or terms. our support to israel s right to defend itself is ironclad as you ve heard me say a number of times, and that s not going to change. it s critical, as i said earlier, that hamas not be able to threaten israel from gaza or even threaten gaza anymore. you know, that s an interest that we all share. that s a common interest with all of us, and so today we had great discussions about the status of the campaign, about goals and objectives, and about how to reduce harm to civilians in the battle space, and to and the need to ensure a sustained flow of humanitarian assistance into gaza. you know, we can offer some insight based upon our own experience in fighting terrorist groups and certainly that enabled us to have great discussions and we also have some great thoughts about how to transition from high intensity operations to lower intensity and more surgical operations, so we had great discussions on all of those issues. on lebanon, we ve been clear that we don t want
has continued to advance. the message loud and clear to anyone that is focused on policy not politics is that he is deeply focused on advancing his program, not freezing it in the first instance and certainly fought denuclearizing. a missile test would be additional provocation. we have to look at the larger picture. kim remains intent on increasing his military capabilities. we don t have a shared de-nuclearization of the korean peninsula actually, david. it continue to harp on that point. as you point out in a great piece, a similar missile test two years ago is what led to president trump s then threat of fire and fury being who would be the next fall jo ut? for everyone, a walk down memory lane here, here s from 2015. listen. north korea best not make any more threats to the united states. they will be met with fire and
now it is the president s choice, how stupid he makes them look by asking them to defend the indefensible. i want to ask you about something that richard perry said. he was asked yesterday. he compared, he said something compared to what nemd 2015. listen to this. mr. president, i know there are people who say, you said you were the chosen one. and i said you were. my fellow republicans, beware of false profits. do not let itching ears be tickled by messengers who feel anger, division, resentment. so how do you get from point b there back to point a? you know, rick perry who was the guy who was respected as the governor of texas has followed
victory, yes? yeah, the most successful intelligence prags are not only destructive, they have deniability. putin has tried to blame his victim in a war for this interference in american elections. you can see the truth of it on the fbi most wanted list. there are 12 russians on that list now who, you know, an indictment was brought against them. but i think that people like kennedy have made the choice they re going to support the president. now it s the president s choice how stupid he makes them look by asking them to defend the indefensible. rick, i want to play or i want to ask you about something that energy secretary richard perry said. he was asked yesterday he compared he said something yesterday compared to what he said in 2015. listen to this. mr. president, i know there are people that say, you know,
york times, the washington post pegged the settlement as some $3 billion coming from the sackler family itself. we know for years now sackler and purdue pharma have been fighting off allegations about fueling the opioid epidemic in this country with the introduction of oxycontin in 1996. propublica has retained some video from dr. richard back in 2015. listen to this. do you know how much the sackler family has made off the sale of oxycontin? i don t know. but fair to say it s over a billion dollars. it would be fair to say that, yes. do you know if it s over $10 billion? i don t think so. do you know if it s over $5 billion? i don t know. that suit was settled. as for the discussions about a future settlement concerning the federal case this fall, purdue has put out this statement saying while purdue pharma is prepared to defend itself vigorously in the opioid