china. we saw this week that basically the u.s. defense secretary lloyd austin counterpart in china decline an invitation to sit down in singapore a few days ago and now xi jinping overnight saying that basically his military chiefs should prepare for the worst-case scenarios and prepare for actual combat and practical use. that sounds like a real escalation. that s one of the reasons we want to be able to have conversations in the military channels with the senior leaders of the prc military as well as lower levels. i mean, when speaker pelosi visited taiwan, one of the avenues of communication that the chinese cutoff was this military to military vehicle here and that is what you need when you have tensions as high as they are much you want to be able to avoid miscalculations and misunderstands. over the weekend there was an unsafe and unprofessional intercept by a rc fighter jet with one of our air force
global supply. defending democracy. losing to communist china would shatter stability. protecting u.s. alliances. asian countries would face a more powerful china with little freedom of speech. the stakes are high. but experts believe there is reason for optimism. do you think the u.s. and china are headed in a positive optimistic direction? the idea that conflict between the u.s. and china is inevitable i strongly disagree with that. reporter: meaningful channels of communication between the u.s. and the prc helps us minimize unknowns, minimize confusion and misunderstands and thes good for taiwan. u.s./china relations on a downward spiral since that suspected chinese spy balloon bursting months of beijing/d.c.
is it right? that russia waited until after the midterms? reporter: yeah, poppy. biden was more than hinting at something there. right? u.s. intelligence officials believe the kremlin made this decision very purposefully, that they wanted to wait to announce the formal withdrawal, formal retreat of russian troops from the city of kherson until just after the midterm elections were over to avoid giving biden, by extension, the democrats a boost. interesting for a couple of reasons. first, obviously, they believed voters could be swayed by such an announcement. kind of misunderstands what voters in the u.s. actually care about. but the second, of course, is that they still believe that a gop-controlled congress a gop-controlled administration, even is better for their interests. they did not want to give and do anything that could have given biden and democrats an advantage in the election. of course, a retreat from
to be seen to be tough on this issue, and some of this argument serve whether it is the right thing or not probably actually suits the prime minister. the argument specifically in response of the archbishop of canterbury today is that he specifically misunderstood what the government wants to do. it is not trying to park its responsibility but taking on responsibility for cutting down on people smuggling. have a listen to the cabinet ministerjacob rees mogg. he minister jacob rees mogg. he misunderstands ministerjacob rees mogg. he misunderstands what the policy is trying misunderstands what the policy is trying to misunderstands what the policy is trying to achieve and it isn t an abandonment of responsibility, it is in fact abandonment of responsibility, it is in fact are abandonment of responsibility, it is in fact are taking on a very difficult in fact are taking on a very difficult response military. the encouragement of people traffickers needs encouragement of people tr
criminals. she has to answer for that particular statement, if she s made it, but if it related to the use of torture tactics towards one of her clients, she has made very clear, as every lawyer must, to make arguments, as she has said, that defend the constitution and are in service of the court to better inform the judge who will decide the issue about the right owed to that particular defendant. in that respect if that was an argument made in an effort to demonstrate the constitutional infringement, it s well within her power as a criminal defense attorney to do so. and this idea that suddenly because you were advocating on behalf of the constitution, you were somehow less qualified to be a judge, really misunderstands what the role of a supreme court justice would be to look at that constitution. i thought it was also notable that she said, you know, these are cases in which the evidence is classified and many of thesis were boil erplate complaints. i want to also bring in joan