free to take whatever actions they want. chris: just to press this, has anyny other country joined s in threatening tariffs if china doesn t clean up its act? i can t answer that. i don t even want to answer that. all i m saying is my trade coalition of the willing will put the whole world behind the united states actions against china. this is going to have a big effect on china. china does not want to lose face. china does not want to be regarded as the enemy in trade for the entire world. the wto is one of the processes. ambassador lighthouse has that in his releases. we ll work there. we ll work directly with the chinese. president trump is a great negligence other yateser. but tariffs negotiator but tariffs may have to be part of this discussion and argument. chris: i want to pick up on that. we go back a ways. ever since i first met you in
election of an incumbent president on average sees 40 seats swing in the opposite direction. that s not going to happen on its own. democrats are not going to win that back simply by being against president trump. we need to be for, and as i mentioned before, our economic policies, and our better deal will become very clear to the american people. chris: in more than a third of house republican or housew races, republicans running for those seats have run ads that go after nancy pelosi. here s an example from a recent special election in pennsylvania, 18. conor lamb is a pelosi liberal. his values aren t our values. chris: that democrat, conor lamb one, one of the ways he won was he promised not to support nancy pelosi if democrats take the house and she s up for speaker again. is nancy pelosi a liability for democrats in this campaign? i think it s more reflective of the fact republicans are bankrupt on ideas. they don t have anything else to
order to send a second signal that just because a year has passed doesn t mean can engage in this behavior again. chris: your reaction to what appears it s not confirmed yet what appears to be an attack and if so, what action president trump is going to need to take? the president is the president today and i think thaa the american people and the congress actually have to be engaged in a discussion about syria, that is a moral discussion when it comes to the use, if this is true, of poison gas. this is a human rights crisis and the president has an obligation to act. that said, over this last year and-a-half our policy actually allowed assad with russia s help to consolidate his power and that leaves open the door to dot these kind to engage in these kind of atrocities because we think we ve rolled back the islamic state. in fact what we ve done is we actually created an environment where it goes underground. it s not consolidating land.
thought it was missing in terms of protections for american workers, which would have had a direct impact on our relationship, our trade relationship witht china. and i think that what is happening now is it s an imposition of tariffs that s throwing the markets around. i care about that for american workers and for retirements and for harmers. chris: what should we do? we should have a trade policy for the region that allows us with our neighbors and our allies to stack up against china. chris: as michael pointed out, how does it work? there was a ruling, i read this weekend, that the wto made about certain chinese trade practices, they have spent six years and are still mulling how to comply. i m not sure the wto is necessarily the framework. it s one avenue. the real framework is european
that number tripled last month, march of 2018, to more than 50,000. don t wees need to stop the sur? i think what we need is comprehensive immigrationt reform. we ve been talking about this for decades. we just haven t seen it happen, not since 1986. what i think is interesting, go back to 1986, when we saw comprehensive immigration reform comprehensive tax redone ino a buy par bipartisan way. here we have a partisan approach to this. the president talks about building a wall, that mexico is going to pay for it. he s putting troops at the border, a provocative move. at the same time, it s not solving the problem. chris: you say it s a provocative move. barack obama put 1800 troops at the border. it was to some degree. provocative. with the language that our president has used towards immigrants in the nation, it s really abhorent to me. this president, making this move