President Trump touched down in Vietnam at 8:45pm (local) / 8:45am (EST). Vietnam is 12 hours ahead of U.S. eastern time zone. President Trump arrived for a second summit with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un aimed at removing nuclear weapons in exchange for economic benefits and better relations with the U.S. and the world.

President Trump was met at the airport with a delegation of Vietnamese government officials and U.S. embassy personnel. The Vietnamese also rolled out the red carpet with a full military color guard for the welcome.

.

Fox News’s Ed Henry has a report from the hotel below:

.

Hanoi Vietnam is 12 hours ahead of U.S. Eastern Time.  Approximately an hour ago Chairman Kim Jong-un arrived via train in Dong Dang, Vietnam, and is en route to his Hanoi hotel.  At approximately the same time Air-Force One was completing a refueling in England (RAF base Mildenhall, just Northeast of London).  Next stop, Hanoi.

Chairman Kim Jong-un arrives in Vietnam

On Tuesday Evening (US EST) / Wednesday Morning (local), POTUS’ schedule looks to begin with the first event at 11 a.m. (local) 11 pm U.S. EST.

• Greeting with the president Nguyễn Phú Trọng, of Vietnam.
• Expanded bilateral talks with Vietnamese delegation.
• Commercial trade signing event.
• Photo op with Prime Minister Nguyen Xuan Phuc of Vietnam
• Expanded bilateral meetings and working lunch with the prime minster of Vietnam

Then, Wednesday evening (local) / Wednesday morning (US EST), President Trump will take part in his first meetings with North Korea Leader Kim Jong Un.

• Anticipate a one on one bilateral and greeting with Kim Jong-un
• Then a social dinner (Trump, Kim + 2 officials from each delegation).  Reportedly President Trump will be joined by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and acting chief of staff Mick Mulvaney.  Chairman Kim will reportedly bring Vice Premier Kim Yung Chol and a third, yet unknown, associate.

Happy Chairman Kim  aka “Little Rocketman”, aka “little panda”, aka “hostage”.

Video of Chairman Kim arriving in Dong Dang, Vietnam:

Prior to departing for Hanoi, Vietnam, President Trump delivered breakfast remarks to an assembly of our nation’s governors.  [Video and Transcript below]  POTUS is confidently on top of his game; and the humor is priceless.

For those who have followed the granular details of the Trump-Kim relationship closely, one early remark about Kim Jong-un (off-the-cuff and not part of the prepared speech) is very interesting (emphasis mine):

“I’m now — right after this meeting, I leave for Vietnam, where I meet with Chairman Kim and we talk about something that, frankly, he never spoke to anybody about. But we’re speaking, and we’re speaking loud”….

.

[Transcript] State Dining Room – THE PRESIDENT: Thank you. (Applause.) Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Please. Thank you very much.

As governors, we all sort of get together and we have a good time. But we also — we’re going to accomplish a lot. This going to be a very good meeting. Tremendous things are happening for our country.

I’m now — right after this meeting, I leave for Vietnam, where I meet with Chairman Kim and we talk about something that, frankly, he never spoke to anybody about. But we’re speaking, and we’re speaking loud. And I think we can have a very good — a very good summit. I think we’ll have a very tremendous summit. We want denuclearization, and I think he’ll have a country that will set a lot of records for speed in terms of an economy.

And I told you last night — it was a lovely dinner — but I told you how well we did with our trade talks in China. And it looks like they’ll be coming back quickly again. And we’re going to have another summit. We’re going to have a signing summit, which is even better. So hopefully, we can get that completed. But we’re getting very, very close.

Ambassador Lighthizer, Steve Mnuchin, a lot of folks in the room have been helping and that’s been great. And I just see our great Secretary sitting there. On drug prices, first time in 54 years that drug prices have actually gone down this year. So, Mr. Secretary, thank you very much. That’s a great, great deal. (Applause.)

Today, it’s my honor to welcome our nation’s governors back to the White House after a wonderful evening last night. And I’m deeply grateful for your presence, your partnership, and your friendship — many of you are such good friends — as we work together on behalf of all Americans.

We’re here to forge bonds of cooperation between our federal, state, and local governments as we strive to deliver a safe, bright, and prosperous future for every community in our magnificent nation.

Thank you as well to all of my Cabinet Secretaries who are here today to share their energy, expertise, and devotion. They are devoted. They work so hard and they’re doing a terrific job. There are few — I say there are none — but there are few administrations that have accomplished what we’ve accomplished over the last two years and the first two years.

It’s been pretty incredible with tax cuts and regulation cuts — more regulations than any other administration in history, and that’s very important. And we still have regulation. But you don’t have 10 of identical regulations that you have to get approved and wiped out from different departments. So we’ve really cut it down.

A highway that would take 17 or 18 years of approval now takes probably two. And we’re trying to get it down to one. And it may be rejected on various grounds, including environmental. But we have it down to two, and we think we can get it down further. So it will be — that will be something. You know. You have many highways and many roadways, and they’re tied up for many years. And that won’t be happening too much anymore.

In my State of the Union Address, I outlined many bipartisan priorities that we all share: delivering fair trade; rebuilding our nation’s infrastructure — which we are going to work very hard on, because as governors, that has to be music to your ears. (Applause.)

And I would like — on infrastructure, I would like you to call your senators and call your congressmen and women and get it done, because I’m ready. I want to sign. I am totally ready.

Reducing the price of healthcare and prescription drugs — and we’ve made a lot of progress, as I said. First year in 54 years that prescription prices have gone down, which is a big statement. But we can get them a lot lower. We’re in the process, Mr. Secretary, of doing that.

Creating a safe and lawful immigration system, and keeping America safe.

We’re gathered today at a truly incredible time for our nation. Things are happening like rarely ever before. Since the election, we’ve created more than 5.3 million new jobs, including a half a million brand-new manufacturing jobs. And that number is going to go over 600,000 manufacturing jobs in just a very short period of time.

And if you remember, manufacturing jobs were never coming back to our country. Well, they are coming back and they’re coming back very strongly. And we have companies opening up in the United States that we thought we lost, that would never be back, and some are coming back and some are brand new and they’re big. And they’re coming in and they’re moving in, which is one of the reasons we need people to come in. They have to come in through a legal process. But with a 3.7 [percent] unemployment, we need to have people coming in. We need workers, frankly, because we have all of these companies pouring in.

We were just discussing — our great new governor of Michigan — last night, where you have some good news coming up very soon. And we have car companies opening up in Michigan and Ohio and Pennsylvania and so many other places. I was with Prime Minister Abe of Japan, and he was saying it could be seven different plants in a very short period of time, not to mention all of the plants that have already opened.

So, we need people. We have to have people and they have to come in, but they have to come in legally and through merit.

Nearly 5 million Americans have been lifted off of food stamps during this very short period of time. Blue-collar jobs are growing at their fastest pace in many decades. The unemployment rates for African Americans — and you’ve heard this many times — Hispanic Americans, and Asian Americans have all reached their lowest levels ever recorded. And with women, it’s now 64 years. Lowest in 64 years. Soon, it will be historic.

So America now has, really, the hottest economy on Earth. Whenever I greet a prime minister or a president, or any leaders of any countries, they always start off by saying, “Congratulations on your economy. It’s been incredible. Congratulations.” And many of them are trying to follow our formula, which was cutting taxes, cutting regulations, and many other things.

We give incentives and we work very hard at getting companies to come back in. Those companies that left, we — in particular, we want to work. They left our country. They fired all of their workers. They moved to another country. They’re now coming back. It’s a great thing.

In a few moments, our first session on vocational training and workforce development will begin. We want every citizen to gain the cutting-edge skills they need to enjoy a rewarding, lifelong career. Many of the governors here today have identified this as a very top priority. My daughter, Ivanka, who is going to be speaking later, is — she has been so much involved. So incredibly involved. Where is Ivanka? Ivanka, keep — keep going. (Laughter.) Created — my daughter has created millions of jobs. I don’t know if anyone knows that, but she’s created millions of jobs. (Applause.)

So, because of our roaring economy, there are more opportunities than ever before to get sidelined workers — and these are people that lost jobs and have never gotten them back, but now they’re coming back and very, very rapidly — get these sidelined workers back into the labor force.

Last year, my administration created the Council for American Worker and launched the Pledge of America’s Workers, where we’ve gained commitments from private sector leaders to hire and train more than 6.5 million Americans. Think of it: 6.5 million. And these are jobs that, for the most part, would not have happened.

I was also proud to sign a modernized Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act into law. We believe two simple rules: Buy American and Hire American. It used to be a terrible thing when you said “America first.” People said all sorts of things: “It’s terrible. It’s a horror.” It’s “America First.” It’s “Make America Great Again.” (Applause.) It’s whatever you want to call it, but that’s the way it is.

I mean, you know very well. And some can’t say, and some can say proudly, but we would focus so much on other countries, it was almost like we put those — not almost. We put those countries ahead of ours. We actually took those countries and put them ahead of ours. We can’t do it. And we’re going to help other countries that we have great relationships. But we can’t do that anymore. It’s America first.

Today, we also will discuss the bold action we took to address economic inequality by establishing Opportunity Zones as part of our historic tax cuts. It’s incredible what’s going on. I don’t know, I think some of you really see it. Okay? You see what’s going with the Opportunity Zones. Far greater than anybody thought. And we’ve done a lot of them, and they have great incentives. And money is being put in by very rich people and rich companies in areas that you would have said nobody will ever invest in. We established incentives for investment in more than 8,700 distressed areas that you have designated in each of your states.

You’re designating some tough places. I say, “Can they give us some tougher places than that?” They are tough and it’s — incredibly, for the first time ever, it’s really working. The concept was always good but it wasn’t done properly. I want to thank you for partnering with us in this critical effort to lift up neglected and totally forgotten communities.

I also want to thank every governor here today who is supporting our new U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement — the USMCA. (Applause.) I’ve long said that NAFTA is the worst trade deal that any country has ever signed. It emptied us out. We had a surplus with Mexico and Canada, and we went to $130 billion trade deficit with the combination of Mexico and Canada. And this deal will bring it back.

We’re opening it up to farmers. We’re opening Canada, as an example — and Mexico — to farmers. They were closed. It was a closed shop. They had all sorts of non-monetary trade barriers. And they had monetary trade barriers. They were charging, for certain agricultural products, an almost 300 percent tariff. Nobody ever talked about it. Nobody ever knew about it. And I’d go up to Wisconsin and the farmers would say, “Sir, we can’t compete. They’re charging us 287 percent, to be exact.” I said, “You got to be kidding.” And we did something about it.

So the USMCA is very important. It will help our dairy farmers in Wisconsin; our wine makers in Oregon and Washington and California; our autoworkers in Michigan and Ohio and Pennsylvania and all over; and dozens of other states, and ranchers and farmers and growers and manufacturers from coast to coast. It’s a very, very comprehensive deal. It’s a deal that nobody thought we’d be able to get approved.

I was able to get it approved, to be honest with you, by using tariffs. I was putting very substantial tariffs — or was getting ready to — on Canada, who was very tough to negotiate. You know, we think of “Oh, Canada.” Well, “Oh, Canada” is tough. They’re tough. (Laughter.) And I said, “Look, you know, you’re either going to do this or we’re going to put 20, 25 percent tariffs on your cars that you ship in here by the millions.

And every time we had a problem, we’d just say, “That’s okay. Don’t worry about it. We’ll put the tariffs on.” And they said, “Okay. Fine. It’s okay. We’ll sign.” It was a tough — it was a really tough negotiation. And same thing with Mexico. But in the end, we got it done and it’s a great deal for us, and it’s a very good deal, I think, for Canada and for Mexico.

They have to get it approved also. We have to get it approved. Let’s see what happens. And I think it probably will be. It should — I think from our standpoint — I know how much they hate me, but they have to hate me even more not to get this deal approved. Okay? That’s the only thing I can say.

To be a prosperous nation, we must also be a safe nation. We passed groundbreaking criminal justice reform. And I have to thank so many people for that. But this was where super- conservatives got together with super-liberals, believe it or not. I mean, I’m looking at names on both sides and right down the middle. Criminal justice reform, where people are put into jail for a pretty minor act — there’s nothing minor — but a pretty minor act, and they’re put in jail for 45 years and 50 years and there’s no chance of ever coming out. And it was a very — and it’s very tough, by the way. A lot of conservatives signed it, and signed it very willingly. In fact, they pushed it. They were pushing it, I think, as hard as the other side. But it’s very, very important.

Many states here today are following the same roadmap to help former inmates become productive and law-abiding citizens. And one of the thing that’s helping the inmates so much — you know this probably better than I do — the economy is so strong that inmates, for the first time, are getting jobs when they come out.

And I have a friend who’s hired seven or eight. I can’t say every one was perfect, but he said, “Five are — I’ll always have them. They’re great.” They got a chance. Nobody would hire them because they have that — whatever it is in the background. And it’s a very tough situation for them in the past.

But the economy is so strong. The economy — the strength of the economy became our best friend. They couldn’t get workers, and now they’re hiring people that they normally wouldn’t have. And the results are incredible. Companies all over the country are saying, “Wow, they are really — they’re really doing a great job.” And it makes me very happy. I think without that very powerful economy it couldn’t happen.

So, finally, to protect our communities, we must secure the border against human trafficking, drug smuggling, and crime of all types. The human trafficking is a tremendous problem where, mostly women, and they’re tied up and they’re taped up, and they’re put in the back of cars, and the car does not come through the port of entry.

I mean, you watch this — “Everything comes through it.” Ninety percent of the drugs don’t come through the port of entry. Ninety percent of the drugs and the big stuff goes out to the desert, makes a left, and goes where you don’t have any wall. I’m going to call it a wall. You know, they’d like me to call it a barrier. It’s a wall. It’s a big, beautiful, powerful steel wall that you can see through — which is very important to be able to see through. And if you don’t have it, you’re not going to have borders, you’re not going to have a country pretty soon. Because we’re spending a fortune. We’re doing an incredible job.

The Border Patrol has been amazing. The military has been amazing. I called in the military and they’ve been amazing. But if we had a wall, we’d save a fortune not only on drugs that are being smuggled into the country. And you’re talking about billions and billions and billions of dollars’ worth of drugs. But we’d save it just on not having to pay military, not having to pay so much on the Border Patrol. The Border Patrol can go to other locations and other places.

But I’ll say this: Border Patrol and ICE — and I’m proud of ICE because they go into areas where a lot of people don’t want to go, including law enforcement. These are tough, tough people that they’re dealing with. And you need tough people. The ICE people, they’re tough but they’re incredible. I mean, they’re just incredible in so many ways. They are patriotic people. They love our country. They want it to work. And they’ll go into situations that you want no part of.

When you look at these MS-13 gangs, sheriffs all over the country have told me, “We’re very happy to have ICE come in and take over.” Because this is a group of people that — hard to even understand how they could have developed this way. They’re mean. They’re sadistic. Their crimes are incredible. We’re taking them out by the thousands, and we’re bringing them back to where they came from. And in some cases, we’re putting them in jail. But, you know, then we pay for them for the next 40 years. But we’re bringing them back where they came from.

And I told Guatemala and I told Honduras, and I told El Salvador — three places where they send us tremendous numbers of people — and they’re rough people. They’re not sending us their finest. It doesn’t make sense. Why would they send their finest? They’re sending us some very — as I would sometimes say — rough hombres. These are rough, rough, tough people. Many criminal people.

And I told these three countries — you know, we send them $500 million a year. I said, “We’re not sending it anymore.” And you organize caravans, and these caravans that are coming up — we had one — and we’ve broken them up. I don’t know if you’ve been seeing. We’ve broken them up. We’ve gotten them broken up, in many cases now, before they get here.

But you take a look at Tijuana, Mexico: Thousands and thousands of people are sitting there, trying to get into our country. And if we didn’t have a wall there — that we’ve totally renovated and fixed — if we didn’t have that wall, it would be impossible even for the military to stop them. Because don’t forget, unlike other countries — and this is a good thing; I don’t want to create controversy because I hate controversy, believe me. (Laughter.) But unlike other countries, we don’t let people get shot. You know? We don’t have people standing there with the most sophisticated machine guns in the world and use them. Many countries do. Many countries do. We can’t do that. We can’t do that. This country can’t do that. But the barrier does it very simply. It just doesn’t let them in.

So you take a look at a place like Tijuana and other places. It’s incredible what that wall has done. And that’s not even the upper — you know, the most — the best of our walls. We have a great system now. We have a prototype. We have — I expect to have 250 to 300 miles of wall built in the very near future. Secretary Nielsen is here right now, and we have — we will shortly have about 200 miles under construction.

We just started a 47-mile patch. We have different patches. We bid it out tough. We have a much better prototype. It’s actually a beautiful wall. It’s a beautiful-looking — actually — you know, I’ve always said part of the wall was that previous administrations, when they did little walls, they built them so badly. So badly. It’s so unattractive. So — I wouldn’t want them in my backyard. And the new one is incredible looking. It’s a piece of art, in a sense. It’s still — and it’s, by the way, more effective. I mean, it’s more effective.

So we are doing a job. We’re getting it up. We have beautiful prototypes. We’re working with the Army Corps of Engineers. We’re total pros. And I don’t know if you saw what I put on Twitter, but I put on Twitter a piece of it. That’s not the new prototype; the new prototype has started in different locations.

But we’re going to be, pretty soon, having well over a couple of hundred miles of wall up. We don’t have to go 2,000. We never planned on going 2,000. It’s 2,000 from the Gulf to the Pacific; it’s 2,000 miles. But you have many natural boundaries, including really tough waters, which you don’t need the wall. We have very, very rugged mountain areas, which you don’t need the wall. Actually, if we do a really good job, and if we have some money left over, we might even throw them in areas where you would say you don’t need them because they’ll figure a way. That will be the area. That will become the weak spot. It’s like water; it just seeks its own.

But these people, they have the traffickers. They’re vicious, they’re smart — the coyotes. How about the name “coyote”? They have people tied up, put in the back of trucks and vans. They can’t go through checkpoints. They have to go through open areas. Can’t walk through. You can’t go through it. Because even if they don’t do much of an inspection of your truck or your car, they do open the back door, or they do look through a window. You can’t have women sitting there that are tied up.

So when I hear the other side say — and we have some of the other side here. But when I hear the other side say, “Oh, no, everything goes through the checkpoint,” that’s absolutely false. You have areas where you literally have roads that are carved in the sand that it’s used so much. They go right through these roads. They go right, they hang a left and hang another left, and “Welcome to the United States.” There’s nobody there to even talk to them. Because you’re talking about 2,000 miles. You’re talking about a lot of area.

So we’re doing really well on the wall — the emergency you’ve all been reading. We do have an emergency. We have an emergency of people pouring into our country that we don’t want — criminals, smugglers. We have drugs pouring into our country. We can’t have it. We can’t have it. We cannot allow this to happy to our country. Most drugs — most of the major drugs are coming through the southern border. This will make it — you’re never going to stop it completely, but we can stop it a lot.

One of the things that Ambassador Lighthizer and Steve, and all of the people that are working with China — the fentanyl is a tremendous problem. It seems to be made 100 percent in China. A hundred percent. Now, China is paying us, right now, billions and billions of dollars of tariffs a month. Every month, billions of dollars. I love it. Personally, I love it. But they’re paying billions of dollars. And it’s hurting them; it’s not good for them.

And I said to President Xi — I said, “President, you have to do me a favor. As part of our trade deal…” — it has nothing to do with trade, or certainly very little — but we’re having shipped over here, from China, fentanyl. It’s killing 88,000 people a year, and probably more. That’s just the ones we know about. It’s deadly. A little tiny spoonful can wipe out a state, it’s hard to believe. It can wipe out an entire state, a spoonful of this stuff.

And in China, they have a very, very tough penalty for drugs. It’s called the death penalty. And I said to President Xi, “You don’t have much of a drug problem. Do you have a drug problem?” “No. No drug problem.” I said, “So you have 1.4 billion people, and you don’t have a drug problem?” “That’s right. No drug problem.” I said, “What do you attribute that to?” “Death penalty. Quick trial.” They don’t have trials that last 19 years. At the end of a — the judge dies. Everybody dies. The only one living is the one that did the damage. No, they have what’s called a “quick trial.” It goes quick. It doesn’t take a lot of time. And if you’re a drug dealer, you’ll say, “You know what — maybe I’ll just sort of stay out of China.” Singapore, the same thing.

So I said to President Xi — I said, “You know, if you would criminalize the sale of fentanyl into the United States, you would be saving many, many lives.” It took me one minute, and he agreed. Because it’s not criminalized. I think they view it as an industrial drug or something. It’s not criminalized. And as part of our deal — and, Bob, don’t forget to put that down — but as part of our deal, I think we’re going to get a criminalization of fentanyl being sold into the United States. It’ll stop. (Applause.) It’ll stop. Very important.

And I have to tell you, I have to really thank President Xi, both for that, and he has been a big help with respect to North Korea. I have a very, very good relationship with Kim Jong Un. Very, very good. But we need all the help we can get. And as you know, about 92 percent of the goods going into North Korea go through China. And President Xi has been very good. He’s been very, very good.

Now, you know, it helps that we are in a strong trading position. But nevertheless, he’s been very strong and he’s, for the most part, held it. At the beginning, he was perfect. I told him the other day, “At the beginning, you were perfect. Now you’re good. Not quite as good. You got to get better.”

But maybe we’ll make a deal and then we won’t have to worry about that any longer. So that will be something really great. But he’s been great.

And the fentanyl is — they’re already working on that process. And, you know, I said, “Do you need any other approvals?” “No.” I said, “Well, that works a lot different than this country.” (Laughter.) He needs no other approval.

When I got the basketball players out — the three basketball players — that was a beautiful scene. I was in China. And you have these three, you know, potential stars — and I guess they’re going into the NBA draft, or just have — but I said, “Would you do me a favor? Three players were just arrested.” They were arrested for stealing — in Louis Vuitton — sunglasses.

And I wasn’t happy with those three players because they never gave our country much credit for having gotten them out. And believe me, they’d be in jail. Stealing in a store in China is a very big offense.

And I said, “Would you do me a favor?” I was having dinner with him at this incredible show that he put on in a ballroom, the likes of which few people have ever seen. It was an incredible evening. Melania is here. And I’m talking. And it just happened and they were arrested. They were put in jail. And I said, “Mr. President, could you do me a favor? Could you let the three basketball players out?”

He didn’t know about it. He called over to his people. He’s got 10 people standing behind him; every one is a central casting. Central casting. (Laughter.) Glasses, pad — boom. He went over — he came back. He reported within two minutes, explained, “Basketball players…” Bom. Bom. And I said, “It would be a great thing if you could possibly let them out.” He goes, “So be it. They’re out.”

I thought — I said, “Is this different than our country?” Huh? (Laughter.) It’s just a little bit different. And we got them out. Then we came back, and the one father said, “Well, we don’t know that Trump helped. I sent a consultant.” That consultant would’ve gotten nowhere.

But, you know, we just have a great relationship with so many of these countries. And I think in some cases it’s tough. There are many countries that take advantage of us very seriously, both at NATO and on trade.

The European Union is very, very tough. Very, very tough. They don’t allow our products in. They don’t allow our farming goods in. You people know. Many of you represent farm states. They won’t — you know that better than anybody. They won’t allow our farm products in. They don’t take any. They have these non-, you know, monetary barriers that are brutal. They’re worse than the — you know, than others.

The cars — they charge us big tariffs. And it’s very hard for a car to get in, number one. But if it does, they have to pay a big tariff, whereas we charge them almost nothing when they send their cars to us — Mercedes and BMW, and all of the things that they send.

So we’re taking care of it. I mean, we’ve informed them that, “Look, if you don’t — if you’re not going play ball…” President Obama, in eight years, couldn’t do a thing. They wouldn’t even meet with him. They said, “We have no intention of meeting.” They wouldn’t even meet with President Obama. They wouldn’t meet with President Bush.

EU is one of the toughest — maybe the toughest. Maybe, in certain ways, tougher than China, just smaller, from our standpoint. But they have to meet. And we told them, “Have to meet. Sorry. And if you don’t meet, we’re going to tariff the hell out of you.” And they’re going to meet. I mean, they’re going to meet.

But we lost last year with the European Union $151 billion. This has been going on for many years. Think of it — $151 billion. We take their product; they don’t take ours. We don’t charge them tariffs; they charge us tariffs.  Other than that, it’s a very fair arrangement.

And, by the way, we pay for their military. Because we pay almost, getting close to 100 percent for their military. I’ve gotten them to put up over $100 billion toward NATO, which has made a big impact. But — so they have to treat us fairly. We want to have a great relationship. I have a great relationship with the leaders. But we have to be treated fairly.

So, overall, we’re doing a great job for our country. Our country has rarely done better. Maybe never done better from an economy standpoint. We’re very proud of it. And we have tremendous potential when we fix these trade deals, because we’re being ripped by everybody. We are just being ripped, because we lose $800 billion a year on trade. Think of it. It’s incon- — $800 billion. Nobody even knows what that means. And we’re fixing that all up. We start with Mexico, Canada, China. China is the big one. China is 50 percent of the number — even more. And we’re doing very well. That could happen fairly soon, or it might not happen at all. Okay? Might not happen at all, but I think it’s going to happen and it could happen fairly soon. The relationship is great.

So I just want to thank all of the governors for being here. You’re very special people. I think we have 17 brand-new governors. Right? Brand new ones. Very smart ones, like my friend. Huh?

Congratulations. It’s a great — you’re going to have — you have such an easy state. (Laughter.) That’s so easy. Great state of Illinois. What an easy state. I don’t know. Huh? Have you found it to be easier or tougher than you thought?

GOVERNOR PRITZKER: Well, you’re going to help us out. (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT: I’ll help you out. I help everybody out. I’m going to help you. Congratulations.

It’s an honor to have you all at the White House.

Thank you very much. Thank you. (Applause.)

[End Transcript]

Hostage rescue, Round #2, begins in Hanoi…

President Trump has been executing a foreign policy, a clear doctrine of sorts, where national security is achieved by leveraging U.S. economic power. It is a fundamental shift in approaching both allies and adversaries; summarized within the oft repeated phrase: “economic security is national security.”

The Trump Doctrine of using economics to achieve national security objectives is a fundamental paradigm shift.  Modern U.S. history provides no easy reference.

“Peace is the prize” ~ President Donald Trump

The nature of the Trump foreign policy doctrine, as it has become visible, is to hold manipulative influence agents accountable for regional impact(s); and simultaneously work to stop any corrupted influence from oppressing free expression of national values held by the subservient, dis-empowered, people within the nation being influenced.

There have been clear examples of this doctrine at work. When President Trump first visited the Middle-East he confronted the international audience with a message about dealing with extremist influence agents. President Trump simply said: “drive them out.”

Toward that end, as Qatar was identified as a financier of extremist ideology, President Trump placed the goal of confrontation upon the Gulf Cooperation Council, not the U.S.

The U.S. role was clearly outlined as supporting the confrontation. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates needed to confront the toxic regional influence; the U.S. would support their objective. That’s what happened.

Another example: To confront the extremism creating the turmoil in Afghanistan, President Trump placed the burden of bringing the Taliban to the table of governance upon primary influence agent Pakistan. Here again, with U.S. support. Pakistan is the leading influence agent over the Taliban in Afghanistan; the Trump administration correctly established the responsibility and gives clear expectations for U.S. support.

If Pakistan doesn’t change their influence objective toward a more constructive alignment with a nationally representative Afghanistan government, it is Pakistan who will be held accountable. Again, the correct and effective appropriation of responsibility upon the influence agent who can initiate the solution, Pakistan.

The process of accurate regional assignment of influence comes with disconcerting sunlight. Often these influences are not discussed openly. However, for President Trump the lack of honesty is only a crutch to continue enabling poor actors. This is a consistent theme throughout all of President Trump’s foreign policy engagements.

The European Union is a collective co-dependent enabler to the corrupt influences of Iran. Therefore the assignment of responsibility to change the status is placed upon the EU.

The U.S. will fully support the EU effort, but as seen in the withdrawal from the Iran Deal, the U.S. will not enable growth of toxic behavior. The U.S. stands with the people of Iran, but the U.S. will not support the enabling of Iranian oppression, terrorism and/or dangerous military expansion that will ultimately destabilize the region. Trump holds the EU accountable for influencing change. Again, we see the Trump Doctrine at work.

Perhaps the most obvious application of the Trump Doctrine is found in how the U.S. administration approached the challenging behavior of North Korea. Rather than continuing a decades-long policy of ignoring the influence of China, President Trump directly assigned primary responsibility for a reset to Beijing.

China held, and holds, all influence upon North Korea and has long-treated the DPRK as a proxy province to do the bidding of Beijing’s communist old guard. By directly confronting the influence agent, and admitting openly for the world to see (albeit with jaw-dropping tactical sanction diplomacy) President Trump positioned the U.S. to support a peace objective on the entire Korean peninsula and simultaneously forced China to openly display their closely-guarded influence.

While the Red Dragon -vs- Panda influence dynamic is still ongoing, the benefit of this new and strategic approach has brought the possibility of peace closer than ever in recent history.

No longer is it outlandish to think of North Korea joining with the rest of the world in achieving a better quality of life for its people.

Not only is President Trump openly sharing a willingness to engage in a new and dynamic future for North Korea, but his approach is removing the toxic influences that have held down the possibility for generations. By leveraging China (through economics) to stop manipulating North Korea, President Trump is opening up a door of possibilities for the North Korean people. This is what I mean when I say Trump is providing North Korea with an opportunity to create an authentic version of itself.

What ultimately comes from the opportunity President Trump has constructed is entirely unknown. However, the opportunity itself is stunning progress creating a reasonable pathway to prosperity for the North Korean people. Chairman Kim Jong-un has the opportunity to be the most trans-formative leader within Asia in generations; but it is still only an ‘opportunity’.

Whether Kim Jong-un can embrace openness, free markets and prosperity is yet to be seen. Freedom is a precariously scary endeavor because there’s always a danger loosening the grip on control can lead to fear, which can lead to even tighter more authoritarian, control.

♦The commonality in these foreign policy engagements is the strategic placement of responsibility upon the primary influence agent; and a clear understanding upon those nation(s) of influence, that all forward efforts must ultimately provide positive results for people impacted who lack the ability to create positive influence themselves.

One of the reasons President Trump is able to take this approach is specifically because he is beholden to no outside influence himself. It is only from the position of complete independence that accurate assignments based on the underlying truth can be made; and that takes us to the ultimate confrontations – the trillion dollar confrontations.

A U.S. foreign policy that provides the opportunity for fully-realized national authenticity is a paradigm shift amid a world that has grown accustomed to corrupt globalists, bankers and financial elites who have established a business model by dictating terms to national leaders they control and influence. We have our own frame of reference with K-Street lobbyists in Washington DC. Much of President Trump’s global trade reset is based on confronting these multinational influence agents.

When you take the influence of corporate/financial brokers out of foreign policy, all of a sudden those global influence peddlers are worthless. Absent of their ability to provide any benefit, nations no longer purchase these brokered services.

As soon as influence brokers are dispatched, national politicians become accountable to the voices of their citizens. When representing the voices of citizens becomes the primary political driver of national policy, the authentic image of the nation is allowed to surface.

In western, or what we would call ‘more democratized systems of government‘, the consequence of removing multinational corporate and financial influence peddlers presents two options for the governing authority occupying political office:

♦One option is to refuse to allow the authentic voice of a nationalist citizenry to rise. Essentially to commit to a retention of the status quo; an elitist view; a globalist perspective. This requires shifting to a more openly authoritarian system of government within both the economic and social spheres. Those who control the reigns of power refuse to acquiesce to a changed landscape.

♦The second option is to allow the authentic and organic rise of nationalism. To accept the voices of the middle-class majority; to structure the economic and social landscape in a manner that allows the underlying identity to surface naturally.

Fortunately we are living in a time of great history, and we have multiple examples surfacing around the world. National elections in Poland, Hungary, Italy, Brazil and right here in the U.S. via Donald Trump highlight responses to dysfunctional multiculturalism and financial influences from corrupt elites within the institutions of globalist advocacy: The International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Two specific reference points are playing-out in real time. •One is the U.K. and voices of the British people who voted to Brexit the European Union. •The second is Mexico, and the July 1st, 2018, election of Andres Manuel Lopez-Obrador (aka AMLO), a nationalist.

In the U.K. we see the government turning more authoritarian and distancing itself from the voices of the majority who chose to rebuke the collective association of the EU. In recent decisions the government has taken a more harsh approach toward suppressing opposition, and as a consequence oppressing free speech and civil liberties. [Insert the example of Tommy Robinson here – there are many others.]

This doesn’t come as a surprise to those who have followed the arc of history when the collective global elite are challenged or rejected. Globalism can only thrive amid a class structure where the elites, though few in number, have more controlling power over the direction of government. It is not accidental the EU has appointed officials and unelected bureaucrats in Brussels as the primary decision-making authority.

By its very nature the EU collective requires a central planning authority who can act independent of the underlying national voices.

As the Trump Doctrine clashes with the European global elite, the withdrawal of the U.S. financial underwriting creates a natural problem. Subsidies are needed to retain multiculturalism.

If a national citizenry has to pay for the indulgent decisions of the influence class, a crisis becomes only a matter of time.

Wealth distribution requires a host.

Since the end of World War II the U.S. has been a bottomless treasury for EU subsidy. The payments have been direct and indirect. The indirect have been via U.S. military bases providing security, the NATO alliance, and also by U.S. trade policy permitting one-way tariff systems. Both forms of indirect payment are now being reversed as part of the modern Trump Doctrine.

Similarly, in Mexico the Trump Doctrine also extends toward changed trade policies; this time via NAFTA. The restructuring of NAFTA into the USMCA disfavors multinational corporations and financial holdings who have exploited structural loopholes that were designed into the original agreement.

With President Trump confronting the NAFTA fatal flaw, and absent of the ability of corporations to influence the direction of the administration, the trade deal ultimately presents the same outcome for Mexico as it does the EU – LESS DOLLARS.

However, in Mexico, the larger systems of government are not as strongly structured to withstand the withdrawal of billions of U.S. dollars. The government of Mexico is not in the same position as the EU and cannot double-down on more oppressive controls. Therefore the authentic voice of the Mexican people is likely to rise.

Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO), is a nationalist but he is not a free-market capitalist. AMLO is more akin to soft-socialist approach with a view that when the central governing authority is constrained, and operates in the best interests of its citizens, equity can be achieved.

The fabric of socialism runs naturally through the DNA strain of Mexico, and indeed much of South America. This is one of the reasons why previous Mexican governments were so corrupt. Multinational corporations always find it easier to exploit socialist minded government officials.

When bribery and graft are the natural way of business engagement, the multinationals will exploit every opportunity to maximize profit. Withdraw the benefit (loophole exploitation) to the financial systems, and the bribery and graft dries up quickly. A bottom-up nationalist like AMLO, is the ultimate beneficiary.

The authentic-sense of the Mexican people, rises in the persona of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador – who actually does personify the underlying nature of the classic Mexican class-struggle.

Thus we see two similar yet distinct outcomes of the Trump Doctrine. Within a highly structured U.K. parliamentary government the leadership becomes more authoritarian and rebukes the electorate; and in Mexico a less structured government becomes more nationalist, more prideful, and embraces the underlying nature of the electorate.

It is not accidental the historic nature of the U.K. is a monarchy (top down), and the historic nature of Mexico is populist (bottom up). Revolution not withstanding, both countries are now returning to their roots.

We are indeed living in historic times.

Tonight President Donald Trump, First-Lady Melania Trump, Vice-President Mike Pence and Second-Lady Karen Pence, together with the cabinet, attend the 2019 Governors’ Ball in Washington DC.

President Trump delivers remarks to the audience:

.

[Transcript] “This has been really a great couple of days. We’ve had a lot of fun together. We’ve gotten to know each other, we’ve gotten to like each other in almost all cases. Let’s see – one or two cases – every case. [Laughter] Every single case.

“I just want to thank Vice President Mike Pence and our Second Lady, Karen, thank you very much. And I especially want to thank our really great Cabinet for being here. We have most members of the cabinet and our great new Attorney General, Bill Barr, and Mrs Barr, thank you very much.

“Our country is doing very, very well. We are doing record business, we’re doing record employment right now. We have the most people working in our country ever in the history of our country, close to 160 million people.

“That’s a big thing and I’ll give you a little advance information. I see Steve Mnuchin’s here and Ambassador Lighthizer, we’ve just had a big meeting with China, we just put out a statement and we’re doing very well with China. It was a long weekend; they decided to stay for two and half more days. They’ll probably be leaving late tonight. They’re going back and if all works well, we’re going to have some very big news over the next week or two. And it’s really been terrific. I tell you that the whole relationship has been outstanding. We’ve put ourselves into a position of strength for the first time in about 35 years, or probably a lot more than that.

“But China’s been terrific. We want to make a deal that’s great for both countries and that’s really what we’re going to be doing and I think as governors, most of you, many of you are governors and doing an incredible job, and so many have come up and said, ‘How are you doing with China?’ which is a very unusual question for people to come up and ask, almost everyone. ‘Sir, how are you doing with China?’ because it affects your state so much.

“China is everywhere and I think you’d really amazed with what you see. Maybe. Let’s see what happens. We still have a little ways to go. Would you say that’s correct, Mr Ambassador? We have a little bit. But I want thank you, Bob, you’ve been working 24 hours around the clock and I will say this publicly, when I was able to be lucky enough to win the presidency I called Bob Lighthizer because for years people have known he’s the greatest trader that we have on this type of trade – we have many different types of trade – and I really understand now why. Thank you very much. Fantastic.

“Also, I was going to leave very early tomorrow, but now I’m going to do it a little bit later. I had an option to do it at six in the morning or 11 and I chose 11. I can spend a little bit of time with you tomorrow morning because you’re having a breakfast and I’ll come to the breakfast. But literally, I said what kind of an option is that, I can leave at six in the morning or 11? They said you can leave at six or anywhere between 11 and 12. I said I’ll take 11 to 12. But you’re having a breakfast so I’ll be with you at the breakfast.”

“But we’ll be leaving for Hanoi, Vietnam, and we’ll be meeting with Kim Jong-un. It’s a very interesting thing to say but I’ve developed a very, very good relationship. We’ll see what that means but he’s never had a relationship with anybody from this country and hasn’t had lots of relationships anywhere.

“The media sometimes will say, well, what have they given up? We’ve given up nothing. The sanctions are on, everything’s on, but we have a special feeling and I think it’s going to lead to something very good and maybe now.

I think ultimately it will, but maybe not, and I’m not pushing for speed but we’re not removing the sanctions. And we’re going to have, I think, a very interesting two and half days in Vietnam and we have a chance for the total denuclearization of an area of the world that was very dangerous.

“When I first came in, or really more particularly at the end of the last administration, there were rockets going up, there were missiles going up, there were bombs going off, there were massive cannons being tested. If you ever saw the picture of the beach, I’ve never seen anything like it where you had literally thousands of cannons on the beach shooting out into the waters. And there was nuclear testing. In fact, they thought it was earthquakes. They said there are massive earthquakes and then they realized it was North Korea. They said wow, it’s maybe not an earthquake. Now there’s no testing, there’s no rockets, there’s no nuclear testing and we get along well, very well, so it will be very interesting to see.

“As I tell Chairman Kim, he has a chance to have a country that is so vibrant economically. Maybe one of the most in the world. He’s got a location that’s unbelievable. As a real estate person, I’ve always done well with location, but he’s right between China, Russia and on the other side South Korea, so they can’t touch each other unless they go through North Korea. And I say, you have one of the greatest locations, they have incredible people, hardworking people, smart, energetic, and I think it could be really one of the great financial and economic countries anywhere in the world. So I tell him that but I said you can’t do that if you’re going to keep nuclear. If you do nuclear, that can’t ever happen.

“And we see eye to eye, I believe, but you’ll be seeing it more and more over the next couple of days, one way or the other. What’s going to happen, I can’t tell you. I think eventually it would but I can’t tell you and I’m not in a rush, I don’t want to rush anybody, I just don’t want testing. As long as there’s no testing, we’re happy. So we’ve done really something, I think, very special with respect to North Korea and it’s a long flight and I’ll be back at the end of the week. But we have two very interesting days planned and I think it’s a very important thing.

“Prime Minister Abe of Japan said he can’t believe what’s happened in such a short period of time because rockets were being fired over Japan: rockets and missiles both. And now that hasn’t happened in long time, 16 months, 17 months, no more testing, no more rockets, no more checking to see whether or not this stuff works. So you’ll be seeing it and I think it’s going to be very interesting for people but there’s a chance to do something very, very special. It’s very exciting.

“And likewise, if we can do a great economic deal, it will be the largest trade deal ever made by far if you look at it, our deal with China, and we truly are very close. So those are a couple of very interesting things. But our country’s doing incredibly well economically. We’ve pick up in terms of value worth $18 trillion.

Now China – I don’t want this – but China has lost about $24 trillion. So they were catching us, catching us, catching us, and now we’ve zoomed out. And I can say this: as long as I’m president, they’re not going catch us, and they’re going to do well – but I want them to do well, they’re not going to catch us.

“So I just want to give a toast to the incredible people in this room and to our unbelievable country. We have a very, very special country. I want to thank our First Lady for having done – this is such a beautiful job. Melania, thank you very much. And I would like to ask Governor Bullock to come up please from a very special place that I like very much for the obvious reason. And perhaps you could give a toast, please.

Thank you, governor.”

POTUS handed over to Steve Bullock, the governor of Montana, who began with a joke: “Thanks so much, Mr President. Your flight options are still a little bit better than flying to Montana.”

Bullock went on to give a toast. He observed: “I look around this room and I see people about as far from each other on the political spectrum as you can get.” He made a plea for unity, saying: “We need to find ways to put partisanship aside.”

A prayer was said.

 

We are living in historic times.

It was not coincidental that North Korea’s Chairman Kim Jong-un took the long train out of the DPRK yesterday while U.S.T.R Robert Lighthizer and Chinese Vice-Premier Liu He were still engaged in the extended U.S-China trade negotiations.  Quite simply Kim’s early exit from Pyongyang meant Chairman Xi’s geopolitical trade leverage was diminished.

If you’ve listened to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo describing Team USA and Team DPRK delegations, both holding discussions in Hanoi all last week, the early exit of Chairman Kim takes on an enlightened context.  Meanwhile, the U.S. media is oblivious.

Since mid 2017 the long-game plan of the Trump Doctrine toward China (on trade) and their proxy province of North Korea (nuclear hostilities) has been clear. However, being able to see it unfold means accepting President Trump held a strategy.  Fortunately for us we have a front row seat.

President Trump has been engaged in a two-year long hostage rescue mission.  We are now entering the final stages of carefully designed hostage negotiations.

The Chinese trade delegation, led by Vice-Premier Liu He, could not leave Washington DC without some structural progress in U.S-China trade discussions that would avoid the looming March 1st 25 percent tariff on over $200 billion worth of Chinese imported products.  With a summit between President Trump and DPRK Chairman Kim Jong-un on the calendar, Vice-Premier Liu stayed in Washington DC for an extra two days.

U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and President Trump knew the Chinese delegation needed the tariff delay; for the Chinese the issue was urgent and important. This necessity gave Trump and Lighthizer leverage.  When Lighthizer brought Liu to the White House on Friday, POTUS Trump laid down the hammer.

The customary ‘light’ Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) would not suffice. Incredibly POTUS Trump made the statement publicly with full media present while he looked directly at both Lighthizer and Liu.  It was a stunning moment.  The Trumpian demand was an actionable and enforceable principle agreement on the trade framework. A ‘heavy’ and contractual MOU that could easily be transferred to the final trade agreement.

We don’t yet know the details within the demanded ‘heavy’ MOU; but we do know the strategy appears to have worked.  From today:

Clearly President Trump is applying the Trump Doctrine, and overlaying the outcome of a U.S. trade agreement based on Chairman Xi removing all elements of his control over the DPRK for Beijing’s benefit.

China uses the DPRK as a source of forced labor, and a strategic geopolitical threat against encroachment by Western interests in the region.  Young Chairman Kim is essentially a hostage to the dictates from Beijing.  For almost two years President Trump has been methodically confronting this dynamic, and countering through the use of strategic economic pressure.  President Trump is seemingly one man, yet he has this entire process surrounded; he is, quite simply, winning.

As a result of the economic leverage President Trump is applying; and with full understanding that Beijing cannot win an all out trade war against their primary customer; China’s panda mask is forced to remain in place.

President Trump reinforces the panda mask of Chairman Xi Jinping with vociferous praise and a level of cunning the Chinese have never before encountered.

As an outcome of the negotiations between Vice-Premier Liu He and Trump’s biggest killers USTR Lighthizer, Commerce Secretary Ross and Trade Advisor Peter Navarro, it would appear the ‘heavy‘ MOU is agreed upon.

Thus President Trump retains full ‘killer’ tariff leverage by announcing a “delay” (key wording), and simultaneously announces an upcoming Panda summit in Mar-a-Lago:

Here’s where it gets interesting….

How heavy is the MOU?

We’ll be able to see how heavy the framework is by the results from phase-two of the hostage rescue.  {Go Deep on phase-one}

If Chairman Kim and President Trump announce an end to the U.S. war with North Korea; or if Kim agrees to some very serious, measurable and actionable denuclearization; then it’s likely the MOU is very heavy and Kim is further distanced from Xi’s grip.

We will be able to tell the weight of the U.S-China MOU by the distance of Chairman Kim from Chairman Xi.

This is both epic and fun stuff to watch.

ps. That graphic is almost two years old…. {{snicker}}

…”Complicated business folks, complicated business”…

 

Senator Lindsey Graham appears on Fox News with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the democrat plan for a bill to block President Trump’s national security declaration for border security.  Senator Graham anticipates any resolution or bill will not survive a veto from the president.

Senator Graham has high praise for the foreign policy of President Trump as it pertains to Venezuela and Syria.  The comments on Syria are enlightening.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo appears on Fox News Sunday with swamp gatekeeper Chris Wallace.  Topics include: the ongoing unrest in Venezuela and the upcoming summit in Hanoi, Vietnam, between President Trump and North Korean chairman Kim Jong-un.

Multiple media outlets are reporting that North Korean Chairman Kim Jong-un has departed Pyongyang en route to Hanoi Vietnam by train.  It’s approximately a two day train ride for the journey.  The summit with President Trump is scheduled for February 27th and 28th.

SEOUL (Reuters) – North Korea on Sunday confirmed for the first time that its leader Kim Jong Un will hold a second summit with U.S. President Donald Trump, days ahead of the high-stakes nuclear meeting set to take place in Vietnam’s capital of Hanoi.

Kim left Pyongyang by train on Saturday afternoon for the Feb. 27-28 summit accompanied by senior North Korean officials, North Korea’s official KCNA news agency said.

The delegation with Kim includes top North Korean officials who took part in last year’s expanded summit talks between Kim and Trump in Singapore, including top envoy to the U.S. Kim Yong Chol, vice chairman of the central committee of North Korea’s Workers’ Party Ri Su Yong, and foreign minister Ri Yong Ho.

The North Korean leader’s sister Kim Yo Jong, who was also seen aiding him in Singapore, is traveling with Kim as well.

Other senior North Korean officials, such as his de facto chief of staff Kim Chang Son and Kim Hyok Chol, negotiations counterpart to U.S. envoy Stephen Biegun, were already in Hanoi to prepare for the summit.  (read more)

Today in presidential history is a day when the import of consequence doesn’t surface until historians apply hindsight.  However, those who carry the longest-lens are enjoying these moments in history…. We make with our support of Trump such a sound as all history from these days forward are forced to note, even if they despise us in the writing of it.  And when we are gone, our beneficiaries will sing of these deeds in forbidden songs while tending the flickering flame of liberty; for we few lived in the era of Trump.

[Transcript] Oval Office – PRESIDENT TRUMP: Thank you very much. It’s a great honor to be with the Vice Premier of China, a very highly respected man in China. And we’re negotiating trade and the trade agreement. And we have many representatives from China and — as you’d know, and most of you know who they are — many representatives from the United States.

I think we’re getting along very well. Ultimately, I think the biggest decisions and some even smaller decisions will be made by President Xi and myself. And we expect to have a meeting sometime in the not-too-distant future.

And I can only say talks are going along well, but we’re going to have to see what happens. I think there’ll be some points that this group won’t agree on because maybe they’re not supposed to agree on, allowed to agree on. And I think President Xi and I will work out the final points, perhaps. And perhaps not.

So I just want to say, Mr. Vice Premier, it’s a great honor to have you.

VICE PREMIER LIU: Thank you.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: And we thank you very much.

VICE PREMIER LIU: Thank you.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Would you like to say something?

VICE PREMIER LIU: Okay. Thank you very, very much, Mr. President. It’s a great honor to meet you. I came here — first I bring a message from our President. If you don’t mind, I ask the interpreter to read the letter to you.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Thank you. Please.

So, you can hear fine? You’ll speak for them (inaudible).

INTERPRETER: Okay. Message from President Xi Jinping to President Donald J. Trump:

Mr. President,

As China and the U.S. are holding another round of high-level economic and trade talks, I entrust Vice Premier Liu He to be my Special Envoy and ask him to bring you my warm greetings and best regards.

Not too long ago, you sent to me a special letter of festive greetings, together with the lovely video made for me and my wife by your grandchildren on the Chinese Lunar New Year. We enjoyed the performance greatly and were happy to see that the little ones have kept improving in their Chinese. We watched the video more than once and feel that we must (inaudible) for these adorable grandchildren of yours.

I’m also pleased to note that, to follow through on what has been agreed upon between the two of us in Argentina, our economic teams have, since lately, engaged in intensive consultations and made significant progress. This has been well received in both our countries and in the wider international community. It is my hope that our two sides will continue to work together in the spirit of mutual respect and win-win cooperation and could redouble our efforts so as to meet each other halfway and reach an agreement that works for our mutual benefit.

Mr. President, I stand ready to be in close touch with you through various means. Please let me know if you have any specific thought in mind.

To conclude, my wife Peng Liyuan and I wish to extend our season’s greetings to you, Melania, and your family. May you all enjoy happiness and success in the Year of the Pig.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Thank you very much. That’s very nice. Say “Thank you very much”; I would really appreciate if you would just give my warmest regards.

The video he’s talking about is a video made by Ivanka and Jared, and it’s — their children speak fluent Chinese, even though they’re very young. They were taught, at a very young age, Chinese. And when President Xi met Arabella, who’s the oldest, he said this was like perfect Chinese from a — at the time, it was 5-year old — from a 5-year old girl from Beijing. And I thought that was nice. And they actually made a little video that they sent to President Xi.

And if you want, we could even give them — I’m sure the press wouldn’t like to see the video but — (laughter) — if you would, just in case you would, I think it would be fine. If you’d like to do that, Jared, you could just give it to a few of the people. But it was — I thought it was a very nice thing. And it shows a great friendship between the two countries. And that was really just a “Happy New Year” wish that was given in Chinese by Arabella — mostly by Arabella and her two brothers. So I think it was — I think it’s good. I wouldn’t mind if you gave it.

We’re having very good talks. There’s a chance that something very exciting could happen. This is a deal that would be signed by me. I’ve been in touch with Congress. I’ve been telling many of the people in Congress exactly where we are. We’re, right now, getting a 25 percent tariff on $50 billion worth of goods coming in — mostly technology and high technology.

We’re getting a 10 percent tariff on $200 billion worth of goods. The 10 percent goes up as of March 1st. It goes to a 25 percent number. So we’d be getting 25 percent on $250 billion. And there’s about $267 billion that’s un-tariffed, untouched, which we’ll discuss later.

But if we could make a deal, we wouldn’t have to bother with that discussion. So we’ll see what happens. But we’ve had very good talks. As you know, Mr. Lighthizer has done a great job. But it’s only a great job, Bob, if you get it finished, right?

AMBASSADOR LIGHTHIZER: Yes, sir.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: And if it’s a deal that’s a good deal for both.

AMBASSADOR LIGHTHIZER: Yes, sir.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: And, Steve, great. But it’s only great if you get it done.

Wilbur, Sonny — Sonny doesn’t care; he just wants a lot of products being bought from the farmers. Is that right, Sonny? That’s what you care about. Sonny is more interested in the farmers than he is any other aspect.

But Larry Kudlow, Mr. Ambassador — the longest-serving governor in the history of the country, as you know. And now he’s ambassador to China. But he was the Governor of Iowa for 24 years, right?

AMBASSADOR BRANSTAD: Twenty- — well, I would have been, except you appointed me as ambassador. (Laughter.)

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Okay, but you were still the longest —

AMBASSADOR BRANSTAD: Twenty-two years and four months, yeah.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: It’s the longest-serving governor in the history of our country. I believe —

AMBASSADOR BRANSTAD: That’s right. That’s right.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: — (inaudible) from the time. And you’ve done a great job as governor and you’re doing a great job as the ambassador to China.

And I might tell the story that when the ambassador was a young man from Iowa, he was in China. And he was dealing with people from China — both in Iowa and in China. And he met a man who was a young man, and he is now the head of China — President Xi. And he said to his wife — he came home — and this was how many years ago, Mr. Ambassador?

AMBASSADOR BRANSTAD: Well, 1970 — 1985 is when he came to Iowa.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Right, but —

AMBASSADOR BRANSTAD: 1985.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: — you met him in 1978 or so, right?

AMBASSADOR BRANSTAD: I went to China in ’84, and then he was in Iowa in ’85.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: So he met him, and he came home and he told his wife, “I just met the next President of China.” And they say, “How would you know?” He said, “Because the competence of this man is so enormous that I believe he’s going to be the next President of China.” And years go by, and he became the next President of China. And they like each other.

So when it came time to picking an ambassador from China, I say, “I think I have the right guy. He happens to be governor of the great state of Iowa.” And you have done a fantastic job. But I thought that story was incredible.

So, many years ago, he said that he knows who the next President of China is going to be. I thought — I just think it’s a great story. And his wife confirms it fully, so that’s good.

So I just want to thank everybody for being here. We’re going to have discussions right now. We’re talking. And again, I think we’re making a lot of progress. I think there’s a very, very good chance that a deal could be made. We’ll be meeting at some point with President Xi — assuming we go further along the line, Bob. Could you say a couple of words to that as to the potential of a meeting — whether or not we will (inaudible)?

AMBASSADOR LIGHTHIZER: We’ve made progress on some very important structural issues and some progress on purchases. We have a few very, very big hurdles that we still have to face, but if we make — if we continue to make progress, that would be a great outcome, and I think the Vice Premier agrees with that.

VICE PREMIER LIU: Yes, we too have made great progress.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Made great progress. I think we have made great progress. Steve Mnuchin, what would you say?

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: I would just add that the Vice Premier and his team have agreed to extend their trip for two days, so we will be meeting all day tomorrow and into Sunday so we can continue on a very important — this is — the ambassador has done a very good job at documenting multiple MOUs that will be binding and enforceable and cover all different types of industries.

If we can successfully conclude this, this will be very good for U.S. business and finally allowing China to open up to U.S. business.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Why do you bother putting it in a form of a letter of intent or whatever you want to call it? To me, it’s a waste of time.

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Well, we want to make sure. These are very important issues. There’s hundreds of issues that we’re dealing with — everything from financial services to currency, to forced technology transfer, to aircraft, to express shipping, to different industries. So these are very complicated issues that the ambassador —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Currency manipulation — a very important subject which a lot people didn’t even think in terms of.

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Yes. And that’s one of the areas, Mr. President, we actually concluded and reached an agreement — one of the strongest agreements ever on currency. But we have a lot of work to do over the next two days on many issues.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Have you discussed and reached a final agreement on currency?

AMBASSADOR LIGHTHIZER: We have on currency, but we have a lot more work to do over the next two days.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: To stabilize currencies.

Okay. Wilbur Ross.

SECRETARY ROSS: I’m very encouraged by what’s going on. I think that the tariff situation is an important one, that this could be a good substitute for it if we can fill in more of the blanks. But there’s a lot more to be done, as everybody has said. So it’s a little early for champagne.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: No, I agree with that.

Secretary, go ahead. For the farmers, (inaudible).

SECRETARY PERDUE: I think the work that’s being done on both sides is very, very important. And I’m happy to hear the progress, obviously. I think everybody understands, Mr. President, this deal will be consummated — if there is a deal — by you and President Xi. And we understand that.

Obviously, you have some great negotiators on your side, as does the Vice Premier, in that regard. There are a lot of details to work through, but ultimately you and President Xi are going to have to really do the deal.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I think we’re doing very well with regard to farmers and the buying of products from our farmers at a certain point. They’ve already made a big commitment to do that. But this will be a very, very substantial farm deal. This will be the biggest farm deal ever made, if you think about it. I don’t think anything will be close, because it’s China. So hopefully, if we arrive at a deal, they’ll be buying lots of every form of farm product.

Mr. Ambassador, would you say something, if you’d like?

AMBASSADOR BRANSTAD: Well, I think this is probably a very historic time. And these are the two biggest economies in the world. And if these difficult structural issues can get worked out, I think it will be tremendously beneficial not only to China and the United States, but to the whole world economy.

So I know people have been working very hard. We’ve had many, many sessions, both in Beijing and here. And I appreciate the hard work and the diligence that’s going on.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Thank you. Yeah, it’s going very well.

Peter, would you like to say something? This is a gentleman that loves tariffs, by the way. He’s like me. He and I — he loves tariffs. Peter, go ahead.

MR. NAVARRO: I agree with you, sir. Tariffs are simple and they’re enforceable.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Right. Right. Okay. That’s all you have to say? But it’s — it’s true.

MR. NAVARRO: I wish the team luck.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Good. They’re doing a good job.

Larry.

MR. KUDLOW: I’ll just echo. And, you know, a good deal that is enforceable — that’s so important to the United States and to you. But if you get a good deal and we can reduce these barriers, I think it will be good for growth and prosperity for the U.S. and for China, sir.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I think the relationship has been very good. That’s what I will say, more than anything else. As to whether we make a deal or not, who knows? But I think we have a good chance. But I think the relationship is outstanding. I think the relationship that we have now with China is better than it’s ever been. And that’s being — you know, making a big statement. Our relationship, the President — the President’s relationship with me, President Xi’s relationship with me — I think that it’s the strongest it’s ever been.

One of the things that’s so important to me is the fentanyl. And President Xi has agreed to criminalize the sale of fentanyl. Right now, it’s not a criminal product because I guess they call it “industrial,” or they call it something. But it’s not a criminal product. And China has much tougher laws than we do in this country on drugs, so they don’t have a big drug problem in China. They have a thing called the death penalty.

And China has much tougher laws than we do. But they’ve agreed to criminalize the sale of fentanyl, including the sale of fentanyl to the United States. And that is a tremendous thing because, as you know, most of it, if not all of it, comes from China. That would be a tremendous thing, in terms of our war on drugs.

So I very much appreciate that. And that’s another thing we’ll be finalizing, hopefully, at the meeting that we have.

So subject to where they are — and we’re going to have a meeting now — but subject to where they are, we will be having at least an additional meeting. And then, ultimately, we’ll have a meeting with myself and President Xi to discuss the final terms and things that haven’t been agreed to. But I think a lot of those things have been agreed to, but they want he and I to agree to them in a final form. But the fentanyl is so important to us. The criminalization of fentanyl is so important to us, and we appreciate that.

I want to just thank everybody for being with us. Mr. Vice Premier, I want to thank you very much. Their trip is being extended, as Steve said. Their trip is being extended by two days, unexpectedly, because they are making great progress. So they’ll be here for an extra couple of days.

So what would that include? That would be Sunday, Monday? Or —

AMBASSADOR LIGHTHIZER: It will be all day Saturday and all day Sunday.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: All day Sunday. So they’ll be leaving on Sunday night and Monday morning.

So, great progress being made. Let’s see what happens. Thank you all very much. I appreciate it.

Q Mr. President, do you expect to extend the deadline because of the progress here? Or will you still stick with March 1st?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, I set the deadline of March 1st, and right now it’s at 10 percent. And I think that if — I mean, you can tell this to President Xi — I think — and if I see progress being made, substantial progress being made, it would not be inappropriate to extend that deadline — keep it at 10 percent, instead of raising it to 25 percent. And I would be inclined to doing that. I haven’t even spoken to my people about it. Most people assume it’ll just kick in automatically — the 25 percent. But I’m the one that said it, and I think it was a reasonable period of time.

But we’re covering things that we didn’t even know we’d be covering. We’re going very deep into the trade, and covering items that a lot of people wanted to cover and nobody thought we’d ever get to. But we have a one-time shot at making a great deal for both countries. And so we are going to give it.

So it depends on where we are. If we’re doing well — Jeff, if we’re doing very well on the negotiation, I could see extending that. And I don’t think it would have to be a long-term extension because I would imagine that if it took, Steve, another month or so or less —

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Yeah, I think our expectation is to conclude this quickly. And if we get to the point, over the next few days, of making progress, recommending a meeting for you and President Xi in March.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Yeah. So dependent on how they do over the next few days, I would certainly consider that. Okay?

Q Is drawing down U.S. troops a consideration? Is drawing down U.S. troops a consideration in your upcoming summit with North Korean Kim Jong Un? And —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: No, it’s not. No. That was not a consideration. That’s not — that is not one of the things on the table.

Q What is on the table?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Oh, you really want me to discuss that now?

Q I do.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Everything is on the table. Everything.

Q Mr. President, do have any concerns about the Labor Secretary tampering with the Jeffrey Epstein case?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I really don’t know too much about it. I know he’s done a great job as Labor Secretary. And that seems like a long time ago. But I know he’s been a fantastic Labor Secretary. That’s all I can really tell you about. That’s all I know about.

Q What about the charges against Bob Kraft? He’s a friend of yours.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, it’s very sad. I was very surprised to see it. He’s proclaimed his innocence totally, and — but I’m very surprised to see it.

Q Have you spoken with Bill Barr about the release of the Mueller report? Have you spoken with him about that?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: No, I have not. No.

Q You’ve said nothing to him about it?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I have not.

Q Do you expect to?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: At some point, I guess I’ll be talking about it. But you know the nice part? There was no collusion. There was no obstruction. There was no anything. So that’s the nice part. There was no phone calls, no nothing. We have a — I won a race. You know why I won the race? Because I was a better candidate than she was. And it had nothing to do with Russia, and everybody knows it’s a hoax. It’s one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on this country.

So I look forward to seeing the report. If it’s an honest report, it will say that. If it’s not an honest report, it won’t.

Yeah, go ahead.

Q You’ve been at this and your teams have been at this trade deal for a long time.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Yeah, well, it’s not a long time when you consider it’s probably the biggest deal ever made.

Q It seems like it’s getting close to the finish line. At this point, when you boil it all down, do you believe it’s more likely that a deal does happen or a deal doesn’t happen?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, I think I can speak for the United States — the question is an interesting one. Is it more likely that a deal happens or doesn’t happen? Speaking for the United States, I would say it’s probably more likely that a deal does happen. But that doesn’t mean it’s going to happen.

Speaking for China, if you’d like to add — answer that question, you can. But I would say that it’s more likely that a deal will happen. The fact that they’re staying — and this is a very high delegation. This is a man who is revered all throughout China, as the Vice Premier. So the fact that they’re willing to stay for a quite a bit longer period — doubling up the time — that means something. I think there’s a good chance that it happens.

Go ahead. Would you like to answer that question?

Q Mr. President —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Wait. Would you like to answer that question?

VICE PREMIER LIU: Thank you, Mr. President. May I speak Chinese instead of English?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Yes, please. Speak Chinese and you — you’ll speak louder.

VICE PREMIER LIU: Okay.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: They can’t hear you.

TRANSLATOR: I will.

VICE PREMIER LIU: (As interpreted.) So from China, we believe it is that —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: You have to speak louder. I’m sorry.

VICE PREMIER LIU: (As interpreted.) From China, we believe that is very likely that it will happen and we hope that ultimately we’ll have a deal. And the Chinese side is ready to ready to make our utmost effort.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I think we both feel that way. I think we both feel that there’s a very good chance that the deal will happen.

Q Mr. President, on troops in Syria, why are you reversing course?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I’m not reversing course. I have done something that nobody else has been able to do. In another short period of time, like hours — you’ll be hearing “hours and days” — you’ll be hearing about the caliphate. It will — it’s 100 percent defeated. Nobody has been able to say that. That doesn’t mean there aren’t some very bad people walking around and strapping on bombs and all of these things. But we’ve done a job that nobody else has been able to do.

I heard Lindsey Graham this morning congratulating me on having defeated the cal- — you know, the caliphate. And, frankly, I’m getting a lot of congratulations.

At the same time, we can leave a small force along with others in the force — whether it’s NATO troops or whoever it might be — so that it doesn’t start up again. And I’m okay — it’s a very small, tiny fraction of the people that we have. And a lot of people like that idea and I’m open to ideas.

But the 2,500 people that we’ve had there will be going to different parts of the world. They may be going over to Iraq, where we have a very powerful base — a base that cost billions of dollars to build, frankly, and that we’ll be using. But we have had tremendous success in defeating the caliphate.

And now everybody is admitting I did more in the last three or four weeks than people have done in years. And it’s been very successful, but we want to make sure it stays that way.

Yes. Please.

Q Tech transfers — going back to the trade deal — we’ve heard that you haven’t made a whole lot of progress on the tech transfers —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Do you want to talk about the transfers? Tech —

Q Does that still have to be part of the deal —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Yeah, I’ll let Bob answer that. Go ahead, Bob.

Q Thanks.

AMBASSADOR LIGHTHIZER: The answer is, yes. It’s one of the structural issues. It has to be done properly. I mean, we’ve made a lot of progress. So whoever told you we weren’t just didn’t know what they’re talking about.

Q Mr. President, why haven’t you condemned the North — the North Carolina election fraud? This is a big story. The Republican candidate is calling for a new election. Why have you not condemned that, given you’ve condemned other kinds of voter fraud?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, I condemn any election fraud. And when I look at what’s happened in California with the votes, when I look at what happened — as you know, there was just a case where they found a million fraudulent votes. When I look at what’s happened in Texas —

Q There haven’t been any cases (inaudible) —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Excuse me. Excuse me. When I look at what’s happened in Texas. When I look at that catastrophe that took place in Florida where the Republican candidates kept getting less and less and less and less. And fortunately, Rick Scott and Ron ended up winning their election, but it was disgraceful what happened there.

So I look at a lot of different places all over the country. I condemn any voter fraud of any kind, whether it’s Democrat or Republican — or when you look at some of the things that happened in California, in particular. When you look at what’s happened in Texas with all of those votes that they recently found were not exactly properly done, I condemn all of it. And that includes North Carolina, if anything — you know, I guess they’re going to be doing a final report. But I’d like to see the final report. But any form of election fraud, I condemn.

Q Mr. President, when do you want to have that meeting with President Xi? And do expect to have that at Mar-a-Lago?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Probably at Mar-a-Lago. Probably fairly soon, during the month of March. Bob, do you have a date? Steve, do you have a date?

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: We’re planning it with your schedule, Mr. President.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Okay, so there — we have two schedules. And we’ll be planning that with the schedule.

Q Do you have any concerns about Michael Cohen’s testimony before Congress this week?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: No. No. No.

[Crosstalk.]

PRESIDENT TRUMP: It’s lawyer-client, but, you know — he’s taking his own chances.

Q Where do things stand with Huawei and ZTE? Would you still consider a ban of Chinese technology?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, ZTE paid a big fine of $1.2 billion, which nobody has ever even heard of before. And we want everybody to compete. And I guess it will be somewhat of a subject that we’re talking about here, Bob. We’ll be talking about it. We may or may not include that in this deal.

Q Include what?

Q Would you drop criminal charges?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: The Huawei and ZTE.

Q Would you drop criminal charges against Huawei as part of this deal?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: We’re going to be discussing all of that during the course of the next couple of weeks. And we’ll be talking to the U.S. Attorneys. We’ll be talking to the Attorney General. But we’ll be making that decision. Right now it’s not something that we’re discussing.

Q Do you think that (inaudible) Republicans will stick with you on the — on your emergency declaration and vote against the joint resolution?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Oh, I think they’ll stick. Yeah. Everybody knows we need border security. We need a wall. I think it’s a very bad subject for the Democrats. We need a wall.

We’ve apprehended more people than we have in many, many years. “Apprehended,” meaning we’ve gotten. With the wall, we wouldn’t even have to apprehend them if we had the proper structure. It’s costing us a lot of money with the military; we have a lot of military there. We have tremendous border control and border security there.

We have — I’ll tell you what, the people of border security, people of ICE, the law enforcement, generally speaking, have done an incredible job at the border. We have caravans heading up and we’re able to head out the caravans. We’ve done a great job. But if we had the wall, it would be much easier. And, frankly, it would be a job that would be perfecto. And it would cost actually, ultimately, a lot less money.

Q So you don’t think that the joint resolution —

Q Mr. President —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: What?

Q Okay, I have question from China Daily. I — you –

PRESIDENT TRUMP: China Daily.

Q — you tweeted yesterday that the U.S. would not block out, currently, more advanced technology in terms of 5Gs, 6Gs. What do you mean?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, I’d like to have all companies be able to compete. I don’t want to artificially block people out based on excuses or based on security. I don’t want to have a security problem.

Q Including Huawei?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Wait. I’m talking about everybody, really — including. But I’m talking about everybody. I don’t want to use artificial blocking. We want to have great 5G. Ultimately, that’s going to morph into 6G. And probably 6G will be obsolete in about two months, the way it’s going — you know, the way that whole world moves. But 6G, at some point in the future, will be obsolete.

But I want to have competition with China. Fair competition. I don’t want to block out anybody if we can help it. Now if there’s going to be a security reason or something, then we have no choice, but that is one of the things we’ll be discussing today. We want to have open competition. We’ve always done very well in open competition.

Go ahead.

Q Mr. President, your officials mentioned that was a deal on currency. Can you explain to us what that was?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, we’ll let you know at the appropriate time, but we have a deal on currency and currency manipulation.

Yes.

Q Will you definitively veto that resolution that was introduced today that would block your national emergency if it passes?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: On the wall?

Q Yes.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Will I veto it? 100 percent. 100 percent. And I don’t think it survives a veto; we have too many smart people that want border security, so I can’t imagine it could survive a veto. But I will veto it, yes.

Q Mr. President, last year you had dropped all U.S. assistance to Pakistan because of terrorists coming from there.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: No, I stopped paying Pakistan the $1.3 billion that we were paying them. In the meantime, we may set up some meetings with Pakistan. Pakistan was very taking very strong advantage of the United States under other Presidents and we were paying Pakistan $1.3 billion a year. I ended that payment to Pakistan because they weren’t helping us in a way that they should have.

And honestly, we’ve had — we’ve developed a much better relationship with Pakistan over the last short period of time than we had. But I did; I ended the payment. We were paying Pakistan $1.3 billion a year. I ended that about nine months ago. A lot of people don’t know that, but I ended it nine months ago.

Q But terrorists are still coming from Pakistan, attacking in Afghanistan and India (inaudible).

PRESIDENT TRUMP: But what are you talking about? What are you — what are you trying to refer to? You’ll have to speak up. I can’t hear you.

Q Terrorists coming from Pakistan have attacked Indian forces in Kashmir.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: That’s right. No, it’s a terrible thing going on right now between Pakistan and India. It’s a very, very bad situation, and it’s a very dangerous situation between the two countries. And we would like to see it stop. A lot of people were just killed and we want to see it stopped. We’re very much involved in that. Yes, if that’s what you’re referring to.

Q People in India are seeking right to self-defense —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: No, India is looking at something very strong. And, I mean, India just lost almost 50 people and — with an attack, so I can understand that also. But we’re talking and a lot of people are talking, but it is a very, very delicate balance going on right now. There’s a lot of problems between India and Pakistan because of what just happened in Kashmir.

Are you talking about Kashmir?

Q Yeah.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: In Kashmir, it’s very dangerous. Yes, please.

Q Mr. President, on Huawei, sir, just one quick follow-up: Are you planning an executive order on Huawei?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, we’re not doing anything right now. We may or may not put that in the trade agreement. We may be discussing it, but we’d only do that in conjunction with the Attorney General of the United States because that is a matter that is outside of what we’re doing. So we do that with the Attorney General, if we do anything. And I guess there’s a question as to whether or not that’s being included in the agreement.

Yeah, go ahead.

Q Mr. President, we haven’t gotten your response yet to Amazon pulling out of New York City, your home city —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I think it’s a big loss to New York City. I think it’s a big loss. I think it’s a — if you look at the deal, the deal was not a great deal from the standpoint of — they could’ve made a better deal than that, a much better deal. But still, I think it’s a loss for New York City.

And the $3 billion wasn’t a check; it was a form of taxes over a period of time that now they’ll never see because, you know, they were going to take in a lot of jobs; they were going to take in a lot taxes. So I think it’s a big loss for New York City. It’s the kind of thinking that our country is going to, on the Left, on the radical Left. But ultimately, it’s not good for jobs and it’s not good for the economy.

But I think it was a big loss for New York City. I come from New York City. I love New York City. I think it was big loss for New York City.

Yes, sir.

Q Mr. President, when were you briefed, sir, on the Coast Guard member who was arrested for threatening Democrats and other members of the media?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I’m actually getting a very final briefing and a very complete briefing in about two hours after this.

Q And do you have any thoughts on this man —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I think it’s a shame.

Q — who went after members of the media?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Yeah. I think it’s a very sad thing, I mean, when a thing like that happens. And I’ve expressed that, but I’m actually a very complete briefing in about two hours.

Q Do you think that you bear any responsibility for moderating your language when it comes to that?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: No, I don’t. I think my language is very nice.

Yes.

Q From People’s Daily China —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: From China. From China.

Q Trade conflict have been one year. Now negotiation is going on. So what’s your — what do you think?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Who are you with in China?

Q People’s Daily China newspaper.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: People’s Daily.

Q Yeah. And then what do you think — that cooperation is still the good solution between the two —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Great cooperation.

Q Yeah.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: We have great cooperation, both ways, with China. And a lot of good things are happening. I mean, I think you see that. So many people, every day, “They are going to make a deal; they aren’t going to make a deal.” They don’t know. They have no idea. It’s fake news. You know, it’s one of those things.

Do they have fake news in China? I think so. (Laughter.)

But it’s a question: Are they going to make a deal? Aren’t they? I think we have a very good chance of making a deal. But both parties want to make it a meaningful deal. We don’t want to make a deal that doesn’t — I can speak for the Vice Premier, I can speak for President Xi, I can speak for myself: Both parties want to make this a real deal and we want to make it a meaningful deal, not a deal that’s done and doesn’t mean anything.

We want to make this a deal that’s going to last for many, many years, and a deal that’s going to be good for both countries. But we want to make it meaningful.

Now, with that being said, China has the advantage of having many years of tremendous success at the expense of the United States, so they understand that. And I never blamed China for that; I blamed our past leaders. Our leaders have done a lousy job with trade. Our country lost $800 billion last year with trade, generally. Eight hundred billion dollars.

So the Vice Premier understands that. So this same agreement should have been made 20 years ago, not now. Because, for 20 years, the United States has been really taken advantage of. And I’m not blaming China, but we should’ve done the same thing to them. But we didn’t do that. We had Presidents that didn’t do their job. You want to know the truth? We had Presidents that did not do their job.

Yeah, go ahead.

Q Will the MOUs be a long-term deal? How long would your MOUs stay in place?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I think the MOU is going to be very short-term — no. I — we expect to go into — I don’t like MOUs because they don’t mean anything. To me, they don’t mean anything. I think you’re better off just going into a document. I was never a fan of an MOU.

AMBASSADOR LIGHTHIZER: An MOU is a contract. It’s the way trade agreements are generally used. People refer to it like it’s a term sheet. It’s not a term sheet. It’s an actual contract between the two parties. A memorandum of understanding is a binding agreement between two people. And that’s what we’re talking about. It’s detailed; it covers everything in great detail. It’s just called a memorandum of understanding. That’s a legal term. It’s a contract.

Q And would you think that would be a very long-term deal, sir?

VICE PREMIER LIU: Yes. Yes. Yes. (Inaudible.) Yes.

AMBASSADOR LIGHTHIZER: Contracts last while they last. There’s no term. They last while they last.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: By the way, I disagree. I think that a memorandum of understanding is not a contract to the extent that we want. We’re going to have — we’re doing a memorandum of understanding that will be put into a final contract, I assume. But, to me, the final contract is really the thing, Bob — and I think you mean that, too — is really the thing that means something.

A memorandum of understanding is exactly that: It’s a memorandum of what our understanding is. But, to me, the contract is — the real question is, Bob, so we do a memorandum of understanding, which, frankly, you could do or not do. I don’t care if you do it or not. To me, it doesn’t mean very much. But if you do a memorandum of — how long will it take to put that into a final, binding contract?

AMBASSADOR LIGHTHIZER: From now on, we’re not using the word “memorandum of understanding” anymore. We’re going to the term “trade agreement.” All right?

VICE PREMIER LIU: Okay.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Right.

AMBASSADOR LIGHTHIZER: No more. We’ll never use the term again.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Good.

AMBASSADOR LIGHTHIZER: We’ll have the same document. It’s going to be called a “trade agreement.” We’re never going to use “MOU” again.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Are they going to put that into another agreement?

AMBASSADOR LIGHTHIZER: It’ll — what we’ll have will be a trade agreement that, if we have — we have major hurdles. I don’t want to put the cart in front of the horse. Assuming you decide on an agreement, it’ll signed by the two people. It’ll be a trade agreement between the United States and China. We’re not going to use (inaudible) —

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Good. Good. I like that much better. I like that term much better.

AMBASSADOR LIGHTHIZER: Do you agree with that?

VICE PREMIER LIU: Okay. I agree. I fully agree.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I don’t — I wouldn’t go into a memorandum. I would go right into a trade agreement. Either you’re going to make a deal, or you’re not. To have these other agreements doesn’t mean anything —

AMBASSADOR LIGHTHIZER: We’re never using that word again.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: — because they’re not that meaningful, in my opinion. But anyway, I like that much better.

Q Mr. President, what do you think needs to be done after your meeting with Lynne Patton on NYCHA?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: On what?

Q Are you going to be meeting with Lynne Patton of the New York City Housing Authority?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Yeah, Lynne Patton is great. And I can tell you, the New York City Housing Authority — the Mayor of New York has done a terrible job with public housing. We’re trying to help them, but the Mayor of the City of New York has done a terrible job with respect to public housing. We’re getting reports back, and it’s a disgrace how badly New York City handles its public housing.

Q Do you have any thoughts on Bill de Blasio heading to Iowa?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Well, I think he has to learn how to run New York City before he starts running the country because he hasn’t done a very good job — including, by the way, with Amazon.

Q On North Korea, your own administration officials say that Kim Jong Un has not actually decided yet whether he wants to denuclearize. So how can you meet with him if he doesn’t even want to get the goal that you want?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: We have had such a great relationship, and China has helped us a lot with North Korea and with Kim Jong Un since I got to office.

If I were not elected President, you would have been in a war with North Korea. We now have a situation where the relationships are good — where there has been no nuclear testing, no missiles, no rockets. We got our hostages back. And we have many of the remains back, and coming back rapidly — the remains of our great warriors from many, many years ago. And the families are so thrilled and so happy. We’ve had a great relationship.

The Singapore was a tremendous success. Only the fake news likes to portray it otherwise. We would’ve gone — we would’ve been — we would have literally been in a war with North Korea, in my opinion, had I not been elected.

Okay. Thank you very much everybody.

Q (Inaudible.)

PRESIDENT TRUMP: Thank you. We’ll see how it goes. I think it will be successful.

Q Do you think Steve King should run again for Congress?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I can’t hear you. You have to speak up.

Q Do you think Steve King should run again for Congress? He said he’d run.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: You know, I don’t know anything about the situation. When did he announce that?

Q He said — today, he said he wanted to run.

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I have not seen it. He hasn’t told me anything. So we’ll have to take a look.

Q Are you still in touch with him?

PRESIDENT TRUMP: I haven’t spoken to him in a long time, no. I haven’t spoken — I have not been involved in that.

Thank you very much everyone.

END 3:07 P.M. EST