in that very close kind of, you effective tool for inflicting economic pain or at least threat know, pack of people, or can you sort of stand out a little bit ming to do so with any country and answer the policy questions, that does not adhere to his respond to the policy questions demands when u.s. interests are and do what you have to do and involved. ultimately, this is not just a sort of seem like you know, you threat for china but a threat can engage with the iowans for every single country who does business with the united directly and be consistent. but his absence creates this states, and the big question today is mexico breathing a sigh sort of vacuum though. of relief? it allows the candidates who are yes and no. they averted the tariffs on the there to hit him and say, look, this is not my not by name one hand but on the other hand this threat still looms as per se but basically suggesting michael said earlier. that he s steal and he s not in he could do this at any poin
saudi arabia. they could introduce a vote to cut off funding to the kingdom based on its human rights record following an emergency declaration which aimed at side stepping congress and getting the arms sales through. the supreme court rejecting another case surrounding the indefinite detention of terror suspects saying it will not britake up a case involving a yemeni citizen they have been holding for years. a story in today s washington post puts a harsh new spotlight on how the nra, the national rifle association, spends its members dues saying over the past three years nearly a fourth of the nra directors collect money from the group, including a firearms executive who the post says received more than $3 million for products. the newspaper says another nra board member got hefty fees for consulting speeches and memberships and the relationship
compel document evidence from plenty of company. the first debates later this month are critical as is any documents. can you sort of have that fight opportunity to get on the radar and sort of shadow box for a of iowa democrats. while, but eventually there comes a point where that meets reality, and it looks like if that s why 19, that s right, 19 of the to 20 democratic hopefuls came to cedar rapids for a state the justice department has reached this deal, that it looks event on sunday trying to make like they finally understood that it was getting to that sort the most of their allotted five of real moment where you can t sort of kind of duck and weave minutes. i was the first governor of the united states to stand up and bob anymore. against donald trump s muslim you actually have to produce the documents and go to court and maybe they are trying to avoid ban. i beat him 21 times in court. that. both sides had an interest in last time we won with hope. getting to this truth,
rewriting unambiguous statutory terms adding quote where we to recognize the authority claimed by fiancee in the tailoring rule we would deliver a severe blow to the constitution s separation of powers. under our system of government congress makes laws and the president acting at times through agencies like epa faithfully skuts them. the supreme court slum slapped down both the epa and the obama administration for trying to rewrite the language of the clean air act. the court s primary dissents authored by justies breyer said it made no sense. in fact, much of the agency s power to do so remains intact. while the court did take away one method of greenhouse gas
our leadership bears a responsibility for the way maliki has acted. and part of that is the fact we have basically vacated the premises militarily which i think would have given us more leverage in dealing with him. we ll see if secretary kerry has any luck this week. a slap in the faces, a pat on the back or both from the supreme court tonight for the environmental protection agency. in a complex divided opinion today the supreme court either dealt the environmental protection agency a stunning blow or upheld most of the agency s power to regulate greenhouse gases, depending on whom you ask. the dispute centered on the epa s decision to broadly expand its regulatory powers under the clean air act while critics argued it did so by side stepping congress and its legislative powers. writing for the majority justice scalia said an agency has no foretailor legislation to bureaucratic policy goals by