mattis is taking a much more hard line approach. i think he realizes that north korea is a very is a very unpredictable partner in all of this. and secretary mattis has been dealing with north korea in a different capacity for much longer than president trump has. so he has a different perspective on this. but one thing i would like to bring up is the fact that several experts said when north korea supposedly destroyed the nuclear facilities, there s experts saying this was not necessarily real and that it could have been staged. so i think the pentagon is keeping a very close eye on this just because north korea has such a reputation for being so unpredictable. so i think they re almost playing on two different fronts at this point, trying to be have a flattering campaign and be a bit more negotiableable. however, at the same time, keeping the best interests at hand. and azi, with just nine days to go, what will you be looking at over the next few days to get a sense of what the
doesn t help get out a more positive narrative of what the epa is doing to help americans. in fact it just seems as if they have information in dealings that they want to keep from readers. so let s talk immigration here as well. president trump really doubling down, shall we say, on his plan to toughen up on immigration including as last month sending a national guard troop to the border, has his hard line approach worked so far from your perspective? well, it depends on the partisan sides you re speaking with. many of his supporters believe sending troops and much of the rhetoric double downs on the hard line immigration policies that he promoted on the campaign trail. but suggestions like removing funding from countries who perhaps do not meet the u.s. standards to addressing undocumented immigration could actually end up sending more of their citizens to the united states as they have fewer resources to tap into in their home countries to help them address the issues that they
legal team, changes in his posture from cooperative to more aggressive, changes from his willingness and almost eagerness to sit down with mueller and his investigators to now a much more hard line approach. it all comes down to that raid. and there was a sense from the president that mueller s investigators had basically, in kicking it to the southern district of new york and in raiding the home and the office and the hotel of his personal attorney, had just sort of like overstepped their bounds, were not operating in good faith. and when you go back to the other stuff you just laid out, there is real concern from the president, but especially people in the president s orbit and those outside advisors who are always in his ear and quite influential. that they don t know what they don t know. but what they do know is this. cohen was sort of the fixer. cohen got his hands dirty in the stuff no one else wanted to deal with with the president s business, with the president s family, with
its ultimate goal regime change. so any agreements made with iran that reduce the level of sanctions against it i think is a big problem for the united states policy. so i think that they want to therefore put extra pressure on other areas which are not actually part of the original iran nuclear agreement up is as ballistic missile testing and things like that for example. so let s talk about considering what you just said the approach then. even though our close european allies want the u.s. to stay in, this is probably somewhat as well about america first. we do what we want in the trum t era. he certainly did things thhis w with north korea. maybe his hard line approach could work with iran? i think the hard line approach never really ended. i think that it was really the fact that iran had used his opportunities in the middle east very well you could say after the iraq war. and i think that the nuclear agreement if you like was a great breakthrough and victory for coercive dipl
control. neil: do you think that s why the president erupts to the degree or surprises people not even mentioning what he is going to do or think of doing to his chief of staff even on this potential veto of the spending measure yesterday because if he said it to anyone, to anyone it would be out there and all of a sudden all bets are off. yeah i think that s another reason this is dangerous because the president is in a situation now in very sensitive circumstances, who has vladimir putin where he can t trust the people surrounding him to keep the information private and you have to imagine being a president in that situation your communication, everything is going to be really hard it causes serious obsticles to governance and so when wie talking about how this is dangerous it s another great example. neil: i do wonder too, on foreign policy issues where we get a lot of the leaking seems to be on whether you have gone too far on tariffs, whether you ve gone too far with vladimir pu