Welcome to the commentary magazine podcast today is Monday. Nowhere twenty six twenty eighteen, I'm John POT hordes the editor of commentary, these seventy some, my dear old monthly of intellectual analysis, political probity and cultural criticism from a conservative perspective Why does a commentary magazine dot com, where we give you a few free, reeds and then ask you to subscribe? Ninety. Ninety five for a digital subscription twenty nine. Ninety five for an all access subscription, including our bureau, monthly magazine in your mailbox eleven times a year we have just put up are no,

our December issue, including a remarkable piece by our own, soon to be introduced, nor Rossman on the social justice, warriors honest mistake in the attack on bread, Cavanaugh very important piece by Noah remark the peace by a rabbi marsala. They check on the mass occur in Pittsburgh and the inadequate, You wish response to the massacre a bunch of other remarkable stuff, so we really go to commentary magazine, dot com you'll, see that and this morning a really important blog item by on Gordon about a startling survey of jewish professionals. That's that shit, oh, that Jews in Eastern Europe feel much safer where they live

then the juice of Western Europe. Despite the reputation, that Eastern Europe is getting for having systematic Distillation and increasingly anti semitic attitude. So is a lot of really great stuff, a commentary amazing there com, but we will get to our discussion now with the aforementioned associate better nor Rossman, high Noah icon senior editor a green oh hi Abe, I jump and social care. Monetary columnist, Christine Rosen High, Christine Hygiene, ok, some bodies, I think it's fair to say that are the politics of hysteria, how can we help to consume the after? The trip to fan was consumed, weekend We had a nice hardy dessert of.

Political and ideological hysteria partially as a result of the climate change report. That was should by the Trump Administration and then most readily by the scenes at the border, over the weekend where a bunch of people tried to climb offence. Another bunch of people tried to for the river from the caravan and. I mean that that the general ideological divide more stark than on this issue. Where I live those are saying that my God, a war crime has been committed, we're using chemical weapons against our banners and whom tear gas was fired and conservative saying what are you talking about? This is standard crowd, control and are you saying that we have no right

troll our borders, these people all wanted asylum. There is a process for asylum were actually seeing them attempt to the country illegally in recklessly, in full view of everything. What what's the matter with you, people you're all crazy. So Christine can you Can you make sense out of pocket? We're like no one can talk straight together about any of this. I think there is a real connect between some of the rhetoric and images we're seeing at the border right now. So you know the Washington Post discovering this. As you know, barefoot babies and diapers being tear gas by government thugs. So you have that image which of course prompt in any decent human being concern and empathy on the other, and you do have a couple hundred people out of a caravan of thousands who are trying to according to officials and crime,

the border in a violent way I mean they are trying to sneak across without going through the through the process. It needs to be gone through, so there are actually several competing narratives here What's what's intriguing about, it is how politically each side is picking the narrative, the best suits their attitude or towards immigration policy, and unfortunately, normal people just looking at the news, are baffled and confused, but also heartsick when they see images of babies and hear the words tear gas. So I think there's a deliberate confused being sown by some of the media. I think you know Trump hasn't help matters by the way he's talked about this caravan and the facts are a little harder to pick a part even going by the mainstream news media stories, Noah yeah! Well we're not going to talk about it briefly. I wanted to mention the fact that

kind of mirrors, the reaction to the climate change debate, because we have this report drop from the from the minutes version, which suggested that in a hundred years time resellers could be really bad for the United States and the response from meat. The press was to debate literally nothing irritably the merits of hysteria as a response to this has a national crisis did we or should we not get hysterical about this, and I really exemplifies what we're seeing responds to very select narrow field images of what happened at the? order whether giving you can choose your own narrative and whether it suits your political agenda. But it's the end for lack of a better word that the twitter vocation of the poor, the political debate where we there's no reward for circumspection and sobriety- you are to reach them a dire conclusion about any given issue at a given time. That's one! That's! What's gonna give you our times was gonna give you attention, regard

whether or not it's it's a sound assessment of situation on the ground. I agree with what Christine said: L with it with the slight in our emphasis on the fact that I do This was a pretty serious attempt to over border agents, and there was a real effort made there to affect some policy change by being this human mass, but at the same time. No one's. Having the right debate about how we are discussing just how to sterical, we ought to be the situation and choosing our own hysteria yeah, I think it in both sea, the border issue and in the climate report they're both indicative of the sort of what what happens now, when any crisis unfolds which is that there is enough there to fuel both sides of the debate along the most star of lines and to really take them conversation away from any.

Practical measures and sort of more towards pushing, is this all out fight over the crisis itself? Nothing ever gets quite resolve. Ok, so the way the way I look at it is that when you look at the caravan and from a greater height you see now what happened? The other the yesterday? That war is a bunch of people desperately trying to cause and international incident right there, climbing affair, it's like: they can never get over the fence with their, therefore adding their there urging it things there trying to swim the river. The deliberate purpose of this was to get the tear gas fired. Them was to get you know too make it look like there's cas at the border and to create this crisis so that people could say

America's committing a war crime when it fires tear gas at a crowd which is ridiculous. Tear gas is now Turkey is not a chemical weapon is a classic form of crime. Control of a riotous mob and and the effort to create. International incidents through photographic cars, you know, is the classic tool of Polly. Would that system whereby the Palestinians would bring him reporters to you now film, Suppose it was supposed to israeli acts of horror. And monstrous Nessie, including a funeral them when the funeral was over, the corpse got out of the Kok often and walked away. That was the one we know one of them. What famous incidents so in this case you know. I don't really think that their. It's a thoroughly two sides, obviously awful, that a child gets tear gas who was response,

support for the tier gassing of a child who was brought to offence and tried it now, and I tried to be hauled over it, but the parent who has brought the child to the fence, I mean that is not the fault of the the aim of the border patrol that fired the tear gas or the mexican authorities who fired the tear gas It also make that clear. It also overlooks the fact that actually, we are processing a lot of these slowly, but we are processing but who have come in they care about caravan. The asylum seekers are going through. The process is very slow, as it should be for asylum seekers and part of the role of our government at a border is to determine who is coming for, say, economic opportunity, verses, true fleeing from but uncle persecution. So we are actually doing that the system is working away. It's supposed to work, but that is different story from the one that, as as you said, John, is, is playing out on twitter and images and there is

isn't why this particular caravan went all the way to San Diego, as opposed to the closer period to them of their close point of the border to them, which would have been in Texas, because San Diego is a point of entry for asylum seekers. What happened in April, when we had the last care of that was an attack on american sovereignty, but was nevertheless pray. Processing, in a brother, orderly fashion, yeah. No, I don't just to be clear. I don't think there's actually two sides either, but I think that doesn't stop certain contingent of its anti increasingly anti border left from it setting aside and and fighting for it and making some case that that doesn't want hold war during the course of the caravans from you, know: Central America up through Mexico, I saw Dozens of interviews with caravan members in both on cable tell me and in newspapers- and they said

We weren't saying what it was that they were supposed to be saying for the purpose: of the political journey they were taking, which is what they are saying was I can't get work. Like my jobs, I wanted I you know, I hope President Trumbull, let us come in, so I can get work in America, which is one of the isn't that I am very and actually enable patient dove, because I think that's good and we want such people and they should work in America and we have a labour shortage and that's great, but that is not what the caravan was supposed to be about. The caravan is supposed to be about asylum An asylum has nothing to do with economic opportunity. Asylum is granted to people who, according to the law, have a quote well founded fear. Of persecution in their homelands, either before political, sometimes, religious and sometimes cultural reasons right. So silent has nothing to do with economic opportunity and,

that was what the this was supposed to be. Was you know people are being tormented by drugs eggs and, being you now being killed on and terrible things are happening, and so they should come and apply for asylum. So I think the whole issue to that was ignored by the media over the last two months, which is what, What the hell is this thing who organized it. Where is it coming from who is arranging it and who, for example, decided over the weekend to send one group. People running at the fence and then one group of people forming the river. I agree, and also that that was that was these are measures that sort of led by a kind of ground generals. You know like I M just happened spontaneously and I agree, and in keeping with that analysis, what what? What do we make of the fact

There are still thousands of others members the caravan their hanging back into you wanna that better that have not been used to either through a rocks or to or to charge the fences right will because they're not right cause they. What will we do know is who's. Who who s here? But I would say that you know when you see a baby and diapers getting tear gas you're seeing that image, because the parent of that baby wanted her child photographed. Getting to your guest, I know that for a fact, but I think we have enough history of the use of photographs as a you know, as a deliberate you, no effort to change that local discussion- would alter the The discussion- and I say this I want to say is again: I am. I am close to us fish on immigration into the United States as you can get and I've I've got had gotten

lot of trouble with people on our side because of it, I've always have had this attitude. I think that you know not only are immigrants in that positive to the U S economy, but that you know America's history and the history. The twentyth century in all that almost obliges us in this direction, but that doesn't mean that you get to anything the hell you want to just to make a political point, because you hate Trump well. In keeping with that sentiment, then we should discuss what extent this has on the political dynamic, because in keeping but the twitter clarification of dialogue, the left as I've seen it has responded to this episode. With Hysterics and that history has been rewarded and Democrats are going ahead to the polls in a year, so they are gonna have to appeal to. Presumably, that most energized and energetic base of voters who doesn't want to hear anything other than that this was an active human rights abuses.

Of chemical agents against civilian targets in Donald Trump is akin to Bashar Al Assad alienating. Perhaps you and Ursula be predisposed not to not to support tramper Republicans. But my thing for Democrats are gonna go too far right while the interesting question then is we have in in the Republican Party over the last twenty years. A kind of series purity tests that are assigned to Republicans outs, Christine's dog, I'm sorry, that's, ok was would hold on hold on. We have to get my eyes humanised them I guess what is the name of your dog? He is named, Odin F odours, the north God he seems to have some Odin ferocity I'm sorry I can. I will try to muzzle anytime someone wants by my front door. He is

defence of our border. Here up. All I was going to say is that you know Republicans and have have place, have put their candidates. Democrats tube less. I think, because David the damage difference and of needs organization and socially. But through a series of purity tests on various subjects right like theirs, portion, there's guns there there you know certain types military action and stuff like that and now the end and the whole question whether this was always are the candidates in the primary process going to be pushed so far. The right that they are going to find it hard to move back to the centre, to gain and petty votes, to win The presence in, if you remember, and twenty twelve Romney campaign manager whose name. I can't now remember once said that once the prime,

there's a rubber. It's like an actress sketch. You just shake it and the path you know, then you can be whenever you want to be in the general election, which was a shocking thing to say because of course, people should be held to their word and what they say, and the question now is we're going into twenty. Nineteen Democrats are in a very strong oppositional position right, but there so many issues on which they are going to be asked to swear fealty. Why after the other, after the other, that don't necessarily have large Extreme support outside democratic activists circles like, for example, single payer Healthcare and add in hatred of all borders or the notion that in other shouldn't be border control. I just or whether they are themselves steering themselves into this same trap or difficulty that republican candidates had twisting them. Those into pretzels to make sure they don't say anything there.

Harm them in this state, but will be ok in that state and then making themselves, maybe not themselves unelectable, but you know just just the political process, not good not allowing them to seem like their asserting the mainstream? I think the poles are actually going to be a little deceptive for Democrats on this issue because, like single pair, which poles pretty well in the abstract immigration pro immigration sentiment is, is for Poland goes the scene and gallop, for example, has never been higher, so Democrats might be convinced of the political salience saying You know. Donald Trump is terrible and immigration all things immigration, including an especially this border episode and its incumbent to be a harbouring. A refuge for the political dispossessed economically dispossessed in these immigrants are an end. Because of that mad sentiment will not only when a primary, but they could think it would be a general election one or two.

Exact area, Cassio, Cortez, tweeted already, you know she compared these migrants to jewish families fleeing Germany, targeted families fleeing Rwanda. You know community fleeing war torn Syria, so obviously she is all in on that. That notion, I got her finger on the closer to the pulses for the democratic electorate them. Maybe a central Canada would Well, that's that's an interesting question so, but if you ok so in content what you don't have a an honest argument like, which is: what are you talking about to be okay to throw rocks at a border patrol agent and the borders. Cohesion has no right to respond with tear gas to get them to move back, so the rocks don't hit them in the head. Somebody He said it was Small well said the throwing a rock wasn't. You know you should be able to deal with. Having rocks thorny, you well the aim of my name. I only want to flights for him to get a rock thrones. Had I'm saying even democratic recitals looking does, but even then

Chris, don't think that border patrol agent should have rocks thrown at them. Now, if some other Democrat says what the hell is, the matter with you you're saying it's: okay for people who are coming to the border and try to cross to injure american authorities who have been assigned the task of guarding the border. What's the matter with you, but you know, no one in the democratic primary process may be able to say that as an argument and then they get into the general and then Trump beats them about the face a neck for three months about how they support criminals, hurting american law enforcement officers, and that is bad for Democrats going into an election and twenty twenty. I mean. I don't think this is the end end of the theatre process right. So if, if things like this, staged from now until until the debt, until the present the primary process and lets say they get

a truly horrific photo up that might sort of chain the terms of them, but we might hit this new phase of or something really need to be done now about the inhumane. You know private. This can no longer stand. We have. We have an ongoing crisis at the border. Of a new dimension, and- and you know, we need to rethink everything see that I could see rights at your thing. We're only in lieu rally in this first or second ending is what you're saying right out of the EU I am also sceptical of any projections. I presume message. Discipline on the part of the president. Oh I think I think you could see message- discipline of this sort like anything that feed that for It's him to his own predilections. Some It's very easy for him to hit over over and over again I'm not by the way. I'm not even saying I think part of it is. You are getting perilously close to disqualifying yourself from the present.

See if you side with a you, know international organisation that is attempting to disband you know elementary border control, and you know even even a present part of whose success was marshalling people who think that we should forcibly deported twelve million people. You know I mean that's the interesting aspect here, which is again the does Trump chow in politics by pulling everybody down to his level is. If trumps, we got a close every Vienna without end. All all you know, tour all travel to America that we can find. What the hell is going on- and you know every All the criminals are coming in killing people in American, all that that that era possible rhetoric about immigration. He then has inspired the our side to go absolutely crazy on its support for

immigration without limit. Will you know with no difference between legal and illegal immigration? All of that you know, are playing into his hands. Look there's a very serious immigration issue in this country. In this sense right we legal and illegal immigration system and trumpets not only trying to shut down illegal immigration, which is obviously a criminal thing or our legal thing, but he is trying. Change and effectively eliminate legal immigration to the United States by lowering the number of legal immigrants. You know in the coming year to forty five thousand or twenty. Five thousand. I can remember what the number is specifically like. This is crazy. We have a labour shortage in the United States. Right now we have three point: seven percent national unemployment rate and the people that we are going to prevent from emigrating. Legally are people who we know how are net contributors to the economy?

There is it there is that there is an ideological low, immigration and trumps part and the and the the forces that could serve as a kind of counterweight toward him are going eggs. Actually in the wrong direction. When there's an and actually it's interesting, that immigration restriction, restriction, quotas, It states have a long and rather sorted history, and if the left really wanted to make a principled argument against trumps legal immigration restriction, as you just mentioned, they could do that. There's that there's a thoughtful way of arguing that this is bad for the country, bad for the economy, and we know this because historically, we have the proof of this in an starting in the late nineteenth through the early.

When you century, with immigration restriction, acts that were passed so again and they were, they were politically motivated. They were re spaced, eugenic quota. So I think that there is an argument that you can make about that, but was interesting. Is it that's not the argument the left ones to make they want to say in a trump tier gases, kids on Thanksgiving Weekend, because that's what suits is no. I mentioned earlier that suits her twitter ice age nets and that's trumped and that's where Trump wants the game to be blade exacerbate you, you don't want to the army, principled arguments against legal immigration, you don't you he wanted, he wants to play the guy. But let us look at them. Sticking up for the river illegal violence. Ok, you and I and all our problems traced back to Twitter, it's true, there's so much. The better part of that is also a self selection process. Like you know, if we in the cellar corridor journalistic

we got off twitter, we Twitter. Wouldn't have this wouldn't have this compulsive controlling effect? Now, let's, to the other twitter controversy, which literally it was that quite twitter cause. It started with Trump saying something in a press conference, but guess some suppose it fights, which I wouldn't really call a fight between President Trump and Chief Justice John Roberts last week went at Trump complained about that night circuit, court of appeals and then said, you know, it's full of Obama, judges and then Roberts made a statement to the appeal at how there are no Obama. Judges are trump judges. There only judge is trying to do a superb job right. So the first thing I'd say about this, and then I will ask you guys, is I you know, I will John Roberts, you know

did. He made me want to vomit, but like the t v, like who the hell is he kidding, I mean ok, so you not an independent judiciary which is made up of judges who are supposed to be independent right. So I would just ask this question. Ruth Paine organs were was appointed, word by Clinton and ninety nine before she has been on the court twenty four year. She is a hero of the left there making would they Hey Geographic Movie out of her, which is coming out of a couple weeks. There's a documentary about her that made fifty million dollars her work out book is the best seller. They make celebratory videos about her answer life. Has she ever inherent Your career issued a decision that you didn't know that she is the issue in advance based on its ideological leanings? Never so the notion that Roberts can say that there is no judges, don't hugh you know a partisan divides. We all know that that's a lie, and so once

yeah trump being incredibly vulgar about saying the night circuits terrible, I'm going to issue a complaint. We need to do something about the ninth circuit, which is something no president should say the independence of the judiciary, trumpets then, you know vindicated in some weird sense by Roberts making this pompous. You know declaration about how the judiciary is beyond such petty concerns. What was right, I mean that is true, though the alternative is that, whereas The liberal justices in the Supreme Court anyway, do tend to come down and ideological lines. The conservatives do not, and I've seen quite a few speck. Knowledgeable people speculate about the nature of this statement from Roberts, indicating that he's got every intention to adopt having Kennedys posture and be sorted. This logical, maverick and swing vote in order to maintain the court as perceived

The independent overview of the political process is very concerned about the court's perception and the public him. He could very well decide that as he did in there the young and the case about the individual mandate- decide that the wise Reserve really subordinate to how the court is perceived in the public. One the one little silver lining too there too. The rumble between Robertson Trump is that it elicited pretty obvious, but ridiculous. Tweet from Chuck Sumer were clearly no sort of pompously toxin. While I dont often agree with the chief justice, but now in because of all his partisan decisions and burn so thing that he is standing up for an independent judiciary, so it did actually draw out even more, graven posturing by some of our other political leaders. Not a coherent one idea. Just funny, because the left is

early. In the midst of you know, elevating Ruth better Ginsberg too, to a folk euro be cause. She is so faithfully political These things I mean- that's, that's the sort of you know that that that's her that that that's what makes her queen of the moment and as no says it's it doesn't apply to conservative judges- and I am that goes to- I think, there's this popular fundamental misunderstanding about conservative judicial ideology, which is at many on the left, thinks that it is the image of left wing activist judicial ideology whereby there there they they are free and they, and they in fact use these campaigns of fear ongoing about conservative justices to say that that that conservative judges we're going to advance right wing policies which is in fact not the

proof. The if you, if you are a few subscribe to a conservative judicial philosophy, it's about faithfulness to what's constitutional, its but fatalism. Constitution, whether or not their produces pie I see results that that you agree with the way we work An example of this in the last couple of weeks with very decisions by judges Trump appointed last year, going against Trump right which I'm sure he's angry about, because he doesn't believe in an independent judiciary, just as he doesn't believe in an independent anything, and so I mean Noteth are lionize. You know the them more conservative judiciary, but yet in the case of Roberts, for example, we know the great reporting by Jan Crawford back in twenty twelve, that Roberts flip two sides in the Obama cared decision. He was expected to take you noted to rule

but it was unconstitutional and something made him decide that he was not and that it was important for him to go the other way so much so that he tried to Bali, Anthony Kennedy, apparently for what we months in going along with him and changing his his position. So that Roberts would have cover and there. You see when he says, like there are no. I guess he has grounds on which to say that you know he was being heterodox, but there we have a circle and so what you conservative, Judge and Kennedy did this all the time himself goes deliberately had dogs, almost to maintain the illusion of the conservative judiciary or of the independent judiciary, whereas democratic she seemed to have no such no such compunctions or knows That they need to show their independence

from their own partisan leanings. I'm very, I was very angry and rising what what Roberts did and twelve was incredibly sophisticates, not because you couldn't have the other position on health care, but because the descent, the worthy opinion that he rode was so deliberate. Disingenuous in saying on page eleven, that something wasn't attacks and on page We find that it was in order for his pretzel twisting effort to find Obama care. Not unconstitutional. You know he had to satisfy it in two different ways by making contrary arguments, so you know, I just think that the funny part here is that what the trump attacking the mind circuit, I think, is perfectly fair: you're allowed to attack them Turkey is a horrible, sir Head and the notion that you know he is not acceptable for the president to say anything

you sure, he's insane. The president is a again against the judiciary and times you know. I mean like each other: it menstruation, if that, if a lower sarka finds against the executive branch is allowed to take their case to the Supreme Court, by which it is saying that the court decided at below the springboard found wrongly so, what's that Difference between saying this is the fifth circuit is out of control and taking a case that the night circuit ruled against you and taken into the Supreme Court. Just rhetoric same thing: saying this the night circuits wrong and should be stopped. Ok. So, let's move on to the fact that we I'd have I've met. Mass of war going on in Europe has just well What do you mean I'm watching, but over the weekend? here that Russia has decided to try to destroy whatever left of the ukrainian Navy

now. It is our view that is a rather poor Noah, most graduate school to study. You know the Soviet Union and Post soviet politics- and you Know- has to go into mere journalism- gets no one's interested mad and now. Finally, finally, your academic studies, I think I hit the front page of the area every so often. I am reminded of why I spent forty thousand dollars to get a second degree of which my professors were varies. Ethical by when at the height of the road, the russian reset, and that was the era of good feelings. There was no idea that could possibly have some sort. A situation that we have today. So this is a pretty fluid situation. What happened, apparently, is that Moscow put a commercial tanker over in the part of this bridge.

That bridges these straight of aim of which is this. A little body of water that leads into the black sea on one side as Russia on the other side is Ukraine or what once was Ukraine now it is occupied Crimea They blocked all naval traffic and what ensued was a series, is of confrontations between naval vessels. There's some dispute over as to whether or not just about sorry about that. Syria has decided that I had said something that trigger her So what what would occur that we understand, as at the did these? The undisputed account is that Russia, naval vessel Randy Tugboat, that was Ukrainian naval Tugboat, captured these two vessels in twenty four sailors and put them back on the Black sea side while shutting down the street.

The russian side of the is up and bullshitting than the straight. Then we had all hell broke loose and the east, where there is ongoing trench warfare. Their husbands is about twenty forty in the ukrainian side started shelling pretty heavily on the russian side engaged similarly the ukrainian President's petrol Moorish Anko introduced measures, in due to implement martial law. And we don't know what the extent of those measures are. The unclassified partners rather innocuous but the classified portion may contain the in order to postpone elections which are supposed to be headed for this. Your parliamentary and presidential three, hundred members of the rather resigned within the course of the last hour, the right as the Ukrainian Parliament

down the measure is expected to pass by. We are in the midst of a crisis, the Asia Straight as open again, so the crisis may have been resolved for for what we understand to be. But this is part of a rationing of tensions Moscow not just here but in Syria as well, and the speculation is that it has to do with the Lattimer Putin's rapidly declining popularity ratings, which has itself has to do with the necessary. Financial reforms that Moscow recently engaged in scaling up the pension age for pensioners, retirement benefits They never wanted to do, but they had no choice because Moscow is declining power, so they might be projecting. In order to maintain Putin's popularity. One way, the other we're facing another international crisis led by Moscow. What a great summary! Basically, so, basically, we have an international crime-

this with Russia, now playing the role that it appears to wish to play in the world- and I would say this- is not so This, then, is a logical comparison, but it is a source spirit. The comparison that lead deeper, is now the world's foremost purveyor of mischief international mischief in a way that saw same was pretty much from the nineteenth these until his, and until his ouster in two thousand and three that that instability in Europe is his friend. He wants it, he likes it. He likes it. Billy in the near east. He seems to feel that he profits from it. Then this whole notion of sowing instability. The in Ukraine insert its supposedly in pursuit of this thanks to the end and safety of of ethics.

Russians and of Russia's own security level, as we have this phenomenon that any to make friends with them any effort to try to make a common cause of them. Anything like that. Only encourage is his active mischief, and if you find him, then he continues Mr also so he's just he is a. He is a sore of discord and I think in some ways This may mean a weird way be one of the reasons that Trump seems to have a personal offence. Before him aside his own strength, and things like that, is that he's a he is a disruptor, but he's a disruptive away is of no use to anybody, but himself. One thing we briefly note is that it would be a colossal mistake on the part of Moscow to inaugurate a wider war. They don't want that they want what they were doing, which is these sort of low intensity provocations which keep mosque as interest on the front burner but not abroad.

Her conflict anywhere in Europe or the near east? It's not one that they would. They are likely to come out on top from when the world is full of instances in which people who didn't want to create massive conflagrations, somehow create and then are sorry that men are sorry that it happened, because it destroys everything that they sought to create. But that's that's a clap, that's a classic world story also, I think- and this is there's been no state from trumpet what about about Ukraine? I know- and I'm not sure we should really want one that's right I assure you- I don't know exactly what he would be. What what any president him were. The did this president, in a way that their pension for saying some inopportune things it in IRAN. I once by the new president in this situation, I can imagine what they would advance saying anything of it. A boilerplate. Now we and by our allies and yadda yadda yadda then, and what is really at the situation in Sierra Leone

you're annoy that he's not dead. There's two things happened without trompe tweets and people get mad at him, and then he doesn't tweet people get mad at him RO, while the emergency- security. Council meeting is going on right now. I think it started eleven a m, so I perhaps will no more about it. I will hear so This'Ll be Nicky. Haley's last stand occasionally, will will fight for the great me o Connor vision of the then her boss explicitly repudiates is not as it and that is the, and that is the with a way of american foreign policy and twenty eighteen or twenty nineteen. So without will bring this to a close, I believe, next time we will be attempting a new system of audio podcasting that should be better than the one we right now, so that something really look forward to you guys are new. A pseudo eyes, the UN system. I know that's a real that's

real draw for the Thursday podcast but death, but where we're going for it, and you can be among the first to experience. The joy of our new system, so with the head for Christine rose in April, wild and no harassment. I'm John passwords keep the candle burning.