frequently by police officers and policing bodies is not always helpful, because if you view protest as inherently problematic and inconvenient, rather than as a necessary and important element of a free society, balance will almost always fall on the side of maintaining order and preventing crime? whereas the starting position should always be that peaceful protest should not be restricted and should be facilitated as far as possible? i should be facilitated as far as ossible? ., should be facilitated as far as ossible? . ., ., possible? i agree with that and the evidence i believe possible? i agree with that and the evidence i believe would possible? i agree with that and the evidence i believe would show- possible? i agree with that and the evidence i believe would show that i evidence i believe would show that thatis evidence i believe would show that that is what we do. getting the balance right between the qualified rights protesters and the impact is difficult and protest is
of course he can negotiate, right? that is what you do in good faith. but again, your starting position is what we have sent. the president has to respond. speaker mccarthy has not and should not start trading off of what we have already done. we set down at the table, said we would do it we have never really done. the vast majority of us have not voted to raise the debt ceiling. our constituents did not send us to washington to raise the debt ceiling. we sent over cuts that are of this year, mostly in washington. they usually put cuts in future years. it saves 5 trillion over 10 years, 1 trillion in the first year. sure, you can debate some of them, but it is something to put us on the path toward fiscal responsibility. to say that should not be part of the debt ceiling fight conflict with everything the president has ever stood for. he said that as a senator in 84, he said it as a senator in 94. in 2011, he negotiated a deal with the vice president of the united states. he has do