so there is a policy agreement on major, major points here that can t be ignored. right. look at mr. lowery, for instance. he was on the board of advisers of americans for prosperity. wrote this 9-9-9 plan which would lower the corporate tax rates of companies like koch industries from all the way from 35% to 9%ment that s a matthew h humongous corporate giveaway. this is coming from the koch brothers who are advising mr. cain. the connections are unseemly but they re starting to pervade into the presidential campaign and into the policy proposal that is we re seeing. now, dana, talking about mr. lowery and the 9-9-9 plan, mr.
about this. he s asked about the tweets, the latest thing the president tweeted, this is a policy the president will put into place that s directly into what republicans what to see. this is the first i can think of, major policy agreement between congressional republicans and the president. one, both sides seem set on. phone s moving, no room for compromising. and trump did move to withdraw from the trans pacific partnership. paul ryan was a big supporter of that deal. so in some ways on trade they had broadly shifted in his direction, no longer just supporting free trade agreement on principle. we re watching for paul ryan to pop up and take questions from reporters. we re going to talk about this after the break with senator joe manchin of west virginia. there s news out of west virginia, news of a deal just in
we have a policy agreement. in the sunset years that is our disagreement.n we believe the path they are taking will pave the way for iran to get a nuclear weapon. t they believe they are going to block it. t it s a policy disagreement. it is not personal. i wouldn t throw any historical analogy. theca prime minister feels he needed to make his case about hise concerns for this deal in s the hope that people would listen to what h he has to say and hopefully you will get a much better deal.de that is what he was arguing for in congress. am joining us now is former israeli ambassador. he is talking about ron is i talking about a policy li disagreement. they have one ambassador that could have profound implications. the lastat century we lost 11 100 million souls give or take a a million or so here or there. that s a lot of evil.
you have signed up to when you joined that site. so theoretically, they could still sell your information even if you think you re using it through white house because it s actually facebook or another third-party site, you re subjected to a different policy agreement that s not necessarily the same one as the white house s. president obama with the megaphone on obamacare yesterday proclaiming the law s success, urging democrats now to run on it ahead of november s midterms. let s listen. i think that democrats should forcefully defend and be proud of the fact that millions of people like the woman i just described who i saw in pennsylvania yesterday, we re helping because of something we did. i don t think we should apologize for it. i don t think we should be defensive about it. i think there is a strong, good, right story to tell. is this a good campaign strategy for those midterm democrats, many vulnerable at this point in time, because of obamacare? is this good for the pres
but they still put it in the report to be used against us by people around the world and they put it in the context of the human rights violation when it s a policy agreement and basically putting the afl-cio, job killing agenda into a human rights report when what we really need in this country is to preserve the right to work and you had richard trumka s picture on here earlier i saw and he opposes the right to work. somebody suggests that s a human rights violation and i wouldn t put that that in the report either, but it shouldn t be in the report in the first place. there is this issue of card check. yes. stuart: which would eliminate to some degree the secret ballot when workers are polled whether they want union representation. aen that s an issue which is before congress. do you think that this report to the united nations was in some way being used to exert leverage on congress, leverage on america, to get card check through congress, even in a lame duck session?