caucus, nowhere near the majority of the caucus, therefore she s sticking to the path. not opening impeachment inquiry and if the evidence shows that s the path to go, nothing is off the table. two things in what the president said. one, when you look at the dynamics in the senate, it doesn t look like impeachment would occur given republicans control the chamber, and at at least at the moment, democrats are not going down that path, according to the speaker of the house. democrats can say whatever they want on tv, on social media, and otherwise. if the speaker is not there, then they are not going there either. so that is kind of where things stand on the dynamic at the moment. we ll obviously have to wait and see. a lot of steps to come and democrats have made clear nothing is off the table. the strategy is to current on their current path, according to the speaker of the house and jerry nadler who would oversee
behavior. we must be full of integrity. but the question is, where is this going? how are we making this real for men and women across the country? that s what i keep focusing on. i know. but in terms of congress, where is it going? do you have republicans who have signed onto the investigation? i have not seen what happened on the letter, but i know there are republicans that have also said that we should be looking at this. there will be anybody that doesn t get this, i would like to see us act in the congress on sexual harassment. i mean in terms of investigating the president. there are people in the republican party that have said it. and i think some of them have set a public battle. i was talking to some of them yesterday. they think this is the right path to go. i don t know if they said their names publicly. do you think they will come public at some point? i think one of them has, but i don t want to put the name on. but we ll see. i think people are really unco
you mix the military and diplomat theic in a step by step process trying to get north korea to first halt and then reverse its nuclear missile developments. that s the path to go. is north korea a worse situation than when you were there or are we seeing a different type of dialogue in the exchange of a president who likes to exchange hot talk. i first worked with north korea in 1994. i did the strike plan, designed it for the then plutonium program. there have been ups and downs. some have worked for a few years. and that gives you some hope that it would work again. but generally it s gotten steadily worse. it was 2006 when they tested their first underground nuclear explosion. and they marched forward consistently since. and it s very risky. because you can t imagine, chris, and i know some people do but i don t.
third explanation, the trump administration actually doesn t know what it s doing. they have not decided on a path and the contradictions we re seeing are a result of them not having figured out what they want to do. what does your gut say of those three scenarios? is it your feeling this was an admission, so to speak, of not thoroughly understanding it and perhaps there is an about-face on it or what? there s an internal struggle in the trump administration in which they haven t frankly decided which path to go. but the path that they would be going is either the first or the second option in the sense of either trying to accept the deal by still ramping up pressure in the region and potentially ramping those pressures up to the extent to force the iranians to walk out of the deal. either way, what is happening right now is tremendously dangerous. this deal did prevent all iran s path towards a nuclear weapon. and the last thing we need right now is to have another north korea sit
continue to be at a statistical tie in the polls, i wouldn t be surprised to see going after elected politician, which trump is not, and cruz will very happily point to the fact he has a record, has a proven record of standing up for conservative values, and that s a great way to promote his own candidacy while not directly attacking trump back. which i think is the path to go. so maybe not fair to suggest, amanda, that cruz is scared. but there is a risk in alienating trump voters, yes? well, any candidate should be interested in getting as many voters as they can whether they re supporting trump, carson, bush, rubio, whoever. i personally don t like the nasty aspect of politicking against other republican candidates. i think the best path is to show by you have the most positive attraction to get those voters and to be a happy warrior going through this election because as maria pointed out we ve had enough nastiness so far. but i actually think there is an obligation to point