and charlie sykes. the title 42 border restriction, it s a lose/lose thing. the criticism from the aclu i talked to them yesterday. they didn t prepare properly. they didn t create regional centers. they didn t get more judges and social workers down there. there s resentment from social ngos about sending 1,500 active duty troops. the message it sends we knew title 42 was going to sunset two years ago. there seems to be they seem to be caught on back footing. the message of militariing the border more plays into the people are trying to seek asylum are criminals. it doesn t help. what we saw most recently this weekend where someone took it upon themselves to take their
months. it doesn t help. so i kind of lost my patients. and it a little sassy post. i don t regret it. there s also, obviously, a threat on the roads. but then people s homes as well, you talked about roof all inches, what do you mean? as the snow continues to pile up on peoples roofs, roofs that have ten, 20 feet of snow on them, really hard to shovel the roof. if you let the snow pile up, it starts to melt or gets too heavy, it will fall off the even of the roof. you could be standing underneath the eve of a roof, and not get crushed by the falling snow. you don t have to be in a mountain to be hit by an avalanche. you get hit by a rueful, inch or the way the snow could collapse and take on a building. we encourage people to clear their roofs as best they can, also clear their propane tanks.
they re careful about that. but i would say this, that if you have rogue regimes intent on nuclear weapons, you can sign 100 agreements with them. it doesn t help. in fact, there have been five. three of them were stopped with credible military action. saddam hussein s iraq. we knocked it out. syria s assad wanted to develop a nuclear capability, we knocked it out. ka daffy s libya wanted to develop a nuclear ability, america knocked it out but that was a diplomatic solution. with a threat. it would be next. the first two were actual military strikes. the third one was but there was a credible military threat. that s the point i m making. the fourth north korea was signatory to the nuclear nonproliferation didn t do a damn thing. there was no credible military threat and they now have a nuclear arsenal and perhaps the means to reach the west coast of the united states and soon god knows what.
sure they would like to have that 1.6 $2 million in their bank instead of going to the state but it will not make or break them. neither is i will have to say the reputation of damage that is often the most powerful impact of a criminal conviction for a company. the reputation is damaged, people went to business with them. in this case the trump organization is sort of a special case. they have already lost a huge number the partners. a huge amount of their market share. there are people who do business with them. and are more eager to do business with them because of her there. i don t think this conviction will change that. i don t see you know, there is no desperately. no death blow here. it isn t one more blow against a company that has significantly lost the market that it used to play to. the markets where used to thrive. it doesn t help. it is not gonna be the end of them. i want to get both of you in on this the manhattan nda spoke to reverend sharpton over there today. i w