argument that trump s lawyer was trying to siet up, saying, i wa specifically asked. and i wasn t asked for a pause. no, that s right. so this is just bluster on the part of trump s team and, you know, that s to be expected, because channeling the candidate. but although pence is becoming more aggressive in his language about the former president s actions ahead of january 6th, dana asked him specifically, can you say you won t vote for him if he s the nominee? and he wouldn t say, no, i m not going to vote for him. now, maybe that s, whell, aisle going to be nominee of the party, but why can t you draw that line? that line would seem to be fundamental. if someone s been indicted or tried to overturn an election in the united states of america, if that s not a deal breaker, what is. but we also all understand that they re trying to win a republican nomination. trump is still popular. 37% of republicans would support him no matter what. and all of these candidates are trying to
just going to spend a moment taking in these live pictures. these are not protests that have just sprung up not protests that have just sprung up in the last couple of days, they have been going since the beginning of the year. thousands of people out. weekend after weekend after weekend. protesting against these judicial reforms. and the hope was that change would have come about before now. but in the last couple of days, the protests have intensified. and they were hoping to delay or stop this vote going through, but they haven t succeeded in that at all. through, but they haven t succeeded in that at all- in that at all. quite, that was the ho e. i in that at all. quite, that was the hope. i wouldn t in that at all. quite, that was the hope. i wouldn t say in that at all. quite, that was the hope. i wouldn t say that - in that at all. quite, that was the hope. i wouldn t say that was - in that at all. quite, that was the j hope. i wouldn t say that was the expectation. what yo
tend to protest developments constituents, because we know people tend t iprotest developments aah”..- ”w..- constituents, because we know people tend t i think;t developments aah.-.” ”w..- constituents, because we know people tend t i think the evelopments aah”..- ”w..- constituents, because we know people tend t i think the speech|ents aah”..- ”w..- constituents, because we know people tend t i think the speech today gearfifi.” ”w..- constituents, because we know people tend t i think the speech today was w.-.” a-.- them. i think the speech today was more intelligent than a general big housing view, he has picked a couple of places, most obviously cambridge, housing view, he has picked a couple of places, most obviously 1 say, idge, housing view, he has picked a couple of places, most obviously 1 say, bute, which i m sure he wouldn t say, but people would say be people would say probably won t be conservative at the next general election and are particularly
you heard the applause? i wouldn t say that s a random sample of the republican party. i think a lot of it is due to donald trump. i think he has unleashed the virus of isolationism within the republican party again, but i don t think it means that support for military aid to ukraine is not drying up. even in the vote in the house on amendments to the defense authorization bill last week, to cut off aid to ukraine, it s true that 70 republicans voted in favor of cutting off the aid, but also means that two thirds of republicans voted to sustain it. it was a free vote for the 70. they knew the aid to ukraine was ultimately going to be approved overwhelmingly. i think it s a huge issue. i think those of us who see the problem of isolationism ultimately brings to the united states continue to have a responsibility to speak out against it. whether it s donald trump or
so what s behind this growing sentiment on the right. you heard the applause? i wouldn t say that s a random sample of the republican party. i think a lot of it is due to donald trump. i think he has unleashed the virus of isolationism within the republican party again, but i don t think it means that support for military aid to ukraine is not drying up. even in the vote in the house on amendments to the defense authorization bill last week, to cut off aid to ukraine, it s true that 70 republicans voted in favor of cutting off the aid, but also means that two thirds of republicans voted to sustain it. it was a free vote for the 70. they knew the aid to ukraine was ultimately going to be approved overwhelmingly. i think it s a huge issue. i think those of us who see the problem of isolationism ultimately brings to the united states continue to have a responsibility to speak out against it.