being met. you have to stand with the process. they undermind the deal. i think stepping back though is important to step back, david, and look at across a few different issues. this is not working. but, you know, he said that his perm relationship made progress. north korea continued to build nuclear weapons. they continue to test. they re unraveling in many ways. so this is worse than where it was when you had the summit. he pulled out of the eye lan nuclear agreement. iran resumed the nuclear program. he tried to say he developed a new form of nuclear weapons, missile delivery that is far more advanced than the united states. things are getting worse across the board. he is both been reckless president and a totally ineffective president on foreign
predicate of that by launching this missile, then i think, you know, we ll see whether trump is offended enough to say something that ends this process or whether he s willing to try to repackage it and say he can still do this given more time and more ability to deal directly with kim. ben rhodes, the president were a student of history, he may look back at what happened on the clinton administration. if if you look at john bolton, he may have leshd what happened with the clinton administration as well when talks were underway with other parties involved. how good is that analogy as we see it here? looking at the trajectory of this the blind faith that president had and there being new ground broken here and where we are today? it seems like you have the leader of north korea who is now taunting the u.s. and no real progress has been made. well, i mean, first of all, diplomacy is hard. you need verification. you can t just take the word of a kim jong-un. you need to verify that th
campaign and committee have because, you know, this is going already raised more than $3 to be a test of a couple things. for one thing, its a distraction million, unlike when the trump from impeachment which came much campaign was like a shoestring, later than the cases that this time it s well financed, well staffed and very good developed into the supreme court technology operation. test. the other thing that is going to so in 2008 barack obama decided be a test is whether trump to reject public financing. he took a lot of heat for that remade the supreme court in the but he did it for one reason, he way that certainly he and his wanted to win. i ll quote one more line from advisors hope he has been able the piece. your colleagues write, that s not to say the issues don t to do. you know, he has appointed more matter. federal judges than any what is there room to talk about? as these candidates focus on president in recent memory and donald trump, what do you think maybe much long
that have to be made that i think rule a lot of people out. they don t want to go into the administration because of the disclosures have you to make. then the president s personal lawyer who is a high profile trial lawyer. but he s on the outside. he s the president s personal lawyer and is not representing the presidency. of i think this is going to be a key thing to watch in the coming weeks. who is going to make that public case for the president? jay still having his daily talk show to do as he represents the president. ann, lastly here, just get a sense about what it meant when lisa murkowski came out speaking to an nbc affiliate saying she intends for there to be a fair trial. she doesn t want to be a rubber stamp for mitch mcconnell s trial in the u.s. senate. yeah, i think lisa murkowski here is hueing to something we ve seen from her before which is a willingness to she has an independent streak. she has a willingness to buck what is really, you know, sort of the monoli
distraction, a lot of dangling of supposed documents he has of supposed evidence he has. there was this oan documentary that he worked on that aired that didn t yale seem to get much traction outside of conservative circles and even far to the right conservative circles. you know, so far seems like a lot of sound. not a lot of substance. but at this point, i don t think it s relevant and a lot of the issues that he is addressing are alienated really from the issue of impeachment. for example, the ukrainian ambassador and he makes this allegation that she had some nefarious plot to keep people out of the u.s. so they could testify. even if that pans out to be true which again will is no evidence of it, but even let s say that was the case, you had some rogue ukrainian ambassador, at this point really, so what. what does that have to do with president trump asking the president of the ukraine to