Donald Trump And America’s Waning Global Influence | Deadline | MSNBC


“DEADLINE: WHITE HOUSE” STARTS NOW. NOW.>>>HI, EVERYONE, IT’S 4:00 IN>>>HI, EVERYONE, IT’S 4:00 IN NEW YORK. NEW YORK. WITH WARNING SIGNS FLASHING RED WITH WARNING SIGNS FLASHING RED THAT THE ECONOMY COULD BE HEED THAT THE ECONOMY COULD BE HEED FOR TURMOIL. FOR TURMOIL. THE DOW CLOSING OVER 800 POINTS THE DOW CLOSING OVER 800 POINTS DOWN TODAY AS DONALD TRUMP’S DOWN TODAY AS DONALD TRUMP’S POLITICAL WEAKNESS, FOREIGN POLITICAL WEAKNESS, FOREIGN POLICY CLUELESSNESS AND POLICY CLUELESSNESS AND ABDICATION OF AMERICAN ABDICATION OF AMERICAN LEADERSHIP ON THE WORLD STAGE IS LEADERSHIP ON THE WORLD STAGE IS ON FULL AND STARK DISPLAY. ON FULL AND STARK DISPLAY. THE WORLD’S EYES ON HONG KONG. THE WORLD’S EYES ON HONG KONG. PRO-DEMOCRACY PROTESTERS SPILLED PRO-DEMOCRACY PROTESTERS SPILLED THE STREETS ON THE FOURTH DAY OF THE STREETS ON THE FOURTH DAY OF ESCALATING TENSIONS THERE. ESCALATING TENSIONS THERE. THE KIND OF STANDOFF AMERICA THE KIND OF STANDOFF AMERICA USED TO TAKE A CLEAR STAND ON USED TO TAKE A CLEAR STAND ON THE SIDE OF PRO-DEMOCRACY THE SIDE OF PRO-DEMOCRACY FORCES. FORCES. TODAY IT’S UNCLEAR WHERE THE TODAY IT’S UNCLEAR WHERE THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT COMES DOWN. AMERICAN PRESIDENT COMES DOWN. POLITICO REPORTS THIS — POLITICO REPORTS THIS — LAWMAKERS AND GOVERNMENT LAWMAKERS AND GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS ACROSS WASHINGTON, OFFICIALS ACROSS WASHINGTON, INCLUDING SON INCLUDING SON INCLUDING SOME OF PRESIDENT’S INCLUDING SOME OF PRESIDENT’S DONALD TRUMP’S ADVISERS ARE DONALD TRUMP’S ADVISERS ARE GROWING INCREASINGLY ALARMED GROWING INCREASINGLY ALARMED WITH WHAT’S DPG ONGOING ON IN HO WITH WHAT’S DPG ONGOING ON IN HO KONG. KONG. MORE THAN THE MOST, INCLUDING MORE THAN THE MOST, INCLUDING TRUMP. TRUMP. UNLIKE MOST PRESIDENTS HE SHOWS UNLIKE MOST PRESIDENTS HE SHOWS FONDNESS FOR AUTHORITARIAN FONDNESS FOR AUTHORITARIAN LEADERS AND LITTLE INTEREST FOR LEADERS AND LITTLE INTEREST FOR PROMOTING HUMAN RIGHTS OR PROMOTING HUMAN RIGHTS OR DEMOCRACY. DEMOCRACY. “THE NEW YORK TIMES” WRITES, “THE NEW YORK TIMES” WRITES, VIOLENCE CASE LATES AND OLD VIOLENCE CASE LATES AND OLD ANIMOSITIES REKINDLED ACROSS ANIMOSITIES REKINDLED ACROSS ASIA, WASHINGTON HAS CHOSEN ASIA, WASHINGTON HAS CHOSEN INACTION AND GOVERNMENTS ARE INACTION AND GOVERNMENTS ARE IGNORING THE TRUMP IGNORING THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S MILD ADMONITION ADMINISTRATION’S MILD ADMONITION AND CALLS FOR CALM. AND CALLS FOR CALM. THE INABILITY OR UNWILLINGNESS THE INABILITY OR UNWILLINGNESS OF WASHINGTON TO HELP DEFUSE THE OF WASHINGTON TO HELP DEFUSE THE FLASH POINTS IS ONE OF THE FLASH POINTS IS ONE OF THE CLEAREST SIGNS YET OF THE CLEAREST SIGNS YET OF THE EROSION OF AMERICAN POWER AND EROSION OF AMERICAN POWER AND GLOBAL INFLUENCE UNDER MR. GLOBAL INFLUENCE UNDER MR. TRUMP, WHO HAS STUCK TO HIS TRUMP, WHO HAS STUCK TO HIS AMERICA FIRST IDEA OF AMERICA FIRST IDEA OF DISENGAGEMENT. DISENGAGEMENT. HERE’S THE PRESIDENT’S REACTION HERE’S THE PRESIDENT’S REACTION TO WHAT ADDTRATION OFFICIAL TO WHAT ADDTRATION OFFICIAL DESCRIBES TO POLITICO AS, QUOTE, DESCRIBES TO POLITICO AS, QUOTE, AS CLOSE TO A TIANANMEN SQUARE AS CLOSE TO A TIANANMEN SQUARE POTENTIALLY THAT YOU’RE BOGGOING POTENTIALLY THAT YOU’RE BOGGOING GET IN A MODERN AGE. GET IN A MODERN AGE.>>IT’S A VERY TRICKY SITUATION.>>IT’S A VERY TRICKY SITUATION. I THINK IT WILL WORK OUT AND I I THINK IT WILL WORK OUT AND I HOPE IT WORKS OUT FOR LIBERTY. HOPE IT WORKS OUT FOR LIBERTY. I HOPE IT WORKS OUT FOR I HOPE IT WORKS OUT FOR EVERYBODY, INCLUDING CHINA. EVERYBODY, INCLUDING CHINA. I WORK IT WORKS OUT EQUALLY. I WORK IT WORKS OUT EQUALLY. I HOPE NOBODY GETS HURT. I HOPE NOBODY GETS HURT. I HOPE NOBODY GETS KILLED. I HOPE NOBODY GETS KILLED.>>VERY TRICKY SITUATION.>>VERY TRICKY SITUATION. I HOPE NOBODY GETS KILLED. I HOPE NOBODY GETS KILLED. MY, HOW FAR WE’VE COME FROM A MY, HOW FAR WE’VE COME FROM A SHINING CITY ON A HILL. SHINING CITY ON A HILL. AND YESTERDAY HIS FIRST PUBLIC AND YESTERDAY HIS FIRST PUBLIC EVENT SINCE TENSIONS IN HONG EVENT SINCE TENSIONS IN HONG KONG ERUPTED, THE PRESIDENT HAD KONG ERUPTED, THE PRESIDENT HAD A LOT OF THINGS OTHER THAN THE A LOT OF THINGS OTHER THAN THE PRO-DEMOCRACY PROTEST ON HIS PRO-DEMOCRACY PROTEST ON HIS MIND. MIND.>>I THINK WE’RE LOOKING DID ALL>>I THINK WE’RE LOOKING DID ALL OVER IN OHIO, IN NORTH CAROLINA, OVER IN OHIO, IN NORTH CAROLINA, IN SOUTH CAROLINA, FLORIDA. IN SOUTH CAROLINA, FLORIDA. WE JUST GOT NUMBERS IN FLORIDA. WE JUST GOT NUMBERS IN FLORIDA. LOOKING FANTASTICALLY GOOD. LOOKING FANTASTICALLY GOOD. I GOT SUED ON A THING CALLED I GOT SUED ON A THING CALLED EMOLUMENTS. EMOLUMENTS. EVER HEARD OF IT? EVER HEARD OF IT? NOBODY HEARD OF IT BEFORE. NOBODY HEARD OF IT BEFORE. NOBODY LOOKS AT OBAMA GETTING NOBODY LOOKS AT OBAMA GETTING $16 MILLION FOR A BOOK. $16 MILLION FOR A BOOK. EVEN THOUGH NOBODY IN HISTORY EVEN THOUGH NOBODY IN HISTORY GOT THAT MUCH FOR A BOOK. GOT THAT MUCH FOR A BOOK. THEY SAID DON’T WORRY ABOUT THE THEY SAID DON’T WORRY ABOUT THE RAIN. RAIN. DO WE HAVE UMBRELLAS? DO WE HAVE UMBRELLAS? UMBRELLAS WORK VERY WELL. UMBRELLAS WORK VERY WELL. ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY’RE MADE IN ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY’RE MADE IN AMERICA. AMERICA. I ALWAYS LOVE TRUCKS. I ALWAYS LOVE TRUCKS. I STILL DO. I STILL DO. NOTHING CHANGES. NOTHING CHANGES. SOMETIMES YOU MIGHT BECOME SOMETIMES YOU MIGHT BECOME PRESIDENT BUT NOTHING CHANGES. PRESIDENT BUT NOTHING CHANGES. I STILL LOVE TRUCKS. I STILL LOVE TRUCKS.>>WORLD IS ON FIRE AND TRUMP IS>>WORLD IS ON FIRE AND TRUMP IS MUSING PUBLICLY ABOUT HIS POLL MUSING PUBLICLY ABOUT HIS POLL NUMBERS IN BATTLEGROUND STATES, NUMBERS IN BATTLEGROUND STATES, HIS LOVE OF UMBRELLAS AND TRUCKS HIS LOVE OF UMBRELLAS AND TRUCKS AND PRESIDENT OBAMA’S BOOK DEAL. AND PRESIDENT OBAMA’S BOOK DEAL. THAT’S WHERE WE START WITH SOME THAT’S WHERE WE START WITH SOME OF OUR FAVORITE REPORTERS AND OF OUR FAVORITE REPORTERS AND FRIEND. FRIEND. THE WHITE HOUSE REPORTER FOR THE WHITE HOUSE REPORTER FOR “L.A. TIMES,” RICK STENGEL WHO “L.A. TIMES,” RICK STENGEL WHO WORKED IN PRESIDENT OBAMA’S WORKED IN PRESIDENT OBAMA’S STATE DEPARTMENT AND FORMER STATE DEPARTMENT AND FORMER MANAGING EDITOR AT “TIME” MANAGING EDITOR AT “TIME” MAGAZINE, EUGENE ROBINSON FROM MAGAZINE, EUGENE ROBINSON FROM “THE WASHINGTON POST,” AND ALSO “THE WASHINGTON POST,” AND ALSO JOINING US FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF JOINING US FORMER CHIEF OF STAFF TO VICE PRESIDENTS JOE BIDEN, AL TO VICE PRESIDENTS JOE BIDEN, AL GORE. GORE. I HAVE TO START WITH YOU, RICK I HAVE TO START WITH YOU, RICK STENGEL. STENGEL. SO MUCH OF WHAT TRUMP DOES I SO MUCH OF WHAT TRUMP DOES I WOULD PUT IN THE CATEGORY OF WOULD PUT IN THE CATEGORY OF STUPID HUMAN TRICKS. STUPID HUMAN TRICKS. HE SAYS SUCH DUMB THINS BUT HE SAYS SUCH DUMB THINS BUT THERE ARE NOT LIVES AT STAKE OR THERE ARE NOT LIVES AT STAKE OR CONSEQUENCES. CONSEQUENCES. THIS IS A MOMENT EVERY AMERICAN THIS IS A MOMENT EVERY AMERICAN PRESIDENT, I WOULD THINK, IF YOU PRESIDENT, I WOULD THINK, IF YOU JUDGE THEIR RECORDS AND THE WAY JUDGE THEIR RECORDS AND THE WAY THEY RESPONDED, WOULD BE THEY RESPONDED, WOULD BE STANDING UP MORE FORCEFULLY IN STANDING UP MORE FORCEFULLY IN THE WAY THE OTHER DEMOCRATS IN THE WAY THE OTHER DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS HAVE BEEN DOING WITH CONGRESS HAVE BEEN DOING WITH THE PRO-DEMOCRACY FORCES. THE PRO-DEMOCRACY FORCES. THE PRESIDENT WOULD BE BACK IN THE PRESIDENT WOULD BE BACK IN THE SITUATION ROOM, NOT GIVING A THE SITUATION ROOM, NOT GIVING A CAMPAIGN RALLY. CAMPAIGN RALLY.>>YES, YOU KNOW, POLITICAL>>YES, YOU KNOW, POLITICAL SCIENTISTS TALK ABOUT FOREIGN SCIENTISTS TALK ABOUT FOREIGN POLICY ALONG A CONTINUUM BETWEEN POLICY ALONG A CONTINUUM BETWEEN REALISM AND IDEALISM. REALISM AND IDEALISM. JOHN ADAMS WAS THE ORIGINAL JOHN ADAMS WAS THE ORIGINAL REALIST. REALIST. WE DON’T GO IN SEARCH OF WE DON’T GO IN SEARCH OF MONSTERS THAT DESTROY. MONSTERS THAT DESTROY. EVER SINCE BILL WILSON WAS EVER SINCE BILL WILSON WAS PRESIDENT, EVERY AMERICAN PRESIDENT, EVERY AMERICAN PRESIDENT HAD TO INCORPORATE PRESIDENT HAD TO INCORPORATE IDEALISM IN THEIR FOREIGN IDEALISM IN THEIR FOREIGN POLICY. POLICY. SO WHEN SOMETHING IS HAPPENING SO WHEN SOMETHING IS HAPPENING IN HONG KONG, EVERY AMERICAN IN HONG KONG, EVERY AMERICAN PRESIDENT UNTIL NOW WOULD SAY WE PRESIDENT UNTIL NOW WOULD SAY WE SIDE WITH THE PEOPLE OF HONG SIDE WITH THE PEOPLE OF HONG KONG IN THE PURSUIT OF LIBERTY KONG IN THE PURSUIT OF LIBERTY AND HUMAN RIGHTS. AND HUMAN RIGHTS. THAT WAS THE CITY ON A HILL THAT THAT WAS THE CITY ON A HILL THAT AMERICA REPRESENTED FOR PEOPLE AMERICA REPRESENTED FOR PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD. AROUND THE WORLD. AS MY OLD BOSS JOHN KERRY USED AS MY OLD BOSS JOHN KERRY USED TO SAY, PEOPLE DON’T WAKE UP AT TO SAY, PEOPLE DON’T WAKE UP AT NIGHT WORRIED THAT WE’RE NIGHT WORRIED THAT WE’RE INVOLVED. INVOLVED. THEY WAKE UP AT NIGHT WORRYING THEY WAKE UP AT NIGHT WORRYING WE’RE NOT INVOLVED. WE’RE NOT INVOLVED. IF YOU LOOK AROUND THE WORLD AND IF YOU LOOK AROUND THE WORLD AND WHEREVER WE LEAVE AND WITHDRAW, WHEREVER WE LEAVE AND WITHDRAW, AS WE ARE DOING NOW, THEY’RE AS WE ARE DOING NOW, THEY’RE NEVER REPLACED BY A BETTER NEVER REPLACED BY A BETTER ACTOR. ACTOR.>>LET ME STOP YOU.>>LET ME STOP YOU. IS THAT STILL TRUE? IS THAT STILL TRUE?>>I THINK IT IS TRUE.>>I THINK IT IS TRUE. THERE ARE NO OTHER ACTORS, NOT THERE ARE NO OTHER ACTORS, NOT BETTER ACTS. BETTER ACTS. WHEN WILBUR ROSS SAID IT’S AN WHEN WILBUR ROSS SAID IT’S AN INTERNAL MATTER THE FOREIGN INTERNAL MATTER THE FOREIGN MINISTER OF RUSSIA AND CHINA MINISTER OF RUSSIA AND CHINA WERE DANCING UP AND DOWN. WERE DANCING UP AND DOWN. WHAT NOBODY TALKS ABOUT, BECAUSE WHAT NOBODY TALKS ABOUT, BECAUSE TRUMP DOESN’T UNDERSTAND T. HE’S TRUMP DOESN’T UNDERSTAND T. HE’S MOVING US TO A SPHERE OF MOVING US TO A SPHERE OF INFLUENCE WORLD. INFLUENCE WORLD. THAT’S THE 19th CENTURY WHERE NO THAT’S THE 19th CENTURY WHERE NO MATTER WHAT YOU DID WAS ODIOUS MATTER WHAT YOU DID WAS ODIOUS OR AGGRESSIVE, IN YOUR SPHERE OF OR AGGRESSIVE, IN YOUR SPHERE OF INFLUENCE, WE’RE NOT GOING TO INFLUENCE, WE’RE NOT GOING TO MESS IT. MESS IT. WE’RE NOT INVOLVED IN THAT. WE’RE NOT INVOLVED IN THAT. THAT’S TRUMP AND WHAT RUSSIA AND THAT’S TRUMP AND WHAT RUSSIA AND CHINA WANT AND WILBUR ROSS SAY CHINA WANT AND WILBUR ROSS SAY WE DO TODAY. WE DO TODAY. EVERY AMERICAN PRESIDENT SINCE EVERY AMERICAN PRESIDENT SINCE WILSON WAS HAVING A HEART ATTACK WILSON WAS HAVING A HEART ATTACK TODAY AND IT’S NOT WHAT AMERICA TODAY AND IT’S NOT WHAT AMERICA SHOULD REPRESENT AROUND THE SHOULD REPRESENT AROUND THE WORLD. WORLD. THERE AND IT ENDS UP IN WORLD THERE AND IT ENDS UP IN WORLD WAR I, WHERE IT HAD. WAR I, WHERE IT HAD. AND IN ANY OTHER ADMINISTRATION, AND IN ANY OTHER ADMINISTRATION, AS YOU SAID, THE ADMINISTRATION AS YOU SAID, THE ADMINISTRATION WOULD HAVE DEVELOPED A RESPONSE. WOULD HAVE DEVELOPED A RESPONSE. FIRST OF ALL, THERE WOULD HAVE FIRST OF ALL, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN DAILY WHITE HOUSE BEEN DAILY WHITE HOUSE BRIEFINGS. BRIEFINGS. WITH THE BRIEFINGS THE PRESS WITH THE BRIEFINGS THE PRESS SECRETARY WOULD HAVE BEEN ASKED SECRETARY WOULD HAVE BEEN ASKED ABOUT THE HONG KONG ABOUT THE HONG KONG DEMONSTRATIONS. DEMONSTRATIONS. THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A CAREFULLY WRITTEN AND MODULATED CAREFULLY WRITTEN AND MODULATED STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF HUMAN STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF HUMAN RIGHTS. RIGHTS. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN CONSIDERED. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A PROCESS. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A PROCESS. EVERYBODY WOULD HAVE KNOWN WHAT EVERYBODY WOULD HAVE KNOWN WHAT IT WAS, WHAT THE IT WAS, WHAT THE ADMINISTRATION’S POSITION WAS. ADMINISTRATION’S POSITION WAS. THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN STATED BY THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN STATED BY THE PRESS SECRETARY OR PERHAPS THE PRESS SECRETARY OR PERHAPS BY THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF. BY THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF. THIS IS JUST, TWEET THIS, BABBLE THIS IS JUST, TWEET THIS, BABBLE THAT. THAT. IT’S INCREDIBLE. IT’S INCREDIBLE.>>IT’S WORSE THAN THAT.>>IT’S WORSE THAN THAT. THE REPORTING THAT I CITED SITES THE REPORTING THAT I CITED SITES POMPEO, OUR COUNTRY’S SECRETARY POMPEO, OUR COUNTRY’S SECRETARY OF STATE, WHO SHOULD BE IF OF STATE, WHO SHOULD BE IF NOTHING ELSE A SAFETY NET FOR NOTHING ELSE A SAFETY NET FOR OTHER WORLD LEADERS AND OTHER WORLD LEADERS AND COUNTRIES IN CRISIS, HE WAS, COUNTRIES IN CRISIS, HE WAS, QUOTE, AFRAID TO GET AHEAD OF QUOTE, AFRAID TO GET AHEAD OF TRUMP. TRUMP. IT’S NOT EVEN THAT. IT’S NOT EVEN THAT. IT’S ACCOMMODATING TRUMP’S IT’S ACCOMMODATING TRUMP’S AFFINITY FOR DICTATORS AS THE OR AFFINITY FOR DICTATORS AS THE OR THING SUGGESTS. THING SUGGESTS.>>HE HAS AN AFFINITY FOR>>HE HAS AN AFFINITY FOR DICTATORS AND SEEMS NOT TO CARE DICTATORS AND SEEMS NOT TO CARE IF JOHNNY COMES IN AND MOWS DOWN IF JOHNNY COMES IN AND MOWS DOWN THE PROTESTERS AND GENERALLY THE PROTESTERS AND GENERALLY THINK THAT’S AN INTERNAL MATTER THINK THAT’S AN INTERNAL MATTER FOR CHINA TO DEAL WITH HOWEVER FOR CHINA TO DEAL WITH HOWEVER IT CHOOSES. IT CHOOSES. IT’S A SCARY THING TO THINK IT’S A SCARY THING TO THINK THAT’S WHAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE THAT’S WHAT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES BELIEVES AND TENDS UNITED STATES BELIEVES AND TENDS TO ACT ON BUT IT DOES SEEM TO BE TO ACT ON BUT IT DOES SEEM TO BE WHAT HE BELIEVES. WHAT HE BELIEVES.>>ELI, I’M SO RELUCTANT TO SORT>>ELI, I’M SO RELUCTANT TO SORT OF ASKING QUESTIONS IN THE FRAME OF ASKING QUESTIONS IN THE FRAME OF THE LOWERING OF THE BAR BUT OF THE LOWERING OF THE BAR BUT I’M GOING TO DO IT ANYWAY. I’M GOING TO DO IT ANYWAY. YESTERDAY OSTENSIBLY AN EVENT YESTERDAY OSTENSIBLY AN EVENT ABOUT ENERGY, CLEARLY HE’S NOT ABOUT ENERGY, CLEARLY HE’S NOT CAPABLE OF DOING ANYTHING AN CAPABLE OF DOING ANYTHING AN EVENT IS OSTENSIBLY ABOUT. EVENT IS OSTENSIBLY ABOUT. HE STANDS UP AND OPENS HIS MOUTH HE STANDS UP AND OPENS HIS MOUTH AND WHAT STILL IS VOWED IS AND WHAT STILL IS VOWED IS WHAT’S ON HIS MIND, POLL WHAT’S ON HIS MIND, POLL NUMBERS, OBAMA’S BIG BOOK DEAL, NUMBERS, OBAMA’S BIG BOOK DEAL, UMBRELLAS AND TRUCKS. UMBRELLAS AND TRUCKS. IS ANYTHING ELSE — AM I MISSING IS ANYTHING ELSE — AM I MISSING ANYTHING? ANYTHING? IS ANYTHING HAPPENING BACK AT IS ANYTHING HAPPENING BACK AT THE WHITE HOUSE? THE WHITE HOUSE?>>YOU KNOW WHEN YOU TALKED>>YOU KNOW WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT EVERYBODY THAT WORKS IN ABOUT EVERYBODY THAT WORKS IN THE BUILDING WHO IS JUST THERE THE BUILDING WHO IS JUST THERE TO SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE TO SERVE AT THE PLEASURE OF THE PRESIDENT. PRESIDENT. THEY RECOGNIZE THAT AND THAT THEY RECOGNIZE THAT AND THAT MEANS NOT CONFLICTING WITH HIM MEANS NOT CONFLICTING WITH HIM OR GIVING HIM ADVICE OR OR GIVING HIM ADVICE OR CONSTRUCTION HE CONSTRUCTION HE INSTRUCTION HE DOESN’T WANT TO INSTRUCTION HE DOESN’T WANT TO HEAR. HEAR. RACKS BY THE RACKS BY THE REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT ON REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT ON ECONOMY AND MANUFACTURING, AS ECONOMY AND MANUFACTURING, AS BELIEVABLE AS INFRASTRUCTURE BELIEVABLE AS INFRASTRUCTURE WHEN THEY THREW THAT TERMINOLOGY WHEN THEY THREW THAT TERMINOLOGY AROUND. AROUND. BUT THAT’S HOW THE PRESIDENT IS, BUT THAT’S HOW THE PRESIDENT IS, HIS STREAM OF CONSCIOUS. HIS STREAM OF CONSCIOUS. IT’S ABOUT HIM. IT’S ABOUT HIM. LAST WEEK I WAS ON AIR FORCE ONE LAST WEEK I WAS ON AIR FORCE ONE IN THE POOL AND WE WENT TO IN THE POOL AND WE WENT TO DAYTON AND EL PASO WITH THE DAYTON AND EL PASO WITH THE PRESIDENT. PRESIDENT. WE DIDN’T SEE A LOT OF HIM UNTIL WE DIDN’T SEE A LOT OF HIM UNTIL THE END BUT YOU COULD JUST TELL THE END BUT YOU COULD JUST TELL AFTER THE FACT WHAT HE SAID TO AFTER THE FACT WHAT HE SAID TO US ON THE PLANE OFF THE RECORD US ON THE PLANE OFF THE RECORD AND FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND AND FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND REPORTING THAT’S COME OUT AT THE REPORTING THAT’S COME OUT AT THE END THAT WAS A DAY AND WHAT WAS END THAT WAS A DAY AND WHAT WAS ON THE PRESIDENT’S MIND WAS NOT ON THE PRESIDENT’S MIND WAS NOT CONSOLING THE COMMUNITY AS MUCH CONSOLING THE COMMUNITY AS MUCH AS HOW HE WAS RECEIVED BY THE AS HOW HE WAS RECEIVED BY THE COMMUNITIES. COMMUNITIES. THAT’S WHAT HE TALKED ABOUT. THAT’S WHAT HE TALKED ABOUT. THAT’S THE FIRST THING HE SAID THAT’S THE FIRST THING HE SAID WHEN ASKED BY OUR REPORTER, WHAT WHEN ASKED BY OUR REPORTER, WHAT HAS TODAY BEEN LIKE? HAS TODAY BEEN LIKE? THEY HAVE A TREMENDOUS RESPECT THEY HAVE A TREMENDOUS RESPECT FOR THE PRESIDENCY. FOR THE PRESIDENCY. HE’S ALWAYS THE CENTRAL HE’S ALWAYS THE CENTRAL CHARACTER IN HIS DRAMA HE’S CHARACTER IN HIS DRAMA HE’S TALKING ABOUT AND THAT’S THE TALKING ABOUT AND THAT’S THE SAME WAY HE APPROACHES FOREIGN SAME WAY HE APPROACHES FOREIGN POLICY. POLICY. THERE’S A CRISIS IN KASHMIR THERE’S A CRISIS IN KASHMIR BETWEEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN BETWEEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN SIMMERING AND THE PRESIDENT SIMMERING AND THE PRESIDENT THINKS HE CAN MODERATE THIS. THINKS HE CAN MODERATE THIS. HE THINKS IF HE’S INVOLVED, CAN HE THINKS IF HE’S INVOLVED, CAN HE SOLVE ANY GLOBAL PROBLEM, HE SOLVE ANY GLOBAL PROBLEM, WHETHER IT’S TENSIONS IN THAT WHETHER IT’S TENSIONS IN THAT REGION. REGION. WHETHER IT’S GETTING KIM JONG-UN WHETHER IT’S GETTING KIM JONG-UN TO GIVE UP HIS NUCLEAR PROGRAM. TO GIVE UP HIS NUCLEAR PROGRAM. HE BELIEVES IF HE’S INVOLVED, HE HE BELIEVES IF HE’S INVOLVED, HE CAN FIX IT LIKE TRADE WARS HE CAN FIX IT LIKE TRADE WARS HE SAID ARE GOOD AND EASY TO WIN. SAID ARE GOOD AND EASY TO WIN. IF HE’S NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF IT, IF HE’S NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF IT, HE DOESN’T SEEM THAT INTERESTED HE DOESN’T SEEM THAT INTERESTED OR CONCERNED. OR CONCERNED. YESTERDAY HE’S SAYING, WHY ARE YESTERDAY HE’S SAYING, WHY ARE THEY BLAMING ME FOR THE CRISIS THEY BLAMING ME FOR THE CRISIS IN HONG KONG? IN HONG KONG? HE’S FORGETTING JUST A FEW WEEKS HE’S FORGETTING JUST A FEW WEEKS AGO IN LATE JULY HE SPOKE ABOUT AGO IN LATE JULY HE SPOKE ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON THERE AND SAID WHAT WAS GOING ON THERE AND SAID CHINA’S GONE EASY ON THEM. CHINA’S GONE EASY ON THEM. CHINA COULD DO A LOT MORE. CHINA COULD DO A LOT MORE. THEY COULD BE A LOT STRONGER. THEY COULD BE A LOT STRONGER. WHICH A LOT OF PEOPLE LOOK AS A WHICH A LOT OF PEOPLE LOOK AS A TACIT GREEN LIGHT TO XI TO GO IN TACIT GREEN LIGHT TO XI TO GO IN FORCEFULLY TO THESE FORCEFULLY TO THESE PRO-DEMOCRACY PROTESTERS AND PRO-DEMOCRACY PROTESTERS AND THAT’S A WORLD VIEW OF TRUMP’S THAT’S A WORLD VIEW OF TRUMP’S WE’VE SEEN THAT’S CONSISTENT WE’VE SEEN THAT’S CONSISTENT WITH WHAT HE SAID FOR YEARS WITH WHAT HE SAID FOR YEARS ABOUT AUTOCRATS AND STRENGTH, ABOUT AUTOCRATS AND STRENGTH, HIS IDEA OF STRENGTH. HIS IDEA OF STRENGTH. IT’S HARD POWER. IT’S HARD POWER. DOESN’T BELIEVE IN SOFT POWER, DOESN’T BELIEVE IN SOFT POWER, HE BELIEVES IN HARD POWER. HE BELIEVES IN HARD POWER.>>RON KLAIN, SOMEBODY RAN>>RON KLAIN, SOMEBODY RAN AGAINST DONALD TRUMP IN THE AGAINST DONALD TRUMP IN THE PRIMARIES AND SAID THE MOMENT HE PRIMARIES AND SAID THE MOMENT HE WAS MOST VULNERABLE WHEN HE WAS WAS MOST VULNERABLE WHEN HE WAS OUTED TO HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE OUTED TO HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE NUCLEAR NUCLEAR NUCLEAR TRY ADWAS. NUCLEAR TRY ADWAS. TO THE DEGREE HE HAS NO SHAME ON TO THE DEGREE HE HAS NO SHAME ON HIS STUNNING KNOWLEDGE ON HIS STUNNING KNOWLEDGE ON FOREIGN POLICY, WHAT IS IT — BE FOREIGN POLICY, WHAT IS IT — BE TAKE YOUR SOURCE’S WORDS FOR TAKE YOUR SOURCE’S WORDS FOR THAT. THAT. THIS IS SOMEONE DEFEATED BY THIS IS SOMEONE DEFEATED BY DONALD TRUMP AND EXAMINING THE DONALD TRUMP AND EXAMINING THE MOLTS TRUMP IS MOST VULNERABLE, MOLTS TRUMP IS MOST VULNERABLE, I ACCEPT THE CONCLUSION THAT WAS I ACCEPT THE CONCLUSION THAT WAS ONE OF THEM. ONE OF THEM. IF YOU TAKE THAT AND TAKE ALL OF IF YOU TAKE THAT AND TAKE ALL OF THE REPORTING ABOUT BASICALLY THE REPORTING ABOUT BASICALLY EVERY INSULT’S ALREADY BEEN EVERY INSULT’S ALREADY BEEN LOBBED AT DONALD TRUMP, AND HE’S LOBBED AT DONALD TRUMP, AND HE’S STILL STANDING. STILL STANDING. YOU KNOW HAVE PRO-DEMOCRACY YOU KNOW HAVE PRO-DEMOCRACY FORCES AS EVERYONE HAS SAID, ANY FORCES AS EVERYONE HAS SAID, ANY OTHER AMERICAN WOULD BE STANDING OTHER AMERICAN WOULD BE STANDING UP FOR BECAUSE LIVES ARE ON THE UP FOR BECAUSE LIVES ARE ON THE LINE. LINE. NOT JUST IN FOREIGN POLICY THAT NOT JUST IN FOREIGN POLICY THAT AFFECT OUR NATIONAL SECURITY BUT AFFECT OUR NATIONAL SECURITY BUT LIVES OF THE PRO DEMOCRACY LIVES OF THE PRO DEMOCRACY PROTESTERS. PROTESTERS. WHAT WOULD YOU ADVISE ANY WHAT WOULD YOU ADVISE ANY CRITIC, NOT JUST A DEMOCRAT, BUT CRITIC, NOT JUST A DEMOCRAT, BUT ANY CRITIC OF DONALD TRUMP’S ANY CRITIC OF DONALD TRUMP’S CONDUCT OVER THE LAST FOUR DAYS CONDUCT OVER THE LAST FOUR DAYS TO DO AND SAY IN. TO DO AND SAY IN.>>LOOK, NICOLLE, IT LOCKS LIKE>>LOOK, NICOLLE, IT LOCKS LIKE THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS ARE NO THOUGHTS AND PRAYERS ARE NO LONGER JUST THE KBUN CONTROLGUN LONGER JUST THE KBUN CONTROLGUN POLICY OF THE TRUMP POLICY OF THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION. ADMINISTRATION. HE’S STANDING ON THE TARMAC HE’S STANDING ON THE TARMAC SAYING I HOPE IT WORKS OUT OKAY, SAYING I HOPE IT WORKS OUT OKAY, PEACEFUL AND WHATEVER. PEACEFUL AND WHATEVER. FOR HIS CRITICS, REPUBLICAN FOR HIS CRITICS, REPUBLICAN CRITICS AND DEMOCRATIC CRITICS, CRITICS AND DEMOCRATIC CRITICS, AN AMERICA ABSENT FROM THE WORLD AN AMERICA ABSENT FROM THE WORLD STAGE AND ABSENT FOR STANDING STAGE AND ABSENT FOR STANDING FROM DEMOCRACY GOES TO RICK’S FROM DEMOCRACY GOES TO RICK’S POINT OF IDEALISM AND REALISM. POINT OF IDEALISM AND REALISM. THERE’S AN IDEALISTIC ELEMENT, THERE’S AN IDEALISTIC ELEMENT, AMERICANS STANDING FOR DEMOCRACY AMERICANS STANDING FOR DEMOCRACY BUT REALISTIC ELEMENT. BUT REALISTIC ELEMENT. ONE COUNTRY’S GOING TO WRITE THE ONE COUNTRY’S GOING TO WRITE THE RULES FOR THE 21st CENTURY, RULES FOR THE 21st CENTURY, EITHER THE UNITED STATES OR EITHER THE UNITED STATES OR CHINA. CHINA. IF AMERICA DOESN’T LEAN FORWARD, IF AMERICA DOESN’T LEAN FORWARD, WE ARE BASICALLY CEDING THE WE ARE BASICALLY CEDING THE ENTIRE PACIFIC TO CHINA. ENTIRE PACIFIC TO CHINA. THAT’S NOT ONLY BAD FOR THAT’S NOT ONLY BAD FOR DEMOCRACY, IT’S BAD FOR OUR DEMOCRACY, IT’S BAD FOR OUR ALLIES THERE AND COUNTRIES LIKE ALLIES THERE AND COUNTRIES LIKE SOUTH KOREAN AND JAPAN, IT’S BAD SOUTH KOREAN AND JAPAN, IT’S BAD FOR AMERICAN INTERESTS AND TRADE FOR AMERICAN INTERESTS AND TRADE AND JOBS. AND JOBS. I THINK WHAT TRUMP’S CRITICS I THINK WHAT TRUMP’S CRITICS HAVE TO HIT ON IS THE PASS HAVE TO HIT ON IS THE PASS SIEVETY, IGNORANCE, INDIFFERENCE SIEVETY, IGNORANCE, INDIFFERENCE BY TRUMP THAT IS PUTTING OUR BY TRUMP THAT IS PUTTING OUR IDEALS AT RISK, ECONOMY AT RISK IDEALS AT RISK, ECONOMY AT RISK AND NATIONAL SECURITY AT RISK. AND NATIONAL SECURITY AT RISK. AND I THINK THAT’S THE CRITIQUE AND I THINK THAT’S THE CRITIQUE THAT NEEDS TO COME AT TRUMP. THAT NEEDS TO COME AT TRUMP.>>ELISE, LET ME HAVE YOU TEE UP>>ELISE, LET ME HAVE YOU TEE UP ON ALL OF THIS AND GIVE YOU ONE ON ALL OF THIS AND GIVE YOU ONE MORE REPORTING FROM “THE NEW MORE REPORTING FROM “THE NEW YORK TIMES.” YORK TIMES.” WANING OF AMERICAN POWER TRUMP WANING OF AMERICAN POWER TRUMP STRUGGLES OF AN ASIA CRISIS. STRUGGLES OF AN ASIA CRISIS. BY FAILING TO ACT AND ASSUME BY FAILING TO ACT AND ASSUME LEADERSHIP IN THE REGION, TRUMP LEADERSHIP IN THE REGION, TRUMP IS ALLOWING LONG, COMPLICATED IS ALLOWING LONG, COMPLICATED HISTORY TO FALL BACK AS HISTORY TO FALL BACK AS TRADITIONAL RIVALS. TRADITIONAL RIVALS. THE MORE THEY FEEL UNITED STATES THE MORE THEY FEEL UNITED STATES IS AN UNRELIABLE PARTNER, THE IS AN UNRELIABLE PARTNER, THE MORE THEY WILL DEFEND MORE THEY WILL DEFEND THEMSELVES. THEMSELVES. I’M HEARING GROWING CALLS IN I’M HEARING GROWING CALLS IN SOUTH KOREA FOR THEIR OWN SOUTH KOREA FOR THEIR OWN NUCLEAR WEAPONS. NUCLEAR WEAPONS. THAT IS AN EXPERT AT THE WILSON THAT IS AN EXPERT AT THE WILSON CENTER. CENTER. DO YOU AGREE? DO YOU AGREE?>>I DO.>>I DO. AND I THINK THAT GOES TO RON’S AND I THINK THAT GOES TO RON’S POINT. POINT. IT’S GOOD TO TALK ABOUT AMERICAN IT’S GOOD TO TALK ABOUT AMERICAN VALUES AND AMERICAN IDEALS BUT VALUES AND AMERICAN IDEALS BUT THIS IS BECOMING AN ISSUE OF THIS IS BECOMING AN ISSUE OF NATIONAL SECURITY FOR THE U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY FOR THE U.S. WHEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN ARE WHEN INDIA AND PAKISTAN ARE FIGHTING OVER KASHMIR, NOW PACK FIGHTING OVER KASHMIR, NOW PACK STAJ STAJ STAN STAN PAKISTAN IS THREATENING ITS PAKISTAN IS THREATENING ITS SUPPORT FOR THE AFGHAN DEAL. SUPPORT FOR THE AFGHAN DEAL. NOW JAPAN AND SOUTH KOREA ARE NOW JAPAN AND SOUTH KOREA ARE REKINDLING THEIR OLD TRADE REKINDLING THEIR OLD TRADE RIVALRIES. RIVALRIES. THEY’RE TALKING ABOUT ENDING AN THEY’RE TALKING ABOUT ENDING AN YENS PARTNER SHN THAT THE U.S. YENS PARTNER SHN THAT THE U.S. NEEDS FOR SURVEILLANCE ON NORTH NEEDS FOR SURVEILLANCE ON NORTH KOREA. KOREA. YOU LOOK AROUND AND NORTH KOREA YOU LOOK AROUND AND NORTH KOREA TESTED FIVE SHORT-RANGE MISSILES TESTED FIVE SHORT-RANGE MISSILES AND PRESIDENT TRUMP ARE TALKING AND PRESIDENT TRUMP ARE TALKING ABOUT HOW HIM AND KIM JONG-UN ABOUT HOW HIM AND KIM JONG-UN LOVE EACH OTHER. LOVE EACH OTHER. IT’S NOT ONLY LACK OF INTEREST IT’S NOT ONLY LACK OF INTEREST AND LACK OF KNOWLEDGE, BUT THE AND LACK OF KNOWLEDGE, BUT THE MORE THE PRESIDENT RETREATS, MORE THE PRESIDENT RETREATS, OTHER COUNTRIES LIKE RUSSIA AND OTHER COUNTRIES LIKE RUSSIA AND CHINA, THERE ARE COUNTRIES THAT CHINA, THERE ARE COUNTRIES THAT ARE GOING TO FILL THAT VACUUM. ARE GOING TO FILL THAT VACUUM. THEY’RE NOT GOING TO DO IT IN A THEY’RE NOT GOING TO DO IT IN A WAY THAT THE U.S. WANTS. WAY THAT THE U.S. WANTS. PRESIDENT TRUMP DOES HAVE SOME PRESIDENT TRUMP DOES HAVE SOME ADVISERS, YOU KNOW, MATT ADVISERS, YOU KNOW, MATT POTTINGER ON ASIA OR EVEN JOHN POTTINGER ON ASIA OR EVEN JOHN BOLTON, WHO BEHIND THE SCENES BOLTON, WHO BEHIND THE SCENES ARE TRYING TO MAKE SOME ARE TRYING TO MAKE SOME MANEUVERS. MANEUVERS. BUT WHEN YOU FAIL TO SEE SOME BUT WHEN YOU FAIL TO SEE SOME KIND OF HIGH-LEVEL INTEREST AND KIND OF HIGH-LEVEL INTEREST AND ENGAGEMENT FROM THE PRESIDENT, A ENGAGEMENT FROM THE PRESIDENT, A WARNING, FOR INSTANCE TO CHINA, WARNING, FOR INSTANCE TO CHINA, HE’S SAYING THAT HE HOPES NO ONE HE’S SAYING THAT HE HOPES NO ONE GETS KILLED, BUT HE’S NOT MAKING GETS KILLED, BUT HE’S NOT MAKING A STARK WARNING TO CHINA, YOU A STARK WARNING TO CHINA, YOU ABOUT BETTER STAND DOWN. ABOUT BETTER STAND DOWN. INSTEAD HE’S SAYING I HOPE THIS INSTEAD HE’S SAYING I HOPE THIS WORKS OUT FOR CHINA. WORKS OUT FOR CHINA. HE DOES SEEM A LITTLE MORE HE DOES SEEM A LITTLE MORE INTERESTED IN THE TRADE DEAL INTERESTED IN THE TRADE DEAL WITH CHINA THAN CRACKING DOWN ON WITH CHINA THAN CRACKING DOWN ON HUMAN RIGHTS. HUMAN RIGHTS. I THINK WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE I THINK WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THE PRESIDENT FEELS VULNERABLE ABOUT PRESIDENT FEELS VULNERABLE ABOUT HIS LACK OF FOREIGN POLICY HIS LACK OF FOREIGN POLICY GRAVITAS AND BE DIPLOMATIC ABOUT GRAVITAS AND BE DIPLOMATIC ABOUT IT, IF THERE’S A SERIOUS IT, IF THERE’S A SERIOUS TIANANMEN-TYPE CRACKDOWN IN HONG TIANANMEN-TYPE CRACKDOWN IN HONG KONG, I THINK THAT COULD BE ONE KONG, I THINK THAT COULD BE ONE OF PRESIDENT TRUMP’S STINGING OF PRESIDENT TRUMP’S STINGING FOREIGN POLICY LEGACIES. FOREIGN POLICY LEGACIES. SO I THINK THAT’S ONE OF THE SO I THINK THAT’S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT HIS ADVISERS AROUND REASONS THAT HIS ADVISERS AROUND HIM ARE VERY CONCERNED. HIM ARE VERY CONCERNED.>>AND, LISTEN, I DON’T WANT TO>>AND, LISTEN, I DON’T WANT TO HOLD THE POSITION, RICK, THAT HOLD THE POSITION, RICK, THAT HAVING A LEARNING CURVE IS A HAVING A LEARNING CURVE IS A POLITICAL VULNERABILITY. POLITICAL VULNERABILITY. WE WOULD NEVER NOMINATE OR ELECT WE WOULD NEVER NOMINATE OR ELECT GOVERNORS. GOVERNORS. WE WOULD NOT ELECT HALF OF THE WE WOULD NOT ELECT HALF OF THE PEOPLE IN CONGRESS AND WE WOULD PEOPLE IN CONGRESS AND WE WOULD NOT HAVE ELECTED DONALD TRUMP. NOT HAVE ELECTED DONALD TRUMP. BUT I GUESS THE TOXICITY IS BUT I GUESS THE TOXICITY IS AROUND THE COMBINATION, THE AROUND THE COMBINATION, THE IMPULSE AND INSTINCT AS A HUMAN IMPULSE AND INSTINCT AS A HUMAN BEING ARE TOLD AUTOCRACYth BEING ARE TOLD AUTOCRACYth THERE’S NO INTELLECTUAL THERE’S NO INTELLECTUAL CURIOSITY AND NO STAFF. CURIOSITY AND NO STAFF. I REMEMBER SAYING — I THINK I REMEMBER SAYING — I THINK SOME OF YOU WERE HERE THE DAY SOME OF YOU WERE HERE THE DAY MATTIS RESIGNED OVER HIS MATTIS RESIGNED OVER HIS DISAGREEMENTS WITH DONALD TRUMP DISAGREEMENTS WITH DONALD TRUMP ON SYRIA POLICY, IT WAS A ON SYRIA POLICY, IT WAS A DANGEROUS DAY NOT JUST FOR THIS DANGEROUS DAY NOT JUST FOR THIS COUNTRY BUT FOR THE WORLD. COUNTRY BUT FOR THE WORLD. HR McMASTER AND DINA POWELL USED HR McMASTER AND DINA POWELL USED TO BE IN THE SIT ROOM EVERY DAY. TO BE IN THE SIT ROOM EVERY DAY. WHO IS EVEN THERE? WHO IS EVEN THERE?>>THE LEARNING CURVE FOR HIM IS>>THE LEARNING CURVE FOR HIM IS JUST THE LEARNING CURVE ABOUT JUST THE LEARNING CURVE ABOUT AMERICAN VALUES. AMERICAN VALUES. HE DOESN’T KNOW WHO WOODROW HE DOESN’T KNOW WHO WOODROW WILSON IS. WILSON IS. HE DOESN’T KNOW WE HAVE HE DOESN’T KNOW WE HAVE HISTORICALLY STOOD UP FOR HUMAN HISTORICALLY STOOD UP FOR HUMAN RIGHTS. RIGHTS. I REMEMBER ONCE HAVING A MEETING I REMEMBER ONCE HAVING A MEETING WITH AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN FOREIGN WITH AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN FOREIGN MINISTER — MINISTER –>>DO YOU THINK HE KNOWS HOW>>DO YOU THINK HE KNOWS HOW MANY DEMOCRACIES THERE ARE IN MANY DEMOCRACIES THERE ARE IN THE WORLD? THE WORLD?>>NO, I DON’T THINK HE EVEN>>NO, I DON’T THINK HE EVEN KNOWS DEMOCRACIES ARE IN KNOWS DEMOCRACIES ARE IN RETREAT. RETREAT. YOU LOOK AT THE LAST TEN YEARS, YOU LOOK AT THE LAST TEN YEARS, FEWER COUNTRIES QUALIFY AS A FEWER COUNTRIES QUALIFY AS A DEMOCRACY. DEMOCRACY. AND THERE’S THIS RISE OF AND THERE’S THIS RISE OF AUTOCRACY, WHICH HE IS AIDING AUTOCRACY, WHICH HE IS AIDING AND ABETTING. AND ABETTING. THAT TO ME IS THE WORST GLOBAL THAT TO ME IS THE WORST GLOBAL AFFAIR AT ALL. AFFAIR AT ALL. I HAD AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN PRIME I HAD AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN PRIME MINISTER S TO ME, YOU COME AND MINISTER S TO ME, YOU COME AND TALK TO ME ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS TALK TO ME ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS AND THE CHINESE COME AND SAY I AND THE CHINESE COME AND SAY I WILL BUILD YOU A SUPER HIGHWAY. WILL BUILD YOU A SUPER HIGHWAY. WHO AM I GOING TO LISTEN TO? WHO AM I GOING TO LISTEN TO? OF COURSE YOU’RE GOING TO LISTEN OF COURSE YOU’RE GOING TO LISTEN TO THE CHINESE. TO THE CHINESE. BUT THOSE PEOPLE IN HONG KONG, BUT THOSE PEOPLE IN HONG KONG, THEY NEED TO LISTEN TO AN THEY NEED TO LISTEN TO AN AMERICAN PRESIDENT SAYING WE AMERICAN PRESIDENT SAYING WE SUPPORT YOUR ASPIRATIONS FOR SUPPORT YOUR ASPIRATIONS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOM OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS AND FREEDOM OF THE PRESS AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH. PRESS AND FREEDOM OF SPEECH. THAT IS THE THING THAT AMERICAN THAT IS THE THING THAT AMERICAN PRESIDENTS HAVE ALWAYS STOOD FOR PRESIDENTS HAVE ALWAYS STOOD FOR AND DONALD TRUMP DOES NOT GET AND DONALD TRUMP DOES NOT GET THAT AND HAS NEVER LEARNED IT. THAT AND HAS NEVER LEARNED IT.>>LISTEN, THAT’S THE OTHER>>LISTEN, THAT’S THE OTHER THING TOO, YOU ASKED WHERE IS THING TOO, YOU ASKED WHERE IS THE STAFF? THE STAFF? WHAT DIFFERENCE WOULD IT MAKE IF WHAT DIFFERENCE WOULD IT MAKE IF THEY WERE THERE? THEY WERE THERE? I HAVE BEEN CRITICAL OF THIS I HAVE BEEN CRITICAL OF THIS ADMINISTRATION FOR IS ADMINISTRATION FOR IS HOLLOWNESS, THE FACT THEY’RE NOT HOLLOWNESS, THE FACT THEY’RE NOT CAPABLE, EXPERIENCED PEOPLE AT CAPABLE, EXPERIENCED PEOPLE AT ALL LEVELS GOING DOWN AND CAN ALL LEVELS GOING DOWN AND CAN GET STUFF DONE. GET STUFF DONE. BUT THE FACT IS THE PRESIDENT — BUT THE FACT IS THE PRESIDENT — MIKE POMPEO IS NOT A STUPID MIKE POMPEO IS NOT A STUPID PERFECT. PERFECT. I KNOW MIKE POMPEO. I KNOW MIKE POMPEO. HE’S NOT A STUPID PERSON AT ALL. HE’S NOT A STUPID PERSON AT ALL. HE UNDERSTANDS THE HISTORY. HE UNDERSTANDS THE HISTORY. AND SO — AS YOU SAID, HE WON’T AND SO — AS YOU SAID, HE WON’T GET OUT IN FRONT OF THE GET OUT IN FRONT OF THE PRESIDENT. PRESIDENT. BECAUSE IF HE SAYS SOMETHING, IT BECAUSE IF HE SAYS SOMETHING, IT COULD BE COUNTERED BY TWEET FIVE COULD BE COUNTERED BY TWEET FIVE MINUTES LATER. MINUTES LATER. IT IS THIS DYSTOPIAN AND OTHER IT IS THIS DYSTOPIAN AND OTHER UNIVERSE WE’VE FALLEN INTO. UNIVERSE WE’VE FALLEN INTO. ANY OTHER ADMINISTRATION, ANY OTHER ADMINISTRATION, EVERYONE IN THE WORLD WOULD BE EVERYONE IN THE WORLD WOULD BE WAITING TO HEAR WHAT’S THE WAITING TO HEAR WHAT’S THE UNITED STATES IS SAYING ABOUT UNITED STATES IS SAYING ABOUT HONG KONG. HONG KONG. NOT NOW. NOT NOW. THERE I DON’T LIKE TO GIVE THERE I DON’T LIKE TO GIVE CREDIT TO REPUBLICANS WHO HELPED CREDIT TO REPUBLICANS WHO HELPED BUILD FRANK INSTEIN, UH-OH, BUILD FRANK INSTEIN, UH-OH, FRANK INSTEIN DOESN’T LISTEN TO FRANK INSTEIN DOESN’T LISTEN TO ME OF THE BUT IN THAT VAIN, LET ME OF THE BUT IN THAT VAIN, LET ME SAY ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI SAYING ME SAY ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI SAYING TRUMP MAY NEED TO BE REPLACED TRUMP MAY NEED TO BE REPLACED FOR 2020. FOR 2020. JOE WALSH, ANOTHER TEA PARTY JOE WALSH, ANOTHER TEA PARTY MEMBER, CALLING FOR A PRIMARY MEMBER, CALLING FOR A PRIMARY CHALLENGE AGAINST DONALD TRUMP. CHALLENGE AGAINST DONALD TRUMP. IT’S A LONELY JOURNEY THOUGH, IT’S A LONELY JOURNEY THOUGH, THE PEOPLE THAT KNEW HIM FROM THE PEOPLE THAT KNEW HIM FROM BIRTHERISM AND PEOPLE THAT SAW BIRTHERISM AND PEOPLE THAT SAW HIM ATTACK NURSES AND DOCTORS IN HIM ATTACK NURSES AND DOCTORS IN AFRICA IN 2015 TO FIGHT EBOLA. AFRICA IN 2015 TO FIGHT EBOLA. I GUESS I WILL TAKE A LAKE GUESS I GUESS I WILL TAKE A LAKE GUESS AT THE PARTY — LATE GUESS AT AT THE PARTY — LATE GUESS AT THE PARTY OVER NONE. THE PARTY OVER NONE. BUT WHAT DO YOU THINK OF — BUT WHAT DO YOU THINK OF — THERE NEVER WAS A FOUL-MOUTHED THERE NEVER WAS A FOUL-MOUTHED ENTHUSIAST THAN ANTHONY ENTHUSIAST THAN ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI. SCARAMUCCI.>>I DON’T WANT TO SPEND TOO>>I DON’T WANT TO SPEND TOO MUCH TIME WORRYING ABOUT ANTHONY MUCH TIME WORRYING ABOUT ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI BUT THE POINT ABOUT SCARAMUCCI BUT THE POINT ABOUT MIKE POMPEO AND POLITICS OF THE MIKE POMPEO AND POLITICS OF THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, IF MIKE POMPEO REPUBLICAN PARTY, IF MIKE POMPEO IS THE SEBLTS,Z, SECRETARY OF ST IS THE SEBLTS,Z, SECRETARY OF ST OF THE FEW PEOPLE WHO HAS A OF THE FEW PEOPLE WHO HAS A LITTLE TO SAY AND NOT SERVING IN LITTLE TO SAY AND NOT SERVING IN AN ACTING CAPACITY AND YOU’RE AN ACTING CAPACITY AND YOU’RE HERE AND I CAN’T GET RID OF YOU HERE AND I CAN’T GET RID OF YOU AND DON’T DO ANYTHING I DON’T AND DON’T DO ANYTHING I DON’T WANT YOU TO DO OR DON’T LIKE, WANT YOU TO DO OR DON’T LIKE, MIKE POMPEO MAY HAVE AMBITIONS MIKE POMPEO MAY HAVE AMBITIONS TO DO SOMETHING OUTSIDE THIS JOB TO DO SOMETHING OUTSIDE THIS JOB IN THE POLITICAL SPACE. IN THE POLITICAL SPACE. AND IF YOU’RE INTERESTED IN AND IF YOU’RE INTERESTED IN BEING A POLITICIAN, THE BEING A POLITICIAN, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AT THIS MOMENT, REPUBLICAN PARTY AT THIS MOMENT, YOU RECOGNIZE THIS IS DONALD YOU RECOGNIZE THIS IS DONALD TRUMP’S PARTY. TRUMP’S PARTY. AND YOU TALK ALL THE TIME ABOUT AND YOU TALK ALL THE TIME ABOUT WHERE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING WHERE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO PUT SERVICE ABOVE AM IGSBITIO TO PUT SERVICE ABOVE AM IGSBITIO NATIONAL SECURITY ABOVE NATIONAL SECURITY ABOVE POLITICAL ADVANTAGE. POLITICAL ADVANTAGE. I DON’T KNOW WHERE THEY ARE. I DON’T KNOW WHERE THEY ARE. BUT WE HAVE NOT SEEN TOO MANY BUT WE HAVE NOT SEEN TOO MANY PEOPLE IN THOSE IMPORTANT PEOPLE IN THOSE IMPORTANT POSITIONS ACTUALLY STEP UP AND POSITIONS ACTUALLY STEP UP AND SAY THE THINGS THAT ARE SAY THE THINGS THAT ARE BASICALLY SELF-EVIDENT AT THIS BASICALLY SELF-EVIDENT AT THIS POINT. POINT. YOU SEE PEOPLE LIKE ANTHONY YOU SEE PEOPLE LIKE ANTHONY SCARAMUCCI ON THE SIDELINES WHO SCARAMUCCI ON THE SIDELINES WHO MAY BE ABLE TO GET AN OP ED IN MAY BE ABLE TO GET AN OP ED IN THE PAPER, GET AN INTERVIEW ON THE PAPER, GET AN INTERVIEW ON TV AND COME FORWARD AFTER THE TV AND COME FORWARD AFTER THE FACT AND RECOGNIZE WHAT’S BEEN FACT AND RECOGNIZE WHAT’S BEEN RECOGNIZABLE FOR A LONG, LONG RECOGNIZABLE FOR A LONG, LONG TIME. TIME. BUT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SERVING BUT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE SERVING IN THIS PARTY WHO WANT TO STAY IN THIS PARTY WHO WANT TO STAY IN THIS PARTY, THEY ARE FALLING IN THIS PARTY, THEY ARE FALLING IN LINE BEHIND THIS PRESIDENT IN LINE BEHIND THIS PRESIDENT BECAUSE THAT’S THE POLITICAL BECAUSE THAT’S THE POLITICAL REALITY IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A REALITY IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A PLACE IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY OF PLACE IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY OF 2019. 2019.>>ELISE, I WANT TO GIVE YOU THE>>ELISE, I WANT TO GIVE YOU THE LAST WORD ON THIS. LAST WORD ON THIS. I GUESS MY QUESTION IS TO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS TO UNDERSCORE AND ASK YOUR UNDERSCORE AND ASK YOUR THOUGHTS, JOHN McCAIN USED TO BE THOUGHTS, JOHN McCAIN USED TO BE ANOTHER NUMBER THAT WORLD ANOTHER NUMBER THAT WORLD LEADERS COULD CALL, ESPECIALLY LEADERS COULD CALL, ESPECIALLY RUSSIA’S NEIGHBORS WHO FELT RUSSIA’S NEIGHBORS WHO FELT THREATENED. THREATENED. WHEN I WORKED ON HIS CAMPAIGN, WHEN I WORKED ON HIS CAMPAIGN, HE WAS OFTEN ON THE PHONE WITH HE WAS OFTEN ON THE PHONE WITH FOREIGN LEADERS ABOUT U.S. FOREIGN LEADERS ABOUT U.S. FOREIGN POLICY. FOREIGN POLICY. FRANKLY, HILLARY CLINTON AS FRANKLY, HILLARY CLINTON AS SECRETARY OF STATE AND U.S. SECRETARY OF STATE AND U.S. SENATOR WAS THE SAME KIND OF SENATOR WAS THE SAME KIND OF AMERICAN LEADER. AMERICAN LEADER. JOHN KERRY IN THE SENATE. JOHN KERRY IN THE SENATE. OBVIOUSLY LATER AS SECRETARY OF OBVIOUSLY LATER AS SECRETARY OF STATE. STATE. WHO WOULD THAT EVEN BE? WHO WOULD THAT EVEN BE? LIKE IF YOU HAVE A CELL PHONE LIKE IF YOU HAVE A CELL PHONE AND YOU WANT TO CALL SOMEBODY IN AND YOU WANT TO CALL SOMEBODY IN AMERICA AND SAY, KIDS ARE ABOUT AMERICA AND SAY, KIDS ARE ABOUT TO DIE HERE IN HONG KONG AT THE TO DIE HERE IN HONG KONG AT THE AIRPORT. AIRPORT. IT’S GETTING UGLY. IT’S GETTING UGLY. WHO DO YOU CALL? WHO DO YOU CALL? WHO DO YOU EVEN DIAL? WHO DO YOU EVEN DIAL?>>I THINK AND HOPED IT WOULD BE>>I THINK AND HOPED IT WOULD BE LINDSEY GRAHAM. LINDSEY GRAHAM. AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT SOME OF THE ISSUES OF NATIONAL SECURITY, ISSUES OF NATIONAL SECURITY, LINDSEY GRAHAM IS SPEAKING OUT. LINDSEY GRAHAM IS SPEAKING OUT.>>BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT AND –>>BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT AND — I WOULDN’T CALL LINDSEY GRAHAM. I WOULDN’T CALL LINDSEY GRAHAM.>>I WOULDN’T CALL LINDSEY>>I WOULDN’T CALL LINDSEY GRAHAM EITHER. GRAHAM EITHER. EVEN THOUGH HIS RHETORIC TALKS EVEN THOUGH HIS RHETORIC TALKS IN FAVOR OF THE DEMONSTRATORS, IN FAVOR OF THE DEMONSTRATORS, IT’S FALLING ON NANCY PELOSI. IT’S FALLING ON NANCY PELOSI. SHE SAID SHE’S WILLING TO PUT SHE SAID SHE’S WILLING TO PUT FORWARD LEGISLATION THAT WOULD FORWARD LEGISLATION THAT WOULD SANCTION CHINESE OFFICIALS SANCTION CHINESE OFFICIALS CRACKING DOWN ON HONG KONG. CRACKING DOWN ON HONG KONG. THE QUESTION IS WHAT IMPACT IS THE QUESTION IS WHAT IMPACT IS THAT GOING TO BE? THAT GOING TO BE? I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT A CASE I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT A CASE SUCH AS RUSSIA, THERE WERE SUCH AS RUSSIA, THERE WERE OFFICIALS AROUND PRESIDENT TRUMP OFFICIALS AROUND PRESIDENT TRUMP THAT GAVE HIM SOME SANCTIONS ON THAT GAVE HIM SOME SANCTIONS ON UKRAINE, OTHER ISSUES. UKRAINE, OTHER ISSUES. PRESIDENT TRUMP DIDN’T DISPUTE PRESIDENT TRUMP DIDN’T DISPUTE IT. IT. HE LET IT GO AHEAD. HE LET IT GO AHEAD. I THINK IF OFFICIALS WERE BRAVE I THINK IF OFFICIALS WERE BRAVE ENOUGH TO BRING SOMETHING TO ENOUGH TO BRING SOMETHING TO PRESIDENT TRUMP, HE WOULDN’T SAY PRESIDENT TRUMP, HE WOULDN’T SAY NO. NO. BUT AGAIN WITH THE ABSENCE OF BUT AGAIN WITH THE ABSENCE OF SOME KIND OF PRESIDENTIAL SOME KIND OF PRESIDENTIAL DECLARATION, WARNING AGAINST DECLARATION, WARNING AGAINST CHINA IN SUPPORT OF HONG KONG, I CHINA IN SUPPORT OF HONG KONG, I THINK IT’S GOING TO FALL ON THINK IT’S GOING TO FALL ON CONGRESS AND THE QUESTION IS CONGRESS AND THE QUESTION IS WHAT IMPACT IS IT GOING HAVE? WHAT IMPACT IS IT GOING HAVE?>>YOU WANT TO TRY TO ANSWER>>YOU WANT TO TRY TO ANSWER THAT, WHAT IMPACT, SFLIK. THAT, WHAT IMPACT, SFLIK.>>IT’S GOING TO HAVE A NEGATIVE

Former Danish official: Trump’s Greenland bid is ‘insulting’


♪ ♪>>GREENLAND WAS JUST AN IDEA, JUST A THOUGHT BUT WHEN THEY SAY IT WAS ABSURD AND SAID THEY NASTY, VERY SARCASTIC WAY I SAID, WE WILL MAKE IT SOME OTHER TIME. WE WILL GO TO DENMARK. I LOVE DENMARK. I’VE BEEN TO DENMARK. WE WILL DO IT ANOTHER TIME.>>Martha: PRESIDENT TRUMP EXPLAINING WHY HE SCRAPPED HIS UPCOMING TRIP TO DENMARK TO DISCUSS THE POSSIBILITY OF THE SALE OF GREENLAND, THAT DECISION WIDELY PANNED BY THE PEOPLE AND POLITICIANS WHO SPOKE OUT IN DENMARK. WATCH.>>I THINK IT’S A VERY BAD WAY OF TALKING ABOUT A COUNTRY AND ESPECIALLY THE PEOPLE OF GREENLAND. I THINK HE NEEDS TO SHOW SOME MORE RESPECT.>>HE ACTS LIKE A SPOILED CHILD. THE DANISH PUBLIC, CLEAR MESSAGES TO THE AMERICAN WORKERS, PLEASE VOTE FOR ANOTHER PRESIDENT NEXT TIME.>>Martha: MY NEXT GUEST WE DID THIS TODAY, TRUMP ASSUMES THE ANONYMOUS PART OF OUR COUNTRY IS FOR SALE ON THAT INSULTINGLY CANCELS THE VISIT THAT EVERYONE WAS PREPARING FOR. OUR PARTS FOR THE U.S. FOR SALE? ALASKA? PLEASE SHOW SOME MORE RESPECT. THE FORMER MINISTER OF BUSINESS. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. WHAT IS YOUR REACTION TO WHAT THE PRESIDENT’S? HE SAID IT WAS AN IDEA, A SUGGESTION AND HE DIDN’T EXPECT IN HIS WORDS, A NASTY RESPONSE.>>IS UNFORTUNATE THAT THERE ARE SUCH WORDS ON BOTH SIDES. IT WAS A SURPRISE TO US AND DENMARK THAT PRESIDENT TRUMP WOULD PUBLICLY RAISE THE IDEA OF BUYING GREENLAND BECAUSE NOBODY IN DENMARK OR GREENLAND HAS EVER INDICATED THAT IT WOULD BE FOR SALE. IT MIGHT’VE BEEN A GOOD IDEA TO CONSULT THE EMBASSY, ANY ONE AND THE FOREIGN MINISTRY IN THE U.S. OR SOMEONE WHO KNOWS ABOUT RELATIONSHIPS BEFORE GOING OUT WITH AN IDEA BECAUSE IT WAS HARD FOR THE PRIME MINISTER TO BLANKLEY SAY NO, THAT IS THE CASE AND IT’S NOT FOR SALE. WE DON’T WANT TO INSULT THE U.S. AND NOTHING PRESIDENT, BUT THE IDEA OF BUYING PART OF DANISH TERRITORY AND THE 50,000 PEOPLE LIVING THERE IS INSULTING BECAUSE IT’S TALKING ABOUT GREENLAND LIKE IT’S SOME KIND OF COMMODITY AND IT’S REAL PEOPLE LIVING THERE. IT’S NOT A COMMODITY, NOT FOR SALE AND IT’S INDICATING WE WOULDN’T CARE ABOUT GREENLAND AND WE DO.>>Martha: AS HE MENTIONED, MIKE POMPEO PUT OUT AN EXPRESSION OF ALLIANCE TO HIS COUNTERPART AND DENMARK TODAY SO WHAT LOOKS LIKE THEY ARE TRYING TO SMOOTH THIS OVER. IT’S INTERESTING THAT 67% OF ALL ADULT GREEN LENDERS SUPPORT A VISION OF GREENLAND AS AN INDEPENDENT STATE AND THEY DO TAKE ABOUT $600 MILLION FROM THE DANISH ECONOMY IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THEMSELVES, OTHER PEOPLE AND DENMARK WHO DISAGREE? ARE PEOPLE SAY, WE DON’T NEED GREENLAND AND THEY WOULD RATHER BE ON THEIR OWN ANYWAY?>>I DON’T THINK YOU WILL FIND ALMOST ANYBODY WHO WANTS TO SELL GREENLAND. IT WOULD HAVE TO BE THERE DECISION. THEY ARE VERY INDEPENDENT. THEY HAVE THEIR OWN CULTURE AND THEIR OWN LANGUAGE. THEY ARE PART OF THE KINGDOM OF DENMARK, BUT THEY HAVE THEIR OWN LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND THEY DECIDE ON THOSE MATTERS LOCALLY. THEY STILL HAVE CHOSEN TO REMAIN PART OF DENMARK BECAUSE THEY THINK THAT IS BEST FOR GREENLAND. THAT’S UP TO THEM.>>Martha: THE PRESIDENT WOULD LIKE DENMARK TO UP THEIR CONTRIBUTION TO NATO SO IT’S A FULL 2% OF YOUR GDP. DO YOU AGREE?>>I AGREE WITH THAT PERSONALLY. I’M A CONSERVATIVE MYSELF. I AGREE THAT THE U.S. SHOULDN’T PAY FOR OUR SECURITY. I THINK ALL NATO MEMBERS NEED TO SPEND MORE AND LIVE UP TO THE 2% TARGET.>>Martha: WE FOUND OUT SOMETHING YOU AGREE ON, EVERYBODY AGREES ON.

DiEM25 will contest the European Parliament elections in Italy – Yanis Varoufakis | DiEM25


Hi everyone, we will do this conference
in English. that’s the first information to let you
know. But there will be the possibility to ask
questions in Italian. They will be translated, Alessio is the one
who’s going to do it. Of course replies will be translated. I would like to thank Yanis Varoufakis,
for accepting our invitation to come here and tell us the latest news
about his movement, and of course his opinion on what is going on in Italy. I’m going to ask actually a question, exactly on this, it’s going to be my first
question : If you can give us some insight on your
agenda and your new alliances in Europe. I’m thinking of course about the European
elections of next year. There were some talking about five
movement stars (5 Star movement)
and also Mélenchon so we would like to understand, if you can
tell us something about your plans for the next weeks and months? Tank you! Well tank you so much, tanks to all of you.
for being here. Tank you for your hospitality. Thank you for your question. The main reason why we’re here is because
Italy today is being torn apart by two destructive forces. One is Brussels, and
the other is Salvini. By the failed establishment of Renzi,
Merkel, Junker, Moscovici on the one hand and by the reckless, racist, xenophobic,
anti-European Salvini project. What we are doing as Diem25 in Italy,
France, Germany, Greece has to be seen in this context. Today Italy is ground
zero of the European crisis. Italy should be in the focus of
progressives around the World. Brussels and Salvini, this is a statement
that may surprise some of you, Brussels and Salvini are working very well
together, as we speak, against the interests of Italians, in particular, and
of Europeans in general. Salvini is Brussels’ greatest supporter.
Junker, Merkel, Macron et al. are hanging on to power with the argument:
“whatever mistakes we have made in Brussels in Berlin, in Rome (talking about Renzi),
after us comes Salvini. So you’d better support us. And Brussels is
is also Salvini’s greatest supporter. By imposing on Italy rules that guarantee
Italy’s stagnation, and falling income for the average Italians, they enable Salvini’s
sortie into xenophobic populism. Allow me to turn directly to the issue
that concern most of you here in Italy today. The clash on the Italian budget
with Brussels. Our position as Diem25 is that both
Brussels and the Lega-5 Stelle government are profoundly and intentionally wrong.
Brussels is wrong to impose on Italy fiscal and banking rules that guarantee
Italy’s stagnation. Rules that were agreed too, by the now
collapsing Italian establishment. The EU’s revamped fiscal rules are
analytically baseless. There is no such things as a structural
deficit. It can not be measured and it should not be measured. It based on faulty
economics. They are forcing Rome to introduce
austerity at a time when Italy’s growth has collapsed to almost 0%. If the Italian
government, any Italian government, were to follow the fiscal compact, you would have an increase in
the debt to GDP ratio. Not a fall, because the denominator, your GDP, would
go into reversal. You would have an other recession. The Lega-5Stelle government is wrong also.
This budget will not boost growth sufficiently to make a difference to most
people, the result would be a deficit overshoot without much benefit. Cutting for instance
the top tax rate will not boost growth. When the rich receive a hand-out, they
take it to Switzerland or to Luxembourg, or save it. Even worse, it is our view that
both Brussels and this government know that they are wrong. Brussels is
choosing to be wrong, because Brussels, the bureaucracy, is more interested in
maintaining control over our countries than they are in shared prosperity across
Europe. And the Lega-5 Stelle government is
choosing to be wrong, because Salvini and Di Maio are more interested in
maintaining this precarious alliance than in the prosperity of the Italian
people. So, here we are as Diem25 facing this
situation : Italy stagnates because its centrist establishment agreed to EU rules
that choked Italy, causing its own political demise, the political demise
of the establishment that approved these rules, and paving the ground for Salvini.
The ancient regime of Renzi et al. and his patrons in Brussels and the Lega-
5 Stelle government are two faces of the same problem. And they will continue to
reinforce each other while Italy sinks, while Europe fragments. One of the side
effects, the collateral damage of this clash between Salvini and Brussels is that we
have stopped talking about the Eurozone reforms, that are absolutely necessary
to keep Italy in the Eurozone. To keep Greece in the Eurozone, to keep
the Eurozone sustainable. Reforms that even Macron discussed are
now dead in the water. The oligarchic establishment the PD, Forza
Italia…, caused the problem and today they cannot pretend to be part of the
solution. Salvini is exploiting this to bring through his rabid xenophobia a new
fascist moment in Italy. While 5stelle is increasingly discredited
as a crutch on which Salvini is leaning to take over government completely
next year. We must act now, Italy has an urgent need
for a new progressive alternative to the implicit but destructive alliance
between the establishment and Salvini’s nationalism. But what Italy does
not need from us progressives is yet another sad leftist alliance of
the usual left wings suspects. Italy does not need another Frankenstein
left wing list that stitches together the dead parts of what used to be Italy’s
glorious left. The last thing Italians needs is another
list of leftist candidates lacking a coherent program of change. A Europeanist
program of change that answers the question what do you do with the banks,
what do you do with public debt What do you do with poverty, not only in
Italy but also in France, in Germany, in Greece. This is why we are here today, to
announce that we are going to put together such a list, with a single, coherent,
credible program. You may very well ask : and who are you?
Who are we, who are going to do this? Last march, in Napoli, Diem25, I was there,
colleagues, political movements from Poland, Denmark, Portugal, my friend B.
Hamon from France together with Luigi De Magistris, the mayor of Napoli we
embarked upon this project of putting together a transnational list with a
coherent program across Europe. This program is now complete, after many
months of very hard work It is the progressive, ecological, feminist
humanist, rational program of the pan-European coalition that we now call :
“Primavera europea”, “European spring”. What we propose, because this is Italy and
we have a major crisis, allow me to start with Italy. Let me give you an
example of the kind of proposal we are bringing to the table, that address the
local, the national and the European at the same time. The first thing we propose, regarding the
Italian budget, is that the component of it which concerns minimum guaranteed income
is introduced and indeed expanded. Simultaneously, number 2, scrap Salvini’s
top tax cuts – when you give hand-outs to the rich, as I said before, you are not
boosting growth, we have known this forever Why have we forgotten it now? Replace those
tax-cuts with a growth enhancing green investment plan, that pushes the deficit,
not to 2.4% of GDP, but to 3% of GDP, but most of it is made up of public
investment, we are talking about something like 20 billion, for 3 purposes: first, the
industrial and ecological transition necessary in this country, to solve
for instance problems like ILVA in Taranto and off-shoring of low-added-value
manufacturing; secondly, environmental safety, beginning
with a plan for seismic prevention, that we have included in our program,
and thirdly, investment in infrastructure to avoid repetition of the Genoa disaster
and invest in sustainable transport. And what about the fiscal rules of the EU?
Our proposal is that we go from 2.4 to 3 but in a growth enhancing manner. Well,
if the EU wants Italy to adhere to the fiscal compact, it can be done. Our proposal
is that the government of Italy calls for an EU council summit, to propose
the following: in order to reduce the fiscal deficit of
Italy from 3% to 0,8%, even to 0%, if Europe cares for this so badly, that we
adopt, as the EU, the EU council can give this green light, as a result of one simple
decision, no need for any treaty changes whatsoever, to give the
green light to the European Investment bank that belongs to all EU member states, for
issuing EIB bonds up to 5% of Eurozone GDP per year, for 5 years, this is about 500
billion Euros, with the European Central Bank standing by
in the secondary bond market to purchase those bonds, in the same way that it has
been doing for the last few years. This way you boost investment, public
investment, through the EIB in Italy in Germany, in Greece, by 5% of GDP, and
that way you can ameliorate, then you could have an Italian government, which is
reducing Italian deficit down to the levels prescribed by the European Council and
the fiscal pact. This is part of our New Deal for Europe,
you can see that we are combining a solution for Italy with a solution for
Europe. Europe desperately needs a large scale green investment program
to create the good quality jobs that we are lacking across Europe, which are
causing our young into precarious jobs in Germany as much as in Italy, which feeds
the nationalist internationalism across Europe, racism, xenophobia,
we need to make this investment in the green energy union that we do not have,
for many reasons, for the planet’s sake, but also for the sake of becoming decoupled
from Putin’s Gazprom. Diem25, in every country, we just gave you
an example here in Italy, combine solutions at the pan-European level, with solutions
at the national level, indeed, the regional level. Ladies
and Gentlemen, austerity for the many and socialism for the bankers, has given
rise to the present fascist moment in Italy to the collapse of the political centre
everywhere, to the reactionary, divided Europe that Mr. Trump dreams of.
Today here in Rome we are saying: Enough! We are saying another Italy,
another Europe, is not only possible but it is here, in the form of our
transnational movement, with a single coherent program that people
can believe in in Italy, in Germany, in France, everywhere. Talking about our next steps: we are here
as part of the process that we began in Napoli, in March of this year, with Luigi
De Magistris, with Benoît Hamon of Génération, with the Alternativet party
in Denmark, with Razem in Poland, with Livre in Portugal, with Mera25, our
new party in Greece, with green parties that we are in discussions with, with
leftist parties, but what matters to us is that we do not simply present to you
a list of people who want to be elected, that our list should have one common
radical europeanist program, Whoever wants to discuss this program with
us. Which is at a very advanced stage you can go into europeanspring.net, and
read our program for Europe as a whole, anyone who wants to discuss this, you can
come along. The discussion ‘are you with Melenchon’,
are you with… whoever, is not the kind of discussion that people out there care for.
This is old style politics, we are not interested in it, we are interested in
solutions. Anyone who wants to join us on the basis of one program for the whole
of Europe that works for Italy, that works for Germany, can come with us and will be
part of this list. The European Parliament elections of May
2019, they are only a start, they give us an opportunity to have this debate.
We will use the May elections to transcend the fake conflict between Salvini and
Brussels, between the authoritarian incompetent establishment and the
misanthropic nationalist international. Diem Italia is here, we are moving up and
down the country, we are scheduling 3 major events in November, there is going to be
one, the final one in Milano, there is going to be one in Taranto, there are going to be
3 major events, we are beginning to collect the signatures that are necessary for Diem
Italia to run in Italy, we invite all the various partners that we embarked upon this
journey last March in Napoli, to join us but there is no more time to waste.
We are moving, we are declaring our presence in Italy and elsewhere, because we are
going to be doing the same thing, there will be a similar announcement of a
political party belonging to Diem25 in Germany on the 24th and 25th of November
in Greece we have already started, in France… we are here not only to contest
an election, but we are here to bring to the people of Italy a scent of next May’s
European Spring, with a message: Italian progressives are no longer alone!
Thank you. Than you Yanis,
We open the questions, so, if there are any? Do you need a translation, anything in
particular? OK, yes, so… Hello, Angela Maoro, Huffington Post Italy:
You didn’t talk about the immigration, which is a topic on which Salvini gains votes.
So what do you have to say about that? I think it’s a topical point in the next
European electoral campaign for everybody.
Thanks. Europe does not have a migration crisis.
Italy and Greece, we have a migration problem. Why? Because there is no such
things as a EU. Europe as a whole is large enough and rich
enough to deal with this problem in a humane way. We must bind together in order
to change the position of the EU regarding migration. But we are not going to do it
through using migrants as scape goats We are not going to succeed either saving
our countries or our Europe, by turning xenophobia, or turbo-charging, I should say
xenophobia, like Salvini is doing. The fact that Salvini is gaining votes
in Italy by becoming increasingly racist is simply a
symptom of inability of progressives to bind together to combine a rational
approach to the problem with a humanism which is in the heart and in the minds of
Italians and Europeans. Our position is very simple. The migrants that are coming
to our shores are an essential ressource for the future. Europe needs migration. We
are an ageing society at the European level, but you can not pile up migrants
and in Greece on the basis of xenophobia in Austria, in Germany, in France, which
then gives a xenophobe like Mr Salvini the opportunity to gather power in Italy,
through turning humans against humans. [Italian translation of the answer] Q: Hi I’m Simon ?? from the Norwegian weekly
paper Morgenbladet, I wanted to ask you: you became yourself famous for opposing
the EU commission and its economic politics I was wondering if you could be a bit
more specific on what exactly is the difference in the way, back in your days,
you criticised the EU commission and the way the Italian government is doing it now
when it comes to the ‘manovra’, the budget? Obviously there is lots of differences when it
comes to immigration for example but exactly the way there are claiming their right to
have their own economic policy. And then, a second question : On 5 Stelle
have you completely giving up hope on seeing the 5 Star movement as a progressive
force in Europe, you now count them as equal to Lega or do you see possibility
in the future of changing that situation? Regarding the difference, between our
opposition to the Brussels establishment and that of the Lega, we are radical Euro-
peanists, we want to bring Europe together. We want… ehm… if you want, a federal Europe, that works
democratically whereas Mr Salvini and his Lega would like to see the dismemberment
of the EU and maybe then its retention as nothing more than a trade zone, that is a
profound difference. We are opposing Brussels, because we are Europeanists and
as Europeanists we are against the policies of Brussels that are destroying Europe and
giving Mr Salvini the opportunity to finish it off On the second question, we never give
up hope on anyone. Some of us are atheists within Diem25m but
we are all believers in humanity. 5 Stelle have to decide for themselves
whether they want to continue this path of being the crutch of a racist,
xenophobic Lega and to be working for them, before Mr Salvini chews them up,
and spits them out, after the European parliament election, or whether they want
to return to a humanist block. If they do we will welcome them. Do you need a translation? So we can save
time and go to the next question, ok? Yes? OK. Can you give us a small summary,
thanks. [Interpreter’s translation] Giovanna Ferrara, “Il Manifesto”, I wanted
to ask this question: from the point of view of new architecture
of Europe, what do you think about the unique situation that has crystallised
in Italy, regarding conflicts within the institutions: I’m talking about the
case of Mimmo Lucano, and of those municipalities that declare “open ports”,
against the directives of the government, and I’m thinking about the “Mediterranea”
organisation, which was born precisely to become the anvil between… inside this
conflict within the institutions. [Interpreter’s translation for Yanis] Diem25 is a municipalist movement, not just
a Europeanist movement. We believe that, within a united Europe, a
democratic Europe, regions and municipalities should have a lot more
autonomy. Indeed the Eurozone crisis has reduced the autonomy of mayors, of
regional authorities by pushing authority down to level of the local. The result is
a greater crisis, both the of local economies and of democracy. In the case of Riace,
you will allow me to simply add to that which you all know, that I find personally
quite interesting and worrying that in an area where you have a particular mayor,
effectively damaging the interests of the mafia, by taking away contracts from them,
that this government, that at least part of it was suppose to be absolutely
determined to make a difference in this fight, is targeting this particular mayor
in the way that they are doing it. This is why, Diem believes very strongly
that this fake contradiction, this fake conflict between the establishment
and the anti-establishment government, is fake. Even down to the level of
Riace. You see how fake it is. Do you need the translation? Yes? [Interpreter’s translation] I have a question also for you Y. : It’s a curiosity, actually, because we hear
a lot talking about communication strategies, to also attract the sceptical citizens, the
euro-sceptical citizens that are apparently growing and I would like you to say some
words on it, I mean do you have a specific communication specific communication strategy? Spin doctors and these new tools,
are you planning to use new tools to… I mean to spread your ideas? We have no spin doctors, we do not have
image makers. Not because we can’t afford them, no I don’t think we can afford them,
but we don’t want them, and we don’t want them because I think that people out there
have had enough of spin. They have had enough of fudges, they have had enough of
politicians. We are not politicians, we are engaging in politics, not because we
want to become ministers or members of parliament but because we feel a historic
duty to intervene in this fake conflict between the establishment and the so
called anti-establishment. The way we are approaching, those who are
sceptical, not just about Europe but about politics, about the future, about the
capacity of democracy to change anything. Those who agreed in the end with W.
Schäuble, when he said that the democracy can not be allowed to change anything.
We are determined to address particular issues, with very specific proposals. Not
wishful thinking, not ‘we want another Europe, another world’, No, you heard
before the specific proposal about the Italian budget. We argued that, yes to the minimum
guaranteed income, and no to the tax cuts, use this money for public investment. We
explained where we think the money should go. Maybe boost the deficit of three percent,
but at the same time go to the EU with a proposal, which is completely legal and,
and within the treaties on how to shrink that deficit down, while boosting
investment within a pan-European. So, speaking to people, to people’s worries
answering their number one question, which is : why should I be optimistic about
the future of my children? The answer is, because we have a capacity
as Europeans, as Italians, to invest in good quality green jobs for your children. And
this is how we could do it. That is us spin doctoring. It isn’t an utopia, what you are saying? What is a utopia, is to think that we can
continue the way we are continuing! What is utopic, is to think for Brussels
that if only Mr Renzi where to return to power in Italy, to impose the rules of
Brussels, everything would be fine. That is utopia. What is utopia, is to think
that Mr Salvini beats up even more hatred for the foreigners and clashes with Europe
without a plan for green investment, that things are going to be better. What we are
proposing is the only realistic plan. Is it utopia to think that realism can
succeed? Well maybe, but it’s a realistic utopia, and that is the only thing that can
stop an awful dystopia from setting in! You need a translation ? No? Ok, here. Good Morning, I am Luca Mariani,
Agenzia Italia, if it’s possible I would like to speak in Italian. Yes of course, you can. Three questions. The first: will you be
the frontrunner for the EU commission? Let’s ask 2… Oh no, very short ones. Will the frontrunner
for the EU commission be Mr. Varoufakis? Second: who will be the frontrunner of your
movement in Italy? De Magistris, the mayor of Naples?
Third: I see Salvini declaring that he is safer in Moscow than in the European capitals,
I see Trump having a privileged relationship with Conte and Farage, maybe this is not
an opposition between Bruxelles and Salvini maybe there is a slightly larger game at
play here? What do you think? Of course, it is a much bigger game. But
Mr Salvini is a major player. S. Bannon will concur. There are other
players, Mr Seehofer in Munich, Those who will probably replace Mrs. Merkel.
Mr. Orban, Mr. Kurz, and so on and so forth… but let me answer your question about
the Spitzenkandidat (frontrunner) : This process has already died according to
the Christian-democrats, they don’t believe in it. The Social-democrats have ceased to
exist. It seems to me that this process has been shown up for what it was, a fake
democratic process. Now Diem25, European Spring, our alliance, are going
to have an open primary before May to decide who is going to represent us in
Brussels. So you can think of this as the Spitzenkandidat of the movement. If You
are asking me personally, I’m going to make myself available to the movement.
But let me also say, that we are absolutely determined to break free of national
divisions in the European parliament elections our movement is going to have
a German leading the ticket in Greece, there will be Greeks contesting European
parliament seats in Germany, there will be Italians in France, and so on. This is our
symbolic way of doing away with this fake division between North and South. There is
no division, between North and South No clash between Italy and Germany, or
Greece and Germany. There is only one clash between progressives and those who
are undoing our societies everywhere. And that clash happens in Greece, in Italy
everywhere. I think that is more or less what I want
to say on this issue. You need translation?
No? A question here… I can speak in English but it’s better
maybe in Italian I just wanted to ask: last week there were
elections in Bavaria, regional elections, with the victory of the green party, led
by a 34-year-old, I wanted to know if these elections, in which, for the first
time the green party, such a young woman, in Bavaria, the land of the German
automobile industry, a green party that is not scared to talk about a numerus
clausus regarding migration policies, I’d like to know if there is a possibility
of an alliance, within Germany, of the German DiEM, and, considering that
we were talking earlier about humanism as the answer to the migration problem, what
does DiEM stand for, can one talk unabashedly about limiting migrant numbers, obviously
considering the available resources for education, for offering work and a
dignified reception to the migrants arriving in all of Europe. [translation for Yanis] We welcome the fact that the green party
did well, in Munich. They did not win Bavaria. They simply took the votes of the
collapsing social democrats. The winners in Bavaria, remain the forces
of the right. The CSU together with the AFD. A crushing victory by them. Let us not
forget that. Would we want to align ourselves with the green parties of Europe?
Absolutely! We are in discussions with them, but I
will answer the question in the same way that I would answer it if you were to
ask me about the Linke, about liberals, anti-systemic liberals, by saying
We are not interested in labels. We are interested in getting things done.
So, we put out a program, which we call a new green deal for Europe. Where we make
proposals about this investment program of 500 billions in green transition, a year,
every year for 5 years. We have a program for what to do with public debt, with the
non-performing loans of the banks, with poverty, with democratisation and so
on. It’s a very comprehensive program. And we are inviting everyone to discuss it
with us, not to accept it. To tell us where we are wrong, and we should do differently.
And we wish that the green, the left, the liberals, progressive-conservatives even
come to us and we can have this discussions in order to start tabula rasa
a new progressive movement in Europe. This is our position, and we are going to
stick to it. On the question of humanism, humanism is
inconsistent with electrified border fences! Full stop. So we have a question here. And we have
some more, so plz keep your answers short. Sorry, you answer too, but the
questions short. Hi, it’s Eric Reg??? of the Globe and Mail,
of Canada. The Italian government insists it doesn’t
want to leave the Euro. But my question do you believe them, do they secretly or
not so secretly want to leave the Euro? And, if they do, is it not a bad idea
to do so in the sense that, for 20 years, since the introduction of the Euro in
Italy, this country has been a corpse it’s just hasn’t worked for this country.
Thank you! No, I don’t believe them. What I do believe
is that Mr. Salvini has chosen a two phase strategy. First beat up anti-migration
rage, xenophobia before the European parliament elections in order to garner
votes but keep the Euro question under wraps for now. So that after the
European parliament elections, he can became prime minister and then
go into phase 2, which will be… not necessarily… there will be no
referendum about the Euro, or anything like that. But he will cause a crisis, that will make
it a natural progression for Italy to forge a parallel currency, that then is the
precursor of something very much like Italexit. This is my personal view. But it
is neither here nor there. The second question, would it be a good
idea to get out of the Euro. I have been very steadfast in my view on
this, regarding Greece, regarding Italy regarding all Euro-Zone member states.
It is this : some people think there is a contradiction in what I am going to say.
There is no contradiction. First we should not have entered the Euro-
Zone. Italy should not have entered it. Greece should not have entered it. We
should not have created the Eurozone Not that the common currency would be a
bad idea, but THIS common currency with THESE rules. Think about it . We created a
central bank without a treasury, to have its back and we have 19 treasuries without
a central bank to look after national banking systems, that they cannot ever save
during a crisis. It is as if we had created a monetary union designed to cause problems
for our citizens. That’s point number one.
Point number two : We should not have a policy of exiting
that terrible monetary union. Some people say, hang on a second, you
just said that we should not have entered it but now you say we should not exit it.
Yes! Because it’s one thing to say, We should not have come in, it’s quite
another to say we should get out. It’s not the same thing. Because, once we
get in, things change. And getting out has a major cost for Europe as a whole,
for Italy. It does not mean that we should not prepare a parallel currency, I prepared
one, when I was a minister. It does not mean that we should stay in the
Euro, even if our countries collapse. No! it means that should be prepared, on
the one hand to go to Brussels, to go to Berlin and put forward proposals for
making changes to the Euro-Zone, that will allow Italy to breathe within it and at the
same time, prepare for exiting for the very simple reason, that even the Bundes-
bank is preparing for an exit of Germany. Because this is a very unstable currency. Tank you Y. There is a question over there. Sorry to bring you back to the Italian
politics… Don’t be sorry, this is why I’m here. OK, thank you. Francesca ??? from Agorà.
I want to ask you, in case of a crisis of the Italian government, what are the
chances of Mr. Di Maio to be your partner? And then: do you see a default of Italy
as a possibility? I’ll start from the second part. I think a
default will be unlikely. But there are ways of hair-cutting debt,
that do not count as default, so for instance, one of the things that is
not unlikely, is that there will be, in the case of Italy and Italian public debt,
financial incentives for Italian savers to buy more bonds, with tax-breaks that
clash with Brussels’ rules. For instance, a parallel currency would, if there was
re-denomination of part of the debt, would also be an effective haircut, that would
not count necessarily as a default. But this is a theoretical discussion. What
really matters, is that we avoid this clash between this government and Brussels, a
clash that is not leading to any improvement in the lives of Italians or the rest
of Europe. On the first question that you asked, I
think I’ve already answered it. As I said, we are atheists who happen to be faithful
in human nature, if Mr. Di Maio drops out of this government and stops being the
crutch of Mr. Salvini, and 5Stelle join again the ranks of humanist rational political
forces, we would be welcoming them as well But I do not see this happening. Every day
they stay within this coalition, I believe 5Stelle is losing its soul. But have you been in conversation,
for example, with Fico? The one who is considered on the left of the… We’ve been in conversations with many
people, not with the particular person that you mention, at least not me, maybe
somebody from our movement has,
maybe I can ask one of our DiEM25 representatives here, to answer
the question. But this is not the issue. The issue is: is 5Stelle interested in
reclaiming its position on the humanist side of politics? Thank you. There is another question over
there and then here… I’m Italian, and Deutsch-Italian from Berlin.
We know that you are going to meet, as soon as possible, Bernie Sanders, so we would
like to know something about the “Internazionale progressista” as we call it.
Thanks. Well thank you for the question, because
this is something quite exciting. DiEM25 is not only europeanist, or actually
we are europeanist because we are internationalist. Europe is a source of
great instability for the rest of the world We are causing serious problems for the
rest of the world, through our inability to solve our crisis. At the same time we
have an American president who is determined to destabilise what is left of
the stability of the world, and we have the complete failure of the West, of the EU and
the US, to get their act together, to deal with the global crisis which began in 2008
and which has not finished. Anyone who thinks it has finished, should reconsider
their views. This is why we need to go beyond the limits
of Europe. You see, the financiers are internationalists, they know how to bind
together to make sure that the majority of people in every country bails them out after
they’ve made their huge errors, the fascists, the nationalists, the racists,
like Trump, Bannon, Seehofer, Salvini, are internationalists, they bind together
magnificently, the only people who are failing, are the progressives. So on the
30th of November, Bernie Sanders and I are going to be launching the progressive
international in Vermont, and we’re going to issue an open call to political forces
from across Europe, from Africa, from Asia from Latin America, from Central America,
to join us. It is going to be a very difficult process, but at least there is going to be
a start. Thank you. Ehm, Paddy? Paddy A??, Sunday Independent,
Professor, to change theme slightly, Brexit. Eh… Is… you say Salvini is
working toward the disintegration of the EU that’s his aim, but have Mr. Farage and
Boris Johnson started the job already? And do you feel that we’re in a Brexit
situation where the 27 countries say ‘unless we get an Irish border resolution,
there’ll be no deal’. Do you think the 27 countries will hold together on that? Yes. But then the question is, will London
prefer a no-deal to a united Ireland? ‘Cause that is the issue, really. I do
believe that, remember that DiEM25 is a movement with a presence in Ireland, both
the Republic and Northern Ireland, and we’re very proud of that, and we’ve brought people
together that would not have been in the same movement if DiEM was not in Ireland.
We think that this is a magnificent opportunity to bring back the concept, in a
non-sectarian way, of a united Ireland. The border must never return. The Good
Friday Agreement must be maintained and supported, and Europe has a role to play
in this. But let me say something about Brexit: you mentioned Mr. Johnson and
Mr. Farage, they would never have succeded to win the Brexit referendum if it was not
for the incompetence of Brussels and Frankfurt in handling the inevitable crisis
of the Eurozone, between 2010 and 2016, and let me explain this: at a time when the
financial world was collapsing, between 2008 and 2010, the ECB, completely hostage
of its charter, that was written by the Bundesbank, was shrinking the money supply
while the Bank of England was boosting the money supply as if there was no tomorrow,
the Bank of Japan, the Fed in the US, the result was hundreds of thousands of
Italians, Greeks, Spaniards, Portuguese, moving to England, at a time where Mr. Osbourne
the Tory party treasurer, was imposing austerity on the majority of the English people. So
you have the refloating of the financial markets in England, drawing people from
the continent, while British workers were being treated with austerity. That was the
recipe for creating the Brexit movement. It was Brussels and Frankfurt’s policies
that gave rise to the disintegration of the EU with Brexit. This is why DiEM25 is
determined to clash with the Brussels establishment in order to save the EU, in
order to make sure that borders, like the one between the Republic and Northern
Ireland never come back. There is a question there. May I? Eva Giovannini, “Mezz’ora in più”,
Rai3. I wanted to come back to what my colleague
asked about earlier concerning Russia, there are explicit encouragements both from
Washington as from Moscow to the government to keep going with this “manovra” (budget proposal)
and there is even talk of potential economic support from the Kremlin, to buy
Italian public debt, they talk about 6 billion I’d like to know from you, politically
speaking, what would it mean for us, for Italians, to be Moscow’s debtors, and so
for Moscow to be Italy’s creditors? Thanks. It is a very bad Idea, very bad idea. For
two reasons. Firstly : Russia is bankrupt and the most they can do, is buy 4% of
your debt issuance for the next year. In the next year your debt issuance is 250
billion €. If they choose to, they would buy 4%, it’s irrelevant. So they can’t
help Italy. That’s one reason. Secondly : you should
not want to be helped by Mr.Putin. The last thing we need in Europe, in Italy
is more dependence on Mr. Putin. Or indeed Mr Trump for that matter.
Remember Mr Trump and Mr Putin are united by a wish to see a Europe that is
disintegrating and becoming more reactionary and more right wing and more
fascistic. This is why we are here. We are here because we need to fight
against Mr Putin, against Mr Trump, against the Brussels establishment that is
making Mr Salvini powerful enough to be playing these games with Mr Trump
and Mr Putin. Plus, if I don’t… I remember something
similar promised to Greece, right? I mean, Russia also promised to buy Greek
bonds some years ago? I’ve written about this in my last book,
which is exists in Italian : “Adults in the room.” and I explained why I was the
one member of the Greek cabinet under Mr Tsipras who effectively vetoed any
discussion with Putin on us being helped by Russia against our struggle with the
troika. For the same reason that I outlined here, I refused even to go
to Moscow along with Mr Tsipras. In the end, of course, Mr Putin did
exactly as I predicted, and said to Mr Tsipras : ” We are not going
to help you!” OK, do you need a final translation? It’s
OK ? OK? So Yanis Varoufakis, tank you again very
much for being here. Tank you to you all. Tank you.

Advice for students: Introduction and initial questions


[A Level English Literature – Paper 2 Prose] [Section 1 – Introduction and initial questions] [Hilary Regan] Hi, my name is Hilary Regan, and I’m the principal examiner for paper
2, the prose paper. I work with Jen Smith who’s the Principal for paper 1 and Tom
Rank the principal for Paper 3 Poetry. You might have seen his videos about comparing
poetry. Today I’m going to talk to you about how students did in the 2018 exam paper, and
answer some questions that students frequently ask me. Just a reminder on this paper, you are writing
about two, out of a possible 24 set texts, one of which has to be a nineteenth-century
text and you are having to cover four Assessment Objectives. AO1 is the quality of your written
argument. AO2 is your analysis of the writer’s crafts, AO3 is the relevant contexts and AO4
is the comparisons and connections you make between texts. Making connections between the texts is one
of the hardest things to do in this exam I think, the best way to make connections is
to do it in detail. A lot of students make connections between different characters,
between the themes in the novels and maybe some plot points and sometimes that’s where
they stop. Now to do a little bit better, it’s better to include more detailed comparison
and more range and that’s going to let the examiner give you credit for making that range
of connections. So other things you could compare is genre, for example if you’ve
studied two science fiction texts like War of the Worlds and Never Let Me Go, or two
gothic novels such as Dracula and A Picture of Dorian Gray. You could compare the contexts,
the historical contexts in which they were written, may be the way that audiences responded
to the texts when they were written. You can compare the writer’s narrative style, the
literary style that they use, the way they structure their novel, the narrative voices.
The more detailed comparisons you can get in there and the more range of comparisons
you make the better. The short answer to this question is no, you
don’t always have to include the theme. Now that theme is there to give you a head
start in comparisons, so it might be relevant, for example if your writing about colonisation
and its aftermath with The Heart of Darkness and A Passage to India, or if you’re are
looking at the role of women in in Tess of D’urbervilles and Mrs Dalloway, but the
questions are very broad, so you don’t always need to shoe horn the theme in if it’s not
relevant. It’s a good idea not to just focus on the themes in your revision, revise a bit
more broadly because if the question isn’t focused on the theme of your grouping, don’t
include it. The exam has just had an extra 15 minutes
added on to it for Summer 2019, now that 15 minutes is intended as planning time. It was
decided that it was a little too much to ask for you to plan and write about two long novels
in just an hour, so we’re not expecting you write a longer answer, we’re expecting
you to have a better planned, better structured essay as a result of that extra 15 minutes.
So I would recommend using that 15 minutes to think about what you’re going to say
about the texts to answer the question, maybe what comparisons you’re going to make and
the quotes you might want to use. It’s a really good idea to practise planning, give
yourself 15 minutes and just write a plan, even if you don’t have time to write the
essay. It will help you write realistic plans, where you’ve not more than you can actually
write in the exam. If you don’t understand a word in the question,
don’t answer that question. You’re given two questions as choice, so don’t run the
risk of getting it wrong, just go for the other question.

Workers FORCED To Attend Trump Rally


>>Oftentimes, when Republicans make crazy
accusations about Democrats, you can look to what they’re up to and you realize that
it’s projection. They’re accusing Democrats of doing what they’re
doing. And recently, there was a story involving
union workers that demonstrated just that. Now Trump had a giant crowd of union workers
at a speech that he gave at a Shell petrochemical plant in Pennsylvania. This took place last week, and it turns out
that the individuals who were there were paid. There was a monetary incentive there. In fact, let me go ahead and read what these
union workers were told. Your attendance is not mandatory, said the
rules that one contractor relayed to employees, summarizing points from a memo that Shell
sent to union leaders a day ahead of the visit to the $6 billion construction site. But only those who showed up at 7am scanned
their ID cards and prepared to stand for hours through lunch, but without lunch, would be
paid. Those who decided not to come to the site
for the event would have an excused but non-paid absence, the company said, and would not qualify
for overtime pay on Friday. So, Donald Trump on various occasions has
accused Democrats of paying people to show up to their events. Or he’s accused people of paying individuals
to show up to protests. Really, in the mean time, Donald Trump is
playing these games and paying individuals to show up to his speeches. Now this has been pitched as an official presidential
event, not a campaign event. But it was a campaign event and I’m going
to give you evidence to prove it. But Cenk, do you want to jump in before I
do that?>>Trump often talks about these liberal protesters
are funded by Soros. And does he have any evidence of that? No, reporters have looked into it. No, it turns out, liberals are actually really
pissed at Donald Trump. And they don’t need Soros to tell him that. So why did they do that? I’ve told you this historically, the right
wing always does this. The Tea Party was mad about the bank bailouts. Did they ever protest the banks? Nope, because the Koch brothers pulled up
with giant buses that already had anti-Obamacare slogans painted on the buses. They took the Tea Party guys and drove them
to protest against Obamacare rather than the bank bailouts. Because the Koch brothers also benefited from
the bank bailouts. So this is what the Republicans always do,
because they don’t have any grassroots support. It’s not like they don’t have any voters,
they do. But during Obama, they hated him so much mainly
based on his race that they’re like, what is he proposing, to give us health care? God damn it, I don’t want healthcare!>>So there are those guys, but are there
guys going, I need a capital gains tax cut for the rich? I’m gonna go protest to make sure the rich
get tax cuts. No, there’s no grassroots support for that
at all. So they have to pay people off and famously,
Trump paid off the people at his first rally when he announced for president. He paid actors 50 bucks to show up.>>Sad.>>So sad, but he’s such a crook and he’s
such an idiot, that by his nature he never pays anyone because he’s a scam artist. Anyway, so the company that he paid or was
supposed to pay to pay off the actors to show up, it turns out he didn’t pay them. So they filed a complaint with the FEC saying
this guy owes us $12,000 for the actors we brought to his stupid escalator rally and
he won’t pay the $12,000 bill. And then finally, Trump had to pay it four
months later.>>It’s amazing.>>It’s a fact, you can go look it up, Washington
Post, anywhere you want. He was-
>>Fake news.>>By the way, you know who suggested to him
to hire actors? Roger Ailes, because Roger Ailes knows this
guy’s pathetic, he doesn’t have any real followers. Buy actors, we fake everything on the right
wing anyway. So then now he makes you poor union guys. Hey if you wanna get paid for the day, then
you better show up and applaud. And they even had instructions to not boo
him.>>I wanna get to that, because that is important. Because not only are they forced to show up
to this thing if they wanna get paid. But they have some pretty strict guidelines
and rules. Now, there was one union leader who was willing
to talk to the Pittsburgh Post Gazette about the pay involved. This union leader wished not to be named because
he did not want to make trouble for his workers. He said one day of work might amount to about
$700 in pay, benefits, and a per diem payment that out-of-town workers receive. So if you’re gonna miss out on that much pay,
you’re going to show up to this thing. And it’s going to be spun as part of, they’re
not officially saying that it’s part of Trump’s campaign. They’re saying this is not a campaign event,
but it was a campaign event. We have evidence to prove it, including the
videos he put out. By the way, the guidelines and the rules for
anyone who did attend. No yelling, shouting, protesting or anything
viewed as resistance will be tolerated at the event. An underlying theme of the event is to promote
goodwill from the unions. Your building trade leaders and job stewards
have agreed to this. So those were the rules. With that said though, I’m going to go to
one of the videos of the event. And you tell me whether or not this looks
like a campaign event.>>I don’t want to do it too early, I did
it very early with Pocahontas, I should have probably waited.>>She’s staging a comeback on Sleepy Joe.>>I don’t know who’s going to win. But we’ll have to hit Pocahontas very hard
again if she does win. But she’s staging a little bit of a comeback. What a group, Pocahontas and Sleepy Joe.>>I don’t think they give a damn about Western
Pennsylvania, do you?>>No.>>I don’t think so.>>Do you care about Western Pennsylvania? Do you care about Pennsylvania?>>He cares about it, of course, because of
the campaign. I’m sure that it was just an accident or a
coincidence, but he happened to be holding this non campaign event in one of those states
that he won to beat Hillary Clinton in an upset, Pennsylvania. Why does it matter if it’s a campaign event
or not? If it’s a campaign event, he has to pay. If it’s not a campaign event, we have to pay,
so he made the taxpayers pay for that.>>Mm-hm.>>By the way, when he does do campaign events
like the one he did in El Paso, he doesn’t pay anything, because he’s a criminal. He never pays his bills, and he thinks, he
says, when I go bankrupt, that’s me not paying my bills. That’s smart business. No, that’s being a crook. And so, he does it over and over again. So sad, now he went from $50 paying out of
his pocket, to $700 but having Shell pay it for him. So the oil companies pay the union guys to
show up there. And say hey, if you protest against him, remember
you’re gonna lose that money, and we’re gonna crush you. This is what fascism looks like.>>What I thought was interesting about that
video, I didn’t look at his face while he was talking. I was actually paying close attention to the
expressions on the union workers’ faces, it was something I enjoy doing. So just a quick tip in case you want to rewind
the video and watch again. And then finally, one other thing that he
did which further reinforces the point that we’re making about this being a campaign event. He turned that entire speech into like a movie
trailer. And it’s too long, I don’t wanna show it because
it’s just too lengthy but with music and everything, making him look heroic.>>Everything’s a campaign ad for him.>>Exactly.>>Why are taxpayers paying for that? It’s outrageous. And I was looking at the same thing, Ana. There was a couple of guys who liked it and
you could tell like Trump and everybody else is like. Normally, at a campaign rally, when he does
racial stuff like Pocahontas, they love it. With the guys who voluntary show up, you see
here though, it’s a muted crowd. Polite applause, they’re not going crazy when
he says Pocahontas. A couple of people like it and the rest are
like I don’t know, man, they made us come here.>>It’s so sad.

How Donald Trump Answers A Question


But isn’t it un-American and wrong to discriminate against people based on their religion? But, Jimmy, the problem Uh, I mean, look, I’m for it… But, look… We have people coming into our country that are looking to do tremendous harm. You look at the two- Look at Paris. Look at what happened in Paris. I mean, these people, they did not come from Sweden Okay? Look at what happened in Paris. Look at what happened last week in California, with…with, you know, fourteen people dead. Other people going to die, they’re so badly injured. We have a real problem. There’s a tremendous hatred out there. And what I wanna do is find out what- you know, you can’t solve a problem until you find out what’s the root cause. And I wanna find out what is the problem what’s going on. And, it’s temporary I’ve had so many people call me and say thank you. Now, if you remember, when I did that a week ago it was like bedlam All of a sudden — and you watch last night and you see people talking. They say, “Well, Trump has a point. We have to get down to the problem.” The people that are friends of mine that called, they said, “Donald, you’ve done us a tremendous service, because we do have a problem and we have to find out what is the — -and we have to find out what is the–
-those might have been prank calls -those may have been prank calls
-No, no One of the things I find fascinating about Donald Trump is the way he uses language differently than other candidates for political office, especially president of the United States Whereas his opponents and the political class in general seem hyper-aware that their words would be picked apart and used against them Trump willfully disregards this fact. As a lifelong salesman, he has a huckster’s knack for selling a feeling even if the ideas and facts that underscore it are spurious, racist or just plain incomprehensible so I thought it would be illuminating to look at a Trump answer to a simple question In this case Jimmy Kimmel asking Trump whether or not it’s wrong to discriminate against people based on their religion referring to Trump’s proposal to temporarily ban all Muslims from entering the United States This 220 word, exactly 1 minute answer displays I think, a range of the things that Trump uses all the time in his speech The first thing to know is how simple this language is Of the 220 words, 172, or 78%, are only one syllable and often they come in a rhythmic series like a volley of jabs ending with one of his buzz words we have to get down to the problem 39 words, or 17%, are two syllables long only 4 words have 3 syllables, 3 of which are the word tremendous, tremendous, tremendous and just two words are 4 syllables long California, which he’s forced to use because it has less syllables than San Bernardino and temporary, which he swallows and it’s temporary, I’ve had so many people this breakdown fits with the study done by the Boston Globe that put all 2016 presidential candidates’ announcement speeches through the Flesch-Kincaid readability test to determine their respective grade level rankings Donald Trump’s speech came out at the 4th grade reading level Now for reference, Ben Carson came out at 6th grade Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush were speaking at an 8th grade reading level and Bernie Sanders was a way up in high school, a sophomore, to be exact Now this isn’t only down to word or syllable choice it’s about sentence construction, too Trump favors simple sentences like we have a real problem
there is a tremendous hatred out there Rarely does he use complex sentences or independent clauses He also favors the second person a lot of the time, addressing listeners directly with commands Look at Paris
Look at what happened in Paris
Look at what happened in Paris
Look at what happened last week in California Or implicating us in what he’s saying as if we’ve already agreed and you watch last night, and you see people talking He’s really good at this, at framing negative response as an over-reaction that was subsequently realized as such if you remember, when I did that a week ago it was like bedlam. All of a sudden – and you watch last, and you see people talking. They said, “Well Trump has a point. We have to get down to the problem.” Maybe the most important technique Trump utilizes and he does this more than anyone I’ve ever heard is ending his sentences with strong punchy words. A lot of times he’ll rearrange the beginning of a sentence awkwardly, so that he can end strong. For example, here, it would probably be more natural to say you can’t solve a problem until you find out what the root cause is but he brings the is forward to end on root cause he does the same here and it looks like he was going to about the same in the end before Kimmel cuts him off these final words are crucial for Trump They’re pointed and taken together sketch the theme of the entire answer harm, dead, die, badly injured, problem, root cause thank you, bedlam, point, problem, service, problem In some sense, it’s these words that audiences remember especially when the rest of the speech is incoherent Like the best salesman, Trump keeps it simple, he repeats a lot we have a real problem, what is the problem we do have a problem, we have to get down to the problem and he uses his favorite words over and over tremendous, tremendous, tremendous service and he always seems to have friends who are part of the group that he’s currently insulting calling him up and thanking him for the privilege many of them called me they said you know Donald, you’re right, we have a problem and look, there is a problem Donald Trump knows when to sound incredulous, or forceful He has good comedic instinct, you can even call him witty but you can’t call him smart or well informed the best salesman could sell you a TV without knowing anything about it because the TV isn’t what matters. What matters, is you. And if you are an American citizen who, for years has listened to politicians sound sophisticated while accomplishing nothing you might just be primed for something that is everything they are not. But the next time you feel like Donald Trump has a point do yourself a favor and look at his words. Hey everybody, thanks for watching. I want to point you in the direction of my friends over at Wisecrack who do some awesome work, some awesome video essays. If you like my stuff, you’re definitely going to like what they do. They talk about books, movies, and my personal favorite is definitely 8-Bit Philosophy, which is like philosophy explained with Nintendo graphics. So well done. I wish I had thought of that. Anyway, go over there, click there, subscribe, watch a video. If you guys want to help me out, as always, you can click right here, pledge a dollar or three dollars or five dollars to my channel. Help me start 2016 right. We’re going to do some awesome stuff in the next year. I can’t wait to see you guys next Wednesday for the next video and I will see you… Well, I just said I’ll see you next Wednesday, so bye!

Living Underwater: How Submarines Work


This video was made possible by Brilliant. Learn something new everyday with Brilliant
for 20% off by being one of the first 200 to sign up at brilliant.org/Wendover. In all of World War Two, the world used about
5 megatons of explosives. Now, this is a Trident II missile, capable
of carrying 12 nuclear warheads together equivalent in power to about 5 megatons of explosives. A single American Ohio Class submarine can
carry 24 Trident II missiles. A single submarine can carry a devastating,
catastrophic, inconceivable amount of firepower. While in reality due to arms reduction treaties
and practicality these boats often carry far less than their maximum armament, submarines
can still creep up anywhere, undetected, ready to unleash their firepower, more powerful
that the entire arsenal of some countries, in an instant. Submarines are different in purpose to some
other elements of a navy. While an aircraft carrier, for example, is
intended to be big, foreboding, and noticeable as a means to display a nation’s power to
the world, submarines are meant to to be unseen, undetected, an invisible, silent force that
could or could not be anywhere at any time. In a way, submarines almost serve a purpose
of psychological warfare—an enemy can never know for sure whether a submarine is looming
off its shore. While dozens of countries operate submarines,
the most powerful and often largest of these boats are those capable of firing ballistic
missiles carrying nuclear warheads. Only six nations are confirmed to have these
submarines—The US, UK, France, India, Russia, and China. In addition, analysts have found evidence
suggesting that North Korea and Israel also each have nuclear-missile capable submarines. Nowadays, there are essentially two different
types of military submarines with two different missions. The attack submarine, the more common kind,
is generally smaller and, in combat, attacks other close-range targets like ships using
torpedoes, shorter range missiles, and other armaments. The other, often larger type of submarine
are those ballistic missile submarines which essentially serve the purpose of being a mobile,
hidden launch platform for nuclear missiles. The idea is that, as a stealth launch platform,
a country’s submarines would survive any nuclear first strike and therefore be able
to retaliate against an aggressor. Ballistic missile submarines are therefore
crucial to the idea of mutually assured destruction—if anyone attacks with nuclear weapons, assuming
those attacked had nuclear weapons that would survive a strike and they retaliated, both
the attacker and those attacked would be destroyed. Therefore, many consider these nuclear missile
equipped submarines to actually be a form of nuclear deterrence—they say they reduce
the likelihood of others using nukes since they assure their subsequent destruction. Considering that these submarines might survive
when a country and its government do not, they therefore need the independent authority
to use their missiles. While other operators likely have similar
setups, it’s known that the UK’s four ballistic missile submarines each have a letter
locked in a safe instructing their commander on what to do if the UK is wiped out by a
nuclear strike. These letters are written by each prime minister
at the beginning of their term and destroyed, unread, at the end. Each PM essentially has to chose which of
the four potential options they want to instruct the sub commanders to do—nothing, to place
themselves under the command of an ally like the US or Australia, for the commander to
use their judgment, or to retaliate and launch nuclear missiles at the attacker. Of course, what gives submarines their stealth
is the blanket of water. American Ohio class submarines are publicly
known to be able to go down as deep as 800 feet or 250 meters. In reality, it is believed they can go much
further. As soon as a sub surfaces, though, their stealth
is lost especially in today’s era of satellite tracking. Therefore, it is important that submarines
can stay underwater for long periods so that that can dive underwater on one side of the
world and make their way to the other undetected. Of course, almost all of the world’s ballistic
missile equipped submarines are nuclear powered meaning they have virtually unlimited range. These boat’s reactor cores only need to
be swapped every few decades. In addition, most submarines have oxygen generators
and desalinators so, like nuclear-powered aircraft carriers, the only thing that really
limits how long they can stay deployed is their food supply. How it works on American nuclear subs, which
work similarly to those of other countries, is that each boat has two fully staffed crews
at any given time—the Blue and Gold crews. The Blue crew will first man the boat while
on patrol which lasts, on average, 77 days. The different submarines different patrols
are scheduled so that there are always submarines deployed. Despite this long patrol period, in the US
Navy at least, submarines are actually known to have the best food of any vessel. Some say it’s because submarines are small—the
chef has nowhere to hide if a meal is bad. It more likely has to do with the fact that
submarines get a higher food budget than other vessels. Food is important to morale especially considering
submarine duty is one of the Navy’s toughest jobs. Of course, fresh food can only last, at most,
two weeks, so the meal quality deteriorates as the weeks go by. Eventually, the only ingredients left are
canned, dried, or frozen. The sign of food quality deteriorating does
mean that the end of patrol is coming at which time the first crew, the Blue crew, would
take the boat back to either its home port or a allied overseas port. The Gold crew will then arrive and then both
crews will work to complete a turnover, restocking, and maintenance period of 25 days. Then, the Blue crew will fly home for vacation
and subsequent training before the cycle repeats again. Most crew members keep this cycle going for
years on end. Submariners even live their days in cycles
as well. They work eight hours on then have sixteen
off to train, conduct maintenance, work out, eat, and sleep. Now, to get a sense of the scale of the largest
of these submarines, here’s a Boeing 747-400 and here’s an American Ohio-Class submarine. It is almost 2.5 times longer with a hull
circumference far larger than the plane’s fuselage. But even this is not the world’s largest
submarine. That title goes to slightly longer and far
wider Russian Typhoon-class submarine. These are so large that their amenities include
a sauna and small pool. On American and most other submarines, the
amenities are more lacking, though. It’s important that submariners have things
to do in their down-time considering they’ll spend three months without sunlight in a metal
tube, but there just isn’t much space. The mess is really the only open space not
devoted to work. Submarines tend to have gym equipment but
it’s not usually consolidated in one room—more often it’s just spread out in different
nooks and crannies. On large Ohio-class submarines, a submariners
tiny bunk is their only true personal space. On smaller submarines, like the American Virginia-class,
the number of sailors exceeds the number of bunks so the most junior sailors will have
to share bunks—while one works the other sleeps and vice versa—and there’s no true
personal space. Compared to many surface Navy ships, which
have phones, frequent mail deliveries, and even internet, communication to the outside
world is limited on submarines. Each submariner is given an email address
that their family can send messages to. When the submarine is able to receive communications,
all these messages are then sent electronically. Onboard, the messages are all reviewed by
a dedicated crew member. They check through to be sure that no information
is being sent that they don’t want known by the sailor. For example, they might choose to not pass
on information of a family death in order to not affect crew morale. There’s often no way to get sailors off,
anyways, so many believe it’s better to leave that news for the end of the patrol. How submarines communicate, though, is complicated
because they do, of course, spend months underwater. Almost all radio waves can’t travel through
salt water but submarines do need communications to receive orders. Very low frequency radio waves, though, do
penetrate water to an extent. That’s why VLF radio forms the core of submarine
communication systems. Different navies have large VLF transmitters—for
example, the US has ones in Maine, Washington, Hawaii, and elsewhere; India has one on its
southern coast; and Australia has one in Western Australia. These VLF signals are able to penetrate the
ocean and be picked up by a submarine as deep as 60 feet or 20 meters. One major disadvantage of VLF, though, is
that it is very low bandwidth. It can’t even transmit real-time audio signals—the
most it can do is about 700 words per minute in text. When deeper, some submarines also have the
capability to launch buoys to shallower depths to receive signals. Submarines also typically can’t respond
with VLF frequencies since they don’t have large enough transmitters so they have to
raise to shallow depths so they can have antennas sticking out of the water to respond. It’s at this depth that modern submarines
will often have quick transmissions with satellites in order to download and upload information. There are a few other techniques used less
commonly, some new technologies under development, and some separate systems designed for use
when the main systems are compromised, but VLF radio forms the bulk of communications
with most submarines. But the fact that submarines spend their time
underwater in stealth also makes another crucial element difficult—navigation. Both GPS and Radar don’t work underwater
since they use higher frequency waves that can’t make their way through any depth of
water. What does work underwater is Sonar where the
submarine essentially generates a sound and then listens to when and how the sound comes
back to map out its surroundings but emitting this sound makes it quite easy for others
to track a submarine. Therefore, when operating in stealth conditions,
submarines can’t use active sonar. Rather, they use an inertial navigation system. These are essentially systems of accelerometers
and gyroscopes that take the last-known accurate GPS position of a submarine and then tracks
the submarines movements relative to that. It uses this to estimate position but of course,
as time goes on from the last reliable reading, the accuracy of this system diminishes. 24 hours after the last reading, these will
drift to only about 1.15 miles or 1.85 kilometers of accuracy. Now, this technique combined with the consultation
of maps is usually fine since most of the time the ocean is a big, wide open space but
there are a few objects floating below the surface that submarines could collide with—submarines. Some modern submarines are so well cloaked
that another submarine just feet away might not be able to detect it. That’s what happened on the night of February
3rd, 2009 when the British Navy’s HMS Vanguard submarine felt a resounding bump while sailing
in the East Atlantic ocean. It had collided with the French submarine
Le Triomphant seemingly just by chance. Luckily they were going at low speed and there
were no injuries but, considering both these subs were both equipped with nuclear warheads,
one can only imagine the potential consequences of a more damaging collision. Submarines are dangerous—even in peacetime. They are designed to disappear so, after something
does go wrong, they often do just disappear. Many submarine operating countries have rescue
submarines that can hypothetically be used to save stranded submariners by going down,
latching on, and shuttling sailors to the surface but in practice, these have never
really had much action. Sometimes submarines sink, their systems fail,
and nobody can get to them before oxygen runs out. As submarines become better at masking themselves
submarine tracking technology is simultaneously advancing. There’s some thought that there will be
a time when nothing can hide in the ocean’s depths but until then, submarines are a crucial
aspect of any modern navy. Nowadays, just as they were in World War Two,
even traditional, non ballistic-missile submarines and their torpedos are effective and deadly. One of the best ways to track submarines is
also by sonar equipped submarines so it’s a situation where countries need submarines
because others have submarines. That’s why there are still hundreds of them
somewhere, or rather, anywhere, ready to strike at any moment. So, you know those short, free moments during
your day like when waiting for the bus, or the train, or for an appointment, or a call? It’s hard to do anything productive during
these times but Brilliant tackles this in a great way. Every day, their short Daily Problems give
you the context and framework needed to solve a problem and let you tackle it on your own. They publish a huge variety of problems so
once you’ve figured one out, if you find it interesting, you can also try their corresponding
course. These are great ways to help learn a little
more in a little time. To start solving Brilliant’s Daily Problems
and taking their great courses, go to brilliant.org/Wendover. The first 200 that go to that link will also
get 20% off their annual premium subscription.

Kim Jong-Un’s New Strategy: Explained


In 2017 North Korea went on a missile launch bonanza first into the Sea of Japan in February, then its first ever intercontinental ballistic missile on July 4th, Happy Birthday America, and 18 other missile tests plus a cyberattack on 150 countries disrupting everything from banks to hospitals No five nine But pretty effective according to North Korean media Americans on internet websites Now have nuclear phobia kim jong un’s threats of war weren’t new But this time they were echoed by the US on twitter by the way Which seems like a bad way to reach someone in North Korea But hey tensions were at an arguably all-time high and then something changed out of nowhere after the deadline Kim jong-un announced He would send two athletes to the 2018 Olympics and not just that but with South Korea under a unified flag his sister and an entourage of suspiciously enthusiastic fans also traveled to the South. Missile testing suddenly stopped and Kim even met with a US Secretary of State He also left the country for the first time as supreme leader to visit Xi Jinping in China And then the biggest news yet both North and South held an inter-korean summit For Kim hugged the South Korean president even stepped on South Korean soil. I mean that sounds like a story from the onion It’s a complete 180 from non-stop missile launches two friendly smiles and hugs in just five months for many This is completely bizarre for others It’s the obvious result of successful foreign policy but what looks like desperation or Backpedaling or even foolishness is really just the continuation of a long-standing very rational very Calculated survival strategy with a twist so what exactly is going on and how will it end? Kim jong-eun has one thing on his wish list Stay in power for him power means wealth and luxury and safety for his family So if that’s the goal you might wonder why not just you know show out and enjoy those things he appears to do the opposite Risking everything by poking the biggest guns he could find That’s why so many see him as genuinely crazy and the media of course has no interest in alleviating that word Worry is their business model But it’s not true Kim inherited a very poor hungry primitive country if he does nothing the country will wither and fail no one to make Swiss cheese or basketballs and becoming a Self-sustaining or just not terrible country would mean economic reform reform brings better living conditions for everyone Which you might expect would protect Kim from revolution? But it’s just the opposite a population that can just barely feed itself only has time to do exactly that Revolutions are feats of strength not weakness What’s really dangerous is a taste of the good life a peek at what they could have? Reformed could eventually make the north as successful as its neighbor, but it would mean goodbye for Kent so he needs resources But can’t afford economic reform the solution is the same kind of socialism the country has always dreamed of and never Delivered shared or resources aka four and eight, and how do you get handouts as a totalitarian country with death camps? But intimidating a superpower like the United States is hard if they had six hundred billion dollars to rival the US military they Wouldn’t need to scare them anyway so instead they skip the entire tech tree straight to nuclear weapons a single nuke is the ultimate shield against war and Uproar which also makes it the perfect Negotiating tool the thought of denuclearizing North Korea is so attractive the world will do anything for the slightest chance to get it including forgetting 15 years of failed foreign policy just two years after Kim jong-un took power a Former exchange student in Pyongyang and now expert and rail and cop wrote a book called the real North Korea Co 40 wrote sounds familiar when North Korea are unhappy they follow the same routine they first manufacture a crisis and drive tensions as high as Possible when newspaper headlines tell the world that the Korean Peninsula is on the brink of war the North Korean government suggests Negotiations the offer is accepted with a sigh of relief Giving North Korean diplomats the leverage to squeeze maximum concessions It’s the North Korean version of the hero’s journey the same story told over and over and over again But because we want to believe we buy it every time at any given moment Kim is either in total assault mode creating fear and therefore our desperation for negotiation or total charm mode Convincing the world is a new man He just needs some financial support man this cycle of aggression charm and repeat is happening now But it’s not new at all there have been six other rounds of negotiations North Korea agreed to abandon their nuclear program in 2005 they got what they wanted and then broke their promise But this time is a bit different their nuclear program has been building up for almost 40 years to one goal the ability to reach The US mainland until then there was no realistic chance of their giving up the program It’s their one and only deterrent the only key to Kim’s life lesson learned from Iraq in Libya on November 28th They tested the whole song 15 proving. They could reach anywhere in America and two months later They joined the Olympics and turned on the charm that timing is no coincidence they accomplished their goal No need for more missile testing now it’s time to cash in get all they can from halting the tests while keeping even if it means hiding the ability to target the U.s.
They couldn’t have scheduled it better xi Jinping was probably pressuring them to relax and tensions were extremely high with the u.s. the administration really wants to show its strategy worked giving Kim enormous negotiating leverage It’s possible the talks will fail or succeed with flying colors But here’s my rough prediction Kim will excite the world with concessions But most will be completely symbolic cheek smiles and no concrete promises He’ll agree to stop nuclear development, which they no longer need in exchange for some American military concessions that also benefit China who would prefer America back out of Asia little to nothing will change inside, North Korea more of the same terrible oppression and real Reunification won’t be possible anytime soon, but American and South Korean politicians will declare a huge success But so will North Korea who finally got a seat at the table has its security guaranteed plus Maybe some economic benefits Exactly as planned when he next finds himself low on cash or in need of something without the attention to get it well He’ll know exactly what works and by the time North Korea makes its next move You could be well on your way to making yours everything you saw in this video I made in a graphic design application called affinity designer It’s far cheaper than Adobe Illustrator, but still a bit intimidating for beginners So a great way to learn it is with a class like this one on Skillshare It’ll walk you through making digital graphics and easy to follow Bite-sized videos everything from colors to custom shapes brushes and exporting if you want to make videos like this one This is a great way to get started and with a premium membership you pay one low price for all the classes you want so You can find the perfect one for you jump around or take multiple at a time There are classes on photography finance app development and something I’m gonna check out calligraphy something. That’s really cool Is that you can browse other people’s projects for inspiration? I mean look at all the cool lettering people have made who took this calligraphy class and for poly matter viewers the first 500 people to sign up with a link in the description get two free months of unlimited classes Thanks again to skill share and to everyone who gives it a try (Engsub by many people)

Christopher Hitchens — Speaking Honestly About Hillary Clinton


HITCHENS: As for Mrs. Clinton… Look! After all she’s done for us, and all she’s
suffered on our behalf she feels she’s owed the Presidency and
you know Who could possibly disagree? Her life is meaningless if she doesn’t get
a least a shot! And — one can only sympathize. Unless you think, as I do, that people should be distrusted who are running
for therapeutic reasons. Because the Presidency doesn’t calm those
demons as her husband has already proved. But look — the reason we have to think about it, and the reason why your question is a good one is this: What else can the democrats do? And if thats the case, what the hell shape
are we in? It still divides us as between those of us
who think that a job must be found for Hillary Clinton, That the country would be somehow disgraced if she wasn’t in an important position, and those of us who could do without her. And neither answer to that question is gonna make any difference at all to the way the market performs. If there were some foreign policy
experience or brilliance Hillary Clinton had ever shown maybe we overlook the fact that she and her husband have never met a foreign political donor they don’t like and haven’t taken from. Look, this is the woman who played the race
card on Barack Obama. This is the woman who if you for “Change that you can believe in” whatever change it was you were voting against. This is the woman whose foreign policy experience
consists of making a fool of herself and fabricating a
story about Bosnia. This is the woman who, with her husband, have
so many connections fundraising connections overseas: Indonesia,
China. Just look at today’s and yesterday’s New
York Times at the list of people with whom the former President Clinton has
acquired a tremendous burden of debt. These are people who pay him all
the time. From odd parts of the Middle East to strange
donors all over the place. My colleague at Vanity Fair Todd Purdum, anyone can google this, just put in “Purdum
Clinton.” See if you can bear to read the sort of friendships
that a former President is having. Its undignified to think about it! From the Riady Family in Indonesia to numerous
Chinese donors who left this country rather than show up
for the hearings on it. But I don’t know of any such expertise on
her part except her pretense to have been under fire
in Bosnia when she had not. Actually when there was pressure on the Clinton
Administration Lez Aspen was Secretary of Defense, you remember? To do something about Sarajevo, to stop the
killing, to prevent the ethnic cleansing Hillary Clinton moved in — hard on her husband
and said “Don’t you do a thing about Bosnia, It’ll
spoil my wonderful healthcare plan.” At least on Healthcare, she knows enough about
the subject to have really… changed American Healthcare for the worse
in her time but foreign policy about foreign policy, she doesn’t even know
that much! MATTHEWS: But I am very suspicious when John
Kyle, a major supporter of the war in Iraq and complete
hawk and neocon in many ways, complete hawk supports her for this. Henry Kissinger has come out of the woodwork, he supports her for this! (HITCHENS: Yes!) Why do these establishmentist conservatives
want her? What are they up to? Why do they want her? I don’t know what they want. HITCHENS: Kissinger… Don’t compare Kissinger
to Kyle I mean, Kissinger is a critic of the war and
a so called realist and someone who likes MATTHEWS: But why do they want her? They’re
both Republicans. Why do they want her? HITCHENS: Because, she’s a status quo type
and They know they can, so to speak, trust her She’s a member of their club. To remind people at this point of the lowest
stage of the Clinton Administration when… Eric Holder signed off at the Justice Department
on the pardon of this fugitive… shall we call him financier? Who’d also given, rather a large loan that
didn’t seem to have been repaid to one of Hillary Clinton’s brothers, who in turn with the other brother
had gone for a Walnut monopoly or was it a hazelnut monopoly
in the Republic of Georgia? Odd bits of the Caucasus involved in American
foreign policy here. Plus donations to the Clinton library. It builds up and it goes on. Is this how the
President elect really wants to start? The amazing brothers of her’s who nearly
got the — was it the — nut monopoly in Kazakstan or something farcical
like that? Just look it up! It’s a ludicrous embarrassment for the President
and for the country. JOURNALIST: You were asked and talked about
the qualifications of now your nominee for Secretary of State. And you belittled her travels around the world equating it to having teas with foreign leaders. And your new White House Council said that her resume was grossly exaggerated when it came to foreign policy. OBAMA: Look, I mean, I think this is fun for
the press to try to stir up whatever quotes were generated during
the course of the campaign. No, I understand! And, you’re having fun. If you look at the the statements that Hillary
Clinton and I have made outside of the heat of the campaign… W We share a view. HITCHENS: Can I just add though that I thought
Obama’s answer there was incredibly cheap and evasive? I mean he was right the first time to say:
This woman doesn’t in fact have any foreign policy experience and he could have added, which also came up in the campaign that the
experience she has claimed such as in Bosnia was fake, was fabricated and he could also have added that she, like
his other nominee (for the Attorney Generalship) main qualification
in politics is being a friend of Marc Rich, which I don’t think is “change.” As I say, if it hadn’t involved her too,
the campaign finance scandals. We’re not talking about the ongoing stuff,
Mr. Clinton’s huge speaking fees in the Gulf and elsewhere. We’re talking about previous convictions:
In the Clinton fundraising scandal If it wasn’t for the fact that she couldn’t
refuse her brothers everything or sorry anything. Couldn’t refuse them anything. Anything they wanted they seemed to have got,
including some kind of deal for Marc Rich. All of this might be forgivable, or it might
assume a different proportion David if it wasn’t for the fact that This woman doesn’t really have any foreign
policy experience worth mentioning. And what is memorable about it, is pretty
bad! Remember Kissinger had to decline the honor that Bush wanted to give him of being Chair of the 9/11 Commission because
it would have involved mentioning the names of all the people who he had business
dealings around the world. And he wasn’t willing to do that with Kissinger
Associates. He didn’t want to expose his clientele. The same thing, believe you me The same thing, believe you me, is gonna come up with the She’s been very very very uncritically pro-Israel
though. At all times. It’s true that she’s got a major name
on the World stage, that’s true by definition It’s only true that she’s respected in
the Pentagon if people go around saying so, I’ve never heard that before I must say. On some things she’s more hawkish than the
President elect, yes. But, she tends to have a quietless reputation
in what I’d call an opportunist matter I mean, who really thinks she felt that strongly
about Iraq? She just didn’t want to cast her vote the
other way. WALSH: He’s not worried about that! I genuinely think that if he’s got an eye toward politics it’s global politics and he wants the strength
of the Clinton name the Clinton brand. HITCHENS: Well thats what thats what the Secretary
of State is for and what you want as President is to know Your secretary of state spends all her working
to make sure your policies stick. With this woman that can’t be said she’s
always thinking first about herself, second about her husband. And third about ?, that’s never changed
and it’s never going to WALSH: That’s your opinion, Christopher. HITCHENS: … Nor will anyone. Guess what, guess who’s saying it? That’s a very clever thing to say. Shall I ask? Would you prefer I uttered your opinion? what a fatuous remark! MATTHEWS: Christopher!

Three main political parties’ reaction about presidential meeting


Let’s head over to the National Assembly…
Our parliamentary correspondent Park Jiwon is standing by.
Ji won, how do the three main political parties feel about their meeting with the president? “Well, Conn-young.
The overall consensus here at the assembly is that today’s meeting went pretty smoothly.
Although opposition parties said they weren’t quite satisfied with today’s results solely,…
they at least rated highly President Park’s willingness to cooperate respect the parliament
more by holding regular meetings.” During a press briefing held at the parliament,…
ruling Saenuri Party’s floor leader Chung Jin-suk said President Park and political
leaders talked frankly over diverse issues ranging from the economy and the people’s
livelihoods to national security,… confirming the participants’ willingness to communicate
on a regular basis. “Personally, I am very satisfied with the
meeting. We were assured that there will be a possibility of cooperation among parties.” The main opposition Minjoo Party of Korea
said it did its best to deliver its view on various matters to the President,… from
how the government should handle the deaths caused by a toxic humidifier sterilizer,…
and the chronic budget problems of the nation’s free childcare services,… to the matter
of revising a special law on the 2014 Sewol-ho ferry disaster.
The liberal party said,… the recent election results that stripped the ruling party from
parliamentary majority show that the public is not content with the government’s current
policies. But the party’s new floor leader Woo Sang-ho
took a rather smoother approach,… expecting next meetings. “We couldn’t agree on issues like inter-Korean
relations, nor the special law on the Sewol-ho ferry,… but I didn’t expect to get satisfactory
results in the first meeting. We will continue to voice our opinions through the next regular
meetings.” Meanwhile, the minor opposition People’s Party
floor leader, Park Jie-won, evaluated the meeting positively. “President Park laughed when I told her that
it was me who criticized the President the most for not being communicative enough. And
she told us she will better communicate and cooperate with the parliament, and respect
the will of the public. I think it is a considerable achievement.” “While the People’s Party appreciates President
Park’s more open-minded approach to the parliament,… the centrist party pointed out that there
are some issues that the party considers as its future tasks,…but that the president
didn’t quite specify her stance over them yet.
Conn-young.” Like the president said… this is just the
first step in many more ahead… and we’ll have to wait and see whether a healthy relationship
and better collaboration can be established between the nation’s top office and the parliament.
Thanks, Ji-won for the report.