trying to leave the eu. what s your take on whether or not nancy pelosi brings u.s. mca to the floor and will the president be successful in these other trade deals, with european nations? i think she has to. look, they gave lighthizer all their markup and their changes, and remember mexico has already approved this canada is waiting to approve this. president trump i think has cut a good deal here, he accommodat ed both of these nations particularly gets this could be tent situation in mexico so china can t gain the system, and sending products through mexico. it s a deal that works with people works with the farmers. i don t know how nancy pelosi holds us back anything but partisan politics but what president trump is trying to do on trade is reformat what the elites in this country and the corporates in this country have basically gone away to de industrialize our country, maria and also to effect and lower the wages of american workers this deals with korea and talk about with ja
met a regulation she doesn t like but will this one make sense. they won t roll back anything. that is not going to happen. it is a question of what they could buy in the future. and i think she is shooting that is her first play here. is to be very aggressive and i think that is smart for her. and other people like many, many politicians going for the harder stance. and then we ll see what we should do. i think the question is how much should these companies be regulated and at the very bottom they have to have significant privacy regulation with teeth in it. that is the very first step. and then the question of data they are allowed to buy and data to trade and how they should be behaving as corporate citizens. microsoft was underwent anti-trust scrutiny and other companies will the same going forward. many anti-trust is the way a lot of this will work out rather than legislation but it is critically important. kara, thank you so much. kara down in austin, texas for
un unless we had something to sign, where we had particular progress. we re giving a leader from a her mitt nation the same status as the president of the united states by even having the meeting in the first place. i think if he should walk back anything, it should be his statements about otto warmbier and whether or not he believed the north korean leader knew anything about what happened with him. i think he tried to walk that back a little bit. in terms of north korea not coming back with a deal, clearly he s trying to change it. to be fake fair, it s hard to cp with a deal, hard to trust kim jong un on anything. arthel: was that enough? i was here, backup for ed henry that night and i was watching it live when the president said that at 2:45 a.m. local time, 2:45 p.m., it stuck in my mind when he said he believed kim jong un and his remarks that he didn t know what happened to otto warmbier at the time. so much of what happened. and so today was this an attempt to somehow try to w
don t like. from virginia to california, we see stark examples of how radically in some ways the country has changed. now, much of this is related to both illegal and in some cases legal immigration that of course progressives love. now, ingraham later clarified her comments saying that she made it clear her comments had, quote, nothing to do with race or ethnicity. though a now deleted tweet of support from former grand wizard of the ku klux klan, david duke, didn t help her case here. susan, if she wasn t referring to race or ethnicity, what did she mean on changing demographics foisted upon the american people. she was talking about race. there s no way of working around it. she can try to walk back anything she d like. the reason she did is because as you mentioned, david duke came out for her in support of what she said. that s the only reason she
and germany. listen to what germany s foreign minister said about the president s comments earlier today, not holding back anything. listen here. either the united states or russia. we are in the free world and that will remain the case. the president today also making the case that nato nations and there were only five of the 29 that are meeting their financial commitment, need to pony up more money to support nato. they need to share the funds for mutual defense. some are suggesting the nato members all agree. fair burden sharing underpins the alliance s cohesion, solidarity, credibility, and ability to fulfill our article three and article five commitments. martha, something very interesting happened tonight in regard to the president s upcoming summit with the russian president vladimir putin that will take place in helsinki, finland, on monday.