as most members of congress as well it is it is troubling that telling that he has said the nato alliance is the most successful military alliance in the history of the world and this is a president who seems intent on disrupting that which has dangerous consequences not only for american national security but for the world order as well david your reaction yeah look i would agree largely with chris this is a president who has taken a notably different posture towards nato compared to any of his predecessors regardless of party and it's left a lot of americans questioning why he would do this in terms of american history this is one of the richest alliances and defending freedom it is one that is most special to the united states the president seems intent on trying to extract concessions out of our allies and so the two questions for many americans in light of the visit with nato as well as the visit with putin it first is why the change
in posture and second you can't escape the context in which this is occurring which is a domestic investigation into the president's campaign it is certainly different behavior than we have seen before it leaves a lot of americans with some hard questions of the president crazies gozo kolo nato members to increase defense spending to four percent from the current two percent. the white house says that's the president's thoughts it's not a shoe unknown soon to what do you make of that group well look you know presidents of both parties have gone to nato to ask them to pick up a greater share of the defense so there's nothing unique about what he's trying to do what is unique it's the style in which he's doing it which is incredibly in tagon istic style that you know perhaps plays well in the real state business it doesn't particularly play well on the world stage especially given the number of battles that we're having with or that this administration is having with our allies right now in particular on trade issues in the number of issues where we
need their cooperation on as david said this is a key strategical alliance there are nato troops from the countries that the president is attacking in afghanistan fighting side by side with us right now so yes europe needs to do more to bear the costs of the defense but there are right ways to do that and there are wrong ways to do that which is what the president's doing today david is the pleasantest strong supporter of nato what do you make of this. you know this goes back to the campaign larry where whether or not he had a clear understanding of article five you know the notion that any nato country that comes under attack will be protected by the others there were questions whether you understood that there were questions about whether or not he would remain committed to it he had actually floored it with the idea of abandoning it this is a president who is suspicious of any multilateral alliance this is part of the nationalism that he continues to push as his agenda and reflected largely in his advisor steve bannon and others we see it in meetings at the g.
seven recently where he was antagonistic to our partners there were we are seeing it in nato at the end of the day it is not a good strategy for the united states we are a more secure nation when we have strong nato alliances and yes every country can do more to commit to their own national security budgets but larry this is not an impending problem we face as a country if you draw the contrast between the nato meeting and the russia meeting the reality is wherever the facts lie we know that u.s. intelligence communities have suggested that russia was adversarial to our interests in the most recent election that is a greater threat a greater question to get to the bottom of than anything related to nato and the level of contributions of our allies in that regard chris what do you expect to happen when the president meets mr putin. you know i'm not sure honestly larry that anybody knows that when when the president met putin last year the conversation was
all about whether the president would force fully confront putin about the meddling in our lection and while the president sort of got to it by the end and admitted that he had raised it and he believed putin's denials about that you've seen this constant walking back of that over the past year now obviously at some of the statements that have come out of the president recently about the aggressive foreign policy moves by russia suggests that this is a president who not just wants to have a good relationship with russia and we can agree that's probably a good thing but seems to be willing to accommodate some of russia's a worse instincts on the world stage right now this is also president as we saw in singapore who was very consumed with the optics with the appearances of these summits as he was with kim jong un so this may be more about. some nice photos of people shaking hands rather than anything real happening. here david in response to
the trump policies china has now slimmed massive thirty four billion dollars worth of u.s. exports including soybeans report says orange juice and was q where is all is go in the. donald trump is launched a trade war and those terms are accurate and this case we are now and in the midst of retaliatory effort encounter retaliatory effort you know decisions of whether or not we have a free trade economy or a protectionist economy those debates are had throughout generations but they require a very skilled commitment to a long term macro economic shift when we saw nafta in the united states where we moved to more free trade economic environment we were willing to accept the pain upfront for the strategy of long term economic growth i think the questions of this president are whether or not he is acting rationally with some coherent long term macro economic strategy or if this just a matter of what he promised his base which is we're
a nation that's being taken advantage of and i'm going to go fight our adversaries economically national security whatever it might be the deep concern though is tariffs are taxes we will see inflation in the united states if there is no long term economic strategy for how it leads to greater economic growth this will be a net negative for the united states economy in the near term. church said he will oppose the nomination of brett kavanaugh for with every ounce of strength he has that may not succeed where did you think of that appointment. well look i as a democrat i have serious concerns about judge kavanagh's record not only in terms of his. stance on abortion on the affordable care act but look where early in this process right now judge kavanagh is twelve years of judicial opinions on the d.c. circuit that need to be reviewed hundreds of thousands of pages of records from his
time in the white house counsel's office during the bush administration that need to be reviewed senators should walk into this with an open mind on both sides frankly. have a chance to question him and look at his record that being said this is a president who made very clear that he had a litmus test for the judges that he was going to pick and so judge kavanaugh may say all the right things he may talk about the importance of precedent but make no mistake this is a president and frankly this is a vice president who yet yesterday said they were intent on overruling roe versus wade so i think it's a fair assumption that is what judge kavanagh's inclination would be david will be as judge to add more what do you think she rolled the way. oh it's absolutely fair and i think you will see him hedge a little bit look the votes are likely there for republicans but democrats have an opportunity here to create a defining moment going into the midterms and we will be on the heels of the midterms when all of these hearings conclude and a vote actually happens i think what we could watch for though larry is this
a lot of conservative jurists are even saying that kavanagh has has said he is not looking to overturn roe v wade that may be the case but what a lot of conservatives are suggesting is they can change abortion rights in the united states even within the construct of roe v wade roe v wade had this underlying viability test the notion that in the third trimester that fetus is capable of of birth and of living and so there's a viability test i think what you'll see conservative jurist do is say working within the roe v wade construct recognizing that as precedent we can still restrict abortion rights that will be the heart of the debate and i think for democrats it's largely a good one in terms of defining the contrast between the parties going into november and let let in voters decide which party they choose to support in this in this case but the public supports role. well that's exactly right and there is a disconnect between the public sentiment about two thirds of american public
support of roe v wade but it's also the lack of protections at the state level there are only a handful of states maybe two handfuls of states that actually protect. the rights of choice at the state level right now and so if roe is overturned or sufficiently cut back it is fair to say that many many states will take action on that and and that will be an interesting battle that we will have that will really define the political landscape for the next five to ten years would we be chaos today that is california allows abortion in mississippi doesn't. it would be and this is exactly how this is going to proceed sort of chris's point larry it's not that the supreme court in the united states can just decide we're going to bring up roe v wade and take a vote on whether to overturn it what will happen when cavanagh gets confirmed is this the pro-life advocacy groups will identify they will target one or two states across the country where they believe they have the greatest success at the state
level to restrict or prohibit abortion perhaps across the board or in very specific cases that will then become the test that gets litigated at the state and at the federal level but beginning at the district level at the state moving its way all the way to the supreme court what will likely become beef come before the court is whether or not a specific state who has restricted abortion is able to keep that law on the books that will be the vote that kavanagh should be asked about do you think that the democrats get control of the house they will bring up impeachment i think that really is the defining issue if they take back the house and i believe they will take back the house there will obviously be a strong sentiment which within the liberal base to do that i'm not sure politically that makes a lot of sense especially if the senate remains in republican control you might have a you know. it might make people in the base feel good but if you can't fundamentally remove the president from office you may be helping out his political prospects
moving into two thousand and twenty david. i think it requires a catalyst and that catalyst could be something in the report or if the president is put under oath and perjure himself it would require something rising to that level the base will want the debate and i think what you may see shy of an actual impeachment hearing should democrats take over in january you may see the judiciary committee hold a hearing with presidential scholars and jurist who can enlighten the congress on the issues of impeachment what rises to the level of pietschmann but without a catalyst a catalyst like the miller report where the president perjuring himself under oath i don't see it advancing past that. chris david both thank you very much thank you thank you guys if you would like and thank you the viewers for joining me on this edition of politicking remember you can join the conversation on my facebook page or tweet me at kings things and do not forget to use the politicking hash tag and
you know world of big partisan news a lot and conspiracy it's time to wake up to dig deeper to hit the stories that made stream media refuses to tell more than ever we need to be smarter we need to stop slamming the door on the. and shouting past each other it's time for critical thinking it's time to fight for the middle for the troops the time. for watching closely watching the hawks.
in. the south for some play the sad part of his life was. always their wife's their sister's. kind of human being that's historically like that but unfortunately due to. physical structures were kind of. close associates or social values were. not only this one conflict. for structures but it unfortunately values to sleep early. the american president arrives in the u.k. on his first official visit triggering protests in the capital. speaking at
a nato summit before his u.k. trip donald trump said he views of lottery as a competitor not an enemy. and facebook labels thousands of russians as being interested in treason sparking concerns about the way the company is overhauling its use and. the latest on the stories you can head to argue dot com coming up at the head of the hyperloop transportation technologies is the guest on so feet and co ok about transport systems.