While Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is a brutal dictator and should be tried at the Hague for international war crimes, the United States should not militarily overthrow him.

The fruits of the economy and all the advantages of technology and globalization have gone far more to the investor class and the professional class and not as much to the working class. Partly because of the loss of labor unions, partly because of things like a lack of antitrust enforcement, policies that have privileged shareholder returns.

People want to have some assurance that their privacy, their data is going to be protected.

Both the Venezuelan and American people will be better served by a negotiated solution between Maduro and Guaido than by a conflict that leads to increased instability and violence.

If you look across the economy, if you have multiple players in an industry, you have more customization, more innovation, greater choice for consumers. The more you have consolidation, the less likely you are to invest in innovation. It becomes all about driving down cost and mass production. And that's not good for innovation in an industry.

I'm not an apologist for Iran's actions. Iran certainly has supported activities of terrorism, and the Houthis don't have clean hands. The Houthis have engaged in crimes too. But the idea that that justifies American involvement in a civil war in Yemen doesn't make any sense strategically.

I am not pollyannaish about the deep partisan battles that divide us.

There's so many people who've built America, much greater in sacrifice and contributions than Silicon Valley. There are people who've died for this country. There are people who have marched for civil rights in this country.

I believe there are ways of cutting past some of the ideological logjams in Washington when it comes to issues of American economic competitiveness and a pro-growth agenda.

My wife grew up in Cleveland.

In my first year in Congress, I introduced a War Powers Resolution to end the war in Yemen.

I'm for strong antitrust enforcement.

The best American manufacturers customize products to meet customer needs, reduce the time required to make them and constantly improve their design.

There's no doubt we need stronger antitrust enforcement. We shouldn't allow Amazon to privilege its own products on its platform, and we should make sure they're not using sellers' data, but the E.U. is not a model for America to copy.

We are very, very thoughtful about once an economic system creates maldistribution of wealth, thinking about how we redistribute it, but we need to pay attention to why that system is excluding people to create that maldistribution in the first place.

People in this country should be able to find economic opportunity and meaningful jobs in the places they grew up.

Do I think that if Google wanted to go acquire a competitor, another big company, we should say no? Of course. We shouldn't be approving them acquiring AT&T or Sprint or some big company.

We've got to get people across this country believing they can be a part of a technology future, that that's going to work for their families in an empowering way.

I definitely think America should seek to lead and shape the world and make it safe for liberal democracy. I just don't think military intervention is going to get us there.

Again and again, there is no respect for the United Nations Charter that makes it illegal under international law to seek regime change.

We should have companies required to get the consent of individuals before collecting their data, and we should have as individuals the right to know what's happening to our data and whether it's being transferred.

There is a risk that overt American support for Guaido could shore up Maduro's base and trigger displays of military force, potentially plunging Venezuela into a civil war.

We need to provide humanitarian assistance to civilians and accept our fair share of refugees.

At its best, technology can empower people in extraordinary ways.

Political divisions may be fierce, but there is at least one issue that most Americans agree on: net neutrality.

On so many issues, California leads the country.

There should be an understanding and trust that your privacy and data will be protected.

Internet service providers should not be permitted to block, throttle and unfairly favor certain content, applications, services or devices.

Sometimes, in Silicon Valley, there is this attitude that we know best and we can change the world. The boldness allows us to invent the future. But, we need more empathy for those who are left behind and a recognition that Silicon Valley can't just call the shots and expect change.

We need to think about what Silicon Valley can contribute to the country - not just that somehow government bureaucrats should listen to our way.

The framers understood that the momentous decision to go to war requires the informed consent of the American people, expressed through their elected representatives.

We have to return to a foreign policy of restraint, one that develops our capabilities and our potential in communities across America, and not become bogged down in unwinnable conflicts that lead to greater resentment of the United States, and that don't advance American interests.

Net neutrality is at the core of what we love about the Internet. Put simply, it allows any individual or business equal access to online services.

We have a choice in Silicon Valley. We can either continue to exist as an island to ourselves, focused on wealth creation and innovation... or we can understand that we are in the middle of a software revolution and answer the nation's call to provide economic opportunity and technology to places left behind.

I don't think American life requires you to be on Facebook. It does require you to have access to the Internet.

We needed overtime laws, we needed unionization, we needed to figure out how to distribute the Industrial Revolution's gains with equity, and we're going through something similar with the technology revolution.

We can't have all the concentration of wealth in a few places in this country. We've got to create economic opportunity and new industries in communities that feel left behind.

We have tried to change regimes through a variety of means - over 80 times, by some estimates. Many of these efforts were counterproductive to U.S. interests.

We have an economy that's really geared toward rewarding the investor class. What are we doing to make sure that people who want to have a middle-class life are able to keep up?

I have helped shape in the past the Democratic Party's agenda on innovation.

Of course it would be great to have more scientists in Congress. But what I'd love is to have another Lyndon Johnson in Congress who makes climate change his first priority. We need people who know how to work the system and the institution.

One thing I want to do is get Silicon Valley to think harder about those who have been left behind by the technology revolution. It has created huge winners for those who are able to understand it and are adept at it. But it has also displaced a tremendous number of jobs.

I do believe American leadership in the world matters, that we can't just disengage from the world.

The challenge for America is: can we become a multicultural, multiracial democracy? It would be historic. It would be America's greatest contribution to human civilization.

Imagine a world where Apple, Google, and Intel were Chinese companies. It would be scary.

The criticism of the Democrats in the past is that they were too timid. They ran on consultant-driven platitudes and didn't offer a compelling enough vision.

There should be some commonsense principles that will assure the American public that their rights are going to be protected online.

America should always stand for human rights and freedom, but not through endless military intervention.

If anything, prolonged overseas military presence breeds radicalization.

My honest answer to what's going to happen to the future of jobs is I don't know.