I'm going to take care of it. I'm going to stop it. I'm going to stop the craziness that is going on. If you look at what's happening, how -- even today, I mean, we're just shipping company after company after company is leaving this country and leaving jobs behind. And I'm going to get it stopped. H Li TV 2/17 2/6/2017 pp g p y Home p y p y g y - Transcripts gj g g g pp Live TV COOPER: Two new polls out today. Quinnipiac, also a CNN one both showing essentially the same thing. You are way ahead here in Florida. Almost I think 2-1 against Rubio. And even in Ohio leading Kasich with six points and seven points in each poll. If you win Florida and Ohio, is it over? TRUMP: I think so. I think if I win those two, I think it's over. I thought Kasich said after Michigan he was going to drop out, to be honest with you. He was saying that he will win Michigan, he will win it easily. And he -COOPER: He is now saying Ohio. If he doesn't win Ohio -- TRUMP: And I was saying Ohio. But no, he said Michigan. He was said, you know, it's his neighbor. And he said he is going to win Michigan, and he was pretty confident of Michigan. And I thought he said he was going to drop out if he lost Michigan. I guess he's not going to do that. So I think we are going to do very well in Ohio. I know Ohio very well. I have many, many friends. COOPER: You think you'll win there? TRUMP: Well, even Paul O'Neill of the Yankees endorsed me. He is from Ohio. Great guy. And he endorsed me last night at the press conference. I think I'll win Ohio, yes. And I think - I mean, we just have better policies. The country is sick and tired of what they are seeing. The country is sick and tired of these politicians that's talk and to all talk, no action. And they are all tired of it, Anderson. COOPER: So if Kasich drops - if you win Ohio, Kasich drops out and out you win Florida and Rubio is gone and it's just you and Cruz, if you don't get all of the delegates needed to win by the convention -TRUMP: Well, I think if I win Ohio and if I win Florida, pretty much, you're going to be pretty much assured of doing that. COOPER: You think you'll get all the delegates? TRUMP: I think so, yes. I really think so. I don't see the convention going that route. I see probably getting the delegates. You know, it is like the fighters. That's the ultimate way of doing it. You knock them out. If you knock them out, nothing can happen. COOPER: You want to go for knockout? TRUMP: I would rather go for a knockout. COOPER: If you get to the convention, though, and you don't have the delegates, is any kind of a deal acceptable to you other than you getting the nomination? TRUMP: Well, then you have to fight it out. But, you know, it is really unfair. Let's say you get there and are a few short but you have 1200, let's say, and somebody else had 500 or 600. Because I'm way ahead and in all fairness to Ted, he is the only one who beats me, but he doesn't say I beat him two or three times for every time he wins one. And we won the important ones. We won the big ones and we won last night. I mean, last night was a romp. So, look. Ted, the problem with Ted is he walks in with the viable, hauls up the viable. You know, I call him lying Ted. COOPER: I have heard that. TRUMP: Puts down the bible and then he lies. I have never seen a man lie this much. But even --. COOPER: You think for a guy who says he is very religious, you are surprise? TRUMP: No, Ted. I call him lying Ted. He is lying Ted. And you know, that's his name. And I think frankly that name has stuck because the evangelicals are on my side. They don't like liars. Evangelicals do not like liars. COOPER: So if it goes to convention, you don't have -- you are a couple short or couple hundred short, for you, that doesn't matter. It's got to be you as the nominee? No other deal is acceptable? Home Live TV 3/17 2/6/2017 - Transcripts Home Live TV TRUMP: I think this. If you go to the convention and because of some artificial number that they said, if you go to the convention and you are leading by a lot of delegates, I think you should get the nomination. And that will be me. I'll have far more delegates. Now, whether I get to that artificial number, I don't know, but I think I will. COOPER: You've had a lot of money thrown against you in just these last couple of weeks. TRUMP: This never been anything like it. COOPER: This whole never Trump movement, is it dead do you think? TRUMP: Well, I think it's mortally wounded. I do think it is mortally wounded. Marco had a very rough night. He had no delegates. He got nothing. And that was a very, very bad night. And, you know, when people have hit me, if you watch, and it's been the story of my life, (INAUDIBLE), but everybody that's hit me has gone down. They all came at me. Perry came at me. I can go through Lindsey Graham came at me. Bush came at me. Every one of them came at me. And every one of them that's come at me has gone down. And wouldn't it be nice to have that happen with our country where we can very simply win again? COOPER: So what do you think was Rubio's demise? TRUMP: I think he tried to be Don Rickles, frankly. He wanted to be Don Rickles and he's not Don Rickles. And it took me by surprise. I mean, I'm standing at one of the debates and all of a sudden, he got nasty. He was very nasty. [20:10:05] COOPER: Did he get under your skin? TRUMP: No, he didn't. Nobody gets under my skin. I mean, you have to handle it. But he was really rude. And, in fact, for a while, I wasn't even sure if what I was seeing was right. Then he had a horrible debate with Chris Christie where he folded. I mean, he totally choked. And you know the expression. Once a choker, always a choker. COOPER: Do you think going after you, you know, with jokes, with humor, with insults, that took him off his message? TRUMP: I think so. He wasn't only joking. I mean, he was insulting and, you know, made up insults, a nasty insults. COOPER: And it weakened him do you think in a long term? TRUMP: It turned out to. I didn't know it would. I mean, I think I hit him very hard. I probably hit him much harder. But maybe for me it's more natural. It wasn't natural for him. And took him off his game. Amazing, I've never seen anything like it. And he went from being, you know, from doing pretty good to now he is at the bottom of the pack. COOPER: I want to ask you about Cruz in a minute. But just in a big picture, have you given much thought to how you want to define the GOP? I mean, you will be not only the nominee, you will be standard bearer for the Republican Party. How do you want to redefine the GOP? TRUMP: OK. Well, I think the biggest story in all of politics, all over the world right now -- I've been on the cover of "Time" magazine four times in the last short number of months - I mean, because of what's happening. There's a movement. And it's millions and millions of people that are disgusted with the incompetence of our politicians and our leaders, if you want to call them that. I don't even call them that. I hate to use it. COOPER: Republicans and Democrats? TRUMP: Republicans and Democrats. And I'll get to the Republicans in a second because they are blown a great opportunity. So you have primaries. And millions of people more are going to the primaries and voting. And in all fairness, it's because of me. I'm not going to joke. It's not because of Ted Cruz who nobody cares about. Millions of people are going to the polls. More people than did four years ago and did ever. By the way, ever. You report on it. Millions of people, it's the biggest story. And people come up to me, Mr. Trump, when I'm signing autographs or shaking hands. Mr. Trump, 50 years old, 60 years old, I've never voted before, but I'm so proud to be voting. COOPER: So you want a more populist GOP? Home TRUMP: No no I'll tell you what I'm a conservative person I don't think the labels matter You know they say he is not Live TV Jeb Bush used to say he is not a conservative 4/17 2/6/2017 - Transcripts TRUMP: No, no, I'll tell you what. I'm a conservative person. I don't think the labels matter. You know they say he is not -- Jeb Bush used to say he is not a conservative, OK. He is not a conservative. I say, what difference does it make? I mean, who cares? I have very conservative views. But one view that probably isn't considered conservative, but is it smart trade. I want smart trade. COOPER: Your position is actually similar to Bernie Sanders in some way. (END VIDEOTAPE) COOPER: His response to that and to critics who say he's destroying the GOP brand and perhaps even the party itself. Plus, he talks about his victory speech which as you saw in Sara Murray's report, turned into sort of infomercial for all things Trump. Some of which are not actually products still sold by Trump. That and more as we count down to the Democratic debate at the top of the hour and after hour the debate analysis later tonight. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) [20:16:56] COOPER: As we count down to the Univision Democratic debate which you can watch right here on CNN tonight and tomorrow's CNN Republican debate, not far from here. More with my conversation with the front-runner of the Republican Party, Donald Trump. In part two, his trade plan and his answers to critics who say it will boost prices of the things that Americans buy. Also his answers, the comparison I grove between him and Bernie Sanders. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) COOPER: Your position is actually similar to Bernie Sanders in some way. I mean, you are both -TRUMP: Except I can do something about it. The difference between Sanders and I, I watched him recently. And he is right about one thing. The world is ripping us off on trade. It has been a horrible thing. It has been horrible, horrible experiment. I have been against it for years. You know, if you look back, I have been against it your friend Wolf Blitzer actually did a tape of his interviews with me from like 15, 17 years ago. And I was saying the same thing, a little bit different nations like Japan who is really ripping us off. COOPER: But your position is pretty un-Republican. I mean, Larry Kudlow who, you know, is positive about your corporate tax policy, he's critical of you on trade. He says that essentially it's going to be raising prices for people on consumer goods, on electronics, on cars and other items. And it's essentially a tax on people who can't afford it. TRUMP: No, I have heard Larry. And let me tell you what's going to happen from a practical standpoint, from a negotiating standpoint. The world is ripping us off because of manipulation, monetary manipulation, devaluations, OK. They are great. The greatest player of them all is China. Nobody has ever played the valuation game with their currency better. It's currency devaluation, than China. China is a grand master. Japan is doing very well. But some of these countries are just absolute masters at it. When we start getting tough, and they think that we're serious, and I'm totally serious. I would put a tax on it in two seconds. COOPER: You talk about a 45 percent tax -TRUMP: I've talked about different taxes. I have also said - I didn't say I was going to put. I said use it as a negotiating tool, and I would if we couldn't make the right deal. COOPER: But that would raise prices for consumer goods. TRUMP: China just devalued their currency recently more than they have at any time in more than two decades. This was like shocking. And the only reason they did it is because we're weak and have no leadership. It makes it impossible for our companies to compete with Chinese companies and China generally, OK. It makes it absolutely impossible. The threat of me doing this, for instance, the threat of doing it against Japan or China, tell Japan, by the way, when your cars come in you are going to have to pay a 35 percent tax. I sued 35 percent. I only used 45 if somebody is really egregious and, of course, now you have many people that are really egregious. COOPER: So you are seeing this as a negotiation tactic? Home Live TV 5/17 2/6/2017 - Transcripts TRUMP: Absolutely. And you know what is going to happen? When they see that we are not playing games, that we are really do because I would do it in a heartbeat. I would love to do it. When they see that we are not playing games, they are going to stop playing with their currencies and they are going to stop taking our jobs to the extent that they are taking them right now. COOPER: You do worry a lot of people, obviously, in the Republican establishment, though. You know this better than anybody and I know you don't like the NBC/"Wall Street Journal" poll. Anew one just came out today and saying the majority of the American voters, six in ten, saying you are harming the GOP's image. Twothirds have a negative impression of you. How do you go about bringing the GOP back together? [20:20:06] TRUMP: Look, first of all, millions of people now are voting more as we just said, more than they were four year ago, eight years ago, 16 years ago. Millions and millions of people. They would never see anything like it. I was in South Carolina and a woman came up who was at the polling. She said, you know, Mr. Trump, I've done this for 24 years. I've never seen anything like it. COOPER: There's a lot of higher voter turnouts. So you are saying that's bringing new people in and -TRUMP: But many more people are coming in. You know where they're coming from? They are Democrats and they are independents and they are people that never voted before. And don't kid yourself. The people that never voted before, that's a huge part of it. They are coming in in tremendous numbers. So many people have told me that, Anderson. They said I have never voted before. I mean, these are people that are 60 years old. I'm not talking about somebody that's 18. They never voted before and they are coming in. And I have had hundreds of people telling me that just walking down the line shaking hands. COOPER: So when Lindsey Graham said choosing between you and Cruz would be like choosing between being shot or poisoned. He is now saying that he will go for Cruz. TRUMP: Yes, that is OK. Look. Let me explain. I was very hard on him. He was very nasty. They were all nasty. And when they are bad you have to do something about it. Lindsey Graham started at seven percent. I got into the race and he attacked me. And Lindsey Graham went home at zero, at zero. Lindsey Graham in South Carolina where he is a senator was at one when I was at 40 and I won South Carolina. Just so you understand. And I watch this guy who ran for president and he left in disgrace. He was a fool. He left in disgrace, OK, in disgrace. He made a fool out of himself. I don't think he could be elected again in South Carolina because he ran so badly. OK, no way. Then I see him on television like nothing happened talking about Donald Trump. Donald Trump is this. Donald Trump is that. I destroyed him in the sense of we were competing. We were combatants. Then I hear him talking about the war. I have been doing this for ten years. You know why we have been doing it for ten years? Because, of guys like him. He wants to attack Syria and ISIS at the same time, OK? Now for what reason? I want to knock out ISIS. You do one at a time. COOPER: So how does the GOP differ under Donald Trump than under President Bush, than under --? TRUMP: It would be smarter. It would save money. It would have balanced budgets. It would have many more products made in the United States. It would have smart trade, not free trade. I'm a free trader. The problem with free trade, and it's a very big problem. We need smart leadership. To have free trade successfully, you have to have a really smart group of people at the top and person. We don't have that. We have people that are grossly incompetent. We are dealing against China. I've made a lot of money dealing against China. I have buildings. I own the bank of America building. A big chunk of it in San Francisco. I owned 1290 Avenue of America. I got it by competing against China. I didn't get it because of China. I competed against them. I won and I have these assets, these great assets. You know, I have told you before, I have the biggest bank in the world is a tenant of mine in Manhattan. I sell condos to the Chinese. I get along great with the Chinese. I have no problem with the Chinese. I wish we could do it. In fact, I respect China. They gotten away with murder. The single greatest theft in the history of the world what China has done for the United States. We have rebuilt China with what they have taken out of our country. I want to ask you about Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz says flexibility is Washington code word for he is getting ready to stick it to the voters. What does flexibility mean to you? (END VIDEOTAPE) Home Live TV COOPER: Well, as you might expect, he had a lot to say about Senator Cruz, his tough rival in the polls of right, at the right. More of our conversation with Trump just 6/17 2/6/2017 - Transcripts ahead. Plus what to watch for in tonight's Democratic debate right here which starts at the top of the hour. Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders facing off in the wake of his own unexpected win in Michigan that is just days from Florida's important primary. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) [20:27:55] COOPER: We're a little more than a half hour away from the Democratic presidential debate here in Miami. Univision is hosting it. CNN is bringing it to you live. You can watch it right here on CNN at the top of the hours. Tomorrow, though, Republicans will be debating that the University of Miami. That's also on CNN. Florida's primary is on Tuesday. And tonight Donald Trump is riding a new wave of momentum after winning big in Michigan and Mississippi last night. He also won the Hawaii caucuses. When I sat down with him earlier today, we talked about his rival Ted Cruz who also had a big win last night in Idaho and today, got a ringing endorsement from their former mutual opponent Carly Fiorina. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) COOPER: I want to ask you about Ted Cruz. You talked about the importance, you know, you and I talked about the importance of being flexible. TRUMP: He's totally inflexible. COOPER: Cruz says flexibility is Washington code word for he is getting ready to stick it to the voters. What is flexibility to you? On what can you work? TRUMP: It's negotiation. COOPER: So you can work with Democrats? TRUMP: Hey, I wrote "the art of the deal." OK. COOPER: How important is unlocking gridlock in Washington? TRUMP: Very important. We have total gridlock. Nobody can do anything. We have corporate -- you take a look at corporate inversions which, by the way, the senators, they don't even know what it is. We have companies leaving our country. They are leaving for two reasons. Because the taxes are too high and I cut taxes very substantially and Larry Kudlow, by the way, loves my tax plan. Taxes are too high and because they can't get their money back. They have money. You know, Anderson, they have money outside of this country. Billions and billions `of dollars, big corporations like Pfizer. That is leaving now moving to Ireland. So they have money out there. Every Democrat agrees we should let it come back. Every Republican agrees we should -- they all agree that we should let it come back. Who wouldn't? In other words, let the money come into the United States. They have agreed for four years they can't make a deal. You know why? There's no leader. I could sit these guys down in a room and within 20 minutes we would have a deal. COOPER: So Donald Trump as president reaches out to Democrats and Republicans? TRUMP: Well, that's the way it was set up, Anderson. COOPER: Because there are some conservatives who say look, it's more important to stand on principle than it is compromise. TRUMP: I watched Ted Cruz make a fool of himself. I watched Ted Cruz filibuster. [20:30:00] For how long did he do it? For two days or something? Home I also watched 99 senators sitting back and laughing at him and saying, "Hey, when do we get back to work?" Live TV 7/17 2/6/2017 - Transcripts Now, they don't get along and everything so getting back to work doesn't help either. His filibuster did nothing. What did they do? He wasted a day and half while he sat there and told stories about Alice in Wonderland. COOPER: What do you want to make deals with Democrats on? Where do you see room for a compromise? TRUMP: OK. Well first of all, I'd start with corporate inversion, because I can that one on about two seconds. The money has to come back in them. They have $2.5 trillion, probably $5 trillion. But the government says $2.5 trillion that companies want to bring into the country. Right. They can't bring it in. Some countries --some companies are leaving to get their money. Not just the taxes. They are leaving because they can't bring their money back in. I could solve that problem in 10 minutes. OK. But there are many things. We have to make a better health care deal. We have to work on education. We have horrible education. We're number 30 in the world in education and yet number one per pupil in cost. COOPER: So those are all things you can make compromises on with Democrats to get something done? TRUMP: Of course you can. Of course you can. You can't be inflexible. Look, if somebody wants to sell this house and they want a billion dollars. I want a billion dollars. You have to negotiate a little bit. OK. COOPER: So the other knock that, you know, because some conservatives make, certainly to make on President Obama. They say he is sort of an imperial president. Its one of the things Cruz is saying about you. Even these are the pledge that you are having people make at rallies. He says that you're-- they're treating your supporters like subjects to a king. The implication being as president you would be ... TRUMP: It's just words. Look, its just words. Ted, it's just words with Ted. Ted is a guy who's somebody he's a very inflexible guy who never -- he'll never make a deal. You talk about gridlock now. If Ted Cruz became president you wouldn't have anything done and Washington would be a total piece of stone. You wouldn't make any -just I understand you know, he talks about he's a constitutionalist. OK, the constitution was set up with senators and congressmen and you are supposed to work and make deals. COOPER: Do you see the constitution ... TRUMP: And two parties. And it could be more than two parties but two parties. COOPER: Do you see the constitution as a living breathing document that -- or do you see that something set in stone from long ago? Those are sort of ... TRUMP: I see the constitution as set in stone. I see it as one of the great documents of all time. I also see it as something that says you're going to sit down and make deals. I mean look, if Ted wants something, health care and he won't negotiate, the other side is not going to negotiate either. There is going to be a little bit of movement. And that's wrong. COOPER: And that's key to you to end gridlock in transition? TRUMP: Yeah, but I'm going to make a better deal on the other side. COOPER: All right. TRUMP: I'm going to make a better deal. COOPER: On foreign policy. Is there -- and maybe you've been running a campaign. Have you started thinking about a -- sort of a Trump doctrine when for using foreign power overseas. What criteria do you look that? TRUMP: First of all, there can be no doctrine because everything is different. Every situation is different. And I didn't want to go into Iraq and I'll say it 100 times. I didn't want to go , you know, there is way you were on Howard Stern's show years. You know, before it ever happened. And if he asked me that question and he's a friend of mine. He's a good guy actually, much different than you see on radio. Believe me. Home Live TV COOPER: It's a great interview. 8/17 2/6/2017 - Transcripts TRUMP: H is a great guy. But Howard asked me and I said, "Well, I don't know." That's was the first time it was ever asked. But don't forget I'm an entrepreneur. They don't ask me about me simply going into Iraq at that time? And this was long before we went in. And you could see that I was very hesitant. That's was like I wish I go in. Look ... COOPER: What criteria would you use for sending troops somewhere? TRUMP: Let me just tell you. Going into Iraq, my opinion, was one of the worst mistakes in the history of this country. It was one of the worst decisions ever made in the history of this country. It started everything that's happening today in the Middle East is because of that one decision to go into Iraq, OK? It was a horrible decision, including the migration. Everything that, you know, it's a mess. Now if Saddam Hussein was there, would we be better off? Absolutely. You know, hey, this was not a nice man. This wasn't great guy, but Saddam Hussein did one thing. He killed terrorists. He was a professional killer of terrorists. Now you want to be a terrorist? You go to Iraq. That's called the Harvard of terrorism. Look, whether it's Gaddafi, so terrible decision, Hillary Clinton. Whether it's Saddam Hussein, we were a lot better off before. COOPER: Do you think your ... TRUMP: And besides that. Iraq did not knock down the world trade center. Just in case you had any questions. COOPER: Do you think Islam is at war with the west? TRUIMP: I think Islam hates us. There is something -- there is something there that is a tremendous hatred there. There's a tremendous hatred. We have to get to the bottom of it. There's an unbelievable hatred of us. COOPER: In Islam itself? TRUMP: You're going to have to figure that out. OK. You'll get another Pulitzer, right? But you'll have to figure that out. But there's a tremendous hatred. And we have to be very vigilant. We have to be very careful. And we can't allow people coming into this country who have this hatred of the United States. COOPER: I guess the question is ... TRUMP: And of people that are not Muslim. [20:35:01] COOPER: I guess the question is, is there a war between the west and radical Islam or between the west and Islam itself? TRUMP: Well, it's radical but it's very hard to define. It's very hard to separate because you don't know who is who. Look, these two young people that got married, she supposedly radicalized him. Who knows what happened? COOPER: The San Bernardino killer? TRUMP: The bottom line is they killed 14 people. They gave them baby showers. I mean, they were friends of theirs and they walked in and they killed them. There's unbelievable hatred. You look at Paris, 138 people killed. Many, many people are going to die in the hospital. Mortally wounded, horribly wounded, horribly wounded. And they walk into a room and boom, boom, boom. There's a sickness going on that's unbelievable. And honestly, you have to get to the bottom of it. COOPER: You talked about going after the families of terrorists. You now reversed that essentially ... Home Live TV TRUMP: I didn't reverse anything. 9/17 2/6/2017 - Transcripts COOPER: You would still want to go after the families of terrorists? TRUMP: No, no, no. I didn't reverse anything. (END VIDEO CLIP) COOPER: Donald Trump had a lot more to say about what tactics he would try to use against terrorists. How far he's actually willing to go and what he thinks about waterboarding. What we talked about today, some were calling his -- and we also talked about what some were calling, it's a real victory speech last night. Let's go ask our political panel what they are expecting to see at the Univision Democratic Debate which starts at the top of the hour now just a minutes away. We're going to bring it you live, starting at 9:00 p.m. Eastern. Stick around. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) COOPER: Looking in the two podiums here in Miami tonight. We're less than 20 minutes from now and Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders will be facing off in Democratic debate. CNN's bringing the Univision Debate to you live. Now earlier today, I interviewed Republican frontrunner Donald Trump fresh off his big wins yesterday and his pretty surreal victory speech which was we've said, he used to showcase something Trump products which aren't actually products that are available. [20:40:10] Steaks, some are calling it a QVC moment filled by Mitt Romney's recent remarks. I asked Trump about that. You'll hear his response in a moment. But, first let's pick up the interview where we left off before the break. Where does Trump stand now on his comments about going after the families of terrorists? (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) You would still want to go after the families of terrorists? TRUMP: No, no, I didn't reverse anything. I clarified very simply we have laws. We have to obey the laws. Now there must have to be one what COOPER: During the candidate of church would be against the law. TRUMP: I didn't say kill. We have to go after them. The family knows would have terrorists in that COOPER: What does that mean? Kidnapping them? TRUMP: You have a terrorist you have we going to do something and it's the only way you going to stop it. You know, I tell the story of General Pershing and take a look at General Pershing in 1990 in the Philippines, how he stopped terrorism. OK. You'll take a look at it. It's too long a story to tell on the tape. It will take the whole thing but it's one of the very interesting and very powerful stories. Look, we're going to have to be a lot tougher. We are playing with a different set of rules. ISIS chops off people heads. ISIS drowns people in steel cages and pulls up the cage an hour later. Everyone is gone, 40, 50, 60 people at a time. COOPER: Were you said the other day we have to play the game, you said we got to play the game the way they play the game. TRUMP: We have to play the game at a much tougher level that were plan. COOPER: What does that mean though? Home Live TV TRUMP: We have to expand those laws. 10/17 2/6/2017 - Transcripts COOPER: Does that mean cutting off heads? TRUMP: No, it doesn't mean that but we have to expand the laws luck. COOPER: What is explains the laws? TRUMP: Anderson, lets me explain something we are playing at this level and they don't care. They have no rules. And we have these rules that are very onerous. I mean our military is got brought in because ... COOPER: Geneva Conventions on war. There's ways -- there's rules in a battle. TRUMP: I know that, but, you know what, it's funny. It's very interesting what's happens with the Geneva Convention. Everybody believes in the Geneva Convention until they start losing and then they say oh, let's take out the bomb. OK. When they start losing. We have to play with a tougher set of rules. We have laws. We don't allow water boarding. Think of this ISIS is -- these are smart people. These are people that know the internet better than we do and we're the ones that's, you know, came up with it. ISIS is sitting around. They just chopped off 20 heads of Christians and others. They just drowned 40 people. And they are sitting around watching us arguing about water boarding. COOPER: When you say increase the laws and do more than water boarding, what is that specifically? TRUMP: I'll work it with the generals. I'll work wit the generals. COOPER: I talked to General Michael Hayden. TRUMP: For sure he says it's terrible that we talk that way. And, you know, what that's why he's been fighting this war for many years. OK. COOPER: He is the Four-Star General Former CIA. Fomer Head of the CIA., he says sharing foreign policy ideas are frightening. TRUMP: Oh, yeah I know well, his, he frightens me because we've been fighting ISIS for many years and this shouldn't have taken -- this should have been over with quickly. So that's the problem we have these people that are frightened because I'm protecting chaos. COOPER: But do you think the problem with fighting ISIS is that we're not using the same tactics that they are? TRUMP: We're not fighting it strongly enough. We have to end it and get become to rebuilding our country. Our infrastructure is falling apart. Our country is falling apart. Our country is falling apart. Our bridges are falling down. You know, 60 percent of our bridges are in dangerous condition? And we're spending trillions, trillions of dollars in the Middle East. We have to fight it viciously and swiftly and we have to knock out ISIS. Now I didn't want to go into Iraq. But the problem now is the way Obama got us out was a disaster. And if you remember, when we got out -- and I said it on your show two or three years ago. I said take the oil. Did I say take the oil? COOPER: Yeah, you did. TRUMP: OK. COOPER: So when you say so are you still in support of water boarding and more? TRUMP: I'm in total support of water boarding. It going to be within the law but I have to expand the law because a lot of people think it's not within the law now because of this administration. So they are allow to chop off heads and we aren't allowed to water board. Somehow we're at a big disadvantage. I will tell you that right now. Home Live TV COOPER: On a -- yeah. 11/17 2/6/2017 - Transcripts TRUMP: And, again I was going to give you the analogy. So they are sitting around having dinner. They believe it or not, even though they chop off heads and even though do they drown people, and they are talking. Can you imagine the conversation when they are talking about how weak and soft and pathetic we are and they go out and chop off people's heads? OK. They can't believe it. They can believe it. COOPER: I asked about ... TRUMP: The fact is, just in a nutshell, we have to be much tougher. If we're going to beat ISIS, we have to be much tougher than we are. When you have General Hayden saying, "Oh, that's so terrible the way Trump is talking," that's why we're losing. COOPER: I got to ask you. I watched the press conference you gave last night. The victory speech. Obviously huge night for you. Just a couple factual things. The steaks you showed, those aren't Trump steaks, right? TRUMP: Oh, no they are Trump. No I buy them. I'm not going to kill the cow. COOPER: No but they aren't sold those are because ... TRUMP: No, no, we sell excuse me. COOPER: For showing this thing was to fight back in Flint and Mitt Romney said about ... TRUMP: No, no just I understand Trump steaks. [20:45:00] We sell the steaks through my clubs. I have many clubs and hotels. So we sell this cow ... COOPER: But they aren't sold at sharper image. They are not TRUMP: Oh no, they are sold differently. COOPER: That business is gone. TRUMP: No, no it's the same thing. It's an offshoot of it. I mean it's the same thing. We have, we do a tremendous steak business. COOPER: Because those steaks weren't bought locally from a meat supplier? TRUMP: No, no. We buy a lot of steaks from different places. I don't want to but if I'm in California, I don't want to buy my steaks in New York. COOPER: So those steaks you sell ... TRUMP: ...we sale the steaks, and largely, to our hotels and our clubs and things like that. You know, it's a small business.. COOPER: And the magazine, you showed up, that's not the Trump magazine that Mitt Romney was talking out? TRUMP: I've had many magazines. Every time I open a business, I'll sometimes open a magazine for a period of a year and get the business started and then close it. COOPER: If people were pointing out today saying, "Oh, look, the items you were showing last night, in order to push back against Mitt Romney, you know, the implication was those are Trump steaks available nationwide somewhere they're not." TRUMP: ...where they are available nation wide. You can buy them at different places that I own. I own many, many places. COOPER: You can buy them if you eat in your restaurant here somewhere? Home Live TV TRUMP: Yeah. h i db h 12/17 2/6/2017 - Transcripts COOPER: You can't go on the internet and buy them. TRUMP: The magazine, that magazine has been with me for a long time and you've morphed it in. COOPER: But that's not the Trump magazine that Romney was talking about. TRUMP: ...many magazines when I start a business, and I keep it open for a year or two until the business gets going. And after the building, if business gets going, you close it up. It's like a lost leader, because frankly, you don't make any money with these magazines. COOPER: Finally, the debate tomorrow night, do you expect that the tone, the tenor to be different than the last? Last one was tough and then you had people on both sides come after you? TRUMP: It's such an interesting question. I think it's going to be much different. I must tell you, last time, I was leading. And by the way, I don't know how you feel about it, but every single poll said that I won the last debate, every -- Drudge said it, Time Magazine said it. You know, they do those online poll. With hundreds of thousands of people calling in, but, I was in the '60s and '70s percentile. Now, when I went into that, I said, this is going to be an interesting evening. I will tell you. It's going to be a tough evening. Many people said, "Oh, boy, I wouldn't want to be you tonight." That was going to be a tough evening. I mean, they were like wounded. They were really wounded. I think this is going to be much different. Now, I may be wrong, but I am now far and away the front-runner. I think -- here's the thing, the Republican Party is sitting on something that's so bright. They are sitting on millions and millions and millions of people that want to be part of it. The worst thing they can do is knock me out. If I get knocked out, if I don't make it, every one of those ... COOPER: Do you think they'll going to start to coalesce around you? TRUMP: ... every one of those, I'm the only one can beat Hillary and I'll beat her easily. I'll bring in Michigan, I may bring in New York. You know, we always talk about the path. You know, the path is much tougher for a Republican, you do understand that structurally. Because if they lose Ohio, it's over, If they lose Pennsylvania, they loose Florida, it's over. But I'll bring in states along the other. First of all, I'll win in Florida. COOPER: Will you debate Cruz if it's one on one? TRUMP: Yeah, that's fine. COOPER: You would do a debate with Cruz .... TRUMP: I don't think he's a good debater. I think he's -- frankly, the way I look at Ted, I think it's very phony. I think Ted is actually a bad talker, pretty good debater, bad talker, can't talk. I don't mind debating him at all. The problem is when I debate somebody, then people say, I'm not a nice person. But they say you won the debate. Home Live TV COOPER: So, bottom line, tomorrow night you're expecting a different tone, but you'll be ready for anything? TRUMP: ... be softer, but I'll be ready. I mean, you know, I think that Marco is going to be a different person. Marco has been, you know, mortally wounded. You know, 13/17 2/6/2017 - Transcripts TRUMP: ... be softer, but I ll be ready. I mean, you know, I think that Marco is going to be a different person. Marco has been, you know, mortally wounded. You know, question is, will Marco even be there? I hope he makes the right decision. I'm not going to make the decision for him. But Marco has been, you know, pretty, badly wounded. It will be interesting to see what happens. Kasich is interesting, because he said he's going to win Michigan and he lost. He said he's going to win, I mean, he said it to you. I think I watched him on your show. COOPER: He never came out and said he'd win. But, he said, he thought he would do very well. TRUMP: ...said, he would Michigan. He didn't even come in second. OK. So, you know, I mean, I was of the impression if he didn't win Michigan -- I'm not talking about Ohio, I'm talking about Michigan. If he didn't win Michigan, he would drop out. He came in third. OK. He didn't even come in second. So, it'll be interesting to see what he says. And Ted is Ted. I mean, we've been playing the game now for a long time. These debates to me are getting very boring, if you want to know the truth. COOPER: Mr. Trump, thank you. TRUMP: Have a good time. COOPER: Appreciate it. (END VIDEO CLIP) A lot to talk about in that interview. Just ahead, we'll have some reaction to what Donald Trump said. Steaks and all, we'll also talk about what is at stake tonight for the Democrat, Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton about to take the debate stage in about 10 minutes. Stay with us, we'll be right back. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) [20:53:14] COOPER: Well, the Univision Democratic Debate will be starting here on CNN just a few minutes from now you can watch right here just stake around for that. There's a lot of excitement in this hall. We're also looking forward to our CNN Republican Debate over the University of Miami tomorrow night. It's a very busy week for us in light of my conversation with the GOP front-runner, I want start offer panel discussion on Donald Trump and then will switch the Democrats his victory speech last night his opponents and also his path going to forward. Joining us right now with CNN "Inside Politics" Anchor John King and Chief Political Analyst Gloria Borger. You know, it's interesting to hear Trump. He is clearly you and I we're talking about this. He's aware of the moment he is in right now. JOHN KING, CNN ANCHOR, "INSIDE POLITICS": Yeah. I take the whole interview globally. Especially when you start very measured, leaning back. You asked him a question about Larry Kudlow his used in China trade. Six weeks ago, Donald Trump would not have let you finish that sentence. He would have jumped and attacked Larry Kudlow. He would made a solution on steaks. He would have been more combative. He understands you heard a bit debate last night before he got into the infomercial two where he said its time to let keep the Republican Senate, keep the Republican Congress. He understands the moment that he's very close to being the presumptive nominee and trying to see more measured, trying to see more frankly, in a word, presidential. COOPER: He can't stop himself from like going back to what Mitt Romney said about his failed businesses showing steaks which are not steaks that are -- they aren't Trump steaks. They are bought from a local meat seller in West Palm Beach Florida called Bush brothers that still sold Home Live TV KING: Irony there? That was witness. COOPER: It's a minor ridiculous point but the fact that he was sort of fibbing about it in a nationally, you know, broadcast press conference is kind of surreal. GLORIA 14/17 2/6/2017 - Transcripts BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: You know, he can only exhibit a certain amount of self-control to a point, I think, and I thought he was trying to do so with you today because, clearly, people have gotten to him and said, OK, you need to act presidential. But then when you ask him a question, he turns into sort of Donald Trump who has to go on the attack, attack, attack. [20:55:00] KING: He got most of the way through. Ted Cruz doesn't get under my skin, doesn't get under my skin, roar. COOPER: I want to bring Alicia Menendez, on Fusion. This is the Network Univision. Thank you so much joining us its pleasure to be here. What are you looking on the stage now? I mean, it comes at a critical time. We do a debate on Sunday night with the democrats for the states now. I mean, a lot has changed just since then. ALICIA MENENDEZ, FUSION CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, and listen, I think the candidates understand that they're speaking tonight to a broad audience, but also very specifically to a Latino audience, which Univision knows that it caters to. So, top of mind for that audience economic issues, one and three Latino voters say that's what's top of mind for them but, immigration, of course, a deeply personal issue to this community. I saw a study that said one in every three Latino voters actually has someone in their family who is undocumented. When you think about that, that's an issue not only that, you know, you might say to a pollster, yes, it's important to me. It's an issue that actually gets you out on the door on Election Day, especially the candidate like Donald Trump. COOPER: And also, Alicia, I've seen polls based where they show Donald Trump very unpopular among Latino voters in a general election. I'm curious to see how much they sort of try to define the GOP as Donald Trump's party and how much they try to talk about Donald Trump. MENENDEZ: I think they would be insane not to. I think Democrats see that there's an opportunity for them to pivot to the general election to use Trump as an example of what the GOP stands for. And yet, even though you see a vast majority of Latino voters saying that they find Trump's remarks on immigration abhorrent. You also see that only a small percentage thinks it's reflective of the Republican Party overall. So the question is, if it's someone other than Trump namely, if it is Cruz, can he get out from under the damage that Trump has done? BORGER: And, you know, tonight, you'll see Hillary Clinton hug President Obama to a certain degree on the executive orders on immigration. But on the question of deportation ... MENENDEZ: Yeah. BORGER: ... and the number of illegal immigrants who have been deported, it's a very big issue in the Latino community. And we'll see how she deals with that. KING: I think it fascinates questions, who are they talking to? They have a national audience, but Senator Sanders is trying to build the relationships from the Latino community, very important to him, because he's a newcomer, because he's from the state of Vermont. So, is he want to focus there or does he want to focus on Ohio or Illinois next week, because he has a national audience, even though he's at a Univision debate. Also on the trade issue, does he want to talk like he talks to the Rust Belt about, you know, you're getting screwed by these deals, we need to be tougher, we need to take them away. Well, in Florida and among the Latino community, a lot of the small businesses do a lot of business throughout the hemisphere. They have family relationships, they have cultural relationship, they have historical relationships. Home Live TV So, the tough on trade argument that you can sell in Michigan, Ohio and Illinois is a little bit different here when you get to Florida. COOPER: And does Hillary Clinton start to -- I mean, did she learn some lesson from what happened in Michigan and start to pivot that, you know, famous word of liti hi h i t ti ltit d f diff t ? 15/17 2/6/2017 politics which you can interpret in a multitude of different ways? - Transcripts MENENDEZ: I saw a statistic that should perhaps, make the Clinton campaign nervous, which is that about 18 percent of the early voting that's been done in the state by democratic voters are from voters who did not vote in the last two elections. So, those are voters that are more likely to come out and vote for an outsider candidate, which is what Sanders is trying to position himself as. So, I think you have the possibility of seeing the type of spike we saw in Michigan that pollsters missed, actually happen on Election Day. BORGER: It's such a diverse state, though, right? And I think that, you know, somebody who can win Florida in either party can say, I have an appeal to a broad coalition because, you know, this is in many ways, three different states. And so, you know, either one of them would want to win this state. COOPER: And just in terms of delegate count. I mean, that you have that floating around in your head at all times. I mean, Bernie Sanders had, I mean, amazing win in Michigan, surprised a lot of people, certainly in the pundit world. The path forward, though, is tough. KING: And yet, she stretched her lead last night in the delegate race. So, you have two campaigns going on. Her campaign says it's OK. Yeah, we took a punch. We didn't want to lose Michigan, it's embarrassing. But, we stress our lead in the delegate debate for the psychology of the race is now in Sanders camp. And the question is one win is not enough, but, if he can take in Ohio and in Illinois, or at least, one of them, if he can have a stronger showing in Florida than people expect. Last night was an opening, it was not a game-changer. It was an opening to a game-changer. Next Tuesday could be a game changer if he wins again. If he understands the pressure up there tonight, she wants to put him back in his place, if he will make him more of a message candidate. So, they both have reasons to escalate the attacks because of the stakes in the campaign, but there are huge risks if you do that, too. That's what I'm fascinated by, the chess. COOPER: Right, how aggressive is it going to get tonight? I mean, we saw a lot of tension on the stage on Sunday ... BORGER: Yeah. COOPER: ... of the debate over the issues of NAFTA and trade. But, are they going to be coming out from the get-go ready to go? BORGER: I think they might. It's hard to say, but so much is at stake, particularly for Bernie Sanders right now that I can't imagine that he would back off. He was very aggressive from the last debate. I think he'll continue. COOPER: Yeah, well, I want to thank John King and Gloria Borger, Alicia Menendez, it's great to have you. Thank you for joining us. We will see all of our panelists after the debate. It's about 10 seconds way now. [21:00:00] Time now for the main event and we'll be on live right afterward. Here it is. Home Search CNN... Live TV  16/17 2/6/2017 - Transcripts U.S. World Opinion Health Travel Living Video More…  U.S. Edition + © 2017 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved. CNN Sans ™ & © 2016 Cable News Network. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | AdChoices | About us | Visit CNN | Newsletters | Work for us | Help | Transcripts | License Footage | CNN Newsource Home Live TV 17/17 EXHIBIT 3 THE SLATEST YOUR NEWS COMPANION JAN. 29 2017 12:09 PM Rudy Giuliani Admits Trump Asked How to Implement a Muslim Ban Legally By Daniel Politi Rudy Giuliani speaks to reporters at Trump Tower on Jan. 12 in New York City. Drew Angerer/Getty Images Whatever they may say now, it turns out that President Donald Trump’s controversial executive order on refugees and immigration was actually the result of his desire to ban Muslims from entering the United States. Rudy Giuliani said as much in an interview, noting that Trump asked him for help on how to implement his desired ban. Ever since Trump signed the executive order Friday stopping the country’s refugee program for four months, and preventing entry of visitors from seven Muslim-majority countries for 90 days, supporters have insisted that it was incorrect to characterize the move as a ban on Muslims. “It’s not a Muslim ban,” Trump said Saturday afternoon. After all, supporters argued, several countries with huge Muslim populations were excluded from the list. (Many were also quick to point out that those excluded from the list have ties to Trump’s business interests.) Advertisement But now Giuliani has essentially admitted that Trump wanted to ban Muslims from the United States, he just knew that an outright blockade would be illegal, so he asked the former New York mayor for help. Giuliani revealed the stark details in an interview on Fox News, where host Jeanine Pirro essentially set up what should have been a softball question: “Does the ban have anything to do with religion?” And that’s when Giuliani got into the explanation: OK. I’ll tell you the whole history of it. So when he first announced it he said, “Muslim ban.” He called me up and said, “Put a commission together, show me the right way to do it legally.” I put a commission together with Judge Mukasey, with Congressman McCaul, Pete King, a whole group of other very expert lawyers on this. And what we did was we focused on, instead of religion, danger. The areas of the world that create danger for us. Which is a factual basis. Not a religious basis. Perfectly legal, perfectly sensible, and that’s what the ban is based on. It’s not based on religion. It’s based on places where there are substantial evidence that people are sending terrorists into our country. This is just the beginning. Help us hold President Trump accountable. Despite Giuliani’s claim that the order has no “religious basis,” that isn’t quite true considering that Trump’s measure specifically states that once the refugee program resumes, it will “prioritize refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.” Trump has outright said he wants to give priority to Christian refugees. He hinted as much again Sunday morning, writing on Twitter that “Christians in the Middle-East have been executed in large numbers. We cannot allow this horror to continue!” Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Follow Christians in the Middle-East have been executed in large numbers. We cannot allow this horror to continue! 10:03 AM - 29 Jan 2017 60,116 226,746 In the interview, Pirro expressed surprise that Saudi Arabia and Pakistan were left off the list. Giuliani said Saudi Arabia deserves the benefit of the doubt: “Saudi Arabia is going through a massive change. I think the kingdom particularly under the new prince has a real understanding that we are dealing with a massive radical Islamic terrorist problem.” And Pakistan? “Pakistan I would have to know more about,” Giuliani said. “It troubles me a little bit like it troubles you.” THE SLATEST YOUR NEWS COMPANION JAN. 29 2017 7:31 PM Trump Defends Immigration Order, Blasts Senate Critics Amid Growing Protests By Daniel Politi Thousands attend an afternoon rally in lower Manhattan to protest President Donald Trump's new immigration policies on Sunday in New York City. Spencer Platt/Getty Images Amid growing chaos and confusion across the country—and the world—regarding President Donald Trump’s executive order barring refugees and arrivals from seven predominantly Muslim countries, the commander in chief defended his order and made it clear he has no plans to back down. As large number of protesters gathered in airports across the country to protest the order that bars Syrian refugees indefinitely, suspends the nation’s refugee program for four months, and halts arrivals of citizens from seven nations—Syria, Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, and Libya—lawyers struggled to figure out how many people were being detained by Trump’s surprisingly broad executive order that was signed on Friday. And, finally, a few Republican lawmakers decided to stand up (at least meekly) to the commander in chief. This is just the beginning. Help us hold President Trump accountable. Elliott Lusztig @ezlusztig Follow Full statement of John McCain and Lindsey Graham on Trump's EO on Immigration: reckless, ill-considered, irresponsible, counter-productive. 1:39 PM - 29 Jan 2017 3,093 4,594 CONTINUE READING FOLLOW SLATE SLATE ON IPHONE ANDROID KINDLE REPRINTS ADVERTISE WITH US ABOUT US USER AGREEMENT CONTACT US PRIVACY POLICY WORK WITH US FAQ FEEDBACK CORRECTIONS Slate is published by The Slate Group, a Graham Holdings Company. All contents © 2017 The Slate Group LLC. All rights reserved. This is just the beginning. Help us hold President Trump accountable. EXHIBIT 4 3/13/2017 Home Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start | Fox News Politics U.S. Opinion Business Entertainment Tech Science Health Travel Lifestyle World On Air F I R S T 1 0 0 D AY S Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start Published February 21, 2017 This is a rush transcript from "The First 100 Days," February 21, 2017. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated. MARTHA MCCALLUM, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Breaking tonight, we are live in Jacksonville, Florida for a special immigration town hall, on the same day that President Trump's Department of Homeland Security issued two very important memos designed to crack down on illegal immigrants on our southern border. Welcome to day 33 everybody of "The First 100." I'm Martha MacCallum and this was President Trump just days here in Jacksonville before the election. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DONALD TRUMP, U.S. PRESIDENT: The border crisis is the worst it's ever been. It's a national emergency. They get caught again, they go to jail for five years, guess what's going to happen? They're not coming back, folks. Now, our people don't want to do it. Our weak, weak politicians don't want to do it. A Trump administration will cancel all federal funding to sanctuary cities. We will end illegal immigration. We are going to stop drugs from pouring into your communities and poisoning our youths and everybody else. And we will deport all criminal aliens, quickly from our country. (END VIDEO CLIP) MCCALLUM: States like Florida, cities like Jacksonville, part of a movement behind the president's victory, drawn to him by a host of issues, not the least of which was talk like that just days before the November election when, as you remember, nobody thought he was going to win, but those ideas resonated in a big way and we are here tonight to speak to people who helped to elect Mr. Trump and we'll ask them how they think it's going so far in the first 100 days and their expectations that were set on immigration policy, its impact on jobs, on safety, on terrorism, and on the culture of the communities that we all live in across this country. The November exit polling from Florida helps to tell the story of why we are here tonight. Among 10 percent who said immigration was the most important issue for them on Election Day, 69 percent of those voted for Donald Trump. Among the 23 percent who said that most important issue to them was illegal immigrants working in the U.S. have to be deported to their home country, 92 percent of those individuals voted for Donald Trump. We're going to get to all of that in moments with a town hall meeting that includes lawmakers, law enforcement, and lots of average voters who've gathered here tonight to have their voices heard. But, first, we go to the White House and Senior Advisor to the President, Stephen Miller, who helped to craft the president's controversial executive order calling for more rigorous vetting of immigrants from seven Middle Eastern countries. Mr. Miller, welcome. Good to have you here tonight. STEPHEN MILLER, ADVISOR TO THE PRESIDENT: Hey, it's great to be here. Thank you. MCCALLUM: So, everybody is anticipating the next rollout of the next executive order, which is supposed to clarify some of the issues that were perhaps wrong with the first one and then got too caught up in the courts. So how is it going to be different this time? 1/15 3/13/2017 Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start | Fox News MILLER: Well, nothing was wrong with the first executive order. However, there was a flawed judicial ruling that was erroneous. The president recently read to the statute from the Immigration and Nationality Act, which clearly states, he has the power as president to impose any restrictions he deems necessary when it's in the national interest. However, because of the exigency of the situation and the need to protect our country, and to protect our citizens, the president is going to be issuing a new executive action based off of the judicial ruling, flawed though it may be, to protect our country and to keep our people safe, and that is going to be coming very soon. MCCALLUM: All right. (Inaudible) is 18-year-old, but he wants to know specifically how the second-order is going to be different. MILLER: Well, one of the big differences that you're going to see in the executive order is that it's going to be responsive to the judicial ruling, which didn't exist previously. And so these are mostly minor technical differences. Fundamentally, you're still going to have the same basic policy outcome for the country, but you're going to be responsive to a lot of very technical issues that were brought up by the court and those will be addressed. But in terms of protecting the country, those basic policies are still going to be in effect. I want to try and broaden the conversation here and not get lost in all this technical minutia. Here's the reality. The United States admits more people than any other country on the face of the earth. We've got a serious problem in our country of terrorism, radicalization, and serious problems of people joining ISIS, joining terror groups, joining Al-Qaeda, and committing or attempting to commit acts of crime and terror against our nation. We have seen a huge synapses between this -MCCALLUM: Let me jump in on you there for a moment. MILLER: Yeah. MCCALLUM: Let me note that -- because here's one of the problems. Now, I know that you think the order was fine the way it was issued initially. But courts disagree. In fact, 48 courts took issued with it and that's why it's halted right now as a result of that process that happens in this country. So, now you're about to issue another order and one of the things that would need to be addressed, it sounds like, is proving that the seven countries that you have targeted are indeed the right ones to target and that you have merit and reason for targeting those specific ones, rather than, let say, Saudi Arabia, right? MILLER: Well, the reality is these seven countries were designated by President Obama and by Congress in 2015 and 2016. The reality is that the seven countries -- look at Yemen, look at Libya, look Syria, look at the conditions in these countries. This is an assessment based on the threat that these countries pose today and going into the future. We've had dozens and dozens of terrorism cases from these seven countries, case after case after case. But more fundamentally, it's the position of our intelligence community that these countries today pose a threat to our country moving forward and the president is acting decisively to protect our country from these threats. And the rulings from those courts were flawed, erroneous, and false. The president's actions were clearly legal and constitutional and consistent with the long-standing traditions of presidents in the past to exercise the authority in the Immigration and Nationality Act to suspend immigration when it poses a threat to our security. And that's what the president will do. In the next few days, we will roll out the details of what that action will be. MCCALLUM: And we understand -- I'm sorry. I think we have a little bit of a delay, so I don't mean to be stepping on you. But I do understand that that's your perspective and that's the White House's argument and we'll see how that next (inaudible). One more question to you from one of our viewers for tonight if you will. Jack Capra who is a veteran in our audience this evening, says how far is the administration willing to go to secure the southern border? Will the administration deploy the 2/15 3/13/2017 Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start | Fox News U.S. military to do so? MILLER: Well, right now we have 20,000 fantastic border patrol agents who are doing a great job. But, Martha, I really want to try and broaden this conversation and get to the core of the issues here. Whether we're talking about the new executive action and in the next few days we will be able to share the details what that will be and how it's responsive to the court's ruling. Whether we're talking about the southern border, whether we're talking about our guest worker programs, here's the core issue. It is the job of the president and the job of our government to protect the hard-working people of this country, to protect their jobs, to protect their wages, to protect their communities, to keep them safe from terrorism, and crime, and drugs, and wage depression. Uncontrolled migration over many years has undermined wages, working prospects for people of all backgrounds, and all walks of life and it's made us less safe. Proper controls will raise wages, improve employment, help migrant workers enter the middle-class who are already living here, and keep us safe from threats of terror. And this president, and this administration is fully committed to doing what is necessary, lawful, just, decent, and right, to take care of and to defend hard-working, patriotic citizens and their communities. MCCALLUM: All right. Well, we look very much forward to that second executive order and we'll watch the path and see if it makes it through the courts and that, you know, the executive branch, the judicial branch, can find their way to put this together. Thank you very much, Stephen Miller, for joining us from the White House tonight. MILLER: Thank you. I really appreciate it. Thanks. MCCALLUM: Good to have you with us. Thank you. So let's bring in Jacksonville native and Florida congressman Ron DeSantis who is one of the first to stand by President Trump's original order. Good to have you here tonight, Congressman. REP. RON DESANTIS, R-FLORIDA: Thanks for coming down to Florida. MCCALLUM: It's great to be here. Thank you for having us. So, one of the interesting comments from General Kelly when he spoke about this the other day was that, you know, he wanted the second executive order to take place in a way that we would not find people backed up in our airports. So he was acknowledging that there was some issue in this rollout. What are your thoughts on that? DESANTIS: Well, I think that's right. I mean, you have examples of, like a grandmother who is a green card holder coming back from one of these countries, that's not where the threat is. The threats are with people who are unvetted. These are countries that are either state sponsors of terrorism, or overrun in large degree by terrorist groups. And if you look-- since 9/11, the biggest change in the terrorist threat has been how much it's expanded in different countries. You have Somalia, other parts of Africa -MCCALLUM: So you think more than those seven should be on the list? DESANTIS: Well, I think that -- if you read the executive order, that's a 90-day period. They are also going to be talking with other countries. So people mentioned Saudi Arabia, so maybe Saudi Arabia doesn't have procedures that were -- that are acceptable but -- so maybe there will be changes there. But I think we have to err on the side of caution. And my view is we have immigration system, but that immigration system shouldn't make the American people assume risk for their safety by us bringing in people we don't know. MCCALLUM: Let's bring in some of our great audience that we have with us tonight. Let me start by going to Jack Capra, who is with us tonight. You know, you listened to this conversation, Jack, and you're a veteran, so we thank you for your service. 3/15 3/13/2017 Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start | Fox News JACK CAPRA, WOUNDED VETERAN AND FLORIDA RESIDENT: Thank you. I actually used to work with Congressman. Yeah. (CROSSTALK) MCCALLUM: -- so you're paying attention. CAPRA: Yeah. I used to work with the congressman in Guantanamo few years ago. We both had duty there, so. MCCALLUM: Well, welcome. It's great to have the two of you here together tonight and good to talk to you about these serious issues. You listen to Stephen Miller from the White House. What did you think about what he had to say? CAPRA: Well, I think his main argument was right on point and I agree with that. I think this is, you know, securing our borders as a national security issue. It's not just -- of course, it's also about economics, but it is a national security issue and it's the federal government's job to keep our people safe, keep our citizens safe from external and internal threats. And so I think immigration is a big contributor to that. MCCALLUM: Yeah. You know, obviously, the rollout of it didn't go quite as planned. You know, it brings me sort of a general question that I want to put to all of you as we get going tonight. As you look at so far the first 100 days, we're on day 33 right now. So I'm going to ask you to raise your hand for three different answers, OK. So the first one would be, so far, are you, A -- no, you don't raise your hand yet because I want you to know all the options. You can either be, A, thrilled. I'm really happy with how it's going. Or, B, you know, it's OK, but I think there's room for improvement. And, C, I am a little disappointed. OK. So raise your hand if you would say that you are thrilled with how it's going so far. Wow, that's a lot of folks. Look at that. OK, what about choice B, which is I'm glad, but, you know, I'd like to see a little bit of improvement around the edges. OK. So how many of you are disappointed, not happy with how it is going so far? A couple up here, one in the back there, one back there. OK, all right. We're going to get around to you and hear some of your reasons for all of that. You know, what do you think about that? DESANTIS: Well, look, I think that Congress is -MCCALLUM: Which category do you fit in, first of all? DESANTIS: Well, I think Congress has gotten off to a slow start. MCCALLUM: Yeah. DESANTIS: I think the president has done much better than we have. He's following through with what he said he would do and we are kind of -MCCALLUM: Wow. DESANTIS: We in the Congress were kind of getting to what we said we do, but we haven't quite gotten of it. I think we will, but I think they've done a better start. It's also important to say, they're not confirming his nominees. He doesn't have guy -- he's got like a fraction of a government in place because the Democrats in the Senate are basically trying to stall as many people as possible. MCCALLUM: So, let me go to somebody over here. Kris Koproski, who is the mother of three and you think that we need to put a pause on emigration. So, are you -- how do you feel about the president so far and do you think Congress -- do you agree with Congressman DeSantis that they're not pulling their weight? 4/15 3/13/2017 Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start | Fox News KRIS KOPROSKI, FLORIDA RESIDENT: I am thrilled with what President Trump is doing. Congress, you know, they need to get on board and specifically, the Democrats. He needs his cabinet, his full cabinet. And they're just seemed to be stopping him at every turn. There's got to be a discussion open. They've got to be willing to give a little bit. MCCALLUM: So you're nodding your head there. Who -- is anybody in particular in Congress that you're, you know, disappointed in so far? And, you know, would you like to give them a message tonight? CLAIRE FRANK, FLORIDA RESIDENT: How much time do you have? MCCALLUM: I got about 48 minutes. Go ahead. FRANK: I would say we finally have someone in office who is doing something probably not even -- the last president I can think has done anything like this was Abraham Lincoln, who is trying to reunite the country. And that's what we voted for him to do. And that's what he is doing. Congress isn't getting behind us. I say, term limits. That way you can clean house, just like he's doing draining the swamp. There's too many in there right now that, you know, are not doing their job. Stop voting -- McCain is a pain. DESANTIS: I am the leader of the term limits movement in the House, so we do need to do that. MCCALLUM: All right. So you're on your third term. So how many terms should he get? How many terms? DESANTIS: Well, our amendment is three terms in the House and two terms in the Senate. MCCALLUM: OK. DESANTIS: The same on Trump endorsed during the campaign. So, let's get a vote and let see what we can do. MCCALLUM: All right. We're just getting rolling here. Great job opening this conversation up here. So, coming to the next moment, just today, the Trump administration ordered more border agents, 5,000 more, also, 10,000 more ICE agents and plans to move ahead with the controversial wall plan on our southern border, so the fallout and the debate from the floor here coming up next. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) MCCALLUM: Breaking tonight, just hours before the doors opened on our town hall meeting here in Jacksonville, Florida, the Department of Homeland Security announced the brand-new priorities when it comes to their plan to deport illegal immigrants. The two memos from DHS Secretary John Kelly today say impart that his agency is going to use public safety to guide their decisions, while the White House made a point of saying that there will be no longer special exceptions to the rules. Watch. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEAN SPICER, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: For so long, the people at ICE and CBP had their handcuffed behind them when they were going to deal with the mission of their job. The last administration had so many carve outs for who could be and who couldn't be adjudicated that it made it very difficult for the customs and enforcement people to do their job and enforce the laws of this country. But, right now, what we've done is to make sure that they have the ability and the guidance and the resources to do what they -- what their mission is. And that's it, plain and simple. (END VIDEO CLIP) MCCALLUM: Joining me now, Sarah Saldana. She was the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, better known as ICE, director under President Obama. And Francisco Hernandez is an Immigration Attorney. Welcome. It's great to have both 5/15 3/13/2017 Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start | Fox News of you with us tonight. SARAH SALDANA, FORMER ICE DIRECTOR, 2014-2017: Thank you. FRANCISCO HERNANDEZ, IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY: Thank you for having me. MCCALLUM: Sarah, he was calling you out a bit there. SALDANA: Yes. I guess he was. But let me tell you something that is maybe not clearly known. I have been a law enforcement officer. I was a prosecutor in Dallas. I was the United States Attorney in Dallas. And I think -- significantly, I think that's one of the reasons that I was selected to be the director of ICE, because I believe in law enforcement. I believe in rational law enforcement. So, that is my focus while I was director and I think we went about it in a good way, given the fact that we had resources that were not unlimited. MCCALLUM: All right. So, he's -- Sean Spicer was saying that under your direction and others, border enforcement officials under the Obama administration that people weren't allowed to do their jobs. That the agents felt that they were handcuffed, that they couldn't deport, that they couldn't detain to the extent that they wanted to. Is that fair? SALDANA: The law is the law. So, with respect to detention and all of those things, we were guided by the law. We were not guided by people's emotions or feelings or thoughts. We were guided by the law. We had priorities, just like this executive order has priorities. We didn't exempt people. I guess one could look at it that way, but one could say that about the executive order, as well. We focused on serious criminals. And, in fact, our numbers went substantially up with respect to the portion of people that we were removing or putting in removal proceedings, being convicted criminals or people who are not in the country legally and there's a reason to remove them. Again, I am weighing as a manager, resources versus the threat to public safety. MCCALLUM: So when you say resources, would you love to have had the 10,000 additional agents that John Kelly is now going to get? SALDANA: It would have been -- we certainly could have responded to Congressman DeSantis, wherever he is, when he drove me on the hill about why we weren't departing more people. It certainly would have helped in that regard. The important thing to me is not volume. Ask any law enforcement officer, the important thing to me is substance. Are we protecting the American public by focusing on people who have no business being here, committing additional crimes, and working against the interest of the American people? MCCALLUM: Francisco, today, you know, just going through the headlines and looking at different web sites, you know, the administration -- Trump administration cracks down. Illegal immigrants are scared. They're nervous about what they're hearing today and yet he also said that DACA would stay in place. That children who came here with their parents at a young age would not be affected by this. So what's your reaction to these two memos today? HERNANDEZ: Well, first of all, I can't argue with Ms. Saldana on qualifications. I feel like a thorn between two roses, OK. But, quite frankly, President Trump has written a blank check that he can't cash. Just like the congressman said, he's going to have to get the money from somewhere. You can't just say we're going to hire 20,000 agents (inaudible) Ms. Saldana. You got to have the people. No one is going to argue about whether you should deport people that commit repeated felonies, you're just barking up the wrong tree. But quite frankly, you've got to do something to get that money and we don't have the money. So we do have to focus, as Director Saldana said on the important things. The deferred actions, yes, dreamers, Gob bless. Let's go and give them a green card, something to work towards, something to earn that were brought into no fault of their own, no one can argue about that. So they're in limbo, but you know what, we have - 6/15 3/13/2017 Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start | Fox News MCCALLUM: But he didn't pay them about (ph). He said that's off the table. HERNANDEZ: That's off the table -MCCALLUM: Unless they have a criminal record. HERNANDEZ: And the interesting thing is, you know, if President Trump argued that President Obama did not have the executive or constitutional power to issue that executive order, well then, neither does he have the executive. So what's good for the goose is good for the gander. So, that's our fear. If we're going to go with those executive orders for President Trump, we've got to fund them. It costs money. MCCALLUM: Let's get some questions from our group here. Hatice Iaconangelo. I'm sure I got that wrong. So what do you think about what you're hearing here tonight? HATICE IANCONANGELO, FLORIDA RESIDENT: I am horrified. I'm horrified. This is not the country I emigrated to. Sure, when I first emigrated 26 years ago -MCCALLUM: From? IANCONANGELO: From Germany. I am a native Berliner. I grew up with a wall. I know what the wall does to families. I witnessed people getting shot crossing over the wall. And I see us as a nation going towards that again. It's horrifying. Little by little, we are getting there. Berlin didn't start out just with a wall coming up instantly, the Russians shooting, everybody. It starts gradually. And it gets worse and worse. I want us to come together as a nation and have compassion for people. Don't just shut yourself off from that what you don't understand, what you don't know. Why don't each one of you who are against immigration may be get to know a refugee? Get to know an immigrant and see where they have come from and what they have gone through in life. MCCALLUM: All right. Let me get a response from Bill Korach who is -- you're shaking your head pretty hard there, sir. Why? BILL KORACH, ST. JOHNS COUNTY COP CHAIRMAN: I was in Berlin when the wall was up. And the wall was meant to keep people in, because the communist system was so horrible. This wall is being designed to protect our borders. We're a sovereign nation. We should have sovereign borders. We are a nation of laws. If we don't have the rule of law, we don't have sovereignty. IANCONANGELO: I am not against protecting the people here, absolutely not. But you don't realize, America is already so safe. This is the safest place I feel on earth. I travel overseas every year. The law enforcement does a great job. The customs office -MCCALLUM: Let me get an answer from Elvira and then we're going to go, so quickly ELVIRA SALAZAR, MEGA T.V. ANCHOR: Good to see you. I think the greatness of a nation is measured not by the size of its guns, but how we treat the most vulnerable members of society, and in this case, illegals or the undocumented. I think that maybe we should take a look at immigration issue in a different way. We should go to the root of the problem. And the root of the problem is very simple. It's called Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala. President Trump has an outstanding opportunity. He is a businessman. He knows how to build coalitions. He knows cultural sensitivities from other countries. He can go to those three countries that are exporting the majority of the people that are knocking on our borders and help them put their house in order. Then, we could avoid or save the money that we're going to be investing on the 20 million -- $20 billion that will cost to build a wall along the Mexican border. And we could earmark those $280 million that we're giving to those three countries. Earmarked that for what Nicaragua did. No one really talks about why Nicaraguans are not coming and knocking on our 7/15 3/13/2017 Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start | Fox News border, because the -- and I'm not a friends of the Nicaraguan government, but they knew how to do it. And they could help us solve the problem. That's another angle. MCCALLUM: All right, thank you very much. So, officials in Miami-Dade, Florida got national attention when they decided to stand against becoming a so-called sanctuary city. We will speak to the man behind that very controversial decision here in Florida coming up next. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) MARTHA MACCALLUM, THE FIRST 100 DAYS HOST: So a point of hot contention in the immigration debate involves so-called sanctuary cities scattered throughout the country. These are cities and towns which offer protections to illegal immigrants by limiting cooperation with federal authorities. I want to start with our audience panel, and I'll ask you all a question first which is a broad question in terms of priorities. It goes to what we're talking about earlier. So I will give you three options and I want you to pick the one that you think should be the GOP priority right now, or the government's priority, or for the whole country priority, regardless of your background. So choice number one will be immigration and the wall, choice number two would be tax reform, and choice number three would be Obamacare repeal and replace. So this goes to what we're talking about over here before in terms of what they're doing first. So if you want them to address immigration and the wall first, raise your hand. Maybe a third, maybe less. Tax reform. Maybe half. All right, Obamacare, repeal and replace. So, I'd say, closer to a third of third but I would say tax reform was the winner. So you want tax reform to be a priority for the folks on Capitol Hill. So maybe they're listening to what you're saying here tonight. So, in terms of immigration, I want to bring our guest, Diane Scheriff, and her daughter, Savannah. You were originally from San Francisco, you live in this area now, right? DIANE SCHERIFF: Right. MACCALLUM: But you believe that it's not true that the jobs that are being done by illegal immigrants are jobs that Americans don't want to do. SCHERIFF: Yes and no. I mean, I think when I lived in California, I had a nanny at first that didn't have a green card. I didn't know that. She was a very hard worker. But, there again, I think there are jobs that are open-- that would be open to Americans, that are taken by illegal immigrants. And I just feel strongly that that is a huge deal in our country, especially Florida, since we have such an influx of illegal immigrants. MACCALLUM: Savannah, what about the issues of sanctuary cities? SAVANNAH SCHRIFF: Well, you know. MACCALLUM: Having grown up in San Francisco, you know, I know you lived in a city that is a sanctuary city. Don't be nervous. Particularly understandable, I scared you. Put that mic in front of your face. It's quite all right. I know the feeling. SCHERIFF: Sanctuary cities, you know, maybe I'll sound like a bad person here, but I'm frustrated that we even have them. Because, I mean, honestly. (APPLAUSE) MACCALLUM: That's what Savannah was going to say. SCHERIFF: It doesn't make sense to me. And the fact that they're growing now, not going away come. And again, I'm a Californian, I live there. But San Francisco, L.A., Oakland, it doesn't make any sense to not work with local law enforcement when it comes to immigrants and criminals. 8/15 3/13/2017 Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start | Fox News MACCALLUM: Thank you very much. I'm joined now by the mayor of Miami- Dade, Mayor Gimenez, and Laura Wilkenson. We've spoken before Laura. And Laura has a tough personal story. You lost your son to a person who was here illegally. And I know you have stood next to President Trump many times as he has talked about Angel Moms. So you took a tough stance and said we are not going to be a sanctuary city anymore in Miami. Has there been a backlash against that in your area? CARLOS GIMENEZ, MAYOR MIAMI-DADE: Yes, there has been. And we have very vocal opposition to what we did. But, you know, what I say to people that tell me that, hey, I really like what you did, I tell them that, you know, I really did a lot less than what you thought I did. And the people that are vocally against it, I say, you know, I did a lot less than what you thought I did. Really, all we did is we labeled a sanctuary city by the Obama administration and the justice department because we were requesting reimbursement from the federal government for detainer requests. And what I did is I said, we know longer need to have that voucher from the federal government saying that they're going to pay us for our costs for detaining these people of interest to immigration. That's all we did. And by doing that, it basically took us off the list of being a sanctuary city. Miami- Dade County has never thought of itself as a sanctuary city. Even when we pass that resolution back in 2014, we didn't think that that would place us as a sanctuary city. So, basically, taking that off, basically now -- and now my. MACCALLUM: The financial decision. GIMENEZ: Yes, obviously, because we were being threatened with millions of dollars in federal funding that we need to provide services for the 2.7 million people of Miami-Dade County. MACCALLUM: Laura, the president said that he is not going -- he is going to respect DACA. How did you feel about that? LAURA WILKENSON: Well, I believe there is going to be a process no matter how you do it. Somebody is going to be inconvenienced. This law -- I mean, without the immigration laws being enforced, this country has run amok. At any way that he doesn't, there is going to be an inconvenience to people. But, for myself, I think if you're not bearing your child in the ground and turning around and walking away, it is not an inconvenience that you can't deal with. (APPLAUSE) MACCALLUM: In terms of your son and your situation, that young man was brought here by his parents. WILKENSON: Yes. He was a dreamer, brought here when he was ten from Belize. He had been charged with the crime of harassment but not convicted. And then, he murdered Joshua while he was out on bond for that. He should never have gotten a bond at the very least. They're a flight risk. And you don't want to wait until they murder your kid, until you say, OK, time-out, now you are in trouble. It's ridiculous. Nobody gets sanctuary from the law. There is nothing I could do and be given sanctuary from it, and there is no reason for anybody else to have that, as well. (APPLAUSE) MACCALLUM: Do you believe that you're getting somewhere with your cause? WILKENSON: Absolutely, yes. Mr. Trump had said he would put a crime victim in -- a program in place. It's called Voice, I believe. And it's to help victims like myself, the real victims. And this gentleman earlier talked about getting some of the money, you know, if you can defund sanctuary cities, there comes the money. He can also take the money away from the 325 agencies in this country that help illegal aliens -- I mean, help them navigate the system. There is not one place or one program in place to help myself. (APPLAUSE) MACCALLUM: Thank you, Laura. Good to have you both here tonight. So we're coming to you tonight from a state 9/15 3/13/2017 Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start | Fox News where there are many jobs that go to legal and illegal immigrants. And when we come back, we are going to hear from our audience about the president's pledge to put America first. How do they think that's going? We'll ask them right after this. (APPLAUSE) MACCALLUM: So when President Trump campaigned on the slogan of America first, a lot of that message was about bringing jobs back to American workers. But are they prepared to take the low wage jobs taken by illegal and legal immigrants? Joining us now, Javier Palomerez, he's president of the U.S.-Hispanic chamber of commerce, and on President Trump's diversity coalition. Although, he was a Hillary Clinton fan at the beginning, and Cindy Nava, a dreamer and Democratic national committee fellow. Welcome to both of you. Good to have you here today. So, Javier, first of all, you're a Hillary Clinton supporter. What made you change your tune? JAVIER PALOMAREZ, PRESIDENT OF THE U.S.-HISPANIC CHAMBER OF COMMERCE: Well, you know, the reality of it is that -- back then, when we were convinced that our side was going to win, we asked of Donald Trump that he honored the will of the people and that he respect the results of this election. The reality of it is, he won, he is now the 45th president of the United States of America, and I'm going to do everything I can to live up to the exact same thing we asked of him. I'm going to honor the will of the people. I'm going to honor the results of this election. (APPLAUSE) PALOMAREZ: And me and my association, a 4.1 million Hispanic-owned firms in this country that contribute over $668 billion to the American economy are going to do everything we can to help this administration move our country forward. At a time that I think we need to collaborate to move in the right direction. MACCALLUM: Cindy, you're a dreamer. CINDY NAVA, DREAMER: I am. MACCALLUM: So, what do you think about what happened today, and the exemption for DACA children, like yourself? And do you believe that there is -- you're talking about common ground. Is there common ground? And do you think that this administration wants to find it? And do you think the resistors and the never Trumpers also want to? NAVA: You know, Martha, I really think that this is a first step towards what really needs to happen, which is to address comprehensive immigration reform. And this is truly surprising I think for many of us that President Trump decided to keep DACA intact. And that's great and that's good. But, right now, there's a lot to fear out in the communities. There's actually some dreamers that have been targeted. And we have families. So what's happening to our families, you know, that's always a concern. So just because we may be feeling a little bit sick here, does not mean that the community is throughout the country are. And DACA comes with many benefits such as a ban on parole, which many people are not familiar with. But advance parole is something that we can request through humanitarian clause, educational, or other -- you know, there's three clauses, and I was able to get that because my grandmother was ill in Mexico, and she was dying. And I was able to spend the five last days of her life with her. MACCALLUM: I want to get a couple of our friends up here. And, again, Earline Shipper, so she's talking about families and keeping people together, what do you say? EARLINE SHIPPER, FLORIDA RESIDENT: I think it's a wonderful idea that we keep families together. I'm happy that this particular decision was made. But I still think that immigration is a very serious situation that has to be controlled and we have to take care of illegals coming into the country that are going to cause harm and we should send them back. MACCALLUM: Eric, what do you think? (APPLAUSE) ERIC WEST, FLORIDA RESIDENT: The amount of people that have come into the country that are taking welfare and 10/15 3/13/2017 Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start | Fox News other government benefits is way too much. We don't need any more welfare recipients in this country. We need people that are going to bring jobs and doctors and things to this country to help our economy. When 91 percent of the Syrian refugees or refugees that comes to this country get welfare, something is wrong. We're committing financial suicide. (APPLAUSE) MACCALLUM: Pablo Manriquez. PABLO MANRIQUEZ, FORMER DNC OFFICIAL: Well, I think the thing to keep in mind here is that Donald Trump did inherit a mess when it comes to immigration. I was one of the people who raised my hand earlier that I am disgusted with how this presidency is going. But I was disgusted with how President Obama's presidency went on this topic, as well. I knocked on thousands of Hispanic doors in particular in 2008, telling people that President Obama was going to offer -Senator Obama at the time was going to offer them some form of relief. He betrayed us. He betrayed us to the tune of 2.8 million deportations. And the reality is that the communities that Cindy is talking about right now do live in fear. And that fear keeps them from working with the police. For example, if a wife is being battered and she is worried that by going to the police she is going to be detained for her immigration status, that's just going to create more battered women. So. (BOOS) MANRIQUEZ: It's true. It's true. I think the point here is that immigrants have already been betrayed by one presidency. And what Donald Trump did today by offering DACA kids hope was a good thing, a very good thing. And I applaud him for it. MACCALLUM: I mean, the people that they're targeting are either criminals or they have final deportation orders, which means that they were notified sometimes ago. And they have been told for quite some time in many cases. They have left and come back against those orders. So those are the people who are being targeted first by the directive that we've got today. So we've got more to come back to after this quick break. So stay with us. But coming up, how do those who have come to America from abroad feel about the moves that have been taken by this administration? We're going to talk to two people from this community touched personally by this issue when we come back. Stay with us live in Jacksonville, Florida. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) MACCALLUM: So as we wait, President Trump's revised order calling for more vigorous vetting of immigrants from seven Middle Eastern countries. We wanted to talk to a couple of local residents in the Jacksonville area for whom this is a large issue, very near and dear to their hearts. Joanne Farhire is an immigration attorney and legal immigrants and now a citizen of the United States. And Hajdary Mohammad is a recent immigrant to Jacksonville from Afghanistan. He spent nine years helping our U.S. troops in his home country. And we thank you for that. (APPLAUSE) MACCALLUM: That is a special category of people that I know you -- I would assume feel in the initial order really got short thrift. Tell me. HAJDARY MOHAMMAD, REFUGEE FROM AFGHANISTAN: What was the. MACCALLUM: In terms of people who helped our troops, like you did. In the initial executive order, they were very concerned about their families that they wouldn't be able to get the men, and feel that you have given a great deal to this country, right? MOHAMMAD: Yeah. Actually, I worked like nine years with the U.S. army in Afghanistan. So like four years for the U.S. army, and five years with the U.S. Special Forces in Afghanistan. So, I mean, because of my work, and my face, and my name, will become known. I am one of those people that they tried to kill. And so, you know, I applied for immigration to come to the United States. I wanted to restart my life, basically from zero to the United States. And I still got some more 11/15 3/13/2017 Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start | Fox News friends that are there right now working with the special ops in Afghanistan. And they are hoping to come to the United States for a better life. MACCALLUM: OK. Joanne, tell us what you think about this new directive and whether or not you're optimistic about them, and whether or not people like Hajdary and the other colleagues who he works with will be protected. JOANNE FARHIRE, IMMIGRATION ATTORNEY: You know I am optimistic. I am hoping that President Trump does realize that there is an issue with immigration, that the immigration system needs to be worked on. But, you know, the way he implemented the executive order before, it did impact victims, you know, the refugees that were coming in, these are people who have already been victimized. They're fleeing their countries because they've been persecuted where they have a well-founded fear of persecution. I understand and I totally support the need for strong borders and security of United States. You know, I am a Republican. I supported the Republican president. However, I don't support the weight that this immigration ban was handled. You have to understand that these are people that are fleeing and they are in fear of their life. So to bring them into this country, they land in an airport, and then they're detained again where they spent. MACCALLUM: And they're going to try to get that right this time. I want to get a quick thought from Ron Stafford, pastor. You're listening to all of this. We're talking about compassion and we're talking about security. What do you think? RON STAFFORD, PASTOR AND FLORIDA RESIDENT: I think the compassion comes with the security. The president, he's working very hard to secure our borders. But yet, those who have green cards and have already been vetted, I think the compassion comes in when you can allow those people to come in. And if they need anything else that needs to be done, then they can finish the investigation. But you must have some compassion for those who put their lives on the line for our country. Those who are here and working, we must begin to work to help them to become citizens. MACCALLUM: Thank you, pastor. A quick break, we will be right back live from Jacksonville. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) MACCALLUM: That has been a very eye-opening conversation here tonight in Jacksonville, Florida. I want to thank all of our guests and our panelist for taking the time to discuss these hot button issues that are very much in all of our minds right now, dealing with immigration in America. We would love to hear from you at home, too. Go to, you can leave me a message or send me a tweet @marthamaccallum, #first100. Thanks for watching it, everybody. We'll see you tomorrow night. Thank you. Content and Programming Copyright 2017 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2017 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content. More from Fox News Spicer ambushed by woman in Apple Store Press Secretary Sean Spicer confronted at an… 12/15 3/13/2017 Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start | Fox News Trump steps up ObamaCare repeal push, meets with… Police find Jeep buried under 20 feet of snow in the… Florida mom reportedly abducted by husband is… Kyle Busch leaves Las Vegas bloodied after brawl with… Video How big game hunting contributes to conservation Laffer: Obamacare replacement bill worth 2,000-3,000… Sponsored Stories Scientists Can't Sleep At Night Thinking About An… This Meal Service is Cheaper Than Your Grocery Store and… RightBrainNews Home Chef 13/15 3/13/2017 Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start | Fox News Matt Damon's Waterfront Home Is Beyond Stunning Why Doctors In The Know No Longer Prescribe Metformin Lonny Magazine Vibrant Health Network Ad Content by Sponsored Stories You May Like Ad Content by I Tried HelloFresh: Here's How It Went There's a Problem With the New Chip Credit Cards Why Doctors In The Know No Longer Prescribe Metformin HomeLight - The Fastest Way to Sell Your Home for… Por Homme AARP Vibrant Health Network Homelight Sponsored Stories Woman Whose Husband Disappeared 20 Years Ago Finally Catches Him (Trend Chaser) Here's What New Dental Implants Should Cost You - View Pricing… (New Dental Implants) The Shirt Brand Every Guy Is Talking About (GQ) Use Data To Sell Your Home Fast (Homelight) Side-Splitting Plane Photos That Will Make You Giggle (Worldation More from Fox News Jessica Simpson slips into Daisy Dukes, shows off slim figure (Fox News Entertainment) This is the Real Reason Why Erin Andrews Works Out (Fox Business Sports) Archaeologists in Alaska uncover campsite used by survivors of doomed… (Fox News Science) Michelle Obama Harvard Essay Surfaces... (Fox Nation) Travel Magazine) Ivanka Trump cuts rent on New York City condo (Fox News) 7 Outrageous Credit Cards For Those With Excellent Credit Jesse Watters Sends Perez Hilton Into A Tailspin With One Simple… (NextAdvisor) (Fox Nation) Ad Content by Watch Now... Dana Loesch: What rights do men have that women don't? Newly identified fault system could unleash 7.4 earthquake 14/15 3/13/2017 Miller: New order will be responsive to the judicial ruling; Rep. Ron DeSantis: Congress has gotten off to a slow start | Fox News Monica Crowley: What happened to me was a political hit job Sections Tools About Follow Home Live Video On Air Personalities Facebook Video Newsletters Careers Twitter Politics Alerts College Students Google+ U.S. Podcasts Fox Around the World Instagram Opinion Radio Advertise With Us RSS Entertainment Apps & Products New Terms of Use (What's New) Newsletters Tech New Privacy Policy Science Ad Choices Health Help Travel Email Newsroom Lifestyle Media Relations World Closed Captioning Policy Sports Weather On Air This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2017 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved. All market data delayed 20 minutes. 15/15 EXHIBIT 5 Morning Mix By Samantha Schmidt February 28 Less than five hours after a man shot up a Kansas bar, killing one Indian man and wounding two other people in an apparently racially motivated attack, an Applebee’s bartender 70 miles away made a 911 call. The woman on the phone told the dispatcher that a man had come into her bar and told her he “had done something really bad and he was on the run from the police.” The man wouldn’t tell her what he did but kept asking her to allow him to stay at her house. The bartender persisted, persuading him to tell her what happened. “He said he shot and killed two Iranian people in Olathe,” the bartender said. She read the news and sure enough, noticed that a few hours earlier, a shooting had taken place in Olathe, a city about 20 miles southwest of Kansas City. Her 911 call, later released by a local television station, led authorities to locate Adam Purinton, 51, of Olathe, late Wednesday and take him into custody. The phone call recording supports witness statements that the bar shooter thought the two men, Srinivas Kuchibhotla and Alok Madasani, were of Middle Eastern descent. They were actually Indian nationals employed by the technology firm Garmin. They had received master’s degrees in the United States. Kuchibhotla died from his injuries Wednesday, and Madasani was released from the hospital the following day. An American who was wounded when he tried to intervene, Ian Grillot, remains hospitalized but continues to improve, doctors said. The FBI announced Tuesday that it is investigating the shooting as “a hate crime,” which could lead to federal prosecution in addition to state murder charges already filed. Witnesses reported that Purinton hurled racial slurs at the two Indians and told them: “Get out of my country.” The shooting stirred anger and fear in India and among the South Asia diaspora in the United States, prompting some to link it to xenophobia spurred by Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. Parents and students in India began to worry that the United States was no longer a safe place for visiting Indian students, scholars and tech workers. The father of Madasani appealed Friday to “all the parents in India” not to send their children to the United States under “present circumstances.” A relative of Kuchibhotla told The Post that the family was in shock. “Something has changed in the United States,” he said. “Such things are not good for the Indian community living here.” Cable news channels debated whether the United States was now a danger zone for those with brown skin. “Is this the new normal?” an anchor on NDTV news channel asked. On Monday, Hillary Clinton tweeted that the president should “step up and speak out.” She shared a link to a story about the Kansas shooting and said: “With threats & hate crimes on rise, we shouldn’t have to tell @Potus to do his part.” Purinton, who faces charges of first-degree murder and first-degree attempted murder, made his first court appearance Monday via closed-circuit television from Johnson County jail. He was seen wearing what a sheriff’s department spokesman called a “safety smock,” assigned to suspects who said something in the jail that suggested they might harm themselves, the Associated Press reported. Purinton, described by the Kansas City Star as a Navy veteran, former pilot and air traffic controller who lives in “a comfortable suburban home,” had a bond set at $2 million, according to court documents. After shots were fired at Austins Bar and Grill on Wednesday night in Olathe, the suspect fled on foot, and a manhunt ensued, the Kansas City Star reported. Purinton was seen less than five hours later in Clinton, Mo., in a 2000 Chevy Silverado. When he spoke with the Applebee’s bartender that night, he made her promise that she would not call the police, she told the 911 dispatcher. “I asked him if he had a gun on him, and he told me he did not,” she said. “And he told me he wasn’t going to hurt me, but I don’t know.” She asked the dispatcher if the police could come to the restaurant quietly, without using sirens. “There’s people in the building still, and I don’t want him to freak out,” she said. But when Clinton police arrived at 11:43 p.m., Purinton gave himself up without a fight, 41 Action News reported. Officers found him in possession of an expired active-duty Navy identification card. He had booked room 131 at the West Bridge Motel up the road from Applebee’s. More from Morning Mix Bill O’Reilly: Fox News erred in booking guest falsely billed as Swedish security adviser Mysterious wave of death strikes the Bahamas’ famous swimming pigs California high school ends ‘senior auction’ as evocative of slavery PAID PROMOTED STORIES Recommended by Here's What New Dental Implants Should Cost You View Pricing & Dentist Scientists Can't Sleep At Night Thinking About An Explanation For This New Dental Implants RightBrainNews 15 of the Most Hated Actresses of All Time The Cheat Sheet EXHIBIT 6 3/13/2017 Sikh man in Kent says he was told, ‘Go back to your own country’ before he was shot | The Seattle Times  Search Crime Sikh man in Kent says he was told, ‘Go back to your own country’ before he was shot    Originally published March 4, 2017 at 10:04 am Updated March 4, 2017 at 7:53 pm Kent police look for gunman who allegedly walked onto victim’s driveway and shot him in the arm; Sikh community sees rise in abuse. By Matt Day  Seattle Times staff reporter Kent police are looking for a gunman who allegedly walked onto a man’s driveway and shot him, saying “Go back to your own country.” The victim, a 39-year-old Sikh man, was working on his vehicle in his driveway in Kent’s East Hill neighborhood about 8 p.m. Friday when he was approached by an unknown man, Kent police said, after talking with the victim. An altercation followed, with the victim saying the suspect made statements to the effect of “Go back to your own country.” The victim was shot in the arm. The victim described the shooter as a 6-foot-tall white man with a stocky build. He was wearing a mask covering the lower half of his face, the victim said. Featured Video Play Video 1/4 3/13/2017 Sikh man in Kent says he was told, ‘Go back to your own country’ before he was shot | The Seattle Times More than 100,000 march for women’s rights (3:21) Most Read Stories 1 South Everett family, ‘still in shock,’ mourns teen killed by falling tree 2 How getting too close to old flames can burn new relationships | Dear Carolyn 3 Adrian Peterson makes trip to Seattle, but decision may not be quick 4 Free agent offensive lineman T.J. Lang rejects Seahawks offer to sign with Detroit Lions 5 Seahawks give OL Luke Joeckel $7 million guaranteed, and not everyone thinks that's a good idea Unlimit Unlimited Digital Access. $1 for 4 weeks. Kent police say they’ve reached out to the FBI and other law-enforcement agencies. “We’re early on in our investigation,” Kent Police Chief Ken Thomas said Saturday morning. “We are treating this as a very serious incident.” Jasmit Singh, a leader of the Sikh community in Renton, said he had been told the victim was released from the hospital. “He is just very shaken up, both him and his family,” Singh said. “We’re all kind of at a loss in terms of what’s going on right now, this is just bringing it home. The climate of hate that has been created doesn’t distinguish between anyone.” In a statement Saturday, the Sikh Coalition, a New York-based civil rights group, asked local and federal authorities to investigate the shooting as a hate crime. Singh said Puget Sound-area Sikh men in particular have reported a rise in verbal abuse and uncomfortable encounters recently, “a kind of prejudice, a kind of xenophobia that is nothing that we’ve seen in the recent past.” To Singh, the number of incidents targeting members of the religion, which has its roots in the Punjab region of South Asia, recalls the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001. 2/4 3/13/2017 Sikh man in Kent says he was told, ‘Go back to your own country’ before he was shot | The Seattle Times “But at that time, it felt like the [presidential] administration was actively working to allay those fears,” he said. “Now, it’s a very different dimension.” Sikh Coalition Interim Program Manager Rajdeep Singh, in calling for the hate crime investigation, said in a statement: “While we appreciate the efforts of state and local officials to respond to attacks like this, we need our national leaders to make hate crime prevention a top priority. Tone matters in our political discourse, because this a matter of life or death for millions of Americans who are worried about losing loved ones to hate.” Matt Day: 206-464-2420 or On Twitter @mattmday Email Newsletter Sign-up Custom-curated news highlights, delivered weekday mornings. email address Sign up By signing up you are agreeing to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.  Next Story Did companies’ donations buy a Trump change in private-prison policy?  Previous Story Man faces murder charge in Federal Way ambush Recommended in 3/4 3/13/2017 Sikh man in Kent says he was told, ‘Go back to your own country’ before he was shot | The Seattle Times Prosecutor: missing French family killed with… Transgender boy with girls wrestling title: ‘I don’t… Cameron Dollar out at Seattle University David Letterman: ‘I would have gone to work on… Contact About the company Advertise Subscriber Services Today’s Front Page  Facebook  Twitter Copyright © 2017 The Seattle Times Company | Privacy statement | Terms of service 4/4 EXHIBIT 7 Post Nation By Amy B Wang March 12 A Florida man who attempted to set fire to a convenience store told deputies that he assumed the owner was Muslim and that he wanted to “run the Arabs out of our country,” according to the St. Lucie County Sheriff’s Office. The sheriff later said the store owners are actually Indian, appearing to make this the latest in a string of incidents targeting South Asians mistaken for people of Arab descent. Around 7:40 a.m. Friday, police received calls that a white male was acting suspiciously in front of the Met Mart convenience store in Port St. Lucie, officials said. Deputies arrived to find the store closed, with its security shutters intact — as well as a 64-year-old man named Richard Leslie Lloyd near a flaming dumpster. “When the deputies arrived, they noticed the dumpster had been rolled in front of the doors and the contents were lit on fire,” St. Lucie County Sheriff Ken Mascara said in a statement posted on Facebook. “Upon seeing our deputies, the man put his hands behind his back and said ‘take me away.’ ” Lloyd “told deputies that he pushed the dumpster to the front of the building, tore down signs posted to the outside of the store and lit the contents of the dumpster on fire to ‘run the Arabs out of our country,’ ” Mascara said. An arrest report said Lloyd had been in the store a few days ago but got upset when it didn’t carry his favorite orange juice, according to WPTV News. Lloyd also stated that he assumed the Met Mart owner was Muslim and that it angered him “due to what they are doing in the Middle East,” the sheriff said. Firefighters were able to extinguish the blaze, authorities said. Lloyd was arrested Friday and booked into the St. Lucie County Jail in lieu of a $30,000 bond. His mental health will be evaluated, and the state attorney’s office will decide whether the incident was a hate crime, according to the sheriff. “It’s unfortunate that Mr. Lloyd made the assumption that the store owners were Arabic when, in fact, they are of Indian descent,” Mascara said. “Regardless, we will not tolerate violence based on age, race, color, ancestry, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, homeless status, mental or physical disability.” The sheriff also thanked those who called 911 when they noticed Lloyd in front of the store. A message left with Met Mart on Sunday morning did not receive a response. The incident appears to be the latest crime targeting people of South Asian descent. In its most recent report, the nonprofit group South Asian Americans Leading Together (SAALT) noted there were 207 documented “incidents of hate violence and xenophobic political rhetoric aimed at South Asian, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Middle Eastern, and Arab communities” from late December 2015 through Nov. 15, 2016, one week after the presidential election. That represented a 34 percent increase in incidents in less than a third of the period covered in SAALT’s 2014 report. An “astounding” 95 percent of incidents were motivated by anti-Muslim sentiment, according to the group. “Notably President Trump was responsible for 21% of the xenophobic political rhetoric we tracked,” it said. The group held a vigil on the steps of Congress on Friday. “At a time when South Asian, Sikh, Muslim, Hindu, and Arab community members are facing hate violence and harassment on nearly a daily basis, we need real leadership from Washington to stem the tide of injustice,” Suman Raghunathan, the group’s executive director, said in a statement. “Waiting nearly a week before commenting on a deadly shooting in Kansas won’t do it. Issuing a second toxic Muslim Ban won’t do it. We need direct action from this administration to forge inclusion, justice, and hope in this quintessential nation of immigrants.” Last week, a 39-year-old Sikh man was shot while working on his car in his driveway in Washington state. The gunman reportedly told him to “Go back to your own country” before pulling the trigger, according to the Seattle Times. Last month, a man reportedly yelled at two Indian men to “get out of my country” before opening fire at a bar in Kansas. One of those men, 32-year-old Srinivas Kuchibhotla, was killed, while another, 32-year-old Alok Madasani, was injured. A man who tried to intervene, 24-year-old Ian Grillot, was injured. Adam W. Purinton, 51, a Navy veteran, was later arrested at a bar in Missouri, where he reportedly bragged about killing two Middle Eastern men, according to the Kansas City Star. Purinton has since been charged with first-degree murder and attempted first-degree murder. The FBI has said it is investigating the shooting as a hate crime. Kuchibhotla and Madasani were from India but living in the United States and working as engineers for Garmin, the technology company. After the shooting, their relatives said they worried that the United States was no longer safe for Indians, citing what they called an increasingly xenophobic atmosphere. “There is a kind of hysteria spreading that is not good because so many of our beloved children live there,” Venu Madhav, a relative of Kuchibhotla, told The Washington Post then. “Such hatred is not good for people.” Kuchibhotla’s widow told reporters two days after her husband’s death that she had told him many times that they should go back to India but that Kuchibhotla was not afraid of staying. “He always assured me good things will happen to good people,” Sunayana Dumala said then. Madasani’s father told the Hindustan Times that there was an increasingly hate-filled atmosphere in the United States and that it was linked to the election. “The situation seems to be pretty bad after Trump took over as the U.S. president,” the father said, according to the newspaper. “I appeal to all the parents in India not to send their children to the United States in the present circumstances.” The White House said linking the crimes to Trump’s rhetoric was absurd, according to Reuters. After being roundly criticized for not speaking out forcefully about the issue, Trump addressed the Kansas shooting in his speech to Congress a week later. As Sangay K. Mishra, author of “Desis Divided: The Political Lives of South Asian Americans,” wrote for The Post last week, the South Asian community has suffered from “security racializing” since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, in which all immigrants from across a broad region are treated as potential terrorists. “The people I spoke with came from different religions, nationalities and cultures — but found themselves treated as similarly foreign and dangerous,” Mishra wrote. “In public spaces like bars and airports, strangers and law enforcement officials were suspicious of their brown bodies. A number of young South Asians in Los Angeles and New York told me that in the months and years after 9/11, they were uncomfortable going to a bar alone. They feared being yelled at, called racial slurs or even physically attacked — which, in some cases, had indeed happened.” Read more: Sikh community asks for hate-crime probe after man is told ‘go back to your own country’ and shot Muslim students tried to meet with a lawmaker. They were first asked: ‘Do you beat your wife?’ PAID PROMOTED STORIES PAID PROMOTED STORIES Recommended by Teen Goes Missing In Aruba. But 10 Years Later, Police Uncover Truth. A Lion Captures a Petrified Baboon and Does the Last Thing You’d Expect LifeDaily Deposts The Tallest Women in Hollywood Livingly EXHIBIT 8 Post Nation By Cleve R. Wootson Jr. March 12 The disturbance at the Middle Eastern restaurant morphed within minutes from bizarre to a violent, one-sided assault. Jason Kendall was walking down State Street about 3 p.m. Saturday when he saw a woman standing inside Al Aqsa Restaurant in Salem, Ore., according to Fox affiliate KPTV. The Mediterranean food joint is a few blocks from the state’s Capitol and Willamette University. Kendall said he thought the woman was being held hostage because “of the type of shirt she was wearing,” the news station reported. He would later tell police that holding women hostage was “what Arabs do.” So he walked into the restaurant and told the woman that she was “free to leave,” according to KPTV. Then he started yelling because he saw a “Saddam Hussein-looking guy” inside the restaurant, according to the Salem Statesman Journal. “Go back to your country, terrorist,” he told the man. “Get out of America.” Local media said employees were able to get Kendall to leave, but not for long. He allegedly returned a few minutes later with a pipe — he told officers that it was his “horn of Gabriel” and that he was walking a “warrior’s path” — and started beating the man who he said looked like Hussein in the head. Police arrived and arrested Kendall, charging him with assault, unlawful use of a weapon and intimidation. He remained in jail on Sunday with bail set at $65,000. According to the Statesman Journal, the intimidation charge stems from Kendall’s alleged threat to inflict injury “based on his perception of the race or national origin of the employee.” Lt. Dave Okada told the newspaper that police are investigating the incident as a possible hate crime. “These crimes don’t happen very often in our community,” Okada told the newspaper. “Our community really does come together and supports each other.” Kendall is scheduled to appear before a judge on Friday. The incident is one of four suspected hate crimes that have occurred in Salem since Donald Trump was elected president, the Statesman Journal reported. In the month after the election, the Southern Poverty Law Center recorded 1,094 bias-related incidents. Of those, 42 were in Oregon. The group said reports peaked after the election, then tapered. The law center said Trump’s incendiary campaign rhetoric — including talk of a Muslim ban and derogatory statements about Mexicans — have contributed to the increase in hate crimes. In his address to Congress last month, Trump condemned an attack in Kansas City, Kan., in which two Indians were shot, one fatally, by a man targeting Muslims. “Recent threats targeting Jewish community centers and vandalism of Jewish cemeteries, as well as last week’s shooting in Kansas City, remind us that while we may be a nation divided on policies, we are a country that stands united in condemning hate and evil in all its forms,” he said. Read more: Sikh community asks for hate-crime probe after man is told ‘go back to your own country’ and shot ‘Raw hatred’: Vandals break into interracial couple’s home, spray-paint slurs and swastikas White supremacist stabs interracial couple after seeing them kiss at bar, police say ‘I was just reading a book’: Canadian cops called on black man reading C.S. Lewis in his car The Post Recommends S^Uk``Ti k^M `k^U ^`UkBSUkiMq^U S^U^Mf`   ¯kiMkB MT, The Latest on the shooting of a Sikh man in Washington state (all times local): MJh`R [iBk ]iUh`hhMk’Uk^B   R` kl` i\\lf k^M]khBfM MJU\`' `JiUJ^Bh ^B* Concerns over protecting immigrants and religious minorities clashed with the agency’s aim of preventing attacks. ^B] T[U* R` S^Uk``Ti ^U LhBrMh hMõ` ®ifUk [MMi   ®MJU\`' Police in suburban Seattle and the FBI are asking for the public’s help in the shooting of a Sikh man who says the gunman told him to go back to his country. PAID PROMOTED STORIES Recommended by 15 Most Hilarious Windshield Notes You Have to See - You'll Laugh So Hard When You See What You Don't Know About the Deadliest Snake in the World Could Save Your Life Teen Goes Missing After Night Out. But 7 Years Later, Police Uncover Truth. Gloriousa HorizonTimes LifeDaily EXHIBIT 9 3/13/2017 Spate of mosque fires stretches across the country - BREAKING NEWS Spate of mosque fires stretches across the country  Senate confirms Trump nominee Seema Verma for administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services By Holly Yan and Mayra Cuevas, CNN  Updated 1:40 PM ET, Thu March 2, 2017 U.S. + Live TV JUST WATCHED Civil rights director: We must stand together  Replay MUST WATCH  Conway: I'm not New footage released Rep. King: I meant S Inspector Gadget in Michael Brown exactly what I said ca    case   w  1:01 / 1:01    Source: WFTS Civil rights director: We must stand together 01:01 Story highlights Mosque fires have occurred in Texas, Florida and Washington state After one mosque burned, a local Jewish leader shared the keys to his synagogue (CNN) — In just the first two months of the year, at least four mosques have gone up in flames as attacks against religious minorities have surged. Those fires follow "the worst year on record for incidents in which mosques were targets of bias," according to the Council of American-Islamic Relations. CAIR documented 139 incidents of "damage/destruction/vandalism" at mosques last year -- the most since record-keeping began in 2009. It does not track fires separately. "Islamophobic bias continues its trend toward increasing violence," said Corey Saylor, director of CAIR's Department to Monitor and Combat Islamophobia. The wave of hostility comes as President Donald Trump campaigned on -- then enacted -- a temporary ban on travelers from Muslim-majority countries entering the United States. He is said to be drafting a new version after the first was struck down in court. Here's a look at the mosque fires so far this year: 1/5 3/13/2017 Spate of mosque fires stretches across the country - January 7: Austin, Texas BREAKING NEWS  Senate confirms Trump nominee Seema Verma for administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services U.S. + Live TV The Islamic Center of Lake Travis burned to the ground before it was completed. The Islamic Center of Lake Travis' new mosque hadn't even been completed yet when it mysteriously caught fire. Leaders said the center had su ered vandalism and gra ti in the past, but this fire was devastating. "You can imagine the emotions that we experienced upon seeing all our hard work, heartfelt e orts and dedication literally go up in flames," the Islamic center posted in a statement. The damage, estimated at $370,000, was considered a complete loss, the Travis County Fire Marshal's O ce said. The cause of the fire remains under investigation. January 14: Bellevue, Washington A fire that torched the Islamic Center of Eastside near Seattle was an act of arson, Bellevue Police Chief Steve Mylett said. No one was inside the mosque at the time of the blaze, which firefighters said shot 40-foot flames into the sky. 2/5 3/13/2017 Spate of mosque fires stretches across the country - BREAKING NEWS nOur tsage Follow Senate confirms Trump nominee Seema Verma for administrator of the Centers for Medicare and @nuRtorious Medicaid Services Islamic Center of Eastside Rebuild -GoFundMe • someone burned down U.S. + a Mosque in Bellevue WA. Donate to help rebuild…  Live TV 2:10 AM - 15 Jan 2017 Islamic Center of Eastside Rebuild January 14th, at 2:00 AM, Islamic Center of Eastside in Bellevue, Washington was set on fire. Thankfully, there are no injuries and no 3 3 The police chief said Isaac Wayne Wilson has been charged with felony malicious mischief and was being investigated for arson. Police found the suspect lying on the ground near the back of the building, CNN a liate KCPQ said. The mosque is asking for donations to rebuild. In recent months, backers of the fund-raising campaign said, "This center and a neighboring Islamic center have seen numerous acts of vandalism." January 27: Victoria, Texas The fire that destroyed the Victoria Islamic Center mosque was intentionally set, the Houston o ce of the Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, Tobacco and Explosives said.  The ATF, CrimeStoppers and the mosque are o ering a combined $30,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and indictment of whoever set the mosque on fire. While members of the mosque grappled with their loss, leaders of a local Jewish congregation stepped in to help -and gave them the keys to their synagogue so they could continue to worship. 3/5 3/13/2017 Spate of mosque fires stretches across the country - Related Video: Fire rips through Houston BREAKING NEWS  mosque 00:37 Senate confirms Trump nominee Seema Verma for administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services U.S. + February 24: Thonotosassa, Florida Live TV A fire that damaged the Islamic Society of New Tampa has been ruled arson, Hillsborough County fire investigators said. Authorities have not ruled whether the fire was a hate crime, but Tampa Mayor Bob Buckhorn said the attack "is no di erent than the wave of anti-Semitic attacks on Jewish community centers and synagogue and bomb threats that have been called in all across the country, including in Tampa over the recent months." CNN's Tony Marco, Ryan Rios and Joe Sterling contributed to this report. Related Article: Fire at Florida mosque ruled arson Indian immigrants reconsider the American dream Undocumented immigrants come out of the shadows 'SNL' is right: Ivanka is complicit Corpse driven 1,300 miles in suitcase, authorities say 4/5 3/13/2017 Spate of mosque fires stretches across the country - BREAKING NEWS  Senate confirms Trump nominee Seema Verma for administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services U.S. + Live TV 5/5 EXHIBIT 10 2/6/2017 Trump: 'Absolutely no choice' but to close mosques - POLITICO  Ÿ–9*4':98+*4; ?*5(?4' 4'.: 8+:9', :52 ' -4/4+66'.Ÿ +8' 9-4/.: :'.: *+18'3+8 63;8   ˜ º º ¿     ? =/?;=97 /=96- 9> >?, /-392- 98 C6/>?69=, :7?<$ The United States will have "absolutely no choice" but to close down some mosques where "some bad things are happening," Donald Trump said in a recent interview, explaining his rationale for doing so. "Nobody wants to say this and nobody wants to shut down religious institutions or anything, but you know, you understand it. A lot of people understand it. We’re going to have no choice," the Republican presidential said in an interview from Trump Tower on Fox News' "Hannity" on Tuesday night. 1/3 2/6/2017 Trump: 'Absolutely no choice' but to close mosques - POLITICO Those remarks go further than Trump did on Monday, when he said he would "strongly consider" closing mosques as part of a response to last Friday's terrorist attacks in Paris that killed more than 130 and injured hundreds more. Asked to explain his shifting position by Sean Hannity, Trump remarked that things are "happening a lot faster than anybody understands." "There’s absolutely no choice. Some really bad things are happening and they're happening fast," he said, taking a dig at President Barack Obama's response to the attacks. "Certainly a lot faster than our president understands because he doesn't understand anything. He doesn't get it. Refuses to even call it by its correct name," which Trump termed "radical Islam." In terms of the refugee situation, Trump said he had "a feeling that a lot of bad things will happen out of this." /-+< /=?9 />32' 09 >?9 =:9<. 6+.83 C,,9   $ ? "But yet we take everybody. We don't know where they come from, we don't know what their crime record is. It could be wonderful. It could be a disaster," he speculated, again pledging that if he wins the presidency, "they're going out." "We can't take a chance. You know, if you take thousands of people, and again I hear it's going to be many more than what you're talking about right now. But if you take thousands of people, Sean, all you need is a couple. You know, you don't need 25, you don't need 100," he said. "Look at the damage done in Paris with just a few people." Trump repeatedly reiterated his desire to "blast the hell out of" ISIL targets and "bomb the hell out of" the terrorist group's oil resources. "Now they're just starting to do that, but they're two years late," Trump said. "Interestingly after Paris, all of a sudden they start bombing sites that they knew about for a year and a half. But they started bombing them after the tragic events of Paris. So, so many things are wrong. We need leadership in the world now. You know, it's really a worldwide leadership, but boy, do we need leadership in our country." 2/3 2/6/2017 Trump: 'Absolutely no choice' but to close mosques - POLITICO 3/3 EXHIBIT 11 ( MEDIA (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/MEDIA/) TRACKING ISLAMOPHOBIA IN > POLITICS (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/POLITICS/) SOCIETY (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/SOCIETY/) WORLD (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/WORLD/) CYBERSPACE (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/CYBERSPACE/) Trump Calls for Ban on Muslims, Cites Deeply Flawed Poll Posted on December 7, 2015 at 6:48 am. Written by Bridge Initiative Team ( SEARCH UPDATE (DECEMBER 7, 2015) In a press release today, GOP frontrunner Donald Trump ( called for a “total and complete shutdown of Muslims ( entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.” His statement also cites a deeply flawed poll conducted by the Center for Security Policy (CSP), a group with a history of fear mongering about Islam and Muslims. In June, when the poll was released and circulated widely on networks like Fox News, we debunked its findings, writing: This survey ( should not be taken seriously. It comes from an organization with a history of producing dubious claims and “studies” about the threat of shariah, and was administered using an unreliable methodology. Its proponents seize upon its shoddy findings, exaggerating and misrepresenting them to American audiences, and falsely claim that the survey data represents the views of Muslims nationwide. Donald Trump is only the latest proponent of CSP’s dubious claims. In an interview with MSNBC, Saba Ahmed recounted how GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson told her that Frank Gaffney, CSP’s director, advised him on issues related to Islam. Numerous other GOP candidates, like Ted Cruz ( and George Pataki (, have attended ( and spoken at CSP’s national summits. Trump’s comment about banning Muslims is only the latest in a series of troubling remarks about Muslims made by Trump and other GOP presidential candidates. These comments are documented in our “Islamophobia and the 2016 Elections (” resource. Original article (Published June 26, 2015) On June 24, 2015, the Center for Security Policy (CSP), a Washington, D.C. think tank run by former Reagan official Frank Gaffney released a survey ( thousands-support-shariah-jihad/) of 600 Muslims living in the United States. Its takeaway, captured in a headline on the CSP website, is this: “Poll of US Muslims Reveals Ominous Levels of Support For Islamic Supremacists’ Doctrine of Shariah, Jihad.” The poll gained quick traction online and in the media. On the evening of its release, Fox News host Bill O’Reilly ( also lent credence to its findings and cast doubt upon American Muslims’ loyalty to their country. Among the poll’s findings are: “A majority (51%) agreed that ‘Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.’” “Nearly a quarter of the Muslims polled believed that, ‘It is legitimate to use violence to punish those who give offense to Islam by, for example, portraying the prophet Mohammed.’” “Nearly one-fifth of Muslim respondents said that the use of violence in the United States is justified in order to make shariah the law of the land in this country.” But this survey ( should not be taken seriously. It comes from an organization with a history of producing dubious claims and “studies” about the threat of shariah, and was administered using an unreliable methodology. Its proponents seize upon its shoddy findings, exaggerating and misrepresenting them to American audiences, and falsely claim that the survey data represents the views of Muslims nationwide. Here are the details. CSP’S HISTORY OF BASELESS FEARMONGERING In recent years, many groups have raised questions about the objectivity and intentions of Frank Gaffney. His tendency to posit conspiracies about Barack Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood is well documented, and has earned him sharp critique across the political spectrum. The Center for American Progress labels ( him a “misinformation expert,” while the Conservative Political Action Committee banned ( him from their 2011 conference for peddling false accusations about GOP connections to Muslim extremists. It was his organization, CSP, that was behind the unfounded rumor ( that Hillary Clinton’s chief of staff, Huma Abedin, was linked to the Muslim Brotherhood, and once floated the false idea ( that General David Petraeus had “submitted” to shariah. Since the early 2000s, CSP has generated dozens of occasional papers, blogs, and reports that fixate on shariah or other allegedly nefarious topics related to Islam. Often, they are loosely sourced ( or entirely unsubstantiated (, relying instead on a furtive web of connections or, in one case, a 24-year-old document written by a lone ( Muslim activist that has since been roundly discredited. FALSE STATISTICS AND FALSE CLAIMS Both Gaffney and O’Reilly claim that the poll’s findings are representative of nationwide Muslim public opinion. But this assertion is untrue. CSP’s survey was a non-probability based, opt-in online survey, administered by the conservative group, the Polling Company/Woman Trend, a small Washington-based agency that has collaborated with CSP on other occasions to produce surveys about Islam and Muslims. (We learned this after reaching out to the Polling Company to get more details about their methodology, which wasn’t released to the public when Gaffney began promoting the survey’s findings.) According to the body that sets ethical standards for polling, the American Association for Public Opinion Research ( (AAPOR), opt-in surveys cannot be considered representative of the intended population, in this case Muslims. The AAPOR says that in these cases (, “the pollster has no idea who is responding to the question” and that these kind ( of “polls do not have such a ‘grounded statistical tie’ to the population.” So when O’Reilly and guest Zuhdi Jasser pointed to this survey and made claims about what “25% of three million, which is hundreds of thousands of Muslims” believe, it’s not only a misleading statement—it’s outright false. This survey does not represent the views of American Muslims. It only represents the views of the 600 Muslims that it polled. LOADED QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS Another problem with this poll is the way that questions and answers are phrased. Often, they are not neutral but are imbued with assumptions, and replicate, in an interrogative form, statements that Gaffney and CSP have declared as fact for years. In one question, respondents are asked: “Do you believe the Muslim Brotherhood in America accurately represents your views?” Packed into this question is the assertion that the Brotherhood indeed exists in the United States — something that Gaffney has long propagated. Those who answer “yes” confirm his suspicions, while those who answer “no” acknowledge nonetheless that the group is present here. They’re put into a lose-lose situation. In several questions that are asked about shariah, the content of what shariah actually is remains unexamined. Even when Gaffney’s survey appears to be more nuanced by asking Muslims how they would “characterize shariah,” it only offers options about how broadly sharia—whatever it is—should be applied. Answers ranging from “guide to the personal practice of Islam” to Gaffney’s ( preferred option (“the Muslim God Allah’s law that Muslims must follow and impose worldwide via jihad”) still don’t allow Muslims to express about what they believe about shariah. Respondents’ likely answered questions on shariah based on their understanding of the concept, but those views were not measured in the survey, nor communicated to the Fox News audience. Instead viewers are left to believe that Muslim Americans support shariah as Gaffney and O’Reilly have portrayed it for years: a “brutally repressive” law hostile to non-Muslims ( At the end of the day, Gaffney and O’Reilly make it look like Muslims support things they actually don’t. SELECTIVE READING AND EXAGGERATIONS Sixty-percent of respondents agreed that “shariah as interpreted by Islamic authorities is compatible with the U.S. Constitution, including freedom of speech and other rights,” and 51% chose this definition of jihad: “Muslims’ peaceful, personal struggle to be more religious.” These rare but helpful nuances are not even alluded to in the promotion and coverage of the survey’s findings in conservative outlets like Fox News. O’Reilly also makes exaggerations that the already-flawed data doesn’t support. “Fifty-one percent [of Muslims] say sharia law should be the reigning law,” he said. But that language is nowhere in the survey data he’s likely referencing, which says that “a majority (51%) agreed that ‘Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to shariah.’” Despite its unreliability, the survey and its findings have spread quickly, with generalizations ( about American Muslims ricocheting ( across the Internet and social media (, and bleeding into more mainstream outlets. Unfortunately, the general public is not equipped with the tools or knowledge to dissect such claims and is left to accept them at face value. This is especially so when they’re touted by a trusted personality, like Bill O’Reilly, and confirm pre-existing beliefs about Muslims. Though the public may not see it, the problems with this poll are numerous: CSP has a history of fabricating fear about Islam and Muslims; the survey’s questions and answers are loaded with bias; and its creators and proponents falsely claim that its findings represent the views of all American Muslims. The American public shouldn’t trust this poll. SHARE THIS:  ( share=facebook&nb=1)  ( share=twitter&nb=1)  ( share=email&nb=1) t / /  ( TAGS: AMERICAN MUSLIMS (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/TAG/AMERICANMUSLIMS/), BEN CARSON (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/TAG/BEN-CARSON/), BILL O'REILLY (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/TAG/BILL-OREILLY/), CENTER FOR SECURITY POLICY (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/TAG/CENTER-FOR-SECURITY-POLICY/), DONALD TRUMP (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/TAG/DONALD-TRUMP/), FRANK GAFFNEY (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/TAG/FRANK-GAFFNEY/), GEORGE PATAKI (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/TAG/GEORGE-PATAKI/), JIHAD (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/TAG/JIHAD/), MUSLIMS (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/TAG/MUSLIMS/), POLL (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/TAG/POLL/), SHARIA (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/TAG/SHARIA/), TED CRUZ (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/TAG/TED-CRUZ/), THE POLLING COMPANY (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/TAG/THE-POLLING-COMPANY/), ZUHDI JASSER (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/TAG/ZUHDI-JASSER/) THE BRIDGE INITITATIVE HOME (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/) ABOUT (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/ABOUT/) TEAM (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/TEAM/) WHAT IS ISLAMOPHOBIA? (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/WHAT-IS-ISLAMOPHOBIA/) INFOGRAPHICS (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/INFOGRAPHICS/) SUPER SURVEY (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/THE-SUPER-SURVEY-TWO-DECADES-OFAMERICANS-VIEWS-ON-ISLAM-MUSLIMS/) HATE CRIMES (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/KNOWMORE-ABOUT-ATTACKS-ON-MUSLIMSSINCE-THE-CHAPELHILLSHOOTINGS/) 2016 ELECTIONS (HTTP://BRIDGE.GEORGETOWN.EDU/ISLAMOPHOBIA-AND-THE-2016-ELECTIONS/) BRIDGE NEWSLETTER SIGN UP Email Address* First Name Last Name SUBSCRIBE RECENT POSTS > Factsheet: President Donald Trump ( > Factsheet: Steve Bannon ( > Factsheet: Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn ( > Factsheet: Faith Leaders for America ( > Factsheet: Kris Kobach ( FOLLOW US ON TWITTER TheBridgeInitiative @bridgeinit "Is it easier to get a job if you're Adam or Mohamed?" Via @bbc #Islamophobia… Is it easier to get a job if you're Adam o… "Adam Henton" was offered three times … 4h TheBridgeInitiative @bridgeinit A "greatest hits" of Steve Bannon's Islamophobic comments in recent years. #SteveBannnon Al-Waleed Bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding ( ( Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service ( Georgetown University ( 3700 O Street, NW ICC 260 Washington, DC 20057 ( PROTECTING PLURALISM. ENDING ISLAMOPHOBIA EXHIBIT 12 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina Like 13K Tweet Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina January 14, 2016 PARTICIPANTS: Former Governor Jeb Bush (FL); Ben Carson; Governor Chris Christie (NJ); Senator Ted Cruz (TX); Governor John Kasich (OH); Senator Marco Rubio (FL); Donald Trump; MODERATORS: Maria Bartiromo (Fox Business Network); and Document Archive • Public Papers of the Presidents • State of the Union Addresses & Messages • Inaugural Addresses • Farewell Addresses • Weekly Addresses • Fireside Chats • News Conferences • Executive Orders • Proclamations • Signing Statements • Press Briefings • Statements of Administration Policy • Economic Report of the President • Debates • Convention Speeches • Party Platforms • 2016 Election Documents • 2012 Election Documents • 2008 Election Documents • 2004 Election Documents • 1960 Election Documents • 2017 Transition • 2009 Transition • 2001 Transition Data Archive Data Index Media Archive Neil Cavuto (Fox Business Network) Location: United States South Carolina Font Size: CAVUTO: It is 9:00 p.m. here at the North Charleston Coliseum and Performing Arts Center in South Carolina. Welcome to the sixth Republican presidential of the 2016 campaign, here on the Fox Business Network. I'm Neil Cavuto, alongside my friend and co-moderator Maria Bartiromo. Share BARTIROMO: Tonight we are working with Facebook to ask the candidates the questions voters want answered. And according to Facebook, the U.S. election has dominated the global conversation, with 131 million people talking about the 2016 race. That makes it the number one issue talked about on Facebook last year worldwide. The American Presidency Project CAVUTO: Now, the seven candidates on the stage tonight were selected based on their standing in six national polls, as well as polls in the early-voting states of Iowa and New Hampshire, those standings determining the position on the stage of the candidates tonight. And here they are. Businessman Donald Trump. [applause] Texas senator Ted Cruz. [applause] Florida senator Marco Rubio. [applause] Audio/Video Index Neurosurgeon Ben Carson. [applause] Election Index Florida 2000 Promote Your Page Too New Jersey governor Chris Christie. [applause] Elections Links Presidential Libraries View Public Papers by Month and Year Month Year Former Florida governor Jeb Bush. And Ohio governor John Kasich. [applause] INCLUDE documents from the Office of the Press Secretary BARTIROMO: Tonight's rules are simple: up to 90 seconds for each answer, one minute for each follow-up response. And if a candidate goes over the allotted time, you'll hear this. [bell rings] So let's get started. Candidates, jobs and growth — two of the biggest issues facing the country right now. In his State of the Union address earlier this week, the president said, quote, "we have the strongest, most durable economy in the world." INCLUDE election campaign documents And according to our Facebook research, jobs is one of the biggest issues resonating across the country, including here in View PPPUS Search the Entire Document Archive Enter keyword: South Carolina. The president is touting 14 million new jobs and an unemployment rate cut in half. The president said that anyone who claims America's economy is in decline is peddling fiction. Senator Cruz, what do you see that he doesn't? CRUZ: Well, Maria, thank you for that question, and let me say thank you to the state of South Carolina for welcoming us. 1/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina AND OR NOT Limit by Year From: 1789 To : 2017 Limit results per page 30 INCLUDE documents from the Office of the Press Secretary INCLUDE election campaign documents Search Let me start — I want to get to the substance of the question on jobs, but I want to start with something. Today, many of us picked up our newspapers, and we were horrified to see the sight of 10 American sailors on their knees, with their hands on their heads. In that State of the Union, President Obama didn't so much as mention the 10 sailors that had been captured by Iran. President Obama's preparing to send $100 billion or more to the Ayatollah Khamenei. And I'll tell you, it was heartbreaking. But the good news is the next commander-in-chief is standing on this stage. [applause] And I give you my word, if I am elected president, no service man or service woman will be forced to be on their knees, and any nation that captures our fighting men will feel the full force and fury of the United States of America. [applause] Now, on to your substantive question. The president tried to paint a rosy picture of jobs. And you know, he's right. If you're a Washington lobbyist, if you make your money in and around Washington, things are doing great. The millionaires and billionaires are doing great under Obama. But we have the lowest percentage of Americans working today of any year Instructions You can search the Public since 1977. Median wages have stagnated. And the Obama-Clinton economy has left behind the working men and women of Papers in two ways: this country. 1. Search by Keyword and The reason all of us are here is we believe we should be fighting for the working men and women of this country, and not Year You can search by keyword Washington, D.C. and choose the range of years within your search by filling BARTIROMO: Thank you, sir. [applause] out the boxes under Search the Public Papers. CAVUTO: Governor Kasich, we are not even two weeks into this stock trading year, but [inaudible] investors already lost $1.6 trillion in market value. That makes it the worst start to a new year ever. Many worry that things will get even worse, 2. View by Month and/or Year and that banks and financial stocks are particularly vulnerable. Select the month and/or year you would like information about and press View Public Now, if this escalates, like it did back when Barack Obama first assumed the presidency, what actions would you take if this Papers. Then choose a Public same thing happens all over again just as, in this example, you are taking over the presidency? Paper and the page will load for you. KASICH: Look, it takes three things basically to grow jobs. And I've done it when I was in Washington when we had a Search Engine provided by the Harry S. Truman Library. Our thanks to Jim Borwick and Dr. Rafee Che Kassim at Project Whistlestop for critical assistance in the implementation of the search function, and to Scott Roley at the Truman Library for facilitating this collaboration. balanced budget; had four years of balanced budgets; paid down a half-trillion of debt. And our economy was growing like crazy. It's the same thing that I did in Ohio. It's a simple formula: common sense regulations, which is why I think we should freeze all federal regulations for one year, except for health and safety. It requires tax cuts, because that sends a message to the job creators that things are headed the right way. And if you tax cuts — if you cut taxes for corporations, and you cut taxes for individuals, you're going to make things move, particularly the corporate tax, which is the highest, of course, in the — in the world. But in addition to that, we have to have fiscal discipline. We have to show that we can march to a balanced budget. And when you do that, when you're in a position of managing regulations; when you reduce taxes; and when you have fiscal discipline, you see the job creators begin to get very comfortable with the fact that they can invest. Right now, you don't have the — you have taxes that are too high. You have regulations — I mean, come on, they're affecting everybody here, particularly our small businesses. They are — they're in a position where they're smothering people. And I mean, are you kidding me? We're nowhere close to a balanced budget or fiscal discipline. Those three things put together are going to give confidence to job creators and you will begin to see wages rise. You will begin to see jobs created in a robust economy. And how do I know it? Because I've done it. I did it as the chairman of the Budget Committee, working with Senator Domenici. And I've done it in the state of Ohio as the chief executive. Our wages are growing faster than the national average. We're running surpluses. And we can take that message and that formula to Washington to lift every single American to a better life. [applause] BARTIROMO: We know that recent global events have many people worried — Iran detaining American sailors, forcing them to apologize; North Korea and its nuclear ambitions; an aggressive China; and a Middle East that continues to deteriorate, not to mention ISIS is getting stronger. Governor Christie, sometimes it seems the world is on fire. Where and when should a president use military action to restore order? CHRISTIE: Well, Maria, I'm glad to have heard from you in the summary of that question about what's going on in the world. Because Tuesday night, I watched story time with Barack Obama. And I've got to tell you, it sounded like everything in the world was going amazing, you know? [applause] The fact is, there's a number of things that the next president is going to have to do to clean up this mess. The first thing is we have to strengthen our alliances around the world. And the best way to do that is to start talking to our allies again and 2/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina having them be able to count on our word. Lots of people will say lots of different things about me in this campaign and others, but the one thing they've never said about me is that I'm misunderstood. And so when we talk to our allies and we give them our word, in a Christie administration, they know we're going to keep it. Next, we have to talk to our adversaries, and we have to make sure they understand the limits of our patience. And this president, given what Ted said right at the beginning, he's absolutely right. It's a — it's absolutely disgraceful that Secretary Kerry and others said in their response to what's going on in Iran that this was a good thing; it showed how the relationship was getting better. The president doesn't understand — and by the way, neither does Secretary Clinton — and here's my warning to everybody out in the audience tonight. If you're worried about the world being on fire, you're worried about how we're going to use our military, you're worried about strengthening our military and you're worried most of all about keeping your homes and your families safe and secure, you cannot give Hillary Clinton a third term of Barack Obama's leadership. I will not do that. If I'm the nominee, she won't get within 10 miles of the White House. [applause] BARTIROMO: Just to be clear Governor, where and when would you use military action? CHRISTIE: MIlitary action, Maria, would be used when it was absolutely necessary to protect American lives and protect American interests around the world. We are not the world's policeman, but we need to stand up and be ready. And the problem, Maria, is that the military is not ready, either. We need to rebuild our military, and this president has let it diminish to a point where tinpot dictators like the mullahs in Iran are taking our Navy ships. It is disgraceful, and in a Christie administration, they would know much, much better than to do that. [applause] CAVUTO: Governor Bush, the president just told the nation two nights ago that America is back and that the idea that our enemies are getting stronger or that this country is getting weaker, well, it's just rhetoric and hot air. Now other Democrats go even further, sir, saying Republicans even suggesting such comments actually embolden our enemies. I guess they would include you. What do you say? BUSH: Well first of all, the idea that somehow we're better off today than the day that Barack Obama was inaugurated president of the United States is totally an alternative universe. The simple fact is that the world has been torn asunder. Think about it. With grandiose language, the president talks about red lines and nothing to follow it up; talks about ISIS being the JV team, they form a caliphate the size of Indiana with 35 (thousand) to 40,000 battle-tested terrorists. He's missing the whole point, that America's leadership in the world is required for peace and stability. In the crowd today is Major General James Livingston, who's the co-chairman of my campaign here in South Carolina, a Medal of Honor recipient. [applause] I've learned from him that what we need to achieve is peace through strength, which means we need to rebuild the military. In this administration, every weapon system has been gutted, in this administration, the force levels are going down to a level where we can't even project force. Our friends no longer think we have their back and our enemies no longer fear us, and we're in a much difficult — we're in a much different position than we should be. And for the life of me, I have no understanding why the president thinks that everything is going well. Terrorism is on the run, China, Russia is advancing their agenda at warp speed, and we pull back. As president of the United States, I will be a commander in chief that will have the back of the military. We will rebuild the military to make sure that it is a solid force, not to be the world's policeman, but to make sure that in a peaceful world, people know that the United States is there to take care of our own national interests and take care of our allies. [applause] CAVUTO: So I take it from that you do not agree with the president. BUSH: No. And worse — worse yet, to be honest with you, Hillary Clinton would be a national security disaster. Think about it. She wants to continue down the path of Iran, Benghazi, the Russian reset, Dodd-Frank, all the things that have — that have gone wrong in this country, she would be a national security mess. And that is wrong. And you know what? Here's the problem. If she gets elected, she's under investigation with the FBI right now. If she gets elected, her first 100 days, instead of setting an agenda, she might be going back and forth between the White House and the courthouse. We need to stop that. [laughter and applause] CAVUTO: Senator Rubio, the president says that ISIS doesn't threaten our national existence like a Germany or a Japan back in World War II, that the terror group is nothing more than twisted souls plotting attacks in their garages. 3/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina But House Homeland Security Committee recently said that over 1,000 ongoing investigations of homegrown extremism in 50 states. So how do you define the threat? Germany then or dangerous nut cases now? RUBIO: Yeah, I would go, first of all, one step further in this description of Hillary Clinton. She wouldn't just be a disaster, Hillary Clinton is disqualified from being commander in chief of the United States. [applause] Someone who cannot handle intelligence information appropriately cannot be commander in chief and someone who lies to the families of those four victims in Benghazi can never be president of the United States. Ever. [applause] On the issue of Barack Obama, Barack Obama does not believe that America is a great global power. Barack Obama believes that America is a arrogant global power that needs to be cut down to size. And that's how you get a foreign policy where we cut deals with our enemies like Iran and we betray our allies like Israel and we gut our military and we go around the world like he has done on 10 separate occasions and apologized for America. He doesn't understand the threat in ISIS. He consistently underestimates it but I do not. There is a war against ISIS, not just against ISIS but against radical jihadists terrorists, and it is a war that they win or we win. When I'm president of the United States, we are going to win this war on ISIS. The most powerful intelligence agency in the world is going to tell us where we are, the most powerful military in the world is going to destroy them. And if we capture any of them alive, they are getting a one-way ticket to Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and we are going to find out everything they know. [applause] CAVUTO: Thank you, Senator. BARTIROMO: Dr. Carson, the president says he does not want to treat ISIS as a foreign army, but ISIS is neither a country nor a government. How do you attack a network that does not respect national borders? CARSON: Well, I'm very happy to get a question this early on. I was going to ask you to wake me up when that time came. [laughter] You know, I find it really quite fascinating some of the president's proclamations. The fact of the matter is he doesn't realize that we now live in the 21st century, and that war is very different than it used to be before. Not armies massively marching on each other and air forces, but now we have dirty bombs and we have cyber attacks and we have people who will be attacking our electrical grid. And, you know, we have a whole variety of things that they can do and they can do these things simultaneously. And we have enemies who are obtaining nuclear weapons that they can explode in our exoatmosphere and destroy our electric grid. I mean, just think about a scenario like that. They explode the bomb, we have an electromagnetic pulse. They hit us with a cyberattack simultaneously and dirty bombs. Can you imagine the chaos that would ensue at that point? He needs to recognize that those kinds of things are in fact an existential threat to us. But here's the real key. We have the world's best military, even though he's done everything he can to diminish it. And the fact of the matter is if we give them a mission and we don't tie their hands behind their back, they can get it accomplished. [applause] CAVUTO: Mr. Trump, at the State of the Union, the president pointed to a guest who was a Syrian refugee you might recall whose wife and daughter and other family members were killed in an air attack. Now he fled that country seeking asylum here, ultimately ended up in Detroit where he's now trying to start a new life. The president says that that doctor is the real face of these refugees and not the one that you and some of your colleagues on this stage are painting; that you prefer the face of fear and terror and that you would refuse to let in anyone into this country seeking legitimate asylum. How do you answer that? TRUMP: It's not fear and terror, it's reality. You just have to look today at Indonesia, bombings all over. [applause] You look at California, you look, frankly, at Paris where there's a — the strictest no-gun policy of any city anywhere in the world, and you see what happens: 130 people dead with many to follow. They're very, very badly wounded. They will — some will follow. And you look around, and you see what's happening, and this is not the case when he introduced the doctor — very nice, everything perfect but that is not representative of what you have in that line of migration. That could be the great Trojan Horse. It could be people that are going to do great, great destruction. When I look at the migration, I looked at the line, I said it actually on your show recently, where are the women? It looked like very few women. Very few children. Strong, powerful men, young and people are looking at that and they're saying what's going on? You look at the kind of damage that two people that two people that got married, they were radicalized — they got married, they killed 15 people in actually 15 — going to be probably 16 but you look at that and you take a look — a good strong look 4/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina and that's what we have. We are nineteen trillion dollars — our country's a mess and we can't let all these people come into our country and break our borders. We can't do it. [applause] BARTIROMO: Senator Cruz, the New York Times is reporting that you failed to properly disclose a million dollars in loans from Goldman Sachs and CitiBank. During your senate race, your campaign said, "it was inadvertent." A million dollars is inadvertent? CRUZ: Well Maria, thank you for passing on that hit piece in the front page of the New York Times. You know the nice thing about the mainstream media, they don't hide their views. The New York Times a few weeks back had a columnist who wrote a column saying, "Anybody But Cruz." Had that actually — that same columnist wrote a column comparing me to an evil demonic spirit from the move, "It Follows" that jumps apparently from body to body possessing people. So you know the New York Times and I don't have exactly have the warmest of relationships. Now in terms of their really stunning hit piece, what they mentioned is when I was running for senate — unlike Hillary Clinton, I don't have masses of money in the bank, hundreds of millions of dollars. When I was running for senate just about every lobbyist, just about all of the establishment opposed me in the senate race in Texas and my opponent in that race was worth over 200 million dollars. He put a 25 million dollar check up from his own pocket to fund that campaign and my wife Heidi and I, we ended up investing everything we owned. We took a loan against our assets to invest it in that campaign to defend ourselves against those attacks. And the entire New York times attack — is that I disclosed that loan on one filing with the United States Senate, that was a public filing. But it was not on a second filing with FDIC and yes, I made a paperwork error disclosing it on one piece of paper instead of the other. But if that's the best the New York Times has got, they better go back to the well. BARTIROMO: Thank you. [commercial break] CAVUTO: All right. Welcome back to the Republican presidential , right here in North Charleston, South Carolina. Let's get right back to the questions. And I'll start with you, Senator Cruz. Now you are, of course, a strict constitutionalist — no one would doubt that. And as you know, the U.S. Constitution says only natural-born citizens are eligible for the office of president of the United States. Stop me if you've heard this before. Now, you were born...[laughter]... you were born in Canada to an American mother. So you were and are considered an American citizen. But that fellow next to you, Donald Trump — and others — have said that being born in Canada means you are not natural-born, and that has raised questions about your eligibility. Do you want to try to close this topic once and for all tonight? CRUZ: Well, Neil, I'm glad we're focusing on the important topics of the evening. [laughter and applause] You know, back in September, my friend Donald said that he had had his lawyers look at this from every which way, and there was no issue there. There was nothing to this birther issue. [laughter] Now, since September, the Constitution hasn't changed. [laughter] But the poll numbers have. [applause] And I recognize — I recognize that Donald is dismayed that his poll numbers are falling in Iowa. But the facts and the law here are really quite clear. Under longstanding U.S. law, the child of a U.S. citizen born abroad is a natural-born citizen. If a soldier has a child abroad, that child is a natural-born citizen. That's why John McCain, even though he was born in Panama, was eligible to run for president. If an American missionary has a child abroad, that child is a natural-born citizen. That's why George Romney, Mitt's dad, was eligible to run for president, even though he was born in Mexico. At the end of the day, the legal issue is quite straightforward, but I would note that the birther theories that Donald has been relying on — some of the more extreme ones insist that you must not only be born on U.S. soil, but have two parents born on U.S. soil. Under that theory, not only would I be disqualified, Marco Rubio would be disqualified, Bobby Jindal would be disqualified and, interestingly enough, Donald J. Trump would be disqualified. [applause] UNKNOWN: Not me. CRUZ: Because — because Donald's mother was born in Scotland. She was naturalized. Now, Donald... 5/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina TRUMP: But I was born here. CRUZ: ... on the issue — on the issue of citizenship, Donald... TRUMP: [inaudible]. Big difference. CRUZ: ... on the issue of citizenship, Donald, I'm not going to use your mother's birth against you. TRUMP: OK, good. Because it wouldn't work. CRUZ: You're an American, as is everybody else on this stage, and I would suggest we focus on who's best prepared to be commander- in-chief, because that's the most important question facing the country. [applause] CAVUTO: Mr. Trump...[crosstalk]...that you raised it because of his rising poll numbers. TRUMP: ... first of all, let me just tell you something — and you know, because you just saw the numbers yourself — NBC Wall Street Journal just came out with a poll — headline: Trump way up, Cruz going down. I mean, so don't — so you can't — you can't...[booing]...they don't like the Wall Street Journal. They don't like NBC, but I like the poll. [laughter] And frankly, it just came out, and in Iowa now, as you know, Ted, in the last three polls, I'm beating you. So — you know, you shouldn't misrepresent how well you're doing with the polls. [applause] You don't have to say that. In fact, I was all for you until you started doing that, because that's a misrepresentation, number one. Number two, this isn't me saying it. I don't care. I think I'm going to win fair and square [inaudible] to win this way. Thank you. Lawrence Tribe and [inaudible] from Harvard — of Harvard, said that there is a serious question as to whether or not Ted can do this. OK? There are other attorneys that feel, and very, very fine constitutional attorneys, that feel that because he was not born on the land, he cannot run for office. Here's the problem. We're running. We're running. He does great. I win. I choose him as my vice presidential candidate, and the Democrats sue because we can't take him along for the ride. I don't like that. OK? [laughter] The fact is — and if for some reason he beats the rest of the field, he beats the rest of the field [inaudible]. See, they don't like that. They don't like that. [audience booing] No, they don't like he beats the rest of the field, because they want me. [laughter] But — if for some reason, Neil, he beats the rest of the field, I already know the Democrats are going to be bringing a suit. You have a big lawsuit over your head while you're running. And if you become the nominee, who the hell knows if you can even serve in office? So you should go out, get a declaratory judgment, let the courts decide. And you shouldn't have mentioned the polls because I would have been much...[crosstalk] CAVUTO: Why are you saying this now — right now? Why are you raising this issue now? TRUMP: Because now he's going a little bit better. No, I didn't care [inaudible]. It's true. No, it's true. Hey look, he never had a chance. Now, he's doing better. He's got probably a four or five percent chance. [laughter] [crosstalk] CRUZ: Neil... [crosstalk] TRUMP: The fact is, there is a big overhang. There's a big question mark on your head. And you can't do that to the party. You really can't. You can't do that to the party. You have to have certainty. Even if it was a one percent chance, and it's far greater than one percent because [inaudible]. I mean, you have great constitutional lawyers that say you can't run. If there was a — and you know I'm not bringing a suit. I promise. But the Democrats are going to bring a lawsuit, and you have to have certainty. You can't have a question. I can agree with you or not, but you can't have a question over your head. CAVUTO: Senator, do you want to respond? CRUZ: Well, listen, I've spent my entire life defending the Constitution before the U.S. Supreme Court. And I'll tell you, I'm not going to be taking legal advice from Donald Trump. TRUMP: You don't have to. Take it from Lawrence Tribe. [applause] [crosstalk] 6/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina Take it from your professors...[crosstalk] CRUZ: The chances of any litigation proceeding and succeeding on this are zero. And Mr. Trump is very focused... TRUMP: He's wrong. He's wrong. CRUZ: ... on Larry Tribe. Let me tell you who Larry Tribe is. He's a left-wing judicial activist, Harvard Law professor who was Al Gore's lawyer in Bush versus Gore. He's a major Hillary Clinton supporter. And there's a reason why Hillary's supporters are echoing Donald's attacks on me, because Hillary... TRUMP: He is not the only one. CRUZ: ... wants to face Donald Trump in the general election. TRUMP: There are many lawyers. CRUZ: And I'll tell you what, Donald, you — you very kindly just a moment ago offered me the V.P. slot. [laughter] I'll tell you what. If this all works out, I'm happy to consider naming you as V.P. So if you happen to be right, you could get the top job at the end of the day. TRUMP: No — no...[laughter]... I think if it doesn't... [applause] I like that. I like it. I'd consider it. But I think I'll go back to building buildings if it doesn't work out. CRUZ: Actually, I'd love to get you to build a wall. [crosstalk] TRUMP: I have a feeling it's going to work out, actually. [crosstalk] RUBIO: Let me [inaudible]. I was invoked in that question, so let me just say — in that answer — let me say, the real question here, I hate to interrupt this episode of Court TV. [laughter] But the real — but I think we have to get back to what this election has to be about. OK? Listen, we — this is the greatest country in the history of mankind. But in 2008, we elected a president that didn't want to fix America. He wants to change America. We elected a president that doesn't believe in the Constitution. He undermines it. We elected a president that is weakening America on the global stage. We elected a president that doesn't believe in the free enterprise system. This election has to be about reversing all of that damage. That's why I'm running for office because when I become president of the United States, on my first day in office we are going to repeal every single one of his unconstitutional executive orders. When I'm president of the United States we are getting rid of Obamacare and we are rebuilding our military. And when I'm president, we're not just going to have a president that gives a State of the Union and says America is the greatest country in the world. When I'm president, we're going to have a president that acts like it. BARTIROMO: Thank you, senator. Mr. Trump, South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley in her response to the State of the Union address... [applause]...appeared to choose sides within the party, saying Republicans should resist, quote, "the siren call of the angriest voices". She confirmed, she was referring to you among others. Was she out of line? And, how would a President Trump unite the party? TRUMP: Okay. First of all, Nikki this afternoon said I'm a friend of hers. Actually a close friend. And wherever you are sitting Nikki, I'm a friend. We're friends. That's good. [laughter] But she did say there was anger. And I could say, oh, I'm not angry. I'm very angry because our country is being run horribly and I will gladly accept the mantle of anger. Our military is a disaster. [applause] Our healthcare is a horror show. Obamacare, we're going to repeal it and replace it. We have no borders. Our vets are being treated horribly. Illegal immigration is beyond belief. Our country is being run by incompetent people. And yes, I am angry. [applause] And I won't be angry when we fix it, but until we fix it, I'm very, very angry. And I say that to Nikki. So when Nikki said that, I wasn't offended. She said the truth. One of your colleagues interviewed me. And said, well, she said you were angry and I said to myself, huh, she's right. I'm not fighting that. I didn't find it offensive at all. I'm angry because our country is a mess. [applause] BARTIROMO: But what are you going to do about it? 7/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina CAVUTO: Marco Rubio. I'm sorry, it's the time constraints. You and Governor Christie have been exchanging some fairly nasty words of late, and I will allow the governor to respond as well. The governor went so far to say, you won't be able to slime your way to the White House. He's referring to a series of ads done by a PAC, speaking on your behalf, that say quote,"One high tax, Common Core, liberal, energy-loving, Obamacare, Medicaid-expanding president is enough. You think you went too far on that and do you want to apologize to the governor? RUBIO: You know, as I said already twice in this , we have a very serious problem in this country. [applause] We have a president of the United States that is undermining this country's security and expanding the role of... CAVUTO: That is not my question. RUBIO: Well, I am going to answer your question, Neil. He is — this president is undermining the constitutional basis of this government. This president is undermining our military. He is undermining our standing in the world. I like Chris Christie, but we can not afford to have a president of the United States that supports Common Core. [applause] We can not afford to have a president of the United States that supports gun control. This president, this president is more interested in funding — less interested in funding the military, than he is in funding planned — he's more interested in funding Planned Parenthood than he is in funding the military. Chris Christie wrote a check to Planned Parenthood. All I'm saying is our next president has to be someone that undoes the damage Barack Obama has done to this country. It can not be someone that agrees with his agenda. Because the damage he has done to America is extraordinary. Let me tell you, if we don't get this election right, there may be no turning back for America. We're on the verge of being the first generation of Americans that leave our children worse off than ourselves. So I just truly, with all my heart belief, I like everybody on the stage. No one is a socialist. No one here is under FBI investigation. So we have a good group of people. CAVUTO: Is he a liberal? RUBIO: Our next president... CAVUTO: Is he a liberal? RUBIO: Unfortunately, Governor Christie has endorsed many of the ideas that Barack Obama supports, whether it is Common Core or gun control or the appointment of Sonia Sotomayor or the donation he made to Planned Parenthood. Our next president, and our Republican nominee can not be someone who supports those positions. CAVUTO: Governor? [applause] CHRISTIE: I stood on the stage and watched Marco in rather indignantly, look at Governor Bush and say, someone told you that because we're running for the same office, that criticizing me will get you to that office. It appears that the same someone who has been whispering in old Marco's ear too. [laughter] So the indignation that you carry on, some of the stuff, you have to also own then. So let's set the facts straight. First of all, I didn't support Sonia Sotomayor. Secondly, I never wrote a check to Planned Parenthood. Third, if you look at my record as governor of New Jersey, I have vetoed a 50-caliber rifle ban. I have vetoed a reduction this clip size. I vetoed a statewide I.D. system for gun owners and I pardoned, six out-of-state folks who came through our state and were arrested for owning a gun legally in another state so they never have to face charges. And on Common Core, Common Core has been eliminated in New Jersey. So listen, this is the difference between being a governor and a senator. See when you're a senator, what you get to do is just talk and talk and talk. And you talk so much that nobody can ever keep up with what you're saying is accurate or not. When you're a governor, you're held accountable for everything you do. And the people of New Jersey, I've seen it. [applause] CHRISTIE: And the last piece is this. I like Marco too, and two years ago, he called me a conservative reformer that New Jersey needed. That was before he was running against me. Now that he is, he's changed his tune. I'm never going to change my tune. I like Marco Rubio. He's a good guy, a smart guy, and he would be a heck of a lot better president than Hillary Rodham Clinton would ever be. [applause] 8/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina BUSH: Neil, my name was mentioned here. Neil, my name was mentioned as well. Here's the deal, Chris is totally right. He's been a good governor, and he's a heck of a lot better than his predecessor that would have bankrupted New Jersey. Everybody on this stage is better than Hillary Clinton. And I think the focus ought to be on making sure that we leave this nomination process, as wild and woolly as it's going to be — this is not being bad. These attack ads are going to be part of life. Everybody just needs to get used to it. Everybody's record's going to be scrutinized, and at the end of the day we need to unite behind the winner so we can defeat Hillary Clinton, because she is a disaster. [applause] Our country rise up again, but we need to have a compelling conservative agenda that we present to the American people in a way that doesn't disparage people, that unites us around our common purpose. And so everybody needs to discount some of the things you're going to hear in these ads, and discount the — the back-andforth here, because every person here is better than Hillary Clinton. CARSON: Neil, I was mentioned too. CAVUTO: You were? CARSON: Yeah, he said everybody. [laughter] And — and I just want to take this opportunity to say, you know, in the 2012 election, you know, we — and when I say we, Republicans — tore themselves apart. You know, we have to stop this because, you know, if we manage to damage ourselves, and we lose the next election, and a progressive gets in there and they get two or three Supreme Court picks, this nation is over as we know it. And we got to look at the big picture here. BARTIROMO: Governor Kasich...[applause]... Governor Kasich, Hillary Clinton is getting some serious competition from Senator Bernie Sanders. He's now at 41 percent in the latest CBS/New York Times poll. Vice President Biden sang his praises, saying Bernie is speaking to a yearning that is deep and real, and he has credibility on it. So what does it say about our country that a candidate who is a self-avowed socialist and who doesn't think a 90 percent tax rate is too high could be the Democratic nominee? KASICH: Well, if that's the case, we're going to win every state, if Bernie Sanders is the nominee. That's not even an issue. But look...[applause]...and I know Bernie, and I can promise you he's not going to be president of the United States. So here's this — the situation, I think, Maria. And this is what we have to — I — I've got to tell you, when wages don't rise — and they haven't for a lot of families for a number of years — it's very, very difficult for them. Part of the reason why it hasn't risen because sometimes we're not giving people the skills they need. Sometimes it's because the Federal Reserve kept interest rates so low that the wealthy were able to invest in — in strong assets like the stock market when everybody else was left behind. People are upset about it. I'll tell you what else they're upset about: you're 50 or 51 years old, and some kid walks in and tells you you're out of work, and you don't know where to go and where to turn. Do we have answer for that? We do. There are ways to retrain the 50 and 51-year-olds, because they've got great value. I'll tell you what else people are concerned about. Their kids come out of college, they have high debt and they can't get a good job. We got to do a lot about the high cost of high — higher education, but we've got to make sure we're training people for jobs that exist, that are good jobs that can pay. [applause] Let me tell you that, in this country — in this country, people are concerned about their economic future. They're very concerned about it. And they wonder whether somebody is getting something to — keeping them from getting it. That's not the America that I've ever known. My father used to say, "Johnny, we never — we don't hate the rich. We just want to be the rich." And we just got to make sure that every American has the tools, in K-through-12 and in vocational education, in higher education. And we got to fight like crazy so people can think the American dream still exists, because it does, with rising wages, with full employment and with everybody in America — and I mean everybody in America — having an opportunity to realize the American dream of having a better life than their mother and their father. 9/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina I'm president — look, I've done it once. I've done it once in Washington, with great jobs and lower taxes. The economy was really booming. And now in Ohio, with the same formula, wages higher than the — than the national average. A growth of 385,000 jobs. [bell rings] It's not that hard. Just know where you want to go, stick to your guts. Get it done, because our — our children and grandchildren are counting on us to get it done. And, folks, we will. You count on it. BARTIROMO: Dr. Carson, one of the other candidates on this stage has brought Bill Clinton's past indiscretions. Is that a legitimate topic in this election? And what do you think of the notion that Hillary Clinton is an enabler of sexual misconduct? CARSON: Well, there's not question that we should be able to look at past president whether they're married to somebody who's running for president or not in terms of their past behavior and what it means. But you know, here's the real issue, is this America anymore? Do we still have standards? Do we still have values and principles? You know, you look at what's going on, you see all the divisiveness and the hatred that goes on in our society. You know, we have a war on virtual everything — race wars, gender wars, income wars, religious wars, age wars. Every war you can imaging, we have people at each other's throat and our strength is actually in our unity. You know, you go to the internet, you start reading an article and you go to the comments section — you cannot go five comments down before people are calling each all manner of names. Where did that spirit come from in America? It did not come from our Judeo-Christian roots, I can tell you that. And wherever it came from we need to start once again recognizing that there is such a thing as right and wrong. And let's not let the secular progressives drive that out of us. The majority of people in American actually have values and principles and they believe in the very things that made America great. They've been beaten into submission. It's time for us to stand up for what we believe in. [applause] CAVUTO: Well, we are not done. Coming up, one of the top things people are talking about on Facebook, guns. And you can join us live us on this stage in the conversation during this commercial break right from home. You can go to[inaudible]. We will be streaming live and talking about how we think the is going so far. We're back in a moment in Charleston, South Carolina. [commercial break] BARTIROMO: Welcome back to the Republican presidential debates, right here in North Charleston. Let's get right back to the questions. Governor Bush, gun rights, one of the top issues seen on Facebook with close to 3 million people talking about it in the past month. Right here in Charleston, Dylann Roof, who has been accused of killing nine people in a nearby church, reportedly had not passed his background check when he got his gun. What is the harm in tightening standards for not only who buys guns, but those who sell them? BUSH: First of all, I'd like to recognize Governor Haley for her incredible leadership in the aftermath of the — [applause] — the Emanuel AME church killings. And I also want to recognize the people in that church that showed the grace of God and the grace of forgiveness and the mercy that they showed. [applause] I don't know if any of us could have done what they did, one after another, within 48 hours of that tragedy taking place. Look, here's the deal, in this particular case, the FBI made a mistake. The law itself requires a background check, but that didn't fulfill their part of the bargain within the time that they were supposed to do. We don't need to add new rules, we need to make sure the FBI does its job. Because that person should not have gotten a gun, should not — would not have passed a background check. The first impulse of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton is to take rights away from law- abiding citizens. That's what they do, whether it's the San Bernardino attack or if it's these tragedies that take place, I think we need to focus on what the bigger issue is. It isn't law-abiding gun owners. Look, I have an A plus rating in the NRA and we also have a reduction in gun violence because in Florida, if you commit a crime with a gun, you're going away. You're going away for a long, long while. And that's what we should focus on is the violence in our communities. Target the efforts for people that are committing crimes with guns, and if you do that, and get it right, you're going to be much better off than creating a political argument where there's a big divide. 10/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina The other issue is mental health. That's a serious issue that we could work on. Republicans and Democrats alike believe this. [applause] The president's first impulse is do this by executive order, power he doesn't have. Why not go to Congress and in a bipartisan way, begin to deal with the process of mental health issues so that people that are spiraling out of control because of mental health challenges don't have access to guns. [applause] BARTIROMO: Thank you, sir. Mr. Trump, are there any circumstances that you think we should be limiting gun sales of any kind in America? TRUMP: No. I am a 2nd amendment person. If we had guns in California on the other side where the bullets went in the different direction, you wouldn't have 14 or 15 people dead right now. If even in Paris, if they had guns on the other side, going in the opposite direction, you wouldn't have 130 people plus dead. So the answer is no and what Jeb said is absolutely correct. We have a huge mental health problem in this country. We're closing hospitals, we're closing wards, we're closing so many because the states want to save money. We have to get back into looking at what's causing it. The guns don't pull the trigger. It's the people that pull the trigger and we have to find out what is going on. [applause] We have to protect our 2nd amendment and you cannot do this and certainly what Barack Obama was doing with the executive order. He doesn't want to get people together, the old-fashioned way, where you get Congress. You get the Congress, you get the Senate, you get together, you do legislation. He just writes out an executive order. Not supposed to happen that way. [applause] BARTIROMO: Thank you sir. TRUMP: You get the Congress. You get the Senate. You get together. You do legislation. He just writes out an order, executive order. It's not supposed to happen that way. [applause] BARTIROMO: Thank you, sir. [applause] CAVUTO: Senator Rubio, you said that President Obama wants to take people's guns away. Yet under his presidency, gun sales have more than doubled. That doesn't sound like a White House unfriendly to gun owners. RUBIO: That sounds like people are afraid the president's going to take their guns away. [applause] Look, the Second Amendment is not an option. It is not a suggestion. It is a constitutional right of every American to be able to protect themselves and their families. I am convinced that if this president could confiscate every gun in America, he would. I am convinced that this president, if he could get rid of the Second Amendment, he would. I am convinced because I see how he works with his attorney general, not to defend the Second Amendment, but to figure out ways to undermine it. I have seen him appoint people to our courts not to defend the Second Amendment, but to figure out ways to undermine it. Here's my second problem. None of these instances that the president points to as the reason why he's doing these things would have been preventive. You know why? Because criminals don't buy their guns from a gun show. They don't buy their guns from a collector. And they don't buy their guns from a gun store. They get — they steal them. They get them on the black market. And let me tell you, ISIS and terrorists do not get their guns from a gun show. These...[laughter and applause]... his answer — you name it. If there's an act of violence in America, his immediate answer before he even knows the facts is gun control. Here's a fact. We are in a war against ISIS. They are trying to attack us here in America. They attacked us in Philadelphia last week. They attacked us in San Bernardino two weeks ago. And the last line standing between them and our families might be us and a gun. When I'm president of the United States, we are defending the Second Amendment, not undermining it the way Barack Obama does. [applause] CAVUTO: But what fact can you point to, Senator — what fact can you point to that the president would take away everyone's gun? You don't think that's [inaudible]? RUBIO: About every two weeks, he holds a press conference talking about how he can't wait to restrict people's access to guns. He has never defended...[crosstalk]...I'll give you a fact. Well, let me tell you this. Do you remember when he ran for president of the United States, and he was a candidate, and he went and said, "These Americans with traditional values, they are bitter people, and they cling to their guns and to their religion." That tells you right away where he was headed on all of this. 11/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina This president every chance he has ever gotten has tried to undermine the Second Amendment. [applause] He doesn't meet — here's the difference. When he meets with the attorney general in the White House, it's not "how can we protect the Second Amendment rights of Americans." It's "give me options on how I can make it harder for law-abiding people to buy guns." That will never happen when I am president of the United States. [applause] CAVUTO: Governor Christie, you, too, have criticized the president's recent executive action on gun control, saying it's unconstitutional, another step to bypass Congress. But hasn't your own position on guns evolved, sir? The New Jersey Star-Ledger reports that you signed several laws to regulate the possession of firearms, and that you argued back in August 2013, and I quote, "These common sense measures will strengthen New Jersey's already tough gun laws." So isn't that kind of what the president wants to do now? CHRISTIE: No, absolutely not. The president wants to do things without working with his Congress, without working with the legislature, and without getting the consent of the American people. And the fact is that that's not a democracy. That's a dictatorship. And we need to very, very concerned about that. See, here's the thing. I don't think the founders put the Second Amendment as number two by accident. I don't think they dropped all the amendments into a hat and picked them out of a hat. I think they made the Second Amendment the second amendment because they thought it was just that important. The fact is in New Jersey, what we have done is to make it easier now to get a conceal and carry permit. We have made it easier to do that, not harder. And the way we've done it properly through regulatory action, not by signing unconstitutional executive orders. This guy is a petulant child. That's what he is. I mean, you know...[applause]... the fact is, Neil, let's think about — let's think about — and I want to maybe — I hope the president is watching tonight, because here's what I'd like to tell him. Mr. President, we're not against you. We're against your policies. When you became president, you had a Democratic Congress and a filibuster-proof Democratic Senate. You had only 21 Republican governors in this country. And now after seven years of your policies, we have the biggest majority we've had since the 1920s in the House; a Republican majority in the Senate; and 31 out of 50 Republican governors. The American people have rejected your agenda and now you're trying to go around it. That's not right. It's not constitutional. And we are going to kick your rear end out of the White House come this fall. [applause] BARTIROMO: So what is the answer, Senator Cruz, to stop mass shootings and violent crime, up in 30 cities across the country? CRUZ: The answer is simple. Your prosecute criminals. You target the bad guys. You know, a minute ago, Neil asked: What has President Obama do — done to illustrate that he wants to go after guns? Well, he appointed Eric Holder as attorney general. Eric Holder said he viewed his mission as brainwashing the American people against guns. He appointed Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, someone who has been a radical against the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. He launched Fast and Furious, illegally selling guns to Mexican drug lords that were then used to shoot law enforcement officials. And I'll tell you what Hillary Clinton has said: Hillary Clinton says she agrees with the dissenters — the Supreme Court dissenters in the Heller case. There were four dissenters, and they said that they believe the Second Amendment protects no individual right to keep and bear arms whatsoever, which means, if their view prevailed and the next president's going to get one, two, three, maybe four Supreme Court justices, the court will rule that not a single person in this room has any right under the Second Amendment and the government could confiscate your guns. And I'll note that California senator — Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein said, if she could say to Mr. America and Mrs. America, "give me your guns, I'm rounding them up," she would. And let me make a final point on this. Listen, in any Republican primary, everyone is going to say they support the Second Amendment. Unless you are clinically insane...[laughter]...that's what you say in a primary. But the voters are savvier than that. They recognize that people's actions don't always match their words. I've got a proven record fighting to defend the Second Amendment. There's a reason Gun Owners of America has endorsed me in this race. There's a reason the NRA gave me their Carter Knight Freedom Fund award...[bell rings]...and there's a reason, when Barack Obama and Chuck Schumer came after our right to keep and bear arms, that I led the opposition, along with millions of Americans — we defeated that gun control legislation. 12/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina And I would note the other individuals on this stage were nowhere to be found in that fight. BARTIROMO: Senator...[applause]... let me follow up and switch gears. Senator Cruz, you suggested Mr. Trump, quote, "embodies New York values." Could you explain what you mean by that? CRUZ: You know, I think most people know exactly what New York values are. [laughter] BARTIROMO: I am from New York. I don't. CRUZ: What — what — you're from New York? So you might not. [laughter] But I promise you, in the state of South Carolina, they do. [applause] And listen, there are many, many wonderful, wonderful working men and women in the state of New York. But everyone understands that the values in New York City are socially liberal or pro-abortion or pro- gay-marriage, focus around money and the media. And — and I would note indeed, the reason I said that is I was asked — my friend Donald has taken to it as advance playing Bruce Springsteen's "Born in the USA", and I was asked what I thought of that. And I said, "well, if he wanted to play a song, maybe he could play, 'New York, New York'?" And — and — you know, the concept of New York values is not that complicated to figure out. Not too many years ago, Donald did a long interview with Tim Russert. And in that interview, he explained his views on a whole host of issues that were very, very different from the views he's describing now. And his explanation — he said, "look, I'm from New York, that's what we believe in New York. Those aren't Iowa values, but this is what we believe in New York." And so that was his explanation. And — and I guess I can — can frame it another way. Not a lot of conservatives come out of Manhattan. I'm just saying. [laughter] BARTIROMO: Are you sure about that? CAVUTO: Maria... TRUMP: So conservatives actually do come out of Manhattan, including William F. Buckley and others, just so you understand. [applause] And just so — if I could, because he insulted a lot of people. I've had more calls on that statement that Ted made — New York is a great place. It's got great people, it's got loving people, wonderful people. When the World Trade Center came down, I saw something that no place on Earth could have handled more beautifully, more humanely than New York. You had two one hundred...[applause] had two 110-story buildings come crashing down. I saw them come down. Thousands of people killed, and the cleanup started the next day, and it was the most horrific cleanup, probably in the history of doing this, and in construction. I was down there, and I've never seen anything like it. And the people in New York fought and fought and fought, and we saw more death, and even the smell of death — nobody understood it. And it was with us for months, the smell, the air. And we rebuilt downtown Manhattan, and everybody in the world watched and everybody in the world loved New York and loved New Yorkers. And I have to tell you, that was a very insulting statement that Ted made. [applause] CAVUTO: Governor bush, for the third time in as many months, the Iranians have provoked us, detaining us, as we've been discussing, with these 10 Navy sailors Tehran had said strayed into their waters. The sailors were released, but only after shown on video apologizing for the incident. This occurring only weeks after Iran fired multiple rockets within 1,500 yards of a U.S. aircraft carrier and then continued to test medium range missiles. Now you've claimed that such actions indicate Tehran has little to fear from a President Obama. I wonder, sir, what would change if they continued doing this sort of thing under a President Jeb Bush? BUSH: Well, first of all, under President Jeb Bush, we would restore the strength of the military. Last week, Secretary Carter announced that the Navy's going to be cut again. It's now half the size of what it was prior to Operation Desert Storm. The deployments are too high for the military personnel. We don't have procurement being done for refreshing the equipment. The B-52 is still operational as the long range bomber; it was inaugurated in the age of Harry Truman. The 13/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina planes are older than the pilots. We're gutting our military, and so the Iranians and the Chinese and the Russians and many other countries look at the United States not as serious as we once were. We have to eliminate the sequester, rebuild our military in a way that makes it clear that we're back in the game. Secondly, as it relates to Iran, we need to confront their ambitions across the board. We should reimpose sanctions, they've already violated sanctions after this agreement was signed by testing medium-range missiles. Thirdly, we need to move our embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem to send a serious signal that we're back in the game with Israel...[applause]...and sign an agreement that makes sure that the world knows that they will have technological superiority. We need to get back in the game as it relates to our Arab nations. The rest of the world is moving away from us towards other alliances because we are weak. This president and John Kerry and Hillary Clinton all have made it harder for the next president to act, but he must act to confront the ambitions of Iran. We can get back in the game to restore order and security for our own country. [applause] CAVUTO: Thank you, Governor. Governor Kasich, while everyone has been focusing on Iran's provocations, I'm wondering what you make of what Saudi Arabia has been doing and its recent moves in the region, including its execution of a well-known Shi'ite cleric and its move to dramatically increase oil production, some say in an effort to drive down oil prices and force a lot of U.S. oil producers out of business. Sure enough, oil prices have tumbled. One brokerage house is predicting a third or more of American oil producers and those heavily invested in fracking will go bankrupt, and soon Saudi Arabia and OPEC will be back in the driver's seat. U.S. energy player Harold Hamrie similarly told me with friends like these, who needs enemies? Do you agree? KASICH: Well, let me — let me first of all talk a little bit about my experience. I served on the Defense Committee for 18 years, and by the way, one of the members of that committee was Senator Strom Thurmond from South Carolina. Let em also tell you...[applause]...that after the 9/11 attacks, Secretary Rumsfeld invited me to the Pentagon with a meeting of the former secretaries of Defense. And in that meeting, I suggested we had a problem with technology, and that I wanted to take people from Silicon Valley into the Pentagon to solve our most significant problems. So I not only had the opportunity to go through the Cold War struggles in Central America, and even after 9/11 to be involved. With Saudi Arabia and oil production, first of all, it's so critical for us to be energy independent, and we're getting there because of fracking and we ought to explore because, see, energy independence gives us leverage and flexibility, and secondly, if you want to bring jobs back to the United States of America in industry, low prices make the difference. We're seeing it in my state and we'll see it in this country. And that's why we must make sure we continue to frack. In terms of Saudi Arabia, look, my biggest problem with them is they're funding radical clerics through their madrasses. That is a bad deal and an evil situation, and presidents have looked the other way. And I was going to tell you, whether I'm president or not, we better make it clear to the Saudis that we're going to support you, we're in relation with you just like we were in the first Gulf War, but you've got to knock off the funding and teaching of radical clerics who are the very people who try to destroy us and will turn around and destroy them. [applause] So look, in foreign policy — in foreign policy, it's strength, but you've got to be cool. You've got to have a clear vision of where you want to go. And I'm going to tell you, that it — I'm going to suggest to you here tonight, that you can't do on the job training. I've seen so much of it – a Soviet Union, the coming down of a wall, the issues that we saw around the world in Central America, the potential spread of communism, and 9/11 and Gulf War. You see what the Saudi's — deliver them a strong message but at the end of the day we have to keep our cool because most of the time they're going right with us. And they must be part of our coalition to destroy ISIS and I believe we can get that done. Thank you. CAVUTO: Thank you John. BARTIROMO: There's much more ahead including the fight against ISIS. More from Charleston, South Carolina when we come right back. [commercial break] BARTIROMO: We welcome back to the Republican Presidential , right back to the questions. 14/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina Candidates, the man who made fighting ISIS the cornerstone of his campaign, South Carolina Senator, Lindsey Graham is out the race but he joins us tonight in the audience. [applause] He says, "the air-strike now in their 16th month have been ineffective." Dr. Carson ... CARSON: Wait a minute, who in their 16th month? BARTIROMO: The air-strikes. CARSON: OK. BARTIROMO: Now in their 16th month are ineffective. Dr. Carson, do you think Senator Graham is right in wanting to send 20,000 troops — ground troops to Iraq and Syria to take out ISIS? CARSON: Well, there's no question that ISIS is a very serious problem, and I don't believe that this administration recognizes how serious it is. I think we need to do a lot more than we're doing. Recognize that the caliphate is what gives them the legitimacy to go out on a jihadist mission, so we need to take that away from them. The way to take that away from them is to talk to our military officials and ask them, "what do you need in order to accomplish this goal?" Our decision is, then, do we give them what we need. I say, yes, not only do we give them what they need, but we don't tie their hands behind their backs so that they can go ahead and get the job done. In addition to that...[applause] addition to that, we go ahead and we take the oil from them, their source of revenue. You know, some of these — these engagement rules that the administration has — "we're not going to bomb a tanker that's coming out of there because there might be a person in it" — give me a break. Just tell them that, you put people in there, we're going to bomb them. So don't put people in there if you don't want them bombed. You know, that's so simple. [applause] And then we need to shut down — we need to shut down their mechanisms of funding and attack their command-andcontrol centers. Why should we let their people be sitting there smoking their cigars, sitting in their comfortable chairs in Raqqa? We know to go ahead and shut off the supply routes, and send in our special ops at 2:00 a.m. and attack them everywhere they go. They should be running all the time, then they won't have time to plan attacks against us. [applause] BARTIROMO: Thank you, sir. Senator Graham has also said that the U.S. will find Arab support for its coalition if it removes Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. And I quote, "The now king of Saudi Arabia told us, 'you can have our army, you just got to deal with Assad.' "The emir of Qatar said, 'I'll pay for the operation, but they are not going to fight ISIS and let Damascus fall into the hands of the Iranians. Assad has to go.'" Governor Christie, how important is it to remove Assad from power and how would you do it? CHRISTIE: Maria, you look at what this president and his secretary of state, Secretary of State Clinton, has done to get us in this spot. You think about it — this is the president who said, along with his secretary of state — drew a red line in Syria, said, if Assad uses chemical weapons against his people, that we're going to attack. He used chemical weapons, he's killed, now, over a quarter of a million of his own people, and this president has done nothing. In fact, he's done worse than nothing. This president — and, by the way, Secretary Clinton, who called Assad a reformer — she called Assad a reformer. Now, the fact is, what this president has done is invited Russia to play an even bigger role, bring in Vladimir Putin to negotiate getting those chemical weapons back from Assad, yet what do we have today? We have the Russians and the Iranians working together, not to fight ISIS, but to prop up Assad. The fact of the matter is we're not going to have peace — we are not going to have peace in Syria. We're not going to be able to rebuild it unless we put a no-fly zone there, make it safe for those folks so we don't have to be talking about Syrian refugees anymore. The Syrians should stay in Syria. They shouldn't be going to Europe. And here's the last piece...[applause]'re not going to have peace in Syria with Assad in charge. You're simply not. And so Senator Graham is right about this. 15/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina And if we want to try to rebuild the coalition, as Governor Kasich was saying before, then what we better do is to get to the Arab countries that believe that ISIS is a threat, not only to them, but to us and to world peace, and bring them together. And believe me, Assad is not worth it. And if you're going to leave this to Hillary Clinton, the person who gave us this foreign policy, the architect of it, and you're going to give her another four years, that's why I'm speaking out as strongly as I am about that. Hillary Clinton cannot be president. It will lead to even greater war in this world. And remember this, after Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have had nearly 8 years, we have fewer democracies in the world than we had when they started. That makes the world less peaceful, less safe. In my administration, we will help to make sure we bring people together in the Middle East, and we will fight ISIS and defeat them. BARTIROMO: Thank you, sir. [applause] Mr. Trump — Mr. Trump, your comments about banning Muslims from entering the country created a firestorm. According to Facebook, it was the most-talked-about moment online of your entire campaign, with more than 10 million people talking about the issue. Is there anything you've heard that makes you want to rethink this position? TRUMP: No. [laughter] No. [applause] Look, we have to stop with political correctness. We have to get down to creating a country that's not going to have the kind of problems that we've had with people flying planes into the World Trade Centers, with the — with the shootings in California, with all the problems all over the world. I just left Indonesia — bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb. We have to find out what's going on. I said temporarily. I didn't say permanently. I said temporarily. And I have many great Muslim friends. And some of them, I will say, not all, have called me and said, "Donald, thank you very much; you're exposing an unbelievable problem and we have to get to the bottom of it." And unlike President Obama, where he refuses even to use the term of what's going on, he can't use the term for whatever reason. And if you can't use the term, you're never going to solve the problem. My Muslim friends, some, said, "thank you very much; we'll get to the bottom of it." But we have a serious problem. And we can't be the stupid country any more. We're laughed at all over the world. [applause] BUSH: Donald, Donald — can I — I hope you reconsider this, because this policy is a policy that makes it impossible to build the coalition necessary to take out ISIS. The Kurds are our strongest allies. They're Muslim. You're not going to even allow them to come to our country? The other Arab countries have a role to play in this. We cannot be the world's policeman. We can't do this unilaterally. We have to do this in unison with the Arab world. And sending that signal makes it impossible for us to be serious about taking out ISIS and restoring democracy in Syria. [applause] So I hope you'll reconsider. I hope you'll reconsider. The better way of dealing with this — the better way of dealing with this is recognizing that there are people in, you know, the — Islamic terrorists inside, embedded in refugee populations. What we ought to do is tighten up our efforts to deal with the entry visa program so that a citizen from Europe, it's harder if they've been traveling to Syria or traveling to these other places where there is Islamic terrorism, make it harder — make the screening take place. We don't have to have refugees come to our country, but all Muslims, seriously? What kind of signal does that send to the rest of the world that the United States is a serious player in creating peace and security? CAVUTO: But you said — you said that he made those comments and they represented him being unhinged after he made them. BUSH: Yeah, they are unhinged. CAVUTO: Well — well, after he made them...[applause]...his poll numbers went up eight points in South Carolina. Now — now, wait... TRUMP: Eleven points, to be exact. 16/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina CAVUTO: Are you — are you saying — are you saying that all those people who agree with Mr. Trump are unhinged? BUSH: No, not at all, absolutely not. I can see why people are angry and scared, because this president has created a condition where our national security has weakened dramatically. I totally get that. But we're running for the presidency of the United States here. This isn't — this isn't, you know, a different kind of job. You have to lead. You cannot make rash statements and expect the rest of the world to respond as though, well, it's just politics. Every time we send signals like this, we send a signal of weakness, not strength. And so it was [inaudible] his statement, which is why I'm asking him to consider changing his views. [applause] TRUMP: I want security for this country. OK? [applause] I want security. I'm tired of seeing what's going on, between the border where the people flow over; people come in; they live; they shoot. I want security for this country. We have a serious problem with, as you know, with radical Islam. We have a tremendous problem. It's not only a problem here. It's a problem all over the world. I want to find out why those two young people — those two horrible young people in California when they shot the 14 people, killed them — people they knew, people that held the wedding reception for them. I want to find out — many people saw pipe bombs and all sorts of things all over their apartment. Why weren't they vigilant? Why didn't they call? Why didn't they call the police? And by the way, the police are the most mistreated people in this country. I will tell you that. [applause] The most mistreated people. In fact, we need to — wait a minute — we need vigilance. We have to find out — many people knew about what was going on. Why didn't they turn those two people in so that you wouldn't have had all the death? There's something going on and it's bad. And I'm saying we have to get to the bottom of it. That's all I'm saying. We need security. BARTIROMO: We — we want to hear from all of you on this. According to Pew Research, the U.S. admits more than 100,000 Muslim immigrants every single year on a permanent lifetime basis. I want to ask the rest of you to comment on this. Do you agree that we should pause Muslim immigration until we get a better handle on our homeland security situation, as Mr. Trump has said? Beginning with you, Governor Kasich. KASICH: I — I've been for pausing on admitting the Syrian refugees. And the reasons why I've done is I don't believe we have a good process of being able to vet them. But you know, we don't want to put everybody in the same category. And I'll go back to something that had been mentioned just a few minutes ago. If we're going to have a coalition, we're going to have to have a coalition not just of people in the western part of the world, our European allies, but we need the Saudis, we need the Egyptians, we need the Jordanians, we need the Gulf states. We need Jordan. We need all of them to be part of exactly what the first George Bush put together in the first Gulf War. [bell rings] It was a coalition made up of Arabs and Americans and westerners and we're going to need it again. And if we try to put everybody in the same — call everybody the same thing, we can't do it. And that's just not acceptable. But I think a pause on Syrian refugees has been exactly right for all the governors that have called for it, and also, of course, for me as the governor of Ohio. BARTIROMO: Thank you, sir, we want to hear from the rest of you, Governor Christie, your take. CHRISTIE: Now Maria, listen. I said right from the beginning that we should take no Syrian refugees of any kind. And the reason I said that is because the FBI director told the American people, told Congress, that he could not guarantee he could vet them and it would be safe. That's the end of the conversation. I can tell you, after spending seven years as a former federal prosecutor, right after 9/11, dealing with this issue. Here's the way you need to deal with it. You can't just ban all Muslims. You have to ban radical Islamic jihadists. You have to ban the people who are trying to hurt us. The only way to figure that out is to go back to getting the intelligence community the funding and the tools that it needs to be able to keep America safe. 17/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina [bell rings] And this summer, we didn't do that. We took it away from the NSA, it was a bad decision by the president. Bad by those in the Senate who voted for it and if I'm president, we'll make our intelligence community strong, and won't have to keep everybody out, we're just going to keep the bad folk out and make sure they don't harm us. BARTIROMO: Senator Rubio, where do you stand? RUBIO: Well, first of all, let's understand why we are even having this and why Donald tapped in to some of that anger that's out there about this whole issue. Because this president has consistently underestimated the threat of ISIS. If you listen to the State of the Union the other night, he described them as a bunch of guys with long beards on the back of a pickup truck. They are much more than that. This is a group of people that enslaves women and sells them, sells them as brides. This is a group of people that burns people in cages, that is conducting genocide against Christians and Yazidis and others in the region. This is not some small scale group. They are radicalizing people in the United States, they are conducting attacks around the world. So you know what needs to happen, it's a very simple equation, and it's going to happen when I'm president. If we do not know who you are, and we do not know why you are coming when I am president, you are not getting into the United States of America. [applause] BARTIROMO: Senator Cruz, where do you stand? Senator Cruz? CRUZ: You know I understand why Donald made the comments he did and I understand why Americans are feeling frustrated and scared and angry when we have a president who refuses to acknowledge the threat we face and even worse, who acts as an apologist for radical Islamic terrorism. I think what we need is a commander in chief who is focused like a laser on keeping this country safe and on defeating radical Islamic terrorism. What should we do? First, we should pass the Expatriate Terrorist Act, legislation I've introduced that says if an American goes and joins ISIS and wages jihad against America, that you forfeit your citizenship and you can not come in on a passport. [applause] And secondly, we should pass the legislation that I've introduced...[bell rings]...that suspends all refugees from nations that ISIS or Al Qaida controls significant territory. Just last week, we see saw two Iraqi refugees vetted using the same process the president says will work, that were arrested for being alleged ISIS terrorists. If I'm elected president, we will not let in refugees from countries controlled by ISIS or Al Qaida. When it comes to ISIS, we will not weaken them, we will not degrade them, we will utterly and completely destroy ISIS [applause]. BARTIROMO: Dr. Carson, where do you stand? Do you agree with Mr. Trump? CARSON: Well, first of all, recognize it is a substantial problem. But like all of our problems, there isn't a single one that can't be solved with common sense if you remove the ego and the politics. And clearly, what we need to do is get a group of experts together, including people from other countries, some of our friends from Israel, who have had experience screening these people and come up with new guidelines for immigration, and for visas, for people who are coming into this country. That is the thing that obviously makes sense, we can do that. And as far as the Syrians are concerned, Al-Hasakah province, perfect place. They have infrastructure. All we need to do is protect them, they will be in their own country. And that is what they told me when I was in Jordan in November. Let's listen to them and let's not listen to our politicians. BARTIROMO: So, to be clear, the both of you do not agree with Mr. Trump? BUSH: So, are we going to ban Muslims from India, from Indonesia, from countries that are strong allies — that we need to build better relationships with? Of course not. What we need to do is destroy ISIS. I laid out a plan at the Citadel to do just that and it starts with creating a "No Fly Zone" and "Safe Zones" to make sure refugees are there. We need to lead a force, a Sunni led force inside of Syria. We need to embed with — with the Iraqi military. We need to arm the Kurds the directly. We need to re-establish the relationships with the Sunnis. We need the lawyers off the back of the war fighters. That's how you solve the problem. You don't solve it by big talk where you're banning all Muslims and making it harder for us to build the kind of coalition for us to be successful. BARTIROMO: Thank you governor. 18/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina CAVUTO: Mr. Trump, sometimes maybe in the heat of the campaign, you say things and you have to dial them back. Last week, the New York Times editorial board quoted as saying that you would oppose, "up to 45 percent tariff on Chinese goods." TRUMP: That's wrong. They were wrong. It's the New York Times, they are always wrong. CAVUTO: Well... TRUMP: They were wrong. CAVUTO: You never said because they provided that... TRUMP: No, I said, " I would use — " they were asking me what to do about North Korea. China, they don't like to tell us but they have total control — just about, of North Korea. They can solve the problem of North Korea if they wanted to but they taunt us. They say, " well, we don't really have control." Without China, North Korea doesn't even eat. China is ripping us on trade. They're devaluing their currency and they're killing our companies. Thousands of thousands — you look at the number of companies and the number in terms of manufacturing of plans that we've lost — 50,000 because of China. [crosstalk] CAVUTO: So they've never said to put a tariff on their... TRUMP: We've lost anywhere between four and seven million jobs because of China. What I said then was, "we have very unfair trade with China. We're going to have a trade deficit of 505 billion dollars this year with China." A lot of that is because they devalue their currency. What I said to the New York Times, is that, "we have great power, economic power over China and if we wanted to use that and the amount — where the 45 percent comes in, that would be the amount they saw their devaluations that we should get." That we should get. What I'm saying is this, I'm saying that we do it but if they don't start treating us fairly and stop devaluing and let their currency rise so that our companies can compete and we don't lose all of these millions of jobs that we're losing, I would certainly start taxing goods that come in from China. Who the hell has to lose 505 billion dollars a year? CAVUTO: I'm sorry, you lost me. TRUMP: It's not that complicated actually. CAVUTO: Then I apologize. Then I want to understand, if you don't want a 45 percent tariff, say that wasn't the figure, would you be open — are you open to slapping a higher tariff on Chinese goods of any sort to go back at them? TRUMP: OK, just so you understand — I know so much about trading about with China. Carl Icahn today as you know endorsed. Many businessmen want to endorse me. CAVUTO: I know... TRUMP: Carl said, "no, no — " but he's somebody — these are the kind of people that we should use to negotiate and not the China people that we have who are political hacks who don't know what they're doing and we have problems like this. If these are the kinds of people — we should use our best and our finest. Now, on that tariff — here's what I'm saying, China — they send their goods and we don't tax it — they do whatever they want to do. They do whatever what they do, OK. When we do business with China, they tax us. You don't know it, they tax us. I have many friends that deal with China. They can't — when they order the product and when they finally get the product it is taxed. If you looking at what happened with Boeing and if you look at what happened with so many companies that deal — so we don't have an equal playing field. I'm saying, absolutely, we don't have to continue to lose 505 billion dollars as a trade deficit for the privilege of dealing with China. I'm a free trader. I believe in it but we have to be smart and we have to use smart people to negotiate. I have the largest bank in the world as a tenant of mine. I sell tens' of millions of [inaudible]. I love China. I love the Chinese people but they laugh themselves, they can't believe how stupid the American leadership is. CAVUTO: So you're open to a tariff? 19/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina TRUMP: I'm totally open to a tariff. If they don't treat us fairly, hey, their whole trade is tariffed. You can't deal in China without tariffs. They do it to us, we don't it. It's not fair trade. KASICH: Neil, Neil — can I say one thing about this. I'm a free trader. I support NAFTA. I believe in the PTT because it's important those countries in Asia are interfacing against China. And we do need China — Donald's right about North Korea. I mean the fact is, is that they need to put the pressure on and frankly we need to intercepts ships coming out of North Korea so they don't proliferate all these dangerous materials. But what he's touching — talking about, I think has got merit. And I'll allow putting that tariff or whatever he's saying here... TRUMP: I'm happy to have him tonight...[laughter] KASICH: For too long — no, for too long, what happens is somebody dumps their product in our country and take our people's jobs, and then we go to an international court and it takes them like a year or two to figure out whether they were cheating us. And guess what? The worker's out of a job. So when they — be found against that country that's selling products in here lower than the cost of what it takes to produce them, then what do we tell the worker? Oh, well, you know, it just didn't work out for you. I think we should be for free trade but I think fair trade. And when countries violate trade agreements or dump product in this country, we need — we need to stand up against those countries that do that without making them into an enemy. And I want to just suggest to you. How do I know this? Because so many people in my family worked in steel mills, and they didn't work with a white collar, they worked in a blue collar. And the fact is those jobs are critical, they're hard working members of the middle class and they need to be paid attention to because they're Americans and they carry the load. So let's demand open trade but fair trade in this country. That's what I think we need to do. [applause] CAVUTO: All right. RUBIO: But on this point, if I may add something on this point. We are all frustrated with what China is doing. I think we need to be very careful with tariffs, and here's why. China doesn't pay the tariff, the buyer pays the tariff. If you send a tie or a shirt made in China into the United States and an American goes to buy it at the store and there's a tariff on it, it gets passed on in the price to price to the consumer. So I think the better approach, the best thing we can do to protect ourselves against China economically is to make our economy stronger, which means reversing course from all the damage Barack Obama is doing to this economy. It begins with tax reform. Let's not have the most expensive business tax rate in the world. Let's allow companies to immediately expense. [applause] It continues with regulatory reform. Regulations in this country are out of control, especially the Employment Prevention Agency, the EPA, and all of the rules they continue to impose on our economy and hurting us. How about Obamacare, a certified job killer? It needs to be repealed and replaced. And we need to bring our debt under control, make our economy stronger. That is the way to deal with China at the end of the day. TRUMP: Neil, the problem... BARTIROMO: We're getting... TRUMP: ... with what Marco is saying is that it takes too long, they're sucking us dry and it takes too long. It would just — you absolutely have to get involved with China, they are taking so much of what we have in terms of jobs in terms of money. We just can't do it any longer. CAVUTO: He is right. If you put a tariff on a good, it's Americans who pay. BUSH: Absolutely. TRUMP: You looking at me? BUSH: Yeah. BARTIROMO: Prices go higher for... TRUMP: Can I tell you what? It will never happen because they'll let their currency go up. They're never going to let it happen. 20/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina Japan, the same thing. They are devaluing — it's so impossible for — you look at Caterpillar Tractor and what's happening with Caterpillar and Kamatsu. Kamatsu is a tractor company in Japan. Friends of mine are ordering Kamatsu tractors now because they've de-valued the yen to such an extent that you can't buy a Caterpillar tractor. And we're letting them get away with it and we can't let them get away with it. And that's why we have to use Carl and we have to use our great businesspeople and not political hacks to negotiate with these guys. [applause] BUSH: Here's — apart from the — apart from the higher prices on consumers and people are living paycheck to paycheck, apart from that, there will be retaliation. BARTIROMO: Yeah. BUSH: So they soybean sales from Iowa, entire soybean production goes — the equivalent of it goes to China. Or how about Boeing right here within a mile? Do you think that the Chinese, if they had a 45 percent tariff imposed on all their imports wouldn't retaliate and start buying Airbus? Of course, they would. This would be devastating for the economy. We need someone with a steady hand being president of the United States. BARTIROMO: Real quick, Senator — go ahead, Senator Cruz. [applause] And then we have to get to tax reform. TRUMP: And we don't need a weak person being president of the United State, OK? Because that's what we'd get if it were Jeb — I tell you what, we don't need that. AUDIENCE: Boo. TRUMP: We don't need that. That's essentially what we have now, and we don't need that. And that's why we're in the trouble that we're in now. And by the way, Jeb you mentioned Boeing, take a look. They order planes, they make Boeing build their plant in China. They don't want them made here. They want those planes made in China. BUSH: They're a mile away from here. TRUMP: That's not the way the game is supposed to be played. BARTIROMO: Thank you, Governor Bush. Thank you, Mr. Trump. Very briefly. BUSH: My name was mentioned. My name was mentioned here. The simple fact is that the plane that's being build here is being sold to China. You can — if you — you flew in with your 767, didn't you? Right there, right next to the plant. TRUMP: No, the new planes. I'm not talking about now, I'm talking about in the future they're building massive plants in China because China does not want Boeing building their planes here, they want them built in China, because China happens to be smart the way they do it, not the way we do it. BARTIROMO: Thank you, Mr. Trump. BUSH: When you head back to airport tonight, go check and see what the... BARTIROMO: Thank you, Mr. Trmup. Thank you, Governor. TRUMP: I'll check for you. BUSH: Check it out. [laughter] BARTIROMO: Senator briefly. CRUZ: Thanks for coming back to me, Maria. Both Donald and Jeb have good points, and there is a middle ground. Donald is right that China is running over President Obama like he is a child, President Obama is not protecting American workers and we are getting hammered. You know, I sat down with the senior leadership of John Deere. They discussed how — how hard it is to sell tractors in China, because all the regulatory barriers. They're protectionist. But Jeb is also right that, if we just impose a tariff, they'll put reciprocal tariffs, which will hurt Iowa farmers and South Carolina producers and 20 percent of the American jobs that depend on exports. So the way you do it is you pass a tax plan like the tax plan I've introduced: a simple flat tax, 10 percent for individuals, and a 16 percent business flat tax, you abolish the IRS...[applause]...and here's the critical point, Maria — the business flat tax 21/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina enables us to abolish the corporate income tax, the death tax, the Obamacare taxes, the payroll taxes, and they're borderadjustable, so every export pays no taxes whatsoever. It's tax-free — a huge advantage for our farmers and ranchers and manufacturers — and every import pays the 16 percent business flat tax. It's like a tariff, but here's the difference: if we impose a tariff, China responds. The business flat tax, they already impose their taxes on us, so there's no reciprocal...[bell rings]...tariffs that come against us. It puts us on a level, even playing field, which brings jobs here at home... UNKNOWN: Maria... CRUZ: ... and as president, I'm going to fight for the working men and women. [crosstalk] BARTIROMO: We've got to get to tax reform, gentlemen. We've got to get to tax reform, and we've got to get to the... UNKNOWN: Yeah, but I want to talk about taxes. BARTIROMO: ... we've got to get to the national debt as well. Coming up next, the growing national debt, the war on crime, tax reform. More from North Charleston, South Carolina, when we come right back. [commercial break] BARTIROMO: Welcome back to the Republican presidential here in North Charleston. Right back to the questions. [applause] Governor Christie, we have spoken much about cutting spending, given the $19 trillion debt. But according to one report, America needs $3.6 trillion in infrastructure spending by 2020. Here in South Carolina, 11 percent of bridges are considered structurally deficient, costing drivers a billion dollars a year in auto repairs. What is your plan to fix the ailing roads and bridges without breaking the bank? CHRISTIE: Well, I'm glad you asked that, Maria. Here's — here's our plan. We've all been talking about tax reforms tonight, and paying for infrastructure is caught right up in tax reform. If you reform the corporate tax system in this country, which, as was mentioned before, is the highest rate in the world — and we double tax, as you know. And what that's led to over $2 trillion of American companies' monies that are being kept offshore, because they don't want to pay the second tax. And who can blame them? They pay tax once overseas. They don't want to pay 35 percent tax on the way back. So beside reforming that tax code, bringing it down to 25 percent and eliminating those special-interest loopholes that the lobbyists and the lawyers and the accountants have given — bring that rate down to 25 percent, but also, a one-time repatriation of that money. Bring the money — the $2 trillion — back to the United States. We'll tax it, that one time, at 8.75 percent, because 35 percent of zero is zero, but 8.75 percent of $2 trillion is a lot of money. And I would then dedicate that money to rebuilding infrastructure here in this country. It would not necessitate us raising any taxes. It would bring the money back into the United States to help build jobs by American companies and get our economy moving again, and growing as a higher rate, and it would rebuild those roads and bridges and tunnels that you were talking about. And — and — and the last piece of this, Maria, is this. You know, the fact is that this president has penalized corporations in America. He's penalized — and doesn't understand. In fact, what that hurts is hurt hardworking taxpayers. You've seen middle-class wages go backwards $3,700 during the Obama administration. That's wrong for hardworking taxpayers in this country. We'd rebuild infrastructure that would also create jobs in this country, and we'd work with the states to do it the right way, to do it more efficiently and more effectively. And remember this — I'm credible on this for this reason: Americans for Tax Reform says that I've vetoed more tax increases than any governor in American history. We don't need to raise taxes to get this done. We need to make the government run smarter and better, and reform this corporate tax system, bring that money back to the United States to build jobs and rebuild our infrastructure, and we need to use it also to protect our grid from terrorists. 22/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina All of those things are important, and all those things would happen in a Christie administration. BARTIROMO: Thank you, sir. Dr. Carson...[applause] is true U.S. companies have $2 trillion in cash sitting overseas right now. That could be used for investment and jobs in America. Also, several companies right now are pursuing mergers to move their corporate headquarters abroad, and take advantage of much lower taxes. What will you do to stop the flow of companies building cash away from America, and those leaving America altogether? CARSON: Well, I would suggest a fair tax system, and that's what we have proposed. A flat tax for everybody — no exemptions, no deductions, no shelters, because some people have a better capability of taking advantage of those than others. You know, and then the other thing we have to do is stop spending so much money. You know, I — my — my mother taught me this. You know, she only had a third-grade education, but — you know, she knew how to stretch a dollar. I mean, she would drive a car until it wouldn't make a sound, and then gather up all her coins and buy a new car. In fact, if my mother were secretary of treasury, we would not be in a deficit situation. But...[laughter]... you know, the — the — the fact of the matter is — you know, if we fix the taxation system, make it absolutely fair, and get rid of the incredible regulations — because every regulation is a tax, it's a — on goods and services. And it's the most regressive tax there is. You know, when you go into the store and buy a box of laundry detergent, and the price has up — you know, 50 cents because of regulations, a poor person notices that. A rich person does not. Middle class may notice it when they get to the cash register. And everything is costing more money, and we are killing our — our — our people like this. And Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton will say it's those evil rich people. It's not the evil rich people. It's the evil government that is — that is putting all these regulations on us so that we can't survive. [applause] BARTIROMO: Thank you, sir. Senator Rubio... TRUMP: Maria — Maria, what you were talking about just now is called corporate inversion. It's one of the biggest problems our country has. Right now, corporations, by the thousands, are thinking of leaving our country with the jobs — leave them behind. They're leaving because of taxes, but they are also leaving because they can't get their money back and everybody agrees, Democrats and Republicans, that is should come back in. But they can't get along. They can't even make a deal. Here is the case, they both agree, they can't make a deal. We have to do something. Corporate inversion is one of the biggest problems we have. So many companies are going to leave our country. BARTIROMO: Which is why we raised it. Senator Rubio? Thank you, Mr. Trump. TRUMP: Thank you. BARTIROMO: One of the biggest fiscal challenges is our entitlement programs, particularly Social Security and Medicare. What policies will you put forward to make sure these programs are more financially secure? RUBIO: Well, first let me address the tax issue because it's related to the entitlement issue and I want to thank you for holding a substantive debates where we can have debates about these key issues on taxes. [applause] Here is the one thing I'm not going to do. I'm not going to have something that Ted described in his tax plan. It's called the value added tax. And it's a tax you find in many companies in Europe. Where basically, businesses now will have to pay a tax, both on the money they make, but they also have to pay taxes on the money that they pay their employees. And that's why they have it in Europe, because it is a way to blindfolded the people, that's what Ronald Reagan said. Ronald Regan opposed the value tax because he said it was a way to blindfold the people, so the true cost of government was not there there for them. 23/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina Now, you can support one now that's very low. But what is to prevent a future liberal president or a liberal Congress from coming back and not just raising the income tax, but also raising that VAT tax, and that vat tax is really bad for seniors. Because seniors, if they are retired, are no longer earning an income from a job. And therefore, they don't get the income tax break, but their prices are going to be higher, because the vat tax is embedded in both the prices that business that are charging and in the wages they pay their employees. When I am president of the United States, I'm going to side with Ronald Regan on this and not Nancy Pelosi and we are not having a vat tax. [applause] BARTIROMO: Thank you senator. CRUZ: Maria, I assume that I can respond to that. BARTIROMO: Senator Cruz, yes. You were meant to. Yes, of course. CRUZ: Well, Marco has been floating this attack for a few weeks now, but the problem is, the business flat tax in my proposal is not a vat. A vat is imposed as a sales tax when you buy a good. This is a business flat tax. It is imposed on business and a critical piece that Marco seems to be missing is that this 16 percent business flat tax enables us to eliminate the corporate income tax. It goes away. It enables us to eliminate the death tax. If you're a farmer, if you're a rancher, if you are small business owner, the death tax is gone. We eliminate the payroll tax, we eliminate the Obamacare taxes. And listen, there is a real difference between Marco's tax plan and mine. Mine gives every American a simple, flat tax of 10 percent. Marco's top tax rate is 35 percent. My tax plan enables you to fill out your taxes on a postcard so we can abolish the IRS. Marco leaves the IRS code in with all of the complexity. We need to break the Washington cartel, and the only way to do it is to end all the subsidies and all...[bell rings]...the mandates and have a simple flat tax. The final observation, invoked Ronald Reagan. I would note that Art Laffer, Ronald Reagan's chief economic adviser, has written publicly, that my simple flat tax is the best tax plan of any of the individuals on this stage cause it produces economic growth, it raises wages and it helps everyone from the very poorest to the very richest. BARTIROMO: Thank you senator. [applause] RUBIO: But that's not an accurate description of the plan. Because, first of all, you may rename the IRS but you are not going to abolishes the IRS, because there has to be some agency that's going to collect your vat tax. Someone's going to be collecting this tax. In fact, Ronald Reagan's treasury, when Ronald Reagan's treasury looked at the vat tax, you know what they found? That they were going to have to hire 20,000 new IRS agencies to collect it. The second point, it does not eliminate the corporate tax or the payroll tax. Businesses will now have to pay 16 percent on the money they make. They will also have to pay 16 percent on the money they pay their employees. So there are people watching tonight in business. If you are now hit on a 60 percent tax on both your income and on the wages you pay your employees, where are you going to get that money from? You're going to get it by paying your employees less and charging your customers more, that is a tax, the difference is, you don't see it on the bill. And that's why Ronald Reagan said that it was a blindfold. You blindfold the American people so that they cannot see the true cost of government. Now 16 percent is what the rate Ted wants it at. But what happens if, God forbid, the next Barack Obama takes over, and the next Nancy Pelosi, and the next Harry Reid...[bell rings]...and they decide, we're going to raise it to 30 percent, plus we're going to raise the income tax to 30 percent. Now, you've got Europe. [crosstalk] BARTIROMO: Thank you senator. I have to get to a question for Mr. Trump. CRUZ: Maria... BARTIROMO: Yes. CRUZ: Maria, I'd just like to say...[crosstalk] CHRISTIE: Maria, I'd like to interrupt this on the floor of the Senate to actually answer the question you asked, which was on entitlements. Do you remember that, everybody? This was a question on entitlements. 24/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina And the reason — and the reason...[crosstalk], you already had your chance, Marco, and you blew it. Here's the thing. [crosstalk] The fact is, the reason why... RUBIO: If you'll answer the [inaudible] core question. CHRISTIE: ... the fact is — the fact is the reason why that no one wants to answer entitlements up here is because it's hard. It's a hard problem. And I'm the only one up on this stage who back in April put forward a detailed entitlement reform plan that will save over $1 trillion, save Social Security, save Medicare, and avoid this — avoid what Hillary Rodham Clinton will do to you. Because what she will do is come in and she will raise Social Security taxes. Bernie Sanders has already said it. And she is just one or two more poll drops down from even moving further left than she's moved already to get to the left of Bernie on this. We have seniors out there who are scared to death because this Congress — this one that we have right now, just stole $150 billion from the Social Security retirement fund to give it to the Social Security disability fund. A Republican Congress did that. And the fact is it was wrong. And they consorted with Barack Obama to steal from Social Security. We need to reform Social Security. Mine is the only plan that saves over $1 trillion and that's why I'm answering your question. BARTIROMO: Thank you, Governor. Thank you, Governor. [applause] CARSON: Can I just add one very quick thing? And I just want to say, you know, last week we released our tax plan. And multiple reputable journals, including The Wall Street Journal, said ours is the best. Just want to get that out there, just saying. BARTIROMO: Thank you, Dr. Carson. Coming up, how would the candidates protect America, and another terror attack, if we were to see it. But first, you can join us live on stage during the commercial break right from home. Go to We'll be streaming live and answering your questions during this break next. More from South Carolina coming up. Stay with us. [commercial break] BARTIROMO: Mr. Trump, your net worth is in the multi-billions of dollars and have an ongoing thriving hotel and real estate business. Are you planning on putting your assets in a blind trust should you become president? With such vast wealth, how difficult will it be for you to disentangle yourself from your business and your money and prioritize America's interest first? TRUMP: Well, it's an interesting question because I'm very proud of my company. As you too know, I know I built a very great company. But if I become president, I couldn't care less about my company. It's peanuts. I want to use that same up here, whatever it may be to make America rich again and to make America great again. I have Ivanka, and Eric and Don sitting there. Run the company kids, have a good time. I'm going to do it for America. So I would — I would be willing to do that. BARTIROMO: So you'll put your assets in a blind trust? TRUMP: I would put it in a blind trust. Well, I don't know if it's a blind trust if Ivanka, Don and Eric run it. If that's a blind trust, I don't know. But I would probably have my children run it with my executives and I wouldn't ever be involved because I wouldn't care about anything but our country, anything. BARTIROMO: Thank you sir. TRUMP: Thank you. CAVUTO: Governor Christie, going back to your U.S. Attorney days, you had been praised by both parties as certainly a tough law and order guy. So I wonder what you make of recent statistics that showed violent crimes that have been spiking sometimes by double digit ratings in 30 cities across the country. Milwaukee Police Chief Ed Flynn said, "most local law enforcement officials feel abandoned by Washington." Former NYC Police Chief Ray Kelly, says that, "police are being less proactive because they're being overly scrutinized and second guessed and they're afraid of being sued or thrown in jail." What would you do as president to address this? 25/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina CHRISTIE: Well, first off, let's face it, the FBI director James Comey was a friend of mine who I worked with as U.S. Attorney of New Jersey. He was the U.S. Attorney in Manhattan. He said, "there's a chill wind blowing through law enforcement in this country." Here's why, the president of the United States and both his attorney's general, they give the benefit of the doubt to the criminal, not to the police officers. That's the truth of the matter and you see it every time with this president. Every time he's got a chance, going all the way back to — remember that Great Beer Summit he had after he messed up that time. This is a guy who just believes that law enforcement are the bad guys. Now, I for seven years was the U.S. Attorney of New Jersey. I worked hard with not only federal agents but with police officers and here's the problem, sanctuary cities is part of the problem in this country. That's where crime is happening in these cities where they don't enforce the immigration laws. And this president turns his back — this president doesn't enforce the marijuana laws in this country because he doesn't agree with them. And he allows states to go ahead and do whatever they want on a substance that's illegal. This president allows lawlessness throughout this country. Here's what I would do Neil, I would appoint an Attorney General and I would have one very brief conversation with that Attorney General. I'd say, "General, enforce the law against everyone justly, fairly, and aggressively. Make our streets safe again. Make our police officers proud of what they do but more important than that, let them know how proud we are of them." We do that, this country would be safe and secure again not only from criminals but from the terrorist who threaten us as well. I'm the only person on this stage who's done that and we will get it done as President of the United States. CAVUTO: Thank you governor. Governor Kasich, as someone has to deal with controversial police shootings in your own state, what do you make of Chicago's move recently to sort of retrain police? Maybe make them not so quick to use their guns? KASICH: Well, I created a task force well over a year ago and the purpose was to bring law enforcement, community people, clergy and the person that I named as one of the co-chair was a lady by the name of Nina Turner, a former State Senator, a liberal Democrat. She actually ran against one of my friends and our head of public safety. And they say down as a group trying to make sure that we can begin to heal some of these problems that we see between community and police. And they came back with 23 recommendations. One of them is a statewide use of deadly force. And it is now being put into place everyplace across the state of Ohio. Secondly, a policy on recruiting and hiring, and then more resources for — for training. But let me also tell you, one of the issues has got to be the integration of both community and police. Community has to understand that that police officer wants to get home at night, and not — not to lose their life. Their family is waiting for them. At the same time, law enforcement understands there are people in the community who not only think that the system doesn't work for them, but works against them. See, in Ohio, we've had some controversial decisions. But the leaders have come forward to realize that protest is fine, but violence is wrong. And it has been a remarkable situation in our state. And as president of the United States, it's all about communication, folks. It's all about getting people to listen to one another's problems. And when you do that, you will be amazed at how much progress you can make, and how much healing we can have. Because, folks, at the end of the day, the country needs healed. I've heard a lot of hot rhetoric here tonight, but I've got to tell you, as somebody that actually passed a budget; that paid down a half-a-trillion dollars of our national debt, you can't do it alone. You've got to bring people together. You've got to give people hope. And together, we can solve these problems that hurt us and heal America. And that is what's so critical for our neighborhoods, our families, our children, and our grandchildren. [applause] CAVUTO: Thank you, Governor. BARTIROMO: Senator Rubio? [applause] Under current law, the U.S. is on track to issue more new permanent immigrants on green cards over the next five years than the entire population of South Carolina. The CBO says your 2013 immigration bill would have increased green cardholders by another 10 million over 10 years. 26/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina Why are you so interested in opening up borders to foreigners when American workers have a hard enough time finding work? RUBIO: Well, first of all, this is an issue that's been debated now for 30 years. And for 30 years, the issue of immigration has been about someone who's in this country, maybe they're here illegally, but they're looking for a job. This issue is not about that anymore. First and foremost, this issue has to be now more than anything else about keeping America safe. And here's why. There is a radical jihadist group that is manipulating our immigration system. And not just green cards. They're looking — they're recruiting people that enter this country as doctors and engineers and even fiances. They understand the vulnerabilities we have on the southern border. They're looking — they're looking to manipulate our — the visa waiver countries to get people into the United States. So our number one priority must now become ensuring that ISIS cannot get killers into the United States. So whether it's green cards or any other form of entry into America, when I'm president if we do not know who you are or why you are coming, you are not going to get into the United States of America. BARTIROMO: So your thinking has changed? RUBIO: The issue is a dramatically different issue than it was 24 months ago. Twenty-four months ago, 36 months ago, you did not have a group of radical crazies named ISIS who were burning people in cages and recruiting people to enter our country legally. They have a sophisticated understanding of our legal immigration system and we now have an obligation to ensure that they are not able to use that system against us. The entire system of legal immigration must now be reexamined for security first and foremost, with an eye on ISIS. Because they're recruiting people to enter this country as engineers, posing as doctors, posing as refugees. We know this for a fact. They've contacted the trafficking networks in the Western Hemisphere to get people in through the southern border. And they got a killer in San Bernardino in posing as a fiance. This issue now has to be about stopping ISIS entering the United States, and when I'm president we will. BARTIROMO: Thank you, Senator. [applause] CRUZ: But Maria, radical Islamic terrorism was not invented 24 months ago; 24 months ago, we had Al Qaida. We had Boko Haram. We had Hamas. We had Hezbollah. We had Iran putting operatives in South America and Central America. It's the reason why I stood with Jeff Sessions and Steve King and led the fight to stop the Gang of Eight amnesty bill, because it was clear then, like it's clear now, that border security is national security. [applause] BARTIROMO: Thank you, Senator. CRUZ: It is also the case that that Rubio-Schumer amnesty bill, one of the things it did is it expanded Barack Obama's power to let in Syrian refugees. It enabled him — the president to certify them en masse without mandating meaningful background checks. I think that's a mistake. That's why I've been leading the fight to stop it. And I would note the Senate just a few weeks ago voted to suspend refugees from Middle Eastern countries. I voted yes to suspend that. Marco voted on the other side. So you don't get to say we need to secure the borders, and at the same time try to give Barack Obama more authority to allow Middle Eastern refugees coming in, when the head of the FBI tells us they cannot vet them to determine if they are ISIS terrorists. RUBIO: Maria, let me clear something up here. This is an interesting point when you talk about immigration. Ted Cruz, you used to say you supported doubling the number of green cards, now you say that you're against it. You used to support a 500 percent increase in the number of guest workers, now you say that you're against it. You used to support legalizing people that were here illegally, now you say you're against it. You used to say that you were in favor of birthright citizenship, now you say that you are against it. And by the way, it's not just on immigration, you used to support TPA, now you say you're against it. I saw you on the Senate floor flip your vote on crop insurance because they told you it would help you in Iowa, and last week, we all saw you flip your vote on ethanol in Iowa for the same reason. [applause] That is not consistent conservatism, that is political calculation. When I am president, I will work consistently every single day to keep this country safe, not call Edward Snowden, as you did, a great public servant. Edward Snowden is a traitor. And if I am president and we get our hands on him, he is standing trial for treason. [applause] And one more point, one more point. Every single time that there has been a Defense bill in the Senate, three people team up to vote against it. Bernie Sanders, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz. In fact, the only budget you have ever voted for, Ted, in 27/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina your entire time in the Senate is a budget from Rand Paul that brags about how it cuts defense. Here's the bottom line, and I'll close with this. If I'm president of the United States and Congress tries to cut the military, I will veto that in a millisecond. [applause] BUSH: There's — look, there's — CAVUTO: Gentlemen, gentlemen — CRUZ: I'm going to get a response to that, Neil. There's no way he launches 11 attack — CAVUTO: Very quick, very quick. CRUZ: I'm going to — he had no fewer than 11 attacks there. I appreciate your dumping your [inaudible] research folder on the stage. RUBIO: No, it's your record. CRUZ: But I will say — CAVUTO: Do you think they like each other? CRUZ: — at least half of the things Marco said are flat-out false. They're absolutely false. AUDIENCE: Boo. CRUZ: So let's start — let's start with immigration. Let's start with immigration and have a little bit of clarity. Marco stood with Chuck Schumer and Barack Obama on amnesty. I stood with Jeff Sessions and Steve King. Marco stood today, standing on this stage Marco supports legalization and citizenship for 12 million illegals. I opposed and oppose legalization and citizenship. And by the way, the attack he keeps throwing out on the military budget, Marco knows full well I voted for his amendment to increase military spending to $697 billion. What he said, and he said it in the last, it's simply not true. And as president, I will rebuild the military and keep this country safe. CAVUTO: All right, gentlemen, we've got to stop. I know you are very passionate about that. [applause] Governor Bush, fears have gripped this country obviously, and you touched on it earlier since the San Bernardino attacks. Since our last , the national conversation has changed, according to Facebook data as well. Now this first graphic shows the issues that were most talked about right before those attacks and now after: the issues of Islam, homeland security and ISIS now loom very large. The FBI says Islamic radicals are using social media to communicate and that it needs better access to communication. Now the CEO of Apple, Governor, Tim Cook said unless served with a warrant private communication is private, period. Do you agree, or would you try to convince him otherwise? BUSH: I would try to convince him otherwise, but this last back and forth between two senators — back bench senators, you know, explains why we have the mess in Washington, D.C. We need a president that will fix our immigration laws and stick with it, not bend with the wind. The simple fact is one of the ways, Maria, to solve the problem you described is narrow the number of people coming by family petitioning to what every other country has so that we have the best and the brightest that come to our country. We need to control the border, we need to do all of this in a comprehensive way, not just going back and forth and talking about stuff — CAVUTO: Would you answer this question? BUSH: Oh, I'll talk about that, too. But you haven't asked me a question in a while, Neil, so I thought I'd get that off my chest if you don't mind. [laughter] CAVUTO: Fair enough. So Tim Cook — so Tim Cook says he's going to keep it private. BUSH: I got that. And the problem today is there's no confidence in Washington, D.C. There needs to be more than one meeting, there needs to complete dialogue with the large technology companies. They understand that there's a national security risk. We ought to give them a little bit of a liability release so that they share data amongst themselves and share data with the federal government, they're not fearful of a lawsuit. 28/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina We need to make sure that we keep the country safe. This is the first priority. The cybersecurity challenges that we face, this administration failed us completely, completely. Not just the hacking of OPM, but that is — that is just shameful. 23 million files in the hands of the Chinese? So it's not just the government — the private sector companies, it's also our own government that needs to raise the level of our game. We should put the NSA in charge of the civilian side of this as well. That expertise needs to spread all across the government and there needs to be much more cooperation with our private sector. CAVUTO: But if Tim cook is telling you no, Mr. President. BUSH: You've got to keep asking. You've got to keep asking because this is a hugely important issue. If you can encrypt messages, ISIS can, over these platforms, and we have no ability to have a cooperative relationship — CAVUTO: Do you ask or do you order? BUSH: Well, if the law would change, yeah. But I think there has to be recognition that if we — if we are too punitive, then you'll go to other — other technology companies outside the United States. And what we want to do is to control this. We also want to dominate this from a commercial side. So there's a lot of balanced interests. But the president leads in this regard. That's what we need. We need leadership, someone who has a backbone and sticks with things, rather than just talks about them as though anything matters when you're talking about amendments that don't even actually are part of a bill that ever passed. CAVUTO: Governor, thank you. [applause] BARTIROMO: When we come right back, closing statements. Stay with us. [commercial break] BARTIROMO: Welcome back. Candidates, it is time for your closing statements. You get 60 seconds each. Governor John Kasich, we begin with you. KASICH: You know, in our country, there are a lot of people who feel as though they just don't have the power. You know, they feel like if they don't have a lobbyist, if they're not wealthy, that somehow they don't get to play. But all of my career, you know, having been raised in — by a mailman father whose father was a coal miner, who died of black lung and was losing his eyesight; or a mother whose mother could barely speak English. You see, all of my career, I've fought about giving voice to the people that I grew up with and voice to the people that elected me. Whether it's welfare reform and getting something back for the hard-earned taxpayers; whether it's engaging in Pentagon reform and taking on the big contractors that were charging thousands of dollars for hammers and screw drivers and ripping us off; or whether it's taking on the special interests in the nursing home industry in Ohio, so that mom and dad can have the ability to stay in their own home, rather than being forced into a nursing home. Look, that's who I stand up for. That's who's in my mind...[bell rings]...And if you really want to believe that you can get your voice back, I will tell you, as I have all my career, I will continue to fight for you, because you're the ones that built this country, and will carry it into the future. Thank you. [applause] CAVUTO: Governor Bush? BUSH: Who can you count on to keep us safer, stronger and freer? Results count, and as governor, I pushed Florida up to the top in terms of jobs, income and small business growth. Detailed plans count, and I believe that the plan I've laid out to destroy ISIS before the tragedies of San Bernardino and Paris are the right ones. Credibility counts. There'll be people here that will talk about what they're going to do. I've done it. I ask for your support to build, together, a safer and stronger America. [applause] BARTIROMO: Governor Chris Christie? CHRISTIE: Maria, Neil, thank you for a great tonight. When I think about the folks who are out there at home tonight watching, and I think about what they had to watch this week — the spectacle they had to watch on the floor of the House of Representatives, with the president of the United 29/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina States, who talked a fantasy land about the way they're feeling. They know that this country is not respected around the world anymore. They know that this country is pushing the middle class, the hardworking taxpayers, backwards, and they saw a president who doesn't understand their pain, and doesn't have any plan for getting away from it. I love this country. It's the most exceptional country the world has ever known. We need someone to fight for the people. We need a fighter for this country again. I've lived my whole life fighting — fighting for things that I believe in, fighting for justice and to protect people from crime and terrorism, fighting to stand up for folks who have not had enough and need an opportunity to get more, and to stand up and fight against the special interests. But here's the best way that we're going to make America much more exceptional: it is to make sure we put someone on that stage in September who will fight Hillary Clinton and make sure she never, ever gets in the White House again. I am the man who can bring us together to do that, and I ask for your vote. [applause] CAVUTO: Dr. Ben Carson? CARSON: You know, in recent travels around this country, I've encountered so many Americans who are discouraged and angry as they watch our freedom, our security and the American dream slipping away under an unresponsive government that is populated by bureaucrats and special interest groups. We're not going to solve this problem with traditional politics. The only way we're going to solve this problem is with we, the people. And I ask you to join me in truth and honesty and integrity. — we will heal, inspire and revive America for our children. [applause] BARTIROMO: Senator Marco Rubio? RUBIO: You know, 200 years ago, America was founded on this powerful principle that our rights don't come from government. Our rights come from God. That's why we embraced free enterprise, and it made us the most prosperous people in the history of the world. That's why we embraced individual liberty, and we became the freest people ever, and the result was the American miracle. But now as I travel the country, people say what I feel. This country is changing. It feels different. We feel like we're being left behind and left out. And the reason is simple: because in 2008, we elected as president someone who wasn't interested in fixing America. We elected someone as president who wants to change America, who wants to make it more like the rest of the world. And so he undermines the Constitution, and he undermines free enterprise by expanding government, and he betrays our allies and cuts deals with our enemies and guts our military. And that's why 2016 is a turning point in our history. If we elect Hillary Clinton, the next four years will be worse than the last eight, and our children will be the first Americans ever to inherit a diminished country. But if we elect the right person — if you elect me — we will turn this country around, we will reclaim the American dream and this nation will be stronger and greater than it has ever been. [applause] CAVUTO: Senator Ted Cruz? CRUZ: "13 Hours" — tomorrow morning, a new movie will debut about the incredible bravery of the men fighting for their lives in Benghazi and the politicians that abandoned them. I want to speak to all our fighting men and women. I want to speak to all the moms and dads whose sons and daughters are fighting for this country, and the incredible sense of betrayal when you have a commander-in-chief who will not even speak the name of our enemy, radical Islamic terrorism, when you have a commander-in- chief who sends $150 billion to the Ayatollah Khamenei, who's responsible for murdering hundreds of our servicemen and women. I want to speak to all of those maddened by political correctness, where Hillary Clinton apologizes for saying all lives matter. This will end. It will end on January 2017. And if I am elected president, to every soldier and sailor and airman and marine, and to every police officer and firefighter and first responder who risk their lives to keep us safe, I will have your back. [applause] BARTIROMO: Mr. Donald Trump? 30/31 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina TRUMP: I stood yesterday with 75 construction workers. They're tough, they're strong, they're great people. Half of them had tears pouring down their face. They were watching the humiliation of our young ten sailors, sitting on the floor with their knees in a begging position, their hands up. And Iranian wise guys having guns to their heads. It was a terrible sight. A terrible sight. And the only reason we got them back is because we owed them with a stupid deal, $150 billion. If I'm president, there won't be stupid deals anymore. We will make America great again. We will win on everything we do. Thank you. [applause] BARTIROMO: Candidates, thank you. CAVUTO: Gentlemen, thank you all. All of you. That wraps up our debate. We went a little bit over here. But we wanted to make sure everyone was able to say their due. He's upset. All right. Thank you for joining us. Much more to come in the Spin Room ahead. NOTE: The criteria for appearing in the main debate is explained as, "Candidates must either: 1) Place in the top six nationally, based on an average of the five most recent national polls recognized by FOX News; OR 2) Place in the top five in Iowa, based on an average of the five most recent Iowa state polls recognized by FOX News; OR 3) Place in the top five in New Hampshire, based on an average of the five most recent New Hampshire state polls recognized by FOX News." Citation: Presidential Candidates Debates: "Republican Candidates Debate in North Charleston, South Carolina," January 14, 2016. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. Home Contact © 1999-2017 - Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley - The American Presidency Project 31/31 EXHIBIT 13 2/6/2017 Transcript: Donald Trump's national security speech - POLITICO  – +4; 45 –– ™8+:9+.)4' 4/ 9)/:/25 ,5 +:;:/:94 +8/.963' =+ +-+225 32+*4 :4/' +.: :' 91'+69 63;8 – *2'45 2-//:= C>3<?-/= 6+893>+8 = :7?<$ .6+89 >:3<-=8+<$   ˜ º º As posted on his website, this is the transcript of Donald Trump's June 13 speech on national security and terrorism in the wake of the Orlando massacre. Underlined segments are the author's. Thank you for joining me today. This was going to be a speech on Hillary Clinton and how bad a President, especially in these times of Radical Islamic Terrorism, she would be. Even her former Secret Service Agent, who has seen her under pressure and in times of stress, has stated that she lacks the temperament and integrity to be president. 1/11 2/6/2017 Transcript: Donald Trump's national security speech - POLITICO There will be plenty of opportunity to discuss these important issues at a later time, and I will deliver that speech soon. But today there is only one thing to discuss: the growing threat of terrorism inside of our borders. The attack on the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, Florida, was the worst terrorist strike on our soil since September 11th, and the worst mass shooting in our country’s history. So many people dead, so many people gravely injured, so much carnage, such a disgrace. The horror is beyond description. The families of these wonderful people are totally devastated. Likewise, our whole nation, and indeed the whole world, is devastated. We express our deepest sympathies to the victims, the wounded, and their families. We mourn, as one people, for our nation’s loss – and pledge our support to any and all who need it. I would like to ask now that we all observe a moment of silence for the victims of the attack. [SILENCE] Our nation stands together in solidarity with the members of Orlando's LGBT Community. This is a very dark moment in America’s history. A radical Islamic terrorist targeted the nightclub not only because he wanted to kill Americans, but in order to execute gay and lesbian citizens because of their sexual orientation. It is a strike at the heart and soul of who we are as a nation. It is an assault on the ability of free people to live their lives, love who they want and express their identity. >-/<<9- C66+-3>369: /, 9> =>=3<9<</> 183>-/>9<: +7+, 89>836 :7?<$  ! ? 2/11 2/6/2017 Transcript: Donald Trump's national security speech - POLITICO It is an attack on the right of every single American to live in peace and safety in their own country. We need to respond to this attack on America as one united people – with force, purpose and determination. But the current politically correct response cripples our ability to talk and think and act clearly. If we don't get tough, and we don't get smart – and fast – we're not going to have a country anymore -- there will be nothing left. The killer, whose name I will not use, or ever say, was born to Afghan parents who immigrated to the United States. His father published support for the Afghan Taliban, a regime which murders those who don’t share its radical views. The father even said he was running for President of that country. The bottom line is that the only reason the killer was in America in the first place was because we allowed his family to come here. That is a fact, and it's a fact we need to talk about. We have a dysfunctional immigration system which does not permit us to know who we let into our country, and it does not permit us to protect our citizens. We have an incompetent administration, and if I am not elected President, that will not change over the next four years -- but it must change, and it must change now. With fifty people dead, and dozens more wounded, we cannot afford to talk around the issue anymore -- we have to address it head on. I called for a ban after San Bernardino, and was met with great scorn and anger but now, many are saying I was right to do so -- and although the pause is temporary, we must find out what is going on. The ban will be lifted when we as a nation are in a position to properly and perfectly screen those people coming into our country. The immigration laws of the United States give the President the power to suspend entry into the country of any class of persons that the President deems detrimental to the interests or security of the United States, as he deems appropriate. 3/11 2/6/2017 Transcript: Donald Trump's national security speech - POLITICO I will use this power to protect the American people. When I am elected, I will suspend immigration from areas of the world when there is a proven history of terrorism against the United States, Europe or our allies, until we understand how to end these threats. After a full, impartial and long overdue security assessment, we will develop a responsible immigration policy that serves the interests and values of America. We cannot continue to allow thousands upon thousands of people to pour into our country, many of whom have the same thought process as this savage killer. Many of the principles of Radical Islam are incompatible with Western values and institutions. Radical Islam is anti-woman, anti-gay and anti-American. I refuse to allow America to become a place where gay people, Christian people, and Jewish people, are the targets of persecution and intimidation by Radical Islamic preachers of hate and violence. It’s not just a national security issue. It is a quality of life issue. If we want to protect the quality of life for all Americans – women and children, gay and straight, Jews and Christians and all people – then we need to tell the truth about Radical Islam. We need to tell the truth, also, about how Radical Islam is coming to our shores. We are importing Radical Islamic Terrorism into the West through a failed immigration system -- and through an intelligence community held back by our president. Even our own FBI Director has admitted that we cannot effectively check the backgrounds of the people we are letting into America. All of the September 11th hijackers were issued visas. Large numbers of Somali refugees in Minnesota have tried to join ISIS. The Boston Bombers came here through political asylum. 4/11 2/6/2017 Transcript: Donald Trump's national security speech - POLITICO The male shooter in San Bernardino – again, whose name I won't mention -- was the child of immigrants from Pakistan, and he brought his wife – the other terrorist - from Saudi Arabia, through another one of our easily exploited visa programs. Immigration from Afghanistan into the United States has increased nearly five-fold in just one year. According to Pew Research, 99% of people in Afghanistan support oppressive Sharia Law. We admit many more from other countries in the region who share these same oppressive views. If we want to remain a free and open society, then we have to control our borders. Yet, Hillary Clinton – for months and despite so many attacks – repeatedly refused to even say the words “radical Islam,” until I challenged her yesterday to say the words or leave the race. However, Hillary Clinton – who has been forced to say the words today after policies she supports have caused us so much damage – still has no clue what Radical Islam is, and won’t speak honestly about what it is. She is in total denial, and her continuing reluctance to ever name the enemy broadcasts weakness across the world. In fact, just a few weeks before the San Bernardino slaughter, Hillary Clinton explained her refusal to say the words Radical Islam. Here is what she said: “Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people, and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.” Hillary Clinton says the solution is to ban guns. They tried that in France, which has among the toughest gun laws in the world, and 130 were brutally murdered by Islamic terrorists in cold blood. Her plan is to disarm law-abiding Americans, abolishing the 2nd amendment, and leaving only the bad guys and terrorists with guns. She wants to take away Americans’ guns, then admit the very people who want to slaughter us. I will be meeting with the NRA, which has given me their earliest endorsement in a Presidential race, to discuss how to ensure Americans have the means to protect themselves in this age of terror. The bottom line is that Hillary supports the policies that bring the threat of Radical Islam into America, and allow it to grow overseas. 5/11 2/6/2017 Transcript: Donald Trump's national security speech - POLITICO In fact, Hillary Clinton’s catastrophic immigration plan will bring vastly more Radical Islamic immigration into this country, threatening not only our security but our way of life. When it comes to Radical Islamic terrorism, ignorance is not bliss – it's deadly. The Obama Administration, with the support of Hillary Clinton and others, has also damaged our security by restraining our intelligence-gathering and failing to support law enforcement. They have put political correctness above common sense, above your safety, and above all else. I refuse to be politically correct. I will do the right thing--I want to straighten things out and to Make America Great Again. The days of deadly ignorance will end, and they will end soon. As President I will give our intelligence community, law enforcement and military the tools they need to prevent terrorist attacks. We need an intelligence-gathering system second to none. That includes better cooperation between state, local and federal officials – and with our allies. I will have an Attorney General, a Director of National Intelligence, and a Secretary of Defense who will know how to fight the war on Radical Islamic Terrorism – and who will have the support they require to get the job done. We also must ensure the American people are provided the information they need to understand the threat. The Senate Subcommittee on Immigration has already identified hundreds of immigrants charged with terrorist activities inside the United States since September 11th. Nearly a year ago, the Senate Subcommittee asked President Obama's Departments of Justice, State and Homeland Security to provide the immigration history of all terrorists inside the United States. These Departments refused to comply. President Obama must release the full and complete immigration histories of all individuals implicated in terrorist activity of any kind since 9/11. The public has a right to know how these people got here. 6/11 2/6/2017 Transcript: Donald Trump's national security speech - POLITICO We have to screen applicants to know whether they are affiliated with, or support, radical groups and beliefs. We have to control the amount of future immigration into this country to prevent large pockets of radicalization from forming inside America. Even a single individual can be devastating, just look at what happened in Orlando. Can you imagine large groups? Truly, our President doesn't know what he is doing. He has failed us, and failed us badly, and under his leadership, this situation will not get any better -- it will only get worse. Each year, the United States permanently admits more than 100,000 immigrants from the Middle East, and many more from Muslim countries outside the Middle East. Our government has been admitting ever-growing numbers, year after year, without any effective plan for our security. In fact, Clinton's State Department was in charge of the admissions process for people applying to enter from overseas. Having learned nothing from these attacks, she now plans to massively increase admissions without a screening plan, including a 500% increase in Syrian refugees. This could be a better, bigger version of the legendary Trojan Horse. We can't let this happen. Altogether, under the Clinton plan, you'd be admitting hundreds of thousands of refugees from the Middle East with no system to vet them, or to prevent the radicalization of their children. The burden is on Hillary Clinton to tell us why she believes immigration from these dangerous countries should be increased without any effective system to screen who we are bringing in. The burden is on Hillary Clinton to tell us why we should admit anyone into our country who supports violence of any kind against gay and lesbian Americans. 7/11 2/6/2017 Transcript: Donald Trump's national security speech - POLITICO The burden is also on Hillary Clinton to tell us how she will pay for it. Her plan will cost Americans hundreds of billions of dollars long-term. Wouldn't this money be better spent on rebuilding America for our current population, including the many poor people already living here? We have to stop the tremendous flow of Syrian refugees into the United States – we don't know who they are, they have no documentation, and we don't know what they're planning. What I want is common sense. I want a mainstream immigration policy that promotes American values. That is the choice I put before the American people: a mainstream immigration policy designed to benefit America, or Hillary Clinton's radical immigration policy designed to benefit politically-correct special interests. We've got to get smart, and tough, and vigilant, and we've got to do it now, because later is too late. The media talks about “homegrown,” terrorism, but Islamic radicalism, and the networks that nurture it, are imports from overseas. Yes, there are many radicalized people already inside our country as a result of the poor policies of the past. But the whole point is that it will be much, much easier to deal with our current problem if we don’t keep on bringing in people who add to the problem. For instance, the controversial Mosque attended by the Boston Bombers had as its founder an immigrant from overseas charged in an assassination plot. This shooter in Orlando was the child of an immigrant father who supported one of the most repressive regimes on Earth. Why would we admit people who support violent hatred? Hillary Clinton can never claim to be a friend of the gay community as long as she continues to support immigration policies that bring Islamic extremists to our country who suppress women, gays and anyone who doesn’t share their views. She can’t have it both ways. She can’t claim to be supportive of these communities while trying to increase the number of people coming in who want to oppress them. 8/11 2/6/2017 Transcript: Donald Trump's national security speech - POLITICO How does this kind of immigration make our life better? How does this kind of immigration make our country better? Why does Hillary Clinton want to bring people here—in vast numbers—who reject our values? Ask yourself, who is really the friend of women and the LGBT community, Donald Trump with his actions, or Hillary Clinton with her words? Clinton wants to allow Radical Islamic terrorists to pour into our country—they enslave women, and murder gays. I don’t want them in our country. Immigration is a privilege, and we should not let anyone into this country who doesn’t support our communities – all of our communities. America has already admitted four times more immigrants than any country on earth, and we continue to admit millions more with no real checks or scrutiny. Not surprisingly, wages for our workers haven’t budged in many years. So whether it’s matter of national security, or financial security, we can’t afford to keep on going like this. We owe $19 trillion in debt, and no longer have options. All our communities, from all backgrounds, are ready for some relief. This is not an act of offense against anyone; it is an act of defense. I want us all to work together, including in partnership with our Muslim communities. But Muslim communities must cooperate with law enforcement and turn in the people who they know are bad – and they do know where they are. I want to fix our schools, roads, bridges and job market. I want every American to succeed. Hillary Clinton wants to empty out the Treasury to bring people into the country that include individuals who preach hate against our own citizens. I want to protect our citizens – all of our citizens. The terrorist attack on the Pulse Night Club demands a full and complete investigation into every aspect of the assault. 9/11 2/6/2017 Transcript: Donald Trump's national security speech - POLITICO In San Bernardino, as an example, people knew what was going on, but they used the excuse of racial profiling for not reporting it. We need to know what the killer discussed with his relatives, parents, friends and associates. We need to know if he was affiliated with any radical Mosques or radical activists and what, if any, is their immigration status. We need to know if he travelled anywhere, and who he travelled with. We need to make sure every single last person involved in this plan – including anyone who knew something but didn't tell us – is brought to justice. If it can be proven that somebody had information about any attack, and did not give this information to authorities, they must serve prison time . America must do more – much more – to protect its citizens, especially people who are potential victims of crimes based on their backgrounds or sexual orientations. It also means we must change our foreign policy. The decision to overthrow the regime in Libya, then pushing for the overthrow of the regime in Syria, among other things, without plans for the day after, have created space for ISIS to expand and grow. These actions, along with our disastrous Iran deal, have also reduced our ability to work in partnership with our Muslim allies in the region. That is why our new goal must be to defeat Islamic terrorism, not nation-building. For instance, the last major NATO mission was Hillary Clinton's war in Libya. That mission helped unleash ISIS on a new continent. I've said NATO needs to change its focus to stopping terrorism. Since I've raised that criticism, NATO has since announced a new initiative focused on just that. 10/11 2/6/2017 Transcript: Donald Trump's national security speech - POLITICO America must unite the whole civilized world in the fight against Islamic terrorism, just like we did against communism in the Cold War. We've tried it President Obama's way. He gave the world his apology tour, we got ISIS, and many other problems, in return. I'd like to conclude my remarks today by again expressing our solidarity with the people of Orlando who have come under attack. When I am President, I pledge to protect and defend all Americans who live inside of our borders. Wherever they come from, wherever they were born, all Americans living here and following our laws will be protected. America will be a tolerant and open society. America will also be a safe society. We will protect our borders at home. We will defeat ISIS overseas. We will ensure every parent can raise their children in peace and safety. We will make America rich again. We will make America safe again. We will make American Great Again. Thank you. 11/11 EXHIBIT 14 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News CBS News / CBS Evening News / CBS This Morning / 48 Hours / 60 Minutes / Sunday Morning / Face The Nation / CBSN Episodes Overtime Topics The Team Log In 60 Minutes All Access RELATED VIDEO 60 MINUTES The Rep Ticket 60 MINUTES Trump Pence's war, but Clinton 60 MINUTES Mike Pe waging radical 60 MINUTES Did Tru The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump and his running mate, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, speak to Lesley Stahl in their first joint interview 2016 Jul 17 CORRESPONDENT Lesley Stahl COMMENTS 216 FACEBOOK TWITTER STUMBLE MORE The following is a script from "The Republican Ticket" which aired on July 17, 2016. Lesley Stahl is the correspondent. Richard Bonin and Ruth Streeter, producers. Recent Segme 60 Minu Presents Row Sea Enhanci The Republican National Convention that begins tomorrow in Cleveland will star Donald Trump and his chosen running mate the governor of Indiana, Mike Pence. The Republican leadership has praised Pence as a good choice to unite the party. He's known as a reliable conservative with close ties to the religious right and he also has good relations with Republicans in Congress, having served six terms in the House of Representatives. Finding 60 MINUTES OVERTIME What kind of vice president would Mike Pence be? But there are significant areas in terms of values and policy where he has differed with Mr. Trump in the past. Avalanc Barack O 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS Eight Ye 1/16 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News We had the chance to ask the two of them about that in their first and only interview together, yesterday afternoon in New York, in Trump's three-story penthouse apartment in the Trump Tower. White H Lesley Stahl: First of all, Governor Pence, congratulations. Mike Pence: Thank you. "It's very, very humbling and I couldn't be more honored to have the opportunity to run with, and serve with, the next president of the United States." Lesley Stahl: This has probably come as a huge, life-changing moment for you.. Mike Pence: It has. It's very, very humbling and I couldn't be more honored to have the opportunity to run with, and serve with, the next president of the United States. Lesley Stahl: Before we actually talk about the politics, you know, there've been so many major world events very recently, in the last week. I don't know if you can remember the last time we have seen a world this much in chaos. You even said, "It's spinning apart." Are you ready for this world that we are facing today? 60 MINUTES OVERTIME Mike Pence on waging war against radical Islam Donald Trump: We're both ready. I've no doubt. We need toughness. We need strength. Obama's weak, Hillary's weak. And part of it is that, a big part of it. We need law and order. We need strong borders. Lesley Stahl: But all reactions to what's been going on aren't muscular. For example, look what happened in Turkey. There was a military coup in a democratic country; a NATO ally. How would you respond to that? Donald Trump: Well, as a president, I'm going to be-- you know, they've been an ally and I stay with our allies. They have been an ally. But that was a quick coup. I was actually surprised to see how well it was handled. And you know who really handled it? The people. So, I mean, we can say what we want, but the people handled it. When they surrounded the army tanks and without the people, you would've never had it. The military would've taken over. "We're both ready. I've no doubt. We need toughness. We need strength. Obama's weak, Hillary's weak." Mike Pence: But I truly do believe that the larger issue here is declining American power in the world. I truly do believe that history teaches that weakness arouses evil and whether it be the horrific attack in France, the inspired attacks here in the United States, the instability in Turkey that led to a coup. I think that is all a result of a foreign policy of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama that has led from behind and that has sent an inexact, unclear message about American resolve. One of the reasons why I said yes in a heartbeat to run with this man, is because he embodies American strength, and I know that he will provide that kind of broad-shouldered American strength on the global stage as well. Lesley Stahl: Let's talk about what happened in Nice, horrendous, carnage, horrible-Donald Trump: Horrible. 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS 2/16 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News Lesley Stahl: Horrible. You said you would declare war against ISIS. What exactly do you have-Donald Trump: It is war. By the way, it is war. Lesley Stahl: No, but does that-- when you say, "Declare war," do you want to send American troops in there? Is that what you mean? Donald Trump: Look, we have people that hate us. We have people that want to wipe us out. We're gonna declare war against ISIS. We have to wipe out ISIS. These are people that-- 60 MINUTES OVERTIME Did Trump consider his daughter for vice president? Lesley Stahl: With troops on the ground? Donald Trump: I am going to have very few troops on the ground. We're going to have unbelievable intelligence, which we need; which, right now, we don't have. We don't have the people over there. We are going to use-Lesley Stahl: You want to send Americans-Donald Trump: Excuse me-- and we're going to have surrounding states and, very importantly, get NATO involved because we support NATO far more than we should, frankly, because you have a lot of countries that aren't doing what they're supposed to be doing. And we have to wipe out ISIS. And speaking of Turkey, Turkey is an ally. Turkey can do it by themselves. But they have to be incentivized. For whatever reason, they're not. So we have no choice. Lesley Stahl: But I still don't know if you're going to send troops over-Donald Trump: Very little. I'm gonna-Lesley Stahl: But declare war-Donald Trump: --get neighboring states and I'm going to get-- we are going to get NATO; we're going to wipe 'em out. We're gonna-Lesley Stahl: But declare war? Mike Pence: Lesley-Lesley Stahl: What does that mean-Mike Pence: This is-- this is the kind-- this is the kind of leadership that America needs and it-Lesley Stahl: But what-Mike Pence: -and it begins with deciding to destroy the enemies of our freedom. Lesley Stahl: How? Mike Pence: And how we do that? I have every confidence. You-- you remember I served on the Foreign Affairs Committee. And I'm very confident that when Donald Trump becomes president of the United States, he'll give a directive to our military commanders, bring together other nations, and we will use the enormous resources of the United States to destroy that enemy. 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS 3/16 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News 60 MINUTES OVERTIME Trump and Pence's shared values Donald Trump: Now look, we are going to get rid of ISIS, big league. And we're going to get rid of 'em fast. And we're going to use surrounding states. We're going to use NATO, probably. And we're going to declare war. It is war. When the World Trade Center comes tumbling down, with thousands of people being killed, people are still-- I have friends that are still-Lesley Stahl: But we did go to war, if you remember. We went to Iraq. Donald Trump: Yeah, you went to Iraq, but that was handled so badly. And that was a war-by the way, that was a war that we shouldn't have entered because Iraq did not knock down-excuse me Lesley Stahl: Your running mate-Donald Trump: Iraq did not-Lesley Stahl: --voted for it. Donald Trump: I don't care. Lesley Stahl: What do you mean you don't care that he voted for? Donald Trump: It's a long time ago. And he voted that way and they were also misled. A lot of information was given to people. Lesley Stahl: But you've harped on this. Donald Trump: But I was against the war in Iraq from the beginning. Lesley Stahl: Yeah, but you've used that vote of Hillary's that was the same as Governor Pence as the example of her bad judgment. 60 MINUTES OVERTIME Trump OK with Pence's vote for Iraq war, but not Clinton's Donald Trump: Many people have, and frankly, I'm one of the few that was right on Iraq. Lesley Stahl: Yeah, but what about he-Donald Trump: He's entitled to make a mistake every once in a while. Lesley Stahl: But she's not? OK, come on-Donald Trump: But she's not-Lesley Stahl: She's not? Donald Trump: No. She's not. Lesley Stahl: Got it. Lesley Stahl: I have to move on or we're never gonna find out why he chose you. Why did you pick him? You had other candidates-Donald Trump: OK, I did. I had a lot of people that wanted it; a lot more people than anybody- 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS 4/16 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News Lesley Stahl: That came to you and begged you for it? Donald Trump: That called me and came to me and wanted it badly. And you know, the press didn't report that. The press said, "Well, maybe he's having hard time picking--" Lesley Stahl: Well, what about the governor? Did he want it like that? Donald Trump: I actually brought it up to him. Lesley Stahl: OK. Donald Trump: I got to know him during the-- when I was in Indiana during the primaries, and I did very well in Indiana, like I did just about everywhere else in all fairness. But-- I got to know him very well and I gained great respect for him. And I looked at the numbers, meaning the financials, which we would say in business. But I looked at the numbers. Unemployment? What a great job he did. Jobs? What a great job he did. Triple-A rating on his bonds. Lesley Stahl: --but you went to him and said-Donald Trump: I did-Lesley Stahl: Would you want to be considered-Donald Trump: I broached it. Lesley Stahl: He didn't -- And then he said, "I-- I really want it." So why did you pick him? Donald Trump: I would say that he thought about it a little bit. And about two seconds later, he called me, with his incredible wife, and said-Lesley Stahl: That I'd like to be-- but what-Donald Trump: Like many others. Lesley Stahl: How does he help you? How does he help you win in terms of groups of people? And what is your weakness that he compensates for and so forth-Donald Trump: Well, I went for the quality individual rather than I'm gonna win a state, because I'm doing very well in Indiana, and I guess I'm a lot up. And I think I'm gonna win Indiana. I have a great relationship and Bobby Knight helped me so much with Indiana. Indiana's a great place; great state. Lesley Stahl: Why didn't you pick him? No, I'm joking -- moving on. Donald Trump: He would've been very good. But he's a terrific guy. But-- but I really like him as an individual. Lesley Stahl: So you must've considered, obviously, by the reaction to your choice, a lot of the conservatives are very happy. Donald Trump: Very happy. Lesley Stahl: Was that part of the-Donald Trump: Yes, it was party unity. I'm an outsider. I am a person that used to be establishment when I'd give them hundreds of thousands of dollars. But when I decided to run, I became very anti-establishment because I understand the system-Lesley Stahl: Is he establishment? Donald Trump: --than anybody else. He's very establishment, in many ways, and that's not a bad thing. But I will tell you-Lesley Stahl: That's kind of interesting -Donald Trump: --I have seen more people that, frankly, did not like me so much, and now they're saying, "What a great pick." You see the kinda reaction. He has helped bring the party 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS 5/16 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News together. I understand. Look, I got more votes than anybody, but I also understand there's a faction-Lesley Stahl: Is it already unified, do you think? Donald Trump: I think it's very close to unified. And I will say-Lesley Stahl: Just because of this pick? Donald Trump: No. I think it's be-- I think it was much more unified than people thought. You saw that with the recent vote where we won in a landslide. You saw that with the big vote, the primary vote. I think it's far more unified than the press lets on. But having Governor Mike Pence has really-- people that I wasn't necessarily liking or getting along are loving this pick, because they have such respect for him. Lesley Stahl: And that was-Donald Trump: And the party unity is OK. You know, I think it's OK to say I picked somebody, because I-- as one of the things. But I really believe the main reason I picked him is the incredible job he's done. Just look at the economics of Indiana-Lesley Stahl: Indiana-Donald Trump: --and what's going on. Lesley Stahl: But what about the chemistry between you two? You don't really know each other that well. You're -- at least I've read, a very low-key, very religious, you're a brash New Yorker-Donald Trump: Religious. Lesley Stahl: Religious? Donald Trump: Religious-Lesley Stahl: Are you? Donald Trump: Yea, religious. Lesley Stahl: --you wouldn't-Donald Trump: Hey, I won the evangelicals. The evangelicals-Lesley Stahl: That doesn't-Mike Pence: You know, nobody thought-Donald Trump: --well, I think it means a lot. I don't think they think I'm perfect, and they would get up and they would say, "You know, he's not perfect," but-Lesley Stahl: They'd point to the -Donald Trump: --they like me-Lesley Stahl: --divorces-Donald Trump: --but I won-- I won states with evangelicals that nobody thought I'd even come close to-Lesley Stahl: Well, that's true-Donald Trump:-and I won-Lesley Stahl: --so you didn't (UNINTEL)-Donald Trump: --with landslides-Lesley Stahl: --need him for the evangelicals? 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS 6/16 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News Donald Trump: I think it helps. But I don't think I needed him, no, because--I won with evangelicals. Mike Pence: But I think we have more in common-Lesley Stahl: Yeah, tell me-Mike Pence: --than-Lesley Stahl: --what you think you have in common. Donald Trump: --what might be immediately obvious. Lesley Stahl: Besides issues. Values and things like that. Donald Trump: I think we will have very, very good chemistry. I feel that. And I can feel that pretty early on. I don't think you need to be with somebody for two years to find that out. My feeling isLesley Stahl: Your gut feeling. Donald Trump: I knew him during the primaries, during many trips to Indiana, I'd be with him. I think we have a great chemistry. Lesley Stahl: I want to ask you though about something you've said about negative campaigning. Donald Trump: Yeah. Lesley Stahl: You said negative campaigning is wrong, and a campaign ought to demonstrate the basic decency of the candidate. Mike Pence: Right. Lesley Stahl: With that in mind, what do you think about your running mate's campaign and the tone and the negativity of it? Mike Pence: I think this is a good man who's been talking about the issues the American people care about. Lesley Stahl: But name-calling? Mike Pence: In that-Lesley Stahl: "Lyin' Ted?" Mike Pence: --in the essay that I wrote a long time ago, I said campaigns oughta be about something more important than just one candidate's election. And-- and this campaign and Donald Trump's candidacy has been about the issues the American people care about. Lesley Stahl: --but what about-Donald Trump: Lesley, Lesley-Lesley Stahl: --the negative side? He apologized for being a negative-Donald Trump: We're different people. I understand that. I'll give you an example. Hillary Clinton is a liar. Hillary Clinton-- that was just proven-Lesley Stahl: That's-Donald Trump: --last week. Lesley Stahl: --that's negative-Donald Trump: Hillary Clinton-Lesley Stahl: By the way -Donald Trump: --you better believe it. Hillary Clinton is a crook. 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS 7/16 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News Lesley Stahl: That's negative-Donald Trump: I call her "Crooked Hillary." She's crooked Hillary. He won't-- I-- I don't-- I didn't ask him to do it, but I don't think he should do it because it's different for him. Lesley Stahl: But-- he-Donald Trump: He's not that kind of a-Lesley Stahl: He probably-Donald Trump: --person. We're different people-Lesley Stahl: --don't you think he-Donald Trump: --to me she's-Lesley Stahl: --thinks that's-Donald Trump: --Crooked Hillary. Lesley Stahl: --wrong? Donald Trump: I don't think he should use that term. I've never said one way or the other. But to him, I don't think it would sound right, but he will say how dishonest she is by going over the facts. Lesley Stahl: But would you go to him-- let's say you won, you're the vice president, your office is, I assume, down the hall, and you go in and you say, "You know, you shouldn't be saying-- name-calling." Would you do that? Would you go in and say, "You crossed the line, I think you should apologize?" Would you do something like that? Mike Pence: Look, I-Lesley Stahl: He's laughing. Mike Pence: --it's probably-- it's-- it's probably-Lesley Stahl: It's OK. Mike Pence: --obvious to people that our styles are different. But I promise you, our vision is exactly the same. Lesley Stahl: No, but would you-Mike Pence: And let me be-Lesley Stahl: --will-Mike Pence: --clear-Lesley Stahl: --will you answer that? Would you go in -Mike Pence: Well the-- one of the things I found out about this man is he appreciates candor. And-Lesley Stahl: So you would go in-Mike Pence: --I-- I-Donald Trump: I'd like him to if he thinks I was doing something wrong-Lesley Stahl: Would you listen-Donald Trump: --just say-Lesley Stahl: --to him-Mike Pence: Yeah. Lesley Stahl: --if he said you- 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS 8/16 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News Donald Trump: Absolutely-Lesley Stahl: --crossed the line. Donald Trump: --absolutely. I might not apologize. You know, you said apologize, but-Lesley Stahl: I did say apologize. Donald Trump: But I might not do that, but I would absolutely want him to come in-- if he thinks I'm doing something wrong, Mike, I would want him to come in and say, really, you're doing, you gotta-- and that's OK. I accept that from my consultants and my people and if Mike came in and told me, you know, "I think you should do this or that-Lesley Stahl: Back off that. Donald Trump: I would listen and very likely listen to him. Lesley Stahl: Do you think John McCain is not a hero because he was captured? Mike Pence: I have a great deal of respect for John McCain, and-Lesley Stahl: Do you think he went too far? Donald Trump: You could say yes. I-- that's OK. Donald Trump: That one, you could say yes, I mean, you're not--it's fine - hey, look, I like John McCain. But we have to take care of our vets. Lesley Stahl: No, but I wanna know if-Donald Trump: OK, but I'm just-Lesley Stahl:-Mr. Pence would go in and-Donald Trump:-I'm just saying, that's-Lesley Stahl: --say to you-Donald Trump: --why not that many people are that upset-Lesley Stahl: What are you -- what did you say? You know, would you do something like that? Mike Pence: I promise you that when the circumstances arise where I have a difference on policy or on presentation, I have-- I can tell you in my heart, I know-- I would have no hesitation, were I privileged to be vice president, to walk into the president's office, close the door, and share my heart. And I also know this good man would listen, and has the leadership qualities to draw from the people around him. Lesley Stahl: Let's talk about-- some of the issues. Because there seems to be some daylight between you two, and we can just tick-- go quickly through these. Immigration. Mr. Trump, you have called for a temporary ban on Muslims entering the United States. Do you agree with that? Mike Pence: I do. In fact, in Indiana we suspended the Syrian refugee program in the wake of the terrorist attack. We have no higher priority than the safety and security of the people of this country, and Donald Trump-Lesley Stahl: Now-Mike Pence: --is right to-Lesley Stahl: --in December-Mike Pence: --articulate that view. Lesley Stahl: --in December you tweeted, and I quote you, "Calls to ban Muslims from entering the U.S. are offensive and unconstitutional." 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS 9/16 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News Donald Trump: So you call it territories OK? We're gonna do territories We're gonna not let territories. territories. people come in from Syria that nobody knows who they are. Hillary Clinton wants 550 percent more people to come in than Obama-Lesley Stahl: So you-Donald Trump: --who doesn't know what he's-Lesley Stahl: --so you're changing-Donald Trump: --so we're going to-Lesley Stahl: --your position. Donald Trump: --no, I-- call it whatever you want. We'll call it territories OK? territories, Lesley Stahl: So not Muslims? Donald Trump: You know-- the Constitution -- there's nothing like it. But it doesn't necessarily give us the right to commit suicide, as a country, OK? And I'll tell you this. Call it whatever you want, change territories, but there are territories and terror states and terror territories nations that we're not gonna allow the people to come into our country. And we're gonna have a thing called "Extreme vetting." And if people wanna come in, there's gonna be extreme vetting. We're gonna have extreme vetting. They're gonna come in and we're gonna know where they came from and who they are. Mike Pence: You just asked me--if I'm comfortable with that-Mike Pence: --and I am. What-- what Donald-Lesley Stahl: You're on the same-Mike Pence: Which-Lesley Stahl: --page on that? Mike Pence: --clearly-- clearly this man is not a politician. He doesn't speak like a politician-Lesley Stahl: He's done pretty well. Mike Pence: --he-- he speaks from his-Mike Pence: --heart-Donald Trump: Is that a good thing? I think that's a good thing. Mike Pence: --he speaks from his heart. And-Lesley Stahl: Well, I-Donald Trump: Well, I-- I speak from my heart and my brain. Just so we understand. Mike Pence: Right. Donald Trump: This is (points to head) maybe more important. Lesley Stahl: Let's go to trade. You have voted for every trade agreement when you were in Congress-Mike Pence: I have. Lesley Stahl: --that came before you. You're supporting the Trans-Pacific partnership that Mr. Trump says would rape this country. Now, are you gonna be able to go out and campaign in support of his protectionist positions? Mike Pence: I support free trade, and so does Donald Trump. Lesley Stahl: Not really-Donald Trump: I do. I'm free trade, but I wanna make good deals. No, no, I'm all for free- 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS 10/16 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News Lesley Stahl: You've talked Donald Trump: --trade. You-Lesley Stahl: --about-Donald Trump: --know I'm not an isolationist. A lot of people think because I wanna make good deals-Lesley Stahl: You wanna undo-Donald Trump: --these are stupid people-Lesley Stahl: --these-Donald Trump: --wait a minute Lesley, these are stupid people that think that. I wanna make great deals for our country. We have deals like the deal signed by Bill Clinton, NAFTA, one of the worst things that ever happened to this country in terms of trade, in terms of economics. Lesley Stahl: What do you think about NAFTA? Mike Pence: You're absolutely right. I've supported free trade throughout my career. But-Lesley Stahl: OK. Mike Pence: --the truth of the matter is NAFTA has provisions in that law that call for it to be reviewed, that have never been-- never been-- initiated. What-- what I hear Donald Trump saying is let's-- let's look at these trade agreements and reconsider them and renegotiate them. And-Lesley Stahl: And you're OK with-Mike Pence: --with regard to-Lesley Stahl: --that? Mike Pence: --and with regard to other trade agreements, we've talked about this. I-- I really do believe when the American people elect one of the best negotiators in the world as president of the United States, we would do well-Donald Trump: We're gonna bring back jobs-Mike Pence: --to negotiate individually with countries. Donald Trump: We're gonna bring back our jobs, we're gonna bring back our wealth, we're gonna take care of our people. Very simple. Lesley Stahl: OK. More issues. Waterboarding. Mr. Trump wants to bring back waterboarding, and quote, "A hell of a lot more." Are you comfortable with bringing back waterboarding? Mike Pence: I don't think we should ever tell our enemy what our tactics are. Lesley Stahl: But what about that? What-Mike Pence: I don't-Lesley Stahl: --about-- he's publicly-Donald Trump: I like that answer. Lesley Stahl: --said that-Mike Pence: I don't think we should-- I-- I think-Lesley Stahl: But are you OK with the idea of-Mike Pence: --I think-Lesley Stahl: --waterboarding? 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS 11/16 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News Mike Pence: --I think enhanced interrogation saved lives. Lesley Stahl: And you're OK with-Mike Pence: I-Lesley Stahl: --that? Mike Pence: --what I'm OK with-- what I'm OK with is protecting the American people. What I'm OK with is when people have the intent to come to this country and take American lives, that-- that we are-- that we are prepared to do what's necessary to gain the information to protect the people of this country-Donald Trump: But Lesley, let's step further. We have an enemy, ISIS and others, who chop off heads, who drown people in steel cages and we can't do waterboarding-Lesley Stahl: OK, but, but why-Donald Trump: OK, they're not playing-Lesley Stahl: --would you use their-Donald Trump: --under -- because you know-Lesley Stahl: --techniques? Donald Trump: --what, those techniques get information. I don't care what anyone says. Lesley Stahl: Are you agreeing with him? Mike Pence: I am-Donald Trump: And get information-Mike Pence: --what I-Donald Trump: --using those things. Mike Pence: --what I can tell you is enhanced information gleaned information that saved American lives and, I was informed, prevented incoming terrorist attacks on this country from being successful. The American people expect the president of the United States to be prepared to support action to protect the people of this nation, and I know Donald Trump will. Lesley Stahl: Have you answered me? Mike Pence: I have. Lesley Stahl: Let's talk about the convention. You're a showman. What are you going to do to keep it from being a snooze-o-rama, as some have happened. Donald Trump: Well, I think we're gonna have an exciting time. We've got some wonderful speakers. We have some very talented people. My family's gonna speak. Lesley Stahl: Worried about violence outside? This is an open-carry state. People can carry guns. There'll be demonstrators. They've already said they're going to carry assault rifles. Are you worried? And would you call on people not to carry their guns? Donald Trump: I have great faith in law enforcement. If they don't want to take their guns, I think that's fantastic. But I have great confidence in law enforcement. The police like Donald Trump. It's law and order. And I have great confidence that they will do a great job. Lesley Stahl: There's no question in anybody's mind that you want to win this election. I don't think anyone would doubt that. But what about being president? Do you really want to be president of the United States? Donald Trump: I want to make America great again. Honestly. I want to make Am-- I'm not doing this because-- I'm sacrificing tremendous things. I could be doing other things. It's 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS 12/16 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News lovely to sit down with you and be grilled. That's okay. But I could be doing other things right now. And I have some of the greatest properties in the world. I could be out there-Lesley Stahl: Would you rather be out there? Donald Trump: I tell you what. I've really enjoyed this process. I've gotten to know the people of this country. I've gotten to know places that I didn't know, that I read about, but I didn't know. I've also gotten to see the problems. And it's a movement. Donald Trump: Now, when you ask me the question, do I wanna be? Lesley Stahl: Yeah. Donald Trump: I wanna be for one reason. I wanna make America safe again, and I wanna make America great again. That's why I'm doing this. And I love it. Lesley Stahl: And you wanna govern? I mean it-Donald Trump: I do wanna govern. Lesley Stahl: It is different-Donald Trump: I do-Lesley Stahl: --building a movement-Donald Trump: I govern my-- I-Lesley Stahl: -and than-- going in there with the nitty gritty and-Lesley Stahl: --all that tough decision making. Donald Trump: Sure. No, no I wanna govern Lesley Stahl: OK, this is my absolute final question. Donald Trump: OK. Lesley Stahl: You're not known to be a humble man. But I wonder-Donald Trump: I think I am, actually humble. I think I'm much more humble than you would understand. Lesley Stahl: As you think about-- prospect of running this country in these tough times where the world is spinning apart-- are you awed? Are you intimidated? Are you humbled by the enormity of this? Donald Trump: You just said it best. Mike Pence: Mmm. Donald Trump: In a world that's spinning apart. That's what I'm thinking of. I'm not thinking of, "Oh gee, isn't this wonderful? Isn't this great what I've done?" I've had people that said, "It doesn't matter if you win or lose, what you've done has never been done before. You're gonna go down in the history books." You know what I say to 'em?" I say, "You're wrong." I will consider it, 'cause I funded my own primaries, I'm funding now a lot of this campaign. I'm putting in, you know-- I've spent $55 million in the primaries. I'm spending a fortunate now. I'll tell you, it is spinning. Our world is spinning out of control. Our country's spinning out of control. That's what I think about. And I'll stop that. Lesley Stahl: Not-- humbled or-- awe. Mike Pence: I can say to 'ya-- what-Lesley Stahl: Go ahead. Mike Pence: Talking with him in private settings, I love the words you used because this man is awed with the American people, and he is not intimidated by the world. And Donald Trump, this good man, I believe, will be a great president of the United States. 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS 13/16 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News Donald Trump: I love what he just said. © 2016 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. Lesley Stahl One of America's most recognized and experienced broadcast journalists, Lesley Stahl has been a 60 Minutes correspondent since 1991. More from 60 Minutes The Coming Swarm The Hunt for Planet Nine JANUARY 8, 2017 JANUARY 9, 2017 Autonomous drones are being called the biggest thing in military technology since the nuclear bomb. David Martin reports. At the farthest edges of our solar system, scientists have found evidence of a ninth planet. Bill Whitaker reports. 216 JANUARY 9, 2017 Lesley Stahl speaks to a countert adviser who admits U.S. failures with hostages, and to the parents Sotloff, a journalist who was kidn ... Comments Most Discuss 216 Comments / 95 people listening + FOLLOW NEWEST | OLDEST | TOP COMMENTS SIGN IN Share POST COMMENT AS... We learned three things from Stahl's supine "interview" with Trump. (1) -- CBS is not the BBC -- it is driven by need for ratings and not the pursuit of objective truth. (2) -- '60 Minutes" -- a mere shadow of its former self --is no match for hard investigative programs like "BBC Panorama" or "BBC NewsHour" and ... (3) -- Lesley Stahl probably induces convulsions in the corpses of past 60-Minutes greats such as Mike Wallace, Ed Bradley, and Bob Simon. She needs to take a week off to watch all reporting by Christiane Amanpour -- well-prepared, incisive, and tenacious. At the very least Stahl should google "Trump Iraq War" for her next interview with Drumpf. ---REPLY AGIBSON95 July 25, 2016 10:10PM 460 Obama tells 60 Minu shaping public opini of the job" 123 Obama says his fam to leave the White H 32 Barack Obama: Eigh the White House 31 Obama doesn't think elect Trump can be improvisational in o 31 Obama to make last TV appearance as pr "60 Minutes" COMMENTING FAQS / GUIDELINES ALBO LANGSAL July 30, 2016 6:6PM 1 LIKE / The Hostage Poli Recommended 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS 14/16 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News Why isn't 60 minutes covering Gary Johnson and Bill Weld? You have the Democratic and Republican Ticket, but no Libertarian ticket. People dislike Trump and Clinton so much, but the media is acting like they will be the only 2 choices on every ballot. Please take the lead and start covering Gary and Bill like you do the other candidates. . Promoted L Call Off the Search: The Best Sheets Find Are Here Business Insider | Brooklinen LIKE / REPLY MOL3898 July 24, 2016 10:10AM Lesley Stahl could not stop herself from asking the same question 20 difference ways!! Just like a parrot! Boots on the Ground? Boots on the Ground?? Just like George bush, just like George bush, she said!! At first I was upset that Trump did not call all her out on this. But after I watch this a second time. Trump really ran the board and come out with new ideas and answers to the old mainstream media on how they treat the GOP He did very well against her. Stayed on target and made her look so bias, which . she is! LIKE / Police: Florida pastor caught with ma flees naked Seriously Undervalued Biotech You H Heard About Finance Spotlight Haeli Noelle Wey, ex-Austin teacher, improper relationships with students REPLY SUNNYDAYSAM July 27, 2016 8:8AM @mol3898 Trump avoided the questions 1 LIKE / REPLY WILLKX November 11, 2016 4:4PM @mol3898 Exactly. LIKE / REPLY RADHA.MA July 22, 2016 2:2PM Leslie Stahl is amazing in that she held a straight face through the interview! These guys are unbelievable, and it is hard to believe America even takes these guys seriously - they are utter buffoonery. I'm afraid for America and these guys leading the world into WW III. Praying for the world, and grateful to be living above the 49th. 2 LIKE / REPLY RADHA.MA July 24, 2016 6:6PM Would 60 minutes please investigate Trump's rape cases? LIKE / REPLY CAITLIN SLATER July 21, 2016 2:2AM I am 20 years old. A female. A college student. This is my first election I will get the opportunity to vote. This interview makes me proud to say that I will vote for Donald Trump and Mike Pence. If only people would be more optimistic while watching interviews like this. If only our country could be more positive when watching, hearing and seeing how the media portrays Trump and Pence then maybe our nation would really come together. Open-mindedness creates space for unity. Close-mindedness creates separation. God Bless. 1 LIKE / REPLY MOL3898 July 24, 2016 10:10AM @Caitlin Slater We need more people like you! LIKE / REPLY WILLKX November 11, 2016 4:4PM @Caitlin Slater How do you you get through class and still be able to think? Good job. LIKE / REPLY MADAGASCANLEMUR July 20, 2016 3:3AM Lesley Stahl should never engage in challenging interviews. This was complete off-the-rails train wreck. She asked nothing. Trump only blew his own horn but doesn't have any idea of what he's doing. Mike Pence is supposed to be an experienced politician, having served both in the U.S. House and as governor of Indiana. But he seems only to have nodded blankly and kissed Trump's a$$. LIKE / REPLY 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS 15/16 2/9/2017 The Republican Ticket: Trump and Pence - CBS News AUGUSTINAPRIEL July 20, 2016 4:4AM @madagascanlemur Interesting - by the way, this system will not allow me to type other than all caps, so I'm not shouting - I watched and thought Lesley did a very good job. Mike made clear his positions, and both he and trump made their plans and positions clear. I find it interesting that we got different impressions. That's what makes horse races and elections. LIKE / REPLY RALYNS July 20, 2016 0:12AM I think we are totally screwed - we have evil vs evil yet again and it seems to get worse every election year... Time to get rid of the death grip that the GOP and Dems have on our country before they totally destroy our country and freedom. Tyrant vs tyrant with Trump only being a little less evil is not a choice that should be forced on us... but, they have it all rigged so that only the GOP or Dems can win. God help us all... LIKE / REPLY ATOM4 July 19, 2016 3:3PM I think we just got a demonstration of how little Trump is analyzing the world, the prospects of another war, the effects of his attacks on EU and NATO, very little to nothing on american economy, and all through the interview: How his personality may do the job on a building site, board room or on a tv screen in the late hours - as on a stage. But how can this man be able to walk the walk with all the real tigers in politics, abroad and in USA? He wouldn't fit in their shoes. Of course Putin wants this man, as he says when he tells he likes him. He can be so easily handled. That is what this interview shows. 1 LIKE / REPLY DONT-POKE-THE-BEAR July 19, 2016 8:8AM They make an excellent team.... I love the fact that Trump is NOT political correct, and Pence is very fluent in the political correctness, they speak both spectrums of the languages but on the same track. They present the same message. I believe the chemistry will work successfully, since they both project Americans first. It's clear that The people are very paranoid to choose who will be our next POTUS. I am confident Trump will do a great job... His reasoning on his VP pick is truly profound, not even superficial on his VP pick. Pence took Indiana to a new level of success.... he impressed me after reading all he did for Indiana state. This will work. 1 LIKE / REPLY ALBO LANGSAL July 30, 2016 6:6PM @Dont-poke-the-Bear Are we looking at the same reality? LIKE / REPLY SALLYINCHICAGO July 19, 2016 8:8AM Every potential voter should be mandated to watch this interview. 4 LIKE / REPLY SHOW MORE COMMENTS CBS Interactive Follow Us Site Map Help Privacy Policy Ad Choice Facebook Twitter Contact Us CBS Bios Careers CBSi Careers Terms of Use Mobile User Agreement About CBS Advertise RSS Email Newsletters YouTube CBS Radio News Internships Development Programs Closed Captioning CBS News Store CBS Local Copyright © 2017 CBS Inter All rights Search... 60 MINUTES ALL ACCESS 16/16 EXHIBIT 15 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News WATCH LIVE: SEE WINTER STORM SWEEP THROUGH TIMES SQUARE SECTIONS GET ALERTS  fl  MEET THE PRESS MEET THE PRESS JUL 24 2016, 11:47 AM ET Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 SHARE    Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 CHUCK TODD: This Sunday, the Democratic National Convention gets underway here in Philadelphia, after a raucous and unpredictable Republican convention. That ended with the nomination of Donald Trump. DONALD TRUMP: I am with you, I will fight for you, and I will win for you. CHUCK TODD: This morning, my sit-down with Donald Trump on his convention speech. DONALD TRUMP: The only negative reviews were a little dark. CHUCK TODD: On whether he's backing off on his Muslim band. DONALD TRUMP: I actually don't think it's a pull-back. In fact, you could say it's an expansion. CHUCK TODD: And on Hillary Clinton's choice of Tim Kaine. DONALD TRUMP: Tim Kaine was a slap in the face to Bernie Sanders. CHUCK TODD: Plus Hillary Clinton and Tim Kaine hit the road in Florida. HILLARY CLINTON: Tim Kaine is everything Donald Trump and Mike Pence are not. CHUCK TODD: But some Bernie Sanders supporters are criticizing the Kaine pick as a sellout to moderates. I'll talk to Sanders and get his reaction to that and to the DNC Wikileaks e-mail release. Joining me for insight and analysis are MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, former chairman of the RNC, Michael Steele, NBC News Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent, Andrea Mitchell, and host of Hardball and Philadelphia hometown boy, Chris Matthews. Trump, Sanders and reactions to the new Democratic ticket. Welcome to Sunday, in a special edition of Meet the Press at the Democratic National Convention. 1/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News CHUCK TODD: Good Sunday morning. We are at the Wells Fargo Center here in South Philadelphia, home of the NBA 76ers and the NHL Broad Street Bullies, the Fliers. Democrats have begun to arrive, along with a pretty bad heat wave. And beginning tomorrow, they will gather to officially nominate Hillary Clinton as their presidential candidate. Yesterday in Miami, Clinton was joined by her new running mate, Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, in an upbeat event that was notable simply by the contrast to the disorganized rollout of Donald Trump's running mate a week earlier, Mike Pence. (BEGIN TAPE) SEN. TIM KAINE: Hillary Clinton, she doesn't insult people, she listens to them. What a novel concept, right? She doesn't trash our allies, she respects them. And she'll always have our backs, that is something I am rock solid sure of. (END TAPE) CHUCK TODD: We will get to reaction to the new Democratic ticket later in the show, including my interview with Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont in a moment. But first, we're going to talk also about Sanders, about those Wikileaks emails and what they may say about DNC favoritism towards Hillary Clinton. But we begin with the man who has now taken control of the Republican Party. It's nominee Donald Trump. I traveled to Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey, sort of his weekend getaway, last night for a face-to-face interview since dropping the word "presumptive," it's his first one, from the nominee title. We touched on so much: Tim Kaine, Trump's tax returns, his proposed restrictions on Muslim immigration and why he says he alone can fix the country's problems. But I began by asking him how it feels to be the Republican nominee for president of the United States. (BEGIN TAPE) DONALD TRUMP: Well, it really feels great. And we really have a very unified party, other than a very small group of people that, frankly, lost. And we have a very unified party. You saw that the other night with the love in the room, and the enthusiasm in the room. The enthusiasm, there are people that say they have never seen anything like what was going on in that room, especially Thursday night. CHUCK TODD: Let me tell you, you bring up Thursday night, I've got to ask you about your entrance. Before we get serious here. That Monday night entrance was something else. I know you've gotten a lot of feedback on it. How'd you come up with it? DONALD TRUMP: I think I'm a little bit lucky, and a couple of people had that idea and I went along with the idea. And everything just worked right. And it was so good that they wanted to do it on Thursday night. I said, "Never in a million years, because you'll never get it that way again." CHUCK TODD: 2/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News I don't think I've seen that even on WWE. DONALD TRUMP: Yeah, I know. Well, Vince is a good friend of mine. He called me, he said, "That was a very, very good entrance." But I didn't want to do it a second time, because, you know, it never works out the second time. CHUCK TODD: All right, let's go into the speech. I want to put some meat on the bones. But first, let's talk about, you've seen some of the positive reviews, some of the negative reviews. Some of the negative has been that it was a little dark-DONALD TRUMP: That's the only thing that-CHUCK TODD: --that there wasn't enough optimism in it. What would you say? It's not Morning in America. DONALD TRUMP: Yeah. CHUCK TODD: What would you say to that? DONALD TRUMP: Well, I think the only negativity, and, you know, the hate, I call them the haters, and that's fine. But the only negative reviews were, "A little dark." And the following day, they had another attack, and then today you see what happened in Afghanistan with many, many people killed. They have no idea how many, so many killed. Yesterday it was Munich. And you know, I know they're saying, "Maybe it wasn't terrorism. Maybe it was just a crazy guy." But in the meantime he's screaming, "Allahu Akbar," as he's shooting people, so, you know, we'll see how that turns out. And all of a sudden people are saying, "Maybe it wasn't dark at all." But the only thing that some people said, "It was a little dark. It was a little bit tough." CHUCK TODD: Do you think it was a little dark? DONALD TRUMP: No, oh, I thought it was very optimistic. To me, it was an optimistic speech, because-CHUCK TODD: What makes it optimistic in your view? DONALD TRUMP: Because we're going to stop the problems. We're going to stop the problems. In other words, sure, I talk about the problems, but we're going to solve the problems. CHUCK TODD: 3/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News One of the phrases you used, "I alone can fix it." And to some people, that sounded almost too strong-mannish for them. Do you understand that criticism and what do you make of it? DONALD TRUMP: I'll tell you, part of it was I'm comparing myself to Hillary. And we know Hillary, and we look at her record. Her record has been a disaster. And I am running against Hillary. It's not like I'm running against the rest of the world. I know people that are very, very capable that could do a very good job, but they could never get elected. I can tell you right now. I can give you ten names of people that would do an extraordinary job, but there's no way they could ever get elected. They wouldn't know where to begin. It wouldn't be for them. But for governing, they would be good. I'm running and, you know, against one person. CHUCK TODD: You said there would be consequences for any company that tried to move a factory out. What-DONALD TRUMP: Absolutely, so simple-CHUCK TODD: --what is the consequence? Let's start with, you bring up Carrier a lot. DONALD TRUMP: It's so simple-(OVERTALK) CHUCK TODD: Right, I understand that. But explain the consequences-DONALD TRUMP: Okay, here's the consequence-CHUCK TODD: What would it be? DONALD TRUMP: So Carrier comes in, they announce they're moving to Mexico, they fire all their people in Indiana, and they say, "Hi, well, here we are in Mexico, you know, enjoy your plant, enjoy the rest of your life," and you hire people from Mexico, okay? Now they make their product and they put it into the United States. Well, we will have a very strong border, by the way, but they put it into the United States and we don't charge them tax. There will be a tax to be paid. If they're going to fire all their people, move their plant to Mexico, build air conditioners, and think they're going to sell those air conditioners to the United States, there's going to be a tax. CHUCK TODD: What kind of tax are you thinking? DONALD TRUMP: 4/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News It could be 25 percent. It could be 35 percent. It could be 15 percent. I haven't determined. And it could be different for different companies. We have been working on trying to stop this government, because we don't know what we're doing. And not only Obama, they've been trying to stop this from before Obama. But they don't know. You know, they've done, they've tried lower interest loans, they've tried zero interest loans, these guys-CHUCK TODD: Well, some of these things aren't going to get through the World Trade Organization. There's-DONALD TRUMP: It doesn't matter. Then we're going to renegotiate or we're going to pull out. These trade deals are a disaster, Chuck. World Trade Organization is a disaster. CHUCK TODD: You know the concern on some of this-DONALD TRUMP: NAFTA is a disaster-CHUCK TODD: -- is that it would rattle the world economy. Look what Brexit did to the world economy. Investors got rattled. DONALD TRUMP: What did it do? What did it do? CHUCK TODD: Now you-DONALD TRUMP: The stock market's higher now than it was when it happened. And by the way, I'm the only one of all of these people at the higher level of the wonderful world of politics, I'm the only one that said, "Brexit's going to happen." Remember, I was asked the question. I said, "Yeah, I think they're going to approve it. I think they want independence. I don't think they want people pouring into their country." And I was-CHUCK TODD: You're not worried about, you think a fractured Europe is good for America? DONALD TRUMP: No, no. But we're spending a lot of money on Europe. Don't forget, Europe got together, why, primarily did they get together? So that they could beat the United States when it comes to making money, in other words, foreign trade-CHUCK TODD: Economic-DONALD TRUMP: Okay? And now we talk about Europe like it's so wonderful. Hey, I love Europe, I have property in Europe. I'm just saying, the reason that it got together was like a consortium so that it could compete with the United States- 5/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News CHUCK TODD: So what you're saying is all this stuff is good for America, even if it's not good for Europe? DONALD TRUMP: Look, you take a look at Airbus. They make more planes now than Boeing, okay? They got together, all of these countries got together so that they could beat the United States. Okay, so we're in competition. So you know, we're in competition in one way, we're helping them in another way. It is so messed up. CHUCK TODD: The Muslim ban. I think you've pulled back from it, but you tell me. (BEGIN TAPE) DONALD TRUMP: We must immediately suspend immigration from any nation that has been compromised by terrorism until such time as proven vetting mechanisms have been put in place. (END TAPE) CHUCK TODD: This feels like a slight rollback-DONALD TRUMP: I don't think that's-CHUCK TODD: Should it be interpreted-DONALD TRUMP: I don't think so. I actually don't think it's a rollback. In fact, you could say it's an expansion. I'm looking now at territories. People were so upset when I used the word Muslim. Oh, you can't use the word Muslim. Remember this. And I'm okay with that, because I'm talking territory instead of Muslim. But just remember this: Our Constitution is great. But it doesn't necessarily give us the right to commit suicide, okay? Now, we have a religious, you know, everybody wants to be protected. And that's great. And that's the wonderful part of our Constitution. I view it differently. Why are we committing suicide? Why are we doing that? But you know what? I live with our Constitution. I love our Constitution. I cherish our Constitution. We're making it territorial. We have nations and we'll come out, I'm going to be coming out over the next few weeks with a number of the places. And it's very complex-CHUCK TODD: Well I was just going to say-DONALD TRUMP: --we have problems in Germany and we have problems with France-CHUCK TODD: I was just going to ask that. Will this limitt- 6/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News DONALD TRUMP: You know, so it's not just the countries with-CHUCK TODD: --would this limit immigration from France? DONALD TRUMP: What we're going to have is a thing called-CHUCK TODD: They've been compromised by terrorism. DONALD TRUMP: They have totally been. And you know why? It's their own fault. Because they allowed people to come into their territory-CHUCK TODD: So you would toughen up. You're basically saying, "Hey, if the French want to come over here, you've got to go through an extra check." DONALD TRUMP: It's their own fault, because they've allowed people over years to come into their territory. And that's why Brexit happened, okay? Because the U.K. is saying, "We're tired of this stuff, what's going on, we're tired of." But listen to this-CHUCK TODD: You could get to the point where you're not allowing a lot of people to come into this country from a lot of places. DONALD TRUMP: Maybe we get to that point. Chuck, look what's happening. Look at what just took place in Afghanistan, where they blow up a whole shopping center with people, they have no idea how many people were even killed. Happened today. So we have to be smart and we have to be vigilant and we have to be strong. We can't be the stupid people-CHUCK TODD: So France, Germany, Spain-DONALD TRUMP: Here's my plan-CHUCK TODD: --places that have been compromised? DONALD TRUMP: --here is what I want: Extreme vetting. Tough word. Extreme vetting. CHUCK TODD: What does that look like? DONALD TRUMP: 7/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News Tough. We're going to have tough standards. And if a person can't prove-CHUCK TODD: Give me one. DONALD TRUMP: --that they're from an area, and if a person can't prove what they have to be able to prove, they're not coming into this country. And I would stop the Syrian migration and the Syrian from coming into this country in two seconds. Hillary Clinton wants to take 550 percent more people coming in from that area than Barack Obama. I think she's crazy. I think she's crazy. We have no idea who these people are for the most part, and you know, because I've seen them on different shows-CHUCK TODD: All right. DONALD TRUMP: --but more importantly, I've read about it. I study it. There is no way that you can vet some of these people. There is no way. Law enforcement officials, I've had them in my office. I've talked to them. CHUCK TODD: You realize some of these folks have nowhere to go? They're truly victims of this civil war, what do you do with them? DONALD TRUMP: We will help them and we will build safe havens over in Syria, and we will get Gulf States-CHUCK TODD: We, the United States are going to build these safe havens? DONALD TRUMP: We, the United States, we'll get Gulf States to pay for it, because we right now, we're going to have $21 trillion very soon, trillion, in debt. We will do safe havens and safe zones in Syria and we will get nations that are so wealthy that are not doing anything. They're not doing much. They have nothing but money. And you know who I'm talking about, the Gulf States. And we will get them to pay for it. We would lead it. I don't want to pay because our country is going down the tubes. We owe too much money. CHUCK TODD: All right. Let me move to something with NATO. Mitch McConnell said this about your NATO remarks in the New York Times. He said it was a rookie mistake, and that once you, let me finish the comment here. "It's a rookie mistake, and it proves that Trump needs people like us around to help steer him in the right direction on some basic things." DONALD TRUMP: He's 100 percent wrong. Okay? He's 100 percent wrong if he said that. I didn't hear he said that-CHUCK TODD: He did say it. 8/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News DONALD TRUMP: Okay, fine, fine-CHUCK TODD: New York Times-DONALD TRUMP: If he said that, he's 100 percent wrong. And frankly it's sad. We have NATO, and we have many countries that aren't paying for what they're supposed to be paying, which is already too little, but they're not paying anyway. And we're giving them a free ride or giving them a ride where they owe us tremendous amounts of money. And they have the money. But they're not paying it. You know why? Because they think we're stupid-CHUCK TODD: So Estonia is paying, and if they get invaded by Russia, you're there? DONALD TRUMP: I feel differently. I feel very differently-CHUCK TODD: But if a country's not doing -- Britain hasn't done the two percent. DONALD TRUMP: We have countries that aren't paying. Now, this goes beyond NATO, because we take care of-- we take care of Japan, we take care of Germany, we take care of South Korea, we take care of Saudi Arabia, and we lose on everything. We lose on everything. If Mitch McConnell says that, then he's wrong. So all I'm saying is they have to pay. Now, a country gets invaded, they haven't paid, everyone says, "Oh, but we have a treaty." Well, they have a treaty too. They're supposed to be paying. We have countries within NATO that are taking advantage of us. With me, I believe they're going to pay. And when they pay, I'm a big believer in NATO. But if they don't pay, we don't have, you know, Chuck, this isn't 40 years ago. This isn't 50 years ago. It's not 30 years ago. We're a different country today. We're much weaker, our military is depleted, we owe tremendous amounts of money. We have to be reimbursed. We can no longer be the stupid country. (END TAPE) CHUCK TODD: When we come back, what Donald Trump says about David Duke, Bernie Sanders, and whether he really plans to spend millions for the sole purpose of defeating Ted Cruz and John Kasich. Sanders about Trump and about his reaction to Tim Kaine becoming Hillary Clinton's running mate. We're in Philadelphia, site of the Democratic National Convention. Stay with us. ***COMMERCIAL BREAK*** CHUCK TODD: Such a beautiful city here. Welcome back. More now of my interview with Donald Trump at The Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey. And since we had a limited amount of time, I ended up speeding things up by asking Trump for some quick reaction to simply some very prominent names in the news. 9/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News (BEGIN TAPE) CHUCK TODD: I'm just going to literally throw out a name and you'll know the question I'm asking. Bernie Sanders. DONALD TRUMP: Great respect for what he's done. He is being taken advantage of, and frankly, the system was rigged, and I'm the first one to say it was rigged against him. And by the way-CHUCK TODD: You took after him. You took after him. You said for supporting Hillary Clinton, you think he needs to-DONALD TRUMP: Well, I'm not a fan of Bernie Sanders. But I am a fan of one thing that he talks about: Trade. He is the only one on that side that understands trade. Now, he can't do anything about it because that's not his thing. But he has been gamed. He has been, it's a rigged system against him. And what happened with the choice of Tim Kaine was a slap in the face to Bernie Sanders and everybody. I was shocked. I love it from my standpoint, I love-CHUCK TODD: Why do you love the Kaine pick? DONALD TRUMP: Well, first of all, he took over $160,000 of gifts. And they said, "Well, they weren't really gifts, they were suits and trips and lots of different things," all for 160-CHUCK TODD: Legal, legal in the state of Virginia. DONALD TRUMP: Bob McDonnell-- I believe it was Bob McDonnell, in the meantime, he had to go to the United States Supreme Court to get out of going to jail-CHUCK TODD: Well, they proved to quid pro quo-DONALD TRUMP: --for taking a fraction of what-CHUCK TODD: They proved quid pro quo on that one. DONALD TRUMP: Excuse me, Bob McDonnell took a fraction of what Kaine took. And I think, to me, it's a big problem. Now, how do you take all these gifts? Hundreds of thousands of dollars. The other thing about him, he's bought and owned by the banks. And the third thing, he's in favor of TPP and every other trade deal that he's ever looked at. And that means he wants people not to work. 10/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News Now, he's going to change his tune. And I understand he's now going to say, "I'm against TPP." Hillary Clinton was totally in favor of TPP, which is the job killer, right? So was he. When she watched me on your show and other shows, all of a sudden she changed, because she knows she can't win that in a debate. CHUCK TODD: All right. Ted Cruz, I'm going to amend it, are you really going to fund a super PAC to help defeat him-DONALD TRUMP: Well, it's not the number one thing on my mind. Look, what's on my mind is beating Hillary Clinton. What's on my mind is winning for the Republican Party. With that being said, yeah, I'll probably do a super PAC, you know, when they run against Kasich, for $10 million to $20 million, against Ted Cruz. And maybe one other person that I'm thinking about-CHUCK TODD: Who's that other one person? DONALD TRUMP: --but I won't tell you that. I mean, he's actually such a small person, I hate to give him the publicity. But yes, I will probably do that at the appropriate at time. But I'm not going to do that until-CHUCK TODD: Oh, give me the small person here. DONALD TRUMP: No, no, don't worry about it. We'll give it to you another time. CHUCK TODD: All right, let me ask you about this one. David Duke announced his Senate candidacy claiming your agenda for his own, or essentially saying, "Glad that you spoke out." DONALD TRUMP: Are you ready, before you ask the question? CHUCK TODD: Newt Gingrich said, "Every Republican should repudiate this guy no matter what it takes"-DONALD TRUMP: I did. And I do. Are you ready? I want-CHUCK TODD: Would you support a Democrat over David Duke if that was what was necessary to defeat him? DONALD TRUMP: I guess, depending on who the Democrat, but the answer would be yes. Look, the answer is, as quick as you can say it. In fact, I went to answer you before you- 11/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News DONALD TRUMP: Because last time with another person in your position, I did it very quickly. And they said, "He didn't do it fast enough." Rebuked. Is that okay? Rebuked, done-CHUCK TODD: Rebuked, done. Okay. Tax returns. A lot of conspiracy theories are being out there about why-- what's in your tax returns. You would get rid of all these conspiracy theories tomorrow-DONALD TRUMP: Let me tell you-CHUCK TODD: Probably make people look silly-DONALD TRUMP: Let me tell you. Let me give you a little lesson on tax returns. First of all, you don't learn very much from a tax return. I put in to the federal elections group 100 and some-odd pages of my financials. It showed, as you know, that I'm much wealthier than anybody even understood, okay? Tremendous cash, tremendous assets, tremendous all that stuff. Okay, that's it. I'm going through a routine audit. Just a routine audit, and I've had it for I think 14 years, 13 years-CHUCK TODD: Why? DONALD TRUMP: Every year they audit me. It's routine government. I would never give my tax returns until the audit's finished. But remember this: Mitt Romney, four years ago, was under tremendous pressure to give his tax returns. And he held it and held it and held it, and he fought it, and he, you know, he didn't do too well, okay? But he didn't do anything wrong on his taxes. When he gave his tax returns, people forget, not now. He gave them in September, before the election-CHUCK TODD: So you still might release them-DONALD TRUMP: No, wait a minute, wait a minute. When he did, and his tax returns are a tiny peanut compared to mine, they went through his tax returns. And they found one little sentence, another little-- there was nothing wrong. And they made him look bad. In fact I think he lost his election because of that. CHUCK TODD: Because of the tax returns? DONALD TRUMP: I think he lost. And I'll tell you why: He didn't do anything wrong. Mitt Romney did nothing wrong. But they would take out of, his weren't too big. Have you ever seen mine with the picture, they're like this high? CHUCK TODD: 12/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News I have seen that picture, yes. DONALD TRUMP: Okay, so they took his tax return and they found a couple of little things. Nothing wrong, just standard. And they made him look very bad, very unfair. But with all that said, I'd love to give them, but I'm under audit. When the audit's finished I'll give them. CHUCK TODD: Finally, Roger Ailes. Is he helping you? Is he advising you? DONALD TRUMP: Well, I don't want to comment. But he's been a friend of mine for a long time, and I can tell you that some of the women that are complaining, I know how much he's helped them. And even recently, and when they write books that are fairly recently released, and they say wonderful things about him. And now all of a sudden they're saying these horrible things about him. It's very sad. Because he's a very good person. I've always found him to be just a very, very good person. And by the way, a very, very talented person. Look what he's done. So I feel very badly. But a lot of people are thinking he's going to run my campaign. CHUCK TODD: Yeah, well-DONALD TRUMP: My campaign's doing pretty well. CHUCK TODD: Mr. Trump, until we meet again. DONALD TRUMP: Thank you very much-CHUCK TODD: Thank you for your time, sir, appreciate it. (END TAPE) CHUCK TODD: Up next, the man who had hoped to be the candidate being nominated by Democrats right here in Philadelphia this week, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. What does he think of those leaked DNC e-mails? We'll get his first comments since it happened. We're going to be right back in just a minute. ***COMMERCIAL BREAK*** (BEGIN TAPE) CHUCK TODD: Tremendous shots there of a beautiful city. Welcome back. It's not the kind of thing you want happening days before your convention. This weekend, Wikileaks released nearly 20,000 emails sent and received by members of the Democratic National Committee, some of which seem to confirm what a lot of people had suspected, that the DNC was playing favorites with Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders. 13/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News It appears Wikileaks either stole these emails or got them from a source. Remember, the DNC was hacked a few months ago. Among the emails was one from the DNC's Chief Financial Officer Brad Marshall that was looking ahead to the contests in Kentucky and West Virginia in early May. While not mentioning Sanders specifically by name, the email appeared to question Sanders' faith. He wrote this, quote: "Does he believe in a god? I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist." Well, Sanders has long believed that DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz was in Clinton's corner the whole campaign. Well, he joins me now. Senator Sanders, welcome back to Meet the Press. And I should note that you talked about your belief in God last fall in an interview, I think, with your hometown paper there, so want to get that out of the way. So let me start with this question questioning your faith. Brad Marshall apologized on Facebook. Has anyone apologized to you personally? And what is your response to this entire discussion? BERNIE SANDERS: Well, no, nobody has apologized to me. And as you just mentioned, this really does not come as a shock to me or my supporters. There is no question but the DNC was on Secretary Clinton's side from day one. We all know that. And I think, as I have said a long time ago, that the time is now for Debbie Wasserman Schultz to step aside, not only for these issues. We need a Democratic Party that is open, that's going to bring young people and working people into it, that is going to stand up and take on the big money interests and fight for working families. I don't think Debbie has been that type of leader. So I would hope, and I said this many months ago, that she would-CHUCK TODD: Right. BERNIE SANDERS: --step aside, we would have new leadership. CHUCK TODD: And do you think it needs to happen now, today, before the start of the convention? BERNIE SANDERS: Well-CHUCK TODD: Would that help calm some of your supporters down? BERNIE SANDERS: Well, I think what is already happening is that it's clear she is not going to be speaking to the convention. That is the right thing. I think right now what we have got to focus on as Democrats is defeating perhaps the worst Republican candidate that I have seen in my lifetime. Donald Trump would be a disaster for this country. He must be defeated. We've got to elect Secretary Clinton on every single issue: fighting for the middle class on health care, on climate change, is a far, far superior candidate to Trump. That's where I think the focus has got to be. 14/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News CHUCK TODD: Do you believe that the DNC's apparent favoritism cost you this race? BERNIE SANDERS: Well, I think you-- there are a lot of reasons why one loses. We started off 50 points behind Secretary Clinton. We had the opposition of virtually the entire Democratic leadership in every state in this country. And by the way, in terms of media, we did not get the kind of media attention that somebody like a Donald Trump got, because media is not necessarily interested in the issues facing the middle class, more interested in attacks in personality. So I think there were a lot of reasons. But I will tell you this, Chuck, from the bottom of my heart, I am extraordinarily proud of the campaign that we ran. The issues that we raised, the fact that we got 13 million Americans to vote for a political revolution. People who know the economy is rigged in favor of big money, people who know that our middle class continues to decline and we have to go outside of establishment politics and economics, people who know that we need to reform a broken criminal justice system and we need comprehensive immigration reform. The people-- what we did in our campaign is bring people together to say, "You know what? This country, our government, belongs to all of us and not just a few." So I am very proud of the campaign we ran and the supporters that came on board. CHUCK TODD: So just to sum up here, these leaks, these emails, it hasn't given you any pause about your support for Hillary Clinton? BERNIE SANDERS: No, no, no. We are going to do everything that we can to protect working families in this country. And again, Chuck, I know media is not necessarily focused on these things. But what a campaign is about is not Hillary Clinton, it's not Donald Trump. It is the people of this country, people who are working longer hours for lower wages, people who do not have health care or are underinsured. Hillary Clinton and I have worked together on a higher education proposal which will guarantee free tuition in public colleges and universities for every family in this country making $125,000 a year or less. We're going to fight for paid family and medical leave. Those are the issues that the American people want to hear discussed, and I'm going to go around the country discussing them and making sure that Hillary Clinton is elected president. CHUCK TODD: You know, The Green Party presumptive nominee, Jill Stein, put out a release yesterday about the emails. And she said this: "Democratic Party elites have been caught red-handed, sabotaging a grassroots campaign that tried to bring huge numbers of young people, independents and non-voters into their party. Instead, they have shown exactly why America needs a new major party, a truly democratic party for the people." Are you going to urge your supporters not to support Jill Stein and try to thwart her efforts to recruit your supporters? BERNIE SANDERS: Well, you know, let me just say this. As the longest serving Independent in the history of the United States Congress, as somebody who came into office by defeating an incumbent Democratic mayor in Burlington, Vermont, I know something about third party politics. And I respect Jill. 15/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News But right now, the focus, to my mind, is to make sure that Donald Trump does not become president of the United States. I think by temperament he is unqualified to be president. I think his views-- you have a guy who's running for president who rejects science, doesn't even believe climate change is real, let alone wants to do something about it, wants to give hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks to the top two-tenths of one percent. CHUCK TODD: Let me ask you-BERNIE SANDERS: So my job right now is to see that Donald Trump is defeated, Hillary Clinton is elected. CHUCK TODD: You know, he makes a big deal out of the fact that you and he agree on one big issue, and that is trade deals, that these trade deals have been bad for the country. And he basically says that Clinton and Kaine, as a ticket, aren't-- that their opposition, for instance, the TPP as sort of Johnny-come-lately, that it can't be trusted, and that Sanders supporters should support Trump if they care about trade. What do you say to that? BERNIE SANDERS: Well, I think in terms of who can be trusted, I think the evidence is clear that there has been no candidate that I have ever seen who lies more often than does Donald Trump. I mean and that's just not me saying it, that's what any independent media analysis has shown. So in terms of trust, you really can't trust a word, I think, that Mr. Trump has to say. In terms of the TPP, it is no secret. I think our trade policies, for many, many years, have been a disaster. They have benefited corporate America at the expense of working people. Secretary Clinton has come out in opposition to the TPP, does not want to see it-CHUCK TODD: Right. BERNIE SANDERS: --appear in the lame duck Congress. That's my view, as well. CHUCK TODD: You know, some of your supporters are disappointed in the pick of Tim Kaine, that he's not progressive enough. I know Tim Kaine called you after he was picked. Do you consider Tim Kaine a progressive? And are you happy with this pick? BERNIE SANDERS: Look, you know, the pick is Secretary Clinton's. I've known Tim Kaine for a number of years. We've served in the Senate together, obviously. Tim is a very, very smart guy. He's a very nice guy. His political views are not my political views. He is more conservative than I am. Would I have preferred to see somebody like an Elizabeth Warren selected by Secretary Clinton? Yes, I would have. CHUCK TODD: 16/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News And then finally, do you feel as if, that you, when you got Glass-Steagall, I wanted to ask about this, because it looks like the one thing that both parties may agree on in their platforms is putting-- is being in favor of reinstating Glass-Steagall. Does this mean we will see that happen in the next Congress? BERNIE SANDERS: Well, I'm going to do everything that I can to make it happen. You know, when we talk about our campaign, one of the things that we have been able to do, Chuck, is create the most progressive Democratic platform in the history of the Democratic Party, and that includes breaking up the large Wall Street banks and reestablishing Glass-Steagall. I think the American people understand that we cannot continue to have a handful of reckless, irresponsible banks often acting illegally, that something has to happen. They have to be broken up. CHUCK TODD: All right, Senator Bernie Sanders. The big speech is tomorrow night. We'll be waiting for you here in a very, very hot Philadelphia, over 100 degrees. BERNIE SANDERS: Okay. CHUCK TODD: Senator Sanders, thanks for coming on. Good to see you, sir. BERNIE SANDERS: Thank you very much. CHUCK TODD: When we come back, reaction to Hillary Clinton's choice of Tim Kaine as a running mate, who showed why he might have appeal, unique appeal, to a very important voting bloc. (BEGIN TAPE) SEN. TIM KAINE: Aprendilo valores de mi pueblo--faith, familia, y trabajo. (END TAPE) CHUCK TODD And we'll be back in a moment from Philadelphia with this great panel. Rachel Maddow, Michael Steele, Andrea Mitchell, and Chris Matthews. Stay tuned. (END TAPE) CHUCK TODD: And we'll be back in a moment from Philadelphia with this great panel, Rachel Maddow, Michael Steele, Andrea Mitchell, and Chris Matthews. Stay tuned. ***COMMERCIAL TAPE*** CHUCK TODD: We are back. So much to talk about already. Our panel is here, Rachel Maddow, host of The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC, former chairman of the Republican National Committee, Michael Steele, he's sort of the fish out of 17/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News water here in Philadelphia. Andrea Mitchell, NBC News, Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent, host, of course, of Andrea Mitchell Reports on MSNBC. And a Philadelphia native himself, Mr. Brotherly Love Chris Matthews, host of Hardball-RACHEL MADDOW: Mr. Brotherly Love? CHRIS MATTHEWS: And sisterly affection. CHUCK TODD: --Sisterly affection here for the Penn grad. CHUCK TODD: And-- this morning by the way we have new pictures of Tim Kaine walking into church this morning in Richmond, Virginia. He now realizes, and now his parish is realizing, what it's like to have Secret Service following around a member of the parish there. All right. RACHEL MADDOW: Know what his Secret Service name is going to be yet? CHUCK TODD: What do we think the code name should be? ANDREA MITCHELL: But we're not sure-RACHEL MADDOW: Well, the big joke was that if you're boring enough, your Secret Service name is Tim Kaine. CHUCK TODD: Ooh. RACHEL MADDOW: Right? That-CHUCK TODD: Those are old Johnny Carson and Jay Leno, Al Gore jokes-CHUCK TODD: All right, you guys are having already too much fun. RACHEL MADDOW: Sorry, sorry. CHUCK TODD: Let me just throw it out here. We heard what Bernie Sanders said about Tim Kaine. It was, that was tougher than I expected. RACHEL MADDOW: 18/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News "His politics are not my politics." ANDREA MITCHELL: That's really -RACHEL MADDOW: "He does not share my political views." That's an aggressive take from Bernie. I'm not surprised. Bernie's an aggressive politician. And I think when Senator Sanders speaks at the DNC, I think everybody's going to be on the edge of their seat. I think that he is not going to pull a Ted Cruz because he's already made an endorsement. CHUCK TODD: Well, he said, "I'm for Hillary," and he was tough on Trump. RACHEL MADDOW: Yeah. And but he doesn't relish going after Trump. He likes going after the Democratic Party to try to move the Democratic Party. That's his target, always has been. MICHAEL STEELE: It's still obvious, he's not 'Feeling the Bern' for Hillary. And that was very obvious. And when you asked about the trust question, he didn't say he trusted Hillary Clinton. He said he didn't trust Donald Trump. So the reality of it is there's still some tension there that Bernie is reflecting among his supporters. And it was evident there. I mean-RACHEL MADDOW: He's got a mission that's bigger than one election. He always has. MICHAEL STEELE: That's true. ANDREA MITCHELL: And in fact, he could quiet the march that is planned to go from the center of Center City, and Rittenhouse Square all the way down at Independence Hall. This march is going to disrupt the city today, no matter how peaceful, because this is a city, in 100-degree heat, that is planning for a convention. And it's going to be a very large outpouring. He also said-CHUCK TODD: And by the way, the hotter it is, the crankier people will be. ANDREA MITCHELL: Yeah. And he also says that Tim Kaine doesn't share his politics, not only that, but that he would have preferred Elizabeth Warren. He made it very clear; Tim Kaine is a nice guy, but he's not endorsing or embracing someone who Hillary Clinton -CHUCK TODD: There's a painful look in your face, Chris. ANDREA MITCHELL: --called Tim Kaine a progressive. 19/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News CHRIS MATTHEWS: He didn't get to pick. Hillary Clinton did. And I've watched Hillary Clinton. I've watched a lot of politicians over the years. You can tell when they're actually happy, not when they fake the laugh or anything else. She looked delighted during his speech yesterday. And I haven't seen her that delighted in a long time. She had found her guy to be her running mate. I think she loved it. And I think one thing we're getting all excited about, I understand why the progressives are upset. But one thing historically we all know is the selection of a vice president is a poor predictor of the direction of that administration. RACHEL MADDOW: Yeah. CHRIS MATTHEWS: FDR picked John Nance Garner-RACHEL MADDOW: It's not a policy pick. CHRIS MATTHEWS: Kennedy picked another conservative from the south, Lyndon Johnson, relatively conservative. And then we got the New Deal out of that and we got the Great Society we got the New Frontier. It's a poor predictor. Now, if this is about spoils, they've got an argument. They wanted a piece of the action. But there's differences between spoils and direction. CHUCK TODD: I want to throw out the one thing that Trump's trying to hit Kaine on, well, two things. But the one big one is the gifts in Virginia. RACHEL MADDOW: Yeah. CHUCK TODD: I only throw it out there is that I heard Ed Rendell ask to defend it. And he struggled, Andrea. He said, "Well, it's illegal in Pennsylvania." ANDREA MITCHELL: Virginia-CHUCK TODD: Okay. And it's legal in Virginia. That wasn't exactly a resounding defense. ANDREA MITCHELL: Yeah. Virginia has a very strange, let's face it, strange gift law. The difference with Bob McDonnell, who was convicted, and then the Supreme Court overturned it, is there was no quid pro quo. He declared it. That was the main thing. He declared everything, put it down, in fact, computed higher numbers to staying in friends' houses. He put everything down. He was meticulous about it. So they don't think there's a big ethics thing. Just on his progressivity or lack of it, he has this civil rights background. I mean I was in the room. And what you saw on T.V. yesterday in Miami, in that largely Hispanic campus, that wonderful 20/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News campus in Miami, it was extraordinary. The enthusiasm for him and the affection. And having watched her all of these years, you're absolutely right, Chris-CHUCK TODD: You know-ANDREA MITCHELL: --she found her guy. She was a happy camper. RACHEL MADDOW: He's not a progressive, but they will tell a very progressive story about his history. The party has moved to the left while he sort of always been a solid liberal. CHUCK TODD: Both of them are trying to-ANDREA MITCHELL: Yeah. CHUCK TODD: I feel like both Clinton and Kaine are trying to catch up to the party's movement. CHRIS MATTHEWS: That's so true. ANDREA MITCHELL: Well, on guns he was always there. He was heroic in Virginia on gun laws. CHUCK TODD: That they're moving-- and Michael, let me ask you this. The Trump camping says, "We love the Kaine pick." And here's their reasoning. They love the Kaine pick because it reinforces that they're the political professionals, that here's Tim Kaine, and all he's done in life, is been in office for the last 25 years. MICHAEL STEELE: Right. CHUCK TODD: And the whole point of Trump is Trump's Mr. "I'm the total outsider." If they want to double down on that, fine, go ahead. What do you say? RACHEL MADDOW: Except Mike Pence MICHAEL STEELE: Right, right, right. CHUCK TODD: They pay no attention to that. I brought that brought to them. I said, "What about Pence?" And they're like, "Well, it's the top of the ticket." 21/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News MICHAEL STEELE: "Ignore that man behind the curtain." CHUCK TODD: What do you say to that? Did they have a point or not? MICHAEL STEELE: Well, they'll have a-- I think the broader point, is an interesting one. Because what he's comparing himself-- he's comparing himself, Trump, to Kaine-CHUCK TODD: Right. MICHAEL STEELE: --and Clinton. So it's me and against them. CHUCK TODD: Yeah. MICHAEL STEELE: Pence is not a part of that equation, necessarily. RACHEL MADDOW: Yeah. MICHAEL STEELE: So when he's talking about the maverick, the outsider, he's-- he's assuming his ticket is total that. ANDREA MITCHELL: Well, Pence wasn't even a part of his own rollout. MICHAEL STEELE: Right. ANDREA MITCHELL: If you remember. And that was-RACHEL MADDOW: He couldn't get a word in edgewise. ANDREA MITCHELL: Hillary Clinton spoke about Tim Kaine-MICHAEL STEELE: I think their strength, Chuck, is gonna be on the argument-- this notion that Tim Kaine is progressive is just not believable. And for a whole host of reasons. I think that's an opening for a lot of folks on Trump's side. RACHEL MADDOW: You can, there are element of his record that are not progressive, but on balance, I would argue that he is. 22/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News ANDREA MITCHELL: I would argue that too. CHRIS MATTHEWS: But one thing, the guy's two doors from you, if you're president. Look at the structure of the West Wing now. It's not some guy that goes back to Maine like Lincoln's first vice president. He or she is right with you. MICHAEL STEELE: Right. CHRIS MATTHEWS: You want a good person two doors for you, somebody who has values. And it's not just smart politics. I think what Hillary Clinton's going to love having is a guy who's a true blue good guy. And I think he is a progressive on all the moral issues-CHUCK TODD: Let's sneak in a break here. When we come back, I want to get into the DNC e-mail situation. And I also want to get your guys' reaction to some interesting comments from Donald Trump. Yeah, you know that guy that was at the start of the show. We'll be right back. ***COMMERCIAL BREAK*** CHUCK TODD: Welcome back, panelists here. Before we jump to Trump, the DNC email leaks, Cleveland, we expected rowdiness, Never Trumpsters, and all that stuff. We expect order here. But I wonder, Rachel, if-- look, I'm hearing from the Bernie bros. I'm in one of the emails just-- I'm the complaint department here sometimes at NBC. Somebody was complaining about coverage. And I said, "Okay, let's talk on the phone," or whatever. But we didn't do anything about it, because I get complaints about coverage every hour, every day. RACHEL MADDOW: Yeah. CHUCK TODD: But I think Bernie supporters may like this place, at least outside. They may be upset, and they may do something about it. RACHEL MADDOW: Yeah. I mean and, you know, there will be that big protest that Andrea was talking about today, to start things off. And there will be a lot, there will be hundreds of Bernie delegates insides the room. Now honestly, from the top, down, he said, "We've got to elect Hillary Clinton." He's been unequivocal about that, that's the most important thing. It'll be interesting to see whether the rules fights and the platform fights end up, in the end, when there's need to get nailed down with those votes, there is some dissent and chaos there. There might be. CHRIS MATTHEWS: One thing is-CHUCK TODD: 23/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News Do you think Debbie Wasserman Schultz needs to get out now? CHRIS MATTHEWS: Well, look-CHUCK TODD: Not even gavel it in? CHRIS MATTHEWS: This is not a mystery story. This isn't Colombo. CHUCK TODD: Yeah. CHRIS MATTHEWS: We knew from the beginning, watching the debate schedule, put together by the DNC-CHUCK TODD: Sure. CHRIS MATTHEWS: --that they were tilting the scales to Hillary Clinton. Middle of the night debates, Sunday morning -- it was an absurd debate schedule. And it just said, "We're for Hillary, we don't want the new guy to get all the attention." ANDREA MITCHELL: And what Bernie said to you is that she's not going to be giving a speech. When does the party chair not give a speech at the convention? And apparently that is the case. CHUCK TODD: And then right now, though, they will gavel in. RACHEL MADDOW: Thank god we haven't-- her quitting right now before -- I mean, the DNC's gonna be running a big part of the ground game for the whole-CHRIS MATTHEWS: Yeah. RACHEL MADDOW: You know, you don't-CHUCK TODD: But I tell you, this-RACHEL MADDOW: It would be suicide for the chair to jump out now-CHUCK TODD: This doesn't help her own fight for reelection, which I still think she's going to be okay. 24/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News RACHEL MADDOW: No, but-CHUCK TODD: It's a district that she knows very well. But-ANDREA MITCHELL: But Bernie endorsed her opponent. RACHEL MADDOW: But her reelection fight is in her district. CHRIS MATTHEWS: Right. RACHEL MADDOW: It's not to be the chair of the DNC, that's next year. CHUCK TODD: All right. Michael Steele, what'd you hear from Donald Trump? Did it make you feel better or worse about his chances? MICHAEL STEELE: Well, I think Donald Trump did a couple of things he needed to do. One was, and you could see it in the room that night, people began to say, "Okay, I can get there." The speech that he gave, when you read it, seemed a lot darker and harsher than when he delivered it. He delivered it in a way-RACHEL MADDOW: I thought the opposite. MICHAEL STEELE: Yeah, yeah. RACHEL MADDOW: When reading it, I wasn't freaked out. MICHAEL STEELE: Yeah. RACHEL MADDOW: And then, when I saw him give it, I pulled the covers up. MICHAEL STEELE: No, for me, it was the reverse. Because the reaction. I'm sitting in the room and I'm getting the reaction from the crowd. RACHEL MADDOW: Mmm. MICHAEL STEELE: 25/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News And the reaction from the crowd was, "This guy is going to be a fighter." And I think that's a strong message for him coming out of this convention. CHRIS MATTHEWS: Rachel, you have never pulled the covers up. RACHEL MADDOW:Oh no, I meant proverbially CHUCK TODD:There's a lot of personal information here. Woah, it's Sunday morning, guys. MICHAEL STEELE: I thought he did what he needed to do, Chuck. I do. RACHEL MADDOW: Standing under those 15-foot-tall letters with Trump, and then his head comes up there. And then he spent 76 minutes screaming, red faced, about terrorism and death and destruction and "I'm the only one who can fix it"-CHRIS MATTHEWS: I think that was technical. I don't think he knew how to read a script like that. I don't think he had the ability to-- his daughter knew how to do it. It's tough to read a script in a conversational manner. So you end up doing this sort of scream thing. RACHEL MADDOW: But it takes an ego to turn a 30 minute script into a 78 minute rant. ANDREA MITCHELL: But he said that he was the person who would fix everything. And they're focusing on that. But, you know, Kaine was focusing on that. You know, it is the "we" not the I. They're comparing him to a dictator. MICHAEL STEELE: But the-ANDREA MITCHELL: It is the language and the delivery, Michael-MICHAEL STEELE: Don't lose sight of the fact that a lot of Americans out there are saying it is the "we" who screwed us up to this point. CHRIS MATTHEWS: Yeah. MICHAEL STEELE: It is the we who've gotten us into this mess. ANDREA MITCHELL: It's a different way of defining democracy, Michael. MICHAEL STEELE: 26/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News So they're looking for the I, someone who's going to step forward as a leader, to get us through this mess. This is the bifurcation of the of the population, the voting population right now. And it's going to be interesting to see which one of these arguments win-RACHEL MADDOW: Is this about the hunger for a strong man, is that what you're talking about? MICHAEL STEELE:Yeah no, there really is Rachel. RACHEL MADDOW:We've seen this around the world, it's not supposed to be us. CHRIS MATTHEWS: I've heard Bernie make your point. MICHAEL STEELE: Yes! CHRIS MATTHEWS: It's that we have to reach outside the establishment to get the solution to these really bad economic problems affecting the working people of this country. MICHAEL STEELE: Right. CHRIS MATTHEWS: Same message. Different sides. MICHAEL STEELE:Same message. RACHEL MADDOW: Same message. The question is whether or not one man is supposed to deliver salvation for the country. We're not supposed to be that kind of country. CHUCK TODD: I want to throw one more. He seemed, at least in the interview with me, he goes after Mitch McConnell, goes after Ted Cruz, goes after John Kasich. ANDREA MITCHELL: He is fearless in that regard. CHUCK TODD:He really is. ANDREA MITCHELL: He is not going to moderate himself. RACHEL MADDOW: You didn't even ask about Kasich. And he's bringing it up CHUCK TODD: No, exactly. He brought Kasich up himself. ANDREA MITCHELL: 27/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News And another player to be named player, who, you know, remain -- could be one of the senators like Jeff Flake. Look, the fact is that he is not playing by anybody's ground rules except Donald Trump's. What he said about N.A.T.O. was extraordinary because he doubled down on that. And the whole system of collect your security in Europe, if you're in Poland today, you are not reassured-CHUCK TODD: What's amazing is the Trump campaign tried to walk it back all last week on the N.A.T.O. stuff. And he's basically saying, "Don't walk it back." RACHEL MADDOW: Even beyond N.A.T.O. to talk about Europe as a threat to America is what's good for Europe is bad for America and we have an interest in Europe being weak and divided, they only got together to screw us? Like, hold on a second. CHRIS MATTHEWS: Yeah, it'll play in Scranton. It'll play up there in the Eerie, Pennsylvania it'll play. RACHEL MADDOW: The European Union-- came out of the way to try to not have World War III. CHRIS MATTHEWS: Because people think we're being shoved around and exploited and he's saying, "I'm going to shove back." ANDREA MITCHELL: They are our markets-- markets, allies-CHUCK TODD: You guys great. I'm going to try to get another half hour. But let me sneak in this. We'll be back in a moment with our-- we'll call it halftime segment. No, it's Endgame Segment. And we'll look at Hillary Clinton's popularity compared to other Democratic nominees on the eve of their conventions. ***COMMERCIAL BREAK*** CHUCK TODD: The panel never stops interacting here. Seriously we just went to a commercial break-RACHEL MADDOW: --wants more with France! CHUCK TODD: It's endgame time. Look, I want to show you here very quickly some numbers, because it will help us judge whether this is a successful convention for Hillary Clinton. These are favorable ratings, personal favorable ratings, whether you're right side up or upside down, from our NBC Wall Street Journal poll, for every Democrat going back to '92. And as you can see, Hillary Clinton in the worst shape of any presumptive nominee going into their convention. Now, let me show you what everybody else came through after their convention. So successful convention for Bill Clinton, successful one for Al Gore. Flat for John Kerry, successful, Barack Obama. Obviously, we'll find out, for Hillary Clinton, what does she need to- 28/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News ANDREA MITCHELL: Well, what they are going to do is they're going to have gauzy films, the same kind of films you saw in 1992, the same producers-CHUCK TODD: And JFK? ANDREA MITCHELL: They're going to have all of these films, biography, résumé. They know that her résumé is not resonating with millennials. People know what she did, they don't know-- they know the list of what she was. They don't know what she actually did, what she accomplished. CHRIS MATTHEWS: Yeah. ANDREA MITCHELL: They're going to do all of that. The balance is going to be very different. RACHEL MADDOW: --because T.V. networks don't always take the movies anymore-ANDREA MITCHELL: Well, they're going to have to validators. RACHEL MADDOW: Yeah. ANDREA MITCHELL: They're going to have people on that podium behind it who are going to talk about things she has done for them. And it's going to be very much all about her and much less about taking down Trump CHRIS MATTHEWS: I think the magic moment in this convention's going to be Thursday night. And a lot of women, and a lot of men, too, are going to see Hillary Clinton as the first party nominee, who's probably going to be like the president. She has the advantage right now. And there are going to be misty eyes all across the country. And any men at that moment who make a wisecrack are going to be guaranteeing another vote for Hillary Clinton. I think it's a very emotional moment for people. They've haven't quite got to it because of all is mishegas that's gone on this year. I think it's going to be magical. And if Hillary Clinton just stands there with a little emotion, this is an amazing historic moment. CHUCK TODD: Michael was the Republican convention too anti-Clinton and not enough proTrump? MICHAEL STEELE: No. The Republican convention had to go anti-Clinton-CHUCK TODD: 29/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News Had to do that? MICHAEL STEELE: --because of the Trump issues. CHUCK TODD: What about this one? MICHAEL STEELE: This one? I was thinking, as you guys were talking about Barack Obama and talking about Hillary Clinton being likable enough, this is going to be a convention in which they're going to showcase her so you can like her. Because people, those numbers show, don't like her. So it's going to be everything you just said, Chris, plus more. The problem is what happens afterwards. And that's where Hillary Clinton's going to have to contine . CHUCK TODD: Here's an out question for all of you. Besides Hillary Clinton's speech, what will be the other buzziest speech or speaker when we walk away from this convention? RACHEL MADDOW: We're going to have a huge one on night one. Bernie is a big deal. MICHAEL STEELE: Bernie. RACHEL MADDOW: The Democratic Party is going through a transformation. Liberals are having their moment. And this convention has to reflect it. CHRIS MATTHEWS: Every Democratic convention I can remember, going back to, God, '64, the best speech was never given by the nominee, whether it's Bobby Kennedy or it's Jesse Jackson, or it's Mario Cuomo. MICHAEL STEELE: Right. CHRIS MATTHEWS: The candidates never have been able to deliver the best speech. So I would bet on Bernie. RACHEL MADDOW: It was Trump Jr. last week. CHRIS MATTHEWS: Bernie or President Obama. ANDREA MITCHELL: Michelle Obama and Barack Obama on day two. CHUCK TODD: 30/31 2/9/2017 Meet the Press - July 24, 2016 - NBC News I think it's Barack Obama on Wednesday night. I think it's going to be to Hillary Clinton what Bill Clinton was to Barack Obama four years ago. All right. That's all for this Sunday morning. CHRIS MATTHEWS: We agree. CHUCK TODD: I'll be hosting a special edition of Meet the Press Daily tonight at 5:00 Eastern on MSNBC. I know that's what everybody on this table will be watching. And then, throughout the week, I'll be joined by my colleagues Lester Holt and Savannah Guthrie right here at The Wells Fargo Center for convention coverage on the network beginning at 10:00 Eastern, 7:00 Pacific. If you missed it last week, you should be regretting it. Watch us this week. And of course we'll be back next Sunday. Because if it is Sunday, Meet the Press. * * *END OF TRANSCRIPT* * * TOPICS FIRST READ FIRST PUBLISHED JUL 24 2016, 11:47 AM ET  NEXT STORY First Read: How the Email Saga Sums Up the Clintons More to Explore Sponsored Links by Taboola My Car is Made Where? 10 Vehicles With Surprising Birthplaces Kelley Blue Book Mysteries That Not Even Science Can Explain (Photos) History Fanatic A Radical Solution to the Dead Mall Phenomenon? FTI Journal FROM THE WEB (Sponsored) MORE FROM NBC NEWS Biotech That Could Turn Painkiller Market into 'Gold Rush' Finance Spotlight The IRS Announces 2017 Standard Mileage Rates TurboTax Peace of Mind is Priceless A Healthier Lasagna with Butternut Squash and Spinach Kraft Recipes Learn More About Spring Skiing and Plan a Trip Vail Resorts Trump Offers to 'Destroy' Texas State Senator's Career Father Killed in Front of Son During Craigslist Meet-Up Emotional Reunions at Logan Following Lift of Travel Ban Grand Jury Indicts Man in Shooting Death of Ex-Jets Player WNBC Chuck Todd: Donald Trump may find the federal courts to be his biggest r… Promoted Links by Taboola 31/31 EXHIBIT 16 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri Like 13K Tweet Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri October 9, 2016 PARTICIPANTS: Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D) and Businessman Donald Trump (R) MODERATORS: Anderson Cooper (CNN) and Martha Raddatz (ABC News) Location: RADDATZ: Ladies and gentlemen the Republican nominee for president, Donald J. Trump, and the Democratic nominee for president, Hillary Clinton. [applause] Document Archive • Public Papers of the Presidents • State of the Union Addresses & Messages • Inaugural Addresses • Farewell Addresses • Weekly Addresses • Fireside Chats • News Conferences • Executive Orders • Proclamations • Signing Statements • Press Briefings • Statements of Administration Policy • Economic Report of the President • Debates • Convention Speeches • Party Platforms • 2016 Election Documents • 2012 Election Documents • 2008 Election Documents • 2004 Election Documents • 1960 Election Documents • 2017 Transition • 2009 Transition • 2001 Transition Data Archive COOPER: Thank you very much for being here. We're going to begin with a question from one of the members in our town hall. Each of you will have two minutes to respond to this question. United States Missouri Font Size: Secretary Clinton, you won the coin toss, so you'll go first. Our first question comes from Patrice Brock. Patrice? QUESTION: Thank you, and good evening. The last debate could have been rated as MA, mature audiences, per TV parental guidelines. Knowing that educators assign viewing the presidential debates as students' homework, do you feel you're modeling appropriate and positive behavior for today's youth? Share The American Presidency Project CLINTON: Well, thank you. Are you a teacher? Yes, I think that that's a very good question, because I've heard from lots of teachers and parents about some of their concerns about some of the things that are being said and done in this campaign. And I think it is very important for us to make clear to our children that our country really is great because we're good. And we are going to respect one another, lift each other up. We are going to be looking for ways to celebrate our diversity, and we are going to try to reach out to every boy and girl, as well as every adult, to bring them in to working on behalf of our country. Data Index Media Archive I have a very positive and optimistic view about what we can do together. That's why the slogan of my campaign is "Stronger Together," because I think if we work together, if we overcome the Audio/Video Index divisiveness that sometimes sets Americans against one another, and instead we make some big goals—and I've set forth Election Index Florida 2000 some big goals, getting the economy to work for everyone, not just those at the top, making sure that we have the best education system from preschool through college and making it affordable, and so much else. Elections Links Presidential Libraries View Public Papers by Month and Year Month Year Promote Your Page Too If we set those goals and we go together to try to achieve them, there's nothing in my opinion that America can't do. So that's why I hope that we will come together in this campaign. Obviously, I'm hoping to earn your vote, I'm hoping to be elected in November, and I can promise you, I will work with every American. INCLUDE documents from the Office of the Press Secretary I want to be the president for all Americans, regardless of your political beliefs, where you come from, what you look like, your religion. I want us to heal our country and bring it together because that's, I think, the best way for us to get the future that our children and our grandchildren deserve. INCLUDE election campaign documents COOPER: Secretary Clinton, thank you. Mr. Trump, you have two minutes. View PPPUS Search the Entire Document Archive Enter keyword: TRUMP: Well, I actually agree with that. I agree with everything she said. I began this campaign because I was so tired of seeing such foolish things happen to our country. This is a great country. This is a great land. I've gotten to know the people of the country over the last year-and-a-half that I've been doing this as a politician. I cannot believe I'm saying that about myself, but I guess I have been a politician. 1/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri AND OR NOT Limit by Year From: 1789 To : 2017 Limit results per page 30 INCLUDE documents from the Office of the Press Secretary INCLUDE election campaign documents Search Instructions You can search the Public Papers in two ways: And my whole concept was to make America great again. When I watch the deals being made, when I watch what's happening with some horrible things like Obamacare, where your health insurance and health care is going up by numbers that are astronomical, 68 percent, 59 percent, 71 percent, when I look at the Iran deal and how bad a deal it is for us, it's a one-sided transaction where we're giving back $150 billion to a terrorist state, really, the number one terror state, we've made them a strong country from really a very weak country just three years ago. When I look at all of the things that I see and all of the potential that our country has, we have such tremendous potential, whether it's in business and trade, where we're doing so badly. Last year, we had almost $800 billion trade deficit. In other words, trading with other countries. We had an $800 billion deficit. It's hard to believe. Inconceivable. You say who's making these deals? We're going the make great deals. We're going to have a strong border. We're going to bring back law and order. Just today, policemen was shot, two killed. And this is happening on a weekly basis. We have to bring back respect to law enforcement. At the same time, we have to take care of people on all sides. We need justice. But I want to do things that haven't been done, including fixing and making our inner cities better for the African-American citizens that are so great, and for the Latinos, Hispanics, and I look forward to doing it. It's called make America great again. 1. Search by Keyword and Year You can search by keyword and choose the range of years within your search by filling out the boxes under Search the Public Papers. COOPER: Thank you, Mr. Trump. The question from Patrice was about are you both modeling positive and appropriate 2. View by Month and/or Year Select the month and/or year you would like information about and press View Public Papers. Then choose a Public Paper and the page will load for you. I apologize to my family. I apologize to the American people. Certainly I'm not proud of it. But this is locker room talk. Search Engine provided by the Harry S. Truman Library. Our thanks to Jim Borwick and Dr. Rafee Che Kassim at Project Whistlestop for critical assistance in the implementation of the search function, and to Scott Roley at the Truman Library for facilitating this collaboration. at our country and they see what's going on. behavior for today's youth? We received a lot of questions online, Mr. Trump, about the tape that was released on Friday, as you can imagine. You called what you said locker room banter. You described kissing women without consent, grabbing their genitals. That is sexual assault. You bragged that you have sexually assaulted women. Do you understand that? TRUMP: No, I didn't say that at all. I don't think you understood what was—this was locker room talk. I'm not proud of it. You know, when we have a world where you have ISIS chopping off heads, where you have—and, frankly, drowning people in steel cages, where you have wars and horrible, horrible sights all over, where you have so many bad things happening, this is like medieval times. We haven't seen anything like this, the carnage all over the world. And they look and they see. Can you imagine the people that are, frankly, doing so well against us with ISIS? And they look Yes, I'm very embarrassed by it. I hate it. But it's locker room talk, and it's one of those things. I will knock the hell out of ISIS. We're going to defeat ISIS. ISIS happened a number of years ago in a vacuum that was left because of bad judgment. And I will tell you, I will take care of ISIS. COOPER: So, Mr. Trump... TRUMP: And we should get on to much more important things and much bigger things. COOPER: Just for the record, though, are you saying that what you said on that bus 11 years ago that you did not actually kiss women without consent or grope women without consent? TRUMP: I have great respect for women. Nobody has more respect for women than I do. COOPER: So, for the record, you're saying you never did that? TRUMP: I've said things that, frankly, you hear these things I said. And I was embarrassed by it. But I have tremendous respect for women. COOPER: Have you ever done those things? TRUMP: And women have respect for me. And I will tell you: No, I have not. And I will tell you that I'm going to make our country safe. We're going to have borders in our country, which we don't have now. People are pouring into our country, and they're coming in from the Middle East and other places. We're going to make America safe again. We're going to make America great again, but we're going to make America safe again. And we're going to make America wealthy again, because if you don't do that, it just—it sounds harsh to say, but we have to build up the wealth of our nation. COOPER: Thank you, Mr. Trump. TRUMP: Right now, other nations are taking our jobs and they're taking our wealth. COOPER: Thank you, Mr. Trump. 2/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri TRUMP: And that's what I want to talk about. COOPER: Secretary Clinton, do you want to respond? CLINTON: Well, like everyone else, I've spent a lot of time thinking over the last 48 hours about what we heard and saw. You know, with prior Republican nominees for president, I disagreed with them on politics, policies, principles, but I never questioned their fitness to serve. Donald Trump is different. I said starting back in June that he was not fit to be president and commander-in-chief. And many Republicans and independents have said the same thing. What we all saw and heard on Friday was Donald talking about women, what he thinks about women, what he does to women. And he has said that the video doesn't represent who he is. But I think it's clear to anyone who heard it that it represents exactly who he is. Because we've seen this throughout the campaign. We have seen him insult women. We've seen him rate women on their appearance, ranking them from one to ten. We've seen him embarrass women on TV and on Twitter. We saw him after the first debate spend nearly a week denigrating a former Miss Universe in the harshest, most personal terms. So, yes, this is who Donald Trump is. But it's not only women, and it's not only this video that raises questions about his fitness to be our president, because he has also targeted immigrants, African- Americans, Latinos, people with disabilities, POWs, Muslims, and so many others. So this is who Donald Trump is. And the question for us, the question our country must answer is that this is not who we are. That's why—to go back to your question—I want to send a message—we all should—to every boy and girl and, indeed, to the entire world that America already is great, but we are great because we are good, and we will respect one another, and we will work with one another, and we will celebrate our diversity. These are very important values to me, because this is the America that I know and love. And I can pledge to you tonight that this is the America that I will serve if I'm so fortunate enough to become your president. RADDATZ: And we want to get to some questions from online... TRUMP: Am I allowed to respond to that? I assume I am. RADDATZ: Yes, you can respond to that. TRUMP: It's just words, folks. It's just words. Those words, I've been hearing them for many years. I heard them when they were running for the Senate in New York, where Hillary was going to bring back jobs to upstate New York and she failed. I've heard them where Hillary is constantly talking about the inner cities of our country, which are a disaster educationwise, jobwise, safety-wise, in every way possible. I'm going to help the African-Americans. I'm going to help the Latinos, Hispanics. I am going to help the inner cities. She's done a terrible job for the African-Americans. She wants their vote, and she does nothing, and then she comes back four years later. We saw that firsthand when she was United States senator. She campaigned where the primary part of her campaign... RADDATZ: Mr. Trump, Mr. Trump—I want to get to audience questions and online questions. TRUMP: So, she's allowed to do that, but I'm not allowed to respond? RADDATZ: You're going to have—you're going to get to respond right now. TRUMP: Sounds fair. RADDATZ: This tape is generating intense interest. In just 48 hours, it's become the single most talked about story of the entire 2016 election on Facebook, with millions and millions of people discussing it on the social network. As we said a moment ago, we do want to bring in questions from voters around country via social media, and our first stays on this topic. Jeff from Ohio asks on Facebook, "Trump says the campaign has changed him. When did that happen?" So, Mr. Trump, let me add to that. When you walked off that bus at age 59, were you a different man or did that behavior continue until just recently? And you have two minutes for this. TRUMP: It was locker room talk, as I told you. That was locker room talk. I'm not proud of it. I am a person who has great respect for people, for my family, for the people of this country. And certainly, I'm not proud of it. But that was something that happened. 3/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri If you look at Bill Clinton, far worse. Mine are words, and his was action. His was what he's done to women. There's never been anybody in the history politics in this nation that's been so abusive to women. So you can say any way you want to say it, but Bill Clinton was abusive to women. Hillary Clinton attacked those same women and attacked them viciously. Four of them here tonight. One of the women, who is a wonderful woman, at 12 years old, was raped at 12. Her client she represented got him off, and she's seen laughing on two separate occasions, laughing at the girl who was raped. Kathy Shelton, that young woman is here with us tonight. So don't tell me about words. I am absolutely—I apologize for those words. But it is things that people say. But what President Clinton did, he was impeached, he lost his license to practice law. He had to pay an $850,000 fine to one of the women. Paula Jones, who's also here tonight. And I will tell you that when Hillary brings up a point like that and she talks about words that I said 11 years ago, I think it's disgraceful, and I think she should be ashamed of herself, if you want to know the truth. [applause] RADDATZ: Can we please hold the applause? Secretary Clinton, you have two minutes. CLINTON: Well, first, let me start by saying that so much of what he's just said is not right, but he gets to run his campaign any way he chooses. He gets to decide what he wants to talk about. Instead of answering people's questions, talking about our agenda, laying out the plans that we have that we think can make a better life and a better country, that's his choice. When I hear something like that, I am reminded of what my friend, Michelle Obama, advised us all: When they go low, you go high. [applause] And, look, if this were just about one video, maybe what he's saying tonight would be understandable, but everyone can draw their own conclusions at this point about whether or not the man in the video or the man on the stage respects women. But he never apologizes for anything to anyone. He never apologized to Mr. and Mrs. Khan, the Gold Star family whose son, Captain Khan, died in the line of duty in Iraq. And Donald insulted and attacked them for weeks over their religion. He never apologized to the distinguished federal judge who was born in Indiana, but Donald said he couldn't be trusted to be a judge because his parents were, quote, "Mexican." He never apologized to the reporter that he mimicked and mocked on national television and our children were watching. And he never apologized for the racist lie that President Obama was not born in the United States of America. He owes the president an apology, he owes our country an apology, and he needs to take responsibility for his actions and his words. TRUMP: Well, you owe the president an apology, because as you know very well, your campaign, Sidney Blumenthal— he's another real winner that you have—and he's the one that got this started, along with your campaign manager, and they were on television just two weeks ago, she was, saying exactly that. So you really owe him an apology. You're the one that sent the pictures around your campaign, sent the pictures around with President Obama in a certain garb. That was long before I was ever involved, so you actually owe an apology. Number two, Michelle Obama. I've gotten to see the commercials that they did on you. And I've gotten to see some of the most vicious commercials I've ever seen of Michelle Obama talking about you, Hillary. So, you talk about friend? Go back and take a look at those commercials, a race where you lost fair and square, unlike the Bernie Sanders race, where you won, but not fair and square, in my opinion. And all you have to do is take a look at WikiLeaks and just see what they say about Bernie Sanders and see what Deborah Wasserman Schultz had in mind, because Bernie Sanders, between super-delegates and Deborah Wasserman Schultz, he never had a chance. And I was so surprised to see him sign on with the devil. But when you talk about apology, I think the one that you should really be apologizing for and the thing that you should be apologizing for are the 33,000 e-mails that you deleted, and that you acid washed, and then the two boxes of e-mails and other things last week that were taken from an office and are now missing. And I'll tell you what. I didn't think I'd say this, but I'm going to say it, and I hate to say it. But if I win, I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation, because there has never been so many lies, so much deception. There has never been anything like it, and we're going to have a special prosecutor. When I speak, I go out and speak, the people of this country are furious. In my opinion, the people that have been longterm workers at the FBI are furious. There has never been anything like this, where e-mails—and you get a subpoena, you get a subpoena, and after getting the subpoena, you delete 33,000 e-mails, and then you acid wash them or bleach them, as you would say, very expensive process. 4/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri So we're going to get a special prosecutor, and we're going to look into it, because you know what? People have been—their lives have been destroyed for doing one-fifth of what you've done. And it's a disgrace. And honestly, you ought to be ashamed of yourself. RADDATZ: Secretary Clinton, I want to follow up on that. [crosstalk] RADDATZ: I'm going to let you talk about e-mails. CLINTON: ... because everything he just said is absolutely false, but I'm not surprised. TRUMP: Oh, really? CLINTON: In the first debate...[laughter] RADDATZ: And really, the audience needs to calm down here. CLINTON: ... I told people that it would be impossible to be fact-checking Donald all the time. I'd never get to talk about anything I want to do and how we're going to really make lives better for people. So, once again, go to We have literally Trump—you can fact check him in real time. Last time at the first debate, we had millions of people fact checking, so I expect we'll have millions more fact checking, because, you know, it is—it's just awfully good that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country. TRUMP: Because you'd be in jail. [applause] RADDATZ: Secretary Clinton... COOPER: We want to remind the audience to please not talk out loud. Please do not applaud. You're just wasting time. RADDATZ: And, Secretary Clinton, I do want to follow up on e- mails. You've said your handing of your e-mails was a mistake. You disagreed with FBI Director James Comey, calling your handling of classified information, quote, "extremely careless." The FBI said that there were 110 classified e-mails that were exchanged, eight of which were top secret, and that it was possible hostile actors did gain access to those e-mails. You don't call that extremely careless? CLINTON: Well, Martha, first, let me say—and I've said before, but I'll repeat it, because I want everyone to hear it—that was a mistake, and I take responsibility for using a personal e-mail account. Obviously, if I were to do it over again, I would not. I'm not making any excuses. It was a mistake. And I am very sorry about that. But I think it's also important to point out where there are some misleading accusations from critics and others. After a year-long investigation, there is no evidence that anyone hacked the server I was using and there is no evidence that anyone can point to at all—anyone who says otherwise has no basis—that any classified material ended up in the wrong hands. I take classified materials very seriously and always have. When I was on the Senate Armed Services Committee, I was privy to a lot of classified material. Obviously, as secretary of state, I had some of the most important secrets that we possess, such as going after bin Laden. So I am very committed to taking classified information seriously. And as I said, there is no evidence that any classified information ended up in the wrong hands. RADDATZ: OK, we're going to move on. TRUMP: And yet she didn't know the word—the letter C on a document. Right? She didn't even know what that word— what that letter meant. You know, it's amazing. I'm watching Hillary go over facts. And she's going after fact after fact, and she's lying again, because she said she—you know, what she did with the e-mail was fine. You think it was fine to delete 33,000 e-mails? I don't think so. She said the 33,000 e-mails had to do with her daughter's wedding, number one, and a yoga class. Well, maybe we'll give three or three or four or five or something. 33,000 e-mails deleted, and now she's saying there wasn't anything wrong. And more importantly, that was after getting a subpoena. That wasn't before. That was after. She got it from the United States Congress. And I'll be honest, I am so disappointed in congressmen, including Republicans, for allowing this to happen. Our Justice Department, where our husband goes on to the back of a airplane for 39 minutes, talks to the attorney general days before a ruling is going to be made on her case. But for you to say that there was nothing wrong with you deleting 5/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri 39,000 e-mails, again, you should be ashamed of yourself. What you did—and this is after getting a subpoena from the United States Congress. COOPER: We have to move on. TRUMP: You did that. Wait a minute. One second. COOPER: Secretary Clinton, you can respond, and then we got to move on. RADDATZ: We want to give the audience a chance. TRUMP: If you did that in the private sector, you'd be put in jail, let alone after getting a subpoena from the United States Congress. COOPER: Secretary Clinton, you can respond. Then we have to move on to an audience question. CLINTON: Look, it's just not true. And so please, go to... TRUMP: Oh, you didn't delete them? COOPER: Allow her to respond, please. CLINTON: It was personal e-mails, not official. TRUMP: Oh, 33,000? Yeah. CLINTON: Not—well, we turned over 35,000, so... TRUMP: Oh, yeah. What about the other 15,000? COOPER: Please allow her to respond. She didn't talk while you talked. CLINTON: Yes, that's true, I didn't. TRUMP: Because you have nothing to say. CLINTON: I didn't in the first debate, and I'm going to try not to in this debate, because I'd like to get to the questions that the people have brought here tonight to talk to us about. TRUMP: Get off this question. CLINTON: OK, Donald. I know you're into big diversion tonight, anything to avoid talking about your campaign and the way it's exploding and the way Republicans are leaving you. But let's at least focus... TRUMP: Let's see what happens...[crosstalk] COOPER: Allow her to respond. CLINTON: ... on some of the issues that people care about tonight. Let's get to their questions. COOPER: We have a question here from Ken Karpowicz. He has a question about health care. Ken? TRUMP: I'd like to know, Anderson, why aren't you bringing up the e-mails? I'd like to know. Why aren't you bringing... COOPER: We brought up the e-mails. TRUMP: No, it hasn't. It hasn't. And it hasn't been finished at all. COOPER: Ken Karpowicz has a question. TRUMP: It's nice to—one on three. QUESTION: Thank you. Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare, it is not affordable. Premiums have gone up. Deductibles have gone up. Copays have gone up. Prescriptions have gone up. And the coverage has gone down. What will you do to bring the cost down and make coverage better? COOPER: That first one goes to Secretary Clinton, because you started out the last one to the audience. CLINTON: If he wants to start, he can start. No, go ahead, Donald. TRUMP: No, I'm a gentlemen, Hillary. Go ahead. [laughter] 6/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri COOPER: Secretary Clinton? CLINTON: Well, I think Donald was about to say he's going to solve it by repealing it and getting rid of the Affordable Care Act. And I'm going to fix it, because I agree with you. Premiums have gotten too high. Copays, deductibles, prescription drug costs, and I've laid out a series of actions that we can take to try to get those costs down. But here's what I don't want people to forget when we're talking about reining in the costs, which has to be the highest priority of the next president, when the Affordable Care Act passed, it wasn't just that 20 million got insurance who didn't have it before. But that in and of itself was a good thing. I meet these people all the time, and they tell me what a difference having that insurance meant to them and their families. But everybody else, the 170 million of us who get health insurance through our employees got big benefits. Number one, insurance companies can't deny you coverage because of a pre-existing condition. Number two, no lifetime limits, which is a big deal if you have serious health problems. Number three, women can't be charged more than men for our health insurance, which is the way it used to be before the Affordable Care Act. Number four, if you're under 26, and your parents have a policy, you can be on that policy until the age of 26, something that didn't happen before. So I want very much to save what works and is good about the Affordable Care Act. But we've got to get costs down. We've got to provide additional help to small businesses so that they can afford to provide health insurance. But if we repeal it, as Donald has proposed, and start over again, all of those benefits I just mentioned are lost to everybody, not just people who get their health insurance on the exchange. And then we would have to start all over again. Right now, we are at 90 percent health insurance coverage. That's the highest we've ever been in our country. COOPER: Secretary Clinton, your time is up. CLINTON: So I want us to get to 100 percent, but get costs down and keep quality up. COOPER: Mr. Trump, you have two minutes. TRUMP: It is such a great question and it's maybe the question I get almost more than anything else, outside of defense. Obamacare is a disaster. You know it. We all know it. It's going up at numbers that nobody's ever seen worldwide. Nobody's ever seen numbers like this for health care. It's only getting worse. In '17, it implodes by itself. Their method of fixing it is to go back and ask Congress for more money, more and more money. We have right now almost $20 trillion in debt. Obamacare will never work. It's very bad, very bad health insurance. Far too expensive. And not only expensive for the person that has it, unbelievably expensive for our country. It's going to be one of the biggest line items very shortly. We have to repeal it and replace it with something absolutely much less expensive and something that works, where your plan can actually be tailored. We have to get rid of the lines around the state, artificial lines, where we stop insurance companies from coming in and competing, because they want—and President Obama and whoever was working on it—they want to leave those lines, because that gives the insurance companies essentially monopolies. We want competition. You will have the finest health care plan there is. She wants to go to a single-payer plan, which would be a disaster, somewhat similar to Canada. And if you haven't noticed the Canadians, when they need a big operation, when something happens, they come into the United States in many cases because their system is so slow. It's catastrophic in certain ways. But she wants to go to single payer, which means the government basically rules everything. Hillary Clinton has been after this for years. Obamacare was the first step. Obamacare is a total disaster. And not only are your rates going up by numbers that nobody's ever believed, but your deductibles are going up, so that unless you get hit by a truck, you're never going to be able to use it. COOPER: Mr. Trump, your time... TRUMP: It is a disastrous plan, and it has to be repealed and replaced. COOPER: Secretary Clinton, let me follow up with you. Your husband called Obamacare, quote, "the craziest thing in the world," saying that small-business owners are getting killed as premiums double, coverage is cut in half. Was he mistaken or was the mistake simply telling the truth? CLINTON: No, I mean, he clarified what he meant. And it's very clear. Look, we are in a situation in our country where if we were to start all over again, we might come up with a different system. But we have an employer-based system. That's where the vast majority of people get their health care. 7/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri And the Affordable Care Act was meant to try to fill the gap between people who were too poor and couldn't put together any resources to afford health care, namely people on Medicaid. Obviously, Medicare, which is a single-payer system, which takes care of our elderly and does a great job doing it, by the way, and then all of the people who were employed, but people who were working but didn't have the money to afford insurance and didn't have anybody, an employer or anybody else, to help them. That was the slot that the Obamacare approach was to take. And like I say, 20 million people now have health insurance. So if we just rip it up and throw it away, what Donald's not telling you is we just turn it back to the insurance companies the way it used to be, and that means the insurance companies... COOPER: Secretary Clinton... CLINTON: ... get to do pretty much whatever they want, including saying, look, I'm sorry, you've got diabetes, you had cancer, your child has asthma... COOPER: Your time is up. CLINTON: ... you may not be able to have insurance because you can't afford it. So let's fix what's broken about it, but let's not throw it away and give it all back to the insurance companies and the drug companies. That's not going to work. COOPER: Mr. Trump, let me follow up on this. TRUMP: Well, I just want—just one thing. First of all, Hillary, everything's broken about it. Everything. Number two, Bernie Sanders said that Hillary Clinton has very bad judgment. This is a perfect example of it, trying to save Obamacare, which is a disaster. COOPER: You've said you want to end Obamacare... TRUMP: By the way... COOPER: You've said you want to end Obamacare. You've also said you want to make coverage accessible for people with pre-existing conditions. How do you force insurance companies to do that if you're no longer mandating that every American get insurance? TRUMP: We're going to be able to. You're going to have plans... COOPER: What does that mean? TRUMP: Well, I'll tell you what it means. You're going to have plans that are so good, because we're going to have so much competition in the insurance industry. Once we break out—once we break out the lines and allow the competition to come... COOPER: Are you going—are you going to have a mandate that Americans have to have health insurance? TRUMP: President Obama—Anderson, excuse me. President Obama, by keeping those lines, the boundary lines around each state, it was almost gone until just very toward the end of the passage of Obamacare, which, by the way, was a fraud. You know that, because Jonathan Gruber, the architect of Obamacare, was said—he said it was a great lie, it was a big lie. President Obama said you keep your doctor, you keep your plan. The whole thing was a fraud, and it doesn't work. But when we get rid of those lines, you will have competition, and we will be able to keep pre-existing, we'll also be able to help people that can't get—don't have money because we are going to have people protected. And Republicans feel this way, believe it or not, and strongly this way. We're going to block grant into the states. We're going to block grant into Medicaid into the states... COOPER: Thank you, Mr. Trump. TRUMP: ... so that we will be able to take care of people without the necessary funds to take care of themselves. COOPER: Thank you, Mr. Trump. RADDATZ: We now go to Gorbah Hamed with a question for both candidates. QUESTION: Hi. There are 3.3 million Muslims in the United States, and I'm one of them. You've mentioned working with Muslim nations, but with Islamophobia on the rise, how will you help people like me deal with the consequences of being labeled as a threat to the country after the election is over? RADDATZ: Mr. Trump, you're first. 8/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri TRUMP: Well, you're right about Islamophobia, and that's a shame. But one thing we have to do is we have to make sure that—because there is a problem. I mean, whether we like it or not, and we could be very politically correct, but whether we like it or not, there is a problem. And we have to be sure that Muslims come in and report when they see something going on. When they see hatred going on, they have to report it. As an example, in San Bernardino, many people saw the bombs all over the apartment of the two people that killed 14 and wounded many, many people. Horribly wounded. They'll never be the same. Muslims have to report the problems when they see them. And, you know, there's always a reason for everything. If they don't do that, it's a very difficult situation for our country, because you look at Orlando and you look at San Bernardino and you look at the World Trade Center. Go outside. Look at Paris. Look at that horrible—these are radical Islamic terrorists. And she won't even mention the word and nor will President Obama. He won't use the term "radical Islamic terrorism." Now, to solve a problem, you have to be able to state what the problem is or at least say the name. She won't say the name and President Obama won't say the name. But the name is there. It's radical Islamic terror. And before you solve it, you have to say the name. RADDATZ: Secretary Clinton? CLINTON: Well, thank you for asking your question. And I've heard this question from a lot of Muslim-Americans across our country, because, unfortunately, there's been a lot of very divisive, dark things said about Muslims. And even someone like Captain Khan, the young man who sacrificed himself defending our country in the United States Army, has been subject to attack by Donald. I want to say just a couple of things. First, we've had Muslims in America since George Washington. And we've had many successful Muslims. We just lost a particular well-known one with Muhammad Ali. My vision of America is an America where everyone has a place, if you're willing to work hard, you do your part, you contribute to the community. That's what America is. That's what we want America to be for our children and our grandchildren. It's also very short-sighted and even dangerous to be engaging in the kind of demagogic rhetoric that Donald has about Muslims. We need American Muslims to be part of our eyes and ears on our front lines. I've worked with a lot of different Muslim groups around America. I've met with a lot of them, and I've heard how important it is for them to feel that they are wanted and included and part of our country, part of our homeland security, and that's what I want to see. It's also important I intend to defeat ISIS, to do so in a coalition with majority Muslim nations. Right now, a lot of those nations are hearing what Donald says and wondering, why should we cooperate with the Americans? And this is a gift to ISIS and the terrorists, violent jihadist terrorists. We are not at war with Islam. And it is a mistake and it plays into the hands of the terrorists to act as though we are. So I want a country where citizens like you and your family are just as welcome as anyone else. RADDATZ: Thank you, Secretary Clinton. Mr. Trump, in December, you said this. "Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on. We have no choice. We have no choice." Your running mate said this week that the Muslim ban is no longer your position. Is that correct? And if it is, was it a mistake to have a religious test? TRUMP: First of all, Captain Khan is an American hero, and if I were president at that time, he would be alive today, because unlike her, who voted for the war without knowing what she was doing, I would not have had our people in Iraq. Iraq was disaster. So he would have been alive today. The Muslim ban is something that in some form has morphed into a extreme vetting from certain areas of the world. Hillary Clinton wants to allow hundreds of thousands—excuse me. Excuse me.. RADDATZ: And why did it morph into that? No, did you—no, answer the question. Do you still believe... TRUMP: Why don't you interrupt her? You interrupt me all the time. RADDATZ: I do. TRUMP: Why don't you interrupt her? RADDATZ: Would you please explain whether or not the Muslim ban still stands? 9/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri TRUMP: It's called extreme vetting. We are going to areas like Syria where they're coming in by the tens of thousands because of Barack Obama. And Hillary Clinton wants to allow a 550 percent increase over Obama. People are coming into our country like we have no idea who they are, where they are from, what their feelings about our country is, and she wants 550 percent more. This is going to be the great Trojan horse of all time. We have enough problems in this country. I believe in building safe zones. I believe in having other people pay for them, as an example, the Gulf states, who are not carrying their weight, but they have nothing but money, and take care of people. But I don't want to have, with all the problems this country has and all of the problems that you see going on, hundreds of thousands of people coming in from Syria when we know nothing about them. We know nothing about their values and we know nothing about their love for our country. RADDATZ: And, Secretary Clinton, let me ask you about that, because you have asked for an increase from 10,000 to 65,000 Syrian refugees. We know you want tougher vetting. That's not a perfect system. So why take the risk of having those refugees come into the country? CLINTON: Well, first of all, I will not let anyone into our country that I think poses a risk to us. But there are a lot of refugees, women and children—think of that picture we all saw of that 4-year-old boy with the blood on his forehead because he'd been bombed by the Russian and Syrian air forces. There are children suffering in this catastrophic war, largely, I believe, because of Russian aggression. And we need to do our part. We by no means are carrying anywhere near the load that Europe and others are. But we will have vetting that is as tough as it needs to be from our professionals, our intelligence experts and others. But it is important for us as a policy, you know, not to say, as Donald has said, we're going to ban people based on a religion. How do you do that? We are a country founded on religious freedom and liberty. How do we do what he has advocated without causing great distress within our own county? Are we going to have religious tests when people fly into our country? And how do we expect to be able to implement those? So I thought that what he said was extremely unwise and even dangerous. And indeed, you can look at the propaganda on a lot of the terrorists sites, and what Donald Trump says about Muslims is used to recruit fighters, because they want to create a war between us. And the final thing I would say, this is the 10th or 12th time that he's denied being for the war in Iraq. We have it on tape. The entire press corps has looked at it. It's been debunked, but it never stops him from saying whatever he wants to say. TRUMP: That's not been debunked. CLINTON: So, please... TRUMP: That has not been debunked. CLINTON: ... go to and you can see it. TRUMP: I was against—I was against the war in Iraq. Has not been debunked. And you voted for it. And you shouldn't have. Well, I just want to say... RADDATZ: There's been lots of fact-checking on that. I'd like to move on to an online question... TRUMP: Excuse me. She just went about 25 seconds over her time. RADDATZ: She did not. TRUMP: Could I just respond to this, please? RADDATZ: Very quickly, please. TRUMP: Hillary Clinton, in terms of having people come into our country, we have many criminal illegal aliens. When we want to send them back to their country, their country says we don't want them. In some cases, they're murderers, drug lords, drug problems. And they don't want them. And Hillary Clinton, when she was secretary of state, said that's OK, we can't force it into their country. Let me tell you, I'm going to force them right back into their country. They're murderers and some very bad people. And I will tell you very strongly, when Bernie Sanders said she had bad judgment, she has really bad judgment, because we are letting people into this country that are going to cause problems and crime like you've never seen. We're also letting drugs pour through our southern border at a record clip. At a record clip. And it shouldn't be allowed to happen. 10/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri ICE just endorsed me. They've never endorsed a presidential candidate. The Border Patrol agents, 16,500, just recently endorsed me, and they endorsed me because I understand the border. She doesn't. She wants amnesty for everybody. Come right in. Come right over. It's a horrible thing she's doing. She's got bad judgment, and honestly, so bad that she should never be president of the United States. That I can tell you. RADDATZ: Thank you, Mr. Trump. I want to move on. This next question from the public through the Bipartisan Open Debate Coalition's online forum, where Americans submitted questions that generated millions of votes. This question involves WikiLeaks release of purported excerpts of Secretary Clinton's paid speeches, which she has refused to release, and one line in particular, in which you, Secretary Clinton, purportedly say you need both a public and private position on certain issues. So, Tu, from Virginia asks, is it OK for politicians to be two-faced? Is it acceptable for a politician to have a private stance on issues? Secretary Clinton, your two minutes. CLINTON: Well, right. As I recall, that was something I said about Abraham Lincoln after having seen the wonderful Steven Spielberg movie called "Lincoln." It was a master class watching President Lincoln get the Congress to approve the 13th Amendment. It was principled, and it was strategic. And I was making the point that it is hard sometimes to get the Congress to do what you want to do and you have to keep working at it. And, yes, President Lincoln was trying to convince some people, he used some arguments, convincing other people, he used other arguments. That was a great—I thought a great display of presidential leadership. But, you know, let's talk about what's really going on here, Martha, because our intelligence community just came out and said in the last few days that the Kremlin, meaning Putin and the Russian government, are directing the attacks, the hacking on American accounts to influence our election. And WikiLeaks is part of that, as are other sites where the Russians hack information, we don't even know if it's accurate information, and then they put it out. We have never in the history of our country been in a situation where an adversary, a foreign power, is working so hard to influence the outcome of the election. And believe me, they're not doing it to get me elected. They're doing it to try to influence the election for Donald Trump. Now, maybe because he has praised Putin, maybe because he says he agrees with a lot of what Putin wants to do, maybe because he wants to do business in Moscow, I don't know the reasons. But we deserve answers. And we should demand that Donald release all of his tax returns so that people can see what are the entanglements and the financial relationships that he has... RADDATZ: We're going to get to that later. Secretary Clinton, you're out of time. CLINTON: ... with the Russians and other foreign powers. RADDATZ: Mr. Trump? TRUMP: Well, I think I should respond, because—so ridiculous. Look, now she's blaming—she got caught in a total lie. Her papers went out to all her friends at the banks, Goldman Sachs and everybody else, and she said things—WikiLeaks that just came out. And she lied. Now she's blaming the lie on the late, great Abraham Lincoln. That's one that I haven't... [laughter] OK, Honest Abe, Honest Abe never lied. That's the good thing. That's the big difference between Abraham Lincoln and you. That's a big, big difference. We're talking about some difference. But as far as other elements of what she was saying, I don't know Putin. I think it would be great if we got along with Russia because we could fight ISIS together, as an example. But I don't know Putin. But I notice, anytime anything wrong happens, they like to say the Russians are—she doesn't know if it's the Russians doing the hacking. Maybe there is no hacking. But they always blame Russia. And the reason they blame Russia because they think they're trying to tarnish me with Russia. I know nothing about Russia. I know—I know about Russia, but I know nothing about the inner workings of Russia. I don't deal there. I have no businesses there. I have no loans from Russia. I have a very, very great balance sheet, so great that when I did the Old Post Office on Pennsylvania Avenue, the United States government, because of my balance sheet, which they actually know very well, chose me to do the Old Post Office, between the White House and Congress, chose me to do the Old Post Office. One of the primary area things, in fact, perhaps the primary thing was balance sheet. But I have no loans with Russia. You could go to the United States government, and they would probably tell you that, because they know my sheet very well in order to get that development I had to have. Now, the taxes are a very simple thing. As soon as I have—first of all, I pay hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes. Many of her friends took bigger deductions. Warren Buffett took a massive deduction. Soros, who's a friend of hers, took a massive 11/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri deduction. Many of the people that are giving her all this money that she can do many more commercials than me gave her —took massive deductions. I pay hundreds of millions of dollars in taxes. But—but as soon as my routine audit is finished, I'll release my returns. I'll be very proud to. They're actually quite great. RADDATZ: Thank you, Mr. Trump. COOPER: We want to turn, actually, to the topic of taxes. We have a question from Spencer Maass. Spencer? QUESTION: Good evening. My question is, what specific tax provisions will you change to ensure the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share in taxes? COOPER: Mr. Trump, you have two minutes. TRUMP: Well, one thing I'd do is get rid of carried interest. One of the greatest provisions for people like me, to be honest with you, I give up a lot when I run, because I knock out the tax code. And she could have done this years ago, by the way. She's a United States—she was a United States senator. She complains that Donald Trump took advantage of the tax code. Well, why didn't she change it? Why didn't you change it when you were a senator? The reason you didn't is that all your friends take the same advantage that I do. And I do. You have provisions in the tax code that, frankly, we could change. But you wouldn't change it, because all of these people gave you the money so you can take negative ads on Donald Trump. But—and I say that about a lot of things. You know, I've heard Hillary complaining about so many different things over the years. "I wish you would have done this." But she's been there for 30 years she's been doing this stuff. She never changed. And she never will change. She never will change. We're getting rid of carried interest provisions. I'm lowering taxes actually, because I think it's so important for corporations, because we have corporations leaving—massive corporations and little ones, little ones can't form. We're getting rid of regulations which goes hand in hand with the lowering of the taxes. But we're bringing the tax rate down from 35 percent to 15 percent. We're cutting taxes for the middle class. And I will tell you, we are cutting them big league for the middle class. And I will tell you, Hillary Clinton is raising your taxes, folks. You can look at me. She's raising your taxes really high. And what that's going to do is a disaster for the country. But she is raising your taxes and I'm lowering your taxes. That in itself is a big difference. We are going to be thriving again. We have no growth in this country. There's no growth. If China has a GDP of 7 percent, it's like a national catastrophe. We're down at 1 percent. And that's, like, no growth. And we're going lower, in my opinion. And a lot of it has to do with the fact that our taxes are so high, just about the highest in the world. And I'm bringing them down to one of the lower in the world. And I think it's so important—one of the most important things we can do. But she is raising everybody's taxes massively. COOPER: Secretary Clinton, you have two minutes. The question was, what specific tax provisions will you change to ensure the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share of taxes? CLINTON: Well, everything you've heard just now from Donald is not true. I'm sorry I have to keep saying this, but he lives in an alternative reality. And it is sort of amusing to hear somebody who hasn't paid federal income taxes in maybe 20 years talking about what he's going to do. But I'll tell you what he's going to do. His plan will give the wealthy and corporations the biggest tax cuts they've ever had, more than the Bush tax cuts by at least a factor of two. Donald always takes care of Donald and people like Donald, and this would be a massive gift. And, indeed, the way that he talks about his tax cuts would end up raising taxes on middle-class families, millions of middle-class families. Now, here's what I want to do. I have said nobody who makes less than $250,000 a year—and that's the vast majority of Americans as you know—will have their taxes raised, because I think we've got to go where the money is. And the money is with people who have taken advantage of every single break in the tax code. And, yes, when I was a senator, I did vote to close corporate loopholes. I voted to close, I think, one of the loopholes he took advantage of when he claimed a billion-dollar loss that enabled him to avoid paying taxes. I want to have a tax on people who are making a million dollars. It's called the Buffett rule. Yes, Warren Buffett is the one who's gone out and said somebody like him should not be paying a lower tax rate than his secretary. I want to have a surcharge on incomes above $5 million. 12/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri We have to make up for lost times, because I want to invest in you. I want to invest in hard-working families. And I think it's been unfortunate, but it's happened, that since the Great Recession, the gains have all gone to the top. And we need to reverse that. People like Donald, who paid zero in taxes, zero for our vets, zero for our military, zero for health and education, that is wrong. COOPER: Thank you, Secretary. CLINTON: And we're going to make sure that nobody, no corporation, and no individual can get away without paying his fair share to support our country. COOPER: Thank you. I want to give you—Mr. Trump, I want to give you the chance to respond. I just wanted to tell our viewers what she's referring to. In the last month, taxes were the number-one issue on Facebook for the first time in the campaign. The New York Times published three pages of your 1995 tax returns. They show you claimed a $916 million loss, which means you could have avoided paying personal federal income taxes for years. You've said you pay state taxes, employee taxes, real estate taxes, property taxes. You have not answered, though, a simple question. Did you use that $916 million loss to avoid paying personal federal income taxes for years? TRUMP: Of course I do. Of course I do. And so do all of her donors, or most of her donors. I know many of her donors. Her donors took massive tax write-offs. COOPER: So have you paid personal federal income tax? TRUMP: A lot of my—excuse me, Anderson—a lot of my write- off was depreciation and other things that Hillary as a senator allowed. And she'll always allow it, because the people that give her all this money, they want it. That's why. See, I understand the tax code better than anybody that's ever run for president. Hillary Clinton—and it's extremely complex—Hillary Clinton has friends that want all of these provisions, including they want the carried interest provision, which is very important to Wall Street people. But they really want the carried interest provision, which I believe Hillary's leaving. Very interesting why she's leaving carried interest. But I will tell you that, number one, I pay tremendous numbers of taxes. I absolutely used it. And so did Warren Buffett and so did George Soros and so did many of the other people that Hillary is getting money from. Now, I won't mention their names, because they're rich, but they're not famous. So we won't make them famous. COOPER: So can you—can you say how many years you have avoided paying personal federal income taxes? TRUMP: No, but I pay tax, and I pay federal tax, too. But I have a write-off, a lot of it's depreciation, which is a wonderful charge. I love depreciation. You know, she's given it to us. Hey, if she had a problem—for 30 years she's been doing this, Anderson. I say it all the time. She talks about health care. Why didn't she do something about it? She talks about taxes. Why didn't she do something about it? She doesn't do anything about anything other than talk. With her, it's all talk and no action. COOPER: In the past... TRUMP: And, again, Bernie Sanders, it's really bad judgment. She has made bad judgment not only on taxes. She's made bad judgments on Libya, on Syria, on Iraq. I mean, her and Obama, whether you like it or not, the way they got out of Iraq, the vacuum they've left, that's why ISIS formed in the first place. They started from that little area, and now they're in 32 different nations, Hillary. Congratulations. Great job. COOPER: Secretary—I want you to be able to respond, Secretary Clinton. CLINTON: Well, here we go again. I've been in favor of getting rid of carried interest for years, starting when I was a senator from New York. But that's not the point here. TRUMP: Why didn't you do it? Why didn't you do it? COOPER: Allow her to respond. CLINTON: Because I was a senator with a Republican president. TRUMP: Oh, really? CLINTON: I will be the president and we will get it done. That's exactly right. 13/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri TRUMP: You could have done it, if you were an effective—if you were an effective senator, you could have done it. If you were an effective senator, you could have done it. But you were not an effective senator. COOPER: Please allow her to respond. She didn't interrupt you. CLINTON: You know, under our Constitution, presidents have something called veto power. Look, he has now said repeatedly, "30 years this and 30 years that." So let me talk about my 30 years in public service. I'm very glad to do so. Eight million kids every year have health insurance, because when I was first lady I worked with Democrats and Republicans to create the Children's Health Insurance Program. Hundreds of thousands of kids now have a chance to be adopted because I worked to change our adoption and foster care system. After 9/11, I went to work with Republican mayor, governor and president to rebuild New York and to get health care for our first responders who were suffering because they had run toward danger and gotten sickened by it. Hundreds of thousands of National Guard and Reserve members have health care because of work that I did, and children have safer medicines because I was able to pass a law that required the dosing to be more carefully done. When I was secretary of state, I went around the world advocating for our country, but also advocating for women's rights, to make sure that women had a decent chance to have a better life and negotiated a treaty with Russia to lower nuclear weapons. Four hundred pieces of legislation have my name on it as a sponsor or cosponsor when I was a senator for eight years. I worked very hard and was very proud to be re-elected in New York by an even bigger margin than I had been elected the first time. And as president, I will take that work, that bipartisan work, that finding common ground, because you have to be able to get along with people to get things done in Washington. COOPER: Thank you, secretary. CLINTON: I've proven that I can, and for 30 years, I've produced results for people. COOPER: Thank you, secretary. RADDATZ: We're going to move on to Syria. Both of you have mentioned that. TRUMP: She said a lot of things that were false. I mean, I think we should be allowed to maybe... RADDATZ: No, we can—no, Mr. Trump, we're going to go on. This is about the audience. TRUMP: Excuse me. Because she has been a disaster as a senator. A disaster. RADDATZ: Mr. Trump, we're going to move on. The heart-breaking video of a 5-year-old Syrian boy named Omran sitting in an ambulance after being pulled from the rubble after an air strike in Aleppo focused the world's attention on the horrors of the war in Syria, with 136 million views on Facebook alone. But there are much worse images coming out of Aleppo every day now, where in the past few weeks alone, 400 people have been killed, at least 100 of them children. Just days ago, the State Department called for a war crimes investigation of the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad and its ally, Russia, for their bombardment of Aleppo. So this next question comes through social media through Facebook. Diane from Pennsylvania asks, if you were president, what would you do about Syria and the humanitarian crisis in Aleppo? Isn't it a lot like the Holocaust when the U.S. waited too long before we helped? Secretary Clinton, we will begin with your two minutes. CLINTON: Well, the situation in Syria is catastrophic. And every day that goes by, we see the results of the regime by Assad in partnership with the Iranians on the ground, the Russians in the air, bombarding places, in particular Aleppo, where there are hundreds of thousands of people, probably about 250,000 still left. And there is a determined effort by the Russian air force to destroy Aleppo in order to eliminate the last of the Syrian rebels who are really holding out against the Assad regime. Russia hasn't paid any attention to ISIS. They're interested in keeping Assad in power. So I, when I was secretary of state, advocated and I advocate today a no-fly zone and safe zones. We need some leverage with the Russians, because they are not going to come to the negotiating table for a diplomatic resolution, unless there is some leverage over them. And we have to work more closely with our partners and allies on the ground. But I want to emphasize that what is at stake here is the ambitions and the aggressiveness of Russia. Russia has decided that it's all in, in Syria. And they've also decided who they want to see become president of the United States, too, and it's not me. I've stood up to Russia. I've taken on Putin and others, and I would do that as president. 14/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri I think wherever we can cooperate with Russia, that's fine. And I did as secretary of state. That's how we got a treaty reducing nuclear weapons. It's how we got the sanctions on Iran that put a lid on the Iranian nuclear program without firing a single shot. So I would go to the negotiating table with more leverage than we have now. But I do support the effort to investigate for crimes, war crimes committed by the Syrians and the Russians and try to hold them accountable. RADDATZ: Thank you, Secretary Clinton. Mr. Trump? TRUMP: First of all, she was there as secretary of state with the so-called line in the sand, which... CLINTON: No, I wasn't. I was gone. I hate to interrupt you, but at some point... TRUMP: OK. But you were in contact—excuse me. You were... CLINTON: At some point, we need to do some fact-checking here. TRUMP: You were in total contact with the White House, and perhaps, sadly, Obama probably still listened to you. I don't think he would be listening to you very much anymore. Obama draws the line in the sand. It was laughed at all over the world what happened. Now, with that being said, she talks tough against Russia. But our nuclear program has fallen way behind, and they've gone wild with their nuclear program. Not good. Our government shouldn't have allowed that to happen. Russia is new in terms of nuclear. We are old. We're tired. We're exhausted in terms of nuclear. A very bad thing. Now, she talks tough, she talks really tough against Putin and against Assad. She talks in favor of the rebels. She doesn't even know who the rebels are. You know, every time we take rebels, whether it's in Iraq or anywhere else, we're arming people. And you know what happens? They end up being worse than the people. Look at what she did in Libya with Gadhafi. Gadhafi's out. It's a mess. And, by the way, ISIS has a good chunk of their oil. I'm sure you probably have heard that. It was a disaster. Because the fact is, almost everything she's done in foreign policy has been a mistake and it's been a disaster. But if you look at Russia, just take a look at Russia, and look at what they did this week, where I agree, she wasn't there, but possibly she's consulted. We sign a peace treaty. Everyone's all excited. Well, what Russia did with Assad and, by the way, with Iran, who you made very powerful with the dumbest deal perhaps I've ever seen in the history of deal-making, the Iran deal, with the $150 billion, with the $1.7 billion in cash, which is enough to fill up this room. But look at that deal. Iran now and Russia are now against us. So she wants to fight. She wants to fight for rebels. There's only one problem. You don't even know who the rebels are. So what's the purpose? RADDATZ: Mr. Trump, Mr. Trump, your two minutes is up. TRUMP: And one thing I have to say. RADDATZ: Your two minutes is up. TRUMP: I don't like Assad at all, but Assad is killing ISIS. Russia is killing ISIS. And Iran is killing ISIS. And those three have now lined up because of our weak foreign policy. RADDATZ: Mr. Trump, let me repeat the question. If you were president...[laughter]...what would you do about Syria and the humanitarian crisis in Aleppo? And I want to remind you what your running mate said. He said provocations by Russia need to be met with American strength and that if Russia continues to be involved in air strikes along with the Syrian government forces of Assad, the United States of America should be prepared to use military force to strike the military targets of the Assad regime. TRUMP: OK. He and I haven't spoken, and I disagree. I disagree. RADDATZ: You disagree with your running mate? TRUMP: I think you have to knock out ISIS. Right now, Syria is fighting ISIS. We have people that want to fight both at the same time. But Syria is no longer Syria. Syria is Russia and it's Iran, who she made strong and Kerry and Obama made into a very powerful nation and a very rich nation, very, very quickly, very, very quickly. I believe we have to get ISIS. We have to worry about ISIS before we can get too much more involved. She had a chance to do something with Syria. They had a chance. And that was the line. And she didn't. RADDATZ: What do you think will happen if Aleppo falls? 15/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri TRUMP: I think Aleppo is a disaster, humanitarian-wise. RADDATZ: What do you think will happen if it falls? TRUMP: I think that it basically has fallen. OK? It basically has fallen. Let me tell you something. You take a look at Mosul. The biggest problem I have with the stupidity of our foreign policy, we have Mosul. They think a lot of the ISIS leaders are in Mosul. So we have announcements coming out of Washington and coming out of Iraq, we will be attacking Mosul in three weeks or four weeks. Well, all of these bad leaders from ISIS are leaving Mosul. Why can't they do it quietly? Why can't they do the attack, make it a sneak attack, and after the attack is made, inform the American public that we've knocked out the leaders, we've had a tremendous success? People leave. Why do they have to say we're going to be attacking Mosul within the next four to six weeks, which is what they're saying? How stupid is our country? RADDATZ: There are sometimes reasons the military does that. Psychological warfare. TRUMP: I can't think of any. I can't think of any. And I'm pretty good at it. RADDATZ: It might be to help get civilians out. TRUMP: And we have General Flynn. And we have—look, I have 200 generals and admirals who endorsed me. I have 21 Congressional Medal of Honor recipients who endorsed me. We talk about it all the time. They understand, why can't they do something secretively, where they go in and they knock out the leadership? How—why would these people stay there? I've been reading now... RADDATZ: Tell me what your strategy is. TRUMP: ... for weeks—I've been reading now for weeks about Mosul, that it's the harbor of where—you know, between Raqqa and Mosul, this is where they think the ISIS leaders are. Why would they be saying—they're not staying there anymore. They're gone. Because everybody's talking about how Iraq, which is us with our leadership, goes in to fight Mosul. Now, with these 200 admirals and generals, they can't believe it. All I say is this. General George Patton, General Douglas MacArthur are spinning in their grave at the stupidity of what we're doing in the Middle East. RADDATZ: I'm going to go to Secretary Clinton. Secretary Clinton, you want Assad to go. You advocated arming rebels, but it looks like that may be too late for Aleppo. You talk about diplomatic efforts. Those have failed. Cease-fires have failed. Would you introduce the threat of U.S. military force beyond a no-fly zone against the Assad regime to back up diplomacy? CLINTON: I would not use American ground forces in Syria. I think that would be a very serious mistake. I don't think American troops should be holding territory, which is what they would have to do as an occupying force. I don't think that is a smart strategy. I do think the use of special forces, which we're using, the use of enablers and trainers in Iraq, which has had some positive effects, are very much in our interests, and so I do support what is happening, but let me just... RADDATZ: But what would you do differently than President Obama is doing? CLINTON: Well, Martha, I hope that by the time I—if I'm fortunate... TRUMP: Everything. CLINTON: I hope by the time I am president that we will have pushed ISIS out of Iraq. I do think that there is a good chance that we can take Mosul. And, you know, Donald says he knows more about ISIS than the generals. No, he doesn't. There are a lot of very important planning going on, and some of it is to signal to the Sunnis in the area, as well as Kurdish Peshmerga fighters, that we all need to be in this. And that takes a lot of planning and preparation. I would go after Baghdadi. I would specifically target Baghdadi, because I think our targeting of Al Qaida leaders—and I was involved in a lot of those operations, highly classified ones—made a difference. So I think that could help. I would also consider arming the Kurds. The Kurds have been our best partners in Syria, as well as Iraq. And I know there's a lot of concern about that in some circles, but I think they should have the equipment they need so that Kurdish and Arab fighters on the ground are the principal way that we take Raqqa after pushing ISIS out of Iraq. RADDATZ: Thank you very much. We're going to move on... 16/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri TRUMP: You know what's funny? She went over a minute over, and you don't stop her. When I go one second over, it's like a big deal. RADDATZ: You had many answers. TRUMP: It's really—it's really very interesting. COOPER: We've got a question over here from James Carter. Mr. Carter? QUESTION: My question is, do you believe you can be a devoted president to all the people in the United States? COOPER: That question begins for Mr. Trump. TRUMP: Absolutely. I mean, she calls our people deplorable, a large group, and irredeemable. I will be a president for all of our people. And I'll be a president that will turn our inner cities around and will give strength to people and will give economics to people and will bring jobs back. Because NAFTA, signed by her husband, is perhaps the greatest disaster trade deal in the history of the world. Not in this country. It stripped us of manufacturing jobs. We lost our jobs. We lost our money. We lost our plants. It is a disaster. And now she wants to sign TPP, even though she says now she's for it. She called it the gold standard. And by the way, at the last debate, she lied, because it turned out that she did say the gold standard and she said she didn't say it. They actually said that she lied. OK? And she lied. But she's lied about a lot of things. I would be a president for all of the people, African-Americans, the inner cities. Devastating what's happening to our inner cities. She's been talking about it for years. As usual, she talks about it, nothing happens. She doesn't get it done. Same with the Latino Americans, the Hispanic Americans. The same exact thing. They talk, they don't get it done. You go into the inner cities and—you see it's 45 percent poverty. African- Americans now 45 percent poverty in the inner cities. The education is a disaster. Jobs are essentially nonexistent. I mean, it's—you know, and I've been saying at big speeches where I have 20,000 and 30,000 people, what do you have to lose? It can't get any worse. And she's been talking about the inner cities for 25 years. Nothing's going to ever happen. Let me tell you, if she's president of the United States, nothing's going to happen. It's just going to be talk. And all of her friends, the taxes we were talking about, and I would just get it by osmosis. She's not doing any me favors. But by doing all the others' favors, she's doing me favors. COOPER: Mr. Trump, thank you. TRUMP: But I will tell you, she's all talk. It doesn't get done. All you have to do is take a look at her Senate run. Take a look at upstate New York. COOPER: Your two minutes is up. Secretary Clinton, two minutes? TRUMP: It turned out to be a disaster. COOPER: You have two minutes, Secretary Clinton. CLINTON: Well, 67 percent of the people voted to re-elect me when I ran for my second term, and I was very proud and very humbled by that. Mr. Carter, I have tried my entire life to do what I can to support children and families. You know, right out of law school, I went to work for the Children's Defense Fund. And Donald talks a lot about, you know, the 30 years I've been in public service. I'm proud of that. You know, I started off as a young lawyer working against discrimination against AfricanAmerican children in schools and in the criminal justice system. I worked to make sure that kids with disabilities could get a public education, something that I care very much about. I have worked with Latinos—one of my first jobs in politics was down in south Texas registering Latino citizens to be able to vote. So I have a deep devotion, to use your absolutely correct word, to making sure that an every American feels like he or she has a place in our country. And I think when you look at the letters that I get, a lot of people are worried that maybe they wouldn't have a place in Donald Trump's America. They write me, and one woman wrote me about her son, Felix. She adopted him from Ethiopia when he was a toddler. He's 10 years old now. This is the only one country he's ever known. And he listens to Donald on TV and he said to his mother one day, will he send me back to Ethiopia if he gets elected? You know, children listen to what is being said. To go back to the very, very first question. And there's a lot of fear—in fact, teachers and parents are calling it the Trump effect. Bullying is up. A lot of people are feeling, you know, uneasy. A lot of kids are expressing their concerns. 17/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri So, first and foremost, I will do everything I can to reach out to everybody. COOPER: Your time, Secretary Clinton. CLINTON: Democrats, Republicans, independents, people across our country. If you don't vote for me, I still want to be your president. COOPER: Your two minutes is up. CLINTON: I want to be the best president I can be for every American. COOPER: Secretary Clinton, your two minutes is up. I want to follow up on something that Donald Trump actually said to you, a comment you made last month. You said that half of Donald Trump's supporters are, quote, "deplorables, racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic." You later said you regretted saying half. You didn't express regret for using the term "deplorables." To Mr. Carter's question, how can you unite a country if you've written off tens of millions of Americans? CLINTON: Well, within hours I said that I was sorry about the way I talked about that, because my argument is not with his supporters. It's with him and with the hateful and divisive campaign that he has run, and the inciting of violence at his rallies, and the very brutal kinds of comments about not just women, but all Americans, all kinds of Americans. And what he has said about African-Americans and Latinos, about Muslims, about POWs, about immigrants, about people with disabilities, he's never apologized for. And so I do think that a lot of the tone and tenor that he has said—I'm proud of the campaign that Bernie Sanders and I ran. We ran a campaign based on issues, not insults. And he is supporting me 100 percent. COOPER: Thank you. CLINTON: Because we talked about what we wanted to do. We might have had some differences, and we had a lot of debates... COOPER: Thank you, Secretary. TRUMP: ... but we believed that we could make the country better. And I was proud of that. COOPER: I want to give you a minute to respond. TRUMP: We have a divided nation. We have a very divided nation. You look at Charlotte. You look at Baltimore. You look at the violence that's taking place in the inner cities, Chicago, you take a look at Washington, D.C. We have an increase in murder within our cities, the biggest in 45 years. We have a divided nation, because people like her —and believe me, she has tremendous hate in her heart. And when she said deplorables, she meant it. And when she said irredeemable, they're irredeemable, you didn't mention that, but when she said they're irredeemable, to me that might have been even worse. COOPER: She said some of them are irredeemable. TRUMP: She's got tremendous—she's got tremendous hatred. And this country cannot take another four years of Barack Obama, and that's what you're getting with her. COOPER: Mr. Trump, let me follow up with you. In 2008, you wrote in one of your books that the most important characteristic of a good leader is discipline. You said, if a leader doesn't have it, quote, "he or she won't be one for very long." In the days after the first debate, you sent out a series of tweets from 3 a.m. to 5 a.m., including one that told people to check out a sex tape. Is that the discipline of a good leader? TRUMP: No, there wasn't check out a sex tape. It was just take a look at the person that she built up to be this wonderful Girl Scout who was no Girl Scout. COOPER: You mentioned sex tape. TRUMP: By the way, just so you understand, when she said 3 o'clock in the morning, take a look at Benghazi. She said who is going to answer the call at 3 o'clock in the morning? Guess what? She didn't answer it, because when Ambassador Stevens... COOPER: The question is, is that the discipline of a good leader? TRUMP: ... 600—wait a minute, Anderson, 600 times. Well, she said she was awake at 3 o'clock in the morning, and she also sent a tweet out at 3 o'clock in the morning, but I won't even mention that. But she said she'll be awake. Who's going— 18/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri the famous thing, we're going to answer our call at 3 o'clock in the morning. Guess what happened? Ambassador Stevens— Ambassador Stevens sent 600 requests for help. And the only one she talked to was Sidney Blumenthal, who's her friend and not a good guy, by the way. So, you know, she shouldn't be talking about that. Now, tweeting happens to be a modern day form of communication. I mean, you can like it or not like it. I have, between Facebook and Twitter, I have almost 25 million people. It's a very effective way of communication. So you can put it down, but it is a very effective form of communication. I'm not un-proud of it, to be honest with you. COOPER: Secretary Clinton, does Mr. Trump have the discipline to be a good leader? CLINTON: No. TRUMP: I'm shocked to hear that. [laughter] CLINTON: Well, it's not only my opinion. It's the opinion of many others, national security experts, Republicans, former Republican members of Congress. But it's in part because those of us who have had the great privilege of seeing this job up close and know how difficult it is, and it's not just because I watched my husband take a $300 billion deficit and turn it into a $200 billion surplus, and 23 million new jobs were created, and incomes went up for everybody. Everybody. AfricanAmerican incomes went up 33 percent. And it's not just because I worked with George W. Bush after 9/11, and I was very proud that when I told him what the city needed, what we needed to recover, he said you've got it, and he never wavered. He stuck with me. And I have worked and I admire President Obama. He inherited the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. That was a terrible time for our country. COOPER: We have to move along. CLINTON: Nine million people lost their jobs. RADDATZ: Secretary Clinton, we have to... CLINTON: Five million homes were lost. RADDATZ: Secretary Clinton, we're moving. CLINTON: And $13 trillion in family wealth was wiped out. We are back on the right track. He would send us back into recession with his tax plans that benefit the wealthiest of Americans. RADDATZ: Secretary Clinton, we are moving to an audience question. We're almost out of time. We have another... TRUMP: We have the slowest growth since 1929. RADDATZ: We're moving to an audience question. TRUMP: It is—our country has the slowest growth and jobs are a disaster. RADDATZ: Mr. Trump, Secretary Clinton, we want to get to the audience. Thank you very much both of you. [laughter] We have another audience question. Beth Miller has a question for both candidates. QUESTION: Good evening. Perhaps the most important aspect of this election is the Supreme Court justice. What would you prioritize as the most important aspect of selecting a Supreme Court justice? RADDATZ: We begin with your two minutes, Secretary Clinton. CLINTON: Thank you. Well, you're right. This is one of the most important issues in this election. I want to appoint Supreme Court justices who understand the way the world really works, who have real-life experience, who have not just been in a big law firm and maybe clerked for a judge and then gotten on the bench, but, you know, maybe they tried some more cases, they actually understand what people are up against. Because I think the current court has gone in the wrong direction. And so I would want to see the Supreme Court reverse Citizens United and get dark, unaccountable money out of our politics. Donald doesn't agree with that. I would like the Supreme Court to understand that voting rights are still a big problem in many parts of our country, that we don't always do everything we can to make it possible for people of color and older people and young people to be able to exercise their franchise. I want a Supreme Court that will stick with Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose, and I want a Supreme Court that will stick with marriage equality. 19/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri Now, Donald has put forth the names of some people that he would consider. And among the ones that he has suggested are people who would reverse Roe v. Wade and reverse marriage equality. I think that would be a terrible mistake and would take us backwards. I want a Supreme Court that doesn't always side with corporate interests. I want a Supreme Court that understands because you're wealthy and you can give more money to something doesn't mean you have any more rights or should have any more rights than anybody else. So I have very clear views about what I want to see to kind of change the balance on the Supreme Court. And I regret deeply that the Senate has not done its job and they have not permitted a vote on the person that President Obama, a highly qualified person, they've not given him a vote to be able to be have the full complement of nine Supreme Court justices. I think that was a dereliction of duty. I hope that they will see their way to doing it, but if I am so fortunate enough as to be president, I will immediately move to make sure that we fill that, we have nine justices that get to work on behalf of our people. RADDATZ: Thank you, Secretary Clinton. Thank you. You're out of time. Mr. Trump? TRUMP: Justice Scalia, great judge, died recently. And we have a vacancy. I am looking to appoint judges very much in the mold of Justice Scalia. I'm looking for judges—and I've actually picked 20 of them so that people would see, highly respected, highly thought of, and actually very beautifully reviewed by just about everybody. But people that will respect the Constitution of the United States. And I think that this is so important. Also, the Second Amendment, which is totally under siege by people like Hillary Clinton. They'll respect the Second Amendment and what it stands for, what it represents. So important to me. Now, Hillary mentioned something about contributions just so you understand. So I will have in my race more than $100 million put in—of my money, meaning I'm not taking all of this big money from all of these different corporations like she's doing. What I ask is this. So I'm putting in more than—by the time it's finished, I'll have more than $100 million invested. Pretty much self-funding money. We're raising money for the Republican Party, and we're doing tremendously on the small donations, $61 average or so. I ask Hillary, why doesn't—she made $250 million by being in office. She used the power of her office to make a lot of money. Why isn't she funding, not for $100 million, but why don't you put $10 million or $20 million or $25 million or $30 million into your own campaign? It's $30 million less for special interests that will tell you exactly what to do and it would really, I think, be a nice sign to the American public. Why aren't you putting some money in? You have a lot of it. You've made a lot of it because of the fact that you've been in office. Made a lot of it while you were secretary of state, actually. So why aren't you putting money into your own campaign? I'm just curious. CLINTON: Well...[crosstalk] RADDATZ: Thank you very much. We're going to get on to one more question. CLINTON: The question was about the Supreme Court. And I just want to quickly say, I respect the Second Amendment. But I believe there should be comprehensive background checks, and we should close the gun show loophole, and close the online loophole. COOPER: Thank you. RADDATZ: We have—we have one more question, Mrs. Clinton. CLINTON: We have to save as many lives as we possibly can. COOPER: We have one more question from Ken Bone about energy policy. Ken? QUESTION: What steps will your energy policy take to meet our energy needs, while at the same time remaining environmentally friendly and minimizing job loss for fossil power plant workers? COOPER: Mr. Trump, two minutes? TRUMP: Absolutely. I think it's such a great question, because energy is under siege by the Obama administration. Under absolutely siege. The EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, is killing these energy companies. And foreign companies 20/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri are now coming in buying our—buying so many of our different plants and then re-jiggering the plant so that they can take care of their oil. We are killing—absolutely killing our energy business in this country. Now, I'm all for alternative forms of energy, including wind, including solar, et cetera. But we need much more than wind and solar. And you look at our miners. Hillary Clinton wants to put all the miners out of business. There is a thing called clean coal. Coal will last for 1,000 years in this country. Now we have natural gas and so many other things because of technology. We have unbelievable—we have found over the last seven years, we have found tremendous wealth right under our feet. So good. Especially when you have $20 trillion in debt. I will bring our energy companies back. They'll be able to compete. They'll make money. They'll pay off our national debt. They'll pay off our tremendous budget deficits, which are tremendous. But we are putting our energy companies out of business. We have to bring back our workers. You take a look at what's happening to steel and the cost of steel and China dumping vast amounts of steel all over the United States, which essentially is killing our steelworkers and our steel companies. We have to guard our energy companies. We have to make it possible. The EPA is so restrictive that they are putting our energy companies out of business. And all you have to do is go to a great place like West Virginia or places like Ohio, which is phenomenal, or places like Pennsylvania and you see what they're doing to the people, miners and others in the energy business. It's a disgrace. COOPER: Your time is up. Thank you. TRUMP: It's an absolute disgrace. COOPER: Secretary Clinton, two minutes. CLINTON: And actually—well, that was very interesting. First of all, China is illegally dumping steel in the United States and Donald Trump is buying it to build his buildings, putting steelworkers and American steel plants out of business. That's something that I fought against as a senator and that I would have a trade prosecutor to make sure that we don't get taken advantage of by China on steel or anything else. You know, because it sounds like you're in the business or you're aware of people in the business—you know that we are now for the first time ever energy-independent. We are not dependent upon the Middle East. But the Middle East still controls a lot of the prices. So the price of oil has been way down. And that has had a damaging effect on a lot of the oil companies, right? We are, however, producing a lot of natural gas, which serves as a bridge to more renewable fuels. And I think that's an important transition. We've got to remain energy-independent. It gives us much more power and freedom than to be worried about what goes on in the Middle East. We have enough worries over there without having to worry about that. So I have a comprehensive energy policy, but it really does include fighting climate change, because I think that is a serious problem. And I support moving toward more clean, renewable energy as quickly as we can, because I think we can be the 21st century clean energy superpower and create millions of new jobs and businesses. But I also want to be sure that we don't leave people behind. That's why I'm the only candidate from the very beginning of this campaign who had a plan to help us revitalize coal country, because those coal miners and their fathers and their grandfathers, they dug that coal out. A lot of them lost their lives. They were injured, but they turned the lights on and they powered their factories. I don't want to walk away from them. So we've got to do something for them. COOPER: Secretary Clinton... CLINTON: But the price of coal is down worldwide. So we have to look at this comprehensively. COOPER: Your time is up. CLINTON: And that's exactly what I have proposed. I hope you will go to and look at my entire policy. COOPER: Time is up. We have time for one more... RADDATZ: We have... COOPER: One more audience question. RADDATZ: We've sneaked in one more question, and it comes from Karl Becker. 21/22 2/6/2017 Presidential Candidates Debates: Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri QUESTION: Good evening. My question to both of you is, regardless of the current rhetoric, would either of you name one positive thing that you respect in one another? [applause] RADDATZ: Mr. Trump, would you like to go first? CLINTON: Well, I certainly will, because I think that's a very fair and important question. Look, I respect his children. His children are incredibly able and devoted, and I think that says a lot about Donald. I don't agree with nearly anything else he says or does, but I do respect that. And I think that is something that as a mother and a grandmother is very important to me. So I believe that this election has become in part so—so conflict-oriented, so intense because there's a lot at stake. This is not an ordinary time, and this is not an ordinary election. We are going to be choosing a president who will set policy for not just four or eight years, but because of some of the important decisions we have to make here at home and around the world, from the Supreme Court to energy and so much else, and so there is a lot at stake. It's one of the most consequential elections that we've had. And that's why I've tried to put forth specific policies and plans, trying to get it off of the personal and put it on to what it is I want to do as president. And that's why I hope people will check on that for themselves so that they can see that, yes, I've spent 30 years, actually maybe a little more, working to help kids and families. And I want to take all that experience to the White House and do that every single day. RADDATZ: Mr. Trump? TRUMP: Well, I consider her statement about my children to be a very nice compliment. I don't know if it was meant to be a compliment, but it is a great—I'm very proud of my children. And they've done a wonderful job, and they've been wonderful, wonderful kids. So I consider that a compliment. I will say this about Hillary. She doesn't quit. She doesn't give up. I respect that. I tell it like it is. She's a fighter. I disagree with much of what she's fighting for. I do disagree with her judgment in many cases. But she does fight hard, and she doesn't quit, and she doesn't give up. And I consider that to be a very good trait. RADDATZ: Thanks to both of you. COOPER: We want to thank both the candidates. We want to thank the university here. This concludes the town hall meeting. Our thanks to the candidates, the commission, Washington University, and to everybody who watched. RADDATZ: Please tune in on October 19th for the final presidential debate that will take place at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Good night, everyone. Citation: Presidential Candidates Debates: "Presidential Debate at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri," October 9, 2016. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. Home Contact © 1999-2017 - Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley - The American Presidency Project 22/22 EXHIBIT 17 2/6/2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees | X LOGIN WITH By signing in with your Social Identity you are agreeing to the Terms of Service and the Privacy Policy. OR USE EMAIL PASSWORD Remember my Email LOGIN Need a myCBN account? Register Here Forgot your Password? CBN Menu The 700 Club News Christian Living CBN Radio Watch CBN Superbook CBN Ministries Give Sign In 1/15 2/6/2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees | Free Subscription Follow CBN News Newswatch Christian World News Studio 5 The Brody File Jerusalem Dateline Mundo Cristiano All Shows 2/15 2/6/2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees | Video US World Israel Health Shows All Shows Jerusalem Dateline Christian World News Newswatch The Brody File Digital Download Mundo Cristiano Politics Entertainment Finance Blogs All Blogs Jerusalem Dateline The Brody File Studio 5 The Link! Mommyhood Matters Money Wise Beltway Buzz Global Lane Healthy Living Hurd on the Web More Blogs Entertainment Finance Politics Shows Watch About/Follow Podcasts/Blog About/Follow 3/15 2/6/2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees | Blog About/Follow Blog About/Follow Watch Resources Related Stories Testimonies Context Watch Blog About/Follow The Watchman Episodes Watch Blog About/Follow Love in Action Project 4/15 2/6/2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees | Watch Blog About/Follow The Brody File Episodes Watch About/Follow Watch About/Follow Blog About/Follow 5/15 2/6/2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees | Blog About/Follow Blog About/Follow Watch Blog About/Follow Jerusalem Dateline Episodes Watch About/Follow Blog About/Follow Blog About/Follow 6/15 2/6/2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees | Watch About/Follow Watch About/Follow Watch About/Follow Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees blogs thebrodyfile Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees 01-27-2017 David Brody Share Tweet Email +125 7/15 2/6/2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees | In an exclusive interview with The Brody File, President Donald Trump says persecuted Christians will be given priority when it comes to applying for refugee status in the United States. “We are going to help them,” President Trump tells CBN News. “They’ve been horribly treated. Do you know if you were a Christian in Syria it was impossible, at least very tough to get into the United States? If you were a Muslim you could come in, but if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible and the reason that was so unfair, everybody was persecuted in all fairness, but they were chopping off the heads of everybody but more so the Christians. And I thought it was very, very unfair.” The Brody File conducted the interview Friday morning in the Blue Room at The White House. More newsworthy clips are coming soon. The entire interview can be seen this Sunday at 11pm on Freeform (cable TV, formerly ABC Family Channel) during our special CBN News show. This is just the third interview President Trump has done from The White House and it will be the only interview that will air in its’ entirety this weekend. MANDATORY VIDEO AND COURTESY: CBN NEWS/THE BRODY FILE DAVID BRODY: “Persecuted Christians, we’ve talked about this, the refugees overseas. The refugee program, or the refugee changes you’re looking to make. As it relates to persecuted Christians, do you see them as kind of a priority here?” PRESIDENT TRUMP: “Yes.” DAVID BRODY: “You do?” PRESIDENT TRUMP: “They’ve been horribly treated. Do you know if you were a Christian in Syria it was impossible, at least very tough to get into the United States? If you were a Muslim you could come in, but if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible and the reason that was so unfair, everybody was persecuted in all fairness, but they were chopping off the heads of everybody but more so the Christians. And I thought it was very, very unfair. So we are going to help them.” While you are here... We'd like to ask for your help. At CBN News, we strive to bring you the most current, pertinent and reliable news possible. We are able to bring you this important news from a Christian perspective because of the help of friends like you who know how vital it is to have an alternative to the news you hear from major media outlets. Would you help ensure that we can continue to provide this important service to you and our country by considering a special gift today? Or would you become a monthly partner so we know we can count on the resources we need to bring you the best news possible? Thanks for being a part of the dynamic future of CBN News, as well as helping The Christian Broadcasting Network share the love of Jesus with hurting people everywhere. Become a Partner Give a special gift 8/15 2/6/2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees | Share Tweet +125 Email JOIN THE CONVERSATION Login Write a comment 125 Comments Subscribe RSS Steve 6 days ago Christian persecution is running at about 100,000 deaths per month. I'm so glad that our President is cognizant of this and willing to alleviate some of the pain and suffering of these people. Like Reply Share Israel Friend Di 0 7 days ago Our President Donald Trump is doing his Christian duty by banning terrorists Muslims and illegals into the USA that want to promote Sharia laws upon us and terrorize this country. Isis and Hamas chop off the heads of their own people if they are found to be worshipping the GOD OF ISRAEL, our GOD, KING JESUS. This has to be stopped before they completely destroy the entire USA and all Christians and Jews, including ISRAEL. The Muslim religion is a hate religion unlike our Judea, Christianity. We love all people of every race and don't kill to please our GOD. Our GOD died, shed HIS innocent blood as the final Lamb of GOD sacrifice and was resurrected to save us from our sins. Like Reply Share Israel Friend Di 0 7 days ago President Trump is doing his Christian duty by protecting America from terrorists and Sharia law. I stand with him. Obama has jeopardized this country by allowing unvetted Muslims into this country. Isis and Hamas want to destroy Israel and the USA. They are empowered by demonic spirits. May the GOD of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the GOD of ISRAEL help us and allow our children to grow up in a safe country or the USA will soon be destroyed because it has turned its back on GOD and ISRAEL. Come soon ADONIA MESSIAH, KING JESUS! Like Reply Share Nancy Bailey 0 7 days ago He is not against muslims, he's against terrorists, which many happen to be muslim. He is about banning terrorists. Stop listening to the left who is trying to divide us. Like Reply Share Charlene Catello 0 7 days ago why is this a war between Muslims & Christians?!?! We are to all love one another as brothers!!! Trump should not be this relevant regarding religious beliefs, so whu are WE allowing him to be? God Help us ALL!! Like Reply Share ByTheirFruits 0 7 days ago A wolf in sheep's clothing. Trump embodies 2 Timothy 3. And too many evangelicals have been fooled by this immoral conman. Shameful. "But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2 People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive,disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without selfcontrol, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4 treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of 9/15 2/6/2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees | pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people." Like Reply Share Matt Hoyle 0 8 days ago How does the "Christian" Broadcast Network reconcile letting someone blatantly lie and not call them out for it on it? Trump's claims about the U.S. accepting refugees from the Middle East are not borne out by the numbers. According to the Pew Research Center, the United States had accepted an almost equal number of Christian and Muslim refugees in the 2016 fiscal year; 37,521 Christians and 38,901 Muslims. Shameful! We see you. Like Reply Share Paluson12 1 8 days ago Donald Trump Har Tillsammans Med sin hustru konverterade till islam Precis SOM Janet Jackson OCH Vladimir Putin konverterade till islam Like Reply Share ffryer4 0 8 days ago I am so thankful that we have a Christian President who seeks power from a higher authority when making difficult decisions. We Americans have been blessed and need to abide by Judeo/Christian biblical precepts that our founders gave us within the U.S. Constitution. CWO4 USA retired Like Reply Share First Amendment 0 9 days ago Today's actions have jeopardized the lives of millions of Americans living abroad and our military forces abroad. Trump has NO vison and NO compassion. He is a delusional sociopath. Like Reply Share 1 reply ffryer4 1 8 days ago Obama has jeopardized them by not fulfilling his duties as the President. ISIS is alive and well because we was nothing more than a community organizer. Like Reply Share tagwolf 1 9 days ago This is literally the beginning of fascism on par with WW2 Germany. I'm saddened so many people can't see it and the one's who do actually want it to happen. This isn't what America is about. It's not what our founders wanted and it's not what most of America wants. All men are created equal. Like Reply Share 3 replies First Amendment 2 9 days ago Thank you for your understanding of what is really happening in our country. Folks here really need a history lesson so that we do not repeat the horrors of WW2. Like Reply Share 1 reply ffryer4 1 8 days ago I dispute your rationale. Like Reply Share ffryer4 1 8 days ago We're a sovereign country. Like Reply Share Chadrack 0 9 days ago 10/15 2/6/2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees | God hearing his people's prayers. Like Reply Share Williem Evans 0 9 days ago Shalom Katoa,Salvation is of the Lord Jesus Christ Romans 10\9 ok also one way to God only way to Heaven. Like Reply Share Williem Evans 0 9 days ago yeeah,mr Trump is right let the Christians in those mooooslums are trouble makers ok. Like Reply Share Williem Evans 0 9 days ago trump is right Like Reply Share Williem Evans 0 9 days ago testing Like Reply Share Honest Joe 0 9 days ago Amen TRUMP! good to see you cleaning out Obama's Legacy like a skid mark in Americas shorts, We hope to see 15,000 Christians allowed in before a single Muslim, Black, or homo, reverse the tide make America Great Again! Like Reply Share 1 reply David Agosta 0 9 days ago You are not a Christian. You aren't even human. Like Reply Share Clarrisse 2 9 days ago BravoPresTRUMP! Like Reply Share Clarrisse 0 9 days ago Bravo Pres Trump! Like Reply Share David 0 9 days ago I was just meeting today with a Christian Family from Pakistan when this story broke. They have been living in third country for 3.5 years waiting to be resettled. Their grandparents included a renowned physician, a brigadier general, and a landowner who owned the land of a dozen villages. All were highly respected and loved by their Muslim neighbors except for the radicals. The father was a business owner who was very respected and loved by his Muslim employees and customers. However, rising extremism caused them to loose everything and eventually repeated attempts to kill them caused them to flee from city to city and then abandon everything and flee to a neighboring country. Here they have all been living in hiding in a tiny room which they cannot leave. Many other Christians from Pakistan and Syria are also living in the area. Some have been captured and placed in sub-human conditions in a detention center, some are staying one step ahead of the police, living in constant fear hour after hour, day after day, year after year. Some fathers have been sent back and turned over to the Pakistani police which is a quick death sentence since all were marked for death simply for believing in Christ. 11/15 2/6/2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees | All have registered with the UNHCR. However, very few Christians have resettled. MANY Muslims have resettled. On one of my visits with them they told of a man who was a radical terrorist well known and feared by the Christians community who came through the program and resettled to the USA in less than 6 months. Meanwhile their daughters are experiencing a childhood with NO social contact or access to education and they all live in constant fear. I am the only person who has taken the risk to connect with them face to face and encourage them. They took the risk to visit local churches at first but were turned away because of the fear of reprisals from the police. So they just sit and wait and hope that something will change. SO David Brody's news article today was a HUGE breath of HOPE! Please pray for them and the many other Christians like them. PLEASE pray that President Trump will act quickly to replace those overseeing the resettlement program, removing the Muslim gatekeepers who are using the program for Jihad with people who will resettle true refugees who will embrace the values of America and not come to change it into the mess they came from. Like Reply Share Mozee Atupu 0 9 days ago (edited) Let me highlight four common mistakes, with reflections based on what we are hearing from Syrian church leaders: 1. “We should use religion as a basis for selecting which refugees to accept.” No, we should not! Most Syrian church leaders insist that Christians should not be given special treatment. Assigning refugee status or offering asylum must be done on the basis of vulnerability and need. To do otherwise not only violates international refugee and humanitarian law, but also the teachings of Christ. The Good Samaritan looked beyond religious and ethnic labels to show genuine neighborliness to the one in need. Are there some Christian refugees who are particularly vulnerable? Undoubtedly – let us welcome them. Are there legitimate security concerns concerning some refugees? Of course, and appropriate safeguards must be put in place. However, let us be clear that we accept refugees on the basis of their need and exclude those deemed to be a security threat on the basis of evidence — not their religion. 2. “Christian refugees are the most vulnerable.” Christians from some areas of Syria are certainly among the most vulnerable. Heinous atrocities targeting Christians and other religious minorities have been committed, especially by the Islamic State, or ISIS. Christian refugees who have fled from areas controlled by extremists have a strong case for asylum, based on vulnerability, but a balanced assessment must recognize two important factors. Firstly, many Christian refugees have not fled from areas overrun by ISIS and have not been under direct threat on account of their religion. Of course, many have a genuine fear of extremists, and especially of an Islamist power-grab if the current government were to fall. The threat they feel is commonly due to their perceived political affiliation —Syrian Christians are assumed to support the regime — rather than their religion. Other groups also feel those threats. Secondly, it is not just Christians who have fled from areas controlled by extremists. The majority who have left are Muslims whose values and ways of life differ from those of the extremists. They, too, have fled because of their extreme vulnerability. While the danger of ill-intentioned infiltrators among asylum applicants must be taken seriously, it would be perverse to label all non-Christians who have fled extremist threats as suspected extremists rather than to recognize their vulnerability. 3. “The United Nations refugee system is skewed against Christians.” Some claim that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees only selects refugees for resettlement from refugee camps, which Christians have avoided through fear. It is true that very few Christians are in refugee camps, but fear is only one factor in this — the natural preference of most Christian refugees has been to move to areas with substantial existing Christian communities, especially in Lebanon. The U.N.H.C.R. denies that only those in camps are eligible for resettlement and have made efforts extending beyond the camps. All who are registered with the U.N. refugee agency are eligible for consideration — and most Christian refugees have access to register and those who have not can readily do so. The U.N.H.C.R. representative in Jordan notes that only 15 percent of all Syrian refugees in Jordan are in camps, and emphasizes that registration teams have visited churches to assist Christians with the registration process. In Lebanon 12/15 2/6/2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees | an even smaller proportion of refugees are in “tented communities” and the term “camp” is strictly avoided because of long-standing political sensitivities. While U.N.H.C.R. is far from perfect, primarily due to a lack of funds and logistical challenges, it is usually best placed to assess the needs and vulnerability of Syrian refugees, whether Christian or otherwise. Like Reply Share 2 Mozee Atupu 9 days ago No Muslim Syrian refugee has killed a single American in the U. White Christian Americans have killed over 200 Americans in the US Like Reply Share 3 Mozee Atupu 9 days ago Overall, a far larger total number of Christian refugees than Muslim refugees have entered the U.S. since fiscal 2002. During the past 15 years, the U.S. has admitted 399,677 Christian refugees and 279,339 Muslim refugees, meaning that 46% of all refugees who have entered the U.S. during this time have been Christian while 32% have been Muslim. Like Reply Share 4 dawnlvsjesus 10 days ago This is so great!!! Thank you Mr. President! Like Reply Share 1 reply Moderator 0 7 days ago Thank you for your comment, dawnlvsjesus. - CBNMark. Like Reply Share Barry Harless 0 10 days ago GREAT Like Reply Share 1 reply Moderator 0 7 days ago Your input is valued, Barry Harless. - CBNMark. Like Reply Share 0 Show more comments View Comments More from The Brody File 02-03-2017 President Trump Interview with Brody File Goes Off the Charts; Delivers 'Big-League' Exposure 01-27-2017 Brody File Exclusive Interview: President Trump Says He Can Impose Border Tax on Mexico If He Wants 01-27-2017 Brody File Exclusive Interview: President Trump Relying on God Now More Than Ever 01-27-2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees 01-27-2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Calls Mainstream Media The “Opposition Party.” 01-27-2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Evangelicals Will Love His Supreme Court Pick The Brody File newsletter Submitted by escamp on August 12, 2015 - 11:03am The Brody File newsletter 13/15 2/6/2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees | Stay up-to-date with CBN News Chief Political Correspondent, David Brody. Subscribe 01-26-2017 President Trump Talks with the Brody File at the White House 01-17-2017 Exclusive: The Day Donald Trump Showed Me His Childhood Bible 01-17-2017 This Just in to Brody File: Exclusive: Donald Trump to Use Childhood Bible for Inauguration 01-11-2017 New Movie Released: Trump Vs. Media Beasts 01-11-2017 Gingrich on Tillerson and Putin: It’s Not Like They’re Rotary Buddies 01-10-2017 Gingrich on Putin: Just Show Him a Little More Respect Share Tweet Email Contact Support CBN News Know Jesus? Grow Get Prayer Give to CBN Free Subscription Get CBN News in your inbox! Apps Podcasts RSS Sections US World Israel Health Entertainment Politics Finances Shows Newswatch Christian World News Studio 5 The Brody File Jerusalem Dateline 14/15 2/6/2017 Brody File Exclusive: President Trump Says Persecuted Christians Will Be Given Priority As Refugees | Mundo Cristiano All Shows Blogs Studio 5 The Link! The Brody File Beltway Buzz Jerusalem Dateline The Global Lane Hurd On the Web Healthy Living Call for Prayer: (800) 823-6053 Donor Privacy Policy Privacy Notice Terms of Use Advertise with us © 2017 The Christian Broadcasting Network, Inc., A nonprofit 501 (c)(3) Charitable Organization. 15/15 EXHIBIT 18 2/16/2017 Donald Trump on Twitter defends Muslim ban, calls world a 'horrible mess' | Metro News This site uses cookies. By continuing, your consent is assumed. Learn more News... but not as you know it 108m shares News Sport Trending Home Trending News UK World Weird Tech Sport Football Rumour Mill PL Table Oddballs Club Metro Entertainment Showbiz TV Film Music Gaming Celebrity Big Brother Soaps Lifestyle Sex Fashion Food Travel Video More Lifestyle Blogs Students Submit stuff Competitions Jobs Property Search Metro Follow us Trump remains defiant over Muslim ban in tweet Simon Robb for 29 Jan 2017 2:32 pm 21 1/15 2/16/2017 Donald Trump on Twitter defends Muslim ban, calls world a 'horrible mess' | Metro News Donald Trump said the country needs ‘extreme vetting’ (Picture: Getty Images) Donald Trump’s Muslim ban has caused controversy around the world since it was unveiled on Friday. Donald Trump attacks 'mess at home and abroad' during rare press conference But despite thousands making a stand across America’s airports – and the US President receiving fierce criticism from abroad – he remained defiant in his latest tweet. Defending his decision, he called the world a ‘horrible mess’ and said the country needs ‘extreme vetting’ of immigrants. He tweeted: ‘Our country needs strong borders and extreme vetting, NOW. Look what is happening all over Europe and, indeed, the world – a horrible mess!’ Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Follow Our country needs strong borders and extreme vetting, NOW. Look what is happening all over Europe and, indeed, the world a horrible mess! 8:08 AM - 29 Jan 2017 51,419 222,818 In a follow up tweet he said Christians in the Middle East have been ‘executed in large numbers’. 2/15 2/16/2017 Donald Trump on Twitter defends Muslim ban, calls world a 'horrible mess' | Metro News Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump Follow Christians in the Middle-East have been executed in large numbers. We cannot allow this horror to continue! 10:03 AM - 29 Jan 2017 60,322 227,762 The President signed the executive order banning all Syrian refugees and temporarily blocking immigrants in seven predominantly Muslim nations from entering the country. Inside the 'Satanic' home where police freed five children from their parents On Saturday, Trump told reporters in the White House’s Oval Office that his order was ‘not a Muslim ban’. But following his latest tweet, people couldn’t disagree more. Alex Zalben @azalben Follow @realDonaldTrump the only mess that's being made is coming from you, breaking apart families and destroying lives. 8:15 AM - 29 Jan 2017 183 2,215 Ken Klippenstein @kenklippenstein Follow @realDonaldTrump you've completely rejected vetting in favor of arbitrary bans 8:09 AM - 29 Jan 2017 47 785 Emma Kennedy @EmmaKennedy Follow @realDonaldTrump last year, 200,000 Americans were killed by air pollution. Chances of being killed by a refugee? 3.4 BILLION to one. 8:09 AM - 29 Jan 2017 325 1,481 3/15 2/16/2017 Donald Trump on Twitter defends Muslim ban, calls world a 'horrible mess' | Metro News Mike P Williams @Mike_P_Williams Follow @realDonaldTrump Your policies, attitude towards human life, families, & innocent people is a horrible mess! May you continue to lose bigly! 8:10 AM - 29 Jan 2017 · Bexley, London 58 798 KWANZA OSAJYEFO @kwanzer Follow @realDonaldTrump Actually LOOK instead of signing whatever your puppeteers give YOU. YOU made this mess. No on else. YOU. #MuslimBan 8:23 AM - 29 Jan 2017 17 142 More Donald TrumpTwitter Petition to have Donald Trump impeached has nearly 1,000,000 signatures The London Dungeon is being slammed for posting really inappropriate Valentine's jokes Donald Trump poses with WWE's McMahon family Nike's new campaign is a stand for equality and it's not messing around 4/15 2/16/2017 Donald Trump on Twitter defends Muslim ban, calls world a 'horrible mess' | Metro News London to host huge screening of The Salesman as Iranian director has boycotted the Oscars Government says Trump should be 'extended full courtesy of state visit' MORE: Searching for ‘tiny hands’ on Twitter gives you Donald Trump’s profile page MORE: People are shamelessly tweeting about how much they change after a job interview MORE: This half onion in a bag has more Twitter followers than all these British politicians Comments (1) 1 Comment Sort by Oldest Add a comment... Grahame Gourlay Whether you love him or loathe him you cannot ignore him. Like · Reply · Jan 29, 2017 12:22pm Facebook Comments Plugin FROM THE WEB Sponsored Links by Taboola This game will keep you up all night! Pirates: Free Online Game Watch: The Next Hot Cash Generating Industry with Donald Trump as President! Finance Spotlight 5/15 EXHIBIT 19 2/9/2017 U.S. admits record number of Muslim refugees in 2016 | Pew Research Center NUM B ER S , FAC TS AND TR ENDS S HAP I NG YOUR WOR LD AB OUT | F OLLOW US M ENU Search RE SE A RCH A RE A S OC TOB ER 5, 2016 U.S. admits record number of Muslim refugees in 2016 BY PHILLIP CONNOR (HTTP://WWW.PEWRESEARCH.ORG/STAFF/PHILLIP-CONNOR/) A total of 38,901 Muslim refugees entered the U.S. in fiscal year 2016, making up almost half (46%) of the nearly 85,000 refugees who entered the country in that period, according to a Pew Research Center analysis of data from the State Department’s Refugee Processing Center ( ItemPath=/rpt_WebArrivalsReports/MX%20-%20Arrivals%20by%20Nationality%20and%20Religion) . That means the U.S. has admitted the highest number of Muslim refugees of any year since data on self-reported religious affiliations first became publicly available in 2002. 1/8 2/9/2017 U.S. admits record number of Muslim refugees in 2016 | Pew Research Center ( Almost the same number of Christian (37,521) as Muslim refugees were admitted in fiscal 2016, which ended Sept. 30. A slightly lower share of 2016’s refugees were Christian (44%) than Muslim, the first time that has happened since fiscal 2006, when a large number of Somali refugees ( entered the U.S. People seeking to enter the U.S. as refugees are processed overseas. As part of the process, they are asked a series of questions, including their religious affiliation. When their applications are approved, refugees travel to the U.S. to be resettled by nonprofit groups associated with the Office of Refugee Resettlement ( . Refugees to the U.S. are different from asylum seekers, who claim asylum after already being in the U.S. or crossing into the U.S. via an airport or land border. Refugees make up a small percentage (about one-in-ten) of the roughly 1 million immigrants granted lawful permanent residency in the U.S. each year. Because the U.S. government does not keep track of the religion of new legal immigrants, it is not possible to say what share of all recent immigrants are Muslim. A 2013 Center report ( , however, estimated that as of 2012, roughly six-in-ten new legal immigrants were Christian, compared with one-in-ten who were Muslim. Just two countries – Syria (12,486) and Somalia (9,012) – were the source of more than half of fiscal 2016’s Muslim refugees. The rest are from Iraq (7,853), Burma (Myanmar) (3,145), Afghanistan (2,664) and other countries (3,741). 2/8 2/9/2017 U.S. admits record number of Muslim refugees in 2016 | Pew Research Center Overall, a far larger total number of Christian refugees than Muslim refugees have entered the U.S. since fiscal 2002. During the past 15 years, the U.S. has admitted 399,677 Christian refugees and 279,339 Muslim refugees, meaning that 46% of all refugees who have entered the U.S. during this time have been Christian while 32% have been Muslim. In the just-ended fiscal year, about 8,120 refugees (10%) were members of faiths other than Islam or Christianity. More than 3,000 belonged to Buddhist traditions while nearly 2,000 more were Hindu. A much lower number of refugees in 2016 were atheists or claimed no religious affiliation (449 refugees overall, or less than 1% of the year’s refugees). ( The U.S. received 84,995 refugees in fiscal year 2016, effectively meeting the 85,000 ceiling ( set by the Obama administration at the beginning of the year. The Democratic Republic of the Congo (16,370), Syria (12,587) and Burma (Myanmar) (12,347) were the top origin countries of refugees in 2016. Together, refugees from these three nations represented nearly half (49%) of all refugees admitted to the U.S. over the past year. The administration set the goal of resettling 10,000 Syrian refugees ( in the U.S. in the fiscal year. This goal was exceeded, and refugee status was given to 12,587 Syrians. Nearly all of them (99%) were Muslim and less than 1% were Christian. As a point of comparison, Pew Research Center estimated ( Syria’s religious composition to be 93% Muslim and 5% Christian in 2010. 3/8 2/9/2017 U.S. admits record number of Muslim refugees in 2016 | Pew Research Center Note: This post, originally published Aug. 16, 2016, has been updated to include data for all of fiscal year 2016. Phillip Connor ( is a research associate focusing on demography and migration studies at Pew Research Center. POSTS EMAIL BIO @PC_CONNOR 29 Comments Anonymous • 4 months ago (#comment-672318) if the U.S. don’t stop letting refugees in, something bad is going to happen. and look at Canada they are having problems with them Muslims I guess they want to have there own rules. Anonymous • 4 months ago (#comment-672285) The type of immigrants is more important than the quantity. We need and want immigrants who desire to become American Citizens, Speak English, Learn our History, respect and follow our laws, and embrace our flag, customs, etc. This country has failed to maintain the focus on immigration that made our country great. People came here from all walks of life but became dedicated citizens. New Immigrants want us to change our country to resemble the country they have come from, they want their flag, their language, their laws, etc. This is not conducive to making America strong. Anonymous • 4 months ago (#comment-672322) Amen! Anonymous • 4 months ago (#comment-672396) Well spoken. This is the point that angers generational Americans. The immigrants choose to leave their country and the corruption there for 1 reason or another. They choose to come live the American Dream. Live it and love it. I would never want to leave my United States of America. Our customs are the best. That’s why everyone desires to come here Anonymous • 4 months ago (#comment-672397) While I agree with the overall point you are making there needs to be some clarification of what I think you are trying to say. If by saying, “embrace our flag,” you mean embrace our constitution and our economic model of competitive capitalism then I absolutely agree. However, they are free to practice their religion, say, and do what they want as long as they do not break laws. Bottom line, they simply need to follow the law of our land, which has created the best and most fair playing field in the world (i.e. their Sharia law has no place in our system). 4/8 2/9/2017 U.S. admits record number of Muslim refugees in 2016 | Pew Research Center Anonymous • 6 months ago (#comment-671327) A 2013 Center report, however, estimated that as of 2012, roughly six-in-ten new legal immigrants were Christian, compared with one-in-ten who were Muslim. but the headline reads; Nearly half of refugees entering the U.S. this year are Muslim i assume many readers like myself replace “refugees” with the word “immigrant” and read the article because of that false assumption. lumping all immigration together as a threat has been one of donald j.’s most effective campaign themes. the fact that southern border illegal immigration is at net zero with illegal hispanics returning to their home countries is adamantly denied by donald j. and the right wing propaganda machine. they also try to make legal immigration of one million people per year it seem like an invasion of hordes of potential terrorists while the number of highly vetted refugees is a tiny fraction of all immigration. in other words the headline is clickbait and undermines the stories factual content. Anonymous • 6 months ago (#comment-671287) “As part of the process, they are asked a series of questions, including their religious affiliation. ” as we saw with San Bernadino case, there is zero follow up, the wife had used a nonexistent address. Anonymous • 4 months ago (#comment-672320) The wife did not enter as a refugee. Steve Coe • 6 months ago (#comment-671276) It would be very interesting to also know how long refugees of various faith traditions had to wait from the time their application was submitted until refugee status was approved by the US. Oliver Clozoff • 6 months ago (#comment-671275) I have a hard time believing these numbers for Christian refugees. Where are they coming from? The article does not say. It’s for sure they’re NOT coming from Iraq or Syria. Lisa Jennings • 6 months ago (#comment-671309) There are christians that live in the middle east. Anonymous • 6 months ago (#comment-671332) That is not true. Only 11% are Christians. Anonymous • 6 months ago (#comment-671360) 11% of the population of Syria is over 2 million people. Not to mention many Christian refugees also come Sub-Saharan Africa, which has a sizable Christian population. 5/8 2/9/2017 U.S. admits record number of Muslim refugees in 2016 | Pew Research Center Anonymous • 6 months ago (#comment-671273) Please clarify use of term ‘non-profit’ . This sounds like private charity instead of the government-reimbursed organizations many taxpayers don’t realize they are supporting. Thank you Marijan Favetti • 6 months ago (#comment-671289) Perhaps if you bothered to do some research, specifically to see who the Office of Refugee Resettlement is partnering with you’d see that they are: Church World Service (CWS)Visit disclaimer page • Ethiopian Community Development Council (ECDC)Visit disclaimer page • Episcopal Migration Ministries (EMM)Visit disclaimer page • Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society (HIAS)Visit disclaimer page • International Rescue Committee (IRC)Visit disclaimer page • US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants (USCRI)Visit disclaimer page • Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services (LIRS)Visit disclaimer page • United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB)Visit disclaimer page • World Relief Corporation (WR Anonymous • 6 months ago (#comment-671259) The immigrant numbers are much higher than that. Maybe you were referring to weekly or at best bi weekly numbers Will Gill • 6 months ago (#comment-671307) Refugee does not include illegal immigration numbers, Illegal immigration numbers are much higher than all the refugee numbers combined. Anonymous • 4 months ago (#comment-672261) Nor it includes immigration to start with… Refuge status is granted temporally to those who are fleeing from a serious threat to their life, integrity or freedom. Anonymous • 6 months ago (#comment-671257) Lop-sided immigration, makes no sense. Vetting inadequate. Tim Crowley • 6 months ago (#comment-671254) No real surprise. Given the areas where there is strife that causes refugees, this is to be expected. Ara Yilancioglu • 6 months ago (#comment-671252) Is it a coincidence you left the most significant fact for the last paragraph of your article? In a predominantly muslim country like Syria, 99% to be close to exact, the USA has “resettled less than 1%” of the Christians. In a muslim country where the islamic religion is the single most powerful driving force behind every single day of life in that country, why is the USA resettling LESS THEN 1% of the Christians? 6/8 2/9/2017 U.S. admits record number of Muslim refugees in 2016 | Pew Research Center In a 99% predominately islamic country like Syria where it’s common knowledge that Christians heads are being chopped off for not converting to Islam, in the country where the non-islamists are persecuted because they don’t worship Allah, why in the world is the USA helping LESS THAN 1% of the Christians in Syria? President Obama and his administration’s policies do nothing to help the REAL refugees in these chaotic, primarily islamic countries. If the Shias have religious or cultural differences with the Sunnis, LET THEM. If the Kurds have religious or cultural difference with the Shias, LET THEM! But in GOD’S name why are we extracting the same intolerant people and importing them into the USA? Those same intolerant muslims who hate homosexuals, who demean women, and who don’t assimilate to western cultures are the same toxic people we are IMPORTING into the USA! The CHRISTIANS are the real refugees and the real asylum seekers and the real victims being slaughtered every day. The Christians are the tolerant people who don’t throw homosexuals off buildings. The Christians are the people who most directly associate with ‘western’ cultures and traditions! The practices of the Obama administration of assisting into the USA the same people who are unable to assimilate to the various sects of their OWN islamic religions in their own islamic countries. The Christians in these islamic countries are having their necks slit open, forced to move to mountaintops and starve, and have their churches razed and burned to the ground. Do we just ignore the news broadcasts from these countries? One would think President Obama would learn from the grave mistakes of England and Europe. That is, if President Obama really means to do what is right for the USA. Rich Rose • 6 months ago (#comment-671330) Ara…well stated! Anonymous • 6 months ago (#comment-671248) So, do any of them have any skills that will contribute to America? Jim Kocsis • 6 months ago (#comment-671242) This article is extremely misleading and seeks to bury the most relevant information in the last paragraph. While Syria has a civil war going on, no group has suffered as much as Syria’s Christians, yet 99% of those we are admitting to the U.S. are Muslim?? Beyond the perils of the war itself, Christians have been specifically targeted by ISIS and therefore should be our priority, to say nothing of the fact that they are far more likely to assimilate into U.S.society successfully. The fact that Christians compromise a much smaller percentage of the Syrian population as compared to Muslims does not make admitting them as the priority any less valid, quite to the contrary, their position as a small persecuted minority within Syrian society makes their claims for asylum even more valid. Anonymous • 4 months ago (#comment-672262) You might be getting this wrong actually. Christians Syrians have suffered the least on average during the civil war and that’s mainly because the places where they live have been kept off war for most the duration of the civil war. Christians in Syria live mostly in the west coast, around center Damascus, Homs and Lakatia (and some in the high-class neighbors in Aleppo who have been largely untouched as well). What is often not told in the new is that Bashad al Assad leads a largely secular Government and thus his larger and stronger base support comes from the religious minorities, including Christians. Most Arabs (the rebels, minus Kurds) hates his secularism and wants to re-institute the Sharia law (some with more strict 7/8 2/9/2017 U.S. admits record number of Muslim refugees in 2016 | Pew Research Center interpretations than others, though). Now, there was been some Christians internally displaced in Syria, but they have a strong enough family and community support to relocate in other parts of Syria not currently in combat. Jane Cook • 6 months ago (#comment-671239) Why would we be taking in Burmese refugees? Burma has never been better. Why are we taking in economic refugees from Congo? They belong to Belgium. Send them there. Syrians need to go to the UAE or Saudi. Why us? Anonymous • 6 months ago (#comment-671316) I can’t say much about Congo. But regarding Burma, they’re going through a political strife, while regarding Syria, the rich Gulf states are not letting in a single refugee for some very odd reason. The rest of the Muslim countries are either too far, already have a large number of immigrants (Turkey, Jordan and Lebanon) or are having their own issues. That’s exactly why Europe and the US are the main destinations. Well, God knows for how long. :/ Mara Ranian • 6 months ago (#comment-671344) I agree with you! Steve Coe • 6 months ago (#comment-671350) Jane, you are apparently unaware of the real situation in Burma. There have indeed been some positive changes, and most citizens have a better life now than they did before 2010. However, the Burma army continues to attack their own citizens of ethnic minority groups, most of whom are Christian. The Muslim Rohinga people also continue to live in squalor. Even though they have had the opportunity to elect 75% of their parliament (the remaining 25% are active military officers appointed by the army), the elected government is still constitutionally subordinate to a still-brutal military. It puzzles me that the vast majority of of western media, who have been informed otherwise, report as though Burma is now a wonderful democracy. It is not that (yet). I personally just returned from a four week trip there two days ago, so my comments are current. 8/8 EXHIBIT 20 EXHIBIT 21 EXHIBIT 22 EXHIBIT 23 3/13/2017 Sean Spicer press conference - live updates - CBS News WAT C H L I V E NEWS S H OW S VIDEO MORE CBSN LIVE SEARCH CBS NEWS / February 21, 2017, 1:52 PM From 60 Minutes Sean Spicer press conference - live updates Putin critic says he's one of the lucky ones: "I'm still here" Does torture get good intel? Ex-Gitmo detainee says, "No" Tortured at Guantanamo, former inmate finds forgiveness Poisoned again? What 60 Minutes learned about Russia's "love of poison" Viewers react to Marine Le Pen's vision of France White House spokesman Sean Spicer holds a press briefing at the White House in Washington, U.S., February 21, 2017. / REUTERS/CARLOS BARRIA - RTSZOOZ 23 Comments / Share / Tweet / Stumble / Email Last Updated Feb 21, 2017 2:22 PM EST At today’s White House briefing, White House press secretary Sean Spicer fielded a number of questions on topics including the president’s anti-Semitism remarks, his coming travel ban and immigration enforcement guidelines released by DHS earlier today. play VIDEO Welcome back, Charlie Rose!   8 PHOTOS Skydiving dogs 0:28 CBS News @CBSNews  Here’s the live blog below. The president looks forward to working with partners in NATO to achieve our shared objectives, White House press secretary Sean Spicer said in remarks before taking questions from the White House press. Most Discussed WikiLeaks posts trove of CIA documents detailing hacking tools 3296 COMMENTS 1/6 3/13/2017 Sean Spicer press conference - live updates - CBS News President and the press Asked about the president’s comments slamming the press as the enemy of the people, Spicer said that he thought the president was very clear that certain outlets have “gone out of their way to not be completely accurate and fair in their coverage of what’s going on.” GOP scores wins as it advances health bill to replace Obamacare 1959 COMMENTS Lawmakers demand evidence for Trump's wiretap claim 1852 COMMENTS U.S. attorney in New York says he was fired 1481 COMMENTS EPA chief says carbon dioxide not main cause of global warming   2075 COMMENTS New Fire TV App 0:21 CBS News @CBSNews  On the president’s recent discussion about the North Korean missile test with Japanese PM Shinzo Abe and the appropriateness of the discussion in the dining area at Mar-a-Lago, Spicer said that to see people jump to that conclusion that it was classified materal is “disheartening.” Travel Ban We’re confident we’ll prevail in the courts, Spicer said. Until that occurs, though, we’ll have a dual track and have been consulting with DOS and DHS. Later in the briefing, Spicer said that the White House would not rescind the existing executive resc order. 1:57 p.m. Margaret Brennan asks about the Anne Frank Center’s comment that Mr. Trump’s remarks on anti-Semitism today merely provided a “bandaid on the cancer of anti-Semitism” within the Trump administration. The president has made clear that he’s the one who seeks to unite this country, Spicer said. He has been very forceful with his denunciation of people who attack because of their hate of people based on their skin color, race, gender. He’s been very clear previous to this that he wants to bring this country together and not divide people. Trade 2:04 p.m. We’re going to look throughout the trade agreements that we have with countries to make sure they’re up to date. He wants to review every trade deal. NSC NSC meeting today -- Is this the first meeting? No, it’s just a routine meeting with the staff, Spicer said. When will the first meeting of the NSC be? Gen. McMaster just got here around noon today, so we’ll give him a few days, Spicer said. Joint address President Trump will talk about what he promised during the campaign and what he’s done, Spicer said. He’ll address the challenges in cities, health care, education 2/6 3/13/2017 Sean Spicer press conference - live updates - CBS News -- where he’s taking this country and why he’s going to enact the policies he’s going to enact. Gendered bathrooms 2:08 p.m. The president believes this is a states’ rights issue, not the federal government. not something the federal government should be involved in. DHS memos What the order sets out today deals with the million or so people who have been adjudicated by ICE -- the people who threaten public safety or have a criminal record will be dealt with first. These people have already gone through due process.  0:08 CBS News @CBSNews  The president has said we have to look at this in a holistic way, Spicer said. ICE and CVP have been handcuffed. The last administration had so many carveouts, it was hard for them to do their jobs, Spicer explained. DACA / Dreamers 2:13 p.m. The president has made clear when you have 12-14 million undocumented people in the country. DACA, DAPA recipients are not the subject of what is being dealt with now. Anyone here illegally is subject to removal, but the priority through DHS guidance is to make sure people who are criminals are removed first. The priority is to make sure law enforcement has the resources they need to carry this out.   0:20 CBS News @CBSNews  3/6 3/13/2017 Sean Spicer press conference - live updates - CBS News John Kasich’s dinner with the president Gov. Kasich has reached out to the president, and the president has shown he wants to meet with anyone who can help move the country forward. If there’s common ground, great. So many of the president’s issues are issues that Ohio is dealing with. Kasich asked for the meeting, Spicer said. The two are scheduled to have dinner later this week. African American History Museum It was a very eye-opening and powerful tour for the president. He wanted to come back, Spicer said, because you can’t do it justice in just one visit. Spicer also talked about the unique experience for the president of seeing the exhibit about Dr. Carson with Ben Carson and his wife. The president looks forward to his upcoming meeting with the Congressional Black Caucus, Spicer also said, in response to a question from American Urban Radio’s April Ryan. DHS memos Are you preparing for the legal battle brewing over today’s immigration-related orders? We have done a phenomenal job of working with DHS and DOS to work through any concerns the courts may have, Spicer told reporters. A dual track is something we want to pursue to keep the country safe. Q: OMB preparing budget that eliminates EX-IM Bank? I can confirm that he’s working on a budget, talking with Congress, but we’re not at a position to go yet. DACA What it means is that this particular enforcement - implementation of order tasking agencies under DHS to address specific problem of those who have been adjudicated. This order does not address DACA, said Spicer. Undocumented who have been here for 10-15 years The president has said before he’s got a big heart. He understands the plight of some of those individuals. He understands the impact it has on many families and communities. Russia Q: doesn’t talk tough enough on Russia. What different tenor should be expected? There is widespread praise for McMaster, the new national security adviser. But the president will be the decider. If he can get a deal with Russia, he’ll try to do it. He understands if he can find common ground on fighting ISIS, growing the economy, he’ll try. If it’s in the interest of the United States, he’ll get a deal, Spicer said. He’ll have whatever he needs to implement a successful team. Adm. Harward wanted this job, but during the course of discussions, he said he had to address financial and family concerns. I talked to him again Saturday night. I would urge people to actually talk with him. We gave out his contact information. All of the rumors about the discretion he would have over the staff are “a hundred percent false,” Spicer said. I’ve talked to him several times. The president was ultimately very impressed with Gen. McMaster. He’s got full authority to structure the team the way he wants, the president said. He will have 100 percent control over the National Security Committee, and he will stay on active duty. 4/6 3/13/2017 Sean Spicer press conference - live updates - CBS News © 2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. 23 Comments / Share / Tweet / Stumble / Email . Sponsored Links by Taboola The Sweatshirt Designed by an Apple Engineer That's Bringing Manufacturing Back to America Business Insider | American Giant Harry's Releases New Blade, Keeps Price at $2 Harry's The Most Addictive Game Of The Year! Forge Of Empires - Free Online Game S HOW 23 COMME NT S + Featured in Politics Popular . Sponsored Links by Taboola No-Show Socks With "Stay-Up" Technology Cool Mom Picks | Bombas Socks I Never Run Out Of Tasty Snacks: Here's How Popdust For NatureBox Key Trump surrogates once led fight vs. WikiLeaks and Assange The Amazing Science Behind an AncestryDNA Test Revealed Several had harsh words for them, including Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, Rep. Peter King and former CIA Director James Woolsey There Are 7 Types of Irish Last Names Which One Is Yours? Ancestry Ancestry 29 Dogs That Will Fight For Your Life PetBreeds — By Graphiq 'Dog Whisperer' Faces Cruelty Probe Reuters TV Living Bold With Psoriasis 25 things you still don't know about Barack Obama Just how many almonds does he really eat, anyway? Howdy Pilgrim, Can You Pass the John Wayne Movie Quiz? 5/6 3/13/2017 Sean Spicer press conference - live updates - CBS News CBS Interactive Follow Us Site Map Privacy Policy Facebook Help Ad Choice Twitter Contact Us Terms of Use RSS CBS Bios Mobile User Agreement Email Newsletters Careers About CBS YouTube CBSi Careers Internships Advertise Closed Captioning CBS Radio News CBS Local Development Programs CBS News Store Copyright © 2017 CBS Interactive Inc. All rights reserved. Search... 6/6 EXHIBIT 24 Politics By Rosalind S. Helderman February 11 As a young conservative in liberal Santa Monica, Calif., Stephen Miller clashed frequently with his high school, often calling in to a national radio show to lambaste administrators for promoting multiculturalism, allowing Spanish-language morning announcements and failing to require recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. Miller’s outrage did not appear to subside after he graduated. As a Duke University sophomore, Miller penned a column, titled “Santa Monica High’s Multicultural Fistfights,” in which he ripped his alma mater as a “center for political indoctrination.” “The social experiment that Santa Monica High School has become is yet one more example of the dismal failure of leftism and the delusions and paranoia of its architects,” Miller wrote in the 2005 article for the conservative magazine FrontPage. In the years before he became a top adviser to President Trump and a leading West Wing advocate for the executive order temporarily halting entry into the United States from seven majority-Muslim countries, Miller was developing his skills as a culture warrior and conservative provocateur eager to condemn liberal orthodoxy — particularly on matters of race and identity. Like Trump, Miller forged that identity while immersed in liberal communities, giving him cachet with fellow conservatives for waging his battles on opposition turf. Starting as a teenager, with his frequent calls to the nationally syndicated “Larry Elder Show,” Miller made a name for himself in conservative media circles for his willingness to take controversial stands and act as a champion for those on the right who felt maligned by a culture of political correctness. He produced a canon of searing columns on race, gender and other hot-button issues and, at Duke, became known to Fox News viewers as a leading defender of the white lacrosse players wrongfully accused of raping a black stripper. By his late 20s, Miller was a key aide to then-Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), helping to torpedo a long-sought goal of immigrant advocacy groups to put millions of unauthorized Hispanic immigrants on a path to citizenship. Today, at 31, he has emerged alongside former Breitbart News chief Stephen K. Bannon as a chief engineer of Trump’s populist “America first” agenda that has roiled the Washington debate over immigration and trade and sparked alarm among traditional U.S. allies abroad. Miller, whose White House title is senior adviser to the president for policy, has been at Trump’s side for more than a year, joining his campaign in January 2016 when Sessions, who was sworn in Thursday as attorney general, was one of the only Republican officials to endorse the businessman’s candidacy. While Trump at times revamped his campaign leadership, with Bannon joining relatively late in August 2016, Miller remained a steady presence whose profile and influence grew over time. He wrote some of Trump’s most strident speeches during the campaign, including his Republican National Convention acceptance address in which Trump declared that “nobody knows the system better than me, which is why I alone can fix it.” And Miller sometimes served as the warm-up act for Trump at his large campaign rallies, including a rip-roaring speech in Wisconsin during the Republican primary when Miller thrashed Trump’s chief rival, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.), for supporting increases in legal immigration that would result in more Muslims entering the country — a position Miller charged that Cruz held with “no regard, no concern” for how it would “affect the security of you and your family.” After reports of Miller’s central role crafting the order imposing a 90-day ban on citizens of Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen from entering the United States, the young aide has drawn uncomfortable new scrutiny. MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, host of the “Morning Joe” program that is a Trump favorite, recently blasted Miller as a “very young person in the White House on a power trip thinking that you can just write executive orders and tell all of your Cabinet agencies to go to hell.” For Miller, though, working in the Trump White House is a natural culmination of his young career — a chance to work for a president who appears to share his zeal for getting under the skin of political opponents. “The way that people on the left abuse and slam people on the right — that’s probably the thing that’s most concerned Stephen,” said Elder, the Los Angeles-based conservative talk-show host who Miller describes as a mentor. “The lack of fairness. The left wing dominance in academia. The left wing dominance in the media. The left wing dominance in Hollywood.” Miller’s ideological awakening found its roots in a left-leaning high school where he has written that social life and academics were badly segregated, despite what he saw as a devotion among teachers and administrators to multiculturalism. “My best judgment at the time was that the educational answer that had been provided, which was to reject the melting-pot formula in favor of an educational formula that focused on all the things that made us different, was not working,” he told The Washington Post in an interview. Miller said he rejects the “provocateur” label, saying it suggests that his intentions are to seek attention rather than what he says is his true goal — “to battle against slim odds, a stacked deck and powerful entrenched forces, in pursuit of justice.” Miller said he turned away from the more liberal politics of his parents as he grew up in Santa Monica after buying a subscription to Guns & Ammo magazine and becoming familiar with the writings of actor Charlton Heston, a longtime president of the National Rifle Association. Miller began appearing on Elder’s show, a local broadcast that is aired in 300 markets, after the 9/11 attacks, when he felt his home town lacked sufficient patriotism. Elder said that Miller called in the first time to voice objections to his school’s failure to recite the Pledge of Allegiance daily as required by state law. In writings at the time and later, Miller said he lobbied for the pledge recitation against a recalcitrant administration that refused to put the practice in place even after he had flagged the legal violation. “Osama Bin Laden would feel very welcome at Santa Monica High School,” he wrote in a letter to the editor at the time. “It’s difficult to overstate the extent to which the instructional environment on campus was breathtakingly PC,” Miller said in an interview. Mark Kelly, who was the principal at the time, said he did not recall the episode as a major fight. When Miller flagged the issue, Kelly said he researched the law and realized that the school, indeed, needed to change its policy and institute the recitation of the pledge. Miller was invited to lead the pledge after it was reinstated. “Stephen was right,” Kelly recalled. The victory was a validation for Miller of the necessity to fight powerful figures who opposed his views. Miller pushed the school administration over his desire to host an on-campus speech by David Horowitz — a onetime Marxist, then controversial far-right conservative — who became an early mentor and would later introduce Miller to Sessions. Horowitz recalls being immediately impressed with Miller. “One of the things that struck me when I became a conservative was that conservatives don’t have any fight,” Horowitz said. “They don’t have any stomach for it. . . . Stephen Miller had that from the get-go.” Cultural-identity issues appeared to particularly animate Miller. In a column in his high school newspaper, titled “A Time to Kill,” he urged violent response to radical Islamists. “We have all heard about how peaceful and benign the Islamic religion is, but no matter how many times you say that, it cannot We change the fact that millions of radical Muslims would celebrate your death for the simple reason that you are Christian, Jewish or American,” Miller wrote. Ari Rosmarin, a civil rights lawyer who edited the student newspaper at time, recalled that Miller was especially critical of a Mexican American student group. “I think he’s got a very sharp understanding of what words and issues will poke and provoke progressives, because he came up around it and really cut his teeth picking these fights that had low stakes but high offense,” Rosmarin said. That skill led Miller to become a mini-celebrity in conservative intellectual circles because of his passion, age and home town. He appeared 70 times on Elder’s show before his high school graduation, according to the host. “He found a really unique role to play that was deeply attractive to national conservatives,” Rosmarin said. “He was like a lonely warrior behind enemy lines.” In the halls of Santa Monica High School, though, where students and teachers took pride in their ethnic diversity and liberal values, Miller was becoming something of a pariah. That environment prompted Miller to become even more assertive, recalled one of his former teachers. “He had to come on a little strong as a defense mechanism — just to survive,” said the teacher, who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear for how colleagues would react to the defense of an alumnus so closely associated with Trump. “He came under a lot of fire, even from teachers.” At Duke, Miller wrote a biweekly column for the student newspaper that regularly aroused the ire of classmates. “Men and women are in many ways the same, but they’re also innately and magnificently different,” he wrote in one column that argued laws requiring men and women to be paid equally would hurt businesses and that the pay gap largely resulted from women taking time off for childbirth, being less willing to ask for raises and being less likely to take part in hazardous work. “The point is that the pay gap has virtually nothing to do with gender discrimination,” he wrote. “Sorry, feminists. Hate to break this good news to you.” In a column titled “The Case for Christmas,” Miller, who is Jewish, argued that the holiday should be more widely recognized as a “crucial American holiday.” “Christianity is embedded in the very soul of our nation,” he wrote. Miller stepped into the national spotlight after three white lacrosse players were falsely accused of rape in a case rife with racial tension. The players were eventually cleared and the local district attorney was disbarred for prosecutorial misconduct in the case. Miller wrote a series of columns about the case and appeared on national television to discuss it. “This travesty has been allowed to continue because we live in a nation paralyzed by racial paranoia,” he wrote in November 2006, writing that professors and others were frightened to speak in defense of the students because the district attorney had turned the case into a racial crusade and opposition “would be perceived negatively by the black community and that there would be a political price to pay.” Speaking years later about his role as an advocate for the players, Miller told The Post: “The one takeaway I have from it is that in a difficult moment, I took a stand on principle — and I was correct.” Reflecting more broadly on his college-era columns, Miller said his writings were a good reflection of his views at the time. But, he said, “I would surely hope that any person who was a writer about political and controversial topics in college would find that their thoughts had matured on a variety of issues.” He declined to outline where his own views had changed over time. Miller’s outspokenness in the lacrosse case first brought him to the attention of Richard Spencer, a white nationalist who was a Duke graduate student at the time. Spencer said he became friendly with Miller through the Duke Conservative Union in fall 2006. “He was very out in front, very bold and strong,” Spencer said in an interview. Spencer last year told the Daily Beast that he was a “mentor” to Miller, which Miller has angrily denied. “I condemn him. I condemn his views. I have no relationship with him. He was not my friend,” Miller said. Miller noted that he served on campus as the executive director of the leading conservative group, which put him in contact with Spencer. “Our interaction was limited to the activities of the organization, of which he was a member, and thus ceased upon graduation,” Miller said. But Spencer said that the two met frequently during their Duke days. As first reported by Mother Jones magazine, they both helped organize an immigration debate between Peter Brimelow, an anti-immigration activist whose website has been labeled a hate site by the Southern Poverty Law Center, and Peter Laufer, who advocated for opening the southern U.S. border. Spencer praised Miller’s media savvy and organizational skills in advance of that event. David Bitner, a friend of Miller’s who also belonged to the conservative club at Duke, said the two did interact in the small group. But Bitner called it “scurrilous libel” for Spencer to claim he was Miller’s mentor. “Richard Spencer believes in white identity politics. Stephen Miller disavows identity politics,” he said. Nevertheless, Miller’s role in the White House has been greeted with enthusiasm by Spencer and other white nationalist figures. “He is not a white nationalist,” Spencer said. “But you can’t be this passionate about the immigration issue and not have a sense of the American nation as it historically emerged.” After attending Trump’s inauguration, Jared Taylor, another high-profile white nationalist, posted a piece to his website in which he wrote that Trump is “not a racially conscious white man” but that there “are men close to him — Steve Bannon, Jeff Sessions, Stephen Miller — who may have a clearer understanding of race, and their influence could grow.” In an interview, Taylor said he was “speculating” and that he has not met or spoken with Miller. Miller said he has “profound objections” to the views advanced by Taylor and Spencer, saying: “I condemn this rancid ideology.” Elder, who is black, said he has never heard Miller speak of Spencer or Taylor or express what he considers racist views. Instead, Elder said, Miller believes as he does: “Race and racism are no longer major problems in America. This is the fairest majority-white country in the world. If you work hard and make good decisions, you’ll be fine.” Miller said that his views at the time were best summed up in a 2005 column in the Santa Monica Mirror, titled “My Dream for the End of Racism,” in which he argued that Americans should focus on how far the country has come in overcoming such prejudice. “No one claims that racism is extinct — but it is endangered,” he wrote. “And if we are to entirely extract this venom of prejudice from the United States, I proclaim Americanism to be the key.” Today's WorldView What's most important from where the world meets Washington Sign up Focusing on “multiculturalism,” he wrote, has had the effect of keeping different groups separate. Miller’s White House role is in many ways a departure for an activist who has mostly seen himself as representing an oppressed political minority. Now he holds the power, helping to drive the government while working steps from the Oval Office. Bitner said he wonders how Miller’s tactics will translate. “I don’t think he’s had the opportunity to practice this,” he said. “These are all outsiders, many of them people who have been vocal minorities. How do you transition from there to governing?” Alice Crites contributed to this report. Rosalind Helderman is a political enterprise and investigations reporter for the Washington Post.  Follow @PostRoz PAID PROMOTED STORIES Recommended by Here's How Much Dental Implants Should Cost The 10 Most Important Things to Do If You're Using Stitch Fix 1 Trick You Should Use Every Time You Turn On Your PC... Dental Implant Gateway Stitch Fix EXHIBIT 25 3/13/2017 In college, Trump aide Stephen Miller led 'Terrorism Awareness Project' warning of 'Islamofascism' - In college, Trump aide Stephen Miller led controversial 'Terrorism Awareness Project' warning of 'Islamofascism' By Andrew Kaczynski and Chris Massie, CNN  Updated 3:40 PM ET, Wed February 15, 2017 JUST WATCHED Miller hammers down on voter fraud claim  Replay MUST WATCH  Deadline day for Project Repat makes America's political Trump admin wiretap millions on t-shirt divide  'Inside Politics: evidence quilts    A    2:52 / 2:52    Source: CNN Miller hammers down on voter fraud claim 02:52 Story highlights Stephen Miller's hardline views on Islam and terrorism took shape while he was a student at Duke University. Miller helped launch the "Terrorism Awareness Project," aimed at educating students about the risk of "Islamofascism." (CNN) — White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller has garnered attention in recent weeks as one of the chief architects behind President Donald Trump's executive order temporarily banning travel from seven Muslim-majority countries. The 31-year-old aide's hardline views on Islam and terrorism took shape while he was still a student at Duke University. It was there, in the 2007 spring semester of his senior year, that Miller helped launch and run the "Terrorism Awareness Project," an initiative, Miller wrote at the time, that was aimed at educating students about the risk of "Islamofascism." A CNN KFile review of Miller's comments on TV and on his blog for the project, which is available on the Web archive, reveal Miller's belief that the US and western civilization are at war with Islamic jihadists. Miller did not respond to multiple requests for comment from CNN's KFile for this story. 1/5 3/13/2017 In college, Trump aide Stephen Miller led 'Terrorism Awareness Project' warning of 'Islamofascism' - Miller served as national campus coordinator, president, and co-founder of the initiative, which was launched by the David Horowitz Freedom Center, a right-wing group which describes its missions as combating "the e orts of the radical left and its Islamist allies to destroy American values and disarm this country as it attempts to defend itself in a time of terror." A key premise of the project, Miller wrote in a blog post, was that schools and universities under left-wing influence had failed to educate students about the risk of what the project's leaders called "Islamofascism" and had allowed the ideology to penetrate school systems and academia. "Gripped by complacency and the omnipresent force of political correctness, our nation has failed to educate our youth about the holy war being waged against us and what needs to be done to defeat the Jihadists that are waging this war," Miller wrote. "American kids attend school in an educational system corrupted by the hard left. In this upside-down world, America is the villain and Jihadists the victims of our foreign policy. Instead of opening eyes, we are fastening blindfolds." The mission, Miller added, was to "provide informational literature, films, posters, advertisements, speakers, and panel discussions whose purpose is to make our fellow students aware of the Islamic jihad and the terrorist threat, and to mobilize support for the defense of America and the civilization of the West." The main e ort taken on by the group was putting on "Islamofascism Awareness Week" at college campuses around the country. One poster for the event available on the Web archive depicts the execution of a woman by a member of the Taliban. A guide available on the Web archive outlined suggestions to college students on how to put on events for the week. The guide suggested students do a sit-in in Women's Studies Departments "to protest the silence of Women's Studies programs and Women's Centers in our universities while women are su ering brutal and inhumane treatment in the Islamic world." It also suggests hosting a filming of "Islam: What the West Needs to Know" which "reveals the violent, expansionary ideology of the so called 'religion of peace' that seeks the destruction or subjugation of other faiths, cultures, and systems of government." 2/5 3/13/2017 In college, Trump aide Stephen Miller led 'Terrorism Awareness Project' warning of 'Islamofascism' - 3/5 3/13/2017 In college, Trump aide Stephen Miller led 'Terrorism Awareness Project' warning of 'Islamofascism' - The archived site also includes a grainy, mid-2000s animation film that features the word "Jihad" superimposed over the United States and set to the musical selection Carmina Burana. The film, "What Every American Needs To Know About Jihad" listed Islamic terrorists and showed quotes of Osama Bin Laden. Ads by the group in the Duke Chronicle advertised screenings of another film "Obsession," a documentary on radical Islam screened on campuses which some critics charged as incendiary and Islamophobic. In February 2007, the group attempted to run an ad in campus newspapers nationwide, but newspapers refused to run it. Fox News reported at the time the ad was designed by Robert Spencer, a man who the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation league have labeled "anti-Muslim." The ad argued that jihad "is about the global rule of radical Islam" and constitutes a war against Christians, Jews, women, and gays, alongside quotations attributed to Osama bin Laden and others. In a February 2007 appearance on Fox and Friends, Miller said the decision by some universities not to run the ad showed their bias. "That's what so insane, is that in today's environment on college campuses, you can have these professors saying that we fabricated 9/11, you can have people like Samuel Arion teaching, who were indicted for terrorist ties, you can have, like at Duke, we had a conference come to the university where people were actually recruited to interfere against Israeli anti-terror operations," Miller said. "You've got this insane stu happening on our campuses, but you can't run a simple fact-based ad that talks about the threat of radical Islam." A screen grab from a Terrorism Awareness Project video. Spencer wrote in an email to CNN's KFile that he didn't remember writing the ad, but he said he was "of course" pleased that Miller had attained an influential role in the White House and defended himself against the criticism that his views are "anti-Muslim." "The idea that those who call attention to the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat are 'extreme thinkers on the right' is false and malicious propaganda spread by the SPLC, a hate group dedicated to defaming and thereby marginalizing voices that dissent from its hard-Left, globalist, internationalist line," Spencer said. "I am no more 4/5 3/13/2017 In college, Trump aide Stephen Miller led 'Terrorism Awareness Project' warning of 'Islamofascism' - 'anti-Muslim' than foes of the Nazis were 'anti-German.' That any of our views are remotely controversial is a testimony to how corrupt and compromised you and your colleagues are." David Horowitz, the founder of the project, said that he didn't remember Miller's involvement, but said that the two have known each other since Miller was in high school and that he recommended Miller to former Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann (Miller worked as her press secretary). Asked how he thought Miller's views on Islam had evolved since he participated in the project, Horowitz said he didn't know, adding, "I know that he admires my work. As many normal people do." New Utah bigamy law passes Senate after 'Sister Wives' suit 'SNL' is right: Ivanka is complicit Rex Tillerson silent as rumors swirl  King doubles down on controversial 'babies' tweet 5/5 EXHIBIT 26 45 GLOBAL RELIGIOUS LANDSCAPE Table: Religious Composition by Country COUNTRY Afghanistan 2010 COUNTRY POPULATION PERCENT CHRISTIAN PERCENT MUSLIM PERCENT UNAFFIL. PERCENT HINDU PERCENT BUDDHIST PERCENT FOLK RELIGION PERCENT OTHER RELIGION PERCENT JEWISH 31,410,000 0.1 % 99.7 % < 0.1 % < 0.1 % < 0.1 % < 0.1 % < 0.1 % < 0.1 % Albania 3,200,000 18.0 80.3 1.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 Algeria 35,470,000 0.2 97.9 1.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 American Samoa 70,000 98.3 < 0.1 0.7 < 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.3 < 0.1 Andorra 80,000 89.5 0.8 8.8 0.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 0.3 19,080,000 90.5 0.2 5.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 4.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 Anguilla Angola 20,000 90.6 0.3 4.0 0.4 < 0.1 2.9 1.6 0.1 Antigua and Barbuda 90,000 93.0 0.6 1.7 0.2 < 0.1 3.6 1.0 < 0.1 Argentina 40,410,000 85.2 1.0 12.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.8 0.3 0.5 Armenia 3,090,000 98.5 < 0.1 1.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 < 0.1 Aruba 110,000 91.9 0.2 6.0 < 0.1 0.1 1.3 0.1 0.4 22,270,000 67.3 2.4 24.2 1.4 2.7 0.7 0.8 0.5 Austria 8,390,000 80.4 5.4 13.5 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 0.1 0.2 Azerbaijan 9,190,000 3.0 96.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 340,000 96.0 0.1 3.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.3 0.3 < 0.1 Australia Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados 1,260,000 14.5 70.3 1.9 9.8 2.5 < 0.1 0.2 0.6 148,690,000 0.2 89.8 < 0.1 9.1 0.5 0.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 270,000 95.2 1.0 1.9 0.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.4 < 0.1 Belarus 9,600,000 71.2 0.2 28.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Belgium 10,710,000 64.2 5.9 29.0 < 0.1 0.2 0.2 < 0.1 0.3 Belize 310,000 87.6 0.1 8.9 0.2 0.5 1.5 0.1 1.0 Benin 8,850,000 53.0 23.8 5.0 < 0.1 < 0.1 18.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 60,000 75.0 1.1 19.4 < 0.1 0.5 3.0 0.8 0.3 Bermuda Bhutan 730,000 0.5 0.2 < 0.1 22.6 74.7 1.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 Bolivia 9,930,000 93.9 < 0.1 4.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.9 1.0 < 0.1 Bosnia-Herzegovina 3,760,000 52.3 45.2 2.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Botswana 2,010,000 72.1 0.4 20.6 0.3 < 0.1 6.0 0.6 < 0.1 194,950,000 88.9 < 0.1 7.9 < 0.1 0.1 2.8 0.2 < 0.1 20,000 84.5 1.2 3.9 1.2 < 0.1 8.4 0.8 < 0.1 400,000 9.4 75.1 0.4 0.3 8.6 6.2 0.1 < 0.1 Brazil British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria 7,490,000 82.1 13.7 4.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Burkina Faso 16,470,000 22.5 61.6 0.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 15.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 Burma (Myanmar) 47,960,000 7.8 4.0 0.5 1.7 80.1 5.8 0.2 < 0.1 8,380,000 91.5 2.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 5.7 < 0.1 < 0.1 Cambodia Burundi 14,140,000 0.4 2.0 0.2 < 0.1 96.9 0.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 Cameroon 19,600,000 70.3 18.3 5.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 3.3 2.7 < 0.1 Canada 34,020,000 69.0 2.1 23.7 1.4 0.8 1.2 0.9 1.0 500,000 89.1 0.1 9.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.5 0.2 < 0.1 Cape Verde TABLE: RELIGIOUS COMPOSITION BY COUNTRY 46 PEW FORUM ON RELIGION & PUBLIC LIFE COUNTRY Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Channel Islands Chile China 2010 COUNTRY POPULATION PERCENT CHRISTIAN 60,000 83.5 0.4 9.4 4,400,000 89.5 8.5 1.0 PERCENT MUSLIM PERCENT UNAFFIL. PERCENT OTHER RELIGION PERCENT BUDDHIST PERCENT FOLK RELIGION 0.9 < 0.1 4.5 0.6 0.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.0 < 0.1 < 0.1 PERCENT HINDU PERCENT JEWISH 11,230,000 40.6 55.3 2.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.4 0.1 < 0.1 150,000 85.2 < 0.1 14.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.3 < 0.1 17,110,000 89.4 < 0.1 8.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.5 0.2 0.1 1,341,340,000 5.1 1.8 52.2 < 0.1 18.2 21.9 0.7 < 0.1 Colombia 46,290,000 92.5 < 0.1 6.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 Comoros 730,000 0.5 98.3 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.0 < 0.1 < 0.1 20,000 96.0 < 0.1 3.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.8 < 0.1 4,660,000 90.9 < 0.1 7.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.8 0.3 < 0.1 4,400,000 93.4 1.4 5.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 11,260,000 59.2 < 0.1 23.0 0.2 < 0.1 17.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 Cook Islands Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Cyprus 1,100,000 73.2 25.3 1.2 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Czech Republic 10,490,000 23.3 < 0.1 76.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Dem. Rep. of the Congo 65,970,000 95.8 1.5 1.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.7 0.1 < 0.1 5,550,000 83.5 4.1 11.8 0.4 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 890,000 2.3 96.9 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.3 < 0.1 0.2 Denmark Djibouti Dominica 70,000 94.4 0.1 0.5 < 0.1 0.1 3.0 1.7 < 0.1 9,930,000 88.0 < 0.1 10.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.9 0.1 < 0.1 Ecuador 14,460,000 94.1 < 0.1 5.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 Egypt 81,120,000 5.1 94.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 6,190,000 88.2 < 0.1 11.0 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.5 0.3 < 0.1 Dominican Republic El Salvador 700,000 88.7 4.0 5.0 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.7 0.5 < 0.1 Eritrea Equatorial Guinea 5,250,000 62.9 36.6 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 Estonia 1,340,000 39.9 0.2 59.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 Ethiopia 82,950,000 62.8 34.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 2.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 50,000 98.0 < 0.1 1.7 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.3 < 0.1 Faeroe Islands Falkland Is. (Malvinas) < 10,000 67.2 0.3 31.5 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 0.8 < 0.1 Fed. States of Micronesia 110,000 95.3 < 0.1 0.9 < 0.1 0.4 2.7 0.7 < 0.1 Fiji 860,000 64.4 6.3 0.8 27.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.5 < 0.1 Finland 5,360,000 81.6 0.8 17.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 France 62,790,000 63.0 7.5 28.0 < 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.2 0.5 French Guiana 230,000 84.4 0.9 3.4 1.6 < 0.1 9.1 0.5 < 0.1 French Polynesia 270,000 94.0 < 0.1 4.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.5 0.4 < 0.1 1,510,000 76.5 11.2 5.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 6.0 0.7 < 0.1 Gabon Gambia 1,730,000 4.5 95.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Georgia 4,350,000 88.5 10.7 0.7 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Germany 82,300,000 68.7 5.8 24.7 < 0.1 0.3 < 0.1 0.1 0.3 Ghana 24,390,000 74.9 15.8 4.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 4.9 0.2 < 0.1 30,000 88.8 4.0 2.9 1.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.3 2.1 Gibraltar 47 GLOBAL RELIGIOUS LANDSCAPE COUNTRY Greece Greenland 2010 COUNTRY POPULATION PERCENT CHRISTIAN 11,360,000 88.1 5.3 6.1 0.1 60,000 96.1 < 0.1 2.5 < 0.1 PERCENT MUSLIM PERCENT UNAFFIL. PERCENT HINDU PERCENT FOLK RELIGION PERCENT OTHER RELIGION PERCENT JEWISH < 0.1 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.8 0.6 < 0.1 PERCENT BUDDHIST Grenada 100,000 96.6 0.3 1.0 0.7 < 0.1 1.3 0.2 < 0.1 Guadeloupe 460,000 95.9 0.4 2.5 0.5 < 0.1 0.4 0.4 < 0.1 Guam 180,000 94.2 < 0.1 1.7 < 0.1 1.1 1.5 1.6 < 0.1 Guatemala 14,390,000 95.2 < 0.1 4.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 Guinea 9,980,000 10.9 84.4 1.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 2.7 < 0.1 < 0.1 Guinea Bissau 1,520,000 19.7 45.1 4.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 30.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 750,000 66.0 6.4 2.0 24.9 < 0.1 0.2 0.6 < 0.1 Haiti 9,990,000 86.9 < 0.1 10.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 2.2 0.3 < 0.1 Guyana Honduras 7,600,000 87.6 0.1 10.5 < 0.1 0.1 1.1 0.6 < 0.1 Hong Kong 7,050,000 14.3 1.8 56.1 0.4 13.2 12.8 1.5 < 0.1 Hungary 9,980,000 81.0 < 0.1 18.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 320,000 95.0 0.2 3.5 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.2 < 0.1 1,224,610,000 2.5 14.4 < 0.1 79.5 0.8 0.5 2.3 < 0.1 Iceland India 239,870,000 9.9 87.2 < 0.1 1.7 0.7 0.3 0.1 < 0.1 Iran Indonesia 73,970,000 0.2 99.5 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 Iraq 31,670,000 0.8 99.0 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 4,470,000 92.0 1.1 6.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 80,000 84.1 0.2 15.4 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Ireland Isle of Man Israel 7,420,000 2.0 18.6 3.1 < 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 75.6 Italy 60,550,000 83.3 3.7 12.4 0.1 0.2 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Ivory Coast 19,740,000 44.1 37.5 8.0 < 0.1 < 0.1 10.2 0.2 < 0.1 2,740,000 77.2 < 0.1 17.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 4.5 1.0 < 0.1 126,540,000 1.6 0.2 57.0 < 0.1 36.2 0.4 4.7 < 0.1 Jamaica Japan 6,190,000 2.2 97.2 < 0.1 0.1 0.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Kazakhstan Jordan 16,030,000 24.8 70.4 4.2 < 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.1 < 0.1 Kenya 40,510,000 84.8 9.7 2.5 0.1 < 0.1 1.7 1.2 < 0.1 Kiribati 100,000 97.0 < 0.1 0.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 2.2 < 0.1 Kosovo 2,080,000 11.4 87.0 1.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Kuwait 2,740,000 14.3 74.1 < 0.1 8.5 2.8 < 0.1 0.3 < 0.1 Kyrgyzstan 5,330,000 11.4 88.0 0.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Laos 6,200,000 1.5 < 0.1 0.9 < 0.1 66.0 30.7 0.7 < 0.1 Latvia 2,250,000 55.8 0.1 43.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 Lebanon 4,230,000 38.3 61.3 0.3 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Lesotho 2,170,000 96.8 < 0.1 3.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Liberia 3,990,000 85.9 12.0 1.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.5 0.1 < 0.1 Libya 6,360,000 2.7 96.6 0.2 < 0.1 0.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 40,000 91.9 5.0 2.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 3,320,000 89.8 < 0.1 10.0 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Liechtenstein Lithuania TABLE: RELIGIOUS COMPOSITION BY COUNTRY 48 PEW FORUM ON RELIGION & PUBLIC LIFE 2010 COUNTRY POPULATION PERCENT CHRISTIAN Luxembourg 510,000 Macau 540,000 COUNTRY PERCENT OTHER RELIGION PERCENT HINDU PERCENT BUDDHIST PERCENT FOLK RELIGION 26.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.3 0.1 15.4 < 0.1 17.3 58.9 1.0 < 0.1 PERCENT MUSLIM PERCENT UNAFFIL. 70.4 2.3 7.2 0.2 PERCENT JEWISH Madagascar 20,710,000 85.3 3.0 6.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 4.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 Malawi 14,900,000 82.7 13.0 2.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.7 < 0.1 < 0.1 Malaysia 28,400,000 9.4 63.7 0.7 6.0 17.7 2.3 0.2 < 0.1 320,000 0.4 98.4 < 0.1 0.3 0.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 15,370,000 3.2 92.4 2.7 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique 420,000 97.0 0.2 2.5 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 50,000 97.5 < 0.1 1.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.3 0.8 < 0.1 410,000 96.5 0.2 2.3 0.2 < 0.1 0.2 0.6 < 0.1 Mauritania 3,460,000 0.3 99.1 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 Mauritius 1,300,000 25.3 16.7 0.6 56.4 < 0.1 0.7 0.3 < 0.1 Mayotte Mexico Moldova Monaco Mongolia 200,000 0.7 98.6 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 113,420,000 95.1 < 0.1 4.7 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 3,570,000 97.4 0.6 1.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.6 40,000 86.0 0.4 11.7 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 1.7 2,760,000 2.3 3.2 35.9 < 0.1 55.1 3.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 Montenegro 630,000 78.1 18.7 3.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Montserrat < 10,000 93.5 < 0.1 4.8 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 1.5 < 0.1 Morocco 31,950,000 < 0.1 99.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Mozambique 23,390,000 56.7 18.0 17.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 7.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 2,280,000 97.5 0.3 1.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 Nauru 10,000 79.0 < 0.1 4.5 < 0.1 1.1 8.1 7.4 < 0.1 Nepal 29,960,000 0.5 4.6 0.3 80.7 10.3 3.7 < 0.1 < 0.1 Netherlands 16,610,000 50.6 6.0 42.1 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Namibia Netherlands Antilles 200,000 93.9 0.2 3.3 0.2 0.5 1.2 0.3 0.3 New Caledonia 250,000 85.2 2.8 10.4 < 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.8 < 0.1 New Zealand 4,370,000 57.0 1.2 36.6 2.1 1.6 0.5 0.7 0.2 Nicaragua 5,790,000 85.8 < 0.1 12.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.4 0.1 < 0.1 15,510,000 0.8 98.4 0.7 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Niger Nigeria Niue North Korea Northern Mariana Is. Norway Oman Pakistan Palau 158,420,000 49.3 48.8 0.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 10,000 96.4 < 0.1 3.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 24,350,000 2.0 < 0.1 71.3 < 0.1 1.5 12.3 12.9 < 0.1 60,000 81.3 0.7 1.0 < 0.1 10.6 5.3 1.1 < 0.1 4,880,000 84.7 3.7 10.1 0.5 0.6 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 2,780,000 6.5 85.9 0.2 5.5 0.8 < 0.1 1.0 < 0.1 173,590,000 1.6 96.4 < 0.1 1.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 20,000 86.7 < 0.1 1.2 < 0.1 0.8 0.8 10.4 < 0.1 Palestinian territories 4,040,000 2.4 97.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Panama 3,520,000 93.0 0.7 4.8 < 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 49 GLOBAL RELIGIOUS LANDSCAPE PERCENT CHRISTIAN PERCENT MUSLIM PERCENT UNAFFIL. PERCENT HINDU PERCENT BUDDHIST PERCENT FOLK RELIGION PERCENT OTHER RELIGION PERCENT JEWISH COUNTRY 2010 COUNTRY POPULATION Papua New Guinea 6,860,000 99.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.4 0.2 < 0.1 Paraguay 6,450,000 96.9 < 0.1 1.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.7 0.2 < 0.1 Peru 29,080,000 95.5 < 0.1 3.0 < 0.1 0.2 1.0 0.3 < 0.1 Philippines 93,260,000 92.6 5.5 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.5 0.1 < 0.1 Poland 38,280,000 94.3 < 0.1 5.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Portugal 10,680,000 93.8 0.6 4.4 0.1 0.6 0.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 3,750,000 96.7 < 0.1 1.9 < 0.1 0.3 0.8 0.1 < 0.1 Qatar 1,760,000 13.8 67.7 0.9 13.8 3.1 < 0.1 0.7 < 0.1 Republic of Macedonia 2,060,000 59.3 39.3 1.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Republic of the Congo 4,040,000 85.9 1.2 9.0 < 0.1 < 0.1 2.8 1.1 < 0.1 Puerto Rico Reunion 850,000 87.6 4.2 2.0 4.5 0.2 0.4 1.1 < 0.1 Romania 21,490,000 99.5 0.3 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 142,960,000 73.3 10.0 16.2 < 0.1 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 0.2 10,620,000 93.4 1.8 3.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.0 0.2 < 0.1 180,000 96.8 < 0.1 2.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.4 < 0.1 Russia Rwanda Samoa San Marino 30,000 91.6 < 0.1 7.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.9 0.3 170,000 82.2 < 0.1 12.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 2.9 2.4 < 0.1 Saudi Arabia 27,450,000 4.4 93.0 0.7 1.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 < 0.1 Senegal 12,430,000 3.6 96.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 7,770,000 92.5 4.2 3.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Sao Tome and Principe Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone 90,000 94.0 1.1 2.1 2.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.6 < 0.1 5,870,000 20.9 78.0 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 Singapore 5,090,000 18.2 14.3 16.4 5.2 33.9 2.3 9.7 < 0.1 Slovakia 5,460,000 85.3 0.2 14.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Slovenia 2,030,000 78.4 3.6 18.0 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Solomon Islands 540,000 97.4 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 0.3 1.3 0.7 < 0.1 9,330,000 < 0.1 99.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 South Africa 50,130,000 81.2 1.7 14.9 1.1 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.1 South Korea 48,180,000 29.4 0.2 46.4 < 0.1 22.9 0.8 0.2 < 0.1 South Sudan 9,950,000 60.5 6.2 0.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 32.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 Spain 46,080,000 78.6 2.1 19.0 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 Sri Lanka 20,860,000 7.3 9.8 < 0.1 13.6 69.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 10,000 96.5 < 0.1 3.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 50,000 94.6 0.3 1.6 1.5 < 0.1 1.3 0.8 < 0.1 170,000 91.1 0.1 6.0 0.3 < 0.1 0.5 2.0 < 0.1 Somalia St. Helena St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia St. Pierre and Miquelon < 10,000 94.7 0.2 3.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.3 < 0.1 St. Vincent and the Gren. 110,000 88.7 1.5 2.5 3.4 < 0.1 2.0 2.0 < 0.1 Sudan 33,600,000 5.4 90.7 1.0 < 0.1 < 0.1 2.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 Suriname 520,000 51.6 15.2 5.4 19.8 0.6 5.3 1.8 0.2 Swaziland 1,190,000 88.1 0.2 10.1 0.1 < 0.1 1.0 0.4 < 0.1 TABLE: RELIGIOUS COMPOSITION BY COUNTRY 50 PEW FORUM ON RELIGION & PUBLIC LIFE PERCENT FOLK RELIGION PERCENT OTHER RELIGION COUNTRY 2010 COUNTRY POPULATION Sweden 9,380,000 67.2 4.6 27.0 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 Switzerland 7,660,000 81.3 5.5 11.9 0.4 0.4 < 0.1 0.1 0.3 PERCENT CHRISTIAN PERCENT MUSLIM PERCENT UNAFFIL. PERCENT HINDU PERCENT BUDDHIST PERCENT JEWISH Syria 20,410,000 5.2 92.8 2.0 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Taiwan 23,220,000 5.5 < 0.1 12.7 < 0.1 21.3 44.2 16.2 < 0.1 Tajikistan 6,880,000 1.6 96.7 1.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Tanzania 44,840,000 61.4 35.2 1.4 0.1 < 0.1 1.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 Thailand 69,120,000 0.9 5.5 0.3 0.1 93.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Timor-Leste 1,120,000 99.6 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Togo 6,030,000 43.7 14.0 6.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 35.6 0.6 < 0.1 < 10,000 99.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 Tokelau Tonga 100,000 98.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.9 < 0.1 1,340,000 65.9 5.9 1.9 22.7 0.3 1.9 1.4 < 0.1 Tunisia 10,480,000 0.2 99.5 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Turkey 72,750,000 0.4 98.0 1.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 5,040,000 6.4 93.0 0.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Trinidad and Tobago Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu U.S. Virgin Islands 40,000 92.1 < 0.1 4.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 2.7 0.6 < 0.1 < 10,000 96.7 0.1 1.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.9 < 0.1 110,000 94.8 0.1 3.7 0.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.6 0.3 Uganda 33,420,000 86.7 11.5 0.5 0.3 < 0.1 0.9 0.1 < 0.1 Ukraine 45,450,000 83.8 1.2 14.7 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.1 United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan 7,510,000 12.6 76.9 1.1 6.6 2.0 < 0.1 0.8 < 0.1 62,040,000 71.1 4.4 21.3 1.3 0.4 0.3 0.8 0.5 310,380,000 78.3 0.9 16.4 0.6 1.2 0.2 0.6 1.8 3,370,000 57.9 < 0.1 40.7 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.8 0.3 0.3 27,440,000 2.3 96.7 0.8 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Vanuatu 240,000 93.3 < 0.1 1.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 4.1 1.4 < 0.1 Vatican City < 10,000 >99.0 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Venezuela 28,980,000 89.3 0.3 10.0 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.1 Vietnam 87,850,000 8.2 0.2 29.6 < 0.1 16.4 45.3 0.4 < 0.1 10,000 97.4 < 0.1 0.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 1.2 0.8 < 0.1 Wallis and Futuna 530,000 0.2 99.4 0.4 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Yemen Western Sahara 24,050,000 0.2 99.1 0.1 0.6 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 Zambia 13,090,000 97.6 0.5 0.5 0.1 < 0.1 0.3 0.9 < 0.1 Zimbabwe 12,570,000 87.0 0.9 7.9 < 0.1 < 0.1 3.8 0.3 < 0.1 4,054,990,000 7.1 24.3 21.2 25.3 11.9 9.0 1.3 < 0.1 Europe 742,550,000 75.2 5.9 18.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 Latin America-Caribbean 590,080,000 90.0 0.1 7.7 0.1 < 0.1 1.7 0.2 < 0.1 Middle East-North Africa 341,020,000 3.7 93.0 0.6 0.5 0.1 0.3 < 0.1 1.6 North America 344,530,000 77.4 1.0 17.1 0.7 1.1 0.3 0.6 1.8 Sub-Saharan Africa 822,720,000 62.9 30.2 3.2 0.2 < 0.1 3.3 0.2 < 0.1 6,895,890,000 31.5 23.2 16.3 15.0 7.1 5.9 0.8 0.2 World EXHIBIT 27 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) U.S. Department of State Diplomacy in Action Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) BUREAU OF COUNTERTERRORISM AND COUNTERING VIOLENT EXTREMISM Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 ( Report Chapter 5 Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) Terrorist safe havens described in this report include ungoverned, under-governed, or ill-governed physical areas where terrorists are able to organize, plan, raise funds, communicate, recruit, train, transit, and operate in relative security because of inadequate governance capacity, political will, or both. As defined by section 2656f(d) of Title 22 of the U.S. Code, the term “terrorist sanctuary” or “sanctuary” excludes the territory of a country the government of which is subject to a determination under section 2405(j)(1)(A) of the Appendix to Title 50; section 2371(a) of Title 22; or section 2780(d) of Title 22– the state sponsors of terrorism. Accordingly, information regarding Iran, Sudan, and Syria can be found in Chapter 3, State Sponsors of Terrorism. TERRORIST SAFE HAVENS AFRICA Somalia. In 2015, terrorists used many primarily rural sections of south-central Somalia as safe havens. Terrorists continued to organize, plan, raise funds, communicate, recruit, train, and operate with relative ease in these areas due to inadequate security, justice, and governance capacity at all levels. Al-Shabaab’s capacity to rebound from counterterrorism operations is due in large part to its ability to maintain control of large swaths of rural areas and routes in parts of Somalia. In 2015, al-Shabaab lost a number of safe havens in south-central Somalia, many of which provided access to funds and other resources the group extorted from local communities. Despite the success of coordinated African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) operations that drove al-Shabaab from former strongholds in Baardheere and Dinsoor, the terrorist organization managed to establish new safe havens from where it planned and launched attacks against government officials, AMISOM bases, and soft targets in Kenya and other parts of the region. The Federal Government of Somalia and its regional administrations lacked the capacity and resources to fill security voids left in the wake of AMISOM’s operations with civilian law enforcement. These gaps allowed al-Shabaab to retain the freedom of movement necessary to establish new safe havens and re-infiltrate areas that AMISOM cleared but could not hold. As seen in previous years, al-Shabaab used smaller towns in the Jubba River Valley such as Jilib and Saakow as bases for its operations. These areas allowed the group’s operatives to continue exploiting the porous border regions between Kenya and Somalia and launch deadly cross-border attacks. Kenya suffered one of the deadliest terrorist attacks in its history when in April, al-Shabaab operatives assaulted the Garissa University College using light arms and suicide vests and killed more than 145 1/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) Kenyans, most of whom were students. Al-Shabaab also used villages along major coastal routes in southern Somalia, namely Kunyo Barow and Tortoroow, to facilitate access to areas just outside of major population centers in Mogadishu and Kismaayo. These and other routes throughout southern Somalia serve as lifelines for al-Shabaab as low-level fighters established illegal checkpoints to collect taxes and tolls from locals. Although the group continued to generate funds from the illicit trade of charcoal and other commodities, al-Shabaab leveraged tax collection to compensate for declining revenues after losing access to the port in Baraawe in 2014. The Federal Government of Somalia remained committed to regional counterterrorism efforts that aim to eliminate al-Shabaab’s access to safe haven in Somalia. Though progress on this front was uneven in 2015, these efforts provided the Somali government with enough space and time to focus on the federalism process and advance its political objectives. According to independent sources and NGOs engaged in demining activities on the ground, there was little cause for concern for the presence of WMD in Somalia. The Trans-Sahara. There are ungoverned, under-governed, and ill-governed areas of Mali that terrorist groups have used to organize, plan, raise funds, communicate, recruit, train, and operate in relative security, despite Malian authorities willingness and responsiveness as counterterrorism partners, a UN peacekeeping mission, and French forces in the region. The Malian government has reestablished its political presence in the cities of Timbuktu and Gao, with some local government officials returning to their posts in 2015. The military, in conjunction with the French and UN forces, worked to eliminate terrorist safe havens in Mali. The Malian government does not support or facilitate the flow of foreign terrorist fighters through its territory, but the lack of government control across large portions of its territory and porous borders makes preventing the flow very difficult. The Malian government does not support or facilitate the proliferation or trafficking of WMD in and through its territory. SOUTHEAST ASIA The Sulu/Sulawesi Seas Littoral. The number of islands in the Sulawesi Sea and the Sulu Archipelago make it a difficult region to secure. Cooperation by all states bordering this region remained strong with U.S. counterterrorism efforts. Although Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines have improved efforts to control their shared maritime boundaries – including through U.S.-funded efforts to enhance domain awareness in the waters south and southwest of Mindanao – the expanse remained difficult to control. Surveillance improved but remained partial at best, and traditional smuggling and piracy groups have provided an effective cover for terrorist activities, including the movement of personnel, equipment, and funds. Kidnappings for ransom remained an ongoing threat. Southeast Asia is vulnerable to exploitation by illicit traffickers and proliferators given the high volume of global trade transiting the region as well as the existence of smuggling and proliferation networks. Weak strategic trade controls, legal and regulatory frameworks, inadequate maritime law enforcement and security capabilities, and emerging and re-emerging infectious disease and burgeoning bioscience capacity, make Southeast Asia an area of concern for WMD proliferation and transit. Other than Singapore, Malaysia, and the Philippines, strategic trade control laws that include controls over dual-use and end-use or “catchall” controls are lacking in Southeast Asia. Assisting these countries to develop strong laws that meet international standards and effective targeting and risk management systems are major goals of the Export Control and Related Border Security program over the next few years. The Southern Philippines. The geographical composition of the Philippines, spread out over 7,100 islands, makes it difficult for the central government to maintain a presence in all areas. Counterterrorism operations, however, have been successful at isolating the geographic influence and constraining the activities of transnational terrorist groups. Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG), 2/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) Jemaah Islamiya (JI), Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters (BIFF), and other militant groups were present in areas on Mindanao, and especially across the islands of Basilan, Sulu, and Tawi-Tawi. The New People’s Army (NPA) maintained a presence across the Philippines, particularly in rural and mountainous areas. Continued pressure from Philippine security forces made it difficult, however, for terrorists to organize, plan, raise funds, communicate, recruit, train, and operate outside their base locations. The Philippines and the United States have strong counterterrorism cooperation. In 2015, the United States continued to work with the Government of the Philippines to monitor and investigate groups engaged in or supporting terrorist activities in the Philippines. The Joint Special Operations Task Force-Philippines, under Operation Enduring Freedom, was concluded in June 2015 after more than a decade. The government launched numerous operations, particularly in the Southern Philippines, against organizations like the ASG, JI, BIFF, and NPA, and prosecuted terrorist suspects and organizations. In 2015, the Philippines also continued coordinating with U.S. law enforcement authorities, especially regarding wanted U.S. fugitives and suspected terrorists. In November, the Philippines passed the Strategic Trade Management Act (STMA), which allows it to control the import and export of dual-use items. At year’s end, the Philippines was working to implement the provisions of the STMA, including setting up a licensing office within the Department of Trade and Industry that will issue licenses required to import and export controlled dual-use commodities and technology. Early implementation progress has been slow, however, due to a number of factors, including a lack of funding, and risks missing the deadlines set by the STMA. THE MIDDLE EAST Egypt. Portions of Egypt’s Sinai region were a safe haven for terrorist organizations in 2015. The Government of Egypt views terrorism as one of the country’s greatest threats and has dedicated significant military resources to combat indigenous and transnational terrorist groups. The Egyptian government continued its extensive security campaign focused on Northern Sinai against ISIL Sinai Province (ISIL-SP), launching Operation Right of the Martyr in September. The Northern Sinai was closed off to tourists, journalists, U.S. government officials, and NGOs in 2015. ISIL-SP has claimed responsibility for increasingly frequent and sophisticated terrorist attacks against Egyptian forces, such as the simultaneous attack on multiple police and security installations in Sinai’s Sheikh Zuewid on July 1; and high profile targets, for example downing a Metrojet airliner, killing all 200 passengers and seven crew members on October 31. Through its Export Control and Related Border Security Program, the United States is working with the Government of Egypt to enhance Egypt’s border security capabilities through the provision of land, air, and maritime border enforcement and targeting and risk management training for Egyptian Customs, Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Interior, Ministry of Transportation, and Ministry of Foreign Affairs officials. In addition, since 2009, the Department of State’s Nonproliferation & Disarmament Fund has assisted Egypt with the provision of passenger and cargo vehicle x-ray detection equipment with the capability to inspect vehicular and truck traffic at fixed transportation checkpoints for WMD-related materials, conventional weapons, and other illicit items. Iraq. Portions of Iraq remained under the control of ISIL during 2015, including the city of Mosul. However, after ISIL took control of large swaths of Iraqi territory in 2014, the Government of Iraq made steady, significant progress in retaking terrain from ISIL throughout 2015. Supported by the 66-member Global Coalition to Counter ISIL, the Government of Iraq retook more than 40 percent of Iraqi territory once controlled by ISIL by the end of 2015, including several key cities. In April, an Iraqi-led military effort retook the city of Tikrit, and by the end of the year 80 percent of internally displaced persons had returned to the city. In November, Peshmerga forces retook the town of Sinjar, a city that came to the world’s attention in the summer of 2014 when ISIL committed atrocities against the Yezidi community. At the end of 2015, the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF), accompanied by local Sunni fighters and police, liberated large parts of Ramadi, the capital of Anbar Province and a strategically important hub. 3/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) ISIL used the territory under its control in 2015 to produce sulfur mustard and IEDs filled with chlorine. The United States has been proactively working with our allies to dismantle this chemical weapons capability, as well as deny ISIL access to chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) materials and expertise through interdictions and strengthening the ability of regional governments to detect, disrupt, and respond effectively to suspected CBRN activity. Due to security conditions in Iraq, the Export Control and Related Border Security (EXBS) program has had difficulty implementing outreach activities. EXBS priorities previously included working with the Government of Iraq to develop and implement regulations and procedures related to The Act of the Iraqi National Monitoring Authority on WMD Non-Proliferation No. 48 of 2012 (INMA Act), adopt and implement a control list, and to enhance Iraq’s border security capabilities related to the inspection and detection of WMD-related goods and technologies. However, these activities are largely on pause. Instead, the EXBS program is assessing equipment and training needs for security forces in the newly liberated regions, as they seek to consolidate gains and reclaim territory from ISIL. The United States and Iraq strengthened their bilateral partnership to counter nuclear terrorism in September 2014 by concluding the “Joint Action Plan between the Government of the Republic of Iraq and the Government of the United States of America on Combating Nuclear and Radioactive Materials Smuggling.” The arrangement expresses the intention of the two governments to work together to enhance Iraq’s capabilities to prevent, detect, and respond to nuclear smuggling incidents, and ultimately prevent terrorist groups from acquiring nuclear and radiological materials. Lebanon. The Lebanese government does not control all regions of the country or its borders with Syria and Israel. Hizballah controls access to parts of the country, including restricting Lebanon’s security services, which allows Hizballah to operate with relative impunity. The government took no action in 2015 to disarm Hizballah, to eliminate its safe havens within Lebanese territory, or to prevent the flow of Hizballah members to Syria or Iraq. Ungoverned areas along the un-demarcated LebaneseSyrian border also served as safe havens for Nusrah Front, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, and other Sunni terrorist groups in 2015, which operate in mountainous, mostly uninhabited zones where the government has limited reach. The Government of Lebanon has made attempts to eradicate these safe havens, however, and is engaged in sustained military operations to rid Lebanon of these Sunni terrorist groups. Palestinian refugee camps were also used as safe havens by Palestinian and other armed groups to house weapons, shelter wanted criminals, and plan terrorist attacks. The United States works closely with the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) and Internal Security Forces to combat terrorist threats along the Syrian border by providing counterterrorism training, military equipment, and weaponry. Lebanon is not a source country for WMD components, but its porous borders make the country vulnerable for use as a transit and transshipment hub for proliferation-sensitive transfers, particularly with the conflict in Syria. The LAF Engineer Regiment partners with U.S. government agencies to detect and prevent proliferation and trafficking of WMD along the Syrian border. The Export Control and Related Border Security program (EXBS) is providing robust commodity identification training for items that can be used in chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons, in order to keep these items from transiting through Lebanon. EXBS was also launching a frontier border security interdiction training program, in partnership with the Department of Defense, to strengthen LAF and ISF border security and interdiction capabilities. Libya. Libya’s porous borders, fragmented security forces, and vast ungoverned territory have made it a permissive environment for terrorist groups such as Ansar al-Shari’a Benghazi, Ansar al-Shari’a Darnah, al-Qa’ida in the Islamic Maghreb, al-Murabitoun, and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). Due to the inability of the Libyan government to effectively administer its territory, terrorist organizations have found safe havens primarily in Sirte, Darnah, Benghazi, and Sabratha, although violent extremist groups operate with impunity throughout Libya. While the Libyan National Army launched a military operation in 2014 with the stated goal of removing violent extremists from Benghazi, it has not succeeded in fully liberating Benghazi from the control of terrorist groups. The government failed to eliminate terrorist safe havens in Libya in 2015, and has been unable to prevent flows of foreign terrorist fighters in and out of its territory. Terrorist training camps and facilitation networks exist 4/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) throughout Libya; local tribes and minority groups frequently serve as facilitators, although this appears largely due to economic rather than ideological motivations. Libya serves as a major source and transit country for foreign fighters en route to Syria and Iraq. There are indications that foreign terrorist fighters are beginning to return to Libya or choosing to stay in Libya to fight there, increasing concerns that Libya has become a battlefield for violent extremist groups such as ISIL. In 2013, the United States signed an agreement with the Libyan government to cooperate on destroying Libya’s stockpile of legacy chemical weapons in accordance with its obligations as an Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) member state. Libya successfully completed operations for the disposal of its remaining mustard gas filled in artillery projectile and aerial bombs in January 2014. Libya also completed the disposal of its remaining bulk mustard in 2013. However, Libya retains a stockpile of natural uranium ore concentrate (yellowcake), stored in a former military facility near Sebha in Libya’s south. This material represents a limited risk of trafficking and proliferation due to the bulk and weight of the storage containers and the need for extensive additional processing before the material would be suitable for weapons purposes. Yemen. Throughout 2015, al-Qa’ida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and ISIL-Yemen exploited the political and security vacuum to strengthen their foothold and expand recruiting inside the country. The Yemeni government has operated in exile for much of 2015, greatly diminishing its ability to focus on counterterrorism efforts. AQAP and ISIL-Yemen have portrayed the unrest in Yemen as part of a broader Sunni-Shia sectarian conflict. By exploiting this sectarian divide, these groups have increased their support base in Sunni communities and enabled ISIL-Yemen, in particular, to gain a foothold in the country. AQAP benefitted during 2015 from the conflict in Yemen by expanding its presence in the southern and eastern governorates. Establishing deeper tribal and familial relationships in these areas allowed AQAP to expand the territory it controlled during 2015 to Abyan, Taiz, and its largest safe haven in the port city of Mukalla. Access to the port enabled AQAP to increase its finances. AQ also maintains a presence in Aden. While AQAP remains the predominant Sunni Islamist terrorist group in the country, there are seven known wilayat (province) proISIL groups operating in 10 of Yemen’s provinces, including Sa’ada, Sana’a, al-Jawf, al-Bayda, Taiz, Ibb, Lahij, Aden, Shahwah, and Hadramawt. ISIL-Yemen’s “wilayat” are beginning to exert more influence by competing to obtain support from Sunni tribes and militias in the same areas. While the exact composition of the group is still unknown, its numbers are considerably smaller than AQAP’s despite it having likely drawn members from some of the same disillusioned Yemeni AQAP members who previously supported ISIL in Iraq and Syria. While ISIL-Yemen has demonstrated a violent operational pace, it has yet to occupy significant territory. Yemen’s political instability continued to hinder efforts to enact or enforce strategic trade controls, leaving the country vulnerable as a transit point for WMD-related materials. SOUTH ASIA Afghanistan. The border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan is an under-governed area that terrorists exploit to conduct attacks in both countries. Terrorist networks active in Afghanistan, such as al-Qa’ida (AQ), the Haqqani Network, and others, operate in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. ISIL Khorasan (ISIL-K) is largely based in Afghanistan, but its support network also reaches into Pakistan’s tribal areas along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. The Afghan government has struggled to assert control over this remote terrain where the population is largely detached from national institutions. Afghanistan cooperates with U.S. counterterrorism efforts. Since taking office in September 2014, President Ghani has pursued cross-border security cooperation with the Pakistani government, including the prospect of joint operations to reduce safe havens on both sides of the border. 5/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) The potential for WMD trafficking and proliferation remains a concern in Afghanistan because of its porous borders and the presence of terrorist groups. The United States and Afghanistan continued to work to finalize a bilateral framework to facilitate closer cooperation to counter nuclear terrorism and enhance Afghanistan’s capabilities to prevent, detect, and respond to nuclear smuggling incidents. The Afghanistan and U.S. governments also continued to work to implement comprehensive strategic trade controls and strengthen Afghanistan’s border security system. The Export Control and Related Border Security (EXBS) Program contributes to strengthening Afghanistan’s border enforcement capacity by providing border interdiction trainings to Afghan Customs Department and the Afghan Border Police. EXBS also sponsors regional cross-border collaboration through trainings with its Central Asian neighbors through the OSCE and the UN Office on Drugs and Crime – World Customs Organization’s Container Control Program. To increase the Government of Afghanistan’s strategic trade control awareness and capacity, EXBS sponsored training for an Afghan delegation, which included representatives from the Afghan Atomic Energy High Commission, the Ministry of Commerce, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs at the University of Georgia, Center for International Trade Security. The United States continued to assist the Afghan government in building capacity to secure potentially dangerous biological materials and infrastructure housed at Afghan facilities, promote surveillance capabilities to detect and identify possibly catastrophic biological events, and engage Afghan scientists and engineers that have WMD or WMD-applicable expertise. Pakistan. In 2015, an assortment of terrorist groups, to include the Haqqani Network, attempted to hide in or operate from the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan, a mountainous region along Pakistan’s northwest border with Afghanistan. The National Action Plan (NAP) calls upon the government to “ensure that no armed militias are allowed to function in the country,” although claims about the NAP’s uneven implementation was a frequent feature in Pakistani media. As in 2014, Pakistan launched military operations to eradicate terrorist safe havens, although their impact on all terrorist groups was uneven. The government administered an Exit Control List (ECL) intended to prevent terrorists and criminal actors from traveling abroad. In August, September, and November, the government announced its intention to remove thousands of people from the ECL on grounds of their wrongful or unsubstantiated addition. Some UN-designated terrorist groups, such as Lashkar e-Tayyiba (LeT) affiliates Jamaat-ud-Dawa and Falah-e-Insaniyat Foundation, were able to fundraise and hold rallies in Pakistan. LeT/JuD leader, Hafiz Saeed, who is also a UN-designated terrorist, was able to make frequent public appearances in support of the organization’s objectives, which were covered by the Pakistani media, for much of the year. In September, the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Agency prohibited media coverage of LeT and affiliated groups, although the groups continued to recruit and operate around the country. Despite JuD and FiF’s proscription under UN sanctions regimes, the Pakistani government affirmed in December that neither organization was banned in Pakistan. To combat the trafficking of items that could contribute to WMDs and their delivery systems, Pakistan continued to work towards harmonizing its national control list with items controlled by the Nuclear Suppliers Group, Missile Technology Control Regime, and Australia Group, as well as taking positive moves such as adding catch-all provisions to its export licensing procedures. Along with list development, Pakistan developed industry internal compliance guidelines and an industry outreach program for strategic technology sectors, which regularly shares information with these industries. The U.S. government seeks to partner more closely with Pakistan on a further enhanced outreach campaign for industry to fully understand and implement Pakistan’s export control requirements, as well as to begin a dialogue on controls on conventional weapons and related dual-use technologies. In addition to industry outreach, Pakistan also participated, developed, and delivered a series of technical trainings to responsible government licensing and enforcement officials for the proper identification of dual-use commodities that could be used to create WMDs and/or their delivery systems. Overall, Pakistan was a committed partner that undertook great efforts to build its export control capabilities. Pakistan is a constructive and active participant in the Nuclear Security Summit process and the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism, and has worked to strengthen its strategic trade controls, including updating its national export control list. The Export Control and Related Border Security (EXBS) Program increased the Government of Pakistan’s enforcement capacity by sponsoring training for Pakistani Customs and Strategic Export Control Division officials on how to properly identify strategic 6/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) commodities of concern. These commodity identification and advanced interdiction trainings were implemented by the U.S. Department of Energy. EXBS also sponsored regional collaboration through nonproliferation fellowships and cross-border coordination with Afghanistan through the UN Office and Drugs and Crime – World Customs Organization’s Container Control Program (CCP). Under the CCP, training was provided to enhance the targeting of skills of port control unit officials at the Torkham and Jalalabad border-crossings. WESTERN HEMISPHERE Colombia. Rough terrain and dense forest cover, coupled with low population densities and historically weak government presence have defined Colombia’s borders with Venezuela, Ecuador, Peru, and Brazil, and historically have allowed for safe havens for terrorist groups, particularly the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) and the National Liberation Army (ELN). The Government of Colombia has not only maintained pressure on these groups to deny safe haven, disrupt terrorism financing efforts, and degrade terrorist groups’ logistics infrastructure, but it also has continued to conduct operations to combat their ability to conduct terrorist attacks. Coupled with ongoing peace negotiations with the FARC and two FARC unilateral cease fire declarations, Colombia experienced an overall decline in the total number of terrorist incidents in 2015. Despite these successes, illegal armed groups, primarily known as “Bandas Criminales,” continued to use the porous border, remote mountain areas, and jungles to maneuver, train, cultivate and transport narcotics, operate illegal mines, “tax” the local populace, and engage in other illegal activities. Improved relations with neighboring Ecuador have led to some increased cooperation on law enforcement issues. Colombia also continued to cooperate and share information with the Panamanian National Border Service. Additionally, Brazil began implementing its Integrated Border Monitoring System in an effort to monitor its entire border, and along with continued cooperation with the Government of Colombia, addressed potential safe haven areas along their shared borders. Venezuela. Venezuela’s porous border with Colombia has made the country attractive to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia and the National Liberation Army, who use it to transit in and out of its territory. There were credible reports that Venezuela maintained a permissive environment that allowed for support of activities that benefited known terrorist groups. COUNTERING TERRORISM ON THE ECONOMIC FRONT In 2015, the Department of State designated one new Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) and amended two existing designations. In addition, the Department designated 37 organizations and individuals as Specially Designated Global Terrorists under Executive Order (E.O.) 13224, and amended two existing designations. The Department also revoked the designations of two organizations and two individuals. The Department of the Treasury also designated organizations and individuals under E.O. 13224. For a full list of all U.S. designations, see the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control website at ( 2015 Foreign Terrorism Organization/Executive Order 13224 group designations: On September 3, the Department of State revoked the Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) designation of the Revolutionary Organization 17 November. 7/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) On September 29, the Department of State amended the E.O. 13224 designation of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant to include the alias Islamic State, and amended the FTO designation on September 30. (See Chapter 6, Foreign Terrorist Organizations, for further information on ISIL). On September 29, the Department of State designated Jaysh Rijal al-Tariq al Naqshabandi (JRTN) under E.O. 13224 and as an FTO. (See Chapter 6, Foreign Terrorist Organizations, for further information on JRTN.) On September 29, the Department of State amended the FTO and E.O. 13224 designation of Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis to include the alias ISIL Sinai Province as its primary name. (See Chapter 6, Foreign Terrorist Organizations, for further information on ISIL-Sinai Province.) On December 9, the Department of State revoked the FTO designation of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG). 2015 Executive Order (E.O.) 13224 designations: On January 14, the Department of State designated ‘Abdallah al-Ashqar. Al-Ashqar is a leadership figure and member of the military committee of the Mujahidin Shura Council in the Environs of Jerusalem (MSC). Al-Ashqar is known to have purchased missiles and other materials to attack Israel. On February 9, the Department of State designated German national Denis Cuspert. Cuspert was a recruiter and propagandist for ISIL. He was allegedly killed in an airstrike near al-Raqqah, Syria, in October 2015. On March 25, the Department of State designated Aliaskhab Kebekov, who was the leader of Russia-based terrorist group Caucasus Emirate, until his death during a battle with Russian Special Forces in April 2015. On April 14, the Department of State designated Syrian-based Tunisian national Ali Ouni Harzi. Harzi was also added to the UN 1267/1989 al-Qaida Sanctions List. Harzi joined Ansar al-Shari’a in Tunisia (AAS-T) in 2011. He was a highprofile member known for recruiting volunteers, smuggling weapons and explosives into Tunisia, and facilitating the travel of AAS-T fighters to Syria. Harzi was killed in an air strike in June 2015. On April 21, the Department of State designated Ahmed Diriye and Mahad Karate. Diriye became the leader of alShabaab in September 2014, following the death of former leader Ahmed Abdi Godane. Prior to assuming leadership of the group, Diriye served as Godane’s assistant, the deputy governor of Lower Juba region and al-Shabaab’s governor of the Bay and Bakool regions. By 2013 he had become a senior advisor to Godane and oversaw the group’s domestic activities. Karate plays an important role in al-Shabaab’s intelligence wing, the Amniyat. On April 21, the Department of State designated Christodoulos Xiros and Nikolaos Maziotis. Xiros is a chief assassin of 17 November. He was most recently arrested in January 2015 by Greek police while planning to carry out armed assaults in Greece, possibly with the intent to free prisoners. It is believed that at the time of his arrest, Xiros was working with members of the Conspiracy of Fire Nuclei. Maziotis is the leader of the Greece-based Revolutionary Struggle. Under his leadership, the group claimed responsibility for the April 2014 bombing in central Athens outside the offices of the Greek central bank. On April 28, the Department of State designated Meliad Farah, Hassan el-Hajj Hassan, and Hussein Atris. Farah and Hassan have been publicly identified as key suspects in a July 2012 bombing in Burgas, Bulgaria, which targeted Israeli tourists and killed six people. The bombing has been attributed to Hizballah. Atris is a member of Hizballah’s overseas terrorism unit. In 2013, Atris was sentenced to two years and eight months in prison by a Thai court for illegally possessing materials to manufacture explosives. He was released in September 2014 and is believed to reside in Lebanon. On August 25, the Department of State designated Abdul Aziz Haqqani. Aziz Haqqani is a senior member of the Haqqani Network (HQN) and brother to HQN leader Sirajuddin Haqqani. For several years, Aziz Haqqani has been involved in planning and carrying out IED attacks against Afghan government targets, and assumed responsibility for all major HQN attacks after the death of his brother, Badruddin Haqqani. On September 8, the Department of State designated Lebanese born Samir Kuntar. In April 1979, Kuntar participated in the attempted kidnapping of an Israeli family in Israel that resulted in the deaths of five Israelis, including two young 8/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) children. Kuntar was convicted in an Israeli court for the murders; he was released from prison in 2008 as part of a prisoner exchange. Kuntar later emerged as one of the most visible spokesmen for Hizballah. With the assistance of Iran and Syria, Kuntar played an operational role in building Hizballah’s terrorist infrastructure in the Golan Heights. He was killed on December 19, 2015 in Jaramana, Syria. On September 8, the Department of State designated Hamas operatives Muhammed Deif, Yahya Ibrahim Hassan Sinwar, and Rawhi Mushtaha. Sinwar and Mushtaha are known for their role in founding the Hamas military wing, the Izzedine al-Qassam Brigade. Deif is a top commander of the Izzedine al-Qassam Brigade. On September 9, the Department of State designated Abu Ubaydah Yusuf al-Anabi, a senior leader of al-Qa’ida in the Islamic Maghreb. In an April 2013 video, al-Anabi called on violent extremists to initiate armed conflict against French interests worldwide, presumably in response to France’s intervention in Mali. On September 29, the Department of State designated 10 individuals and five groups connected to foreign terrorist fighters in Algeria, Indonesia, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, and Yemen: Rustam Aselderov is a former commander of the Caucasus Emirate, and the current leader of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant – Caucasus Province (ISIL-CP). Aselderov defected from Caucasus Emirate and swore allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi in early December 2014. A spokesman for al-Baghdadi accepted this pledge of allegiance and appointed Aselderov as the “emir” of ISIL-CP. French citizen Peter Cherif is a foreign terrorist fighter and member of al-Qa’ida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). In 2004, he was captured while fighting for al-Qa’ida in Iraq (AQI) near Fallujah, Iraq. He was convicted in Baghdad in July 2006 for illegally crossing the border and sentenced to 15 years in prison. He escaped in March 2007 after an insurgent attack and prison break and traveled to Syria. He was later arrested in Syria, extradited, and served 18 months in jail in France. He was released pending trial and fled to Yemen. Cherif was sentenced to five years in prison, in absentia, for being a member of a terrorist organization. Tarkhan Ismailovich Gaziyev is a North Caucasian warlord, who has been involved in the Chechen insurgency since 2003. In 2007, Gaziyev became the Caucasus Emirate Commander of the Southwestern Front of the Province of Chechnya and carried out numerous attacks in this role. Gaziyev split from the group in 2010 and travelled to Turkey. He now leads a group in Syria, known as “Tarkhan Jamaat,” which is part of ISIL, and has participated in fighting in Latakia, Syria. French national Boubaker Hakim was once a member of Ansar al-Shari’a in Tunisia. Hakim claimed responsibility for the assassination of two Tunisian politicians in 2013. He is now a member of ISIL. Maxime Hauchard is a French national who traveled to Syria to join ISIL in August 2013. Hauchard was identified among the ISIL fighters appearing in the November 2014 execution video, which depicted the beheadings of several Syrian soldiers and showed the severed head of an American hostage. Shamil Izmaylov is a Russian militant currently fighting in Syria. Before traveling to Syria in 2012, Izmaylov trained in and later set up his own terrorist training center in Egypt. In mid-2013, Izmaylov established a Russian-speaking ISIL faction in Raqqa that has been fighting as a distinct unit. In addition to participating in combat in Syria, Izmaylov has been associated with the Caucus Emirates. British citizen Sally Jones traveled from the UK to Syria in 2013 to join ISIL and fight alongside her husband, deceased ISIL hacker Junaid Hussain. Jones and Hussain targeted American military personnel through the publication of a “hit list” online encouraging lone-offender attacks. Jones has used social media to recruit women to join ISIL. In August 2015, she offered guidance to individuals aspiring to conduct attacks in Britain on how to construct homemade bombs. Tajikistan citizen Gulmurod Khalimov – a former Tajikistan special operations colonel, police commander, and military expert – is a Syria-based ISIL member and recruiter. Khalimov appeared in a propaganda video confirming he fights for ISIL. French citizen Emilie Konig traveled to Syria in 2012 to join and fight for ISIL. While in Syria, Konig directed individuals in France to attack French government institutions. In a video posted on May 31, 2013, Konig was shown training with 9/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) weapons in Syria. British citizen Nasser Muthana travelled to Syria from Cardiff, UK in November 2013 to fight for ISIL. In June 2014, Muthana was featured in an ISIL propaganda video in which he and two other English-speaking individuals attempt to persuade Muslims in the West to join the fight. In the video, Muthana admitted to participating in battles in Syria and expressed his plans to travel to Iraq, Lebanon, and Jordan to continue the fight. Muthana has also used social media to threaten the British government about returning to the UK to test new skills he has gained in Syria. Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant-Caucasus Province (ISIL-CP) became ISIL’s newest regional group on June 23, 2015, when the spokesman for ISIL leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi released an audio recording accepting the allegiance of the fighters of four Caucasus regions – Chechnya, Dagestan, Ingushetia, and Kabardino-Balkaria. On September 2, 2015, ISIL-CP claimed responsibility for an attack on a Russian military base in Magaramkent, southern Dagestan, which killed and wounded a number of Russian citizens. In December 2015, the group also claimed responsibility for a shooting near the citadel of Derbent in Dagestan, Russia that killed one and left 11 others injured. Jund al-Khilafah in Algeria (JAK-A) is an ISIL-affiliated group operating in Algeria. The group emerged in September 2014 when top military commanders of AQIM’s central region broke away from AQIM and announced allegiance to ISIL. JAK-A became notorious following its September 2014 abduction and beheading of French national Herve Gourdel. Jaysh Rijal al-Tariq al Naqshabandi (JRTN) aims to overthrow the Government of Iraq and implement a Ba’athist or similar regime. It first announced insurgency operations against Coalition Forces in Iraq in December 2006 in response to Saddam Hussein’s death. More recently, the group has played an important role in some of ISIL’s most significant military advances, including the seizure of Mosul. Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant-Khorasan (ISIL-K) was announced in an online video in January 2015. ISIL-K is led by former Tehrik e-Taliban Pakistan commander Hafiz Saeed Khan and consists of former Pakistani and Afghan Taliban commanders. The Mujahidin Indonesian Timur (MIT) is an ISIL-linked terrorist group operating in Indonesia. MIT members have ties to other Department of State designated FTOs, including Jemmah Anshorut Tauhid and Jemaah Islamiya. In July 2014, MIT’s leader, Abu Warda Santoso, pledged allegiance to ISIL. MIT has become increasingly bold in its attacks on security forces. The Department of State amended the E.O. 13224 designation of Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis (ABM) to include the alias ISIL Sinai Province as its primary name. ABM has used ISIL Sinai Province as its primary name since pledging allegiance to ISIL in November 2014. The group has since continued attacking Egyptian targets. (See Chapter 6, Foreign Terrorist Organizations, for further information on ISIL Sinai Province. The Department of State amended the E.O. 13224 designation of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant to include the alias Islamic State. (See Chapter 6, Foreign Terrorist Organizations, for further information on ISIL.) On November 13, the Department of State designated Maghomed Maghomedzakirovich Abdurakhmanov. Abdurakhmanov is believed to have beheaded three individuals in Syria. He was arrested in July 2013, and in July 2015 was sentenced by a Turkish court to seven-and-a-half years in prison for being a member of a terrorist organization. On December 9, the Department of State designated Emrah Erdogan. Erdogan is a German-national known to have joined in combat, recruited, and fundraised as a member of al-Qa’ida and al-Shabaab. Erdogan was sentenced to seven years in prison in January 2014 in Germany for these activities and for phoning in false terrorist threats against the parliament in Berlin in November 2010. MULTILATERAL EFFORTS TO COUNTER TERRORISM 10/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) In 2015, the United States continued to work through multilateral organizations to strengthen regional and international efforts to counter terrorism and violent extremism, including by developing and promoting global norms and building the capacities of states to implement them. The Global Counterterrorism Forum (GCTF). Since its launch in September 2011, the GCTF has mobilized more than US $300 million to support national and regional efforts to strengthen civilian institutions to counter terrorism and violent extremism. This includes support for the development and implementation of GCTF framework documents at both the regional and country levels. The GCTF is working with partners around the globe to change how states – particularly those emerging from authoritarian rule – respond to the challenges of terrorism and the violent extremist ideologies that underpin it. The GCTF, with its 30 founding members (29 countries and the EU), regularly convenes counterterrorism policymakers and practitioners, as well as experts from the UN and other multilateral and regional bodies, to identify urgent CT needs, devise solutions, and mobilize expertise and resources to address such needs and enhance global cooperation. With its primary focus on countering violent extremism (CVE) and strengthening civilian criminal justice and other rule of law institutions that deal with terrorism, the GCTF aims to diminish terrorist recruitment and increase countries’ capacity for dealing with terrorist threats within their borders and regions. In the past year, the GCTF launched two new initiatives: The International CT and CVE Clearinghouse Mechanism (ICCM): Operating as a project under the auspices of the GCTF, the ICCM will develop and manage an up-to-date database of recent and ongoing counterterrorism and CVE capacity-building assistance. The ICCM will assist pilot countries and donors to mobilize and coordinate donor resources to address identified needs, especially regarding key aspects of UN Security Council and General Assembly Resolutions related to counterterrorism and CVE. This initiative initially will focus on three pilot countries – Kenya, Nigeria, and Tunisia. The Initiative to Address the Lifecycle of Radicalization to Violence: This initiative is developing tools that can be applied across the full life cycle of radicalization: from the front end, where governments and communities are attempting to prevent susceptible individuals from being attracted to the ideologies promoted by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant and other terrorist groups; to the back end, where governments and communities need to assess the risk posed by violent, radicalized individuals and determine their long-term disposition and possible rehabilitation and reintegration into society, either in or out of the criminal justice system. The purpose of the GCTF cross-working group initiative is to expand on existing GCTF good practices and develop additional tools needed to address the full life cycle of radicalization from prevention to intervention to rehabilitation and reintegration. The GCTF has also inspired the establishment of three independent institutions that provide platforms for delivering sustainable training and resources in support of CVE and strengthening rule of law. Based in Abu Dhabi, Hedayah, the first international center of excellence on CVE, hosted a number of training and capacity-building courses focusing on community policing and community engagement, CVE and education, and CVE and communications. Hedayah developed Guidelines and Good Practices for Developing National CVE Strategies which is a document that offers guidance for national governments interested in developing or refining a national CVE strategy, or CVE components as part of a wider counterterrorism strategy or framework. The International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law (IIJ), based in Malta, was inaugurated in June 2014 as a center dedicated to providing police, prosecutors, judges, corrections officials, lawmakers, and other criminal justice actors with the training and tools required to address terrorism and related transnational criminal activity. During 2015, the IIJ trained more than 450 judges, prosecutors, investigators, parliamentarians, and other criminal justice professionals and experts from more than 30 countries. Some of the activities supported by the IIJ during the last year 11/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) included programs directed at: dismantling terrorist facilitation networks; building informal and formal legal cooperation networks; combating kidnapping for ransom; fostering the rule of law while developing counterterrorism policies; supporting border security; bringing foreign terrorist fighters to justice; strengthening mutual legal assistance efforts; supporting senior judicial officials in developing criminal justice responses to terrorism; hosting the GCTF Criminal Justice-Rule of Law Working Group Plenary Meeting; and developing a parliamentarian program in the area of counterterrorism. In June 2014, the Global Community Engagement and Resilience Fund (GCERF) became fully operational in Geneva as a foundation under Swiss law, with its first Board meeting held in November of that same year. Pilot countries include Bangladesh, Mali, and Nigeria. In 2015, each of the pilot countries set up a “country support mechanism” which brings government, civil society, and the private sector together to develop needs assessments and oversee development of grant applications. An Independent Review Panel was established to review and make recommendations on grant applications. Grants will be focused on programs that strengthen resilience against violent extremism. In December 2015, the Governing Board approved Burma, Kenya, and Kosovo as additional beneficiary countries and reviewed the pilot countries’ draft national applications. The UN is a close partner of, and participant in, the GCTF and its activities. The GCTF serves as a mechanism for furthering the implementation of the universally-agreed UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy and, more broadly, to complement and reinforce existing multilateral counterterrorism efforts, starting with those of the UN. The GCTF also partners with a wide range of regional multilateral organizations, including the Council of Europe, the OSCE, the AU, and the Inter-Governmental Authority on Development (IGAD). The United Nations (UN). Sustained and strategic engagement at the UN on counterterrorism issues is a priority for the United States. Throughout 2015, the UN Security Council (UNSC) remained engaged with stemming the flow of foreign terrorist fighters by promoting implementation of UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 2178 (2014), a Chapter VII binding resolution that requires all states to “prevent and suppress the recruiting, organization, transporting, or equipping” of foreign terrorist fighters, as well as the financing of foreign terrorist fighter travel and activities.” Lithuania, Spain and the United States chaired ministerial meetings during their respective UNSC presidencies that focused specifically on measures to enhance border security; criminalize and prevent the travel of foreign terrorist fighters, counter violent extremism (CVE), and counter-ISIL financing. In 2015, the UNSC adopted several other counterterrorism-related resolutions, including: UNSCR 2199 to degrade ISIL, al-Nusrah Front, and other al-Qa’ida (AQ)-associated groups’ financial support networks, paying particular attention to halting oil smuggling, kidnapping for ransom, and the illicit trade of antiquities from Syria; UNSCR 2250 to emphasize the role of youth in countering terrorism and countering violent extremism leading to terrorism; and UNSCR 2253 to further disrupt AQ and ISIL’s sources of revenue. In addition, the United States engaged with a wide range of UN actors on counterterrorism, which included: The Counter-Terrorism Committee Counter-Terrorism Executive Directorate (CTED). The United States supported CTED efforts to analyze capacity gaps of Member States to implement UNSCRs 1373, 1624, and 2178, and facilitate training and other technical assistance to UN member states. This included participating in the UN Security Council’s Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC) thematic debates on a range of issues including stemming the flow of foreign terrorist fighters; the role of women in countering violent extremism; and preventing terrorists from exploiting the Internet and social media to recruit terrorists and incite terrorist acts, while respecting human rights and fundamental freedoms. The Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force (CTITF). The United States supported CTITF efforts to create a capacity-building plan to assist Member States’ implementation of UNSCR 2178 and improve implementation of the UN Global Counterterrorism Strategy, including by serving on the Advisory Board of the UN Counter-Terrorism Centre (UNCCT), which delivers training and technical assistance. In 2015, the United States funded a range of UNCCT and CTITF activities including: promoting effective use of advance passenger information to stem the flow of Foreign terrorist fighters; capacity building for Mali’s security and justice sectors; a training initiative to secure open borders; 12/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) implementing good practices on addressing and preventing terrorist kidnapping for ransom; and supporting community engagement through human rights-led policing. The UNSC 1267/1989/2253 Committee. On December 17, 2015, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Jacob Lew chaired a special UN Security Council (UNSC) meeting with finance ministers on countering ISIL finance and all forms of terrorist financing to bolster international efforts to further disrupt ISIL’s sources of revenue and isolate it from the international financial system. At the finance ministers meeting, the UNSC unanimously adopted UNSCR 2253, which updated the UN sanctions on al-Qa’ida to recognize the increasing prominence of ISIL as a global threat by renaming the 1267/1989 al-Qaida Sanctions Regime and List to the 1267/1989/2253 ISIL (Da’esh) and al-Qaida Sanctions Regime and List. The United States worked closely with the UN Sanctions Committee and its Monitoring Team in 2015 by proposing listings and de-listings, providing amendments, engaging the Committee’s Ombudsperson in de-listings, and providing input to the Committee to enhance its procedures and implementation of sanctions measures. The United States also assisted the Monitoring Team with information for its research and reports. There are 215 individuals and 72 entities listed on the list. In 2015, 35 individuals and four entities were added to the list. The Committee also worked to ensure the integrity of the list by conducting regular reviews and by endeavoring to remove those individuals and entities that no longer met the criteria for listing. In 2015, 21 individuals were de-listed, of which eight individuals were de-listed following the submission of a petition through the Office of the Ombudsperson. The UN Office on Drugs and Crime’s Terrorism Prevention Branch (UNODC/TPB). The Terrorism Prevention Branch (TPB), in conjunction with the UNODC’s Global Program against Money Laundering, continued to provide assistance to countries seeking to ratify and implement the universal legal instruments against terrorism. The United States provided funding to UNODC/TPB for a vast array of counterterrorism programming focused on strengthening the criminal justice system’s response to terrorism. In 2015, the United States provided funding for several new TPB programs aimed at strengthening the legal regime against terrorism within a rule of law framework in Morocco and improving the criminal justice response to foreign terrorist fighters in the Balkans and Central Asia. The UN Inter-Regional Crime Research Institute (UNICRI). The United States has provided financial support to a UNICRI-led global effort to strengthen the capacity of countries to implement the good practices contained in the GCTF’s Rome Memorandum on Good Practices for the Rehabilitation and Reintegration of Violent Extremist Offenders. In addition, in 2015, the United States provided funding to UNICRI to launch a pilot diversion program aimed at potential foreign terrorist fighters and others at risk of recruitment into violent extremism and terrorism. This pilot effort seeks to address the challenges presented by youths who have come to the attention of law enforcement as a result of having come under the influence of violent extremist ideologues or terrorist recruiters. The UNSC 1540 Committee. The Committee monitors and fosters implementation of the obligations and recommendations of UNSCR 1540, which establishes legally binding obligations on all UN Member States related to the establishment of and enforcement of appropriate and effective measures against the proliferation of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, their means of delivery, and related materials to non-state actors, including terrorists. The 1540 Committee’s program of work focuses on four main areas: monitoring and national implementation; assistance; cooperation with international organizations, including the UNSC committees established pursuant to UNSCRs 1267 and 1373; and transparency and media outreach. The Committee submitted its annual report on implementation to the UNSC in December 2015, which also described preparations for the 2nd Comprehensive Review of UNSCR 1540 in 2016. The Committee’s Group of Experts also participates as part of the CTITF, and cooperates with INTERPOL, UNODC, FATF, and other bodies involved in counterterrorism efforts. The International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). ICAO’s Universal Security Audit Program (USAP) continued to contribute directly to U.S. security by ensuring that each of ICAO’s 191 member states conducts regular security audits that comply with aviation security standards. In 2015, ICAO continued to transition to the USAP-Continuous Monitoring Approach (USAP-CMA) to enable greater focus of resources on states requiring more assistance in meeting the Standards. ICAO has begun to pilot the process and certify auditors accordingly. USAP conducted assistance missions 13/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) to help states correct security problems revealed by surveys and audits. ICAO, in partnership with the UN’s CTED, has assisted member states in the implementation of UN Security Council Resolutions on counterterrorism, including border control. The two entities have conducted assessment visits and organized workshops focused on countering terrorism and the use of fraudulent travel documents, and promoting good practices on border control and aviation security. ICAO is also working with member states to encourage incorporation of advance passenger information and Passenger Name Record in the travel decision process and with priority countries on implementation of ICAO’s public key directory program, as a means to validate e-passports at key ports of entry. Also, ICAO with the World Customs Organization is working to establish standard practices for enhanced screening of cargo. Together with the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, ICAO and CTED have encouraged member states to ratify and implement international counterterrorism treaties. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The IAEA continued to implement its Nuclear Security Plan (2014-2017) for countering the threat of terrorism involving nuclear and other radioactive material. The United States was actively involved in IAEA efforts to enhance security for vulnerable nuclear and other radioactive materials and associated facilities, and to reduce the risk that terrorists could gain access to or use such materials or expertise. The International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL). Through its secure I-24/7 global police communications system, INTERPOL connects its member countries’ law enforcement officials to its array of investigative and analytical databases, as well as its system of messages, diffusions, and notices. Following the example of the U.S. National Central Bureau, a number of member countries are now integrating INTERPOL’s information sharing resources and capabilities into their respective national border security and law enforcement infrastructure to help monitor and interdict the international transit of foreign terrorist fighters and other transnational criminals. With financial and staffing support from the United States, the INTERPOL Counter-Terrorism Fusion Centre’s Foreign Terrorist Fighter project represents a multinational fusion cell that manages an analytical database containing identity particulars that supports law enforcement and border control authorities’ abilities to determine the terrorist threat posed by subjects located in, or attempting to enter, their respective jurisdictions. More than 50 countries now contribute to INTERPOL’s foreign terrorist fighters database, and information shared through its channels has increased six-fold in the last year, growing to some 5,000 foreign terrorist fighters identities. From these records, dedicated analysis has been delivered to INTERPOL’s membership to combine, evaluate, and share intelligence on the capabilities, means and emerging trends of foreign terrorist fighters to ensure that the right piece of data reaches the right officer on the frontlines. In this respect, more than 2,000 INTERPOL alerts intended to disrupt foreign terrorist fighter mobility were issued by member countries in the last year. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and the FATF-Style Regional Bodies (FSRBs). The United States supported FATF plenary activities on a number of countering the financing of terrorism (CFT) issues including guidance on, and vulnerabilities of, emerging terrorist financing risks, preventing terrorist financing abuse of the non-profit sector, and countering the financing of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant; and participated in the FATF-style regional bodies (FSRBs) work to strengthen the implementation of FATF CFT standards. In particular, the United States continued to stress the importance of targeted sanctions and Recommendation 6, a provision to freeze and confiscate assets. The United States also continued to stress Recommendation 5, a provision to criminalize terrorist financing for any purpose, including, as clarified in a newly-revised interpretive note, the financing of foreign terrorist fighters. Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). Under the 2015 Serbian Chairman in-Office, the OSCE focused on counterterrorism, culminating in the adoption of declarations on countering violent extremism (CVE) and strengthening OSCE efforts to counter ISIL/DAESH at the OSCE Belgrade Ministerial Council meeting in December 2015. Throughout the year, the OSCE conducted numerous CVE initiatives in line with the February White House Summit on Countering Violent Extremism, such as launching a robust CVE communications campaign, hosting a counterterrorism conference that joined together a broad array of stakeholders on sharing best practices to counter the incitement and recruitment of foreign terrorist fighters, and developing a capacity-building program for community leaders to thwart violent extremists. These CVE-related initiatives were bolstered by other OSCE activities, such as an expert workshop on Media Freedom and Responsibilities in the Context of 14/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) Counterterrorism Policies in Bucharest in October 2015 and a conference on foreign terrorist fighters in Southeastern Europe in September 2015. On border security, U.S. funding to the OSCE’s Border Management Staff College in Dushanbe contributed to building the capabilities of border and customs officials to counter transnational threats in Central Asia. The United States also funded a border security training seminar focused on the OSCE’s Mediterranean Partners (North Africa and the Middle East) in Spain. Through the OSCE’s Action against Terrorism Unit, the United States also supported initiatives aimed at addressing effective criminal justice system responses to terrorism, travel document security, cyber security, and nonproliferation. North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). NATO’s counterterrorism efforts focus on improving awareness of the threat, developing response capabilities, and enhancing engagement with partner countries and organizations. In 2015, the North Atlantic Council and working level NATO committees hosted representatives from the UN, GCTF co-chairs Turkey and the United States, and NGOs for discussions on the foreign terrorist fighter threat and lessons learned in countering violent extremist content online. The NATO Headquarters’ Intelligence Unit now benefits from increased information sharing between member services and the Alliance, and produces analytical reports relating to terrorism and its links with other transnational threats. Building partner capacity and developing innovative technologies are part of NATO’s core mission, and methods that address asymmetric threats like terrorism are of particular relevance. Much of this work is conducted through the Defence Against Terrorism Programme of Work (DAT POW), which aims to protect troops, civilians, and critical infrastructure against terrorist attacks, including suicide bombers, IEDs, rockets against aircraft, and chemical, biological and radiological materials. The DAT POW supports the implementation of NATO’s spearhead force – the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force – by developing projects to improve troop readiness and preparedness. To complement counter-ISIL coalition efforts, NATO has continued to develop a Defense and Related Security Capacity Building package to assist Iraq in building more effective security forces. European Union (EU). In 2015, the EU’s work with the United States included efforts to curb terrorist financing, strengthen cooperation on countering violent extremism, shut down foreign terrorist fighter networks, and build counterterrorism capacity in partner countries. Much of this work is completed through regular senior-level and working-level consultation and collaboration, including the U.S.-EU Consultation on Terrorism and the U.S.-EU Political Dialogue on Counterterrorist Financing. In the aftermath of the November 13 terrorist attacks in Paris, the EU committed during in December to several counterterrorism actions, including improving data entry of foreign terrorist fighters in various EU information data bases, approving a Passenger Name Record directive to help identify and track terrorist travelers, and pursuing closer cooperation with key partners such as the United States. Group of Seven (G-7). Within the context of the G-7 Roma-Lyon Group (RLG) meetings on counterterrorism and countercrime, the United States helped develop a policy toolkit of measures to address the foreign terrorist fighter problem and generated support for the newly established International Counterterrorism and Countering Violent Extremism Clearinghouse Mechanism (ICCM), which the G-7 supports under the auspices of the GCTF. The United States also sought to advance projects through the RLG’s expert groups on counterterrorism, transportation security, high-tech crime, migration, criminal legal affairs, and law enforcement. Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF). Counterterrorism activities of the 27-member ARF countries included the annual meeting on counterterrorism and transnational crime (CTTC) and supported capacity building through ARF institutions. In 2015, the United States provided funding for an ARF Workshop for First Response Support for Victims of Terrorism and Other Mass Casualty Events, which was hosted by the Government of Philippines in Manila on September 22-23. The workshop brought together policymakers, practitioners, and first responders across the ASEAN region from the domains of (natural) disaster preparedness and management and those responsible for managing and coordinating responses to terrorist attacks. Participants included a total of 63 policymakers, practitioners, and first responders from 16 countries. The meeting took stock of national and regional efforts on these fronts in Southeast Asia as well as international good practices in the area of first responder support to victims of terrorism and other mass casualty events. 15/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) Additionally, the United States encouraged information sharing and supported the CTTC work plan, which focused on illicit drugs; chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear terrorism; cybersecurity; counter-radicalization; the sponsorship of a regional transnational crime information sharing center; and a workshop on migration. Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). In 2015, APEC continued to implement its comprehensive Consolidated Counterterrorism and Secure Trade Strategy. The Strategy, adopted in 2011, endorsed the principles of security, efficiency, and resilience, and advocated for risk-based approaches to security challenges across its four cross-cutting areas of supply chains, travel, finance, and infrastructure. The United States sponsored a workshop that highlighted the threat that foreign terrorist fighter travel poses to the Asia-Pacific region and explained why advance passenger information systems are effective at helping mitigate that threat. The United States also sponsored a workshop on countering terrorists’ use of new payment systems (NPS) that helped reinforce the capacities of APEC members to promote the legal and transparent use of NPS while effectively countering their illicit uses. Organization of American States’ Inter-American Committee against Terrorism (OAS/CICTE). In 2015, the CICTE Secretariat conducted 62 activities, training courses, and technical assistance missions that benefited more than 3,687 participants in five thematic areas: border control; critical infrastructure protection; counterterrorism legislative assistance and terrorist financing; strengthening strategies on emerging terrorist threats (crisis management); and international cooperation and partnerships. The United States is a major contributor to CICTE’s training programs and has provided funding and expert trainers for capacity-building programs focused on aviation security, travel document security and fraud prevention, cybersecurity, legislative assistance and counterterrorism financing, supply chain security, and customs and immigration. INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS AND PROTOCOLS A matrix of the ratification status of 18 of the international conventions and protocols related to terrorism can be found here: ( LONG-TERM PROGRAMS AND INITIATIVES DESIGNED TO COUNTER TERRORIST SAFE HAVENS AND RECRUITMENT COUNTERING VIOLENT EXTREMISM (CVE). CVE refers to proactive actions to counter efforts by violent extremists to radicalize, recruit, and mobilize followers to violence; and efforts to address specific factors that facilitate violent extremist recruitment and radicalization to violence. President Obama convened the White House Summit on Countering Violent Extremism in February 2015. More than 60 countries, 12 multilateral bodies, and representatives from civil society, business, and the faith community participated and launched a global “whole-of-society” effort to tackle the broad range of factors fueling violent extremism. The Summit underscored the need for a comprehensive approach that seeks to both limit the growth of active violent extremist groups and prevent new ones from emerging. Summit participants outlined a concrete action agenda with nine pillars related to preventing and countering violent extremism: 16/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) Promote local research and information-sharing on the drivers of violent extremism; Empower civil society; Strengthen relations between at-risk communities and security and police forces; Promote counter-narratives and weaken the legitimacy of violent extremist messaging; Promote educational approaches to build resilience to violent extremism; Enhance access to mainstream religious knowledge; Prevent radicalization in prisons and rehabilitate and reintegrate violent extremists; Identify political and economic opportunities for at-risk communities; and Strengthen development assistance and stabilization efforts. Governments in Albania, Algeria, Australia, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Mauritania, and Norway hosted regional CVE summits to engage additional states, municipal governments, and civil society and private sector participants in preventive approaches to violent extremism. A number of countries developed National CVE Action Plans charting their way forward. On the margins of UNGA 71, mayors from around the world launched a new Strong Cities Network to identify and share community-level best practices for building social cohesion and resilience against violent extremism. Young people gathered at the first-ever Global Youth CVE Summit to showcase innovative tools for countering the appeal of violent extremism among their peers. Researchers and practitioners with the support of State and USAID launched the RESOLVE Network (Researching Solutions to Violent Extremism) to connect with policy institutes and methodologists around the world to better understand the community-level factors fueling violent extremism and the best evidence-based approaches to address them. Civil society organizations joined in all of these events and initiatives, further amplifying the chorus of voices to counter violent ideologies on the ground. The Intergovernmental Authority on Development sponsored a new CVE Center for Excellence and Counter Messaging for the East Africa region. The Government of Albania is spearheading an initiative to build regional capacity and cooperation around CVE, for example by supporting CVE-related research and counter-messaging. In line with the Department of State and USAID Joint Strategy on CVE, State and USAID leverage a range of available diplomatic, development, and foreign assistance tools and resources to have a demonstrable impact to prevent and counter the spread of violent extremism. The following five objectives guide our CVE assistance and engagement: Expand international political will, partnerships, and expertise to better understand the drivers of violent extremism and mobilize effective interventions. Encourage and assist partner governments to adopt more effective policies and approaches to prevent and counter the spread of violent extremism, including changing unhelpful practices where necessary. Employ foreign assistance tools and approaches, including development, to reduce specific political or social and economic factors that contribute to community support for violent extremism in identifiable areas or put particular segments of a population at high risk of violent extremist radicalization and recruitment to violence. Empower and amplify locally credible voices that can change the perception of violent extremist groups and their ideology among key demographic segments. Strengthen the capabilities of government and non-governmental actors to isolate, intervene with, and promote the rehabilitation and reintegration of individuals caught in the cycle of radicalization to violence. State and USAID are pursuing a range of programs to assist partners around the world to prevent and counter radicalization and recruitment to violence. Key areas of programming include the following: 17/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) Supporting the Development and Implementation of National CVE Action Plans: The United States is providing technical support and assistance to governments as they design and implement national CVE action plans, in partnership with civil society and the private sector. To reinforce these national action plan efforts, the United States is supporting Hedayah, the CVE Center of Excellence in Abu Dhabi, in providing capacity building and technical expertise to governments on CVE policy and practice. Researching Drivers of Violent Extremism and Effective CVE Interventions: The United States is supporting innovative regional, country-based, and thematic research on the drivers of violent extremism and on programming approaches designed to inform targeted CVE policy and programming. The United States is supporting the Researching Solutions to Violent Extremism (RESOLVE) Network, which connect academics and researchers to study the dynamics of CVE in specific, local contexts and identify effective CVE interventions. At the same time, the United States is also working with the Global Counterterrorism Forum (GCTF) to develop an expanded toolkit for addressing the life cycle of radicalization to violence. Building the CVE Capacity of Criminal Justice Actors and Institutions: The United States is supporting programs, especially in the Horn, Sahel, and Maghreb regions of Africa to strengthen the CVE capacity of law enforcement, including police deployed to peace and stabilization operations, prison management and justice sector actors, and to help address drivers of violent extremism such as corruption and human rights abuses. The United States is also supporting programs to train and assist corrections officials to counter radicalization to violence in prison settings and promote rehabilitation, including addressing returning foreign terrorist fighters. Strengthening CVE Efforts by Sub-National, City, and Local Partners: The United States is supporting the Strong Cities Network, a global network of municipal and other sub-national leaders and local government practitioners involved in building community resilience and social cohesion to counter violent extremism in their local communities. The United States is also contributing to the Global Community Engagement and Resilience Fund, the first multilateral fund supporting community-based projects that counter local drivers of recruitment and radicalization to violence. Enhancing Civil Society’s Role in Countering Violent Extremism: Recognizing that youth play a vital role in preventing the spread of violent extremism, the United States is supporting programs that empower youth as change agents in preventing violent extremism in their communities. The United States is also supporting programs that elevate the role of women in preventing the spread of violent extremism in their countries, communities, and families. Countering Violent Extremist Messaging and Promoting Alternative Narratives: With the leadership of the announced interagency Global Engagement Center, the United States is supporting efforts to help government and non-governmental partners to counter the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant’s (ISIL’s) messaging and promote alternative narratives. The United States is supporting the Sawab Center in Abu Dhabi, the first-ever joint online messaging program, to counter ISIL propaganda by directly exposing its criminal nature, challenging its doctrine of hate and intolerance, and highlighting Coalition successes. The United States is also supporting efforts to mobilize and build the capacity of civil society actors and other influential voices who can credibly challenge violent extremist narratives, including through the Peer-to-Peer: Challenging Extremism Program (P2P). CIVILIAN COUNTERTERRORISM CAPACITY BUILDING PROGRAMS. As the terrorist threat has evolved and grown more geographically diverse in recent years, it has become clear that our success depends in large part on the political will and capabilities of our partners to counter terrorism. To succeed over the long term, we must have partners who can not only militarily disrupt threats and degrade networks in a way that comports with international laws and norms, but who have strong civilian capabilities, as well. We need law enforcement, justice sector, and corrections partners, who can disrupt attacks and investigate, arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate terrorists and their facilitation networks. The United States uses various funding authorities and programs to build the capacity of law enforcement, justice, and corrections officials to counter terrorism. The Department of State’s Bureau of Counterterrorism oversees the following capacitybuilding programs: Antiterrorism Assistance (ATA), Counterterrorism Financing (CFT), Counterterrorism Engagement with Allies 18/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) (CTE), the Regional Strategic Initiative (RSI), and the Terrorist Interdiction Program (TIP). For further information on these programs, we refer you to the Annual Report on Assistance Related to International Terrorism, Fiscal Year 2014: ( In his speech at West Point in May 2014, President Obama called for the United States to develop more effective partnerships in countries and regions where terrorist networks seek a foothold and announced the Counterterrorism Partnership Fund (CTPF) to provide significant, flexible resources to build “a network of partnerships from South Asia to the Sahel.” Congress has appropriated significant additional funding for the Department of State’s Counterterrorism Partnership Fund . This funding will enable us to significantly expand civilian counterterrorism capacity-building activities with key partner nations in the Middle East, North Africa and the Sahel, the Horn of Africa, and South and Central Asia, and other regions as required to mitigate the threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters, prevent and counter terrorist safe havens and recruitment, and counter Iranian-sponsored terrorism. REGIONAL STRATEGIC INITIATIVE (RSI). Terrorist groups often take advantage of porous borders and ungoverned areas between countries. The RSI program enables flexible civilian responses to rapidly evolving threats and builds the partner capacity and cooperation necessary to counter the most serious threats facing the United States. Current RSI efforts focus on stemming the flow of foreign terrorist fighters to Syria and Iraq, countering terrorist safe havens, counter-ISIL messaging, and countering Hizballah’s activities. In 2015, RSI supported a wide variety of projects focused on regional law enforcement cooperation and effectiveness against transnational threats. Examples include the counterterrorism rapid response project, which allows the Department of State to quickly deploy advisors and experts to provide immediate assistance to partner nations in various technical areas. In 2015, the rapid response fund mechanism was used to assist Kosovo in processing foreign terrorist fighter cases and taking them to trial; training for Tanzanian Police in improving their skills in dismantling explosive devices, including IEDs; and a central authoritiesfocused project in India that targeted information sharing in counterterrorism cases. Other RSI projects in 2015, included a series of global engagements geared at building partner nations’ domestic and regional capacity to counter Hizballah criminal activities by using legal and law enforcement tools; as well as activities aimed to assist in the implementation of the Global Counterterrorism Forum good practices, including the Hague-Marrakech Memorandum on Good Practices for a More Effective Response to the FTF Phenomenon (Hague-Marrakech Memorandum). Programs to Counter Foreign Terrorist Fighters During the period 2012-2015, significant numbers of foreign terrorist fighters traveled to Iraq and Syria to fight alongside a number of violent extremist groups, most prominently the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and the Nusrah Front. While some of these individuals have been killed in the fighting, thousands have returned home and more will certainly follow. Many of these fighters are returning home with battlefield experience and can pose a direct and immediate threat to their home countries and regions. Amplified by social media, and fueled by local factors, new fighters continue to be attracted to the conflicts in Iraq and Syria and to other regions where ISIL affiliates are active and emerging. North Africa, the Middle East, and Europe remain key source regions for foreign terrorist fighters. There is also increasing concern regarding ISIL’s presence in Libya, and the travel of foreign terrorist fighters to that conflict zone. The Department of State has played a pivotal role in the creation of an international framework for addressing the threat from foreign terrorist fighters. In 2014, the Department of State worked with partners to establish a Foreign Terrorist Fighters Working Group and adopt The Hague-Marrakesh Memorandum on Good Practices for a More Effective Response to the Foreign Terrorist Fighters Phenomenon under the auspices of the Global Counterterrorism Forum (GCTF). This memorandum gave 19/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) practical effect to UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 2178, which was adopted on September 24, 2014, during a high-level UN Security Council (UNSC) meeting chaired by President Obama. Additionally, the U.S.-led Global Coalition to Counter ISIL established an ISIL-focused Foreign Terrorist Fighters Working Group co-led by Turkey and the Netherlands. In part as a result of our efforts, at least 45 countries have passed or updated existing laws to more effectively identify and prosecute foreign terrorist fighters. Thirty-five countries have arrested foreign terrorist fighters, and 12 have successfully prosecuted at least one foreign terrorist fighter. The United States has information-sharing arrangements with 50 international partners to identify and track the travel of suspected terrorists, and at least 50 countries, plus the UN, now contribute foreign terrorist fighter profiles to INTERPOL, a four hundred percent increase over a two-year period. Several countries have also developed new action plans and programs to counter foreign terrorist fighter radicalization and recruitment in their countries, for example in the Western Balkans. Strategic Objectives: Looking forward, the Department of State will continue to expand and deepen bilateral and multilateral engagement to counter the foreign terrorist fighters threat and related radicalization and recruitment to violence. We have identified the following six strategic objectives, which the Department pursues in close partnership with other U.S. government agencies. Work with partners to identify, monitor, and address the travel of foreign terrorist fighters to and from Iraq and Syria and new areas affected by ISIL expansion, such as Libya. The Department continues to prioritize bilateral engagement with key source and transit countries. Our approach brings together partner countries’ homeland security, law enforcement, justice sector, intelligence, diplomatic, military, capacity building, and information sharing efforts. These engagements facilitate increased cooperation and, where appropriate, technical assistance. Such cooperation takes the form of information-sharing arrangements, provision of hardware and software to improve border security and management, financial intelligence exchanges, and support in law enforcement investigations, amongst others. Over the course of the last three years, the Department of State has led interagency delegations to countries in Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia. In the past six months, the Department has prioritized engagement with Morocco, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Kuwait, Turkey, Belgium, France, and the Netherlands to increase cooperation to counter foreign terrorist fighters. Following the November Paris attacks, the Department is leading efforts to deploy interagency expert teams to broaden and deepen cooperation with European partners to combat terrorist travel and help reduce the flow of foreign terrorist fighters across their borders. These teams will provide tailored advice in areas such as information sharing, watchlisting, and border security. Encourage and assist top foreign terrorist fighter source and transit countries to employ more robust border and aviation security procedures to identify and interdict potential foreign terrorist fighters and those returning. The Department funds a variety of programming that is implemented by our interagency and multilateral partners, including the Department of Homeland Security, to bolster partner nation capacity to secure borders and prevent foreign terrorist fighters travel onward to conflict zones and back home to countries of origin. Trainings focus on aviation security, to include traveler screening and airport security practices; maritime security, which encompasses training to deter and interdict materiel to support ISIL (illicit funds, weapons and people) and a variety of border security courses aimed at improving controls at land borders. Enable top foreign terrorist fighter source and transit countries to track and interdict travel by foreign terrorist fighters through more robust information sharing, watchlisting, and traveler screening both with the United States and between top foreign terrorist fighter source and transit countries. The United States now has information-sharing arrangements with 50 countries. Under these arrangements, the United States and foreign partners exchange screening information on known and suspected terrorists, which serves to disrupt and stem the flow of foreign terrorist fighters to ISIL and other terrorist groups. The United States has expanded information sharing with several countries, including Malaysia, Turkey, and some Gulf Cooperation Council countries – many of which were 20/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) traditionally reluctant to create formal arrangements. Additionally, the Department, working in partnership with the Department of Justice (DOJ) INTERPOL Washington, has launched a new effort in Southeast Asia to enhance law enforcement and border security agencies’ access to INTERPOL data, develop protocols and expertise to leverage INTERPOL data, and encourage best practices for interagency and international collaboration to combat the flow of foreign terrorist fighters from the region. Encourage and assist top foreign terrorist fighter source and transit countries to establish and employ the necessary legislative, administrative, policy and criminal justice frameworks, capabilities, tools and programs to investigate, interdict, divert, prosecute, adjudicate and incarcerate aspirant or returning foreign terrorist fighters. The Department works with a full range of implementers to help partners develop or improve their criminal justice systems to deal with terrorism cases within a rule of law framework. For example, State funds the DOJ to help governments draft new legislation where necessary and to assist partner countries to enforce laws designed to address the foreign terrorist fighter problem. As a result, countries in the Western Balkans – including Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia – have recently adopted counterterrorism legislation. Though it did not receive assistance from the DOJ, Croatia also recently adopted counterterrorism legislation. In addition, the Department is working within the UN system and with regional and sub-regional organizations to develop technical assistance programs that advance the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, UNSCR 2178, and GCTF Good Practices to Counter the Global Foreign Terrorist Fighter Phenomenon. Encourage and assist top foreign terrorist fighter source and transit countries to counter violent extremism and prevent radicalization to violence, including through community resilience programs and countermessaging. Our CVE efforts are guided and shaped by a developing understanding of the local geography, demography, and drivers of recruitment and radicalization to violence: where the hotspots are; who is most susceptible; and why they may be motivated to join. We support a range of foreign terrorist fighters-relevant CVE programming including, but not limited to: building the capacity of credible third parties to deliver CT messaging and to develop positive alternatives to the messaging of violent extremists; engaging youth at-risk of radicalization to violence with positive alternatives; empowering women, religious leaders, and civil society more broadly as constructive CVE advocates and activists; amplifying the voices of victims and survivors of terrorism as well as returned/rehabilitated foreign terrorist fighters and other violent extremists; and supporting rehabilitation and reintegration in prisons and beyond. The Department’s CVE programming funds counter-recruitment and counter-messaging efforts. For example, in Southeast Asia, we currently support a series of training workshops to share good practices, approaches, and tools for effective counter-narratives with regional governments and civil society; there is a particular thematic focus on ISIL. In the Western Balkans and Southeast Asia, we support local law enforcement engagement with at-risk communities and civil society groups to raise awareness of radicalization to violence, and design collaborative initiatives to provide positive alternatives in places where there has been some foreign terrorist fighter flow. Encourage and assist top foreign terrorist fighter source and transit countries to develop comprehensive diversion and rehabilitation and reintegration programs for aspirant and returning foreign terrorist fighters, both inside and outside the prison setting. The Department supports rehabilitation and reintegration programs, which are essential elements to assist foreign terrorist fighters in disengaging from violent behavior. We have taken a number of steps over the past several years to promote rehabilitation and reintegration programs in prisons. For instance, the Department is supporting a DOJ and UN project at high-level security prisons in East Asia that focuses on training correction officials on proper management of terrorist inmates. Since prisons can be places where radicalization to violence can occur, we are also supporting efforts to promote a full range of criminal justice sector tools that can be used in lieu of sentencing an offender to prison. For example, we are supporting a pilot diversion program aimed at potential foreign terrorist fighters and others at risk of recruitment into violent extremism and terrorism. This pilot effort seeks to address the challenges presented by youths who have come to the attention of law enforcement as a result of having come under the influence of violent extremist ideologues or terrorist recruiters. Other 21/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) programs target returning foreign terrorist fighters to help them reintegrate into society and avoid becoming a source of enduring threat. To help partner countries deal with returning foreign terrorist fighters that may be outside of the criminal justice system, we are supporting an initiative being implemented by Hedayah and the International Institute for Justice and Rule of Law. This effort, launched in January 2016, is designed to assist countries develop or refine their rehabilitation and reintegration programs, strategies, policies and procedures. SUPPORT FOR PAKISTAN In 2015, the United States continued to build a long-term partnership with Pakistan, as we believe that a stable, secure, prosperous, and democratic Pakistan is in the long-term U.S. national security interest. To support this partnership, the United States has allocated civilian and security assistance totaling more than US $9 billion since 2009. U.S. security assistance to Pakistan is designed to build Pakistan’s counterterrorism and counterinsurgency capacity. In addition, since 2001, the Department of Defense has reimbursed nearly US $14 billion in Coalition Support Funds for Pakistani expenditures in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. Account FY 2015 FY 2013 FY 2014 1,237.1 853.4 787.8 Economic Support Fund (ESF) 826.3 456.5 468.0 Intl. Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement (INCLE) 47.4 55.4 40.0 Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining (NADR) 8.4 5.6 10.0 280.2 269.9 265.0 International Military Education and Training (IMET) 5.0 4.9 4.8 Food for Peace Title II (FFP) 69.9 61.1 -- Total Foreign Assistance Foreign Military Financing (FMF) 653(a) *figures in millions, USD Since the Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act (commonly referred to as Kerry-Lugar-Berman, or “KLB”) was enacted in October 2009, and with funding made available in annual appropriations legislation, the United States has committed more than US $5 billion in civilian assistance to Pakistan, in addition to more than US $1 billion for humanitarian assistance. The United States continued to focus on five sectors determined in consultation with the Pakistani government in 2011: energy; economic growth including agriculture, stabilization of areas vulnerable to violent extremism; education; and health. Emphasis on improving democracy, governance, and gender equity are integrated into programming across the five sectors. Since the passage of this major authorization and annual appropriations legislation, U.S. assistance has made almost 2,300 megawatts available to Pakistan’s electricity grid, benefiting some 23 million Pakistanis and helped Pakistan take steps to reform the troubled sector; funded the refurbishment or construction of nearly 1,000 kilometers of roads, enabling trade, security, and 22/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) mobility; trained more than 5,600 police and 1,000 prosecutors across Pakistan; provided scholarships to approximately 12,000 Pakistanis to attend Pakistani universities, 50 percent of whom were women; and supplied better access to comprehensive family planning services to more than 100,000 women. Energy: Chronic energy shortages severely limit Pakistan’s economic development. As such, energy is our top assistance priority, supporting the goal of job creation, security, and political stability in Pakistan. U.S. assistance has helped Pakistan improve governance and management systems, and increase the country’s distribution companies’ revenue collection by more than US $400 million in 2015, as well as provide commercial opportunities for U.S. businesses. The United States continued to fund infrastructure rehabilitation projects, especially in clean energy, and provided technical assistance to Pakistani energy institutions, including distribution companies, to increase power generation and improve performance. The new U.S.-Pakistan Clean Energy Partnership will help the private sector add at least 3,000 megawatts of clean power generation infrastructure to Pakistan’s national electricity system by 2020. Economic Growth: Through a range of programs and public-private partnerships in agriculture and other sectors of Pakistan’s economy, U.S. assistance helped Pakistan create jobs and foster economic growth. In 2014, the United States made awards for the Pakistan Private Investment Initiative, a public-private program in which U.S. capital, matched equally by private sector funding, committed to provide equity to small-and medium-sized Pakistani enterprises to provide much needed liquidity. During U.S.-Pakistan Economic Partnership Week in Islamabad in March 2015, U.S. Secretary Penny Pritzker and Pakistani Finance Minister Ishaq Dar hosted the third U.S.-Pakistan Business Opportunties Conference. The U.S. Department of Commerce is providing technical assistance in the areas of trade facilitation, intellectual property reform, competition and telecommunications law, and commercial law education. The Pakistani participants attend trade shows and hear from U.S. companies and business associations about best practices and the underpinnings of U.S. success, including the free market and rule of law. The Department of Commerce also trains private sector professionals in a variety of industries, including supply chain, packaging, and gems and jewelry. To promote private investment, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) facilitated US $800 million in financing and insurance for projects in Pakistan. Trade and investment assistance was provided under the bilateral Trade and Investment Framework Agreement. The United States supported implementation of the Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement. The United States has contributed US $15 million to the development of the Central Asia South Asia Electricity Transmission and Trade Project (CASA-1000) project, which will transmit 1,300 megawatts of electricity from Central Asia to Afghanistan and Pakistan, and supports the CASA-1000 Secretariat. Stabilization: The United States supported Pakistan’s efforts to make its territory inhospitable to violent extremists by strengthening governance and civilian law enforcement capacity and promoting socioeconomic development, particularly in areas bordering Afghanistan and other targeted locations vulnerable to violent extremism. U.S. efforts included road construction, small community-based grants, police and governance training, and providing equipment to civilian law enforcement. Education: Pakistan’s ability to educate its youth is critical to its economic growth and future trajectory. U.S. education programs focused on increasing the number of students who enroll in and complete courses in primary and tertiary educational institutions; and improving the quality of that education – with a specific focus on reading – to prepare Pakistani students for the workforce. Pakistan is the recipient of the largest U.S. government-funded Fulbright Program in the world, and, since 2009, the Fulbright Program has funded more than 800 Masters and 200 PhD candidates and nearly 100 Senior Scholars from Pakistan. Through the Merit- and Needs-Based Scholarship Program and predecessor projects, the United States has funded more than 12,000 total scholarships for underprivileged students to attend university in Pakistan and financed a new dormitory for women at Forman’s Christian College in Lahore. The United States funds 23 partnerships between Pakistani and U.S. universities to facilitate professional development for faculty, curriculum reform, joint research, and peer-to-peer interaction. In June 2015, USAID, in collaboration with Pakistan’s Higher Education Commission, launched the U.S.-Pakistan Centers for Advanced Studies, which established three centers in Pakistan through partnerships between four Pakistani and three U.S. universities in energy, water, and agriculture and food security. Under a U.S.-Pakistan Basic Education Initiative, the United States funded 23/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) reading programs to improve the reading skills of 1.9 million primary grade students. The United States has also funded the rebuilding or renovation of almost 600 schools, and provided English language training to 9,400 underprivileged Pakistani teenagers countrywide. Health: The provision of basic health services in Pakistan is inadequate for much of the population, particularly for rural populations. U.S. health programs supported the Government of Pakistan’s efforts to deliver healthcare, particularly in the areas of maternal and child health. U.S. assistance was also used to support Government of Pakistan initiatives to construct health clinics and hospitals, fund the acquisition of medical materials, and provide critical family planning and reproductive health care. Since 2010, USAID has trained more than 29,000 health care workers, who served more than 3.5 million community members throughout Pakistan. Humanitarian Assistance: Since October 2009, more than US $1 billion of emergency humanitarian assistance has been provided to Pakistan in response to floods and conflict, above and beyond bilateral assistance. During the historic floods in 2010, funding from the American people helped 10 million flood-affected citizens, who received rescue services, food, emergency shelter, cash grants, and even seeds to replant crops. During his January 2015 visit to Pakistan, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry pledged US $250 million to facilitate the return of 1.6 million Internally Displaced Persons to the FATA. The pledge consists of humanitarian aid, early recovery assistance, and post-conflict development assistance. International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement: Pakistan took important steps to counter violent extremists operating in the areas bordering Afghanistan during 2015. These steps included intensifying support to civilian law enforcement and border security agencies. The United States directly supported Pakistan’s efforts to build the capacity of its civilian law enforcement and border security agencies by providing training, equipment, infrastructure, and aviation assistance. U.S. assistance helped build capacity in law enforcement agencies responsible for holding areas cleared by Pakistan’s military, protecting local populations from militant attacks, and maintaining law and order. Collectively, these efforts enhanced the counterinsurgency, law enforcement, and counter-narcotics capacities of Pakistan’s civilian law enforcement and border security agencies. Improved security will, in turn, facilitate economic development, which is necessary for long-term Pakistani stability and progress. Nonproliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining, and Related Programs (NADR): The United States provided assistance to strengthen Pakistan’s export control system to prevent transfer of WMD and related technology. NADR/Export Control and Related Border Security funds were used for nonproliferation export control training, national control list harmonization, and customs enforcement, general inspection, and WMD detection training for border control personnel. The United States also provided targeted assistance to build Pakistani law enforcement capacity to detect, deter, and respond to terrorist threats. Foreign Military Financing (FMF): FMF promotes the development of Pakistan’s long-term counterinsurgency (COIN) and counterterrorism capabilities to enable security and stability throughout the country, particularly in the conflict-affected areas bordering Afghanistan, and to improve Pakistan’s ability to lead and participate in maritime security operations that support counterterrorism aims. The United States continued to focus FMF towards seven core capabilities: precision strike; air mobility/combat search and rescue; battlefield communications; night operations; survivability and countering IEDs; border security; and maritime security. International Military Education and Training (IMET): The IMET program supported professional military education for Pakistan’s military leaders, emphasizing respect for the rule of law, human rights, and democratic values, including civilian control of the military. IMET also supported effective management of Pakistan’s defense establishment through training in logistics, defense acquisition, and resource management. A significant portion of this funding supported training related to counterterrorism and counterinsurgency operations in Pakistan. To build capacity and cooperation between our security forces, Pakistan received the largest amount of IMET of any of our global partners, at nearly US $5 million annually. Since 2009, the United States has trained more than 2,300 members of the Pakistan military. 24/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) Measures to ensure that assistance has the greatest long-term positive impact on the welfare of the Pakistani people and their ability to counter terrorism: More than a quarter of U.S. civilian assistance is implemented via Pakistani partners, including the Government of Pakistan and private sector actors, when practicable. This is done to strengthen local capacity and increase sustainability, providing the greatest possible long-term impact of U.S. assistance. Increasingly, the Administration is also implementing public-private partnerships to engage the private sector as a long-term partner in Pakistan’s development. COUNTERTERRORISM COORDINATION WITH SAUDI ARABIA The United States and Saudi Arabia have a strong bilateral relationship. Multiple high-level visits in 2015 deepened this relationship at the personal and institutional level and provided senior officials from both countries the chance to discuss means of improving counterterrorism coordination. During 2015, the Government of Saudi Arabia, working with the United States, continued to build and augment its capacity to counter terrorism and violent extremist ideologies, including al-Qa’ida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). Saudi Arabia continued to maintain a robust counterterrorism relationship with the United States and supported enhanced bilateral cooperation to ensure the safety of U.S. and Saudi citizens in both countries, and to enhance the security of infrastructure in Saudi Arabia critical to the global economy. Saudi Arabia continued its long-term counterterrorism strategy to track and halt the activities of terrorists and terror financiers, dismantle the presence or reconstitution of al-Qa’ida (AQ)-affiliates, impede the ability of militants to operate from or within Saudi Arabia, and to implement laws against supporting terrorist groups and travel to conflict zones. Saudi Arabia welcomed UN Security Council Resolutions 2170 and 2178, expanding existing counterterrorism programs and rhetoric to address the phenomenon of foreign terrorist fighters, and leveraged terrorist finance provisions of its Law for Crimes of Terrorism and Terrorist Financing (CT Law) to combat funding of violent extremist groups operating throughout the region. Saudi Arabia continued to cooperate with the United States to prevent acts of terrorism both through engagement in bilateral programs and through information exchange agreements with the United States. During 2015, Saudi Arabia increased its public designations of individuals and entities for violating the Kingdom’s laws criminalizing terrorist financing and support. Saudi Arabia in April designated the Pakistan-based al-Furqan Foundation for providing financial support to groups operating in Afghanistan and Pakistan, including AQ, and in May and November sanctioned more than 12 individuals and entities acting on behalf of Hizballah. Saudi Arabia sought to expand economic and civic opportunities for its people. Nearly half of the Saudi populace is under 25 years of age. The late King Abdullah promoted an economic development agenda, and Saudi Arabia has sought to address economic sources of social discontent, such as housing scarcity and the need to create jobs for millions of Saudis. During his September 2015 visit to Washington, King Salman announced a US $4 trillion investment plan to diversify the Saudi economy away from oil and provide employment to Saudi youth. In December 2015, for the first time, women were allowed to vote in and run as candidates for municipal elections. The Ministry of Islamic Affairs continued to train and regulate imams, prohibiting them from inciting violence, and continued to monitor mosques and religious education. The King Abdulaziz Center for National Dialogue continued to promote tolerance and respect for diversity through its dialogue and awareness-raising programs. The Ministry of Interior continued to operate its flagship de-radicalization program (the Sakina Campaign for Dialogue). Some religious figures not directly associated with the establishment, however, reportedly made statements that promoted intolerant views. The United States continued to support Saudi Arabia in reforms it is undertaking by facilitating Saudi nationals studying in the United States and promoting educational exchanges; encouraging increased bilateral trade and investment; urging Saudi Arabia to take actions necessary to attract job-creating partnerships with U.S. companies; and supporting programming in such areas as 25/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) judicial reform and women’s entrepreneurship, as well as the Ministry of Interior’s well-developed extremist rehabilitation program, the Mohammed bin Naif Counseling and Care Center, to reduce recidivism among former fighters charged with crimes related to terrorism. Throughout 2015, Saudi Arabia continued its efforts to disrupt terrorist activities in its territory by tracking, arresting, and prosecuting terrorist suspects. Neighborhood police units engaged and worked directly with community members in Saudi Arabia, encouraging citizens to provide tips and information about terrorist activity. The government offered rewards for information on terrorists, and Saudi security services made several announcements throughout the year pertaining to the arrest of hundreds of AQAP and ISIL members and supporters. Saudi security professionals regularly participated in joint programs and information exchange agreements around the world in 2015, including in the United States and Europe. The Saudi Arabian government has continued to provide specialized training programs to combat terrorism financing for bankers, prosecutors, judges, customs officers, and other officials from government departments and agencies. In 2008, the U.S. and Saudi Arabian governments concluded a Technical Cooperation Agreement, and a year later established the joint Office of Program Management-Ministry of Interior (OPM-MOI) to implement it, institutionalizing a Saudi-funded bilateral program of technical assistance focused on the protection of critical infrastructure and the Saudi public. Through the OPM-MOI program, U.S. agencies are helping Saudi Arabia improve its ability to thwart terrorists before they act and to respond to terrorist attacks if they occur. In April 2014 and August 2015, the Saudi Arabian government participated in the U.S.-Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Strategic Cooperation Forum Task Force on counterterrorism and border security. Saudi officials have issued statements encouraging enhanced cooperation among GCC and Arab League states on counterterrorism issues, and the Saudi Arabian government has hosted international counterterrorism conferences on combating extremist ideology and countering terrorist financing. In May 2015, the Saudi government hosted the second meeting of the Counter ISIL Finance Group (CIFG). U.S.-Saudi collaboration was not confined to bilateral issues. With political upheaval across the region throughout the year, the United States consulted closely with the Saudi government on regional stability, including in Egypt, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. Working both bilaterally and multilaterally through the GCC and the Arab League, the Saudi government provided leadership in promoting peaceful transitions. Saudi Arabia has cooperated regionally and internationally on counterterrorism issues as demonstrated by its participation in the Global Counterterrorism Forum. Saudi Arabia is a member of the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism, the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), and the Middle East and North Africa Financial Action Task Force. As part of its strategy to promote stability throughout the region, the Saudi government increased the scope of its economic and development assistance. On the humanitarian front, Saudi Arabia pledged a US $500 million grant to the UN for Iraq humanitarian assistance in July 2014, US $60 million in Syria humanitarian assistance at the International Pledging Conference in Kuwait, and US $104 million in humanitarian assistance to the World Food Program for refugees in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Syria. Saudi Arabia has been an important partner in the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL, participating in Coalition airstrikes against ISIL in Syria, and offering to host a train and equip program for the moderate Syrian opposition. In addition, Saudi Arabia has enacted tough criminal penalties for those traveling to fight in foreign conflicts and has enforced those penalties. The Government of Saudi Arabian and religious leaders have issued many public statements against ISIL. Saudi Arabia, along with Italy and the United States, co-leads the Counter-ISIL Finance Group (CIFG), which coordinates the Coalition’s efforts to disrupt and dismantle ISIL’s financial infrastructure. On December 14, 2015, the Saudi government announced the formation a 34-state Islamic Counterterrorism Coalition to be headquartered in Riyadh that will focus on countering violent extremism and coordinating military efforts against all terrorist threats – including ISIL – in Muslim countries. 26/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) BROADCASTING BOARD OF GOVERNORS INITIATIVES: OUTREACH TO FOREIGN MUSLIM AUDIENCES This section is provided by the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) Four of the five broadcast entities under the supervision of the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) provided programming for countries with large Muslim populations in 2015: the Voice of America (VOA), the Middle East Broadcasting Networks (Alhurra TV, Radio Sawa, and Afia Darfur), Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL), and Radio Free Asia (RFA). Eighteen of RFE/RL’s broadcast languages – almost two-thirds of the total – were directed to regions with majorityMuslim populations, including Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Pakistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. Additional broadcasting regions in the Russian Federation included the majority Muslim populations of Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, and the North Caucasus. VOA has been particularly successful in reaching non-Arabic-speaking Muslim audiences, with strong performances in the Balkans, Afghanistan, Indonesia, Nigeria, Pakistan, and Tanzania, among other places. The Middle East Broadcasting Networks broadcast throughout the region to more than 340 million people. VOA and RFE/RL provided news and information to Afghanistan and the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region in Dari and Pashto. Together, RFE/RL and VOA reached nearly 53 percent of Afghan adults each week. Radio Free Asia broadcast to the more than 16 million mainly ethnic Uighur Muslims in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region of northwestern China and Central Eurasia. The BBG, in partnership with Radio Free Asia, launched the online news operation Benar News to reach predominantly Muslim audiences in India, Bangladesh, Malaysia, Thailand, and Indonesia. These communities often lack access to accurate and balanced journalism, but at the same time are exposed to a proliferation of violent extremist narratives supporting the ideology of terrorist groups like the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). Benar News counters those narratives by publishing credible domestic news, features, analysis, and commentary in multiple formats – text, video, and pictures – and in five languages – Bahasa Indonesia, Bahasa Malaysia, Thai, Bengali, and English. Among its inaugural coverage in 2015, Benar News launched the series “Torn Lives (,” which profiles people affected by the rise of ISIL and violent extremist groups. The BBG used the latest communications technologies to avoid jamming of its signals and to reach audiences through digital and other communications tools, such as web chats and blogs. THE MIDDLE EAST Arabic: Middle East Broadcasting Networks (MBN) has seven bureaus/production centers in the region, in addition to its main studios in Virginia, and a network of regional correspondents. MBN broadcast to a population that includes an estimated 317 million Muslims or about 23 percent of the world’s Muslim population. MBN takes a diverse approach to reaching the largest potential audience, using three platforms: television (Alhurra TV, Alhurra-Iraq TV), radio (Radio Sawa, Radio Sawa Iraq and Afia Darfur), and digital (, and The networks provided a unique, local perspective of breaking news, current events, and balanced coverage on topics such as freedom of speech, religion, and the role of women in society and politics. Alhurra also produced programs encouraging freedom of the press, freedom of expression, and non-violence. Iraq: Every week, 36 percent of Iraqi adults – some 6.3 million people – listened to or watched one of the three BBG broadcasters serving the country: Alhurra TV, Radio Sawa, and VOA Kurdish. One in three Iraqis say Alhurra-Iraq is their most important source of information. Radio Sawa Iraq is one of the top radio stations among adults. In August 2015, the resources of 27/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) RFI were merged with Sawa to provide the audience extensive Iraq-specific news informational programming. VOA Kurdish reached three percent of Kurdish-speaking Iraqis weekly. In 2015, MBN created Raise Your Voice , a multi-platform initiative for Iraqi audiences across television, radio, and digital, composed of five television programs, one radio program, an interactive website, and a digital team to engage audiences on “Raise Your Voice” social media properties. This initiative, entirely in Arabic, is designed as a non-sectarian platform to encourage citizens to speak out and be a part of the discussion about the fight against violent extremism. These television programs air on Alhurra-Iraq, targeting Iraqi audiences, and the radio program is broadcast over Radio Sawa Iraq. These programs are also available to the entire region via satellite and digital distribution, through YouTube and social media properties. Television Delusional Paradise: A 30-minute, weekly mini-documentary series composed of firsthand accounts, obtained through original interviews, of families and communities that have suffered at the hands of ISIL. The program covers families that have lost loved ones both due to ISIL recruitment and attacks, including an interview with the Jordanian pilot’s family. The program was launched on Sept. 26, 2015 and airs on Alhurra, as well as Alhurra-Iraq. MBN has licensed the program to LBC, so that Delusional Paradise also airs on the popular Lebanese channel. From Irbil: Kurdistan is not well represented in the major Arabic-language satellite television networks. Launched on November 28, 2015, “From Irbil” is a weekly program in Arabic that reports from the streets of Kurdistan and will focus on the plurality of Iraq, discussing issues that are important to Kurds, Shia, and Sunni. It airs on Alhurra-Iraq, targeting Iraqi audiences, but is also available to the entire region via satellite and online. Light Among Us: A weekly mini-documentary series coming from the streets of Iraq, it will be dedicated to stories of Iraqis who have overcome challenges and obstacles to better their lives and their country despite the current crisis. The program started airing on Alhurra-Iraq November 8, 2015. Radio What’s Your Opinion: Launched in August 2015, this daily interactive program on Radio Sawa’s Iraq streams during the evening drive. The program’s two Iraqi hosts field calls and interact with social media throughout the program. This program features topics that tie into MBN’s “Raise Your Voice” digital properties. Digital An interactive website, with a corresponding Facebook page, that provides a platform for essayists, reporters, and community-members to productively discuss violent extremism. The website has a weekly theme, such as “Children in Danger: How to protect children from extremist ideology” and “Reform in Arab countries: How the lack of reforms has contributed to extremism.” The website posts six to seven daily articles on the topic that are either commissioned articles, selected audience posts, or pieces of MBN journalism. VOA is providing news coverage of ISIL activities in Turkey, Iraq, Syria, and the region on all platforms – radio, television, online, and social media – as well as providing information on U.S. policies and activities to address the ISIL threat. In 2015, VOA established the Extremism Watch Desk to acquire content in eight different languages focused on ISIL and its extremist activities. That content is translated into English, video is added when available, and it is shared with VOA’s 45 language services, the VOA News Center, and BBG colleagues at MBN and RFE/RL, multiplying the amount of material available for broadcast across the BBG. 28/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) Kurdish: The Kurdish Service covered counterterrorism on a daily basis by conducting interviews and increasing stringer reporting from the region, including audio and video reports from the front lines. Much of this content has been broadcast on affiliate NRT TV in northern Iraq, on the BBG FM network in northern Iraq, and on numerous radio affiliates in Iraq. VOA Kurdish has conducted many interviews with the people on the ground including Yezidi girls who were taken by ISIL and were able to escape. Persian: VOA’s Persian Service provided relevant global and regional news relating to Iran and crucial information about U.S. policy toward Iran and the region. VOA Persian delivered original television programming for six hours per day. In addition, VOA and RFE/RL’s Radio Farda each produced one hour of Radio-on-TV (ROT), starting with VOA Persian’s ROT Tamasha, and followed by Radio Farda’s ROT “Sobhane Ba Khabar.” As of June 2015, Radio Farda was also providing live, five-minute TV newscasts online and on VOA’s Persian video stream at the top of the hour from 7am to 1pm Tehran time. VOA Persian became the first international broadcaster into Iran during the P5+1 talks to start live news updates at the top of every hour and to provide 11 hourly live five-minute news bulletins to the Iranian viewers throughout the day that resulted in increasing delivery of combined VOA Persian – Radio Farda live news content by 62 percent during a 24hour cycle. VOA Persian implemented a sharp increase – by 60 percent – of live breaking news broadcasts focusing on major speeches and statements by President Obama and Secretary Kerry, key Congressional hearings, and major international events. In most cases, VOA Persian was the only broadcaster in Farsi in Iran to go live. VOA Persian launched “Tablet,” a new, edgy weekly current affairs talk show with a youthful, energetic feeling. RFE/RL’s Radio Farda broadcast newscasts at the top of each hour, followed by reports, features, interviews, and regular segments on youth, women, culture, economics, and politics. Radio Farda live coverage from Vienna of the P5+1 negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program served as a primary source of information for Iranians, with a record one million page views logged on July 14, 2015 – the day the deal was announced. Radio Farda’s comprehensive human rights monitoring is unique inside Iran. It is listened to by prison inmates who rely on it for accurate reporting on their cases. Radio Farda’s online community continued to increase. Its main Facebook page has a fan base of 1.5 million. Radio Farda’s circumvention strategies to fight internet blockage by the Iranian regime remained successful, with nearly 286 million page views logged in 2015. SOUTH ASIA Afghan: VOA’s Afghan Service and RFE/RL’s Radio Free Afghanistan covered all aspects of the conflict in Afghanistan and the border region on radio, TV, and digital platforms. In addition, VOA and RFE/RL provided extensive coverage of the emergence of ISIL in eastern Afghanistan since January 2015, dispatching reporting teams to the region and collaborating with VOA’s News Center. The coverage included exclusive interviews with two ISIL defectors, a profile of a counter-ISIL commander and reports on a pro-ISIL rally on a university campus that led to the arrest of several ISIL sympathizers. VOA’s Afghan Service covered the Afghan government’s peace initiatives with interviews with High Peace Council officials, former Taliban officials, and ordinary citizens as well as original reports and analysis. Research shows that RFE/RL’s Radio Free Afghanistan is one of the most popular and trusted media outlets in Afghanistan. One of the leading news sources inside the country, its programs provided reliable information on the war on terrorism. 29/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) Radio Azadi has covered the emergence of ISIL in Afghanistan from its beginning, and was the first media outlet in the country that reported on the threat. Urdu: VOA Urdu reporters in Washington and stringers in five major Pakistani cities reported on terrorism-related activities and provided updates on all major developments in the target area. VOA Urdu particularly highlighted the ongoing Pakistani military operation in Pakistan’s volatile tribal areas with close coordination between Islamabad, Kabul, and Washington. Another issue of focus has been Pakistan’s efforts to facilitate the Afghan peace talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban. The Pakistan/Afghanistan Border Region: VOA Deewa and RFE/RL Radio Mashaal broadcasts go directly to PakistanAfghanistan border regions to cover the terrorism threat, which includes ISIL sympathizers, the Haqqani Network, AQ, and the Taliban. Broadcasting highlights included: The Nobel peace laureate Malala Yousafzai chose VOA Deewa to connect with girls and women in the region. VOA Deewa has a daily ‘Radio on TV’ broadcast targeted toward women called ‘Bibi Shereen’ (Darling Woman). Violent extremists believe it is forbidden for women to raise their voices but VOA Deewa empowers women in communities where there are violent extremists to raise their voice against violence and radical views. Radio Mashaal continues to offer audiences programming that is an alternative to the extremist rhetoric in the region. Mashaal launched a weekly program, Towards Peace, aimed at promoting dialogue and democracy as a means of conflict resolution in the tribal regions of Pakistan. The program talks to experts, tribal leaders, and other relevant stakeholders to examine ways to achieve political goals, settle disputes, and solve problems through non-violent means. Bangla: The VOA Bangla Service continuously broadcasts the following on multimedia platforms: interview based reports, features, roundtable discussions, and popular call-in shows on terrorism, human rights themes, and security issues. CENTRAL ASIA In September 2015, RFE/RL started producing a version of its Russian-language “Current Time” video program for the Central Asian market. The show is on domestic stations in Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Kazakhstan, and provides audiences with unique video-reporting tailored to their needs. RFE/RL launched an experimental wire service directed at Central Asia, which provides news in the Kazakh, Kyrgyz, Tajik, and Russian languages to more than 900 subscribers, including a large number of Central Asian media professionals. This allows RFE/RL to help foster a positive, pluralistic media environment. RFE/RL’s English-language Mejlis experts’ roundtable regularly reports on Taliban, Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, and ISIL terrorism throughout the region, and is among RFE/RL’s most popular online features. Kazakhstan: RFE/RL’s Kazakh Service content was delivered via its internet website, mobile site, and social media platforms. The web strategy attracted a younger audience to this bilingual (Kazakh and Russian) site, providing opportunities for interactivity and exploring new genres such as video reporting. The Service’s reporting on Kazakh terrorist fighters in Syria and Iraq ( was widely quoted ( in local Kazakh media ( and sparked many discussions on Kazakh language web forums. Kyrgyzstan: RFE/RL’s Kyrgyz Service is the second most trusted radio news source (file:///\\dcfileserver\Department%20Shares\Communications\13%20-%20BBG%20WeeklyMonthly%20Reports\2014\2014 30/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) 04%20Reporting\��������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� 31/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� 32/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������� ��������������������������������������������������%09htt p:\\wp-content\uploads\IRI-KR-poll-February-2014-Rus-main-part-Updated.pdf) in Kyrgyzstan, according to a July 2015 survey conducted by the International Republican Institute, Baltic Surveys Ltd./The Gallup Organization, SIAR Research and Consulting, and USAID. The weekly reach of the Service rose in 2015 to 36.2 percent of the population. The Kyrgyz Service's weekly television news programs – the political talk show "Inconvenient Questions" and youth-oriented "Azattyk+" – reach one in four Kyrgyz every week. Tajikistan: RFE/RL’s Tajik Service served as a reliable source of news and information in Tajikistan. An international conference on combating extremism in Dushanbe was opened with a Tajik Service video report about Tajiks who had joined ISIL. 33/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) Uzbekistan: The VOA Uzbek Service’s weekly 30-minute TV feature program, daily six-minute TV News Brief and a daily 30minute radio broadcast featured interviews with U.S. and international sources on topics including religious extremism, terrorism, and U.S.-Uzbekistan and U.S.-Central Asian relations. VOA Uzbek regularly covers the Fergana valley. The Service distributed original stories to mobile phone subscribers. Reports were also accessible on Twitter, YouTube, Facebook, SoundCloud, and Russia based Odnoklassniki, MoiMir, and VKontakte. VOA Uzbek has FM radio affiliates in Northern Afghanistan and Kyrgyzstan, and a TV affiliate in Southern Kyrgyzstan and Northern Afghanistan. Turkmenistan: RFE/RL’s Turkmen Service is the only international media company under supervision of the BBG providing regular multi-media reporting from inside the country, with original video reporting and photojournalism on such issues as homelessness, housing conditions, and travel restrictions on Turkmen citizens, while its reporting on human rights cases has brought critical attention to cases of activists and journalists imprisoned or detained. A variety of foreign stringers, such as those of AP, Reuters, and RIA Novosti, also contribute reporting on Turkmenistan. EAST ASIA AND PACIFIC China: VOA delivers news, including religious and local issues affecting more than 23 million Chinese Muslims, to China via satellite television, radio, internet, social media, and mobile channels in Mandarin, Cantonese, and Tibetan. VOA provided extensive coverage of Chinese government policies and treatment of ethnic Uighurs and Tibetans. There were also reports about Muslim migrants traveling through Southeast Asia and their alleged involvement in terrorist activities. Radio Free Asia’s Uighur language service broadcast two hours daily, seven days a week, and was the only international radio service providing impartial news and information in the Uighur language to the potential audience of more than 16 million Uighur Muslims in northwestern China and Central Eurasia. Consistent with RFA's mandate, the Uighur service acted as a substitute for indigenous media reporting on local events in the region. Its programs included breaking news, analysis, interviews, commentary, a weekly news review, and feature stories. RFA’s Uighur service first reported on a knife attack at a coal mine ( that left dozens dead in China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region. RFA’s reports were cited by global media outlets and human rights groups worldwide including CNN, The New York Times, Washington Post, BBC, Le Obs, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch. RFA Uighur also closely covered the arrest and trial of Uighur economics scholar Ilham Tohti (, who was sentenced to life in prison for his blogging activity. Tohti was considered a moderate Uighur voice. RFA interviewed Tohti’s colleagues, friends, and family. Indonesia: About 89 percent of Indonesians are Muslim making it the country with the single largest Muslim population. VOA Indonesian’s weekly audience reach stands at more than 33 million people or 18.9 percent of the adult population as last measured in 2015. The VOA Indonesian Service routinely covered all terrorist developments in Indonesia and the Indonesian government’s and civil society’s response. The Indonesian Service also reported to Indonesia on ISIL and violent extremism developments in the Middle East as well as the U.S. and world response. Thailand: VOA’s Thai Service has 11 affiliate radio stations in southern Thailand. VOA Thai broadcast news and information eight hours and 30 minutes per week to all of its affiliates; it also produced a weekly video report for placement with TV networks in Thailand. The programs emphasized the U.S.-Thailand relationship, religious and cultural diversity, and education. VOA Thai broadcasts via six radio affiliates to the three southern provinces and also Songkhla, an adjacent province. Burma: VOA’s Burmese Service closely monitored and reported on relations between the Buddhist and Muslim communities in Burma, particularly in Arakan State, while reporting on events and ways to promote mutual trust, tolerance, and understanding. VOA weekly call-in discussion programs provided effective fora to discuss national elections and sensitive issues and to 34/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) stimulate further dialogue. VOA Burmese broadcast daily radio and television programs via domestic affiliates and via satellite and with popular web and mobile sites. The VOA Burmese Bureau in Yangon participated in local, ethnic media seminars to discuss professional journalism standards and to identify and counter hate messages. RFA’s Burma Service closely covered the ongoing plight of Burma’s minority Muslim Rohingyas, who have often had to bear the brunt of anti-Muslim communal violence and have been forced in many cases to live as refugees. The service also continued to cover the humanitarian crisis resulting from the Burmese government’s policies in Rakhine state. EUROPE AND EURASIA The Russian Federation and Ukraine: In 2015 the BBG expanded “Current Time,” its daily 30-minute Russian-language television news program, jointly produced by VOA and RFE/RL. Airing in nine countries via 25 media outlets and available to digital audiences worldwide, weekend editions of the program were launched. A version of “Current Time” produced for the Central Asian market aired in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan. In support of the “Current Time” brand, RFE/RL launched a social media-driven digital reporting and engagement service (DIGIM), tasked with disseminating and producing innovative crossplatform digital content and engaging with Russian-language audiences on social media. VOA’s Russian and Ukrainian Services regularly addressed terrorism-related issues and threats in the United States, Europe, and other key areas of interest to the target audience. Journalist Fatima Tlisova provided VOA Russian with enterprise reporting related to the trial of Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, which began in March 2015. The Service also provided extensive coverage of ISIL’s growing influence in the North Caucasus and Russia’s military intervention in Syria. Tatarstan/Bashkortostan: The Tatar and Bashkir communities are the two largest Muslim communities in Russia. RFE/RL’s Tatar/Bashkir Service was the only major international media producing content in the Tatar and Bashkir languages and provided listeners with objective news and analysis on issues such as Russia’s policy toward ethnic and religious minorities, centralization, corruption, the role of Islam in predominantly Muslim regions, and gender issues. The Service’s webpage, the most technologically advanced state-of-the-art web source in Tatar, remained a virtual meeting place for people to discuss these and other issues. North Caucasus: Broadcasting in the Avar, Chechen, and Circassian languages, RFE/RL’s North Caucasus Service reported the news in a region where media freedom and journalists remained under severe threat. Turkey: The VOA Turkish Service produced 2.5 hours of original television content per week, and had a strong presence in Turkey on TV and on the internet. Content was distributed nationwide via affiliate TGRT Haber TV and online on affiliate Mynet. Turkish stringers in Ankara and Istanbul have been covering Turkey’s security operations against suspected ISIL militants and recruiters inside Turkey. Stringers in Berlin, Paris, Brussels ,and Syria covered ISIL-related stories as well. Coverage of TurkeySyria-U.S.-ISIL issues and interviews were often picked up by many Turkish media outlets with full attribution to VOA Turkish. The Balkans: VOA’s Balkan Services provided extensive coverage of the rise of violent extremism in the region’s countries with sizeable Muslim populations – Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Macedonia, and Serbia. More than 4.7 million adults weekly consumed VOA content across broadcast and digital platforms throughout the Balkans. VOA coverage highlighted the threats posed by international terrorist networks that recruit foreign terrorist fighters for ISIL and for al-Qa’ida and its affiliates. VOA’s Balkan Services also focused on U.S.-sustained efforts to work with western Balkans nations to confront the terrorists and reduce their capacity to recruit in the region. RFE/RL’s Balkan Service is the only inclusive source of news in a region where genuine media freedom remains elusive and many outlets reflect ethnic divisions. The Service provided comprehensive coverage of the worsening refugee crisis situation, as tens of thousands fleeing Syria, Afghanistan, and Iraq, made their way through Macedonia, Serbia, and Croatia in the hopes of 35/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) reaching Germany. Azerbaijan: VOA’s Azerbaijani Service delivered daily TV and web programming focused on the country’s political dynamics. Due to its aggressive social media campaign, VOA Azerbaijani’s multimedia content now receives half a million views per month on Facebook. VOA Azerbaijani remained a leading authoritative source of news regarding the large Azeri population in northern Iran. Despite the December 2014 raid by Azerbaijani authorities on RFE/RL’s Baku bureau, which led to the bureau’s formal closure in May 2015, the Azerbaijani Service has continued to provide vital coverage of under-reported events in the country. The Service’s “Korrupsiometr” web portal features the latest laws and regulations, along with Azerbaijani lawyers responding to audience questions. AFRICA Hausa: VOA’s Hausa Service continued to provide comprehensive, multimedia coverage of Boko Haram’s terrorist activities in Northern Nigeria and neighboring countries through its daily news programming, interactive call-in shows, and audio streaming and postings on its website. The Service also launched its first television program in September 2015. The new half-hour weekly magazine show, “Taskar,” combines original reporting from across the United States and from Hausa Service reporters not only in Nigeria, but also in Niger and Cameroon. Somali: VOA Somali continues to cover an area heavily affected by terrorism and violent extremism. Somalia has seen relentless attacks by the terrorist group al-Shabaab. VOA Somali regularly interviewed Somali government officials, Islamic scholars, and independent experts to give perspectives and context on the terrorist threat. In April 2015, VOA Somali interviewed a former high-level al-Shabaab intelligence official who had surrendered to the Federal Government of Somalia in the months prior. His interview provided an insider’s view of al-Shabaab’s foreign terrorist fighter recruitment, relationship with al-Qa’ida affiliates, and prospects of aligning with ISIL. In November 2015, VOA Somali launched a daily youth show called “Today’s Youth” that gives the latest updates on music, technology, and news, about employment and arts to youth who have been affected by years of war. In addition, VOA Somali’s weekly “Islamic Affairs” show, which focuses on major issues affecting Muslims, continued to attract lots of interest among the listeners. In one program, Islamic scholars discussed the causes of violent extremism among youth. Swahili: VOA’s Swahili Service broadcast to large Muslim populations in Tanzania and Kenya, and smaller Muslim communities in Uganda, Burundi, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Since 2014, the Service has increased its efforts to reach the Muslim communities in Kenya’s Indian Ocean coastline, where the city of Mombasa was rocked by several terrorist attacks. To improve its coverage in the area, VOA Swahili is opening a reporting center in Mombasa. In 2015, Swahili service programming on the security situation in the city has played a significant role in initiating a conversation in Mombasa exploring how older people, religious leaders, and matriarchal leaders can reclaim the moral authority they used to enjoy before vocal radical voices silenced them in recent years. French to Africa: VOA’s French-to-Africa Service broadcast to Muslims throughout Francophone Africa. Via FM transmitters in Bamako, Niamey, Abidjan, and Ouagadougou, VOA provided extensive coverage of the peace process in Mali. VOA also provided reports about terrorist attacks in Mali and in Paris. In 2015, VOA continued to broadcast to the entire region in French and to Mali in Bambara, the most widely spoken local language of Mali. The service also reaches Muslims through Sahel Plus, a 36/37 3/13/2017 Country Reports on Terrorism 2015 Chapter 5: Terrorist Safe Havens (Update to 7120 Report) 25-minute weekly French program with news and features about issues of common concern to people in the Sahel region. Frenchto-Africa’s weekly program Dialogue des Religions also offered discussions with Muslim scholars and experts on a variety of topics, including Islam. ENGLISH On September 10, VOA English joined with VOA Central News to produce a 90-minute Radio/TV/Web simulcast around President Obama’s speech on ISIL, complete with analysis and Congressional reaction. VOA English provided extensive, timely and in-depth coverage on conflicts in the Middle East and parts of Africa to a global audience on multimedia platforms, and special reports to affiliate stations. In October 2015, VOA English and the Newseum Institute coproduced a television special that took an in-depth look at ISIL and its use of propaganda. ISIL and the Digital War featured analysts Michael Weiss and Lorenzo Vidino. VOA English current affairs program Press Conference, USA interviewed U.S. Representative Ed Royce, Chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. In 2015, VOA English provided in-depth analysis and perspective on the war in Syria with newsmakers, such as former U.S. Ambassador to Syria Edward Djerejian and Mideast and strategic analyst Anthony Cordesman. The Office of Website Management, Bureau of Public Affairs, manages this site as a portal for information from the U.S. State Department. External links to other Internet sites should not be construed as an endorsement of the views or privacy policies contained therein. Note: documents in Portable Document Format (PDF) require Adobe Acrobat Reader 5.0 or higher to view, download Adobe Acrobat Reader ( 37/37 EXHIBIT 28 EXHIBIT 29 3/13/2017 Former Iraqi Terrorists Living in Kentucky Sentenced for Terrorist Activities | OPA | Department of Justice JUSTICE NEWS Department of Justice Office of Public Affairs FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Tuesday, January 29, 2013 Former Iraqi Terrorists Living in Kentucky Sentenced for Terrorist Activities Defendants Attempted to Ship Weapons and Money from U.S. to Iraqi Insurgents Defendants Admitted to Extensive Terrorist Activities Against U.S. Soldiers in Iraq Two Iraqi citizens living in Bowling Green, Ky., who admitted using improvised explosive devices (IEDs) against U.S. soldiers in Iraq and who attempted to send weapons and money to Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) for the purpose of killing U.S. soldiers, were sentenced today to serve federal prison terms by Senior Judge Thomas B. Russell in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Kentucky. The sentences was announced Lisa Monaco, Assistant Attorney General for National Security; David J. Hale, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Kentucky; and Perrye K. Turner, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI Louisville Division. Mohanad Shareef Hammadi, 25, a former resident of Iraq, was sentenced to life in federal prison, and Waad Ramadan Alwan, 31, a former resident of Iraq, was sentenced to 40 years in federal prison, followed by a life term of supervised release. Both defendants had pleaded guilty to federal terrorism charges. “These two former Iraqi insurgents participated in terrorist activities overseas and attempted to continue providing material support to terrorists while they lived here in the United States. With today’s sentences, both men are being held accountable,” said Assistant Attorney General Monaco. “I thank the dedicated professionals in the law enforcement and intelligence communities who were responsible for this successful outcome.” “These are experienced terrorists who willingly and enthusiastically participated in what they believed were insurgent support operations designed to harm American soldiers in Iraq,” stated U.S. Attorney Hale. “The serious crimes of both men merit lengthy punishment, and only the value of Alwan’s immediate and extensive cooperation with law enforcement justifies our recommendation of a reduced sentence for him. Bringing these men to justice is the result of a comprehensive law enforcement effort. The FBI agents of the Louisville Division, along with the federal and local law enforcement members of the Joint Terrorism Task Forces here in Kentucky, including the Bowling Green Police Department, and our many other partners, are to be commended.” “Protecting the United States from terrorist attacks remains the FBI's top priority,” said FBI Special Agent in Charge Turner. “Using our growing suite of investigative and intelligence capabilities, FBI agents and analysts assigned to our Bowling Green office were able to neutralize a potential threat. Our local Joint Terrorism Task Force, comprised of FBI Agents and other local, state and federal agencies from across the Commonwealth, remains committed to dismantling extremist networks and cutting off financing and other forms of support provided by terrorist sympathizers, whether they are operating in Kentucky or worldwide.” “Today, the sentencing of Alwan and Hammadi represents the culmination of the extensive, effective and focused efforts of the U.S. Attorney's Office and the Kentucky Division of the FBI for their roles in the investigation and prosecution of these would-be terrorists. I want to thank U.S. Attorney David Hale, the Kentucky Division of the FBI and the members of the FBI Bowling Green local office for their individual and collective efforts in bringing Alwan and Hammadi to justice for their crimes against the people of Kentucky and the United States,” stated Chief Doug Hawkins, Bowling Green Police Department. 1/3 3/13/2017 Former Iraqi Terrorists Living in Kentucky Sentenced for Terrorist Activities | OPA | Department of Justice Alwan, whose fingerprints were found on an unexploded IED found in Iraq, pleaded guilty earlier in the case on Dec. 16, 2011, to all counts of a 23-count federal indictment. He pleaded guilty to conspiring to kill U.S. nationals abroad; conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction (explosives) against U.S. nationals abroad; distributing information on the manufacture and use of IEDs; attempting to provide material support to terrorists and to AQI and conspiring to transfer, possess and export Stinger missiles. Hammadi pleaded guilty on Aug. 21, 2012, to a 12-count superseding indictment. Charges against him included attempting to provide material support to terrorists and to AQI; conspiring to transfer, possess and export Stinger missiles; and making a false statement in an immigration application. At today’s sentencing, at the request of the United States, Alwan received a reduced sentence due to his cooperation with federal law enforcement. The United States asked for no reduction of Hammadi’s sentence. According to information presented by the United States in connection with today’s sentencings, Hammadi and Alwan both admitted, in FBI interviews that followed waiver of their Miranda rights, to participation in the purported material support operations in Kentucky, and both provided the FBI details of their prior involvement in insurgent activities while living in Iraq. Both men believed their activities in Kentucky were supporting AQI. Alwan admitted participating in IED attacks against U.S. soldiers in Iraq, and Hammadi admitted to participating in 10 to 11 IED attacks as well as shooting at a U.S. soldier in an observation tower. Court documents filed in this case reveal that the Bowling Green office of the FBI’s Louisville Division initiated an investigation of Alwan in which they used a confidential human source (CHS). The CHS met with Alwan and recorded their meetings and conversations beginning in August 2010. The CHS represented to Alwan that he was working with a group to ship money and weapons to Mujahadeen in Iraq. From September 2010 through May 2011, Alwan participated in ten separate operations to send weapons and money that he believed were destined for terrorists in Iraq. Between October 2010 and January 2011, Alwan drew diagrams of multiple types of IEDs and instructed the CHS how to make them. In January 2011, Alwan recruited Hammadi, a fellow Iraqi national living in Bowling Green, to assist in these material support operations. Beginning in January 2011 and continuing until his arrest in late May 2011, Hammadi participated with Alwan in helping load money and weapons that he believed were destined for terrorists in Iraq. Documents filed by the United States describe in detail the material support activities of the men in Bowling Green. Without Hammadi present, Alwan loaded money and weapons he believed were being sent to Iraq on five occasions from September 2010 through February 2011, handling five rocket-propelled grenade launchers, five machine guns, two sniper rifles, two cases of C4 explosive and what he believed to be $375,000. After Hammadi joined Alwan in January 2011, the two men loaded money and weapons together on five occasions from January to May 2011. Together, on these five occasions, they loaded five rocket-propelled grenade launchers, five machine guns, five cases of C4 explosive, two sniper rifles, one box of 12 hand grenades, two Stinger surface-to-air missile launchers and what they believed to be a total of $565,000. Alwan and Hammadi were recorded by video during these operations. In speaking with the CHS, Alwan spoke of his efforts to kill U.S. soldiers in Iraq, stating “lunch and dinner would be an American.” Hammadi told the CHS that he had experience in Iraq with “Strelas” (a Russian made, portable, shoulderfired surface-to-air missile launcher) and discussed shipping “Strelas” in future operations. According to the charging documents, Hammadi entered the United States in July 2009, and, after first residing in Las Vegas, moved to Bowling Green. Hammadi and Alwan were arrested on May 25, 2011, in Bowling Green on criminal complaints. Both defendants were closely monitored by federal law enforcement authorities in the months leading up to their arrests. Neither was charged with plotting attacks within the United States. All of the weapons, including Stinger missiles, had been rendered inert before being handled by Hammadi and Alwan. The weapons and money handled by the men in the United States were never provided to AQI, but instead were carefully controlled by law enforcement as part of the undercover operation. This case was investigated by the Louisville Division of the FBI. Assisting in the investigation were members of the Louisville and Lexington Joint Terrorism Task Forces, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Marshals Service, U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services and the Bowling Green Police Department. 2/3 3/13/2017 Former Iraqi Terrorists Living in Kentucky Sentenced for Terrorist Activities | OPA | Department of Justice The prosecution was handled by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Michael Bennett and Bryan Calhoun from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Kentucky and Trial Attorney Larry Schneider from the Counterterrorism Section of the Justice Department’s National Security Division. 13-122 National Security Division (NSD) Updated September 15, 2014 3/3 EXHIBIT 30 PolicyAnalysis September 13, 2016 | Number 798 Terrorism and Immigration A Risk Analysis By Alex Nowrasteh EX EC U T I V E S UM M ARY T errorism is a hazard to human life and material prosperity that should be addressed in a sensible manner whereby the benefits of actions to contain it outweigh the costs. Foreign-born terrorists who entered the country, either as immigrants or tourists, were responsible for 88 percent (or 3,024) of the 3,432 murders caused by terrorists on U.S. soil from 1975 through the end of 2015. This paper presents the first terrorism risk analysis of the visa categories those foreign-born terrorists used to enter the United States. Including those murdered in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 (9/11), the chance of an American perishing in a terrorist attack on U.S. soil that was committed by a foreigner over the 41-year period studied here is 1 in 3.6 million per year. The hazard posed by foreigners who entered on different visa categories varies considerably. For instance, the chance of an American being murdered in a terrorist attack caused by a refugee is 1 in 3.64 billion per year while the chance of being murdered in an attack committed by an illegal immigrant is an astronomical 1 in 10.9 billion per year. By contrast, the chance of being murdered by a tourist on a B visa, the most common tourist visa, is 1 in 3.9 million per year. Any government response to terrorism must take account of the wide range of hazards posed by foreign-born terrorists who entered under various visa categories. The federal government has an important role to play in screening foreigners who enter the United States, and to exclude those who pose a threat to the national security, safety, or health of Americans. This terrorism risk analysis of individual visa categories can aid in the efficient allocation of scarce government security resources to those categories that are most exploitable by terrorists. The hazards posed by foreign-born terrorists are not large enough to warrant extreme actions like a moratorium on all immigration or tourism. Alex Nowrasteh is the immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute’s Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity. 2 “ From 1975 through 2015, the chance of an American being murdered by a foreign-born terrorist was 1 in 3,609,709 a year. ” INTRODUCTION The December 2, 2015, terrorist attack that left 14 people dead in San Bernardino, California, was committed by American-born Syed Rizwan Farook and his foreign-born wife, Tashfeen Malik, who entered the United States two years earlier on a K-1 fiancé(e) visa.1 Their attack was dramatic and brutal, and it prompted calls for heightened immigration restrictions, additional security checks for K-1 immigrants, and even a complete moratorium on all immigration.2 Substantial administrative hurdles and barriers are in place to block foreign-born terrorist infiltration from abroad.3 Any change in immigration policy for terrorism prevention should be subject to a cost–benefit calculation. A sensible terrorism screening policy must do more good than harm to justify its existence. That means the cost of the damage the policy prevents should at least equal the cost it imposes. Government security resources should be allocated to the most efficient means of reducing the costs of terrorism. The Strategic National Risk Assessment (SNRA) seeks to evaluate the risk of threats and hazards, like terrorism, to help the government more effectively allocate security resources to the “threats that pose the greatest risk.”4 However, the SNRA did not include a thorough terrorism risk analysis of different visa categories. This policy analysis identifies 154 foreignborn terrorists in the United States who killed 3,024 people in attacks from 1975 through the end of 2015. Ten of them were illegal immigrants, 54 were lawful permanent residents (LPR), 19 were students, 1 entered on a K-1 fiancé(e) visa, 20 were refugees, 4 were asylum seekers, 34 were tourists on various visas, and 3 were from Visa Waiver Program (VWP) countries. The visas for 9 terrorists could not be determined. During that period, the chance of an American being murdered by a foreignborn terrorist was 1 in 3,609,709 a year. The chance of an American being killed in a terrorist attack committed by a refugee was 1 in 3.64 billion a year. The annual chance of being murdered by somebody other than a foreignborn terrorist was 252.9 times greater than the chance of dying in a terrorist attack committed by a foreign-born terrorist. The first part of this policy analysis provides a quantification of the risks of foreign-born terrorists entering the United States in each U.S. visa category. It does so by identifying known foreign-born terrorists, counting how many people they murdered in terrorist attacks, and estimating the costs of those attacks. The second part of this policy analysis compares the costs of terrorism with the costs of proposed policy solutions such as an immigration moratorium. BRIEF LITERATURE SURVEY Few researchers have tried to identify the specific visas used by terrorists, and none have used that information to produce a risk assessment for each U.S. visa category. John Mueller and Mark Stewart have produced superb terrorism risk analyses, but they did not focus specifically on the terrorism risk from visa categories.5 Robert S. Leiken and Steven Brooke wrote the most complete survey of visas used by foreign-born terrorists.6 However, their published work does not allow separating threats by country, their analysis ended in 2006, their data set is no longer available, and they did not produce a risk analysis.7 Broader links between immigration and terrorism are the subject of additional strands of research. Immigrants are overrepresented among those convicted of terrorist-related offenses post-9/11.8 In the developing world, heavy refugee flows are correlated with increased terrorism.9 METHODOLOGY This analysis focuses on the 41-year period from January 1, 1975, to December 31, 2015, because it includes large waves of Cuban and Vietnamese refugees that posed a terrorism risk at the beginning of the time period and bookends with the San Bernardino terrorist attack. It identifies foreign-born terrorists who were convicted of planning or committing a terrorist attack on U.S. soil and links them with the specific visa they were first issued as well as the num- 3 ber of people they individually murdered, if any, in their attacks.10 This report counts terrorists who were discovered trying to enter the United States on a forged passport or visa as illegal immigrants. Asylum seekers usually arrive with a different visa with the intent of applying for asylum once they arrive, so they are counted under the asylum category. For instance, the Tsarnaev brothers, who carried out the Boston Marathon bombing on April 15, 2013, traveled here with a tourist visa but their family immediately applied for asylum, so they are included in that category. Next, information on the individual terrorists, their visa types, and number of victims is compared with the estimated costs per victim and the total number of visas issued in each category. Where conflicting numerical estimates exist, the highest plausible figures are used with the intent to maximize the risks and costs of terrorism in terms of human life. The appendix lists all of the terrorists identified. Finally, other costs of terrorism, such as property damage, losses to businesses, and reduced economic growth, are considered. Only three terrorist attacks committed by foreigners on U.S. soil have created significant property, business, and wider economic damage: the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 9/11 attacks, and the Boston Marathon bombing. The costs of the government’s responses to terrorism are excluded. This analysis is concerned primarily with the cost of human lives taken in terrorist attacks. Counting Foreign-Born Terrorists and Their Victims This policy analysis examines foreignborn and immigrant terrorists and so excludes American-born terrorists except for purposes of comparison. For attacks planned or carried out by native-born Americans in concert with foreigners, the Americans are excluded and the immigrants are credited entirely for the terrorist plots and murders. That choice increases the estimates of the harm caused by foreign-born terrorists. For plots that included many foreignborn terrorists and victims, each terrorist is credited with an equal number of victims. For instance, the 1993 World Trade Center attack was committed by six foreign-born terrorists; six people were murdered, so each terrorist is responsible for one murder. Airplane hijackings that started in the United States and ended in different countries—such as the September 10, 1976, hijacking of TWA Flight 355 by Croatian nationalists that eventually terminated in Paris, France—are also included. However, this analysis excludes terrorist attacks in which the identities of the perpetrators were unknown, as well as attacks that occurred or were intended to occur (but were not successfully carried out) abroad. Sources The identities of the terrorists come from nine main data sets and documents. The first is Terrorism Since 9/11: The American Cases, edited by John Mueller.11 This voluminous work contains biographical and other information related to attacks and cases since September 11, 2001. Mueller’s work is indispensable because he focuses on actual terrorism cases rather than questionable instances of people who were investigated for terrorism but then cleared of terrorism, convicted under other statutes, and ultimately counted as “terrorismrelated” convictions. For instance, the widely cited March 2010 Department of Justice (DOJ) report, National Security Division Statistics on Unsealed International Terrorism and TerrorismRelated Convictions,12 included only 107 convictions based on actual terrorism statutes out of 399 “terrorism-related” convictions.13 Many of those terrorism-related convictions were for citizenship fraud, passport fraud, or false statements to an immigration officer by immigrants who never posed an actual terrorism threat to the homeland.14 The convictions of Nasser Abuali, Hussein Abuali, and Rabi Ahmed provide context for the government’s use of the term “terrorism-related.” An informant told the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) that the trio tried to purchase a rocket-propelled grenade launcher, but the FBI found no evidence supporting the accusation. The three individuals were instead charged with receiving two truckloads of stolen cereal and convicted.15 “ Nasser Abuali, Hussein Abuali, and Rabi Ahmed were charged with receiving two truckloads of stolen cereal and convicted. The government classified their convictions as ‘terrorismrelated.’ ” 4 “ From 1975 through 2015, the chance that an American would be killed in a terrorist attack committed by a refugee was 1 in 3.64 billion a year. ” The government classified their convictions as “terrorism-related” despite the lack of an actual terrorist connection, terror threat, planned attack, conspiracy, or any actual tentative steps taken toward carrying out a terror attack. That case is an especially absurd one to count as terrorism, but it is not too different from many of the other 289 convictions in the DOJ report. The second source is the Fordham University Center on National Security’s compilation of all of the trials for Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) members in the United States.16 Third is the 2013 Congressional Research Service report American Jihadist Terrorism: Combating a Complex Threat.17 The fourth source of terrorist identities is the RAND Database of Worldwide Terrorism Incidents (RDWTI), which covers the years 1968–2009.18 Fifth is the Global Terrorism Database (GTD) maintained by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism at the University of Maryland, College Park.19 The RDWTI and GTD overlap considerably. Sources six through nine are the New America Foundation,20 Mother Jones,21 the Investigative Project on Terrorism,22 and the research of University of North Carolina professor Charles Kurzman.23 Individual immigration information for the terrorists comes from the sources mentioned above, news stories, court documents, government reports, and publicly accessible databases. Many of the terrorists analyzed here entered the United States on one visa but committed their terrorist attack after they switched to another visa or were naturalized. This report classifies those individuals under the first visa they had when they entered. The only exception to that rule is for those seeking asylum in the United States—they are counted under the asylum visa. That exception is important because those individuals usually make their claim at the U.S. border or after they have entered on another visa, often with the intention of applying for asylum. For instance, Faisal Shahzad entered initially on a student visa and then obtained an H-1B visa before he unsuccessfully attempted to detonate a car bomb in Times Square in 2010. He is counted as having entered on a student visa. THE ATTACKS These data sets identify 154 foreign-born terrorists in the United States from 1975 to the end of 2015. Ten of the subjects were illegal immigrants, 54 were lawful permanent residents (LPR), 19 were students, 1 entered on a K-1 fiancé(e) visa, 20 were refugees, 4 were asylum seekers, 34 were tourists on various visas, and 3 were from Visa Waiver Program (VWP) countries. The visas for 9 terrorists could not be determined. The number of murder victims per terrorist attack comes from government reports, the RDWTI, the GTD, and John Mueller’s research. From 1975 through 2015, those 154 foreign-born terrorists murdered 3,024 people, 98.6 percent of whom were killed on September 11, 2001. The other 1.4 percent of murder victims were dispersed over the 41-year period, with two spikes in 1993 and 2015. The spikes were produced by the 1993 World Trade Center bombing that killed 6 people and the combination of two 2015 incidents—the Chattanooga shooting on July 16, 2015, that killed 5 people and the San Bernardino attack on December 2, 2015, that killed 14 people. (The 2013 Boston Marathon bombing killed 3 people.) From 1975 through 2015, the annual chance that an American would be murdered in a terrorist attack carried out by a foreign-born terrorist was 1 in 3,609,709. Foreigners on the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) killed zero Americans in terrorist attacks, whereas those on other tourist visas killed 1 in 3.9 million a year. The chance that an American would be killed in a terrorist attack committed by a refugee was 1 in 3.64 billion a year. Of the roughly 768,000 total murders committed in the United States from 1975 to the end of 2015, 3,024 (or 0.39 percent) were committed by foreign-born terrorists in an attack.24 Those risk statistics are summarized in Table 1. The annual chance of being murdered was 252.9 times as great as dying in an attack committed by a foreign-born terrorist on U.S. soil. The U.S. murder rate declined from a high of 10.17 per 100,000 in 1980 to a low of 4.45 per 100,000 in 2015 (see Figure 1). The 1975–2015 rate of murder committed by foreign-born terrorists was 0.026 per 100,000 per year, spiking to 1.047 in 2001. Zero Americans were killed in a domestic attack committed by foreign-born terrorists 5 Table 1 Chance of Dying in an Attack by a Foreign-Born Terrorist, 1975–2015 Visa Category Terrorism Deaths per Visa Category Chance of Being Killed Percent Chance of Being Killed All 3,024 1 in 3,609,709 0.00003 Tourist 2,834 1 in 3,851,715 0.00003 Student 158.5 1 in 68,869,156 0.000002 Fiancé(e) visa (K-1) 14 1 in 779,697,234 0.0000001 Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) 8 1 in 1,364,470,160 0.00000007 Asylum 4 1 in 2,728,940,320 0.00000004 Refugee 3 1 in 3,638,587,094 0.00000003 Illegal 1 1 in 10,915,761,281 0.00000001 Unknown 1.5 1 in 7,277,174,187 0.00000001 Visa Waiver Program (VWP) 0 Zero 0.00000000 Sources: John Mueller, ed., Terrorism Since 9/11: The American Cases; RAND Database of Worldwide Terrorism Incidents; National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism Global Terrorism Database; U.S. Census Bureau, “American Community Survey”; Disaster Center, “United States Crime Rates 1960–2014”; and author’s calculations. Note: Nonwhole numbers for deaths result from dividing the number of victims among multiple terrorist perpetrators. Figure 1 U.S. Murder Rates, Excluding Foreign-Born Terrorism Source: Disaster Center, “United States Crime Rates 1960–2014”; RAND Database of Worldwide Terrorism Incidents; National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism Global Terrorism Database; and author’s calculations. “ The annual chance of being murdered from 1975 through the end of 2015 was 252.9 times as great as dying in an attack committed by a foreign-born terrorist on U.S. soil. ” 6 “ A total of 3,432 Americans were murdered in terrorist attacks during the period from 1975 to the end of 2015. Of those, 408 were killed by native-born Americans or unknown terrorists and 3,024 were killed by foreigners. ” in 30 of the 41 examined years. In the 14 years after 9/11, only 3 years were marred by successful foreign-born terrorist attacks. Figure 1 shows a single perceptible blip for terrorism on the 9/11 attacks and a flat line otherwise. Uniqueness of 9/11 The foreign-born terrorist murder rate by itself has a single spike in 2001 and is virtually a flat line for every other year (see Figure 1). The foreign-born terrorist murder rate of 1.047 per 100,000 in 2001 is 176.3 times as great as the next highest annual rate of 0.0059 in 2015. The statistical mode (meaning the most common number) of the annual murder rate by foreignborn terrorists is zero. The 9/11 attacks killed 2,983 people (not counting the 19 hijackers). The attacks were a horrendous crime, but they were also a dramatic outlier. The year 2015 was the deadliest year excluding 9/11, with 19 Americans killed by foreign-born terrorists. Fourteen of those victims were killed in the San Bernardino attack—the second deadliest ever committed by a foreignborn terrorist on U.S. soil. The attacks on 9/11 killed about 213 times as many people as were killed in San Bernardino. To put the deaths by foreign-born terrorists into perspective, a total of 3,432 Americans were murdered in terrorist attacks during the 41-year time period. Of those, 408 were killed by native-born Americans or unknown terrorists, and 3,024 were killed by foreigners.25 Government officials frequently remind the public that we live in a post-9/11 world where the risk of terrorism is so extraordinarily high that it justifies enormous security expenditures.26 The period from 1975 to 2001 had only 17 murders committed by 16 foreignborn terrorists of a total of 64 who either tried or were successful in their attacks. During the same time period, 305 people were killed in terrorist attacks committed by native-born Americans and those with unknown nationalities. The majority of those victims (168) were killed in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing that was committed by Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols, who were both U.S. natives. From September 12, 2001, until December 31, 2015, 24 people were murdered on U.S. soil by a total of 5 foreign-born terrorists, while 65 other foreign-born terrorists attempted or committed attacks that did not result in fatalities. During the same period, 80 people were murdered in terrorist attacks committed by native-born Americans and those with unknown nationalities. The number of murders committed by terrorists who are native-born or have unknown nationalities is higher than the number committed by foreigners in pre- and post-9/11 United States. The horrendous death toll from the terrorist attacks of 9/11 dominates deaths from other attacks. Estimating the Cost per Terrorist Victim When regulators propose a new rule or regulation to enhance safety, they are routinely required to estimate how much it will cost to save a single life under their proposal.27 Human life is very valuable but not infinitely so. Americans are willing to take risks that increase their chance of violent death or murder, such as enlisting in the military, living in cities that have more crime than rural areas, or driving at high speeds, actions that would be unthinkable if individuals placed infinite value on their own lives. It then stands to reason that there is a value between zero and infinity that people place on their lives. In public policy, a review of 132 federal regulatory decisions concerning public exposure to carcinogens found that regulatory action never occurs if the individual fatality risk is lower than 1 in 700,000, indicating that risks are deemed acceptable if the annual fatality risk is lower than that figure.28 A similar type of analysis for foreign-born terrorism will help guarantee that scarce resources are devoted to maximizing the number of lives saved relative to the costs incurred. In 2010, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) produced an initial estimate that valued each life saved from an act of terrorism at $6.5 million, then doubled that value (for unclear reasons) to $13 million per life saved.29 Hahn, Lutter, and Viscusi use data from everyday risk- 7 reduction choices made by the American public to estimate that the value of a statistical life is $15 million.30 This policy analysis uses Hahn, Lutter, and Viscusi’s $15 million estimate to remove any suspicion of undervaluation. There are other costs of terrorism, such as property damage, medical care for the wounded, and disruptions of economic activity.31 However, those costs are highly variable and confined to three major terrorist attacks caused by foreigners. They are the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 9/11 attacks, and the Boston Marathon bombing. The highest plausible cost estimates for those events are $1 billion,32 $170 billion,33 and $25 million,34 respectively. The combined amount of just over $171 billion excludes the costs of the government’s response to terrorism but captures virtually the entirety of the property and other economic damage. The cost of lives lost was greater than the value of property and other economic damages in every terrorist attack examined here except for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and 9/11 attacks. TERRORISM RISK FOR EACH VISA CATEGORY The DHS annual Yearbook of Immigration Statistics35 provided the statistics for the numbers of lawful permanent residents, student visas, K-1 fiancé(e) visas, asylum seekers, B-tourist visas, and entrants through the VWP. The numbers of student visas, K-1 fiancé(e) visas, and Btourist visas issued are available from 1981 onward, and the VWP numbers are available only beginning in 1986, when the program was created. The particulars of the various visa programs will be described in their individual sections. The Refugee Processing Center has recorded the number of refugees going back to 1975. The annual gross inflow of illegal immigrants is estimated on the basis of data from DHS, Pew Research Center, the Pew Hispanic Center, and other sources.36 For the purposes of this report, only the illegal immigrants who actually entered the country illegally are included in that category.37 Immigrants who entered on legal visas and became illegal by overstaying are counted under the legal visa category on which they entered. There are other vastly greater estimates of the number of illegal immigrants who entered the United States from 1975 to 2015; this analysis assumes the smaller estimated number of illegal entries to maximize the danger posed by that class of immigrants.38 This estimation methodology could exaggerate the number of terrorists who entered the United States with an LPR status, thus diminishing the relative danger of other categories. At the time of writing, data were unavailable for 2014 or 2015, so for those years this paper uses an estimate of the previous two years of available visa numbers. The terrorist risk for each visa category can be understood in different ways. The following sections will present the number of foreignborn terrorists in each visa category, the number of murders carried out by terrorists in each visa category, the chance of a terrorist getting a visa, and how many deaths can be expected by each foreign-born terrorist on a particular visa. Multiplying the number of murders in each visa category by the $15 million cost per victim yields the estimate of the costs of terrorism. Each subsection that follows presents two estimates: one includes all victims from all foreign-born terrorist attacks from 1975 to the end of 2015 and the other excludes 9/11 because it is such an extreme outlier. The number of victims from the 9/11 attacks is more than two orders of magnitude greater than the next deadliest foreign-born terror attack on U.S. soil.39 That scale of attack is unlikely to be repeated, whereas other attacks on a smaller and less deadly scale will certainly occur in the future. Presenting the terrorism hazard data in two formats, one including 9/11 and the other excluding it, enables the reader to focus on understanding the risks from the more common smaller-scale attacks that terrorists commit on U.S. soil. Terrorism Risk for All Visa Categories The U.S. government issued 1.14 billion visas under the categories exploited by 154 foreignborn terrorists who entered from 1975 to the end of 2015.40 Of those, only 0.0000136 percent were actually granted to terrorists. In other “ One foreignborn terrorist entered the United States for every 7.38 million nonterrorist foreigners who did so in the tourist, lawful permanent resident, Visa Waiver Program, illegal immigrant, student, and K-1 fiancé(e) visa categories. ” 8 “ The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the deadliest in world history. ” words, one foreign-born terrorist entered the United States for every 7.38 million nonterrorist foreigners who did so in those visa categories. Table 2 and Figure 2 display these numbers, broken out in subcategories. The 9/11 terrorist attacks were the deadliest in world history. Table 3 gives the same statistics as Table 2, except that it excludes the 9/11 attacks. Excluding the 9/11 terrorists and Zacarias Moussaoui, who intended to participate but could not because he was in jail at the time, 134 foreign-born terrorists entered the United States of a total of 1.14 billion visas issued in these categories from 1975 through 2015. That means that only 0.00001 percent of all foreigners who entered on these visas were terrorists. For each terrorist, excluding the 9/11 attackers, 8.48 million visas were granted to nonterrorist foreigners. Of the 19 9/11 hijackers, 18 were on tourist visas. The 19th hijacker was Hani Hanjour who entered the United States on a student visa. Zacarias Moussaoui was not a hijacker on 9/11, but he was involved in the plot. His French citizenship allowed him to enter the United States on the VWP. Omitting the 9/11 terrorist attackers would make the student and the tourist visa categories look substantially safer and slightly improve the safety of the VWP. Number and Cost of Terrorism Victims for All Visa Categories As previously noted, 3,024 people were murdered by foreign-born terrorists in attacks in the United States from 1975 to the end of 2015. Those terrorist attacks cost $45.36 billion in human life or $1.11 billion per year on average Table 2 All Terrorists, by Visa Category, 1975–2015 Annual Number of Terrorists per Category Terrorists Percentage Years of Visa Data Available Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) 54 35.1 41 1.317 34,829,485 644,990 0.8 Tourist* 34 22.1 35 0.971 657,934,182 19,351,005 1.0 Refugee 20 12.9 41 0.488 3,252,493 162,625 2.1 Student* 19 12.3 35 0.543 24,176,617 1,272,454 1.8 Illegal 10 6.5 41 0.244 26,519,625 2,651,963 4.1 Unknown 9 5.8 41 0.220 NA NA 4.6 Asylum 4 2.6 41 0.098 700,522 175,131 10.3 Visa Waiver Program (VWP)^ 3 2.0 30 0.100 388,024,058 129,341,353 10.0 Fiancé(e) visa (K-1)* 1 0.7 35 0.029 604,132 604,132 35.0 Visa Category  Entries per Category Visas Issued to Nonterrorists per Terrorist Average Number of Years between Attacks/ Convictions Sources: John Mueller, ed., Terrorism Since 9/11: The American Cases; RAND Database of Worldwide Terrorism Incidents; National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism Global Terrorism Database; Center on National Security; Charles Kurzman, “Spreadsheet of MuslimAmerican Terrorism Cases from 9/11 through the End of 2015,” University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill,; Department of Homeland Security; Pew Hispanic Research Center; Worldwide Refugee Admissions Processing System; and author’s estimates. Note: LPR = lawful permanent resident; VWP = Visa Waiver Program; K-1 = fiancé(e) visa; NA = Not available. *1981 onward. ^1986 onward. 9 “ Figure 2 All Terrorists, by Visa Category Of all 154 foreign-born terrorists analyzed here, 114 did not murder anyone in a terrorist attack. ” Sources: John Mueller, ed., Terrorism Since 9/11: The American Cases; RAND Database of Worldwide Terrorism Incidents; National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism Global Terrorism Database; Center on National Security; and Charles Kurzman, “Spreadsheet of Muslim-American Terrorism Cases from 9/11 through the End of 2015,” University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill, Note: LPR = lawful permanent resident; VWP = Visa Waiver Program; K-1 = fiancé(e) visa. as displayed in Table 4.41 The terrorism cost equals $39.93 per visa issued over that time. Excluding the 9/11 terrorist attacks lowers the human cost of terrorism to $615 million during the period or $15 million per year as displayed in Table 5. The murder-cost of terrorism committed by the foreign-born inside the United States, excluding 9/11, is $0.54 per visa issued. Of the 154 terrorists, 114 did not murder anyone in a terrorist attack. Many of them were arrested before they were able to execute their attacks or their attacks failed to take any lives. Including all terrorists and the 9/11 hijackers, even the ones who did not kill anybody, each terrorist killed about 20 people on average for a total human cost of $294.6 million. Excluding 9/11, each terrorist killed an average of 0.31 people, for a total human cost of $4.6 million per terrorist analyzed here. Only 40 of the 154 foreign-born terrorists actually killed anyone. Of those terrorists, each one killed an average of 75.6 people and took $1.13 billion worth of human life. Excluding 9/11, each successful terrorist killed an average of just under two people for a human cost of $29.29 million inflicted by each successful terrorist. Excluding the 9/11 attackers, 21 foreign-born terrorists succeeded in murdering 41 people from 1975 through 2015. Sixteen of those terrorists committed their attacks prior to 9/11 and killed a total of 17 people—an average of 1.06 murders per terrorist. Only two terrorists during this time period killed more than one person each: Mir Aimal Kasi shot and killed Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employees Frank Darling and Lansing Bennett as they were waiting in traffic outside of CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, on January 25, 1998; and El Sayyid Nosair assassinated Meir Kahane on November 5, 1990, and then participated in the first World Trade Center attack on 10 Table 3 Terrorists, by Visa Category, Excluding 9/11 Attacks, 1975–2015 Annual Number of Terrorists per Category Visas Issued to Nonterrorists per Terrorist Average Number of Years between Attacks/ Convictions Terrorists Percentage Years of Visa Data Available Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) 54 40.30 41 1.317 34,829,485 644,990 0.8 Refugee 20 14.93 41 0.488 3,252,493 162,625 2.1 Student* 18 13.43 35 0.514 24,176,617 1,343,145 1.9 Tourist* 16 11.94 35 0.457 657,934,182 41,120,886 2.2 Illegal 10 7.46 41 0.244 26,519,625 2,651,963 4.1 Unknown 9 6.72 41 0.220 NA NA 4.6 Asylum 4 2.99 41 0.098 700,522 175,131 10.3 Visa Waiver Program (VWP)^ 2 1.49 30 0.067 388,024,058 194,012,029 15.0 Fiancé(e) visa (K-1)* 1 0.75 35 0.029 604,132 604,132 35.0 Visa Category  Entries per Category Sources: John Mueller, ed., Terrorism Since 9/11: The American Cases; RAND Database of Worldwide Terrorism Incidents; National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism Global Terrorism Database; Center on National Security; Charles Kurzman, “Spreadsheet of Muslim-American Terrorism Cases from 9/11 through the End of 2015,” University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill,; Department of Homeland Security; Pew Hispanic Research Center; Worldwide Refugee Admissions Processing System; and author’s estimates. Note: LPR = lawful permanent resident; VWP = Visa Waiver Program; K-1 = fiancé(e) visa; NA = Not available. *1981 onward. ^1986 onward. February 26, 1993, which killed six people. Over time the number of terrorists has shrunk but their deadliness has increased. There were five successful attacks after 9/11 that killed 24 people, with each terrorist responsible for an average of 4.8 murders. Egyptian-born Hesham Mohamed Hedayet killed two people on July 4, 2002, at Los Angeles International Airport; the Tsarnaev brothers killed three people in the Boston Marathon bombing on April 15, 2013; Mohammad Abdulazeez murdered five people on July 16, 2015; and Tashfeen Malik, along with her U.S.-born husband, killed 14 on December 2, 2015, in San Bernardino, California. The pre-9/11, 9/11, and post-9/11 numbers are summarized in Table 6. Foreign-born terrorists on tourist visas have killed more Americans in attacks than those on any other type of visa, followed dis- tantly by those who entered on student visas. The 2,983 deaths on 9/11 account for all but 41 of those deaths. Excluding the 9/11 attacks, the K-1 fiancé(e) visa appears to be the deadliest (due entirely to the San Bernardino attack) followed by LPRs and tourists. The following subsections discuss the terrorism risks and costs for each specific visa category. Summary data for the categories are provided in Table 7. Illegal Immigrants Only 10 illegal immigrants became terrorists, a minuscule 0.000038 percent of the 26.5 million who entered from 1975 through 2015 as summarized in Table 7. In other words, 2.65 million illegal immigrants entered the United States for each one who ended up being a terrorist. 11 Table 4 Deadliness of All Terrorists, by Visa Category, 1975–2015 Visa Category Murders Percentage Total 1975–2015 Estimated Entries for Each Visa Category Number of Visas Issued per Victim of Terrorism Cost per Death (dollars) Cost per Visa Type (dollars) Cost per Visa Issued (dollars) Tourist 2,834 93.72 657,934,182 232,157 15,000,000 42,510,000,000 64.61 Student 158.5 5.24 24,176,617 152,534 15,000,000 2,377,500,000 98.34 Fiancé(e) visa (K-1) 14 0.46 604,132 43,152 15,000,000 210,000,000 347.61 Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) 8 0.26 34,829,485 4,353,686 15,000,000 120,000,000 3.45 Asylum 4 0.13 700,522 175,131 15,000,000 60,000,000 85.65 Refugee 3 0.10 3,252,493 1,084,164 15,000,000 45,000,000 13.84 Unknown 1.5 0.05 NA 15,000,000 22,500,000 Illegal 1 0.03 26,519,625 26,519,625 15,000,000 15,000,000 0.57 Visa Waiver Program (VWP) 0 0.00 388,024,058 0 15,000,000 0 0.00 3,024 100.00 1,136,041,115 375,675 15,000,000 Total NA 45,360,000,000 NA 39.93 Sources: John Mueller, ed., Terrorism Since 9/11: The American Cases; RAND Database of Worldwide Terrorism Incidents; National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism Global Terrorism Database; Center on National Security; Department of Homeland Security; Pew Hispanic Research Center; Worldwide Refugee Admissions Processing System; and author’s estimates. Note: Nonwhole numbers for deaths result from dividing the number of victims among multiple terrorist perpetrators; NA = Not available. Only one of those illegal immigrants, Ahmed Ajaj, actually succeeded in killing an American as he was one of the 1993 World Trade Center conspirators. The human cost of terrorism caused by illegal immigrants was thus $15,000,000 or equal to $0.57 cents per illegal immigrant. As a reminder, none of the 9/11 hijackers entered the United States illegally. Lawful Permanent Residents An LPR is also commonly known as a green card holder. An LPR can reside and work permanently in the United States until such time as he naturalizes or commits a serious enough crime to lose his green card and be deported.42 More terrorists have taken advantage of the LPR category than any of the other visa categories. From 1975 through 2015, 54 foreign-born terrorists were LPRs—an average of 1.32 terrorists per year. Over the 41-year period, more than 35 million LPRs were allowed in, meaning that just 0.00016 percent of LPRs were actual terrorists. In other words, one terrorist entered for every 644,990 nonterrorist legal permanent residents. Those 54 LPR terrorists killed only eight people in terrorist attacks. The human cost of LPR terrorism was thus $120 million, equal to $3.45 per green card issued. None of the 9/11 hijackers had green cards. Student Visas Student visas allow foreigners to enter the United States temporarily to attend an educational institution such as a college, university, seminary, private elementary school, or vocational training program.43 A total of 19 students—0.00008 percent of the 24,176,617 student visas issued from 1981 to 2015—were terrorists.44 In other words, one terrorist was issued a student visa for every 1,272,454 students who were not terrorists. 12 Table 5 Deadliness of All Terrorists, by Visa Category, Excluding 9/11, 1975–2015. Visa Category Murders Percentage Total 1975–2015 Estimated Entries for Each Visa Category Number of Visas Issued per Victim of Terrorism Cost per Death (dollars) Cost per Visa Category (dollars) Cost per Visa Issued (dollars) Fiancé(e) visa (K-1) 14 34.15 604,132 43,152 15,000,000 210,000,000 347.61 Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) 8 19.51 34,829,485 4,353,686 15,000,000 120,000,000 3.45 Tourist 8 19.51 657,934,182 82,241,773 15,000,000 120,000,000 0.18 Asylum 4 9.76 700,522 175,131 15,000,000 60,000,000 85.65 Refugee 3 7.32 3,252,493 1,084,164 15,000,000 45,000,000 13.84 Student 1.5 3.66 24,176,617 16,117,745 15,000,000 22,500,000 0.93 Unknown 1.5 3.66 NA NA 15,000,000 22,500,000 Illegal 1 2.44 26,519,625 26,519,625 15,000,000 15,000,000 0.57 Visa Waiver Program (VWP) 0 0.00 388,024,058 0 15,000,000 0 0.00 41 100.00 1,136,041,115 27,708,320 15,000,000 615,000,000 0.54 Total NA Sources: John Mueller, ed., Terrorism Since 9/11: The American Cases; RAND Database of Worldwide Terrorism Incidents; National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism Global Terrorism Database; Center on National Security; Department of Homeland Security; Pew Hispanic Research Center; Worldwide Refugee Admissions Processing System; and author’s estimates. Note: Nonwhole numbers for deaths result from dividing the number of victims among multiple terrorist perpetrators; NA = Not available. Terrorists on student visas appear especially deadly because one of them was a 9/11 hijacker. Altogether, students caused 158.5 fatalities, or one for every 152,534 students admitted.45 The human cost of terrorism caused by foreigners on student visas was thus $2.38 billion, equal to 5.23 percent of all the terrorism costs to human life. The average terrorism cost per student visa issued is $98.34. Excluding 9/11, 18 terrorists entered the United States as students, or one entry for every 1.34 million student visas issued. Those 18 committed a total of 1.5 murders that cost $22.5 million or $0.93 per student visa issued. K-1 Fiancé(e) Visas The K-1 visa permits a foreign-citizen fiancé or fiancée to travel to the United States to marry his or her U.S.-citizen sponsor within 90 days of arrival. Once married, the foreign- citizen can then apply to adjust his or her immigration status to that of LPR.46 Tashfeen Malik entered the United States on a K-1 visa sponsored by her U.S.-born husband, Syed Rizwan Farook. Together they murdered 14 people during the San Bernardino terrorist attack of December 2, 2015. Because it is unknown which attacker specifically killed which victims, this report attributes all 14 murders to Malik. The San Bernardino attack is the only one to involve this visa. However, because of the relatively small number—604,132—of these visas issued over the 41-year time frame examined, this lone attack makes the K-1 look like a very dangerous visa, with a single murder for every 43,152 K-1 visas issued. The single terrorist on the K-1 visa has imposed $210 million in costs or an average of $347.61 for every K-1 visa issued—by far the highest 13 “ Table 6 Foreign-Born Terrorists and Murders in Pre- and Post-9/11 United States Average Murders per Successful Terrorist Number of Successful Terrorists Murders in Terrorist Attacks Pre-9/11 16 17 1.06 26 9/11 19 2,983 157 1 Post-9/11 5 24 4.8 14 Years Covered Sources: John Mueller, ed., Terrorism Since 9/11: The American Cases; RAND Database of Worldwide Terrorism Incidents; National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism Global Terrorism Database; Center on National Security; Department of Homeland Security; Pew Hispanic Research Center; Worldwide Refugee Admissions Processing System; and author’s estimates. cost per visa issued. So while it is the second deadliest visa, there is no trend of K-1 visa holders committing attacks.47 Refugees A refugee is a person who is located outside of the United States and is of special humanitarian concern; demonstrates that he or she was persecuted or fears persecution because of race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group; is not firmly settled in another country; and does not violate other immigration bars on admission such as posing a national security or public health risk.48 Refugees apply from a third country and then enter the United States after they have been granted their visa. Refugees must apply for a green card after one year of residing in the United States. Of the 3,252,493 refugees admitted from 1975 to the end of 2015, 20 were terrorists, which amounted to 0.00062 percent of the total. In other words, one terrorist entered as a refugee for every 162,625 refugees who were not terrorists. Refugees were not very successful at killing Americans in terrorist attacks. Of the 20, only three were successful in their attacks, killing a total of three people and imposing a total human cost of $45 million, or $13.84 per refugee visa issued. The three refugee terrorists were Cubans who committed their attacks in the 1970s and were admitted before the Refugee Act of 1980 created the modern rigorous refugee-screening procedures currently in place. Prior to that act, a hodgepodge of poorly managed post–World War II refugee and displaced persons statutes, presidential grants of parole, and ad hoc congressional legislation allowed Hungarian, Cuban, Vietnamese, and other refugee groups to settle in America.49 All of the murders committed by foreign-born refugees in terrorist attacks were committed by those admitted prior to the 1980 act. Two of the Cuban terrorists assassinated a Chilean dissident and his American aide. The third Cuban terrorist assassinated a Cuban exile leader who supported a closer United States relationship with Fidel Castro. The GTD and RDWTI showed many more terrorist attacks and assassinations in the 1970s and 1980s that were likely perpetrated by Cuban or Vietnamese refugees, but no one was ever arrested for the crimes so they could not be included here. Many of the refugees arrested after 9/11 were admitted as children, and in some cases there is doubt over whether their attacks even qualify as terrorism.50 Other refugees have been Of 20 terrorist refugees admitted to the United States between 1975 and 2015, only three were successful in their attacks, killing a total of three people. ” 14 Table 7 Summary of Terrorism Incidents and Costs, by Visa Category Visa Category Total Terrorists per Category Murders per Category Total Entrants per Category Entrants per Terrorist Entrants per Victim Costs per Death (dollars) Total Human Costs (dollars) Costs per Entrant in this Category (dollars) Illegal immigrant 10 1 26,519,625 2,651,963 26,519,625 15,000,000 15,000,000 0.57 Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR) 54 8 34,829,485 644,990 4,353,686 15,000,000 120,000,000 3.45 Student, including 9/11 Student, excluding 9/11 19 18 158.5 1.5 24,176,617 24,176,617 1,272,454 1,343,145 152,534 16,117,745 15,000,000 15,000,000 2,377,500,000 22,500,000 98.34 0.93 Fiancé(e) visa (K-1) 1 14 604,132 604,132 43,152 15,000,000 210,000,000 347.61 Refugee 20 3 3,252,493 162,625 1,084,164 15,000,000 45,000,000 13.84 Asylum seeker 4 4 700,522 175,131 175,131 15,000,000 60,000,000 85.65 Tourist, including 9/11 Tourist, excluding 9/11 34 16 2,834 8 657,934,182 657,934,182 19,351,005 41,120,886 232,157 82,241,773 15,000,000 42,510,000,000 15,000,000 120,000,000 64.61 0.18 Visa Waiver Program (VWP) 3 0 388,024,058 129,341,353 0 15,000,000 0 0.00 Sources: John Mueller, ed., Terrorism Since 9/11: The American Cases; RAND Database of Worldwide Terrorism Incidents; National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism Global Terrorism Database; Center on National Security; Charles Kurzman, “Spreadsheet of Muslim-American Terrorism Cases from 9/11 through the End of 2015,” University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill,; Department of Homeland Security; Pew Hispanic Research Center; Worldwide Refugee Admissions Processing System; and author’s estimates. arrested for terrorism or the vague “terrorismrelated charges,” but they were planning terrorist attacks overseas or providing material support for foreign groups operating overseas.51 No refugees were involved in the 9/11 attacks. Asylum Seekers Asylum seekers are those who ask U.S. border officials for protection because they have suffered persecution or fear that they will suffer persecution because of their race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinions.52 Unlike refugees, asylum seekers must apply in person at the border and are often detained before being granted asylum. Four asylum seekers, or 0.0006 percent of the 700,522 admitted from 1975 through 2015, later turned out to be terrorists. For every terrorist who was granted asylum, 175,131 nonterrorist asylum seekers were admitted. Terrorists who were asylum seekers killed four people in terrorist attacks, three of them in the Boston Marathon bombing on April 15, 2013, carried out by the Tsarnaev brothers. The brothers entered the United States as young children and later became terrorists. Ramzi Yousef, who helped plan the 1993 World Trade Center bombing that killed six people, was the other asylum seeker. Because Yousef planned and carried out those attacks as a member of a six-person team, this report considers him to be responsible for one of the six murders. Altogether, asylum seekers caused four fatalities, or one for every 175,131 admitted. The total human cost of terrorism by asylum seekers was $60 million, equal to an average of $85.65 per asylum seeker admission. No asylum seekers were involved with 9/11. Tourist Visas Tourists on the B visa are allowed to tour the United States for business or pleasure as well as enroll in short recreational courses of 15 study.53 These are the tourist visas available to most residents of the world. The tourist visa categories were the second most abused by terrorists. A total of 34 terrorists entered the United States on tourist visas over the 35-year period (1981–2015) for which data are available. That is an average of 0.97 terrorists who entered on a tourist visa annually. Almost 658 million tourists entered the United States on tourist visas, so a single terrorist was issued a visa in this category for every 19.35 million issued. The 34 terrorists on tourist visas killed 2,834 people in attacks or one victim for every 232,157 visas issued. The total terrorism cost in terms of human life by terrorists on tourist visas was $42.51 billion, or $64.61 per visa. Eighteen of the terrorists who carried out the 9/11 attacks held tourist visas, so this visa category is responsible for 93.7 percent of all deaths caused by terrorists. Excluding 9/11 lowers the number of fatalities to eight and the total death-related costs to $120 million or $0.18 per tourist visa issued. Excluding the 9/11 hijackers, one terrorist entered on a tourist visa for every 41.12 million nonterrorist tourists. There was one murder victim for every 82.24 million nonterrorist tourists who entered. was in jail on unrelated charges during the attacks. The second was the British shoe bomber Richard Reid, who attempted to ignite his shoe on a transatlantic flight en route to the United States. The last was Qaisar Shaffi, who cased New York buildings for a future attack that was broken up by British intelligence. Besides those three, Ahmed Ajaj and Ahmed Ressam were apprehended at John F. Kennedy International Airport while attempting to enter the country illegally using forged passports from nations that were part of the VWP. Because they were captured at the border and their documents were forgeries, they are classified as illegal immigrants.56 In addition, a few international terrorist suspects have been apprehended while trying to enter through the VWP. These include a member of the Provisional Irish Republican Army, a French-Bolivian dual-national who was implicated in a 1990 bombing of U.S. Marines in La Paz, and a British mercenary who tried to buy a fighter jet for the infamous Colombian drug lord Pablo Escobar.57 According to the historical data, the VWP was the least likely category to be used by terrorists. Visa Waiver Program The visa statuses of nine terrorists are unknown. Those individuals committed their attacks or were arrested between 1975 and 1990. Only two of the nine actually succeeded, and they are responsible for 1.5 murders with a total human cost of $22.5 million.58 The VWP enables most citizens of the participating countries to travel to the United States for business or tourism for up to 90 days without first obtaining a visa.54 The participating countries are developed nations in Europe, East Asia, and South America that have established security procedures to exclude terrorists and share traveler information with the U.S. government, and whose citizens rarely overstay illegally in the United States.55 There were three terrorists on the VWP out of a total of 388 million entries during the life of the program (since 1986), or a single terrorist for every 129 million entries. That makes the VWP the safest visa category. The three VWP terrorists killed zero people. One was French national Zacarias Moussaoui, who was originally part of the 9/11 conspiracy but Unknown COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS Immigration screening for counter-terrorism purposes is important, but it will never be perfect.59 As Steven Camarota at the Center for Immigration Studies wrote, “To be sure, in a nation as large as the United States, it is impossible to prevent terrorists from entering the country 100 percent of the time.”60 Even though terrorists rarely achieve their ultimate policy goals, the United States will always be vulnerable to terrorist attacks in the sense “ There were only three terrorists on the Visa Waiver Program during the life of the program (since 1986), which amounts to a single terrorist for every 129 million entries. ” 16 “ An immigration moratorium would have to prevent 504 times the number of murders in any given year as actually occurred annually from 1975 through 2015 for the costs of the moratorium to equal the benefits. ” that the possibility of harm will be greater than zero.61 Confronted with the threat of Islamic terrorism, well-known conservatives like Larry Kudlow, David Bossie, and Ann Coulter have called for a complete moratorium on immigration.62 They presumably want to restrict only LPRs, student visas, fiancé(e) visas, illegal immigrants, refugees, and asylum seekers, but they may also want to prevent the entry of tourists. The following sections will separate tourists from immigrants and migrants to estimate how many Americans must die from terrorism to justify a moratorium on foreigners entering the United States. Finding the breakeven point at which the benefits of reduced terrorism justify the cost incurred by stopping all legal immigration and tourism helps form the outer-most boundaries of a sensible policy.63 If the benefits of the different policies proposed below outweigh the costs, then the measure is cost-effective. If, however, the costs of the policies proposed below are greater than the benefits, then they are not cost-effective. This cost-benefit analysis considers the cost of human deaths, property damage, injuries, and economic disruption caused by terrorism. In virtually all cases of terrorism, with the notable exception of the 9/11 attacks, property damage is minuscule while the cost of injuries is minor compared with the cost of the deaths. Government reactions to terrorism, such as the virtual shutdown of Boston in the wake of the Marathon bombing and the grounding of all air travel after 9/11, are not considered.64 Broad Immigration Moratorium The economic cost of a moratorium on all future immigration is tremendous. Professor Benjamin Powell of Texas Tech University estimated the economic costs of a total immigration moratorium at $229 billion annually.65 This section includes two cost projections. The first conservatively estimates the economic costs of a moratorium to be only $35 billion annually, which is the number used by Harvard economist George Borjas.66 That $35 billion counts only the immigration surplus, which is the increase in American wages caused by immigration. The figure ignores other enormous economic benefits, including the economic gains to the immigrants themselves. The second cost projection assumes the $229 billion annual price tag of a moratorium calculated by Benjamin Powell. The greatest possible benefit of an immigration moratorium would be the elimination of all terrorism by immigrants. Including the devastation caused by the 9/11 attacks, 190 people were murdered on U.S. soil in terrorist attacks committed by 117 illegal immigrants, LPRs, students, fiancé(e)s, refugees, asylum seekers, and those with unknown visa statuses since 1975—accounting for 6.3 percent of all fatalities caused by foreign-born terrorists on American soil. The other 2,834 murders, or 93.7 percent, were committed by 34 tourists who would have been unaffected by an immigration moratorium. Those 34 tourists account for 22.1 percent of all foreign-born terrorists but 93.7 percent of murders caused by foreign-born terrorist attacks. Some 99.7 percent of the murders committed by terrorists on tourist visas occurred on 9/11. A ban on immigration will barely diminish the costs of terrorism. The costs of an immigration moratorium vastly exceed the benefits, even with very generous assumptions buttressing the promoratorium position. According to a breakeven analysis, which seeks to find when the cost of an immigration restriction would equal the benefit of reduced terrorism, an immigration moratorium would have to prevent 2,333 deaths annually at an estimated $15 million per death. In reality, an average of 4.6 murders were committed per year by immigrant (nontourist) terrorists during the 41-year period. An immigration moratorium would have to prevent 504 times as many such murders in any given year as actually occurred annually from 1975 through 2015 for the costs of a moratorium to equal the benefits. Benjamin Powell’s more realistic $229 billion annual estimate of the economic costs of an immigration moratorium means the ban would have to prevent 15,267 murders by terrorists each 17 year at a cost savings of $15 million per murder for the benefits of the ban to equal the costs. That number is about 3,294 times as great as the average annual number of terrorist deaths caused by immigrants (excluding tourists) and more than five times as great as all of the murders committed by all foreign-born terrorists (including tourists) from 1975 through 2015. In short, an immigration moratorium produces huge economic costs for minuscule benefits. Tourism Moratorium Given the role that tourism played in the 9/11 attacks, it is tempting to think that limiting an immigration ban to tourism might be a preferable policy. Yet the economic costs of a tourism moratorium are even larger. The World Travel and Tourism Council estimated that international tourists added $194.1 billion directly and indirectly to the U.S. economy in 2014.67 A moratorium on tourism would deny the U.S. economy an amount of economic activity equal to just over 1 percent of U.S. gross domestic product. The majority of all murders committed by foreign-born terrorists, 93.7 percent, were committed by 34 different terrorists on tourist visas. A total of 99.7 percent of all terrorist murders committed by those on tourist visas were committed by 18 such men on 9/11. Over the entire 41-year period of this study, an average of 69.1 Americans were murdered each year in terrorist attacks committed by those on tourist visas, producing an average annual cost of $1.037 billion—which is what would be saved if there was a moratorium. But the costs of a tourist moratorium vastly exceed the benefits. Such a moratorium would have to deter at least 12,940 murders by terrorists per year to justify the loss in economic activity. The annual number of murders committed by tourists in terrorist attacks would have to be 187.2 times as great as they currently are to justify a moratorium. To put in perspective the 12,940 murders that would have to be prevented each year, that is about 4.3 times as great as all the deaths caused by all foreign-born terrorists over the entire 41-year period studied here. Counterterrorism cannot justify a tourist moratorium. Including Nonhuman Costs The destruction of private property, businesses, and economic activity caused by foreign-born terrorism during the 1975–2015 time period is estimated to have cost $171 billion. The combined human, property, business, and economic costs of terrorism from 1975 through 2015 are thus estimated at $216.39 billion. Spread over 41 years, the average annual cost of terrorism is $5.28 billion, which is still far less than the minimum estimated yearly benefit of $229.1 billion from immigration and tourism ($35 billion + $194.1 billion). The average yearly costs of terrorism, including the loss of human life, injuries, property destruction, and economic disruptions, would have to be 43.4 times as great as they have been to justify a moratorium on all foreigners entering the United States. A moratorium on foreigners entering the United States is more costly than the benefits even when including the property, business, and greater economic costs caused by foreign-born terrorism. CONCLUSION Foreign-born terrorism on U.S. soil is a lowprobability event that imposes high costs on its victims despite relatively small risks and low costs on Americans as a whole.68 From 1975 through 2015, the average chance of dying in an attack by a foreign-born terrorist on U.S. soil was 1 in 3,609,709 a year. For 30 of those 41 years, no Americans were killed on U.S. soil in terrorist attacks caused by foreigners or immigrants. Foreign-born terrorism is a hazard to American life, liberty, and private property, but it is manageable given the huge economic benefits of immigration and the small costs of terrorism. The United States government should continue to devote resources to screening immigrants and foreigners for terrorism or other threats, but large policy changes like an immigration or tourist moratorium would impose far greater costs than benefits. APPENDIX All identified foreign persons who attempted terrorism in the United States over the time period 1975–2015 are listed in Table A1. “ Foreign-born terrorism is a hazard to American life, liberty, and private property, but it is manageable given the huge economic benefits of immigration and the small costs of terrorism. ” 18 Table A1. Identified Foreign Persons Who Attempted or Committed Terrorism on U.S. Soil, 1975–2015 Name of Terrorist Important Date Fatalities* Visa upon Entry Hernandez, Valentin 2/21/1975 1 R Kajevic, Stojilko 6/22/1975 0 U Otero, Rolando 10/17/1975 0 R Bušić, Zvonko 9/10/1976 0 L Vlašić, Slobodan 9/10/1976 0 L Matanić, Petar 9/10/1976 0 L Pešut, Frane 9/10/1976 1 L Sampol, Guillermo Novo 9/21/1976 1 R Diaz, Alvin Ross 9/21/1976 1 R Brekalo, Jozo 6/14/1977 0 U Buconjic, Marijan 6/14/1977 0 U Dizdar, Vladimir 6/14/1977 0 U Kelava, Bozo 8/17/1978 0 R Kodzoman, Mile 8/17/1978 0 U Kavaja, Nikola 6/20/1979 0 L Asadi, Hormoz 11/9/1979 0 F Ghodoosi, Feraidonoon 11/9/1979 0 F Noori, Mohamaad 11/9/1979 0 F Heidary, Hady 11/9/1979 0 F Stamboulish, Antoun 11/9/1979 0 F Perez, Alberto 3/25/1980 0 R Sánchez, Ramón 3/25/1980 0 R Arocena, Eduardo 3/25/1980 0 R Garcia, Andres 3/25/1980 0 R Losada-Fernandez, Eduardo Fernandez 3/25/1980 0 R Sassounian, Harout 10/6/1980 0 L Tcharkhutian, Vicken 1/1/1982 0 L Kozibioukian, Hratch 1/1/1982 0 L Kozibioukian, Stanouche 1/1/1982 0 L Chirinian, Varant Barkev 1/1/1982 0 L Sassounian, Harry 5/5/1982 1 L Tung, Kuei-sen 10/1/1984 1 U Tran, Be Tu van 3/18/1986 0 R Kikumura, Yu 4/13/1988 0 T el-Hage, Wadih 1/31/1990 0.5 F Francis, Glen Cusford 1/31/1990 0.5 U 1/1/1993 0 F al-Ridi, Essam continued 19 Table A1. Identified Foreign Persons Who Attempted or Committed Terrorism on U.S. Soil, 1975–2015 Name of Terrorist Important Date Fatalities* Visa upon Entry Kasi, Mir Aimal 1/25/1993 2 T Ayyad, Nidal A. 2/26/1993 1 L Ismail, Eyad 2/26/1993 0 F Yousef, Ramzi 2/26/1993 1 A Abouhalima, Mohammed 2/26/1993 0 T Abouhalima, Mahmud 2/26/1993 1 T Salameh, Mohammad 2/26/1993 1 T Nosair, El Sayyid 2/26/1993 2 T Ajaj, Ahmed 3/9/1993 1 I Haggag, Abdo Mohammed 6/1/1993 0 L Saleh, Matarawy Mohammed Said 6/1/1993 0 L Ali, Siddig Ibrahim Siddig 6/1/1993 0 L Elhassan, Tarig 6/1/1993 0 L Khalafalla, Fares 6/1/1993 0 T Abdelgani, Amir 6/24/1993 0 T Rahman, Omar Abdel 6/24/1993 0 T Abdelgani, Fadil 6/24/1993 0 T Baz, Rashid 3/1/1994 1 F Elgabrowny, Ibrahim 3/4/1994 0 L Saleh, Mohammed 1/19/1996 0 L Abu Kamal, Ali Hassan 2/23/1997 0 T 7/1/1997 0 I Khalil, Lafi 7/31/1997 0 T al-Dahab, Khalid Abu 8/21/1998 0 F Ressam, Ahmed 12/1/1999 0 I Tizegha, Abdel Hakim 12/1/1999 0 I Meskini, Abdelghani 12/1/1999 0 I Hanjour, Hani 9/11/2001 157 F Atta, Muhammad 9/11/2001 157 T al-Omari, Abdul Aziz 9/11/2001 157 T al-Shehri, Waleed 9/11/2001 157 T al-Suqami, Satam 9/11/2001 157 T Banihammad, Fayez 9/11/2001 157 T al-Ghamdi, Ahmed 9/11/2001 157 T al-Ghamdi, Hamza 9/11/2001 157 T al-Shehhi, Marwan 9/11/2001 157 T al-Shehri, Mohand 9/11/2001 157 T Mezer, Gazi Ibrahim Abu continued 20 Table A1. Identified Foreign Persons Who Attempted or Committed Terrorism on U.S. Soil, 1975–2015 Name of Terrorist Important Date Fatalities* Visa upon Entry al-Shehri, Wail 9/11/2001 157 T al-Hazmi, Nawaf 9/11/2001 157 T al-Hazmi, Salem 9/11/2001 157 T al-Mihdhar, Khalid 9/11/2001 157 T bin Ghanim, Majid Muqid Mushan 9/11/2001 157 T al-Ghamdi, Saeed 9/11/2001 157 T al-Haznawi, Ahmad 9/11/2001 157 T Jarrah, Ziad 9/11/2001 157 T al-Nami, Ahmed 9/11/2001 157 T Moussaoui, Zacarias 9/11/2001 0 V 12/22/2001 0 V Mandhai, Imran 2/1/2002 0 L Jokhan, Shueyb Mossa 5/1/2002 0 L Hedayet, Hesham Mohamed 7/4/2002 2 T al-Bakri, Mukhtar 9/9/2002 0 L Kim, Steve 10/3/2002 0 L Khan, Majid Shoukat 3/28/2003 0 A Paracha, Uzair 3/28/2003 0 T 5/1/2003 0 F 11/28/2003 0 R Siraj, Shahawar Matin 1/1/2004 0 I Paracha, Saifullah 7/8/2004 0 U Barot, Dhiren 8/1/2004 0 F Tarmohammed, Nadeem 8/1/2004 0 F Shaffi, Qaisar 8/1/2004 0 V Aref, Yassin Muhiddin 8/4/2004 0 R Hossain, Mohammed Mosharref 8/6/2004 0 L Samana, Hammad Riaz 8/2/2005 0 L Taheri-azar, Mohammed Reza 3/3/2006 0 L Ahmed, Syed Haris 3/23/2006 0 L Hayat, Umer 4/25/2006 0 L Abraham, Patrick 6/1/2006 0 I Duka, Shain 5/8/2007 0 I Duka, Dritan 5/8/2007 0 I Duka, Eljvir 5/8/2007 0 I Shnewer, Mohamad Ibrahim 5/8/2007 0 L Tatar, Serdar 5/8/2007 0 L Reid, Richard Faris, Iyman Abdi, Nuradin M. continued 21 Table A1. Identified Foreign Persons Who Attempted or Committed Terrorism on U.S. Soil, 1975–2015 Name of Terrorist Important Date Fatalities* Visa upon Entry Abdullahu, Agron 5/8/2007 0 R Defreitas, Russell 6/1/2007 0 L Kadir, Abdul 6/2/2007 0 L Lemorin, Lyglenson 2/7/2008 0 L Payen, Laguerre 5/20/2009 0 L Zazi, Najibullah 9/19/2009 0 R Smadi, Hosam Maher Husein 9/24/2009 0 F Abdulmutallab, Umar Farouk 12/25/2009 0 T Ahmedzay, Zarein 1/7/2010 0 R Medunjanin, Adis 1/7/2010 0 R Ouazzani, Khalid 2/3/2010 0 L Shahzad, Faisal 5/1/2010 0 F Hasanoff, Sabirhan 6/30/2010 0 L Hassoun, Sami Samir 9/18/2010 0 L Ahmed, Farooque 10/27/2010 0 L Mohamud, Mohamed Osman 11/26/2010 0 L Younis, Awais 12/6/2010 0 L Martinez, Antonio 12/8/2010 0 L Aldawsari, Khalid Ali-M 2/23/2011 0 F Mamdouh, Mohamed 5/11/2011 0 L Ferhani, Ahmed 5/11/2011 0 R Melaku, Yonathan 6/17/2011 0 L Kodirov, Ulugbek 7/26/2011 0 F Arbabsiar, Manssor 10/11/2011 0 L Pimentel, Jose 11/20/2011 0 L 1/7/2012 0 R 2/17/2012 0 T Nafis, Quazi Mohammad Rezwanul Ahsan 10/17/2012 0 F Qazi, Raees Alam 11/30/2012 0 L Qazi, Sheheryar Alam 11/30/2012 0 L Aldosary, Abdullatif Ali 11/30/2012 0 R Tsarnaev, Dzhokhar 4/15/2013 1.5 A Tsarnaev, Tamerlan 4/15/2013 1.5 A El Shukrijumah, Adnan Gulshair 12/6/2014 0 L Juraboev, Abdurasul Hasanovich 2/1/2015 0 L Saidakhmetov, Akhror 2/1/2015 0 L Habibov, Abror 2/1/2015 0 U continued Osmakac, Sami El Khalifi, Sidi Mohamed Amine 22 Table A1. Identified Foreign Persons Who Attempted or Committed Terrorism on U.S. Soil, 1975–2015 Name of Terrorist Important Date Fatalities* Visa upon Entry Siddiqui, Asia 4/1/2015 0 L Diaz, Miguel Moran 4/2/2015 0 L Suarez, Harlem 4/3/2015 0 L Mumani, Fareed 6/7/2015 0 L Abdulazeez, Mohammad Youssuf 7/16/2015 5 L Malik, Tashfeen 12/2/2015 14 K Note: A=asylee, F=student on F or M visa, I=illegal, K=K-1 fiancé(e), L=lawful permanent resident, R=refugee, T=tourist on B-visa, U=unknown, V=visa waiver program. *If multiple attackers, all casualties spread evenly across all attackers. NOTES 1. Matt Pearce, “A Look at the K-1 Visa That Gave San Bernardino Shooter Entry into U.S.,” Los Angeles Times, December 8, 2015, http:// 2. Alicia A. Caldwell, “U.S. Reviewing Fiancé Visa Program after San Bernardino Shooting,” Associated Press, December 8, 2015, http://www.; Larry Kudlow, “I’ve Changed. This Is War. Seal the Borders. Stop the Visas,” National Review, December 11, 2015, http://www.nationalreview. com/article/428411/larry-kudlow-seal-bordersstop-visas; David Bossie, “Conservatives Should Think Bigger on Immigration Ban,” Breitbart, December 11, 2015, big-government/2015/12/11/conservatives-shouldthink-bigger-on-immigration-ban/; Ann Coulter, interview by Breitbart News Saturday, December 12, 2015, 3. See Jared Hatch, “Requiring a Nexus to National Security: Immigration, ‘Terrorist Activities,’ and Statutory Reform,” BYU Law Review 3 (2014): 697–732. 4. U.S. Department of Homeland Security [DHS], “The Strategic National Risk Assessment in Support of PPD 8: A Comprehensive RiskBased Approach toward a Secure and Resilient Nation” (Washington: DHS, December 8, 2011), 5. John Mueller, ed., Terrorism Since 9/11: The American Cases (Columbus: Ohio State University, March 2016), faculty/jmueller/since.html. 6. Robert S. Leiken and Steven Brooke, “The Quantitative Analysis of Terrorism and Immigration: An Initial Exploration,” Terrorism and Political Violence 18, no. 4 (2006): 503–21. 7. Emails with Robert Leiken on March 14, 2016, and Steven Brooke on March 17, 2016, confirmed that the data set their paper was based on does not exist anymore. Emails are available upon request. 8. U.S. Government Accountability Office [GAO], “Criminal Alien Statistics: Information on Incarcerations, Arrests, and Costs,” GAO-11187 (Washington: GAO, March 2011), p. 25. 9. Daniel Milton, Megan Spencer, and Michael 23 Findley, “Radicalism of the Hopeless: Refugee Flows and Transnational Problems,” International Interactions (August 2013): 3. 10. Illegal immigrants are included in a visa category called “illegal” to improve readability. 11. Mueller, Terrorism and Political Violence. 12. U.S. Department of Justice [DOJ], National Security Division Statistics on Unsealed International Terrorism and Terrorism-Related Convictions 9/11/01–3/18/10 (Washington: DOJ), https://fas. org/irp/agency/doj/doj032610-stats.pdf. html. 21. “Profiles in Terror,” Mother Jones, http://www. 22. The Investigative Project on Terrorism, “International Terrorism and Terrorism-Related Convictions 9/11/01–3/18/10,” http://www.investi 23. Charles Kurzman, “Spreadsheet of MuslimAmerican Terrorism Cases from 9/11 through the End of 2015,” University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill, 13. GAO, “Criminal Alien Statistics,” pp. 25–26. 14. DOJ, National Security Division Statistics. 15. “Profiles in Terror: Nasser Abuali,” Mother Jones, nasser-abuali-stolen-cereal. 16. “By the Numbers: ISIS Cases in the United States, March 1, 2014–January 25, 2016,” New York, Center on National Security at Fordham Law, January 25, 2016, http://static1.squarespace. com/static/55dc76f7e4b013c872183fea/t/56a7a90 a2399a387c5bc9eeb/1453828362342/ISIS+Cases+Statistical+Overview+01-25-16.pdf. 17. Jerome P. Bjelopera, “American Jihadist Terrorism: Combating a Complex Threat,” CRS Report for Congress no. R41416 (Washington: Congressional Research Service, January 23, 2013), https:// 24. United States Crime Rates 1960–2014, Disaster Center website, http://www.disastercenter. com/crime/uscrime.htm. 25. I used the Global Terrorism Database (GTD) at the University of Maryland to estimate the total number of terrorist deaths in the United States during this time period except for 1993 because the data are missing for that year. I used data from the RAND Database to fill in the missing 1993 GTD data. 26. John Mueller and Mark G. Stewart, Chasing Ghosts: The Policing of Terrorism (New York: Oxford University Press, 2016), pp. 13–21. 27. John Mueller and Mark G. Stewart, “Responsible Counterterrorism Policy,” Cato Institute Policy Analysis no. 755, September 10, 2014, p. 4. 28. Mueller and Stewart, Chasing Ghosts, p. 137. 18. RAND National Security Division, “RAND Database of Worldwide Terrorism Incidents,” 19. “Global Terrorism Database” (College Park: University of Maryland), http://www.start.umd. edu/gtd/. 20. “Homegrown Extremism 2011–2015” (Washington: New America Foundation), http:// 29. Lisa A. Robinson, James K. Hammitt, Joseph E. Aldy, Alan Krupnick, and Jennifer Baxter, “Valuing the Risk of Death from Terrorist Attacks,” Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 7, no. 1 (2010): article 14. 30. Robert W. Hahn, Randall W. Lutter, and W. Kip Viscusi, “Do Federal Regulations Reduce Mortality?” Washington, AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, 2000, 24 See also Benjamin H. Friedman, “Managing Fear: The Politics of Homeland Security,” Political Science Quarterly 126, no. 1 (2011): 85, footnote 31. 31. See Karen C. Tumlin, “Suspect First: How Terrorism Policy Is Reshaping Immigration Policy,” California Law Review 92, no. 4 (July 2004): 1173–239; and John Mueller and Mark G. Stewart, “Evaluating Counterterrorism Spending,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 28, no. 3 (Summer 2014): 237–48. 32. Phil Hirschkorn, “New York Remembers 1993 WTC Victims,” CNN New York Bureau, February 26, 2003, US/Northeast/02/26/wtc.bombing/. 33. Mueller and Stewart, Chasing Ghosts, pp. 144, 279. 34. “Insurers Have Paid $1.2M for Boston Bombing P/C Claims So Far; Health Claims to Top $22M,” Insurance Journal, August 30, 2013, 2013/08/30/303392.htm. Tracking: A Key Component of Homeland Security and a Layered Defense,” GAO-04-82 (Washington: GAO, May 2004), new.items/d0482.pdf. 38. Combining three sources for three time periods yields an astonishing 50,052,500 illegal entries: (1) the estimated gross illegal entries from Massey and Singer, “New Estimates,” for the years 1975 to 1989; (2) Robert Warren and Donald Kerwin, “Beyond DAPA and DACA: Revisiting Legislative Reform in Light of Long-Term Trends in Unauthorized Immigration to the United States,” Journal on Migration and Human Security 3, no. 1 (2015), for the years 1990 to 2009; and (3) estimating from Jeffrey S. Passel and D’Vera Cohn, “Trends in Unauthorized Immigration: Undocumented Inflow Now Trails Legal Inflow” (Washington: Pew Research Center, 2008), for the years 2009 to 2015. 39. “San Bernardino Shooting,” CNN, http:// 40. Illegal immigrants are not really a visa category, but they are listed as such for simplicity’s sake. 41. No discount rate adjustment. 35. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, “Yearbook of Immigration Statistics” (Washington: DHS, multiple years), yearbook-immigration-statistics. 36. Thomas J. Espenshade, “Unauthorized Immigration to the United States,” Annual Review of Sociology 21 (1995): 195–216; Doug S. Massey and Audrey Singer, “New Estimates of Undocumented Mexican Migration and the Probability of Apprehension,” Demography 32, no. 2 (May 1995): 203–13; and “Estimates of the Unauthorized Immigrant Population Residing in the United States: 1990 to 2000” (Washington: Office of Policy and Planning, U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service), https://www.dhs. gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/Ill_ Report_1211.pdf. 37. U.S. General Accounting Office, “Overstay 42. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, “Lawful Permanent Resident (LPR)” (Washington: DHS), lawful-permanent-resident-lpr. 43. Bureau of Consular Affairs, “Student Visa” (Washington: U.S. Department of State), https:// student.html. 44. F and M visas are for students. 45. Wadih el-Hage was on a student visa when he and Glen Cusford Francis likely assassinated Dr. Rashad Khalifa on January 31, 1990, in Tucson, Arizona. 46. Bureau of Consular Affairs, “Nonimmigrant Visa for a Fiancé(e) (K-1)” (Washington: U.S. De- 25 partment of State), tent/visas/en/immigrate/family/fiance-k-1.html. 47. Alex Nowrasteh, “Secret Policy to Ignore Social Media? Not So Fast,” Cato at Liberty, December 15, 2015, 48. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, “Refugees” (Washington: DHS), https://www.uscis. gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum/refugees. 49. Charlotte J. Moore, “Review of U.S. Refugee Resettlement Programs and Policies,” Congressional Research Service (Washington: Government Printing Office, March 1, 1981), pp. 3–16. 50. Matthew Hendley, “Paul Gosar Thinks Abdullatif Aldosary, Alleged Bomber, Is a ‘Known Terrorist’; He Is Not,” Phoenix New Times, December 7, 2012, http://www.phoenixnewtimes. com/news/paul-gosar-thinks-abdullatif-aldosaryalleged-bomber-is-a-known-terrorist-he- isnot-6647318. 51. U.S. Government Accountability Office, “Combating Terrorism: Foreign Terrorist Organization Designation Process and U.S. Agency Enforcement Actions,” GAO-15-629 (Washington: GAO, June 2015), assets/680/671028.pdf. 52. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, “The United States Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP) Consultation & Worldwide Processing Priorities” (Washington: DHS), https://www. united-states-refugee-admissions-program-usrap -consultation-worldwide-processing-priorities. 55. Ibid. 56. Steven A. Camarota, “The Open Door: How Military Islamic Terrorists Entered and Remained in the United States, 1993–2001,” Center for Immigration Studies, Center Paper no. 21, May 2002, theopendoor.pdf. 57. Office of Inspector General, “An Evaluation of the Security Implications of the Visa Waiver Program,” OIG-04-26 (Washington: DHS, April 2004), pp. 11–12, Mgmt/OIG_SecurityImpVisaWaiverProgEval_ Apr04.pdf. 58. Two terrorists killed one person in an attack, so they each got credit for one-half of the murder. 59. DHS, “The Strategic National Risk Assessment in Support of PPD 8.” 60. Camarota, “The Open Door: How Military Islamic Terrorists Entered and Remained in the United States, 1993–2001.” 61. Max Abrahms, “Why Terrorism Does Not Work,” International Security 31, no. 2 (Fall 2006): 42–78. 62. Kudlow, “I’ve Changed”; Bossie, “Conservatives Should Think Bigger”; and Ann Coulter, interview by Breitbart News Saturday. 63. See Mueller and Stewart, “Evaluating Counterterrorism Spending.” 64. Mueller and Stewart, Chasing Ghosts, p. 188. 53. Bureau of Consular Affairs, “Visitor Visa” (Washington: U.S. Department of State), https:// 65. Benjamin Powell, “Coyote Ugly: The Deadweight Cost of Rent Seeking for Immigration Policy,” Public Choice 150 (2012): 195–208. 54. Bureau of Consular Affairs, “Visa Waiver Program” (Washington: U.S. Department of State), visa-waiver-program.html#reference. 66. George Borjas, “Immigration and the American Worker: A Review of the Academic Literature” (Washington: Center for Immigration Studies, April 2013), p. 2, 26 immigration-and-the-american-worker-reviewacademic-literature. 67. World Travel and Tourism Council, “Travel & Tourism: Economic Impact 2015, United States of America,” London, World Travel and Tourism Council, p. 5, reports/economic%20impact%20research/coun tries%202015/unitedstatesofamerica2015.pdf. 68. Mueller and Stewart, “Evaluating Counterterrorism Spending,” pp. 239–40. RELATED STUDIES FROM THE CATO INSTITUTE U.S. Immigration Levels, Urban Housing Values, and Their Implications for Capital Share by Ryan Murphy and Alex Nowrasteh, Cato Institute Working Paper no. 37 (August 9, 2016) Voice, Exit, and Liberty: The Effect of Emigration on Origin Country Institutions by Michelangelo Landgrave and Alex Nowrasteh, Cato Institute Economic Development Bulletin no. 25 (May 26, 2016) Checking E-Verify: The Costs and Consequences of a National Worker Screening Mandate by Alex Nowrasteh and Jim Harper, Cato Institute Policy Analysis no. 775 (July 7, 2015) The Political Assimilation of Immigrants and Their Descendants by Sam Wilson and Alex Nowrasteh, Cato Institute Economic Development Bulletin no. 23 (February 23, 2015) Responsible Counterterrorism Policy by John Mueller and Mark G. Stewart, Cato Institute Policy Analysis no. 755 (September 10, 2014) Clicking on Heaven’s Door: The Effect of Immigrant Legalization on Crime by Paolo Pinotti, Cato Institute Research Briefs in Economic Policy no. 8 (August 20, 2014) The Fiscal Impact of Immigration by Alex Nowrasteh, Cato Institute Working Paper no. 21 (July 23, 2014) German Jewish Émigrés and U.S. Invention by Petra Moser, Cato Institute Research Briefs in Economic Policy no. 2 (May 21, 2014) State-Based Visas: A Federalist Approach to Reforming U.S. Immigration Policy by Brandon Fuller and Sean Rust, Cato Institute Policy Analysis no. 748 (April 23, 2014) The Economic Gains from Eliminating U.S. Travel Visas by Robert A. Lawson, Saurav Roychoudhury, and Ryan Murphy, Cato Institute Economic Development Bulletin no. 19, (February 6, 2014) Privatizing the Transportation Security Administration by Chris Edwards, Cato Institute Policy Analysis no. 742 (November 19, 2013) Building a Wall around the Welfare State, Instead of the Country by Alex Nowrasteh and Sophie Cole, Cato Institute Policy Analysis no. 732 (July 25, 2013) Poor Immigrants Use Public Benefits at a Lower Rate than Poor Native-Born Citizens by Leighton Ku and Brian Bruen, Cato Institute Economic Development Bulletin no. 17 (March 4, 2013) How to Make Guest Worker Visas Work by Alex Nowrasteh, Cato Institute Policy Analysis no. 719 (January 31, 2013) The Economic Case against Arizona’s Immigration Laws by Alex Nowrasteh, Cato Institute Policy Analysis no. 709 (September 25, 2012) RECENT STUDIES IN THE CATO INSTITUTE POLICY ANALYSIS SERIES 797. Five Myths about Economic Inequality in America by Michael Tanner (September 7, 2016) 796. Freedom of Speech under Assault on Campus by Daniel Jacobson (August 30, 2016) 795. 25 Years of Reforms in Ex-Communist Countries: Fast and Extensive Reforms Led to Higher Growth and More Political Freedom by Oleh Havrylysyn, Xiaofan Meng, and Marian L. Tupy (July 12, 2016) 794. Options for Federal Privatization and Reform Lessons from Abroad by Chris Edwards (June 28, 2016) 793. New York’s Bank: The National Monetary Commission and the Founding of the Fed by George Selgin (June 21, 2016) 792 The Problem with the Light Footprint: Shifting Tactics in Lieu of Strategy by Brad Stapleton, Cato Institute Policy Analysis no. 792 (June 7, 2016) 791. Hate Speech Laws: Ratifying the Assassin’s Veto by Robert Corn-Revere (May 24, 2016) 790. A Walk Through the JOBS Act of 2012: Deregulation in the Wake of Financial Crisis by Thaya Brook Knight (May 3, 2016) 789. Menu Mandates and Obesity: A Futile Effort by Aaron Yelowitz (April 13, 2016) 788. Japan’s Security Evolution by Jennifer Lind (February 25, 2016) 787. Reign of Terroir: How to Resist Europe’s Efforts to Control Common Food Names as Geographical Indications by K. William Watson (February 16, 2016) 786. Technologies Converge and Power Diffuses: The Evolution of Small, Smart, and Cheap Weapons by T. X. Hammes (January 27, 2016) Published by the Cato Institute, Policy Analysis is a regular series evaluating government policies and offering proposals for reform. Nothing in Policy Analysis should be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of the Cato Institute or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress. Contact the Cato Institute for reprint permission. All policy studies can be viewed online at Additional printed copies of Cato Institute Policy Analysis are $6.00 each ($3.00 each for five or more). To order, please email EXHIBIT 31 fl D=3< B335D43A It’s Not Foreigners Who are Plotting Here: What the Data Really Show Tuesday, February 7, 2017, 8:48 PM A little more than a week ago, Benjamin Wittes posted a piece about the malevolence and incompetence of Trump’s Executive Order on visas and refugees—an order that, in his words, is both wildly over-inclusive and wildly under-inclusive. If we take the ban and its stated purpose at face value (which Ben argued we should not), at best, the ban is ineffective and fails “to protect Americans.” At worst, as many experts have suggested over the past few weeks, the Executive Order is completely counterproductive. As ten bipartisan former national security of cials—four of whom were briefed regularly on all credible terrorist threat streams against the U.S. as recently as a week before the EO—said in a legal brief on Monday: YO^QYSVV3 J]Z= d0 d_S]`MOB NYJVOXZ7 PZ _YOX_]J[O2 Ü d_SY`XXZ1 XSV^`< ^SVZ[JOYYS< R_Sb ^_OOX YZ^YRZ9 RO9 d_S]`MOB NYJVOXZ7 PZ d]J_O]MOB ]OX]Z4 We view the order as one that ultimately undermines the national security of the United States, rather than making us safer...It could do long-term damage to our national security and foreign policy interests, endangering U.S. troops in the eld and disrupting counterterrorism and national security partnerships. Ben’s piece touched a nerve. It has received nearly half a million pageviews, according to Google Analytics, and was featured this week on This American Life. In this post, I want to follow up on and esh out an aspect of the piece that has gotten a lot of attention but much of it in the vein of repetition, not elucidation. Speci cally, Ben pointed to some of the most compelling empirical evidence on the issue of ineffectiveness: the EO wouldn’t have blocked the entry of any of the individuals responsible for recent terrorist attacks on American soil. Other media organizations have elaborated on the theme, with various news outlets running stories showing that no one from any of the seven countries included in the Executive Order has carried out a fatal attack on U.S. soil since 9/11. But there’s more to say on this subject and more data to share on it, and I suppose I’m as good a person as any to shed some light. I know something about domestic terrorism investigations. Before going to law school 18 months ago, I spent ve years at the FBI working in an analytical capacity. I spent the majority of that time providing case assistance to FBI agents working international terrorism investigations within the United States—in other words, cases very similar to the ones the president insists we need to keep Muslims out to stop. I spent those ve years responding to terrorism threats to the United States, and working cases up until the point of arrest. I also worked extensively with other government agencies and deployed overseas in support of the Bureau’s counterterrorism mission. If you are finding Lawfare useful in these times, please consider making a contribution to support what we do. Moreover, because of my background, when I started working with Lawfare, Ben asked me to track criminal cases for the site, so I have kept up with the ow of public counterterrorism cases around the country over the last year about as closely as anyone has. I actually know this data—what they say, and what they don’t say. There may be people around who know the data even better than I do, but one of them is clearly not Kellyanne Conway, who either misspoke on national television in a particularly embarassing fashion or simply made up a terrorist plot. The only true fact she relayed to Chris Matthews about the “Bowling Green massacre,” was this one: “Most people don’t know [about] that because it didn’t get covered.” Indeed, the Bowling Green massacre didn’t get covered—because it never happened. Nonetheless, in response to the media criticism of Conway, the White House released a list of 78 terrorist attacks it says were underreported; the New York Times has annotated the list with the paper’s coverage of every attack. It is true, however, that the volume of cases is much larger than the media’s appetite for in-depth coverage of them—a fact that is actually true of most crime categories. The FBI arrests dozens of counterterrorism suspects each year and, generally, those cases receive little more coverage than a spot on the CNN ticker at the bottom of your screen. For every successful attack, and every subsequent article asking where and how the FBI went wrong, there are a lot of cases that get interrupted early or mid-stream. Unless you make a conscious effort, you probably won’t hear much about most of them. So the Bowling Green Massacre aside, it’s possible that Conway is right in some larger sense: that a close look at these cases would show heaps of refugees or immigrants from the seven named countries—Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen—plotting to blow things up and shoot up nightclubs and concert halls. So let’s take a hard look at some empirical data I put together on who the terrorists are and how they relate to the assumptions in the executive order. For those who don’t want to do this deep dive, here’s a quick two-sentence summary: Conway’s position is empirically indefensible. Absolutely nothing in the large body of data we have about real terrorist plots in the United States remotely supports either a focus on barring refugees or a focus on these particular seven countries. Nothing. The Data All of othe data I’m going to cite come from of cial Justice Department documents that have been made publically available by the department. I began assembling them with a review of the National Security Division’s press releases, available here, and I tracked all counterterrorism subjects arrested or charged since January 1, 2015. When determining a subject’s immigration or citizenship status, I used the criminal complaint or indictment. At times, I had to review additional court documents to determine the details of a plot or a subject’s background. But all data here come from the of cial court docket; to the extent I rely on any outside sources, I explicitly refer to those outside sources explicitly below. By my count, the FBI has arrested and charged 97 counterterrorism subjects during the past two years. For those of you tracking these numbers at other institutions, you’ll notice that this number differs slightly from their reports. The New American Foundation, for example, has counted 123 individuals. The discrepancy is due to the fact that New America’s numbers include not only individuals who have been charged with terrorism offenses domestically, but also Americans who have been accused of such activity abroad. For example, I did not include in my review American citizens who have left the United States and died in Syria ghting for ISIL and were thus never charged by the Justice Department. Additionally, I did not include individuals who were not charged because they died while conducting an attack on American soil. So, for example, Abdul Razak Ali Artan, a Somali refugee who was shot and killed by law enforcement after he attacked students at the Ohio State University, is not included in the dataset. In that sense, I suppose, my dataset is biased towards under-inclusion of refugees. In a much larger sense, however, it is biased in the other direction—i.e. towards the White House’s view of the matter. The reason is that while these data are not exclusive to ISIL, they are focused on cases that are much more likely to include attacks by foreigners, and Muslim foreigners particularly, than attacks by others. That’s because the workload focus of the DOJ’s National Security Division tends to have an overseas lilt to it. I’ve included arrests of any individual supporting any Designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, including Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and Al-Shabaab. To the extent that the Justice Department issues press releases, I also included purely domestic terrorism subjects, including white supremacists and sovereign citizen attacks. That being said, much of the violence committed by those groups is prosecuted under state authorities, and when federal, not necessarily as terrorism. So while the vast majority of arrests in my sample involve ISIL-sympathizers, that is not the case of the vast majority of terrorist violence in the United States. If there’s a pool of data that will support the White House’s claims, I’m looking at it. One quick additional caveat: These data provide an incomplete picture. The FBI has open cases on individuals who have not been arrested, many of whom never will be; the demographics of those subjects are obviously not available to the public. In a meeting with the National Association of Attorneys General in February 2015, FBI Director James Comey told the group that the FBI is investigating ISIL sympathizers in all 50 states. Moreover, to the extent I am relying on criminal complaints to categorize a subject and the threat he or she poses to the U.S., understand that only a tiny fraction of an FBI case le is declassi ed and included in public documents. So you should understand what follows as a representation of that subset of the data that is available to the public. U.S. Citizens The Program on Extremism at George Washington University has routinely published statistics indicating that the “vast majority” of individuals charged in the U.S. with offenses related to ISIL are U.S. citizens. When considering all terrorism offenses, that claim holds up—80 of the 97 suspects arrested in the past two years, or more than 82 percent, are American citizens. Most of those, notably, are not naturalized citizens. Of the U.S. citizens, only six were naturalized. In other words, more than 76 percent of individuals arrested by the FBI over the past two years for terrorism-related offenses were U.S. citizens as a result of having been born in the United States. Naturalized U.S. Citizens Where do the naturalized citizens come from? Of the six naturalized citizens on the list, two—Nihad Rosic and Mediha Medy Salkicevic— emigrated to the U.S. from Bosnia, a country not on Trump’s list. While in the United States, the government alleges that Rosic and Salkicevic raised and sent money to individuals ghting with ISIL in Syria and Iraq. Both men contributed money from their personal savings, while other members of the conspiracy sent supplies including tactical gear. At one point, Rosic attempted to leave the country to join ISIL as a ghter overseas. Neither subject plotted an attack in the United States. Another naturalized citizen, Rasmieh Yousef Odeh came to the United States from Israel—a country that’s really not on Trump’s list. Odeh’s case is unique; she was charged with immigration violations for failing to disclose a previous terrorism conviction in Israel. Now 68 years old, Odeh was convicted in Israel for her role in the 1969 bombings of a supermarket and the British Consulate in Jerusalem, which were carried out on behalf of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP.) In the past two years, Odeh is the only convicted terrorist to slip through the cracks and immigrate to the United States. However, the indictment makes no charges that she was engaged in any sort of terrorist activity while living in the Chicago area. The nal three naturalized citizens do come from countries on Trump’s list: Iraq, Syria, and Somalia. Two of these men however, were not charged with material support to terrorism, but with making false statements to law enforcement. Iraqi-born Bilal Abood, traveled to Syria in April 2013. He returned to the U.S. in September 2013, but denied supporting any terrorist groups. In April 2015, Abood falsely told the FBI that he had never pledged allegiance to Abu Bakr alBaghdadi, the leader of ISIL. A review of Abood’s computer proved otherwise. Mohamad Saeed Kodaimati, originally from Syria, was charged with making false statements involving international terrorism matters. The charges stem from a conversation he had with FBI agents at the U.S. Embassy in Ankara, Turkey in March 2015 after a trip to Syria. During that interview, Kodaimati claimed that he had never been involved in any ghting, red his weapon, met a member of ISIL, or worked at a Sharia court—all of which was contradicted by the FBI’s investigation. Again, nothing in the public court documents suggests that either subject engaged in attack plotting in the United States. Of the six naturalized citizens on our list, there is exactly one from a newly banned country who was charged with material support to terrorism. Abdirahman Sheik Mohamud emigrated to the U.S. from Somalia. In April 2014, Mohamud traveled from Ohio to Istanbul and onward to Syria, where he received weapons and explosives training. In June 2014, Mohamud returned to the U.S., where he told an acquaintance that he wanted to attack a military facility or a prison, killing U.S. military members. Legal Permanent Residents In addition to the citizens, the FBI has arrested six counterterrorism subjects with Legal Permanent Resident status over the past two years—only one of them from a newly-banned country. Akhror Saidakhmetov, an LPR and a citizen of Kazakhstan, was arrested at JFK airport in April 2015 as he attempted to board a ight to Istanbul, with the eventual goal of joining ISIL in Syria. His codefendant Abdurasul Hasanovich Juraboev, an LPR and citizen of Uzbekistan, had also purchased a plane ticket to Istanbul. Both men discussed the possibility of conducting an attack in the United States if they were unable to travel and ISIL directed them to do so. Armin Harcevic and Jasminka Ramic, LPRs and citizens of Bosnia, worked with co-defendants Nihad Rosic and Mediha Medy Salkicevic, referenced above, to provide nancial support to ISIL ghters overseas. Ibrahim Zubair Mohammad, an LPR and citizen of India, studied engineering at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign before conspiring to provide nancial support to Anwar Aulaqi and AQAP. That leaves Mohamed Ra k Naji, an LPR and a citizen of Yemen. In 2015, Naji travelled from New York to Yemen to join ISIL and ght, the government alleges. Although he initially complained that it was dif cult to reach the group, he was eventually successful but returned to New York City several months later. While in New York, Naji disclosed to an FBI source that he was considering conducting an attack similar to the Bastille Day attack in France, in Times Square. Although Naji may have voiced aspirations to conduct an attack in the U.S., the government has not made any suggestions that he made any concrete steps to do so. So far, in other words, Naji’s is the only terrorist plot that would have been stopped by keeping all people from the seven countries out—and it was stopped just ne without banning all people from those countries. But the story gets worse for the White House—actually much worse. Foreign Citizens In addition to subjects with Legal Permanent Resident status, three arrestees were foreign citizens who did not have this status in the United States. None came from a banned country. Yahya Farooq Mohammad, a citizen of India, conspired with Ibrahim Zubair Mohammad, referenced above, to provide nancial support to AQAP, the government alleges. Nelash Mohamed Das, a citizen of Bangladesh, considered traveling overseas to join ISIL, but was eventually arrested after he began plotting an attack in the United States. With the help of an FBI source, Das identi ed his preferred target—a U.S. military member—and believed ISIL would pay him $80,000 for killing him, according to the prosecution. Das was arrested by the FBI after he and the source drove to the target’s house and Das reached for his (inert) weapons. Azizjon Rakhmatov is a citizen of Uzbekistan, and a co-conspirator of Akhror Saidakhmetov and Abdurasul Hasanovich Juraboev, both referenced above as LPRs. According to the government, Rakhmatov helped fund Saidakhmetov’s travel to Syria. Refugees Okay, so what about the elephant in room—the refugees? Over the past two years, the FBI has arrested four refugees: two came from countries on Trump’s list. According to documents released by the Justice Department, neither of those arrestees expressed interest in conducting attacks in the United States. To put those numbers in perspective, the U.S. admitted 84,995 refugees in the scal year ending in September 2016, according to the Pew Research Center—12,587 of those refugees came from Syria, while 9,880 came from Iraq. Ramiz Zijad Hodzic and Sedina Unkic Hodzic, entered the U.S. as refugees from Bosnia. We’ve already discussed above their co-conspirators: Nihad Rosic, Mediha Medy Salkicevic, Armin Harcevic and Jasminka Ramic. Both Hodzics took part in the same terrorism- nancing plot. Omar Faraj Saeed Al Hardan entered the U.S. as a refugee from Iraq in 2009 and was granted LPR status in 2011. (I did not count Al Hardan in the LPR number above since he entered the U.S. as a refugee.) In January 2016, Al Hardan was charged with attempting to provide material support to ISIL, procurement of citizenship or naturalization unlawfully and making false statements. According to the Justice Department’s press release, Al Hardan discussed his plans to travel overseas to ght with ISIL with an FBI source. He asked the source to train him in building transmitter/receiver detonators for improvised explosive devices, so once in Syria he could build remote detonators for ISIL. In November 2014, Al Hardan took an oath of loyalty to ISIL and participated in tactical weapons training with an AK-47. Although he aspired to become a “martyr” and proclaimed himself to be, “against America,” Al Hardan never made plans to conduct an attack in the United States but was planning to join ISIL overseas. Aws Mohammed Younis Al-Jayab, a Palestinian born in Iraq, emigrated from Syria to the U.S. as a refugee in October 2012. At the time of the indictment in early 2016, Al-Jayab remained in the country with refugee status. According to the Justice Department, Al-Jayab travelled to Syria and fought with a terrorist organization between November 2013 and January 2014. To sum up, since January 1, 2015, the FBI has arrested two refugees from countries on Trump’s list. A Little Perspective Let’s put these numbers in perspective. In the past two years, the FBI has arrested ve subjects, all American citizens, from Ohio alone. Three of them—Christopher Lee Cornell, Munir Abdulkader, Terrence J. McNeil—actively plotted attacks in the United States. Cornell planned an attack on the U.S. Capitol, while Abdulkader and McNeil targeted police stations and U.S. military personnel closer to home. During the same time period, the FBI arrested nine subjects from Virginia, all U.S. citizens. Since January 2015, the FBI has also arrested more anti-immigrant American citizens plotting violent attacks on Muslims within the U.S. than it has refugees, or former refugees, from any banned country. As we wrote about here, here and here, in October 2016, three white men from Kansas were charged with conspiring to use a weapon of mass destruction. According to the graphic complaint, the anti-Muslim and anti-immigrant men planned to attack a mosque in the area. The men progressed quickly with their plot, amassing rearms and explosives. The targets were people from Somalia, who ironically, would now be covered by Trump’s order. And nally during the two years of arrests I studied, the FBI arrested six U.S. citizens en route to Istanbul, who planned to travel on to Syria to join ISIL. In other words, there are more U.S. citizens arrested while leaving the United States to commit mayhem abroad, transiting through Istanbul alone, than there are refugees trying to sneak into the country to perpetrate violence here. Since we’re already on the topic, let’s talk about Americans traveling to join ISIL. Over the past two years, the FBI has arrested 34 Americans who aspired to leave, attempted to leave or actually left the United States to join a terrorist group overseas. In other words, although two refugees came into the U.S. and were charged with material support, seventeen times that number of U.S. citizens tried to leave the U.S. to conduct attacks and ght overseas. More Americans have snuck into Syria to join ISIL, than ISIL members have snuck into the United States. In September 2015, a congressional report indicated that 250 Americans have gone to Syria and Iraq to ght with ISIL. By comparison, as of December 2015, only 71 individuals in the United States had been charged with ISIL-related activities—the vast majority of whom were also U.S. citizens, according to George Washington University. Trump wants a favorable balance of trade. In the department terrorism, he’s already got a massive trade surplus. Extraditions If you’re tracking the numbers, you might have noticed that I actually haven’t accounted for all of the non-U.S. citizens on our list. That’s because, every year, the FBI seeks extradition of foreign nationals into the United States to face prosecution in U.S. federal courts. That is, to milk the trade analogy, we import terrorists for prosecution. During the time period we’ve focused on, a citizen of Kosovo and a citizen of the United Kingdom, were extradited to the U.S. to face prosecution for material support. Meanwhile, two citizens of Yemen—Saddiq Al-Abbadi and Ali Alvi—were arrested in Saudi Arabia and extradited to the United States. Both members were charged with conspiring to murder nationals abroad and providing material support to al-Qaeda. Both men travelled from Pakistan to Afghanistan in 2008 to conduct attacks against U.S. military personnel. In May 2008, Al-Abbadi led a battle against U.S. forces during which one U.S. Army Ranger was killed. In addition, Nisreen Assad Ibrahim Bahar, a citizen of Iraq and the wife of a deceased ISIL leader, was charged by means of a criminal complaint in February 2016, with conspiracy to provide material support to ISIL, for her alleged role in the death of U.S. hostage Kayla Mueller. According to the Justice Department, Bahar is currently in Iraqi custody and facing prosecution in her home country. Bringing foreign nationals—even from countries on Trump’s list—to the United States to face charges, while not common, is not unheard of. In June 2014, the Justice Department announced that Ahmed Abu Khatallah, a Libyan national who helped to facilitate the September 2012 attacks on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, had been taken into custody and charged in federal district court in the District of Columbia. The Washington Post reported that Khatallah was captured during a joint Special Operations and FBI raid in Benghazi. The previous October, Special Forces in Tripoli took Abu Anas al-Liby in custody, eventually bringing the suspect to stand trial in New York City for his role in the 1998 bombings of the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. The U.S. government actually spends an incredible amount of money and manpower bringing individuals from overseas to stand trial in the United States. These programs make sense, but rely on an incredible amount of cooperation, not only between U.S. government entities, but with foreign partners, throughout the extradition process. Amazingly, there is no explicit provision in the executive order that allows entry to the country even of terrorist suspects the United States wishes to bring here for criminal prosecution. Such people could be brought here, as I read the order, only under a waiver provision that allows the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security to make exceptions to the order: “The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security may, on a case-by-case basis, and when in the national interest, issue visas or other immigration bene ts to nationals of countries for which visas and bene ts are otherwise blocked.” One wonders when the last time was the United States government issued a visa to someone to come to the country to face prosecution. Attacks in the United States As discussed above, over the past two years American citizens have been traveling to Syria in unprecedented numbers. Others are sending money overseas or helping their friends and family to travel. That group includes the two refugees on the list, as well as foreign nationals. But if the goal is really to keep Americans safe, we should take a closer look at who it is that is actually plotting attacks in the United States. We’ve already mentioned several subjects on Trump’s list who expressed a desire to conduct an attack here in the United States: Abdirahman Sheik Mohamud, a naturalized citizen from Somalia and Mohamed Ra k Naji, an LPR and citizen of Yemen, both told friends that they were thinking about conducting an attack at home. However, it may be important to distinguish between individuals who casually tell their friends that, yeah, they’d like to conduct an attack, and those people who take concrete steps to do it—whose overt actions are the basis for their material support charges. Focusing on the later group, of those subjects who planned and took concrete steps to conduct an attack in the United States, only one, Nelash Mohamed Das—the citizen of Bangladesh who was arrested at the house of his target—is not an American citizen. The remaining 26 terrorism subjects who plotted terrorist attacks in the United States are all non-naturalized U.S. citizens. Some like Mohamed Bailor Jalloh, Jonas M. Edmonds, and Munir Abdulkader chose military and law enforcement targets, as alleged by the government. Several others planned attacks in New York City, or tried to emulate the Boston Marathon Bombings use of pressure cookers. This is not to say that travelling overseas to ght for ISIL or providing material support to any terrorist group that targets the United States does not pose a meaningful threat. It does. But if the purpose of the Executive Order is to keep Americans safe by keeping foreigners from certain countries out, it surely bears emphasis that the empirical data indicate that foreign nationals simply aren’t plotting attacks within U.S. borders at the same rate as U.S. citizens. Indeed, the rates aren’t anywhere close to comparable. ^YZS_JQS_^OaY8 X^S]Z]]OC §^OOQ`POA ¦^MS[ZC ¤OMYOSMB VJMS_SVZ? NYJ dQZVZRMd^? YS ¤/¤0 J R_Sb d_S^]OaSYD Y]O_^ObR_]Z= XZ]P ON`JV X`M NO_J`NJ]Q ORB ¤YZS^SaS2 X^S]Z]]O_]O_Y`Z1 ^´804 OR_ ]ZP QYSU]Zb ^]JOd Oa… _YO[^ OR^ §VZZRM^ O_J`NJ]Q Z_ ]ZS]? ¤VZZRMB bJ; N]Ja]J7 _J _YON`_^ ]JOd NYZMO^ J ^S YO^QYSVV3 J]Z=  B 3 ; 1 8 CA / 3 A > < B3;18CA/ 23C/;3A Rethinking the Role of Human Rights in the International Refugee Regime <? ¦ § § ]J< §S]4 ^SaJ2 ¤F ^OXJ9 Safeguarding Our Homeland and Protecting Our Values <? ¦ § § ]J< §NOF YZ^YRZ9 RO9 The Presidential Memorandum and the “Public Charge” Law <? ¦ § § ]J< §O`C ZVVS]`< YSOV: YOVO7 The Revised Refugee EO: Legal and Empirical Arguments for Judicial Deference <? ¦ § § ]J< §YZ< ^OSV`Q]J< ]O_O? Trump’s Revised Refugee and Visa Order: A Quick and Dirty Analysis <? ¦ § § ]J< §YZ< ^O__SF YSXJTYO0 3A/4F/; CA>??DB EXHIBIT 32 3/13/2017 What the Data Tells Us About Immigration and Terrorism What the Data Tells Us About Immigration and Terrorism BY ANDREW LINDSAY February 17, 2017 On January 27, President Donald Trump signed an executive order enacting a 90-day suspension of all visas for nationals of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somali, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. The asserted purpose of the order is to protect the United States from “terrorist attacks by nationals” under the pretext that “numerous foreign-born individuals have been convicted or implicated in terrorism-related crimes since September 11, 2001.” This claim underlies the order’s indefinite bar on Syrian refugee admittance, 120-day bar of other refugees, and the 90-day travel ban affecting nationals from the seven Muslim countries listed above. An earlier version of the order which was leaked to the press stated that “hundreds of foreign-born individuals have been convicted or implicated in terrorism-related crimes since September 11, 2001.” Both the leaked draft and the order suggest that there is a horde of terrorists who are bypassing the screening process employed by U.S. consulates around the world. But as the CATO Institute has demonstrated, Americans face a de minimis risk of death from terrorism at home: 1 in 3.6 million. The false assertion that domestic terrorism is a largely Muslim problem is more a reflection of the President’s misguided belief in Muslim conspiracies and an interconnected web of “global jihad ” than actual empirical evidence. Framing potential terrorism as foreign, undifferentiated, and uniquely Muslim serves no other purpose than to deepen fears of an immigrant “other” in order to increase executive power. The apparent basis for this focus on foreign born terrorists seems to be a 2016 analysis released by Attorney General Jeff Sessions, which investigated a Department of Justice list of 580 terrorism and 1/3 3/13/2017 What the Data Tells Us About Immigration and Terrorism terrorism-related convictions. The analysis concluded that at least 380 convictions were of foreignborn individuals. Earlier that year , the then-Senator decried “the dangerous and costly status quo” associated with investigating “immigrant suspects in the United States” while admitting “680,000 migrants from Muslim countries [into the U.S.] every five years.” Sessions claims that the immigration of people from Muslim-majority countries represents a failure of costly counterterrorism efforts. But a close analysis of the data undermines this conclusion. First, in what seems like an attempt to inflate numbers, Sessions’ analysis lumps together terrorism convictions and cases in which individuals were implicated in terrorism, two very different things. Sessions’ analysis came on the heels of three letters sent to the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security and State demanding “immigration histories of individuals implicated in terrorism since early 2014.” According to Sessions, “implicated ” is a very broad standard that could include any convictions resulting from a terrorism investigation, even those without definitive links to international terrorism. In fact, only 194 of the 380 foreign-born convictions identified by Sessions (51 percent) were prosecuted for terrorism offenses. But this does not mean that 194 people were convicted of terrorist attacks. Rather, the vast majority of these individuals (68 percent) were convicted of “material support” of terrorism, which are cases where money, goods or other resources were provided to someone associated with a U.S. designated terrorist group. This result closely matches findings from a recent Fordham University study of all ISIS-related convictions from May 2014 to June 2016. The study revealed that 70 out of 101 charges (69 percent) were for “material support” of terrorism. Under the material support law, there is no requirement that the assistance provided was intended to, or assisted in any violent act. An egregious example of material support is the case of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), formerly one of the largest Muslim charities in the United States. The five defendants, all leaders in the organization, were convicted of 108 criminal counts, including material support of terrorism, money laundering, and tax fraud. HLF, now defunct, was convicted of providing material support to Hamas, a designated foreign terrorist organization in the Palestinian territories. The prosecution did not assert that “HLF was funding Hamas directly or that its money was used (or was intended to be used) to support suicide bombings or other sorts of violence.” Only that the government maintained that Hamas controlled the local organizations HLF funded thus helping “Hamas win the ‘hearts and minds’ of the Palestinian people.” This claim was undermined by the fact that the U.S. Agency for International Development provided funds to the same organizations for at least three years after the government closed HLF. An attorney for one of the defendants, Nancy Hollander summed the problem with this case best, “the government traced every penny from the Holy Land Foundation directly to charity. No guns, no suicide belts, no explosives. Yet, because this charity went to families in Palestine, it was a crime.” The five defendants were sentenced to a combined total of 180 years in prison. The other 49 percent of convictions – which the Sessions analysis describes as “implicated in terrorism” and the Justice Department called “terrorist-related offenses”—were actually convictions for crimes ranging from immigration fraud to obstruction of justice. It is not possible to verify the Justice Department’s claim that these cases involved “charged violations of a variety of other statutes where the investigation involved an identified link to international terrorism” and may have “connections to international terrorism that are not apparent from the nature of the offenses of conviction themselves.” However, the use of this category was criticized by the DOJ Inspector General as “inaccurately reported by significant margins” in a September 2013 audit . Indeed, as far back as 2003, the Government Accountability Office reported that the “DOJ does not have sufficient management oversight and internal controls in place to ensure the accuracy and reliability in its terrorism-related convictions.” Although the Department was found to have “revised its procedures for gathering, classifying, reporting terrorism-related statistics based on recommendations” from subsequent audits, the DOJ Inspector General maintained in 2013 that “implementation of the revised procedures was not effective to ensure that terrorism-related statistics were reported accurately.” 2/3 3/13/2017 What the Data Tells Us About Immigration and Terrorism Second, at least 75 of the total of 194 terrorism convictions resulted from FBI sting operations. This figure was obtained by cross-referencing a Mother Jones database of terrorism-related sting operations and the Sessions analysis. These convictions may not be indicative of real threats. For years , the FBI has targeted dozens of individuals, and provided them with the inspiration, resources, and tools to carry out domestic terrorist plots or provide material support to terrorist groups. Many of these cases involve people who were not part of any foreign terrorist group and may never have had the interest or capacity to threaten national security without significant FBI encouragement and resources. For example, Laguerre Payen is one of four convicted in a Newburgh, NY sting operation made infamous by an HBO documentary . An FBI informant recruited James Cromite, a low-level drug dealer and offered him $250,000 to recruit three other Muslims and carry out an attack. The informant recruited Payen , a homeless crack addict and paranoid schizophrenic. When told of a trip to Florida as reward, Payen said he could not go because he had no passport. He hardly posed the type of threat on which the government should expend resources. Another example is Patrick Abraham , one of five convicted in a Miami sting operation. An FBI informant targeted a group of poor African-American and Haitian men, offering them $50,000 to join a terror plot. Subsequently, the informant recorded Abraham and the other men pledging allegiance to al-Qaeda. The group, dubbed the Liberty City 7, was not even Muslim, but a sect of the Moorish Science Temple that called itself the “Seas of David .” According to Mother Jones , the men were financially strapped misfits who operated out of a warehouse, where they had no weapons save a ceremonial sword. They were clearly misguided in seeking support from a purported member of a terrorist group but not, as the government asserts, domestic al-Qaeda operatives intent on, much less capable of, committing harm to the United States. Third, the Justice Department list of foreign born terrorism convictions covers a range of disparate foreign terrorist organizations (FTO's) with very different political aims. These FTO’s pose varying degrees of risk to US national security. For instance, some of convictions involved groups such as the Cambodian Freedom Fighters (Cambodia), the Front for the Liberation of the Enclave of Cabinda (Angola), and the Tamil Tigers or the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (Sri Lanka), militant political organizations involved in violent conflicts in their respective nations, but pose no known domestic threat. The executive order’s attempt to cast America’s terrorist threats as uniquely Muslim, interconnected and undifferentiated belies the immense heterogeneity of terrorist organizations from outside the country. Empirical evidence demonstrates that Americans face more concrete threats from “homegrown extremism ” and even then, in a given year an individual is more than twice as likely to be killed by a far right extremist as opposed to someone claiming ties to Islam. There is no question that terrorism is a serious national security issue but the threat is complicated. Relying on raw and undifferentiated data serves to obfuscate rather than assist the development of an effective response. The claim that foreign-born individuals have a greater propensity to commit terrorism, and that limiting foreign-born individuals travel into the United States on this basis will have a positive impact on national security, is another example of an “alternative fact ” that should have no place in the day to policy operations of the state. (Image: ) 3/3 EXHIBIT 33 March 10, 2017 The Honorable Donald J. Trump The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20050 Dear Mr. President, We have worked for years, under both Democratic and Republican administrations, to protect America’s national security. We are deeply concerned that the March 6, 2017 executive order halting refugee resettlement and suspending visa issuance and travel from six Muslim-majority countries will, like the prior version, weaken U.S. national security and undermine U.S. global leadership. The United States faces serious threats from terrorist networks and must take all prudent and effective steps to combat them, including the appropriate vetting of travelers to the United States. But the recent order suffers from the same core substantive defects as the previous version. The revised executive order will jeopardize our relationships with allies and partners on whom we rely for vital counterterrorism cooperation and information-sharing. To Muslims— including those victimized by or fighting against ISIS—it will send a message that reinforces the propaganda of ISIS and other extremist groups, that falsely claim the United States is at war with Islam. Welcoming Muslim refugees and travelers, by contrast, exposes the lies of terrorists and counters their warped vision. We must remain vigilant to keep our nation safe from terrorists, whether foreign or homegrown. At the same time, we must remain true to our ideals. These are not mutually exclusive goals. In fact, resettlement initiatives advance U.S. national security interests by protecting the stability of U.S. allies and partners struggling to host large numbers of refugees. Following the 9/11 attacks, the United States developed a rigorous system of security vetting for travelers to our homeland, leveraging the full capabilities of the intelligence and law enforcement communities. Since then, the U.S. has added enhanced vetting procedures for travelers and has revised them continuously. Our government applies this process to travelers not once, but multiple times. Refugees are vetted more intensively than any other category of traveler. They are screened by national intelligence agencies and INTERPOL, their fingerprints and other biometric data are checked against terrorist and criminal databases, and they are interviewed several times. These processes undergo review on an ongoing basis to ensure that the most updated and rigorous measures are applied, and any additional enhancements can be added without halting refugee resettlement or banning people from certain countries. We welcome the removal of Iraq from the 90-day travel ban, but we remain concerned that the Iraqis who risked their lives to work with the U.S. military, U.S. government and other U.S. organizations will be left in harm’s way for even longer due to the order’s 120-day suspension of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program and overall reduction in refugee admissions. These individuals were given priority access to U.S. resettlement under the Refugee Crisis in Iraq Act, but their resettlement, like that of many Page 1 of 8 other vetted refugees, will now likely be delayed as security clearances and other approvals expire, adding many more months onto their processing. The United States has a moral obligation to protect these allies. Bans like those included in this order are harmful to U.S. national security and beneath the dignity of our great nation. Further, the order’s drastic reduction in the number of refugees to be resettled in this fiscal year after the 120-day moratorium weakens this country’s ability to provide global leadership and jeopardizes our national security interests by failing to support the stability of our allies that are struggling to host large numbers of refugees. America’s much-admired compassion and openness are sources not of weakness but strength. These qualities accord with the ideals on which our nation was founded, and on which our greatness rests. The revised executive order is damaging to the strategic and national security interests of the United States. We urge that, in moving forward, the United States: ensure any vetting enhancements are necessary, non-discriminatory and otherwise consistent with the U.S. Constitution; implement any necessary enhancements without a counterproductive ban or suspension on entry of nationals of particular countries or religions; and immediately restart a strong non-discriminatory refugee resettlement initiative, which will in turn advance U.S. global leadership and national security interests. We firmly believe that these steps will strengthen U.S. national security and appreciate your attention to the concerns we raise in this letter. Sincerely, (names in alphabetical order) Wally Adeyemo Former Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor for International Economics Christopher Le Mon Former Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Dr. Madeleine K. Albright Former Secretary of State Marcel Lettre Former Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Steven L. Arnold Lieutenant General U.S. Army (Ret.) George Little Former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs Alyssa Ayres Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia Albert J. Madora Major General U.S. Army (Ret.) Jeremy Bash Former Chief of Staff, Department of Defense Kelly Magsamen Former Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Asian and Pacific Security Affairs Page 2 of 8 Rand Beers Former Acting Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Thomas Malinowski Former Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor Daniel Benjamin Former Coordinator for Counterterrorism, Department of State Robert Malley Former Special Assistant to the President and White House Coordinator for the Middle East, North Africa, and the Persian Gulf Region Rob Berschinski Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor Brian McKeon Former Acting Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Nisha Biswal Former Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Pete McCloskey, Jr. U.S. Congressman, 1967-1983 11th, 17th, and 12th Congressional Districts of CA Jarrett Blanc Former Deputy Special Representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan John McLaughlin Former Deputy Director and Acting Director of Central Intelligence Agency Charles Blanchard Former General Counsel U.S. Air Force Philip McNamara Former Assistant Secretary for Partnerships and Engagement, Department of Homeland Security Antony Blinken Former Deputy Secretary of State Bernadette Meehan Former Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Max Boot Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow in National Security Studies Council on Foreign Relations Sarah Mendelson Former Ambassador to the Economic and Social Council, United Nations David M. Brahms Brigadier General U.S. Marine Corps (Ret.) James Miller Former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Michael Breen Retired United States Army Officer Lisa Monaco Former Assistant to President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and Deputy National Security Advisor Page 3 of 8 Rosa Brooks Former Counselor to Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Alberto Mora Former General Counsel, Department of the Navy Ambassador (ret.) Nicholas Burns Former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, Ambassador to NATO and to Greece Janet Napolitano Former Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security Ambassador William J. Burns Former Deputy Secretary of State William L. Nash Major General U.S. Army (Ret.) Luis C.deBaca Former Ambassador at Large to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons Thomas Nides Former Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Michael Carpenter Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Russia, Ukraine, Eurasia Michael P. Noonan U.S. Army Veteran Director of Research, Foreign Policy Research Institute Derek Chollet Former Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Suzanne Nossel Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Organizations Affairs Richard Clarke Former National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection and Counterterrorism for the U.S. James C. O’Brien Former Special Envoy for Hostage Recovery David Cohen Former Deputy Director, Central Intelligence Agency Matthew Olsen Former Director of the National Counterterrorism Center Bathsheba Crocker Former Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs Rick Olson Former Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Ryan C. Crocker Former U.S. Ambassador to Lebanon, Kuwait, Syria, Pakistan, Iraq, and Afghanistan Charles Otstott Lieutenant General U.S. Army (Ret.) James P. Cullen Brigadier General U.S. Army (Ret.) Eric Pelofsky Former Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for North Africa and Yemen Page 4 of 8 Mary DeRosa Former Deputy Counsel to the President for National Security Affairs Gale Pollock Major General U.S. Army (Ret.) Daniel Drezner Professor Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy Amy Pope Former Deputy Homeland Security Advisor and Deputy Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Paul D. Eaton Major General U.S. Army (Ret.) Michael Posner Former Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor Mari K. Eder Major General U.S. Army (Ret.) Samantha Power Former United States Ambassador to the United Nations Brian Egan Former Legal Adviser U.S. State Department Jeffrey Prescott Former Senior Director for Iran, Iraq, Syria, and the Gulf States, National Security Council Evelyn Farkas Former Executive Director, Commission on the Prevention of WMD Proliferation and Terrorism Ned Price Former Special Assistant to the President and National Security Council Spokesperson Daniel Feldman Former Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Dafna Rand Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor Steve Feldstein Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor William D. Razz Waff Major General U.S. Army (Ret.) Jose W. Fernandez Former Assistant Secretary of State for Economic, Energy, and Business Affairs Susan Rice Former National Security Advisor to the President of the U.S. Jonathan Finer Former Director of Policy Planning, Department of State Bill Richardson Former Governor of New Mexico and United States Ambassador to the United Nations Michele Flournoy Former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy Leon Rodriguez Former Director, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Page 5 of 8 Eugene Fox Major General U.S. Army (Ret.) Laura Rosenberger Former Chief of Staff to the Deputy Secretary of State Danielle Garbe Former Director for Lebanon and Jordan, National Security Council Tommy Ross Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Security Cooperation Dennis P. Geoghan Brigadier General U.S. Army (Ret.) Murray G. Sagsveen Brigadier General U.S. Army (Ret.) Suzy George Former Deputy Assistant to the President, Chief of Staff and Executive Secretary, National Security Council Eric Schwartz Former Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, and Migration F. Stephen Glass Rear Admiral, JAGC U.S. Navy (Ret.) Norman R. Seip Lieutenant General U.S. Air Force (Ret.) Rachel Goldbrenner Former Senior Policy Advisor to the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Wendy Sherman Former Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Mary Beth Goodman Former Special Assistant to the President for Development and Democracy Vikram Singh Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for South and Southeast Asia Philip Gordon Former Special Assistant to the President and White House Coordinator for the Middle East, North Africa, and the Persian Gulf Region Elissa Slotkin Former Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs Wilton Scott Gorske Major General U.S. Army (Ret.) Jeff Smith Former General Counsel, Central Intelligence Agency Donald J. Guter Rear Admiral, JACG U.S. Navy (Ret.) Julianne “Julie” Smith Former Deputy National Security Advisor to the Vice President of the United States Ziad Haider Former Special Representative for Commercial and Business Affairs, U.S. Department of State Tara Sonenshine Former Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs Page 6 of 8 Irv Halter Major General U.S. Air Force (Ret.) Matthew Spence Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Middle East Policy Lee H. Hamilton U.S. Congressman, 1965-1999 9th Congressional District of IN James Steinberg Former Deputy Secretary of State Keith Harper Former Ambassador to the United Nations Human Rights Council Nik Steinberg Former Counselor to the U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations Luke Hartig Former Senior Director for Counterterrorism National Security Council Seth M.M. Stodder Former Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for Border, Immigration & Trade Policy Caitlin Hayden Former National Security Council Spokesperson Jake Sullivan Former National Security Advisor to the Vice President of the U.S. Leif H. Hendrickson Brigadier General U.S. Marine Corps (Ret.) Timothy S. Sullivan Rear Admiral U.S. Coast Guard (Ret.) Heather Higginbottom Former Deputy Secretary of State for Management and Resources Antonio M. Taguba Major General U.S. Army (Ret.) John D. Hutson Rear Admiral, JACG U.S. Navy (Ret.) Jim Townsend Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for European and NATO Policy David. R. Irvine Brigadier General U.S. Army (Ret.) Michael G. Vickers Former Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence John H. Johns Brigadier General U.S. Army (Ret.) David Wade Former Chief of Staff, Department of State Colin Kahl Former National Security Advisor to the Vice President of the United States William Wechsler Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Counterterrorism and Special Operations Page 7 of 8 Gil Kerlikowske Former Commissioner, United States Customs and Border Protection Moira Whelan Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs John Kerry Former Secretary of State Catherine Wiesner Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration Jeremy Konyndyk Former Director, Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance, USAID Douglas Wilson Former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs Charles Kupchan Former Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Tamara Cofman Wittes Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Mark P. Lagon Former U.S. Ambassador-at-Large to Combat Trafficking in Persons Jon Brook Wolfsthal Former Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs Jonathan Lee Former Deputy Chief of Staff, Department of Homeland Security Lee Wolosky Former Special Envoy for Guantanamo Closure Michael R. Lehnert Major General U.S. Marine Corps (Ret.) Tom Wyler Former Counselor to the Secretary of Commerce and Senior Advisor for International Economics Paul N. Lekas Former Deputy General Counsel for Legal Counsel, Department of Defense Stephen N. Xenakis Brigadier General U.S. Army (Ret.) CC: The Honorable Rex W. Tillerson, Secretary of State The Honorable James N. Mattis, Secretary of Defense The Honorable Jefferson B. Sessions, Attorney General of the United States The Honorable John F. Kelly, Secretary of Homeland Security The Honorable Michael P. Dempsey, Acting Director of National Intelligence Page 8 of 8 EXHIBIT 34 3/13/2017 Trump delays new travel ban after well-reviewed speech - Trump delays new travel ban after well-reviewed speech By Laura Jarrett, Ariane de Vogue and Jeremy Diamond, CNN  Updated 6:01 AM ET, Wed March 1, 2017 Immigration violations: The one thing to know 01:15 Story highlights The new travel ban will exclude legal permanent residents and existing visa holders Two sources also expect that the President will formally revoke the previous executive order ban announcement. Washington (CNN) — President Donald Trump has delayed plans to sign a reworked travel ban in the wake of positive reaction to his first address to Congress, a senior administration o cial told CNN. The decision came late Tuesday night as positive reviews flooded in for Trump's speech, which struck a largely optimistic and unifying tone. Signing the executive order Wednesday, as originally indicated by the White House, would have undercut the favorable coverage. The o cial didn't deny the positive reception was part of the administration's calculus in pushing back the travel "We want the (executive order) to have its own 'moment,'" the o cial said. The sudden change of plans came as Trump and his top advisers returned to the White House after his address to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday night. 1/3 3/13/2017 Trump delays new travel ban after well-reviewed speech - Trump's original executive order, signed a week after he took o ce, banned citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the US and temporarily suspended the entry of all refugees. A federal court issued a temporary stay that halted implementation of the travel ban earlier this month, a decision that was later upheld by a federal appeals court. The new travel ban will exclude legal permanent residents and existing visa holders from the ban entirely, sources familiar with the plans told CNN earlier Tuesday. While sources caution that the document has not yet been finalized and is still subject to change, there will be major changes: · The new executive order will make clear that legal permanent residents (otherwise known as green card holders) are excluded from any travel ban. · Those with validly issued visas will also be exempt from the ban. · The new order is expected to revise or exclude language prioritizing the refugee claims of certain religious minorities. Speaking in Munich, Germany, earlier this month, Department of Homeland Secretary John Kelly promised a "phased-in" approach to minimize disruption this time around. But what remains to be seen are the other key aspects of the new executive order, especially in terms of refugees, including: · What happens to the suspension of the refugee program for 120 days? · Will Syrian nationals still be barred indefinitely? · Will the cap on the number of refugees change? The first version of the executive order caps it at 50,000 for fiscal year 2017. Two sources also expect that the President will formally revoke the earlier executive order, despite repeated statements from White House press secretary Sean Spicer that the two orders would co-exist on a "dual track." The administration could potentially argue that the existing challenges to the original executive order are moot, but the challengers tell CNN the legal battles will likely continue even after the new order is signed. "Exempting lawful permanent residents and current visa holders will not cure the core legal problem -- that the ban was motivated by religious discrimination, as evidenced by the President's repeated statements calling for a Muslim ban," ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt explained. "That discriminatory taint cannot be removed simply by eliminating a few words or clever tinkering by lawyers." 2/3 3/13/2017 Trump delays new travel ban after well-reviewed speech - New Utah bigamy law passes Senate after 'Sister Wives' suit Glenn Greenwald: CIA and FBI probably intervened in election 'SNL' is right: Ivanka is complicit CBO's cost estimate for American Health Care Act (full text) 3/3 EXHIBIT 35 2/16/2017 Families hoping to make the U.S. their home scramble to rearrange their lives - LA Times Families hoping to make the U.S. their home scramble to rearrange their lives Syrians evacuated from the embattled city of Aleppo during a cease-fire arrive Dec. 19 at a refugee camp near Idlib. (Associated Press) By Shashank Bengali, Nabih Bulos and Ramin Mostaghim JANUARY 27, 2017, 4:15 PM H | REPORTING FROM TEHRAN ours of interviews, months of waiting: they were a small price to pay for Syrians, Iranians and others hoping the U.S. would be their new home. President Trump appeared to end those hopes Friday with an executive order that was expected to bar refugees from entering the United States, including citizens of several Muslim-majority nations. For Syrians attempting to flee the nearly six-year-old civil war in their country, Trump’s policy, based on a draft of the order, would indefinitely suspend their chances of finding refuge in the U.S., a country that many blame for failing to stop the conflict. For citizens of countries including Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen — whose visa applications would be blocked until a new “extreme vetting” procedure is put in place — the policy would separate families, Presidents Day Sale! Get 90% off. Ends 2/22. keep parents from attending their children’s weddings and perhaps make it tougher for green-card holders to SAVE NOW › come home to the U.S. 1/4 2/16/2017 Families hoping to make the U.S. their home scramble to rearrange their lives - LA Times “Why is Trump victimizing Iranians as people?” asked a 45-year-old engineer in Tehran, who asked that his name be withheld because he did not want to run afoul of U.S. authorities. Even before Trump signed the executive order Friday afternoon, families in the affected countries reacted to reports about a draft of the policy obtained by the Los Angeles Times and other news organizations. The Iranian engineer and his wife had traveled to Cyprus to apply for asylum in the U.S., because Iran and the U.S. have not had diplomatic relations since 1979. The couple’s 18-year-old daughter is autistic, he said, and refuses to wear a headscarf, which has gotten her arrested by Iran’s moral police. “The education and medical care of an autistic child is breaking me financially,” he said. “I hoped that in America we could afford to get her better care and schooling.” Syrians who were in the middle of a lengthy, difficult process to apply for asylum in the U.S. suddenly found their petitions stuck in limbo, with no word as to whether their scheduled interviews would take place. Abdul Jabbar Yousef, a 33-year old native of Homs, Syria, who is applying for asylum in the U.S., had gone through two interviews over the past year but was unsure if his third interview, scheduled for two weeks from now, was still on. The father of three left Homs in late 2012 and settled in Jordan, before migration officials contacted him and asked if he wanted to go to the U.S. This week he called the International Organization for Migration, which processes asylum cases, but officers there said they had heard nothing. “We asked if they could switch our case to another country, and they said it was unlikely,” Yousef said. For Abdul Salam Hussein, 21, going to America meant a chance to complete his studies. His family had applied for asylum in the U.S. two years ago, after they fled the northern Syrian city of Aleppo in early 2014. His parents, along with most of his younger brothers and sisters, had already been granted asylum, but Hussein was forced to apply separately when he turned 21. He hoped to become a journalist and prepared for the TOEFL, an English proficiency test foreign students must take to apply for U.S. universities. He had also picked up some Turkish and German living in the city of Bursa, roughly 60 miles south of Istanbul. “My older brother was a geography teacher in Syria, but now he’s working in a garment factory. … It’s not right. That’s why we wanted to go to America,” he said in a phone interview this week. With prospects of getting refuge in America dimming, Hussein wondered whether he should have risked his life to join the throngs of Syrians who have fled the country by sea. Presidents Day Sale! SAVE NOW › “We’ve 90% off.two years if this happens,” he said. “I could have gone to Europe in the boat. I have friends of Get wasted Ends 2/22. mine who applied to Canada, and they are there now. I’m still in Turkey.” 2/4 2/16/2017 Families hoping to make the U.S. their home scramble to rearrange their lives - LA Times Yet he remained sanguine. “We learned from the war not to regret anything,” he said. “What can I do? Sit down and cry? If they don’t [let me into the U.S.] then I’ll try somewhere else.” Jamal Abdi, policy director for the National Iranian American Council, an advocacy group based in Washington, said the order had been generating insecurity and uncertainty. “We’re already inundated with calls and emails from people about travel plans they’re putting on hold, spouses and family members who are currently traveling and not able to come back to the U.S., a large Iranian student population who are at international conferences and potentially stuck in limbo,” Abdi said. The language in the executive order was so broad, Abdi said, that it was not immediately clear whether greencard holders — who have undergone strict vetting to become permanent U.S. residents — would be allowed to come back to the United States if they were currently overseas. Simindokht Shirvani, a green-card holder from Iran who lives in Southern California, has been with her pregnant daughter in Iran for the past month and is unsure whether she will be allowed to return to the U.S. Shirvani, a member of the Bahai religious minority that has complained of widespread discrimination in Iran, said she was shocked at the news. She hoped Trump’s policy would make an exception for her faith, as reports suggested that “religious minorities” in the majority-Muslim countries would be exempted from the ban. “But I am worried about my fellow countrymen and women who are Muslims and may not be admitted to U.S. soil even with a green card,” said Shirvani, a 65-year-old widow. “It is not fair.” Hadi Kargar, a retired Iranian education ministry employee in Tehran, and his wife were hoping in February to visit their daughter in Boston, where she is earning a master’s degree focusing on human rights. Two years ago they obtained a U.S. visa from the U.S. consulate in Dubai. They have an appointment there scheduled for next week, but after hearing reports that U.S. authorities have suspended visa interviews for Iranians, they have no idea whether to spend the more than $1,000 it will cost to get to Dubai. “We do not know what the answer of the U.S. will be — it is less than 10 days from now,” said Kargar, 60. “Hearing the news my wife got so worried that she is sick now. We don’t want to migrate to America — we just want to see our daughter.” Foreign students in the U.S. were anticipating being separated from loved ones. At a pro-immigrant demonstration in New York this week, Saeed Vasebi, a 28-year-old doctoral student from northwestern Iran, said he was unsure whether he could return home this summer to visit his family and Presidents Day Sale! girlfriend and still be2/22. Get 90% off. Ends allowed to come back and complete his degree in renewable energy. SAVE NOW › 3/4 2/16/2017 Families hoping to make the U.S. their home scramble to rearrange their lives - LA Times “If I leave this country, I cannot get back and I cannot finish my PhD,” said Vasebi, who held a placard that read, “We are students, not terrorists.” “I don’t know that I can ask my girlfriend to wait four more years for me. We were planning to get married. I can apply for a new visa in Iran. I can ask her to apply for a visa. But it is not a sure thing.” Some institutions were already taking action before Trump signed the order. At a major teaching hospital in Ohio, one official said he had sent instructions to administrators telling them to cancel offers of residency to medical students from some countries. “We are literally going to look at ‘Country of origin’ and remove the applicant based on [that],” said the official, who did not want to be named criticizing the policy. “Can’t get more racist than that.” Special correspondents Mostaghim reported from Tehran and Bulos from Amman, Jordan, and staff writer Bengali from Mumbai, India. Staff writer Barbara Demick in New York contributed to this report. Follow @SBengali on Twitter for more news from South Asia Copyright © 2017, Los Angeles Times This article is related to: Middle East, Iran, Syria, Africa, Turkey Presidents Day Sale! Get 90% off. Ends 2/22. SAVE NOW › 4/4 EXHIBIT 36 2/16/2017 Trump’s Muslim ban is tearing apart families Adrienne Mahsa Varkiani Follow Associate Editor @ThinkProgress. World News and all things freelance. Send me your pitches: avarkiani@am… Jan 30 · 6 min read 1/7 2/16/2017 Trump’s Muslim ban is tearing apart families 2/7 2/16/2017 Trump’s Muslim ban is tearing apart families 3/7 2/16/2017 Trump’s Muslim ban is tearing apart families 4/7 2/16/2017 Trump’s Muslim ban is tearing apart families 5/7 EXHIBIT 37 2/16/2017 Children and Refugees Who Planned Medical Care in the US Stuck After Trump Executive Order - Health News - ABC News Radio Tuesday S E ARCH Jan312017 → Children and Refugees Who Planned Medical Care in the US Stuck After Trump Executive Order Comments Off Share Article Tweets by @ABCNewsRadio ABC News R… @ABCNews… Jayne Fleming/Reed Smith(NEW Boston University students catch alleged art gallery thief after Super Bowl YORK) -- Refugees and children in need of medical treatment are among the thousands affected after Donald Trump issued an executive order to largely ban travelers from seven majority Muslim nations. In Jordan, at least 20 refugees from Syria and Iraq with serious medical conditions are waiting to see if they will be allowed in the country, 1m according to their lawyer Jayne Fleming and the Center for Victims of Torture. Mohammed, 6, is currently undergoing cancer treatment for Ewing sarcoma according to his father, Jihad, and Fleming. The family fled to Jordan from Syria in 2014, after a missile hit their home, Jihad told ABC News through a translator. ABC News R… @ABCNews… President Trump says he has asked the Justice Department to investigate leaks Fleming is a pro bono lawyer and head of the human rights team for law firm Reed Smith. The people she currently represents from the affected nations, which she said includes an Iraqi man with hemophilia who has gone untreated for two years and a Syrian family with two nearly-blind children in need of eye surgery, were "in the pipeline" for resettlement in 35m the U.S. Embed View on Twitter She had been hoping to have the Syrian family, identified by their first names for safety reasons, medically evacuated to the U.S. so that Mohammed could get better treatment and the family would no longer have to worry about how to pay for it. Jihad has sold his furniture and raised money online to pay for surgery and chemotherapy for his son; he said he had to borrow furniture from a friend. When the executive order indefinitely barring Syrian refugees from entering the U.S. was announced, Jihad said the family felt "very bad." "That was a shock," he told ABC News through a translator. "Even Mohammad was talking about his desire to go to the U.S." After Mohammed's cancer diagnosis, the doctors advised the family to keep the boy out of school, since chemotherapy would weaken his immune system. The family had hoped further treatment would help. "Mohammad is very smart and he was hoping to finish his studies and go to school." Another Syrian father told ABC News that he felt he was running out of time before two of his children could go completely blind. Copyright © 2016, ABC Radio. All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Your California Privacy Rights | Basheer, who used to work as a mathematics professor in Syria, has five Children's Online Privacy Policy children. Two of his children, Hamzah, 14, and Jinan, 10, are both losing External links are provided for reference purposes. ABC News is their sight, he said. He said Hamzah retains only two percent of his not responsible for the content of external Internet sites. vision in one of his eyes. Website powered by Squarespace 1/2 2/16/2017 Children and Refugees Who Planned Medical Care in the US Stuck After Trump Executive Order - Health News - ABC News Radio "The medical treatment is very limited and there aren't many organizations that supports the treatment," Basheer said. While Basheer was able to get his children in a school for the blind, he is anxious to get to the U.S. because it is a "democratic country." He said his son could go fully blind if his condition remains untreated. "Hamzi, in particular, he won a robot competition and a championship and was invited to speak in competitions abroad but he couldn't join because of the financial situation," Basheer said. Another Syrian child, a 17-year-old named Mustafa, lost part of his jaw and facial bone in a mortar attack on his home when he was just 13, according to the Palestine Children's Relief Fund. The Syrian teen lives in Damascus, but Palestine Children's Relief Fund said they were able to help fund his travel to the U.S. in 2014, where doctors at the Shriner's Hospital in Galveston, Texas performed reconstructive surgery. Though the surgery helped him regain some sense of normalcy, he needs further procedures to fully recover, according to officials at the Palestine Children's Relief Fund. The nonprofit organization helps "arrange medical care all over the world for sick and injured children from the Middle East who cannot be adequately treated in their homeland." But the plan to bring Mustafa back for further procedures in April has been put on hold as officials try to determine if he will be barred from entering the U.S., according to the organization's president, Steve Sosebee. "His speech, his breathing and his eating are all impacted by the terrible injury that he somehow survived," Sosebee told ABC News. "Further delay means further suffering for a boy who already has suffered enough." Sosebee said the indefinite hold has put additional strain on Mustafa's case because he's near the usual age limit to receive free care from Shriner's hospital and it's not clear if it will remain available should he turn 18 before he is allowed to return to the U.S. President Trump's executive order, which he said is aimed at protecting the nation from terrorists, suspends for 90 days immigration to the U.S. from seven countries -- Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, Iraq, Iran and Libya. It also suspends for 120 days the entry of refugees into the U.S. and indefinitely bans Syrian refugees from coming into the country. Though the executive order does not appear to include an exception for those in need of medical treatment, on Tuesday the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Acting Commissioner Kevin McAleenan said waivers would be considered for refugees who were "ready to travel" and who would be put through "undue hardship." Copyright © 2017, ABC Radio. All rights reserved. Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 5:21PM by Kelly Terez Permalink 2/2 EXHIBIT 38 2/16/2017 Trump’s Travel Ban, Aimed at Terrorists, Has Blocked Doctors - The New York Times HEALTH Trump’s Travel Ban, Aimed at Terrorists, Has Blocked Doctors By DONALD G. McNEIL Jr. FEB. 6, 2017 The Trump administration has mounted a vigorous defense of its ban on travel from seven majority-Muslim nations, saying it is necessary to prevent terrorists from entering the United States. But the ban, now blocked by a federal judge, also ensnared travelers important to the well-being of many Americans: doctors. Foreign-born physicians have become crucial to the delivery of medical care in the United States. They work in small towns where there are no other doctors, in poor urban neighborhoods and in Veterans Affairs hospitals. Forty-two percent of office visits in rural America are with foreign-born physicians, according to the American Academy of Family Physicians. Foreign-born physicians “are the doctors in small towns in Maine and Iowa,” said Dr. Patricia F. Walker, the associate director of the University of Minnesota’s Global Health Pathway, which helps refugee doctors practice in the United States. “They go to the places where graduates of Harvard Medical School don’t want to go,” she said. Across the United States, more than 15,000 doctors are from the seven Muslimmajority countries covered by the travel ban, according to The Medicus Firm, a firm 1/5 2/16/2017 Trump’s Travel Ban, Aimed at Terrorists, Has Blocked Doctors - The New York Times that recruits doctors for hard-to-fill jobs. That includes almost 9,000 from Iran, almost 3,500 from Syria and more than 1,500 from Iraq. Dr. Hooman Parsi, an oncologist so talented that he has an O-1 visa granted to individuals with “extraordinary ability or achievement,” was to start seeing patients on Wednesday in San Bernardino, Calif. A federal judge in Seattle lifted the administration’s travel ban on Friday, and a federal appeals court has declined to restore it. Yet Dr. Parsi is still stuck in Iran, waiting for a delayed visa amid the confusion while his American employer fumes. “We need him desperately,” said Dr. Richy Agajanian, the managing partner of the Oncology Institute of Hope and Innovation, which had just hired him. “We had an office completely constructed — we spent three months on it, and it was supposed to open Feb. 1. Now we can’t open it. This is really sad and frustrating.” The 30-doctor practice does a lot of work in the Inland Empire, in San Bernardino and Riverside Counties, Dr. Agajanian noted. “It’s very sparse in doctors out there — many miles between oncologists,” he said. “The patients he would be seeing have to travel another 25 miles now. Our doctors are already overworked, and now they’ll have to be on call more often.” The United States has a persistent doctor shortage, even though 31 new medical schools have opened since 2002 and many existing ones have increased class sizes, according to Merritt Hawkins, a Dallas-based medical recruiting firm. It also noted that there are 22 percent more residencies available each year than there are American graduates to take them. Graduates of foreign medical schools now fill that gap; the largest number come from India, followed by Pakistan, China, the Philippines, Iran and Israel. (Iran is on Mr. Trump’s exclusion list; Pakistan, a Muslim-majority country with a history of internal and external terror attacks, is not.) Many foreign graduates have J-1 visas, which give them about three years to complete their residencies. “They must pass licensing exams and they must do a 2/5 2/16/2017 Trump’s Travel Ban, Aimed at Terrorists, Has Blocked Doctors - The New York Times residency to practice here, even if they’re superstars where they come from,” said Phillip Miller, a Merritt Hawkins spokesman. Foreign-born graduates have often worked at world-class institutions and have published academic papers, so they have higher average scores than American graduates on the medical knowledge portions of the licensing examinations, according to Merritt Hawkins research — though most initially score lower on the clinical skills portions, which include English and communication skills. “I had to work my butt off to get here,” said Dr. Abdelghani el Rafei, a first-year resident at the University of Minnesota. “They only take the top graduates from schools in countries like mine.” Such foreign-born graduates must return home when their visas expire, but they can get extensions if they agree to work in an area that the Department of Health and Human Services considers “medically underserved,” which is roughly defined as having less than one primary care doctor for every 3,000 people. Those who practice in an underserved area for several years can apply for green cards. “After that, they can practice anywhere, but at least you’ve had three or four years of a physician in your town, and that’s pretty significant,” Mr. Miller said. Citing figures from the Iowa Board of Medicine, The Des Moines Register reported last week that 172 doctors practicing in Iowa were from the seven countries subject to Mr. Trump’s travel ban, and that 23 percent of the state’s 13,000 practicing doctors were born outside the United States. Andrea Clement, a spokeswoman for Medicus, said that 76 percent of the foreign doctors it placed last year had gone to areas with fewer than 25,000 people or to small to medium-size cities of 25,000 to 500,000. It placed more foreign doctors in Wisconsin than in any other state, she said, followed by California, Texas, Maryland, Oregon, Missouri, Tennessee, Ohio and Arizona. Some urban areas are medically underserved, too. While Manhattan’s Upper East Side has five times the number of doctors it needs to be adequately served 3/5 2/16/2017 Trump’s Travel Ban, Aimed at Terrorists, Ha