nothing you have ever seen before. he said we won t lead the way. we ll go with them. a day after that, omb director mulvaney said that you would spent close to $50 billion to up great and enhance the nuclear arsenal. week after that, the president ahead of russia came out and said he has a first strike weapon. now whether or not you believe that he has a first strike weapon, isn t it inherently dangerous for the owners of the two largest nuclear arsenals to engage in bringmanship and why are we abandoning our role as a peace makener disarmorment? the president wants to make sure that we have the most robust and modern military. he s been in constant conversations with the secretary of defense and acting in large part on the recommendations of the secretary. i think everybody can certainly rest assured knowing that secretary mattis is making good
embracing donald trump to say the least. this is what vanity fair wrote this week. that president trump, who has established a credible threat of war and appears just impulsive enough to follow-through may have convinced kim that he has no other option but to bet on peace. the prospect of a cataclysm that could decimate north and south with trump may have convinced both sides to take some action. so seems like the president is getting credit to get to this point. right. that s deservedly so. what has happened here is the status quo has changed. the past few years, the kim regime has been disdainful of international overtures. it literally didn t pick up the phone for several years when south korea tried to contact them. now they invited the south korean delegation to north korea. they extended this invitation to donald trump, which suggested to me that the internal calculus being made in pyongyang has changed and i think that is clearly true both because of the
wednesday governor brown said that donald trump is declaring war on california. now, i know the president has given brown money before for his campaigns. when the president goes to california next week, will it be war or will it be peace? i couldn t hear the last part. when the president goes to california, will it be war or peace? if anybody is stepping out of bounds here, it would be someone who is refusing to follow federal law, which is certainly not the president. and wire we re going for an incredibly positive trip. the president is going to look at prototypes along the boarder and meet with and speak to the members of our armed services. he will be speaking with members of all five branches of the military. i don t think that could be anything but a positive thing. john? thank you.
maximum pressure that the u.s. has been putting on the regime and also because of what we think of as loose talk but perhaps strategic talk. intimating that we might have be contemplating military action. dana: and they want the united states to remove its troops from the peninsula. is that just something we should not even entertain? yeah, one of the sort of foundational structures that keeps the peace in northeast asia is the tight alliance between the u.s. and japan and between the u.s. and south cree and the big part of that is to nearly 30,000 troops in south korea. we need to keep them as long as the north is a threatening regime. but you know, i also think trump should get credit here, too. this meeting that might happen with north korea was worked out in tandem with south korea. even though the south korean government has a left wing