"Because they're following their passions and not looking dispassionately at the data," said Jolly, a frequent critic of the former president and the state of his longtime party. "Why are they trying to send their base in the direction of a national ban?" "Why can't Republicans figure out a cohesive, coherent message on this," said Menendez. And again, what the judges in the cases do.”ĬNN 08 11 2023 18 07 49 "I want to get your take on something that Sean Hannity said," said anchor Alicia Menendez, playing a clip of Hannity on Fox News saying, "I think the American people - and I consider myself pro-life, I believe in the sanctity of life - but I think, politically, that there is, Republicans have got to say, as Bill Clinton once said, I never thought I would quote him, rare, legal, and I'd add the word very early in a pregnancy, that seems to be politically where the country is. It's part of why he got in the race as early as he did, and also to freeze the field, but we should be looking for everything that he says about these cases, any change in language, any way that he handles it differently. We've been talking about that long before he actually got in the race. Trump obviously, is using this campaign as something of a shield. “This is a series of legal actions with wrapped around a political campaign. We look for what Trump says this weekend when he's in Iowa, we look at the next debate and whether the first debate and whether Trump actually goes, but we’ve…never seen anything like this,” Haberman said. “Next we're going to see again whether Trump, you know, does something that the judge considers violative of this order on social media. IN OTHER NEWS: Ex-Republican lawmaker in Tennessee sentenced to more than a year in prison Otherwise you can be absolutely sure he will cross it.Haberman’s comments came in response to a question from Blitzer over what to expect after Judge Tanya Chutkan warned Trump’s lawyers on Friday that the former president’s repeated use of inflammatory statements would likely accelerate the pace of his case. Putin needs to know that there is a line he cannot cross. Of course autocrats have their reasons, but are they reasons we have to accept as justifiable? There is no moral equivalence between the ambitions of a repressive state and those of a repressed people. Ask most Ukrainian citizens, yearning for western democratic freedoms, whether Putin has a right to deprive them of those freedoms in the name of some bogus historical affinity. That’s the voice of the non-interventionists but haven’t they been duped? Is a man who sends undercover troops into Crimea and then swears that they are locals defending their homeland really to be trusted? Ask the people of Georgia, whose country has been carved up by Putin, whether they think he has no interest in expansion. So cut him some slack: we need more diplomacy and fewer threats of reprisals. He couldn’t survive the national humiliation of it becoming yet another western outpost. Putin isn’t being expansionist: he just wants Ukraine to remain a non-aligned buffer zone between Russia and the West. It has backed the overthrow of a democratically elected president. The West has tried to influence elections in Ukraine. Not only have Nato and the EU broken that promise, they have even sought to bring Ukraine – for centuries seen as umbilically tied to Russia – into the western fold. The promise that Russia managed to extract from the West, as it watched its old empire crumble, was that NATO would not expand eastward and that the Baltic states and Poland would not be absorbed into the EU. You don’t have to like Vladimir Putin, or doubt that he’s a nasty piece of work, to recognise that the Russian president’s reaction to the crisis in Ukraine is largely justified.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |