d etat. prime minister netanyahu s plans to curtail the judiciary. i will ask ehud barak and tzipi livni about what is happening on the ground and in the nasset. also, china s new foreign minister said this week there would surely be conflict and confro confrontation with the u.s. if the american government continues to speed down the wrong path. i ll dig in deep on the moods in both beijing and washington with kevin rudd, the former prieme minister of australia about to be sworn in as the new ambassador to the united states. also, should silicon valley s tech giants finally pay up for serving news content. they ve already squared off with australia over this and canada is next up. but it all may be too little, too late in the age of ai. i will explain. but first, here is my take. mexico could be entering a golden age. it is perfectly placed to benefit from the growing tensions between the united states and china. parts of the country are already seeing a boom as companie
sweet child of mine [ gasps ] welcome back. it is 11:00 a.m. eastern and 8:00 a.m. pacific. i m ana cabrera in for jose diaz-balart. we begin with the second anniversary of the roe v. wade ending the constitutional right to an abortion. that decision triggering a string of anti-abortion laws affecting millions. leaving one in three women of reproductive age living in a state with an abortion ban. and it reignited the debate around abortion with president biden making reproductive rights a centerpiece of his bid. later this hour kamala harris will deliver remarks at the university of maryland on this critical issue and just this morning the biden campaign releasing a new ad on a louisiana woman denied emergency care when she was having a miscarriage because of the state s abortion ban. i was turned away from two emergency rooms. that was a direct result of donald trump over turning roe v. wade. he s now a convicted felon. trump thinks he should not be held accountable
you know, often looking from the outside, we think what is in this for china? china is at risk of shredding its international reputation by being too close to putin s invasion of ukraine. not insufficiently independent, et cetera. if you look at this relationship, however, through the beijing lens or through the xi jinping lens, it is important to see that from his strategic view having russia on side with china for the long-term is a fundamental importance for most of the 400 year history as you know as a student of this, it is been a heavily armed border. there is no longer 18 soviet divisions on the other side of the border. china could focus all of its military activity and resources and planning to the maritime theater. its principal future adversary to the united states. i think the oath thing in xi s calculus, is the russians from
that based on logic of it just does not make any sense. it s interesting because axi is reporting the following, the block covers crypto news independently and has been secretly funded for over a year and funneled from disgraced sam brickman there might be some hot water around this media site paid. at think it is crazy. sam big ben has been paying for many, many people on the democratic side. the money goes very far. the only way that him testifyin makes any sense would be through s if it was somehow tied to his donations. everything he says can be used against him. it can still be used against him . is that fair? 100%. but on their oath thing. i would never allow if he was m client to go in and testify.
mueller s office put it. it has been interpreted in circles meaning mueller was trying to shoot down the entirety of the buzzfeed story, they were trying to say everything in the buzzfeed story is the opposite of what happened but my understanding that is not true. the statement is narrowly tailored and goes after one pivotal claim in the buzzfeed report and that is the oath thing it goes after what is the point. and the claim is mueller has documents and witness testimony showing that trump told cohen to lie. the only thing mueller said in that statement is that specific claim is incorrect. they didn t say whether or not the president or michael cohen had such a conversation. or whether or not just like woodward and bernstein. did he thnt tell the grand jury. when somebody says they have experience in politics and journalism, when you say not accurate, that is not the same as saying not wrong. you say not accurate means something is wrong. congressman and deny heck of washin