we are doing very well in our negotiation with china. we pretty much concluded our negotiation with canada and wit. we have done deal and signed a deal with south korea, which a lot of people said was not going to happen, it would be impossible. it's a good deal, it's a horrible deal, it's a good deal. i think a lot of this has to do with the fact, though, that already companies are moving back into our country that have left our country in some cases. in some cases they're moving back because they want to be here. but in many cases these are automobile companies that have left and gone to other countries. now they're coming back to the united states. so it's nice to see. one of the things that's so beautiful to watch is 3.2% wage growth. that hasn't happened in so long for our country. that's an incredible thing. that means people are actually getting more money, taking home

more money, and that's something that's really nice to see. a lot of you have been following me when we were on a thing called the campaign. that was an exciting campaign. a great campaign. and i used to talk about wages going down, not going up, but going down for years, 19 years. and now they just went up 3.2%, and yet there's no inflation because other things are going down like the gas of your gasoline at the tank. it's low. and that doesn't happen by luck. i work hard on that. that's like a tax cut for people. so a lot of good things are happening. labor participation rate increased to 63.1. that's an incredible the economy is very good. and remember, from the time of my election, the stock market's gone up very close to 30%.

and that's with all of the things that are happening. and there are a lot of things happening. we have a massive trade negotiation going on with china. president xi is very much involved. so am i. we're dealing at the highest levels. we're doing very well. we are doingt very well. in the meantime, we've taken in billions and billions of dollars in tariffs from china and from others. our steel industry has come roaring back. and that makes me very happy. i think we'll have to build a steel wall as opposed to a concrete awall, because we hav steel companies again. there's something awfully nice about that. so we had a productive meeting today with speaker pelosi and senator schumer. i thought it was really a very, very good meeting. we're all on the same path in terms of wanting to get government open. we're going to be meeting.

i've designated a group, and we're going to be meeting over the weekend. that group to determine what we're going to do about the border. really, i want to thank a lot of the border patrol people, the nice people who came up yesterday. they had a tremendous impact on i think a lot of democrats, frankly, but a lot of people. because they were able to lay out exactly what the problem is. and one of the problems described to me as an example, you have ports of entry. we're going to agree with chuck and nancy and steny and dick durbin was there. we're going to agree that -- and we want to -- make the ports bigger, more powerful. able to handle more traffic. have very, very powerful drug equipment there. so they make very good stuff now. we don't have it, because of budgets and other reasons. but we're going to make our ports of entry very powerful. very strong.

we're going, to have the best drug finding equipment anywhere in the world. they make it much better today than they made it even two years ago. and i explained to them the problem is, we can have a wonderful port of entry. we have 2,000 miles of border between the m united states and mexico. and if you take a look and you see, like we do, through certain technology, including cameras in airplanes, not just drones, you'll see vast numbers of vehicles driving through the desert and entering where you don't have a very powerful fence orwh a wall. that happened this week, where a wonderful young police officer -- i spoke to his wife yesterday -- where he was shot, viciously shot, for simply stopping a person that came over the border illegally. got shot, killed.

and took the most beautiful picture just hours before, a christmas picture. we don't want that happening. but i was explained to, and i explain to people, because it's really common sense -- so you have ports of entry. we have great security at the ports of entry. and then you may have fencing or walls up and down, left and right, east and west. butan they stop. because we don't have proper border security. these people have vehicles. and they drive to the right. they're not going through what we have great border patrol officers and i.c.e. officers and military now. i'll tell you, the military ha done a fantastic job. they don't stop. they go right to the easiest part and the weakest part, sometimes out in desert, but you have miles and miles and miles of unprotected area. and you can see where they drive over. you even have people walking that trek. and that's a very dangerous

trek. and they bring children or even worse, they use children. you know, children are the biggest beneficiaries of what we want to do. children are hurt more than anybody else. these coyotes, what they do with children, all because we have open borders, because they think they can get away with it. they don't come in through the port, where we have a lotth of protection. they come in through empty areas, vast spaces, empty areas. just like this terrible person came in when he shot officer singh. they come in through these vast open areas. you don't even have a sign saying mexico/u.s. there's no sign designating, you have just entered the united states. it's just open space. and is explained that to the meeting today with nancy pelosi, chuck schumer and a lot of othr people at the meeting. and i said, one of the things that happens there is human

traffickers. maybe that's the worst of all. where you'll have traffickers having three and four women, tied up, sitting in the back of a van or a car, and they'll drive that van or the car not through a port of entry, where we have very talented people that look for every little morsel of drugs or even people or whatever they're looking for. not going to go there. they get off the road and they drive out into the desert and they come and make a left turn, usually it's a left, not a right. most of them cometu out, becaus in san diego and in areas ofth california, we just finished brand-new walls. beautiful walls. steel walls.. and they wanted them, badly. they were asking us. that's why we did it bthere. i said, i let's not do it in california. california always explains through their great governors. they're always complaining. i said, let's not do it. let the governor ask us. but we did it anyway, because

they really needed it. they were having tremendous problems. so we built a brand-new wall in san diego. and it's working really well. you should go and look at it. it's amazing. it's incredible how well it works. but these coyotes and these humanre traffickers, they make right turn before they get to the port of entry. theyt go as far as the wall is r as far as the barricade is, and then they make a left, welcome to the united states, and what they do with -- usually the women -- sometimes children. that they're trafficking with and in, you don't want to know about. so the only way you're going to stop that is by having a solid steel structure or concrete structure. whether it's a wall or some form of very powerful steel. now, the steel is actually more expensive than the concrete.

but i think we're probably talking about steel, because i really feel the other side feels better about it. and i canan understand what they're saying. it is more expensive. we mentioned the price that we want, $5.6 billion. very strongly. because numbers are thrown around. 1.6, 2.1, 2.5. this is national security we're talking about. we're n not talking about games. we're n talking about national security. this should have been done by all of the presidents that preceded me.l and they all know it. some of them have told me that we should have done it. so we're not playing games. we have to do it. and just remember, human traffickers. remember drugs. the drugs are pouring into thi country. they don't go through the ports oftr entry. when they do, they sometimes get caught. when we finish, and the democrats do want this. they want ports of entry

strengthened, and i want to do that too. in fact, we have it down. it's about $400 million. and we can have the best equipment in the world. now what they'll do, if we have the protection, and we have strong ports of entry with this incrediblent drug-finding equipment, i don't know what they're going to do. because they're noton coming in through past -- the steel gates or the steel walls. or the concrete walls, depending on what's happening. because we are meeting this weekend. we have a group -- i've a set ua group. they are going to tell us who their groupth of experts and probably people in the senate. and congressmen and women are going to come and we have three -- i said give us three. and then i said, you know what, send over nine or six or three or two. doesn't matter. send over whoever you want. but it's common sense. so now when they makee that tur,

they make it, and now all of a sudden they can't go any further. and they have to go back. and that's going to stop the caravans for two reasons. number one, they're not going to be able to get through. but when they realize they can't get through, what's going to happen? they're not going to form and they're not going to try and come up. and they can apply for asylum and they can -- most importantly, they can apply for citizenship, because the companies that i told you that created theseou great job numbers -- they're incredible job numbers, beyond anybody's expectations. i don't think there was one wall street genius of which i know many, but they're not geniuses. there's not one that predicted anywhere close to these job numbers. i thought they were goingng to good. but there wasn't one that i sa. so now we have everything so beautifully handled. we need to have, however -- we

need border security. and all of this security, if we do what i think what the democrats want, all of the border things that we'll be building will be done right here in the good old usa by steel companies that were practically out of business when i came into office as president, and now they're thriving. you call up the heads of u.s. steel and i could name ten companies. you look at t what's going on wh the steel industry. it's almost a miracle. it was a dead industry. we need steel for defense. we need steel for a lot of things. steel and aluminum. but those industries were in deep trouble. the steel industry was almost dead and now it's a vibrant, vibrant industry. so what i'm going to do is ask -- first of all, mike pence, the vice president, to say a couple of words, because mike is -- we put together a team of people that will work over the weekend, and they'llke be negotiating on the border, on

the look, on different things having to do withn border security. including at the ports ofde ent. and i think they're going to be very successful. because i found the democrats really wantto to do something. so we're at 5.6. if you look at it, $5.6 billion. but we are able to also, in addition to that, because what we t want to do has to be done properly, and we'rebe negotiati very tough prices. very, very tough. becausee you heard much higher numbers. those higher numbers were very much a misnomer. you heard 20 and $25 billion in daca. what happened was when a judge incredibly -- because it was an incredibly -- i will say wrong decision. in fact, president obama, when he signed the daca with the executive order, made a statement to the effect, this isn't going to work. and someis judge from the 9th

circuit, here we go again, upheld it. and then it was upheld by the 9th circuit appellate. and now it's going before the united states' supreme court. and hopefully that will be properly adjudicated, because if it is, talks will begin on larger immigration matters, having to do with daca, having to do with other things. so that is taking place. we may add a few things on to our discussions over the weekend. but i'm going to ask mike pence, and then i'll have leader mccarthy say a few words. and we'll take a couple of questions. but we'rere very proud of the js and the job numbers. that was incredible. and i think i'll be even more proud if we can have great border security for the first time in really the history of our country. the southern border is a dangerous, horrible disaster. we've done a great job.

but you can't really do the kind of job we have to do, unless you have a major powerful barrier. and that's what we're going to have to have. so first we start with mike pence. w >> >> thank you, mr. president. we are nearly two weeks into a government shutdown. but our nation is also in the midst of a crisis on our southern border. and today president trump convened for the second time this week, republican and democrat leaders from the congress. to address both issues. and we are truly grateful for the candid and constructive dialogue that took place today here at the white house. with speaker pelosi and leader schumer. with our republican senate leadership, as well. and we look forward to continued dialogue over the course of this

weekend. make no mistake about it. we are in the midst of a crisis in our southern border. every day, nearly 2,000 people are apprehended or stopped attempting to come into our country having no lawful claim to be here. last year alone, 17,000 individuals with previous criminal records were apprehended, attempting to come across our southern border. every day, all across this country, in a single week, 300 americans lose their lives to the scourge of heroin addiction. 90% of the heroin in this country flows through our southern border. and the human trafficking that the president just described so compellingly. last month alone, 20,000 minors were brought alone across our border. more interdicted by border

patrol personnel. you heard the president's passion today here at the podium. and we all, leader mccarthy and all of the leaders gathered. the situation room today heard the president's passion for the better part of two hours. not just to address a government shutdown, but to address border security. and this crisis at our southern border. and today -- >> you're watching live the rose garden at the white house. it was described as a statement or a remarks. we heard the president and now the vice president speaking, essentially reiterating arguments we've heard about the border wall. the president's insistence on the $5.6 billion. he has made no mention of the government shutdown, although the vice president did have two weeks, hundreds of thousands of federal employees now not working while this has worked out. nancy pelosi, the new speaker of the house, was part of that group that met with the

president today to discuss the shutdown, to discuss a way out, and this border security issue. she made clear in her remarks, which we're going to play for you right now, that the government has to be open first before anything else can happen. here's speaker pelosi. >> good afternoon. we just completed a lengthy and sometimes contentious conversation with the president. we agreed, we will continue our conversations, but we all -- we recognize on the democratic side that we really cannot resolve this until we open up government. and we made that very clear to the president. services -- >> senator chuck schumer was also part of that meeting. he came out and said the president has suggested the government shutdown could last years, potentially, laying his stake on this particular issue. the president says he's going to be taking questions. we'll get back to that to get more specific guidance on where he stands now as they look

forward to some kind of negotiations taking place over the weekend. let me bring in chuck todd from our washington news room. chuck, this is the second day in a row the president has come before the cameras and essentially made the same arguments about the wall. >> it's true. but let me give you a couple things here that i think were telling in where we are. number one, the body language of the republican side. the president and the vice president. versus the body language of the democratic side, nancy pelosi and chuck schumer. nancy pelosi and chuck schumer, very pessimistic about where things stand. i think nancy pelosi in that same clip that you played later on is asked, well, did you move things forward? and she basically said, well, if we have a better understanding of what everybody's position is, then i guess yes. the president tried to paint a brighter picture. so what does that tell you? the white house is moving. they're trying to find a way out of this. i think they know that they -- they're side is fracturing quicker than the democratic side. i think the fact that they have decided to take the most

contentious part of the negotiation and give it to sort of a committee, which is a very washington decision, right? a committee. we're going to let our underlings see if they can come up with something. i think that's part one of the likely compromise we're going to see, lester, which is they'll reopen all of the government and set the -- set aside the fight over the wall. perhaps to take place over a couple of weeks or couple-month period. it looks to me that's where we're heading. that allows the president to say, i haven't caved in on the wall yet. we just want to open the rest of the government while we continue those negotiations. >> yeah. >> that's where we're headed. >> notably, at the beginning of his remarks, he made several remarks about this idea of making ports of entry stronger. and new magical technology that will make drug-finding a little easier and more effective. is that a tell in itself? that may be a -- you know, instead of wall money, more money toward that sort of security? >> look, i've always thought the president has the standing with

his own base to say the following. look, the democrats don't want a wall. they're not giving me money for a wall. but i got a whole bunch more money out of them. and at some point they're going to beg me to build a wall when they realize that it's good, but it can be better. in some form of that, lester, you could sort of see that's where the president is trying to position himself, where they're going to agree that, hey, everybody agrees we need more security. we've agreed on that part. we're going to continue the wall negotiations over here on the side. it's about the only move the president has left. because there is no other way for him to do this without losing face here. this isn't a way for him to save face, and at least to punt on the wall issue and keep it alive and not disappoint his base. >> we talk about a lot of pressure on him and his issue of leverage. but in terms of the democrats right now saying unless you open up the government, there is nothing else to talk about here, is there a political risk there?

>> ask me again on january 11th. and why do i say that? january 11th, the next time those federal government workers are due to get a paycheck, currently out of work or furloughed. right now i think the democrats are more united. think about this fact, lester. two months ago, if you would have said in the first 48 hours of the new congress we weren't going to be talking about all the democrats that were hand-wringing over nancy pelosi. i would have said, no, of course, that will be a big story. the democratic party is more united today than ever before, and it's all thanks to donald trump and how he's managed these negotiations. so right now i don't think democrats feel like they have any political pressure on them to move at all. but i would say, ask me again on january 12th. if we go that far and another paycheck is missed by those government workers. >> and we continue to keep our eye on those republicans who tend to have more vulnerable seats in two years. >> we already have two that have indicated they would like to see

a deal cut now, similar to the deal, essentially, that nancy pelosi is offering. that's cory gardner in colorado. susan collins now in maine. but don't forget the other pressure here, lester. your mitch mcconnell, and i think we're about to get questions. >> let's go back to the president. >> you can't fared afford to ma president angry in your own re-election. >> mr. president, senator schumer came out and said the meeting from his point of view, and speaker pelosi's, was contentious. he also said you said in the meeting -- this is him quoting you, i just want to check, that the shutdown could go on for months or even a year or longer. did you say that? >> i did. absolutely, i said that. i don't think it will. but i am prepared, and i think i can speak for republicans in the house and republicans in the senate. they feel very strongly about having a safe country. having a border that makes sense.

without borders, i've said many times, we don't have a country. i hope it doesn't go on even beyond a few more days. it really could open very quickly. i told them, bring who you want. we have three people. you can ideally bring three, but you can bring six, you can bring nine, you can bring 12 and they're going to be working over the weekend. i think it may have been somewhat contentious, but i think it was very productive. i have to say that. and i think he said that too. >> what was the productive part, from your point of view, mr. president? did the democrats move at all in your direction on funding of a border barrier? >> i don't want to get into that, because i don't want to put them in a position where they have to justify anything to a lot of the people they have to make happy. we want to save lives. we want children to be safe. the children are being decimated. and i'm not talking about necessarily children in our country. i'm talking about wonderful children that are coming up from other places, whether it's honduras or guatemala or el salvador or mexico or other

places. and we have to take care of those children also. we can't let them die on the way up. what's happening to women on those caravans, you're not talking about it. but it's horrible what's happening. if they know it's not going to take place because they can't get through because we have a great border wall or fence or barrier, they're not going to come up and you're not going to have the problem. at the same time, they can apply to come into our country, which many people have done. and we need people, major. we have to have people. because we have all these companies coming in. we need great people. but we want them to come in on a merit basis. and they have to come in on a merit basis. they can't come in the way they've been coming in for years. i get calls from the great tech companies. and they're saying, we don't allow people at the top of their class at the best schools in the country, we don't allow them to stay in our country.

so they end up going back to china. and japan. and so many other countries. all over the world. and we don't keep them. they get educated at our finest schools, and then we don't allow them through a various set of circumstances to have any guarantees of staying. so we lose out on great minds. we can't do that. we have companies that if we don't change that and we're working on that, and we discussed that with the democrats, and i think they agree. we're working on that. but we don't want to lose our great companies, because we have a ridiculous policy that we won't accept smart people. so call it politically correct or not. but we have to let these great, brilliant companies have the smartest people in the world. yes, ma'am. one at a time, please. go ahead. >> mr. president, why not reopen the government to create more space to have that broader conversation? >> we think it could go very quickly. no, we won't be opening until it's solved.

we think this is a much bigger problem. the border is a much more dangerous problem, a problem of national security. it's a problem of terrorists. i talk about human traffickers, i talk about drugs, i talk about gangs. but a lot of people don't say, we have terrorists coming through the southern border, because they find that's probably the easiest place to come through. they drive right in and they make a left. not going to happen. not going to happen. so we're not going to do that. we won't be doing pieces. we won't be doing it in drips and drabs. and i'll tell you what. i've seen a lot of people over the last week and a half. i've been right in this magnificent structure right behind you, it's called the white house. and i was here on christmas, and my family was in florida. i said, go to florida. and i didn't even find it to be a lonely place. there is something very special about the white house. but i was here christmas, i was here on new year's eve. and i will tell you, the people that i've spoken with and i've gotten to meet a lot of people that i wouldn't have met.

a lot of people have been coming through the white house and explaining different things. and different attitudes. a lot of people that you think are upset and certainly they're not thrilled, but they say, sir, do the right thing. we need border security. and these are people that won't be getting paid. border patrol yesterday was saying, sir, we're affected by it. do what's right. it's time. this is after many, many decades. many, many decades. this should have taken place a long time ago. we're going to get it done. yes, ma'am. >> thank you. two questions for you. was daca a part of the discussions today. >> yeah. >> and also, why can d it take this many days for a working group to come together? why didn't you just hash the details out today? >> sometimes that's what happens in a negotiation. it does take longer than it should. and sometimes you agree to things that could have been agreed to two weeks ago. but that's just the way a negotiation is. we set out a number, $5.6 billion. we're very firm on a number. we also explained that, as you

probably understand, the military is very affected. we may use the military for parts of it. homeland security, obviously, is very affected. we may, in addition to the $5.6, we will use homeland security funds. so we have things happening in addition to the $5.6. but we have to get a structure built. >> was daca part of the discussion? >> please, go ahead. >> thank you, mr. president. to follow up on that question, with respect to the daca program, were you discussing that in terms of a pathway to citizenship, including an end to the partial government shutdown? >> we discussed it a long time ago, as you remember. that's when they had this mythical number of $25 billion. but actually it was $25 billion, but only $1 billion up front. and we talked $2 billion, $1.5 billion. the rest of it, the government couldn't guarantee, because it's not set up to guarantee. you remember those discussions. but where it really ended was when the judge ruled against, and it was -- i said, as soon as

that happened, because that was a shocking decision. it was shocking to the democrats and it was more shocking to the republicans. it was an incorrect decision, a political decision, made by a judge. and i know a lot of people don't like when i say it. but try going there sometime to the ninth circuit and try winning a case. not easy. everyone files right in the ninth circuit. the fact is, it was a terrible decision and an incorrect decision. when that decision came down, when that judge ruled the way he ruled, i said, as soon as i heard it, i said, you know what's going to happen? we're never going to hear from them again. and that's exactly -- that's what broke up the daca deal. yes, we had a pathway, we had many things. that was getting close to being a deal. the problem was that the money was a very small amount of money. it wasn't really the 25. it was 25 and then come back every year. well, we don't want to go through that every year. but we were getting close, and i said, as soon as that decision

came down, that incorrect and horrible decision -- i mean, there's been a number of them made lately. but as soon as that decision came down, i said, you'll never hear from them again. and i called up. i said, what's going on? they said, president trump, we don't know who that is. it was over. the deal was over. that's what killed the daca deal. it was nothing else. it was the judge's decision. and if the supreme court does what really everyone thinks from a legal standpoint, it should be doing, if they don't allow the president of the united states, which is me also, because it president obama is allowed to do that, i'm allowed to do it, also. can you imagine? if the supreme court overrules that wrong executive order, we'll have a deal very quickly on daca and other things. and the democrats want that and so do we. but once he ruled that way, it

was something you couldn't really negotiate. ye yes. >> mr. president, two questions for you. are you still proud to own the shutdown? >> i appreciate the way you say that. but once -- i'm very proud of doing what i'm doing. i don't call it a shutdown. i call it doing what you have to do for the benefit and for the safety of our country. but when nancy pelosi said, you don't have the votes in congress, i will tell you what i was proud of. i was never more proud of my republican party and those congressmen and women, when they saw that and they got together and they voted 217-185, and it wasn't even close, that was an incredible day. i'm very proud of that. when she said you couldn't get the vote. and i'm not holding that against her. because despite the fact that i'm not saying it was an easy meeting or even a kind meeting or a nice meeting, but in the end, i think we've come a long

way. we're going to be working very hard over the weekend, and we'll see if we can do something. so you can call it whatever you want. you can call it the schumer or the pelosi or the trump shutdown. doesn't make any difference to me. just words. >> mr. president -- >> second question! >> mr. president, my second question on federal workers, sir? >> yeah, just one second. just one second, please. >> maybe the same question. thank you, mr. president. two questions, just to follow up on daca. are you open to a path to citizenship in theory for daca? and can you explain to federal employees of the agencies that are closed, which are not homeland security, why those agencies should stay closed? homeland security is significant in and of itself if it stays closed. >> because we want to do what's right and we want to do it all at one time. we don't want to take it in pieces. and daca is going to be a great subject. i look forward to discussing it. we'll discuss it at another

time. but there are a lot of great things that can happen with daca if the democrats want to do that. i think what we're all waiting for, to be honest, is the supreme court judges, the supreme court justices' ruling, in a not very long period of time. you know, as you know, it's up now, hopefully they will be making a ruling, maybe sometime in the summer. so i think before we discuss too much daca, i would like to see what happens. i think it's a very important decision. because, frankly, if they rule the way it is, it gives the president too much power. can you imagine me saying that? but i would be entitled to the same power. it's not a correct thing that took place. and president obama never felt it was going to hold up and it held up. but i don't think it's going to hold up at the supreme court. if it doesn't hold up, you're going to see a lot of good things happening. because you'll be having daca, and you'll be putting other things with daca. hopefully by that time, the wall will be well under construction. and just a little statement on

that. we've already built a lot of the wall. we've been working very, very hard. we've renovated a tremendous amount of wall. i just told you, we did a lot of wall in san diego, where they wanted it very badly. so we haven't been sitting still for the first, believe it or not, less than two years. we've been working very, very hard. the wall is -- we've done a lot of miles of wall already. so we're not just starting off fresh. but we have large numbers of miles that we have to do. and we can't let gaps -- because if you have gaps, those people are going to turn their vehicles or the gangs of -- you think they're going to be coming in through those gaps, and we cannot let that happen. >> mr. president! >> kevin. >> mr. president -- >> thank you, sir. thank you, mr. president. appreciate that. a question about government employees. what is your personal message to those who are impacted by the shutdown, and if you wouldn't mind, if you could comment on the remarks made by a freshman congress person about

impeachment involving a bit a profanity last night. >> well, you can't impeach somebody that's doing a great job. that's the way i view it. i've probably done more in the first two years than any president, any administration, in the history of our country. you look at tax cuts, you look at regulations, you look at what we've done for the vets, you look at the rebuilding of the military, and the numbers that we're talking about. and many other things. i could give you a list. it's pages long. so i think it's very hard to impeach somebody whose done a great job. that's number one. and we even talked about that today. i said, why don't you use this for impeachment? and nancy said, we're not looking to impeach you. i said, that's good, nancy. that's good. but you know what? you don't impeach people when they're doing a good job. and you don't impeach people when there was no collusion. because there was no collusion. you know russians better than i do, kevin, okay? there was no collusion. i didn't need russians to help me win iowa. i didn't need russians to take

the great state of wisconsin and michigan and pennsylvania. i won them because i went there and i campaigned hard. and my opponent didn't go there enough. and she lost. a lot of good states. a lot of states that for many, many years, for decades, have gone democrat. they went republican. that's why i won. not because of russia. >> your comment about the freshman congressperson's comments, specifically -- >> well, i thought her comments were disgraceful. this is a person i don't know. i assume she's new. i think she dishonored herself, and i think she dishonored her family. using language like that in front of her son and whoever else was there, i thought that was a great dishonor to her and to her family. i thought it was highly disrespectful to the united states of america. yes. go ahead. >> thank you, mr. president. earlier this week, you repeated your claim that through the usmca, mexico will be paying for

the wall. >> that's right. >> can you describe in detail the specific mechanisms in the trade deal? >> you're going to be seeing it very soon. we made a new trade deal. nafta has been one of the great disasters of all-time. probably the worst trade deal ever made, maybe. we lost millions of jobs, thousands and thousands of companies. nafta left our country dry. nafta was a disaster. i campaigned on either terminating or renegotiating nafta. and bob lighthizer and jared kushner and a whole group of people did an incredible job. they did an incredible be job. and now we have a deal for our country. and as you know, it's three countries. we will be taking in billions and billions of dollars more money for the united states, including jobs, including companies that won't be leaving us any more and going to mexico and in some cases canada to a lesser extent.

but we lost 25% of our car business, because of nafta. nafta was a disaster. now we have the usmca. the united states, mexico and canada trade agreement. it's brand-new. it's totally different. it makes it very difficult for companies to -- incentive woois move to other countries. and we will be making billions and billions a year more money. >> so why not use that for the wall? >> excuse me. because i didn't have to. that is paying for the wall. many, many times over -- in fact, what we save on the usmca, the new trade deal we have with mexico and canada, what we save on that just with mexico will pay for the wall many times over, just in a period of a year, two years and three years. so i view that as absolutely mexico is paying for the wall. and that's fine. >> will you be pressuring

putin -- >> yes. yes, ma'am. go. >> mr. president, thank you. you ran your campaign promising supporters that mexico is going to pay for the wall -- >> here we go again. >> the wall was going to be made of concrete. you just said earlier the wall could be made of steel and right now our government is shut down over a demand from your administration that the american taxpayer pay for the wall. so how can you say you're not failing on that promise to your supporters? >> very nice question so beautifully asked. even though i just answered it. >> you didn't answer it. it has not passed congress yet, sir. >> are you ready? i just told you, we just made a trade deal. and we will take in billions and billions of dollars, far more than the cost of the wall. the wall is peanuts compared to what the value of this trade deal is to the united states. as far as concrete, i said i was going to build a wall. i never said, i'm going to build a concrete. >> you've said concrete. >> just so you know, because i know you're not into the construction business. you don't understand something. we now have a great steel business that's rebuilt in the

united states. steel is stronger than concrete. if i build this wall or fence or anything the democrats need to call it, because i'm not into names. i'm into production. i'm into something that works. if i build a steel wall rather than a concrete wall, it will actually be stronger than a concrete -- steel is stronger than concrete, okay? you could check it out. listen, if i build a wall and the wall is made out of steel instead of concrete, i think people will like that. and here's the other good thing. i'll have it done by the united states steel corporation, by companies in our country that are now powerful, great companies again. and they have become powerful over the last two years, because of me and because of our trade policies. so if i have a steel wall, or you could call it a steel fence -- but it will be more powerful than any of the concrete walls that we're talking about.

it's possible that it will look better. and one of the things -- i think you have seen this, that is very important for us, very, very important. speaking of border control and i.c.e. and local law enforcement and even military. they want to be able to see through it. you can't really see through a concrete wall. they want to be able to see who is on the other side of the wall. because if they're here, and you have about a 12-inch concrete wall, and you have people on the other side, but you can't see what's over there, it's very dangerous. they want to be able to see through the wall. a see-through wall made out of steel is far stronger than a concrete wall. so i'm very happy with it. i think -- i think -- i'm not sure, but i think that's what the democrats prefer. and if it can get them there, i'm okay. it actually will be a more powerful wall, and it will be a more beautiful wall than having a concrete wall. >> so if the new trade deal -- mr. president -- >> jeff, go ahead. >> mr. president --

>> go ahead. go ahead, jeff. >> you mentioned china, sir, in your remarks. are you concerned about the words and the actions of apple this week with regard to revenue, and can you tell us what sort of progress you meant when you were referring to trade talks with china? >> well, i think we're doing very well. china is paying us tremendous tariffs. we're getting billions and billions of dollars of money pouring into the treasury of the united states, which in history we've never gotten from china, as you know. it's been very unfair. i had a fantastic meeting with president xi, who i both like and respect. one of the things that came out of that meeting was fentanyl. as you know, almost all of it comes from china. and he's going to now criminalize the making of fentanyl. and unlike our country, they have unbelievably strong prohibitions about drugs. it was not on their list. they view it as a -- i guess as some kind of a commercial product. now they view it as something that's very dangerous. they're going to be changing

their laws to make -- to make fentanyl a criminal -- a criminal process if you're making fentanyl. if they do that, you know what their ultimate is. it's called the death penalty. i think it could -- and i thanked president xi very much. so the first question i said to him when we started the trade talks in argentina. this was a meeting that was supposed to last for about 45 minutes. and it ended up being almost four hours. some of were you there. it was a great meeting. we'll see what happens. you never know with a deal. but i will tell you, china is not doing well now. and it puts us in a very strong position. we are doing very well. but we're taking in billions and billions of dollars. and i hope we're going to make a deal with china. and if we don't, they're paying us tens of billions of dollars worth of tariffs. not the worst thing in the world. but i think we will -- i think we will make a deal with china. i really think they want to. i think they sort of have to. and i think we're going to have a great relationship.

i think that president xi and myself have a great relationship. also, north korea, we're doing very well with north korea. and that's based on relationship also. >> can you just -- mr. president -- >> go ahead. one more quick one. >> just to follow up, sir. apple issued a revenue warning this week which led its stock to go down and the rest of the stock market to go down, as well. are you concerned about that? >> no, i'm not. look, they've gone up a lot. they've gone up hundreds of percent since i'm president. apple was at a number that was incredible. and they're going to be fine. apple is a great company. but that's not my -- look, i have to worry about our country. don't forget -- don't forget this. apple makes their product in china. i told tim cook, a friend of mine, who i like a lot. make your product in the united states. build those big, beautiful plants that go on for miles, it seems. build those plants in the united states. i like that even better. apple makes its product in china. china is the biggest beneficiary

of apple. more than us. because they build their product mostly in china. but now he's investing $350 billion, because of what we did with taxes. and the incentives we created in the united states. he's going to build a campus and lots of other places. so my focus is the united states. i want to get those companies to come back, like so many are doing, into the united states. i want apple to make their iphones and all of the great things that they make in the united states. and that will take place. >> mr. president! >> thank you -- >> thank you -- >> please, go ahead. >> thank you, mr. president. i want to ask you two questions. one, as you talk about the wall, eminent domain. many of those who own property on the southern border will lose their property because of this. and once this happens, they say that they could go to court with you for years. it could take years. and also, what is the safety net for federal workers? you're saying months and possibly a year for this

shutdown. do you have in mind a safety net for those who need their checks, those who need ssi, those who need medicaid, what have you? >> well, the safety net is going to be having a strong border, because we're going to be safe. i'm not talking about economically, but ultimately economically. i really believe that these people, many of the people we're talking about, many of the people you're discussing, i really believe they agree with what we're doing. and we could have this -- april, we could have this fixed very quickly. this could happen by early next week. we're going to be working over the weekend. we could have a solution to this, but i wanted to keep it all at one point. and i think a lot of the people you're referring to, april, are really wanting that to happen, too. i believe a lot of them want to see border security and they're willing to give it up. when i had the people in yesterday, they represent most of the border patrol. the people that you had yesterday that were at the news conference, they represent most of border patrol. every one of them said, don't even think about us.

get this fixed. that is doing the great thing for our country. as far as eminent domain, you're right, 100%. eminent domain is very interesting. but you wouldn't have any highways, schools, roadways. what we're doing with eminent domain is in many cases, we'll make a deal upfront that we've already done that. the secretary has done a lot of that. and if we can't make a deal, we take the land and we pay them through a court process, which goes actually fairly quickly. and we're generous. but we take the land. otherwise you could never build anything. if you didn't use eminent domain, you wouldn't have one highway in this country. you have to use eminent domain. it's actually something you don't want to use it, but if you're going to do a stretch -- as an example, pipelines and other things that go, you have to use eminent domain, otherwise you would never be able to buy the land. if we had one person that wouldn't sell us out of hundreds -- just one. it only takes one. then we wouldn't be able to

build proper border security, because we would have that big opening i was talking about. so what happens is some were paid up front. you make a deal up front and we're willing to do that in all cases and when they're unwilling to make a deal, which also happens, then you go to court. but in the meantime, we're able to build the border security. so i think it's a fair process. i think it's a process that's very necessary. but i think it's fair. >> couldn't this hold up your wall? >> no, it's not going to hold it up, because under the military version of eminent domain and under actually homeland security, we can do it before we even start. now, a lot of times we'll make a deal. and i would say a good percentage of the time we're making deals. we have already purchased a lot of it. you know, a lot of the money that we've been given has already been spent on purchasing the land. the right-of-way. it's essentially a right-of-way. so we are very, very far along on that. but eminent domain is something that has to be used, usually you would say for anything that's long. like a road, like a pipeline or

like a wall or a fence. okay? thank you. good question. >> mr. president? >> mr. president? thank you. >> please, go ahead. >> thank you. two questions. first, mr. president, have you considered using emergency powers -- >> should we keep this going or not, folks? >> sure. >> i just don't want to say, oh, he stood out there. you have so many questions. i'm just looking at mike and steve and kevin. i'm saying, should we, and most importantly, madam secretary. i'm just -- >> i just need a coat. >> oh, are you cold? get out of here. take mine. do you want mine? should we keep this going? >> please, yes indeed. >> so, let me know when you get tired. >> i'm not. have you considered using emergency powers to grant yourself authorities to build this wall without congressional? >> yes, i have. >> secondly on mexico. >> you have. >> yes, i have. and i can do it if i want. >> so you don't need congressional approval to build the wall. >> no, absolutely.

we can call a national emergency, because of the security of our country, absolutely. no, we can do it. i haven't done it. i may do it. i may do it. but we can call a national emergency and build it very quickly. and it's another way of doing it. but if we can do it through a negotiated process, we're giving that a shot. >> so is that a threat hanging over the democrats? >> i would never threaten anybody. but i am allowed to do that, yes. >> second question. >> called a national emergency. >> on mexico, the benefits from that trade deal are going to go to private companies, private citizens. so you're talking about tax revenues. >> they're going to pay tremendous tax. >> american taxpayers. >> i'll give an example. when a company was going to leave for mexico, or canada, but for mexico, because we've lost tremendous amounts of our car business, like 25%, to mexico. if they stay, all of those taxes that they have been paying, real estate taxes, sales taxes,

employee/employer taxes, tremendous taxes that nobody even understands they pay. they're tremendous. income taxes. federal income taxes. state income taxes in some cases. all of those taxes stay with us. the wall is -- you know, it's -- it's great. but the usmca, which gives a disincentive for companies to leave. it's a tremendous disincentive. anybody that leaves after this deal is done -- look, it's one of the primary reasons that i like it. because i can live prenafta, too. the only thing i can't live with is nafta. i can live pre nafta, before nafta. before everybody left new england and left all of the different places, ohio, pennsylvania. i mean, you still have empty steel factories all over the place and other factories. i can live pre nafta very easily. but the only thing i'm not living with is nafta. that was one of the worst trade deals ever made. >> so those are american

taxpayer dollars, which you consider essentially mexico paying for the wall. >> well, many, many times over. look, the usmca will make in the form that we right now are losing approximately 100 -- hard to believe. and this doesn't include the drugs pouring in, which is probably a much higher number than anybody would even know, in addition to destroying lives and families so horribly. we are losing close to $100 billion a year. on trade with mexico. for many years. not only that, they have a tax of 17%. we don't have a tax. so they have a value-added tax of 17%. we don't have a tax of 17%. that deal was bad the day it was made. because they charged a tax before the deal was made, and we didn't. it was an obsolete deal when it was made like 30 years ago. whatever it was. no, no. all of this stuff is changing now.

this is a fair deal. this is a good deal for mexico. frankly, oil companies and other companies have an incentive now to go to mexico, and take away a lot. and that's why we're keeping gasoline prices so low. you look at what's going on with gasoline prices. i mean, it's rather incredible. if you look back four months ago, oil hit $83 a barrel. 83! it was heading to $100 and then it could have gone to $125. you want to see problems? let that happen. after i made some phone calls to opec and the opec nations, which is essentially a monopoly, all of a sudden it started coming down. i'm very happy with what's happened. and i'm very happy that people are paying a lot less in many cases than $2 a gallon for gasoline. you look at what's happening, everyone is talking about -- didn't happen by luck. it happened through talent. >> mr. president!

>> go ahead, go ahead. >> if this shutdown, sir, does last -- since you said you would come back for the second question, for months or years, i want to understand how you expect federal workers to last that long without a paycheck. >> i don't think it will. >> cabinet members are set to get raises tomorrow. how is that fair? >> we'll have to talk to the b cabinet members then. >> would you ask them to give that money back? >> it's very important we have great border security. i think it's going to be over with sooner than people think. but i will do whatever we have to do. if we have to stay out for a very long period of time, we're going to do that. and many of those people, maybe even most of those people, that really have not been and will not be getting their money in at this moment, those people in many cases are the biggest fan of what we're doing. >> how do you know that, sir? >> all right. please. major, go ahead. >> to follow up on that, mr. president. the $10,000 raise that your cabinet members and senior administration officials are due to receive starting tomorrow,

will you ask them not to accept that, at least during the shutdown itself? >> well, i might consider that. you know, that's something i may consider. that's a very good question. okay. who else is out there, mike? who do you see out there? it's always been very fair. >> is there a commitment -- >> are you committing to that, mr. president? >> go ahead, yeah. good. go ahead. go ahead. >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. vice president. >> mike highly recommended you. this will be the killer of them all. >> well, two questions. if that's all right. first one is kind of a follow-up to that. you're a landlord. for people that are worried about paying their rent checks, government employees right now, people worried about bill collectors, would you ask those companies, landlords, to kind of go easy? >> i think they will. >> but i'm sorry, would you ask that, sir? >> hey, i've been a landlord for a long time, been in the real estate business for a long time. when you see there are problems out there, difficulties out there, you know, the people are all good for the money.

they work with people. they work with people. >> so you would encourage landlords -- >> sure. i would encourage them to be nice and easy. we have a bigger subject that we're doing. it's called the security of our nation. including terrorism, please. okay. >> and if you don't mind, one more question, sir. >> go ahead, please. go ahead. >> thank you, sir. >> come on. >> thank you, mr. president. >> thank you. >> i had a question about the terrorism. i wanted to ask, who are these individuals who are being captured, terrorists? are they people on the watch list? are they from travel-banned countries? second question, i wanted to ask, why is senator mitch mcconnell not here? why was he not invited? >> oh, he's been great. he's been really -- mitch mcconnell -- first of all, he was here. he was with us for hours at the meeting. >> why is he not here at this -- >> because he's running the senate. i mean, mitch mcconnell has been fantastic. he has been really great. he's right at the top of everything that we're doing. and he's really been fantastic.

kirsten, do you want to answer that question about the tariffs, please? >> sure. obviously, i can't get into classified information. but cvs stopped over 3,000 special interest aliens trying to come into the country on the southern border. those are aliens who the intel has identified as concern. either they have travel patterns that are identified as terrorist travel patterns or have known or suspected ties to terrorism. so we have 3,000 we know about. i think what the president continues to make clear is it's our sovereign duty to know who comes into our country without any kind of a structure and without changing the laws. we have no way to know the identity of every person that walks across the unsecured border. so the ones we know about, we can give you 3,000, but we'll look to see what else we can give you on class. obviously, there's ongoing investigations that i can't get into. >> mr. president! >> so i think that we can say

with assurity, i think it was a great meeting. we'll see what happens. it may get solved, it may not get solved. you now know the number. you knnow know what we're willi to do and if we have to do it, we'll do it. and we're going to be i believe very productive over the weekend. we have a very talented group. they have a very talented group of people, as i understand. and i think some tremendous things will happen. and i really believe the biggest beneficiaries of what we're doing are children, are women, are workers, and a lot of these people that really do benefit are not only the people in our country, but the people that travel up, trying to get into a country that they think they're going to get into, and they can't. and they get sick, and there's tremendous damage done to them and their families. these are all tremendous beneficiaries of what we're doing. so this really does have a higher purpose than next week's pay. and the people that won't get

next week's pay or the following week's pay, i think if you ever really looked at those people, i think they would say, mr. president, keep going. this is far more important. i want to thank you all. and we'll see you soon. they'll be working very hard over the weekend. thank you very much. president trump completing about an hour in the press, speaking primarily on his meetings on the government shutdown. his continued demand for over $5 billion for the wall. we had heard from speaker pelosi a bit earlier, saying it's a nonstarter until we get the government back to work. the president seem to go minimize, as you heard, minimizing any disgruntled sense from federal employees who will soon go without their first paycheck in all of this. he continued to suggest without any supporting evidence that he thinks they are largely behind him and would say go, go, do what you have to do. perhaps the biggest part o