point, clarissa, he wasn t. i think part of it is, if you were one of the clinton people, you see president trump the only time we ve heard president trump acknowledge with no cav t caveats, yes, there was russia, was so he could blame president obama. we ve seen that repeatedly over the last several days. looking at it, if you re a clinton person, my guess and not based on reporting, my guess is they don t want to drive a further wedge, given that the current president is already trying to. what s your read on manafort registering as a foreign agent? that doesn t have much retroactive impact to his lobbying activities, who he worked for, what money he made and how that was handled. what does it suggest? it suggests a couple things. it s tripped up other people. i believe it came up with michael flynn and is one of the things being looked at with him. what it tells me is that one of
will be very serious consequences if there is another chemical attack and nikki haley saying it won t just be the as sad regime, it s their backers and russia and iran. what s your response to this and do you think congress needs to be involved before we can talk about show of force against the assad regime? let me say the chemical weapons use is unacceptable and should be responded to. president obama should have responded to it in 2013, 14, some kind of response to a chemical weapon use is appropriate and warning is appropriate to prevent chemical weapon use. here s what s worrying me, we re starting to see we will respond in different ways and maybe talk about people working with assad and all of a sudden, you re talking about a much larger
and why he is president and he will continue to execute against that. we should not be surprised. i think we may need to change the way in which we approach this. no. you have to confront it. you have a reporter in the white house, jim acosta tried to make his voice heard. they haven t called on him in several weeks, that s part of the problem. the white house correspondents association, the president refusing to attend that. i wrote a column about that for playbook you have to confront this issue and recognize the fact he is at war with the media. once we accept that and then move forward and make head way. the simple fact of the matter is if you pretend this is business as usual in the white house and anywhere else, this trickles down to statehouses and city government, they sea to the guy at the top can get away with it,
many times when the light comes on. he said make it effective to the lower income and what really works. that jives with what i believe is one way to make this bill much more effective and much deeper for those most vulnerable who need that safety net. the president was right there with i think my line of thinking and open to suggest shuns and pushing it as a policy and politically as well. you have just as much political opposition on the other side in your party that they want to take as much money out of it as possible, this was a pledge tantamount to deficit reduction move here by pulling money out of the system and help to motivate tax policy. not only do you have equal resistance at thor end of the spectrum but they marry out.
conservatives will feel awfully hood-winked if all we heard about the deficiencies in obamacare and needed to be repealed and pulled out by the majority in its roots and when they get the white house and some backtracking by people like senator collins, maybe not so much. you can t have your cake and east it, too, there will be hell to pay if they don t pass some version of healthcare reform. i have a let me reiterate. my friends who are big believers in what you just said, it comes down to their desire to have something be better. they don t like where their deductibles are, don t like the policy configurations, choice, they want better and i know you factored that in the name of this bill on the republican side. it doesn t appear to be better. why put so much stock in the political promise of repeal and