I want to ask you about the strategy. And i see that the distinction in that strategy in comparing the russian in the american approach, for example, because the russians, its more about cleaning the immediate mass around you, cutting down emissions, Waste Management, energy efficiency, etc. Putting your own house in order for denmark and its more about global implications of their policy. And i think more abstract goals. This is ultimately about the choice strategy. Do you start with your immediate environment or do we all a for a planetary change from get go . Whats your take on that . What do you think will be more efficient . Very interesting question. Yes. Oh, i appreciate the recent present ro, Bidens Leadership for net 010 to 15. Richie has revive the sort of momentum to drive the global actions for climate change. It is very laudable, and i welcome you so much. But as your question regarding your customer, global, kind of dry board local actions, i think we cannot distinguish t
Ideas. One idea is actually back what theyre looking. The idea that investing in the environment, people ease or cost, that is, i see as a conventional thinking. But we have to shift away from that kind of conventional thinking, tours new idea that protecting climate change and the people either an investment. I think that sort of paradigm, at least we thoroughly has been adopted by many governments because im sure you watch very carefully the recent climate change align climate change hosted by the Bite And Ministration and pretty much every leader said that they see environmental protection defied against climate change as it then you developmental paradigm for their societies. Now, while they all agree that something needs to be done, what they want to do is actually very, very different in the devil is always in the details. Is there more Agreement Or Disagreement on the practicalities . Let me tell you my personal engagement with this a history of climate change in negotiation. I
congress splits sharply over defense priorities. republicans are choosing maga extremism over our military. a woke military is a weak military. as president biden signals a drawn-out war in ukraine. we will not waver. reporter: but can the president guarantee the u.s. is in it for the long haul? national security adviser jake sullivan is next. and on the rise? six months until the iowa caucuses and new numbers revealing voters views of the gop field. is donald trump leaving an opening? there s really broad support for the candidacy. that means i ll be on the debate stage. gop presidential candidate chris christie is coming up. and melting down. the southwest is roasting under extreme heat with no relief in sight. will all of these climate disasters finally change minds on capitol hill. arizona democratic senator mark kelly will join me. hello. i m jake tapper in washington where the state of our union is deadlocked. ukraine is digging in for a drawn-out war
taking sides. congress splits sharply over defense priorities. republicans are choosing maga extremism over our military. a woke military is a weak military. as president biden signals a drawn-out war in ukraine. we will not waiver. but can the president guarantee the u.s. is in it for the long haul? national security adviser jake sullivan is next. and on the rise? six months until the iowa caucuses and new numbers revealing voters views of the gop field. is donald trump leaving an opening? there s really broad support for the candacy and it s on the debate stage. gop president chris christie is coming up. and melting down, the southwest is roasting under extreme heat with no relief in sight. will all these climate disasters finally change minds on capitol hill? arizona democratic senator mark kelly will join me. hello. i m jake tapper in washington where the state of our union is deadlocked. this morning ukraine is digging in for a drawn-out wa
to have said all i need you to do is to find me 11,000 votes unchanged. i think if you look at that context it is pretty clear that petitioner is acting in the capacity of office seeker, not as president i am focus on the legal test. i am not hearing any objections to it. other than i think the d.c. circuit place more content consideration off limit then i went. i want to understand on the court immunity, or whatever word we use, it seems to me that we are narrowing the ground of dispute here considerably. do we look at motives? the president s motives for his actions? for example, he has lots of power as we ve discussed, but he might use them to enhance his election in his personal interest. it is not a relevant consideration when we look at core powers? i think of this more as looking at the objectives of the activity as opposed to the subjective motives in the sense that you are i think there is concern about seeing a electoral motive to be reelected as such. e