the words he s using. i don t think it s helpful to talk about something vague like the deep state or to say things like, we re going to talk about the weaponization of the federal government. the federal government is a vast beast. if you want to talk about taming aspects of it that have overreached their authority, then you should be specific and you should be rigorous in how you investigate that, and i think setting the tone by calling it the weaponization of federal government is entirely political. he s a politician, he s allowed to do that, but if your purpose. and i think there is serious reform needed in institutions like the fbi, certainly in some of our intelligence gathering institutions and the relationship between our large technology and social media platforms and our intelligence gathering services at the domestic level. ifear, though, that there s a real looking back quality to the weaponization commission. it s going to be settling scores rather than fixing problems.
state or to say things like, we re going to talk about the weaponization of the federal government. the federal government is a vast beast. if you want to talk about taming aspects of it that have over, overreached their authority, then you should be specific and you should be rigorous in how you investigate that, and i think setting the tone by calling it the weaponization of federal government is entirely political. he s a politician. he s allowed to do that. but if your purpose, and i think there is serious reform needed in institutions like the fbi, certainly in some of our intelligence gathering institutions and the relationship between our large technology and social media platforms, and our intelligence gathering services at the domestic level. ifear, though, that there s a real looking back quality to the weaponization commission. it s going to be settling scores rather than fixing problems. all this is indicative of an institution that the political writer yuval levin descri
the weaponization of the federal government. i do not applaud the the words he s using. i don t think it s helpful to talk about something vague like the deep state or to say things like, we re going to talk about the weaponization of the federal government. the federal government is a vast beast. if you want to talk about taming aspects of it that have over overreached their authority, then you should be specific and you should be rigorous in how you investigate that, and i think setting the tone by calling it the weaponization of federal government is entirely political. he s a politician. he s allowed to do that. but if your purpose and i think there is serious reform needed in institutions like the fbi, certainly in some of our intelligence gathering institutions and the relationship between our large technology and social media platforms, and our intelligence gathering services at the domestic level. ifear, though, that there s a real looking back quality to the weaponization co
government. have been targeted by their covernment. . , ., , ., government. there are serious reform needed in institutions government. there are serious reform needed in institutions like government. there are serious reform needed in institutions like the - government. there are serious reform needed in institutions like the fbi - needed in institutions like the fbi and some needed in institutions like the fbi and some intelligence gathering institutions and the relationship between institutions and the relationship between technology and social media platforms between technology and social media platforms and our intelligence gathering services at the domestic level~ gathering services at the domestic level~ i gathering services at the domestic level. i fear that there is a real -looking level. i fear that there is a real looking back quality to the weaponisation commission that is going weaponisation commission that is going to weaponisation commission that is
president biden expected to go himself, likely this fall. just give us your assessment of the state of the continent right now. has the u.s. neglected and ignored what has been going on there? i m so glad you asked this question it s not so much that the u.s. has ignored africa as much as the policies toward africa have always been treated have always been focused on two things first, either fixing problems, so giving humanitarian aid, trying to stop famine, things of this kind, and, second, to stop extremism. to work with partners there to handle violent groups, militias, terrorist organizations across the continent. when you only end up focusing on the problems, you don t focus on the opportunities there, ways to grow the economy, ways to work with a population that is rapidly growing. china has. that is what china has been doing. they have been offering loans to countries across africa as part of their belt and road initiative, to try and expand