Mr. Trump, thanks for joining us. Thank you. This is your first day in Washington in quite a while. I know there's a lot of focus today on foreign policy. Let me ask you about U.S. participation in NATO. Do you think the United States needs to rethink U.S. involvement in NATO? Yes, because it's costing us too much money, and frankly, they have to put up more money. They're going to have to put some up also. We're paying disproportionately, it's too much, and frankly, it's a different world than it was when we originally conceived of the idea and everybody got together. But we're taking care of, as an example, the Ukraine. I mean, the countries over there don't seem to be so interested. We're the ones taking the brunt of it. So I think we have to reconsider -- keep NATO but maybe we have to pay a lot less toward the NATO itself. When you say keep NATO, NATO has been around since right after World War II in 1949. It's been a cornerstone of U.S. national security around the world. NATO allies hear you say that, they're not going to be happy. Well, they might not be happy, but you know, they have to help us also. It has to be -- we are paying disproportionately, and very importantly, if you use Ukraine as an example, and that's a great example, the countries surrounding Ukraine, I mean, they don't seem to care as much about it as we do. So there has to be at least a change in philosophy. And there also has to be a change in the cut-up, the money, the spread, because it's too much. So you're really suggesting decrease its role in NATO? Not decrease its role, but certainly decrease the kind of spending. We are spending a tremendous amount in NATO, and other people proportionately less -- no good. What do you say with allies who are watching and they're not happy with what you're saying? What do say to those allies? [Inaudible] make that happy, Wolf. What, they're not happy -- what, we're spending a fortune. We are spending tremendous amounts of money. And you look at countries that circle other countries, they're not as bothered by it as we are. So you have to make them happy. But the kind of money -- look, we owe $19 trillion, it's going to be $21 trillion very soon with the crazy omnibus budget that they just passed, which is ridiculous. We can't afford to do all of this anymore to the same extent. That was a different time; it was a different age. Let's talk about what you told the Washington Post earlier today. You suggested the U.S. should be noninterventionist. But you remember in our last debate you suggested maybe the U.S. would have to deploy 20,000 or 30,000 troops in Iraq and Syria to destroy ISIS. What I said is that they tell, the military tells me, you'd need 20,000 or 30,000 troops. I wouldn't deploy 20,000. I'd get people from that part of the world to put up the troops, and I'd certainly give them air power and air support and some military support. But I would never ever put up 20,000 or 30,000. So if a military commander said to you, Mr. President, we need 20,000 to 30,000 troops to destroy ISIS, we've got to send them into Iraq and Syria, you would say -- you said at the debate, you said, you'd listen to the generals. I do listen to the generals. but I would much rather have people in the local area -- in the area -- put up the troops. To me that's very important. I don't want to send -- we've had -- look, we've spent $2 trillion, at least, in Iraq. We're spending trillions of dollars in the Middle East. You know where we are now? We're further back than we were 15 years ago. We are in such bad shape. The Middle East is a disaster for us. And in the meantime our country is crumbling, we have a country, the roads are no good. The hospitals are no good. The airports are third world airports. You look at LaGuardia and Kennedy and LAX, and all of the airports, and you go to other countries, you go to Dubai and you go to Qatar and you go to these other countries, it's like unbelievable. Wolf, we have to rebuild our country. Let's talk about the subject of your speech today at AIPAC, Israel. Hillary Clinton spoke this morning at the AIPAC conference. Listen to what she said. Listen to this clip. [Begin Video Clip] We need steady hands, not a president who says he's neutral on Monday, pro-Israel on Tuesday, and who knows what on Wednesday, because everything's negotiable. [Applause] Well, my friends, Israel's security is non-negotiable. [End Video Clip] She's talking about you. What's your response? I agree with her on the last statement, it is nonnegotiable. And frankly, she is just doesn't know me. She doesn't know my policy. She doesn't know what I'm going to be doing, and she certainly doesn't know what I'm going to be saying today at 5:00. She says you don't have steady hands. I have the steadiest hands -- look at these hands. I have the steadiest hands -- and far steadier than hers. Look where she got us. I mean, look at Libya, look at the migration, look at Benghazi. I mean here's a woman that's talk. She's just -- you know, she's just reading it off a teleprompter. All she does -- believe me, they write that for her. Look at the job, probably in history -- although I think John Kerry may even be worse, I'm not sure after the Iran deal. But look at what she's done. She's referring to your comment that you wanted to be neutral as a negotiator to try to achieve an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement. I would love to be neutral if it's possible. It's probably not possible, because there's so much hatred. There's so much going on. I am very pro-Israel. I've always been pro-Israel. I have many awards from Israel, many awards. I've contributed a lot of money to Israel. There's nobody more pro-Israel than I am. We have to protect Israel. Israel is so important to us. What do the Palestinians need to do for a U.S. president to be neutral in trying to achieve a peace agreement? Well, I would love to achieve a peace agreement. What do the Palestinians need to do? Well, let me tell you -- well, the one thing they have to do is they have to end terror, okay. They have to stop with the terror because what they're doing with the missiles and with the stabbings and with all of the other things that they do, it's horrible and they've got to -- it's got to end. Now, I have many, many friends from Israel and Jewish friends. Everybody wants to see peace. It seems to me the all-time Olympics in peace in a deal. Can you make that deal between Israel and the Palestinians? I think the answer is, maybe. I never say that. What else do they have to do besides stopping terror? Well, I think a primary thing is stopping terror. If you look at what's going on, I think a primary thing is stopping terror. And by the way, in another hour, I'm going to be explaining exactly what I think they have to do and what Israel has to do, and I think you'll be very surprised by what I have to say. But look, one thing they have to do, is they have to stop the stabbings, the weapons, the military. What they're doing is incredible. They killed a young man -- a young soldier last week. They stabbed him. This is crazy. Now, from the time they're born, they're educated a certain way. It's got to change. There's a bad mindset going on, Wolf. Back in December, you seemed to question whether Israel would be willing to make the concessions it would need to make to achieve a two-state solution, Israel and Palestine. What are you expecting from Israel, what kind of concessions? I can say this, I can say this -- I believe that Bibi and I believe that almost everybody over there wants a deal, wants some deal done. That's what I'm going to be discussing in one hour from now. Which discussions? For example, would you want Israel to stop building settlements in east Jerusalem and the West Bank? I'm going to discuss that in one and a half hours from now? Can you give us a sense? I really can't. I mean, I will tell you the biggest thing from my standpoint, is there has to be a different way, there has to be a different attitude. Because of all the deals that I've ever seen, this is the one that's the most difficult. Not the Iran deal, which was a horrible deal, and we wouldn't want to have a deal like that. One other thing, I don't like the United Nations getting involved in the negotiation. This has to be a deal between the Palestinians and the Israelis. This has to be that. You can't force a deal down the throats of both, but you know it will be a bad deal for Israel if they do that. So the -- I would veto a deal with the United Nations, if the United Nations forces a deal, I would veto that deal immediately. You would use the U.S. veto at the Security Council? I would use the -- I would absolutely veto that deal. That's not what deal making is about. That's not what you could -- they have to make their own deal. And I will try as president -- now, everybody has failed, everybody. But I will try as president to work out a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Will you recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital and move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem? Well, I'm going to discuss that in an hour, but the answer is yes, I would. When? How quickly after you... Fairly quickly. I mean, it's a process, but fairly quickly. I mean, the fact is, I would like to see it moved, and I would like to see it in Jerusalem, and I will be talking about that in one hour. Hillary Clinton at the AIPAC meeting today, she also said this, referring to you. Listen. [Begin Video Clip] Encouraging violence, playing coy with white supremacists, calling for 12 million immigrants to be rounded up and deported, demanding we turn away refugees because of their religion and proposing a ban on all Muslims entering the United States. If you see bigotry, oppose it. If you see violence condemn it. If you see a bully, stand up to him. [Applause] [End Video Clip] She's talking about you. I guess. I mean, look, we have to be vigilant. Our country is under siege. We're under attack. We're under attack in virtually every way. Our economy is falling apart. We're sitting on a big fat bubble. Our trade deals are no good. Our health care is no good. Our security is no good. Look what happens in our country. Our security is no good. People are pouring across the border. People that are convicted criminals are pouring across the border. We have to be vigilant, we have to be smart or we're not going to have a country any longer. As you know, dozens of rabbis and other Jewish religious leaders, they're protesting your speech at AIPAC. Among other things, they say, "As Jews we must take a stand against hate. We denounce in the strongest possible terms the bigotry, racism, xenophobia, and misogyny expressed by Mr. Trump." What do you say to those rabbis and others? Well, I heard about it. And I'll have to see what happens. I mean, are they going to leave or do they want to hear what I have to say? Because I have a very good chance of getting the nomination. I have a very good chance of getting... [Crosstalk] But on the substance, what do you want to say to the, because those are strong words? Well, look, I mean, I've heard words. I've heard Hillary's words, which are largely false, by the way. Although I will say this -- we do have to practice vigilance. We have to be smart. We are not being smart. We're being very foolish right now. We can't take in the Syrian refugees. We don't know where they come from. I mean, I don't know where they come from. There's no paperwork. Nobody knows. Are they ISIS? Are they ISIS-related? But what's your message to these rabbis and others who are so concerned about the words they have heard from you over these many months? My message to the rabbis is that I'm going to be great for Israel. I am very pro-Israel. Do you know I was the grand marshal of the Israeli Day Parade a number of years ago when nobody else would have done it because it was a very bad and very dangerous time for Israel. I will be very good for Israel. Now, President Obama, the worst president that Israel has ever -- I mean, there's been nothing -- probably one of the worst things that's ever happened to Israel is President Obama's election. So if the rabbis want to leave, if some of them want to leave, that's okay. But the people that really understand me and they understand Israel, they know I'm going to be the best.... Their condemnation, they're not talking about Israel -- they're talking about bigotry, racism, xenophobia or misogyny. Or let's call it intelligence -- we have to be careful. We have to be careful who we allow into the country. We've had tremendous problems. Look what happened in California recently with a woman who comes in, radicalizes the guy. They walk into their workplace, they kill 14 people. Look what happened in Paris, France. We have to be careful, Wolf. I know you've disavowed David Duke and the Ku Klux Klan... I have. ... several times, but why do you think these white supremacists, these various white supremacists out there are supporting your campaign? I don't know, because I am the least racist person you'll ever meet, so I don't know. And I don't know that they really are. I mean, you're telling me that, so I don't know... [Crosstalk] Well, the ADL put out a list of 10 white supremacists, neo-Nazis, they called them, anti-semites, who are out there, working, supporting your campaign. I just don't know. I mean, you are telling me this, but I don't know why. I am certainly the least racist person. But you condemn them? Of course I condemn them. Always. I've always condemned them. You don't want their support? I don't want their support. I don't want their support; I don't need their support. Let's talk a little bit about Cuba right now. Historic moment. The president of the United States is in Cuba as we speak right now, the first time in 88 years an American president has gone to Cuba. If you're elected president, would you continue to normalize economic and diplomatic relations with Cuba? Probably so, but I'd want much better deals than we're making. For instance, I read where Cuba expects to be bringing a major lawsuit against us for all of the problems that we've caused them over the last long period of time, for billions and billions of dollars. Naturally before I did anything as to normalization, I would absolutely make them sign something that no way that suit is going to be brought. I thought it was very disrespectful when the president of the United States flies into Cuba last night and Castro wasn't there to meet him -- wasn't there to meet him. Now, he met the pope. He meets other leaders of much smaller countries, frankly less important countries, and he wasn't there to meet the president getting off of Air Force One. I though that was a very big slight. I'll be honest, I don't know how Obama felt about that. I think that was a very, very big slight. All right, so you say you're going to continue to try to normalize diplomatic and economic relations. Would you open a Trump hotel in Havana? I would, I would, if -- At the right time, when we're allowed to do it. Right now we're not. I wouldn't do it on the basis that you get a 49 percent interest, because right now you get a 49 percent interest. Nobody knows even what the economics are or what they're going to do. And maybe it won't work out. But I will tell you, I think Cuba has certain potential, and I think it's okay to bring Cuba into the fold, but you have to make a much better deal, and you have to get all liabilities. You don't want to be sued in a year from now or two years from now for $4 trillion because they say we destroyed Cuba. This has to be part of the deal. You're here in Washington, once again, first time in a while. You met with members of Congress today. You're seen as an outsider. Is there a turning point that you see right now happening in your race for the White House as a result of your success? Well, I think the turning point has already taken place. I won Florida by 20 points against a very popular sitting senator. I won other states. I've won now just about 22-plus islands. Are you anxious to work with the so-called establishment, with members of the Senate, members of the House and try to... Many of them want to work with me. They're calling my office. People that I see... [Crosstalk] ... were not the leaders. They didn't come to the meeting. They were other -- they were other members. The leaders have called me. We'll see how the leaders react, but the leaders have called me. I've been -- I've spoken to Mitch McConnell, I've spoken to Paul Ryan. We'll see what happens. It's a process. Do you think you should have invited the congressional leadership, Paul Ryan, Mitch Mcconnell to this meeting today? This was just a meeting. This was a meeting of some very respected people. Senator Jeff Sessions is a tremendous man, one of the most respected senators in the country. And a meeting of some senators, some Congressmen and women. I think it was a very good meeting. John Kasich, the Ohio governor, the Republican presidential candidate, said this on CNN. Listen: [Begin Video Clip] Everybody has got to face the fact that we're going to an open, multi-ballot convention. I won Ohio because of my message and my record, and guess what, as a result of that, Donald Trump is going to go -- not going to go to the convention with enough delegates. [End Video Clip] Your response? I disagree. First of all, I almost beat him, and he's been there a long time. He's been there many, many years, and I almost beat him. Came very close. Had I had one more day or two more days, I would have beaten him. Second of all, that night I won five states, between states and islands, I won five. Nobody has, I think, ever done that. And it was a very, very close race. But because I won so many others, it really nullified it, neutralized, as you know, because I've watched your reports. And I think I will win and perhaps easily without having to go through the machinations of the [Inaudible] . Let's say you show up in Cleveland at the Republican convention, and don't have that the magic number of 1,237 which is the number you need to be guaranteed on the first ballot if you're going to be the Republican -- let's say you're 20 or 100 short. The chairman of the Republican Party, Reince Priebus, he says that that's not the rules, that they would have to go along with the rules. What would happen if you're just short? Well, I heard him say that. No. 1, I don't think I'm going to be there. I think I'm going to be... [Crosstalk] Will you go along with the rules? Let me explain something. It's a little unfair, because I have been competing against -- we started with over 17 people. Then we go down to 15, and then 12, and 11 and 10. And I had many, many people that I'm competing with. So you know, when you talk about the majority plus one, it's a very unfair situation because we had so many people running for office, so one would get 2 percent, one would get 4 percent, one would -- and I was always in the lead. I mean, just about from the beginning I've been leading. But it's very unfair when I have all of these people running, it's not like I'm running against two people or three people, Hillary is running against one person. So I think that's very unfair, No. 1. No. 2, I think I'm going to get the majority anyway. But if you don't, will you abide by the rules? Now despite that -- well, I think this. I've had many, many people running against me, which really -- you understand what I mean, mathematically it's unfair. It's almost impossible to believe that I should do that, that I would be able to do it. I think I'll be able to do it. But I will say this, if I was at 1,190, so I'm a little bit off, and I have millions of votes more than anybody else, because right now I have 2 million votes more than anybody else running for office, by a lot. It's not even close. So are calling on the RNC to change the rules? If you're close, you should still be the nominee? I'm not calling -- I'm saying this, I think it's going to be very hard for them to do. I have millions of votes more than anybody else that's running -- millions of votes. And again, that's also with a lot of people running. So, you know, it's more difficult. But I'd say the majority -- it's a tough thing when you have all these people. I mean, had races, I guess, that started off where they started the primaries where there were 12, 14 people, something like that, maybe more than that, an then I'm supposed to get half? So mathematically it's unfair. But I still think despite... But those are the rules. Well, it's -- look, you're supposed to have three people, two people, one person. You're supposed to have people. You're not supposed to have 17 people running. I want to... I think I'll do it anyway. I think I'll do it. I may do it easily, because I think we'll have a big night in Arizona, and I think we'll do well in Wisconsin. But I do say this -- it's mathematically unfair. Now, if I have millions of votes more, and if I have 1,100 and somebody else is down at 400, 500, I think it's awfully tough to take all of these people out of the system. Because I want to play for you what the House speaker, Paul Ryan, said about the -- used the word "riots" if that were to happen. Listen to what he said. [Begin Video Clip] Nobody should say such things in my opinion, because to even address or hint to violence is unacceptable. [End Video Clip] Now, you don't want any violence to emerge, right? Of course I don't. They say it all the time. Because you used the word "riots" twice. I didn't use -- I said very simply if that happened I'll have no part in it, but there could very well be riots. And you know that's true. I mean, are supposed to be so politically correct -- are we supposed to be so politically correct that we're not allowed -- I have people, millions and millions of people that have come out. It's the biggest story in world politics today are the number of people that came out. I mean these people are by the millions. And you see what's happening with the Republicans. And they're not coming for other people [Inaudible] . I just want to be precise. Will you unequivocally say to your supporters, you don't want any violence, you don't want any riots at the convention? Of course I would, 100 percent. But I have no control over the people. You have a lot of control over the people. They listen -- a lot of your supporters, they listen closely to what you're saying. Wolf, these people have been disenfranchised. They lost their jobs. They make less money now than they made 12 years ago. People that are working hard and working double jobs are making less money now in real dollars than they made 12 years ago. They are -- they see their jobs going to Japan and to China and to Mexico. Mexico, forget it, it's the new China. You know what, they're very -- they're not by nature angry people, but I will tell you, right now they're angry people. But you could calm them. I don't know that I could calm them down. With your words. I'd certainly try. I don't want to see -- but they're very angry people. They have been misled by politicians for years, and they're tired of it. And that's why I'm doing so well, and that's why I'm leading. Do you understand why there's a sense of unease about you out there in the general public right now? No, I don't see that. I don't see that. I think I'll do very well in the general, and I think I'll beat Hillary very easily. And I think I'll bring in states like Michigan that was devastated by job loss, states like New York. The sense of unease, some of the words that you've said. The violence at the campaign rallies that they see on television, the riots outside. We have not had anybody really hurt at these... There's some people got hurt. Excuse me. I have 21,000 people showed up the other day to Arizona. I didn't have one protest. They tried to block the road, but outside of the road, once Sheriff Joe saw the cars he moved the cars... [Crosstalk] You had to cancel that whole event in Chicago because you were afraid people could get hurt. You know why? Because I didn't want to see violence. I could have gone through that event very easily, and there would have been probably some problems. But you can understand why some people are nervous? I don't really. You know, when I go into those rooms, and I have by far the biggest crowds, much bigger than anybody -- and much bigger than Bernie. He is second, I agree. But much bigger than Bernie, much bigger anybody, you know that. I mean, we had 21,000 people in Arizona. It was like a lovefest. Those rooms are wonderful. But here's what happens. Sometimes a protester -- and I think they're professionals. They get into the room, and they start raising their voice, and they start screaming, and sometimes they get physical, very physical, and they start screaming and making noise, and it's a disgrace. Sometimes they put themselves in front of the entrance door so people can't get in. Sometimes they try and block a car by chaining themselves to a car in the middle of the highway. They're the problem. My people aren't the problem. They're the problem. And the news doesn't cover it. Let me tell you, you have agitators. These aren't even protesters. You have agitators. And they'll wait for me to make a final point, and just before they'll start screaming at the top of their lungs. People are very upset about it. Let me play this ad. This is a Republican super PAC. It's a very negative ad that you've seen, I'm sure, but I'll play it. I love -- I'm sure I'll love seeing it. [Begin Video Clip] A person who is very flat-chested is very hard to be a 10. I'd look her right in that fat, ugly face of hers. Look at that face. Would anyone vote for that? She had the height. She had the beauty. She was crazy. But these are minor details. I like kids. I mean, I won't do anything to take care of them. I'll supply funds, and she'll take care of the kids. You know, it really doesn't matter what they write, as long as you've got a young and beautiful piece of [Expletive] . [End Video Clip] Has your language come back to haunt you? No. I think people understand. I think people -- first of all, half of that was show business. The dropping to the knees, that was in "The Apprentice." The Rosie O'Donnell stuff. But I think people understand. Look, these politicians, I know them. They say far worse when they're in closed doors or where they're with a group of people that they trust. This -- a lot of that show business stuff. And you know in Florida, the amazing thing, they spent $38 million in negative ads on me, and you know what, I won by a record landslide. Pretty amazing. But that's not how you feel about women in those words? Nobody -- of course not. Nobody respects women more than I do. Nobody takes care of the women -- and they take care of me because they do such a great job. So it was just show business? It's show business, or they -- I don't even know some of those statements. I mean, I'm hearing these statements. I don't even know what they are. Nobody respects women more than I do. Why do you keep... And by the way, I'll take care of women with women's health issues far better than Hillary Clinton, who's a total phony will take care of women -- if she's even allowed to run. Why do you keep attacking Megyn Kelly of Fox? Because every night on her show she does negative hits on me. Every single night. And frankly, if she didn't, her ratings would drop down far lower than yours. Do you think it's presidential, though, to tweet about her, call her cry on Twitter? I don't care. It doesn't matter to me. Look, she hits me, she's got a television show. She hits me. When it's unfair, I hit her back. She was fair in the second debate, I thought it was fine. I mean, I thought she was okay. A little -- could have done a little bit better, but that's okay. But I thought she was fine in the second debate, and I said it. I told people. They asked me, what did you think of Megyn Kelly? I said, I thought she was fine. Now, here's the story. Every night, the show, it's like an infomercial, always negative stuff, always negative stuff, always. Not fair. So I will fight back with Twitter. I will let people know she's a third rate talent. I will say what I have to say, it's very simple. But it's not fair that she -- you know, let her not talk about me. And by the way, seriously, if she didn't talk about me, her ratings would go down like a rock. Fox News issued an extraordinary statement. I read the statement. Your vitriolic attacks against Megyn Kelly and your extreme sick obsession with her is beneath the dignity of a presidential candidate. She's got the obsession. She's the one that puts me on her show every night. Look at her show. Look at the airtime I get on her show, and I don't do her show. She wants me to do it so badly. Roger Ailes wants me to do her show so badly. They want to have a primetime special on Fox network where Megyn Kelly interviews me. I said, what's in it for me? What do I get out of it? You're going to get great ratings, what do I get out of it? They want a primetime special. I said no, I won't do it. So don't tell me about obsession. She should do somebody else. And I'm telling you, if she didn't do me, watch what happens to her. Watch. Now, in the meantime, she's benefited greatly. She's hotter now than ever before because of me. She should give me at least of ha of her salary. All right, let's talk about a few other issues before I let you go. Before you lost Iowa to Ted Cruz, you had a good relationship with him. Is it at all realistic if you get the nomination you could call on this man, you call him "Lyin' Ted," to be your vice presidential running mate? Crazier things happen in politics, I will say that. I've seen things happen that are pretty crazy? That would be -- so you're not ruling that out necessarily? I don't want to rule out anything. I think it's probably unlikely. And I did have a very good relationship. But I also had a relationship when I said, when's it going to come. You know, at some point it had to come. And we were essentially, we're the last two standing, because John is -- you know, not is doing so well. I mean, he's one for 28. He won his state, and not by much. He won his state, so he's one for 28. I don't know, he's in because he's -- you know, he's a guy that doesn't want to get out. Quick question on Hillary Clinton. You recently said she has low energy, very low energy, doesn't have the stamina to be president. You're roughly the same age as Hillary Clinton. Now why do you say that? I think she doesn't have the stamina. You watch her life. You watch how she'll go away three or four days; she'll come back. She'll go -- I just don't think she has the stamina. Look, we've got to beat China in trade. We've got to beat ISIS. We've got -- we've got so many problems in this country, I say she does not have the stamina to be a good president. Plus, she's always got problems, whether it's Whitewater, or whether it's the e-mails or -- it's always -- it's always drama. It should end. It should end. She shouldn't even be running. Honestly, she shouldn't be allowed to run based on the e-mails, okay, to be totally honest with you. She's being protected. But Hillary Clinton does not have the stamina, doesn't have the energy, she doesn't have it. Doesn't have the strength to be president, in my opinion. Mr. Trump, thanks very much for joining us. Thank you. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.