>> harris: the president speaking on one of the big stories on fox today earlier. and now will he be asked again about judge brett kavanaugh's nomination to the supreme court? we're watching. i'm harris. here's dana. ♪ >> dana: fox news alert. president trump set to take questions moments from now at a white house news conference with the president of poland. earlier the president praised judge brett kavanaugh and blasted democrats as sexual assault allegations threaten to derail his supreme court nominee. hello, everyone, i'm dana perino and this is the daily briefing. this just in. a source close to kavanaugh saying the judge claims he does not know his accuser, christine blasey ford. as senator grassley says, he still has not heard whether dr. ford will testify on monday. majority leader michigan mitch l sure to face questions when he speaks. right now chief

correspondent john roberts has more. john? >> good afternoon to you, dana. my colleague doug mckelway and i both spoke to the same source in the past hour. a person who has spoken with judge kavanaugh since all of this news broke. this person claiming that kavanaugh does not know who christine blasey ford is. that even though women who kavanaugh socialized with knew of her and went to school with her, it's because they went to school with her that kavanaugh went to georgetown prep, which which is an all boys school and thereby buttressing the allegations that he does not know who this person is. we are also told that it's expected that in the next few days, and this might not necessarily come from kavanaugh but from other people that significant gaps in this time line may be filled in. the suggestion that other people who knew her and maybe knew of this alleged incident would come forward and fill in some of the gaps. meantime, in the senate, they are trying to figure out what to do how to proceed going forward. senator charles grassley of iowa who is the chairman of

the judiciary committee says he wants to have a hearing on monday at which both ford and kavanaugh would appear and only those two. he suggested that ford would likely go first, followed by kavanaugh. but the democrats are saying well, wait a minute, we want other people to be heard as well. and senator susan collins of maine went so far to suggest that perhaps the way this hearing should unfold is that an attorney for christine blasey ford should question kavanaugh and then an attorney for the judge should in turn question ford and then the senators get to ask their questions a short time ago while i was meeting with the president of poland in the oval office. president trump weighed in on voicing support for kavanaugh and scolding the democrats for sitting on this for weeks, almost a couple of months before dropping it at the 11th hour. listen here. >> frankly, a terrible thing that this information wasn't given to us a long time ago. months ago when they got it they could have done that, instead of waiting until everything was finished and then all of a sudden spring

it that's what the democrats do. that's what they do. it's obstruction. it's resist. we feel we want to go through this process and we want to give everybody a chance to say what they have to say. >> some people don't want there to be a hearing on monday at all looking into this. a lot of democrats saying this should be turned over to the fbi for a full investigation and that that investigation should be completed before this goes back to the senate. the president did not think that was a good idea. listen here. >> i don't think the fbi really should be involved because they don't want to be involved. if they wanted to be, i would certainly do that but, as you know i think politically speaking the senators will do a very good job. >> according to senator grassley, the fbi investigation is closed they will not be anything else. hearing scheduled for monday. we know brett kavanaugh is

eager to testify senator grassley said this morning on the hugh hewitt radio show he and his people have reached out several times to christine ford and her representatives and they have yet to hear back as to whether or not she might be there. a lot still undecided here. dana? >> mitch mcconnell about to address theland. earlier toe mcconnell vowed to move forward saying these allegations don't reflect the man he knows. >> so this alleged incident is completely at variance with his entire life history. he welcomes the opportunity to address the committee about this claim. >> dana: bret baier is the anchor of "special report." we're fortunate to have him today. already the republicans are going to be delayed in getting this nomination confirmed if indeed it does finally get confirmed. because they would hope to have a vote on thursday. that now is put off. >> that's right. this public hearing is set for monday. we just don't know whether it's going forward or not. if dr. ford doesn't show up,

decides not to come, what then happens? and i think you've seen republicans huddling on capitol hill looking into that. you just had a letter come out from the senate judiciary committee staff saying that they have moved forward to start the interview process laying the groundwork for this public hearing. they interviewed judge kavanaugh yesterday. extensively. they are reaching out to the other people in the "the washington post" article, including the third person mentioned, mark judge. and they have reached out to dr. blasey ford but have not heard back from her attorney or her. they say the democrats are not taking part in any of that where do you go from her if she doesn't show. >> dana: collins had the suggestion that perhaps ford's lawyer should question kavanaugh and attorney for kavanaugh could question senators asking

questions. do you think that will fly with the democrats? >> maybe not with the democrats. the majority may want to do it. to have somebody else do the questioning of christine blasey ford, in part, because all the members of the senate judiciary committee on the republican side are white men. that's not the best image going forward in this environment in which we are and dealing with, as they will have to very sensitively these allegations and to try to get to facts. so, i would assume if that's the way that it goes forward that you will see a female lawyer for the majority asking the questions to dr. ford. >> dana: senator graham was on hannity last night. he was talking about how political this is all being. i understand what senator collins is suggesting is a way to figure out a way to depoliticize. this he says it's already been politicized. listen to senator graham. >> they can't beat him on the law. so they are trying to destroy his life. there has been a pattern by democrats on this committee to take his words out of

context, to try to accuse him of things that he had nothing to do with. and the last straw here is this allegation that came about last thursday and, again, why didn't they act on it before? >> dana: so, there is politics involved. there is also past involved and anita hill who was obviously front and center for the clarence thomas hearing at the end. she wrote this today in the "new york times," still acts protocol surfaced during a confirmation hearing suggest that the committee has learned little from the thomas hearing. less the more recent me too movement. this could get to the back and forth about should the fbi investigate or not. brett kavanaugh has been through at least i think 6 background investigations from the fbi. none of this has ever come up. fbi now at question whether they should get involved or not. >> sure. and you saw the fbi saying there is no federal crime involved here. they feel like their background efforts have been closed.

obviously the president said that as well. i suppose he could instruct the fbi to reopen it. but, as you mentioned, kavanaugh has been through six of these already. two-to-miss hill's point in that op-ed, with all due respect, there is a time frame here on the democrat side as well with senator feinstein. if she had started the process even anonymously, not bringing forward that person's name but saying there is this incident and telling republicans about it behind closed doors, starting the fbi investigation at that point while the background investigation was still open, we could be at a different place right now. >> dana: we certainly could be. bret baier, thanks. we will watch you on "special report" tonight. >> bret: thanks, dana. >> dana: calling for the fbi to conduct an investigation against kavanaugh. that's what bret and i just talked about. they completed a sending report to the white house. >> i strongly believe the fbi and in particular the

will will will a former department of justice prosecutor and a partner at law. >> dana, i'm sorry, i just lost your feed. looks like i cannot hear me. let me read to you kim strassel tweets, she says the g.o.p. needs to do better calling bs on demands for fbi investigation. fbi background checks of nominee involve interviewing people and putting results in a fire. the report goes white house, senate solely for guidance. the fbi isn't absoluting

crimes in these checks. it has put her detailed claims in the file and she has been invited to testify. that is the fbi's job. that is statute of limitations are not long past. democrats know this and are suggesting fbi has a different role here: that is not how it works. it would in fact be wildly irregular to do anything more than it has and it would look highly political. james, i believe you are back with us and you can hear us fine now? >> yeah. what role do they have or not have in this process? >> i mean, they are really not there to investigate and decide issues on cases that could or may be should be brought. in other words, they look into criminal conduct. they look into criminal record, they talk to neighbors. they do a lot in these investigations. but what they don't do is resolve unresolved accusations. they flag it. they say there might be an issue. that there is a woman who has made a complaint about something from 30 plus years

ago. they are not in the business of actually doing interviews and trying to determine whether it was a makeable case either then or now. revolve these issues. >> dana: there is a way that prosecutors look at things. way civil trials or cases are brought. what about in the senate advising consent? >> look, in a criminal case you are talking about proof beyond a reasonable doubt. and when i was a prosecutor, i certainly had some cases that were pretty challenging this way in terms of delayed reporting. maybe not 36 years or 34 years. but, you know, it's a difficult case. and it would be pretty easy for a prosecutor to decide even in the absence of a statute of limitations problem that there is no case to be proven yard. proven beyond a reasonable doubt because it's a high standard. civilly it's a preponderance of the evidence. when you get to the senate and talking about advising an consenting. you are talking about what

individual politicians want to make of it. there is no burden of proof. there is no way to say it's provable or not provable. have you no rule book to tell you what the standard is. >> dana: we will keep an eye on it and mitch mcconnell will come back to the podium and taking questions from the press and i'm sure he will address. this can i ask you about one other thing that the president has announced yesterday that he has instructed the government to release documents related to the investigation and the fisa investigation. several bullet points he wants to be released documents former fbi officials. documents led to carter page on surveillance and bro interviews, et cetera. what will you be looking for? what questions might this answer? >> well, it's going to answer some questions about a little bit about why bruce ohr was meeting with a decommissioned informant and what the substance of those conversations were. that will also help us decide whether or not the fisa court was actively mislead by the fbi there are still probably going to be a lot of questions.

we will be closer to knowing how this thing got initiated or what was going on at the high levels of the fbi. >> dana: that includes james comey. >> it really goes all the way back up through the whole change of fbi commands that was in control when this investigation started. they were signing off on fisa warrant. they presumably had some idea about the steel dossier and how it was being characterized. the same question holds true for the doj officials which will basically have to look at and see what they knew or didn't know. this is really getting to the heart of that investigation in a way that will shed some light about whether the fbi was playing unfair with the fisa court. >> dana: all right. some democrats saying this is unfair and it's going to be incomplete. but, at least the american people will have more information. james trusty, thanks for hanging in there with us. >> sure, thanks. >> dana: we are waiting for president trump to hold a joint news conference. we will go there live when it begins. both parties deciding thousand proceed with the kavanaugh nomination as we await word on whether his

accuser will testify on monday. ♪ ♪ me, and need cash? you should know about the newday va home loan for veterans. it lets you borrow up to 100 percent of your home's value. not just 80 percent like other loans. and that can mean a lot more money for you and your family. with our military service, veterans like us have earned a valuable va benefit. the right to apply for a va home loan. the newday va loan lets you refinance your mortgages, consolidate your credit card debt, put cash in the bank, and lower your payments over 600 dollars a month. newday usa has been granted automatic authority by the va. they could close your loan in as little as 30 days. so call newday usa. they look at your whole financial picture, not just your credit score. and they'll do everything they possibly can to get you approved. call today. and get the financial peace of mind every veteran deserves. go to newdayusa.com, or call 1-877-236-1855.

the best simple salad ever?d great tasting, heart-healthy california walnuts. so simple, so good. get the recipes at walnuts.org.

♪ >> dana: fox news alert. we are awaiting a president trump news conference. we have that for you when it starts. but, first, both parties considering their options today as questions remain on how the senate will proceed with the allegations of sexual misconduct against supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. jamil jaffer is a former clerk to justice gorsuch and served on confirmation team for justice gorsuch, alight toe and roberts. this nomination had felt fairly smooth up until last friday jamil. tell me if you know anything about how brett kavanaugh is feeling. >> look, dana, it's hard to know how brett kavanaugh is feeling right now. obviously, he is concerned with the situation he has made clear that he is prepared and ready to testify again before the senate judiciary committee to talk about these

allegations. and to defend his integrity and honor. we will see that opportunity early next week and the opportunity for dr. ford to come forward and tell her story about what happened, what is alleged to have happened 30 plus years ago. >> earlier today mercedes schlapp from the white house had this to say about the politicalness of this process. >> someone obviously in this process in the last minute effort wh by the democrats to stall the vote. to basically try smear judge kavanaugh's reputation. >> dana: so far jamil we don't have any answer from ford's lawyer or ford herself on whether she will show on monday. if she does not come to that hearing, what do you think the committee will do to proceed? >> well, it's hard to know what the committee will do at this point. you know, to be fair, what's most important here is the committee have a fair and open process going forward. dr. ford have the opportunity to come forward and tell her story, that judge kavanaugh have his opportunity to defend honor and character.

these senators in the american public have a chance to see these folks and understand what's being said and to hear from other folks that were around contemporaneously with these alleged events. that is the best way if senators, the american public keep an open mind, hear the stories out and make a decision going forward. that's the best process, that appears to be the process the senators have going forward and hopefully people will take advantage of that and have the opportunity to tell their stories. >> dana: there are seven senators that say they want to delay the vote. we have a list of them here. of course jeff flake of arizona. but roy blunt of missouri adding his name as well as shellie more capito from west virginia. do you think it would be worthwhile for brett kavanaugh to be getting in touch with these senators to be talking to them and telling him his side of the story before this goes on because there is a long time between tuesday and monday. >> certainly. there is quite a while this thing is going to play out as it has already in the last four or five days. what's interesting here is dr. ford didn't want to come out publicly. >> dana: i'm going to pause threw, jamil, mitch

mcconnell is stepping to the mike spoken. we want to hear what he has to say. >> continue to be heard. and anticipate they will handle this in a fair manner. it is still disturbing, however, to think about the way in which this has developed right at the end. the ranking member of the judiciary committee had notice of this for quite some time. and decided to spring it right at the end. it's pretty obvious this is all about delaying the process. but the accuser certainly does deserve a right to be heard and we are looking forward to hearing what she has to say on monday. judge kavanaugh, as you know has been anxious to testify. and i'm sure he will be here as well. >> so far, dr. ford's lawyer has refused to respond to invitations to participate in a bipartisan process, which is traditional in

judicial nominations either responding to the staff for an interview or even the invitation to come testify on monday. but we have certainly hope that she takes advantage of this opportunity, if she still would like to, if she would prefer to do this in a closed setting, that's her choice. buff we have offered her basically an open or closed setting. but, again, to say -- to reiterate what leader mcconnell, the point he made, we wouldn't find ourselves, nor would dr. ford find herself in this situation if senator feinstein hadn't sat on this letter she has had since july. said nothing about it during the course of the hearing for judge kavanaugh and now raising it at this late date. but, we believe that the process of confirming judges should continue to be bipartisan we're hopeful our democratic colleague also join news making sure we can restore some dignity and

civility and decorum to the process rather than just have another repetition of what we saw during judge kavanaugh's earlier hearing, which is basically having a judiciary hearing by mob rule. >> the leader has pointed out the situation of the supreme court is entirely of the democrats' own making. remember, we have had 32 hours of open testimony on the supreme court nomination where members had an opportunity to ask questions in an open setting. they were closed meetings. there have been 1300 written questions that have been responded to by judge kavanaugh. and he met with 65 united states senators over the course of the last two months. and never a whiff of this letter until just this last week. and so, this is a process that the democrats have created. and it's entirely now up to

us to try and make sure that dr. ford has her side of the story heard as well as judge kavanaugh and we hope that she will take advantage of that opportunity and we can move forward with this process. in the meantime, we continue to get record economic news. in addition to to having 4.2% economic growth in the second quarter of this year, very robust number, we also saw middle income levels reach their highest level ever. >> dana: jamil jaffer, i think you stayed with us here. mitch mcconnell just coming out and saying that he believes christine blasey ford should have the right to be heard and she will have an opportunity to do so. did i think it was interesting, it might have been the first time i had heard senator cornyn said they have offered ford's lawyer and for ford herself the possibility of a closed hearing, which would mean it would not be public, which i wonder if she is concerned about the public spectacle of it all, which i could understand, that maybe that

might be an option for getting this done. >> absolutely. oftentimes in -- when there are sensitive matters about a nominee, they often do it in closed setting. they ask some tough questions about the background check and the like in closed settings. that's not an unusual circumstance. why it would be somewhat unusual to have another witness testify in those hearings it, seems perfectly appropriate in this scenario if that's what dr. ford wants. it's interesting dr. ford did not want the story to come out. it's unfortunate it came out in this way without her consent. now that it's out, she has a choice to make whether she testifies and under what circumstance. these are things that should be in her hands. and she should have the opportunity to make those calls and unfortunately we are in a position where she didn't make that call and made for her by other folks. now we are in a situation where she has another decision to make which is an unfortunate position to put somebody in this position in. >> dana: before mitch mcconnell started speaking you were going to talk about what happens if she doesn't come to testify. do you think then that the republicans might say gave the opportunity, we have questioned brett kavanaugh, we're going to go ahead and

have this vote or will they try to just -- is the idea for the democrats to delay this as loc long as they can? >> i don't know what you can do other than offer somebody an opportunity to testify either in public or in a closed setting with appropriate precautions in place. those are the opportunities that are available here. this is obviously a public proceeding. and the the process needs to move forward it is important that dr. ford have the opportunity to tell her story. and if she has been given an opportunity. >> dana: we have mcconnell taking questions now. we will go back to him. >> there have been multiple investigations, judge kavanaugh has been through six fbi investigations in the course of his lengthy public career. we want to give the accuser an opportunity to be heard and that opportunity will occur next monday. >> [inaudible] should there be one? >> she is going to have an opportunity to be heard monday. the committee will make

decisions about the makeup of the hearing, but she has been asking for the opportunity to be heard. and she is going to be given the opportunity to be heard on monday. as senator cornyn pointed out she could do it privately if she prefers or publicly if she prefers. monday is her opportunity. >> have you had several meetings of members of the judiciary committee on this topic and thousand forge ahead here. that said that would indicate in your mind the fact that you are having these meetings that this nomination is in trouble. we know you only have 51-49 majority here. are you concerned that this could tank this nomination regardless of what's true or not in this case because it's only 51-49. >> no, i'm not concerned about tanking the nomination. we have been meeting with the committee to agree to a process that is fair to the woman who is accusing here. that everybody can agree is a fair process. and the committee has agreed

to do it the way i just outlined. i think that gives her ample opportunity to express her point of view and, judge kavanaugh, of course, has been anxious for days to discuss the matter as well. thank you. >> senator mcconnell are you -- >> dana: mitch mcconnell finishing up media availability after weekly policy lunch he has had with his team. let's bring in mary anne marsh advisor to john kerry and coshocton holt. as mitch mcconnell was saying there he said he is not concerned about tanking the nomination. that was the question that was asked by a reporter. the question being is the nomination in trouble and especially when they have a 51-49 split in the senate. he also said she is being asked -- she has asked for an opportunity to be heard. she something granted that opportunity on monday. and it could be an open or closed setting. if she does not come, josh, what do you think mcconnell will do? >> well, look.

i mean, her attorney yesterday, just as a matter of fact pattern here went out on virtually every morning show to discuss her client's allegation. and, in doing so, indicated that her client would also like to speak and would like to be heard before the senate judiciary committee and so now they have provided that option either in public or in private, whatever her preference might be. you would think that having represented that she wanted to make her voice known that she would take advantage of that i think either way they are going to be investigating this, and they are going to come to a resolution after monday. >> dana: marianne, the idea of delaying this, do you in some way think this is retribution for how the democrats feel merrick garland was treated when he was no, ma'a nominated by presit obama. >> i think this has nothing to do with the timing of anything. reality is there is no magic to having original lay vote on thursday. there is no magic to monday. the people who have a time

line here are donald trump, mitch mcconnell and the republicans who are trying to jam in one more supreme court justice before this election after sitting on merrick garland for over a year and never even meeting with the guy. not once. and is he brett kavanaugh's boss right now. so i think that says a lot right there and as to professor ford. >> let me jump in there because there are a couple things totally gulling. the has anything to do with merrick garland. the fact we are discussing ruining anybody's life, either the accuser or the accused here because we feel like political retribution is necessary for a supreme court debate that happened last cycle is completely disgusting. i think most americans would think so, too. second of all, to the point of what the timing might be, the time something very important here because senator feinstein had the information from the accuser all the way back in july. >> oh, josh, come on. >> instead of going through what is a very typical process of litigating out truth and fact and making

sure the committee had the ability to evaluate all of this. [talking at the same time] >> dana: how do you respond to the time line and dianne feinstein. what's the defense there. >> here is what is gulling, dianne feinstein had professor ford's letter in july. and she asked to be -- it remain anonymous. to this day, her choice would have been to be anonymous, except for the fact that reporters started showing up at her home, at her classrooms, contacting her colleagues, so she decided if her story was going to be told, she would be the one to tell it. >> mary anne, you may want to check your facts on that. >> josh, that's what you need to understand, is that women reluctantly come forward in niec these matters. >> i don't dispute that. >> the fact that she revealed to her therapist in 2012 tells you everything this is not political. >> dana: josh, you said there is a factual concern there go ahead. >> i don't dispute anything you had to say about the accuser and her being reluctant to speak. listen, this is a very

delicate circumstance from a lot of different issues. but one of the things that has been reported is that she called "the washington post" tip line to share this story back in july. if that is the case and it is in fact also the case that she had discussed it with her local lawmaker, representative h. >> dana: josh, i have to jump in here. if you would stand by president trump and president duda of poland are taking to the podiums now. we will listen to them and bring you back as soon as they are done. >> today i'm very honored to host the president of poll land, a friend of mine, president duda. and mrs. duda, thank you very much for being here. a great honorable. it's lovely to have you at the white house. we spent some time in the oval office and we accomplished a lot. melania and i are deeply grateful for the incredible welcome the president and

mrs. duda gave us in warsaw, poland last year. it was a very exceptional day, extraordinary. it's wonderful to have them both with us in washington today. thank you very much, mr. president. during my visit last summer, i had the privilege to stand before the monument to the warsaw uprising and address the people of poland about our shared commitment to defending our heritage and our civilization. it was an experience i will always treasure and i will never ever forget. not far from where we stand today, another monument in another square, the statue of general, a lafayette park, reminds us that the bonds between our people go all the way back to america's revolutionary war. this year the united states and poland are celebrating 100 years of poll land

regaining its independence and nearly 100 years of u.s. polish diplomatic ties. it's a long time. i'm thrilled to say that the alliance between our nations has never been stronger. with you and i at the helm. i do agree with that? thank you, mr. president. glad he said yes. [laughter] in our discussions, this afternoon, president duda and i agreed to bolster our robust defense ties. we will enhance cooperation and military relations, intelligence, missile defense, technology and training. i'm proud to report that poll land has recently purchased a state of the art patriot missile system to the great system. we make the greatest military equipment by far. anywhere in the world. and it's made right here in the u.s.a. we are grateful for poland's leadership on defense spending and burden sharing in nato. i want to commend poland for

meeting its nato defense spending obligations and i'm glad that it plans to increase spending beyond the 2% minimum obligation. thank you very much for that. i would like to share my gratitude to the people of poland for their contributions to nato's resolute support mission in afghanistan and the coalition to defeat isis. we have made tremendous progress with respect to the defeat of isis, as you have seen. we also understand that you can't have national security without border security, both poland and the united states understand that strong nations must have very strong borders. the president and i, likewise, are exploring opportunities to advance energy security, the united states and poland are deeply committed to energy diversity all across europe, know nation should be dependent upon a single

foreign supplier of energy. poland has worked tirelessly to increase energy independence nationally and across central europe. it is constructing a new pipeline, the highest technology from norway to poland and it recently built a liquified natural gas import facility. last year the united states was proud to send its first export of lng to poland and soon, our nations will launch a high level diplomatic exchange on energy security. and, mr. president, we are now, as of a few months ago, the largest producer of energy in the world. so that was -- that's a big statement. president duda, i also, just want to talk to you about the three cs summit where central european leaders

working hard to increase energy market access, reduce energy trade barriers, which is something we have to get done with respect to the european union, the trade barriers. they make it very difficult for the united states, and to strengthen energy independence. the united states firmly supports these goals and we are eager to expand commercial ties all across the region of europe. in our meeting today, the president and i discussed our bilateral economic relationship at length, poland has experienced more than a quarter century of uninterrupted economic growth, which is a very big statement, very few can say that. and we look forward to further enhancing trade, investment, and commerce between our two great nations. my administration is committed to realizing a future of prosperity and opportunity for all americans. this month, we celebrated the highest employment level

in u.s. history. we are right now employing more people. we have more workers in the united states than at any time ever in u.s. history. i look forward to partnering with president duda as we grow our economies together. mr. president, thank you for joining me today. poland has chosen its place among the free and independent nations of the world. and as a loyal ally and strategic partner of the united states, and we greatly appreciate that, we welcome the next 100 years of friendship between our two nations. mr. president, thank you very much. >> thank you. >> distinguished mr. president, distinguished ladies and gentlemen. i am delighted that in this

year it's so important to poland, the year of poland regaining its independence we celebrate our 100th anniversary of it, i'm able to be hosted here, by the president of the united states at the white house at washington. and also from this perspective, from the perspective of the centennial of poland gaining its independence, this fact is importance for polls, both those living in poland and those living abroad especially the 10 million pols living in the united states. this is a huge symbolic importance. one reason for that is that the matter of polish independence was one of the important points of the policy of the u.s. president wilson. it was precisely president wilson before 1918, he was the one who put polish independence on his agenda,

on the agenda of his policy that happened among others, thanks to a great polish politician, a composer and musician. but it is a fact that pols experienced back then a lot of good from the united states and from the president of the united states there are no other words to describe the fact that that great state indicated to poland and defined poland as a country who should be europe and world reinstated on that map 100 years ago in 1918. and i'm absolutely delighted today as polish president i can in washington at the same table as the president of the united states and sign an agreement which is deepening our strategic partnership and renewing that strategic partnership. i'm talking here about the agreement on the strategic partnership, agreement was signed in 2008 between our countries. bank then it waback then it wasy

the ministers. today a new version, because a lot has changed. this renewed version of the partnership was signed personally by myself and president donald trump. i would like to express my deep gratitude to you, mr. president, for that fact. this agreement indicates the most important aspects of our cooperation and our friendship. it also sets new paths for the future. the defense military cooperation, tightening our cooperation area of security and energy business. tightening our cooperation in the broadly business. and also in the aspects of the already mentioned cooperation as part of the three c's initiative to which the president has alluded. i came here to washington from the summit of the ccc

initiative. the first organized as part of the ccc initiative. the president was there as part the ccc. thank you for that. and that meeting and all the leaders who held their speeches there said in a very clear way about the need and hope for cooperation with the united states of america regarding theee newly and building of a new infrastructure, road infrastructure, railway infrastructure both concerning electricity and the transmission of gas in central europe along the north/south axis. referring here to the area between the baltic states poland, czechoslovakia, hungary, bulgaria, all the way down to the black sea and through croatia and slovenia. this is a pace in which we want to cooperate and

develop our cooperation with the united states is a key importance. also as far as providing energy security is concerned. today we talked at length about this with mr. president. we also discussed threats to energy security in europe to the possible diversification of supplies. without any doubt, such a huge, threat right now as posed by the construction of gas 2 pipeline. we discussed with mr. president i presented him the situation as i as it hae to be clear and say from the jerry magerman and russian side construction. there are still formalities connected with the laying of the bypass baltic sea. this adjustment threatens energy stability of europe and without any doubt it threatens polish energy security because it threat there is a threat of ration and domination.

russia says it's going to build more pipelines 3 and 4. this widespread domination in europe is obvious. what are the results of such a domination, ladies and gentlemen, we were able to see ourselves a couple years ago in ukraine a sudden interruption of supplies. of course, it had nothing to do with economic factors. it was connected only and exclusively with a political blackmail. was effect. and it is obvious that today we are making efforts and we are going to go to any length to protect ourselves from that that is why we decided to construct energy terminal. that's why we also decided to receive the lng gas from the united states. i'm really glad we have concluded such contracts. i'm glad that american companies right now are delivering lng to poland and this precisely is a very important element of diversification of gas supplies to our country. i firmly believed thanks to

lng and expanding its capacities as far as the annual quantities of gas are concerned, we are not only going to realize our own energy needs i hope we will be able to transmitted gas further to our neighbors through the development of the ccc initiative. through the construction of interconnecinterinterconnectors. opening up business. we would like to invite american business to poland. there are veteran investment possibilities. poll land is experiencing growth. of course there are companies from the united states which have been present in the polish market for many, many years like general electric which right now sim plementing huge investment cob conventional energy such as construction of the 2, a huge contract

abilitying to almost $2 billion. these are huge projects being realized in poland. invite huge economic projects and who have got huge possibility of investment. we would also like to invite a smaller one. poll land is a big european country. i believe it is an interesting partner where the united states and the u.s. business is very much welcome and i want to assure you, ladies and gentlemen, about that. there is also a perspective of developing through poland to include the ccc countries. this is something we have been working on as a part of the ccc initiative. we want to ensure, also, the communication possibility and we also want to increase the opportunity for economic cooperation. we want also business partners from the u.s. to join our project. investment in our part of europe. we would like to invite

american businesses to come. i believe this opens opportunity for making joint business. ladies and gentlemen, all of that is connected, of course, with the issue of military security. i'm hugely delighted with the president of the u.s. armed forces and published territory. i'm deeply satisfied with the decisions that were taken by summit in 2016 where the president of the military forces of nato in poll land was guaranteed. i'm also happy that we have in poland american soldiers as part of our bilateral agreement that i would like to invite you, mr. president, to post more american troops to poland. we believe the presence of the united states is a guarantor of security in our part of europe. we ourselves want to invest further. we want to modernize polish armed forces and, mr. president trump

mentioned the so-called -- air defense system that includes the purchase of patriot missiles. we are implementing the largest military investment so far as the poll lash armed forces are concerned over the past 30 years. we want to implement more projects. we want to buy more equipment. we also want to cooperate in the area of development as regards to military technology. i'm convinced this between poland and the united states will go smoothly. i hope the if the will make no decision to deploy to poland together with equipment. ladies and gentlemen, i was smiling when talking to mr. president. i said i would very much like for us to set up a permanent american bases in poland, which we would call fort trump and i firmly believe this is possible. i am convinced that such a decision lies both in the polish interest as well as in the interest of the united states. poland is an attractive

country and first and foremost it's got a very strategic location in europe. and i'm convinced that for the interest of the united states, also pertaining to the security of the united states itself, the presence of the u.s. forces in our country is important also to protect american interests. mr. president, once again, thank you very much for this meeting. thank you once again for this joint cooperation that we're able to sign today. thank you for also adding to this your splendor to the poland celebrating independence and 10th anniversary of our strategic partnership. >> thank you. a tremendous amount of lng will be exported to poland. we are giving them a pretty good price. they are buying a lot of it and that's going to be great. >> i do want to say while we are together shown in north carolina, south carolina,

virginia and the area that was so horribly hit by hurricane florence. i got some clips of some of the things that the coast guard is doing and getting people to safety and horrible, holler conditions. i want to just salute all of the people that are working so hard, the first responders, the law enforcement. military, fema, the job they are doing is incredible. it's incredible. i just want to thank them very much. i think what we will do is take our first question from emerald robinson of one america news. emerald? >> >> thank you, mr. president. so news today of a plane, a russian plane shut down over syria. russia is assigning the blame to israel, even though it was accidentally shot down by syrian forces. clearly things are heating up there are concerns by

many americans, most americans that we might be involved in a war in syria soon. you had hoped to bring troops home. clearly things are changing. what do you tell american people today about a possibility of war in syria? >> well, i just heard about the incident you have mentioned, emerald. it sounds to me and it seems to me just like based on a review of the facts that syria shot down a russian plane and i understand about 14 people were killed, at least. and that's a very sad thing. that's what happens. but, syria according to early reports. that's subject to change. syria shot down a russian plane. that's not a good situation. we have done a very job in syria and in the region erratic indicating isis which is why we are there. and we're very close to being finished with that job. and then we're going to make

a determination as to what we are going to do. but we have eradicated isis in a very large area of the middle east. these are people that will not be coming here because they are not around any longer. so we have done in a very short period of time our vice president is here, mike pence. our great secretary of state really thank you very much for the great job you are doing. mike pompeo, and we have been working very hard on this and done an incredible job over there but we will make a decision fairly quickly. thank you very much. would you have a question for the president? >> certainly. thank you, president duda. clearly you said you asked president trump if he would consider a permanent base in poland, of course that also relates to russia. what would you say or how the president respond to your position to have a

permanent base from america in poland and then, also, do you currently have concerns over the u.s.-russia relationship? >> [translator] >> of course, i told mr. president about all the aspects connected with the permanent presence of the armed forces in poland. first and foremost, ladies and gentlemen, we can not say if there are permanent bases of the u.s. armed forces in poland we will see a duration of security because that will lead to an increased russian connectivity and increased militarization of this part of europe by russia. i want to say clearly, ladies and gentlemen, very strong militarization of, for instance, -- has taken place more than 10 years now. it is reality we live in today. as far as an aggressive russian behavior is

concerned. increasing of the militarization russia has been conducting such activity see that in militarized way in georgia in 2008 when the then president of poland professor took european leaders and stop russian tanks which were about to attack the capital of georgia and from that moment, that military expansion has been developing -- the attack on ukraine and today we can see an illegal annexation of crimea. today we are witnessing constant violation of international law in the [inaudible] these are today political and military facts of europe and presentation of the united states is only providing security and possibility to defend because let me reiterate again, it is only about the guarantee of security and defense of our part of europe that is the free

world. this is the most crucial issue right now from our perspective. from the perspective of central and eastern european countries. and we are speaking in one voice on this one, generally. that is why we wanted to ensure the presence of the united states armed forces and also we wanted to have the presence of nato forces in our part of europe as well. of course, mr. president and his staff, his advisors and also the pentagon's staff has to consider all these issues, but there is a whole range of arguments which are in favor of the fact that the presence of the u.s. armed forces in this area is absolutely justified today. that is due to the protection of the interest of the united states as well. so, i am absolutely convinced of this one because today, unfortunately, we are seeing international law being violated. today we are seeing aggressive behaviors. and i'm convinced that there is no, more effective method

of presenting a war as it stands demonstrating we are ready any moment to propel an attack. presence also means deterrence at the same time when we are -- when we have a strong military presence then there will be no more happening ever. >> i think it should be pointed out that the president said and he said it publicly that he would pay the united states, meaning poland would be paying billions of dollars for a base and we're looking at that more and more from the standpoint of defending really wealthy countries and not being reimbursed, paid. it's one thing when we defend countries that can't defend themselves and they are great people and we should help them. we don't expect anything for that but, when we are defending immensely wealthy countries and not paying for the defense to the united states, they are only taking advantage of us. and we are in discussions

with numerous countries, all of whom you know about payment, payment and we get along with them very well. but it's not fair that includes nato. as you know, i got $44 billion additional last year where they paid an additional. you can speak to secretary general saltenberg, who is the head of nato, and he said he has never seen anything like it. and this year we did even better. but, when a country is very wealthy and when the united states has been protecting them for many years at tremendous cost. cost like nobody in this room would believe. it's time that they help with burden-sharing and they will do that. the president offered us much more than $2 billion to do this. so we are looking at it we are looking at it from the standpoint of, number one, military protection for both countries and also, cost a

term you don't hear too often and you haven't heard too often over the last 25 years but that's the way it has to be. thank you very much would you like to have a question, please? >> >> polish press agency. i have a question to president trump. do you share the conviction which we have just heard a minute ago expressed by president duda concerning the threat which is posed to the region not only to the region by russia and do you also share the view that permanent american bases in poland are justified not only due to the security of the countries in our region but also due to the security of the united states? >> i do. i actually do. i think it's a very aggressive situation.

i think russia has acted aggressively. they respect force. they respect strength as anyone does. and we have the greatest strength in the world especially now. we were being depleted under the last administration. we had planes that were old and tired and didn't fly in some cases they were getting used parts. this is the united states, that doesn't happen. we make the greatest planes in the world and missiles in the world and we have enhanced to put it mildly our military it's literally being rebuilt as we speak with literally hundreds and hundreds of planes and missiles and everything can you imagine. they never had it so good because i got in congress $700 billion this year. $670 billion last year. that's far more than they ever anticipated. i viewed it two ways. number one military because it's always more important than anything else, including jobs. but number two is jobs.

we make everything here hundreds of thousands of jobs to make the best military in the world and russia respects that they respect that so i am with the president i feel that he is right and i feel that, look, you look at the history of poland and russia, that's a long and very complicated history certainly has a right to feel that way. okay? >> i had a question to president duda. after the meeting that you have had today at the white house do you ever the [inaudible] permanent american presence in our country are closer to being implemented? are they going to be a fact? >> ladies and gentlemen, myself and mr. president had

a meeting. a private meeting and then we met also with our staff. we have long conversations, very honest discussions very strong at certain points as well. in terms of diagnosis of the situation in the area of military security and energy security alike. and i am convinced that all of us are going to draw appropriate conclusions from these discussions because as i said, both sides presented their positions in absolutely many elements. they are concurrent as far as the assessment of the situation currently is what kind of steps need to be taken in order to protect both the issue of security and the issue of interest. these are business related issues. i am convinced that ladies and gentlemen you are going to see the results of those, our meetings today