and so they are at or near sea level. i m wondering what you want folks at home to know about this part of florida, what the community is like and was like before the storm. oh, the community, obviously, i governed on sanibel almost 14 years. the community was one that was thriving. the community was a tourist destination. sanibel one of the top ten tourist destinations in the world. obviously, that s the before. right now the after is we are now rebuilding. the good news is that the resources we have had to address the situation, the bridge, the federal government, department of transportation, all making commitments to have design plans within 30 days it build that bridge as quick as humanly possible. it s all hands on deck. it s the first time you see all forms of government working together as one. i hope we learn from the storm and continue to do that. yeah. i hate to see sanibel island in
there is no longer a nuclear threat from north korea. does he still no longer believe there is a nuclear threat from north korea even though we heard they re committed to making a long-range missile? we know the history of north korea making promises, making commitments, taking american money when president clinton said we ve got this resolved back in 1994. this administration is not going to do that. we ve charted a different path. frankly, we ve been criticized for taking that path where we work, where we negotiate and a brighter future for the north korean people will gather for a second time. we have economic sanctions in place. we know the standards for relieving those sanctions and i m very hopeful we ll make a substantial step towards achieving the denuclearization in a verifiable way in north korea. the japanese have been great partners in this, and we re very hopeful we can get a good outcome. do you think north korea remains a nuclear threat?
the offers and counteroffers may be, but a real step. a demonstrable, verifiable step is something that president trump is very focused on achieving. tensions on the peninsula have alleviated but your successor, gina haspel told congress that north korea is committed to developing a long-range nuclear armed missile that would pose a direct threat to the united states. president trump after the last summit tweeted, there is no longer a nuclear threat from north korea. does he still believe there s no longer a nuclear threat from north korea, even though gina haspel says north korea is committed to creating this missile that could create the united states? i m familiar with the fact pattern. we know the history of the north koreans making promises, making commitments, lying, taking american money when president clinton said we ve got this resolved back in 1994. this smrgs nadministration is ng to do that. we ve charted a different path. we ve been criticized for taking
is taking a rather cautiously optimistic approach to this next sit-down between trump and kim. here s more of that interview with jake tapper on state of the union. we know the history of the north koreans making promises, making commitments, lying, taking american money when president clinton said we ve got this resolved back in 1994. this administration is not going to do that. we have charted a different path. frankly, we ve been criticized for taking that path. the two people who can actually effectuate the denuclearization of north korea and a brighter future for the north korean people will gather for a second time. we have economic sanctions in place. we know the standard for relieving those sanctions. and i m very hopeful we ll make a substantial step towards achieving the full denuclearization in a verifiable way in north korea. the south koreans, the japanese have been great partners in this, and we re very hopeful we can get a good outcome. has the trump administration
rhetoric because if you take the rhetoric that the government shouldn t raise taxes to pay for what the government s making commitments to do like fighting these wars in afghanistan, paying for social security, paying the government makes commitments the public s happy with and they say, yes, make those commitments, and then says but we won t keep them because we re not going to tax to pay for them and that s not really american. if my arithmetic is correct here, chris, two years of continuing the tax hike for everybody including the way if you include just the portion for the wealthiest that s $140 billion over two years. right. current estimates of the war in afghanistan maybe $100 billion a year. so that s $200 that s $340 billion right there if you change policies on the war and if you change policies on taxes. but republicans want the tax cuts and the war. yes that s my point. it s the same people. and at the same time they re going to wring their hands of how