floridian has to have this type of oversight. all florida businesses. so it s it s a little bit much to be complaining utthat. i don t think the suit has merit. i think it s political. which is quite the argument especially since desantis has previously bragged that the whole reason he started a war with mickey mouse in the first place was because the company spoke out against his don t say gay law. here s what he said right before he signed the measure revoking disney s special governing status last year. take a listen. incredibly, they say we are going to work to repeal parents rights in florida. i m thinking to myself, you re a corporation based in burbank, california. and you re going to marshal your economic might to attack the parents of my state? we view that as a provocation. and we re going to fight back against that. seems pretty cut and dry nee. desantis war against free speech doesn t end there. new reporting says florida officials are threatening to revoke the te
doing. which was highlighting not just the sanctions but the diplomatic expulsions. and other elements that are much more robust policy as opposed to the rhetoric we saw when the president was standing with vladimir putin which i think is indefensible. as the week went on in middle america, how do think this place? i think they ve turned down: this conversation because they re worried about the economy and health care costs. but, it s still very important to digest what president trump is doing on foreign-policy. putthat in the context of how he treated our nato allies. he went to europe and treated our nato allies very hostilely . he attacked them publicly into the opposite and was very weak standing next to vladimir putin in terms of his language. i don t think this was a rhetorical screwup. i think president trump wants american policy to go in a different direction. i think that his influence that
interview was what the administration asked to be doing. which was highlighting not just the sanctions but the diplomatic expulsions. and other elements that are much more robust policy as opposed to the rhetoric we saw when the president was standing with vladimir putin which i think is indefensible. as the week went on in middle america, how do think this place? i think they ve turned down: this conversation because they re worried about the economy and health care costs. but, it s still very important to digest what president trump is doing on foreign-policy. putthat in the context of how he treated our nato allies. he went to europe and treated our nato allies very hostilely . he attacked them publicly into the opposite and was very weak standing next to vladimir putin in terms of his language. i don t think this was a rhetorical screwup. i think president trump wants american policy to go in a different direction. i think that his influence that
interview was what the administration asked to be doing. which was highlighting not just the sanctions but the diplomatic expulsions. and other elements that are much more robust policy as opposed to the rhetoric we saw when the president was standing with vladimir putin which i think is indefensible. as the week went on in middle america, how do think this place? i think they ve turned down: this conversation because they re worried about the economy and health care costs. but, it s still very important to digest what president trump is doing on foreign-policy. putthat in the context of how he treated our nato allies. he went to europe and treated our nato allies very hostilely . he attacked them publicly into the opposite and was very weak standing next to vladimir putin in terms of his language. i don t think this was a rhetorical screwup. i think president trump wants american policy to go in a different direction. i think that his influence that
hillary clinton could run for the white house again, and we want to ask, is she fit to be the leader of the free world, considering her record as secretary of state? well, charles krauthammer certainly doesn t think so. name me one thing, just one, not three. give me one thing she achieved in the four years as secretary of state. i have yet to hear an answer. i do think it s really awful that you can have a four-year term, achieve nothing, and as you say, go backwards with russia, backwards on iran. backwards on syria, backwards on venezuela. backwards in relation with just about all of our allies. i mean, this is a foreign policy failure. all right, strong opinions utthat, but a new gallup survey shows 59% of americans still view here favorably a year after she stepped down as secretary of state. keep in mind, eric, this is in the aftermath even of benghazi, the aftermath of the famous thought around the world, what difference does it make? very popular.