they deserve to be americans and they are great americans unlike you while. unfortunately i mean this is how we want to talk about all day i wish we had all the time in the world to devote to it film and i have to cut because our show is over thanks for being with us here on our to international john wayne loud former republican member of the missouri senate thank you and tighe barry from code pink. all right it does it for me you're watching the international stay with us. china retaliates with tariffs of their own is this

a trade war donald trump says no we'll take a look at that on this edition. of the politicking on larry king in a move that was not surprising the most china announced tariffs of their own on u.s. goods in response and not retaliate. to the trumpet ministrations tabs on products from china let's talk about what's happening there with lani chin lonny is a research fellow. in the george w. bush administration and was an advisor to marco rubio's and mitt romney's presidential campaigns and he joins us from the beautiful campus at stanford university in palo alto california lani given china's new tower of move is this a trade war now. larry i don't think so i think if you look at it in the grand

scheme of what could have been in fact what we're looking at now is a relatively minor set of activity on both the u.s. side as well as the chinese side now the question is will this escalate into something more will there be additional tariffs applied by the united states additional retaliation by china as of now though what we have is a relatively limited and circumscribed set of activities on both sides the uncertainty larry is really the issue here we don't know where it's going on our side we don't know where it's going on the chinese side and i think those are questions that remain to be answered this seems like they have a lot in the only way they can. so are all those stocks right. the well they have all the money. so they they do have a lot of u.s. treasuries they do have the ability certainly on that front on the trade front

there is also the possibility that they could impose tariffs in a way that would be highly problematic for certain u.s. industries so yes china has a lot of leverage but don't forget we have a lot of leverage here too going forward the question is how much of that leverage the president wants to use and whether in fact the goal here is really to get to the chinese to get them to the negotiating table to forge a better long term trade deal with that country i think that's the big wildcard here no one exactly knows what the long term strategy is for the trumpet ministration in dealing with china in this way and i think that ultimately remains the biggest reason why you see markets so jittery and a lot of analysts concerned about where this could lead china's putting in turn vines soybeans the biggest soybeans. iowa missouri and indiana who let have an impact in the. very strategic on the part of the chinese larry they're going after

states first of all where president trump did well but second of all where there are political equities at play this year you're absolutely right that it creates a difficult situation for republicans in those states are they going to be in favor of this activity that trump has undertaken knowing that potentially in the long run it could lead to economic issues in their states it could lead to economic issues for example for farmers and ranchers this is a question alternately that will have to play out how these candidates will respond how trump will continue to escalate or not the trade war with china but make no mistake the chinese are being very strategic in their response to president trump's activity oh well the trump administration has published those of thirteen hundred chinese exports could be subject to twenty five percent tariff. warning it will take measures of equal intensity and scale wouldn't that be a trade war well again i think the question becomes how extensive this

u.s. list actually is we're going into a period of time now over the next sixty days when that list of thirteen hundred categories you mentioned could be narrowed substantially by the u.s. or it could stay the same we'll see but this could be the first effort in a bid to open discussions to open negotiations was to see i think it's far too premature to declare this a trade war to declare this a massively escalating situation we don't actually know exactly where this is going to end it's clear that the rhetoric has amped up that that we are under risk potentially of a trade war but to say that we are there now i think is premature a long term t.v. come in tune of interviewed him a lot larry kudlow staunch advocate of free dream publicly slam the president's pretention this moves and he's going to ripley's jerry jones director of the national economic council what do you make of that. well i have a great deal of respect for larry i have been on set with him before i've talked to

him people forget he had a long background not just on wall street but also as somebody who served in presidential administrations understands the issues the most important thing is i trust larry's instincts i think that he's got the right instincts on economic policy i think he will help certainly to rein in some of the more protectionist instincts the president has so i am actually very confident that larry is going to do a great job as a director of the national economic council and he is going to serve the free market cause well in that role what do you make of trump going to war with these o's in the amazon. well this to me is very troubling i don't think that our public leaders whether it's the president or anybody else should be using their office to go after a specific american company and here's why there are repercussions when a public leader when a public official says things about a specific company it affects that company's share price it affects people's confidence in that company and ultimately it takes us away from the kind of free

market economics i would hope the president stands for so i'm troubled by the specific attacks on amazon i think if there are issues that need to be addressed around the competitive landscape of online retailing those should be addressed by regulators but going after a specific company i think is highly problematic and frankly goes against the free market instincts that i think trumps policies have demonstrated so far goody bag good that attack and presidential action or tools we have. well potentially there could be specific investigations instigated by the department of justice or by the the f.t.c. if there are specific concerns around the competitive ransack competitive behavior of a company like amazon but remember usually these sorts of things are targeted at industries there are investigations that usually go to multiple companies and generally speaking we don't have the president specifically naming a company when he talks about the need for that kind of investigative activity so

what i worry about is not so much trying to investigate online retailing what i worry about is going after a specific company and the leadership of that specific company and the impacts that could have on the marketplace says you are less with the sloan the trump has replaces. his national security advisor his top economic adviser and the head of the v.a. what do you make of this. well i think president trump wants to put around him people that he agrees with and who agree with him i think he is certainly entitled to have his own cabinet his own set of advisors what i want to make sure of is that there are people there who are willing to give him their best advice even if it means running afoul of maybe what the president wants now i think that there are some good people who have been named in these positions i think among my pompei o is going to be a very good secretary of state gina hasp all as director of the cia larry kudlow as

director of the any c. we've talked about a lot of these people i think they will be strong people i think they'll be good leaders but it's very important for a president to have around him not just people who agree with him but people who disagree with him as well and i hope that these people will exercise those responsibilities when given the opportunity what do you think of his plans summit with can join you in north korea with him we don't know where it will be. well i think if it happens it's probably a good thing i mean frankly if we are at the negotiating table with kim jong un that means that we are not engaged in kinetic activity hostile fire etc what i worry about a little bit in this situation larry is that kim jong un is using this as a stalling technique that he's using it as an opportunity to further develop his nuclear program that he's using it as an opportunity frankly to drive a wedge between the united states and our allies in the region so long as these negotiations are truly negotiations about ending north korea's nuclear program and

denuclearizing the nuclear the a korean peninsula i think that's a good thing but as with anything with the north korean leader we have to be careful and watchful but overall i think the signs are quite positive that we might have these discussions with the north koreans learn these all those thanks for your time today thank you larry. in a surprise announcement president trump says he's thinking about withdrawing u.s. troops from syria in his remarks the commander in chief said quote as far as series concerned our primary mission was getting rid of isis we've almost complete in that task end quote not everyone agrees with that assessment including many military leaders plus what happens in syria if the united states pulls out let's talk about that with representative steve russell republican of oklahoma he serves on the house government oversight and reform committees on services committee as well he is a decorated combat veteran

a retired army lieutenant colonel should we pull out he joins us by the way from oklahoma city congressman should we pull out of syria well i think we had to look at. the whole issue in syria really revolved around the rise of isis isis was precipitated i believe by an early withdrawal from iraq a lot of the bathurst movement that we saw. a lot of bad actors that we had even detained and captured during our operations in iraq they they later became those that administrated isis so if you look at it in a syria iraq construct then you you have to look at the authorizations of military force that we were using to go after isis and we've largely seen that now be successful in the last year. i do think it's time that we evaluate that if we were to extend beyond that then i think that we would have to go and we would have to

visit authorization of military force use of military force to ask ok if the idea was to go after these terrorists and isis then what would what would be the extension of that and so the president. is right to evaluate it he is right to ask those questions congress is also asking many of those questions and then we'll also have to play with our regional players we've certainly seen the kingdoms in the region israel others they are all very concerned about the ascendancy and rise of iran and their presence there obviously russia although they have an interest with the port of tartus and latakia air base that's been ongoing for decades we've got to look at turkey a nato all of those factors. to something that we partner together to look at how we make a stable region i might add though larry all of that should add up without an assad in power are you surprised that the military is opposed to that leaving i think

the the the military obviously they want to solidify their gains this is the stated policies that we see with the kurds is that this is a temporary relationship that we see to combat and go after these areas so we have to look at the long range strategic interest in the region. if we have the political will. for a long term commitment in iraq and syria then the american public there's nothing that we can't do if we don't have that long term commitment then things become more difficult from a military perspective we want stable governments in both places and i do think that there's an awful lot that you can see that the assad regime needs to be held accountable they have created enormous devastation we've seen a lot of aerial attacks and dumb bomb attacks by assad's regime and also even

russian military efforts supported by air now that has created enormous collateral damage on infrastructure they've tried to pin that on the united states that is certainly not the case where the most accurate user of force on the planet in terms of limiting collateral damage so i think that as we look at all of that construct we have to look at ok what is the end state goal and objective in syria and i don't know that the united states unilaterally can make a determination or it's going to have to be done with strategic partners and regional partners congressman stay right there we'll have more politicking right after the break.

after weeks of media hysterics and official claims without a shred of evidence the case that russia was behind the salisbury poisoning incident is falling apart transparency in the rule of law have never played or what happens next sadly is too predictable.

about to politicking i'm talking with thomas and steve russell republican of oklahoma who serves on the house government oversight and reform committees and armed services committee as well what do you make of trump sending troops to the border before there is any chance of a wall well this is not something that is so unusual in u.s. military history we have sent troops to the border and one nine hundred fourteen thousand nine hundred sixteen general pershing led an expedition where we saw a lot of you know was our state militias that went to the precursor of our national guard in combating incursions with punch will be a criminal activity we also in the one nine hundred eighty s. saw in the war on drugs the formulation of joint task force bravo to combat the

problems on our border using military resources using a lot of different things it is a had an external border we have the right to defend it and the president is well within his authority as commander in chief to do that. on the domestic and you said that the veterans of his department is broken in capital letters president trump fired the secretary david still can and nominated the house physician ronnie jackson the navy rear admiral is going to work i hope so i do think that the president he certainly has somebody that he trusts that has a close personal relationship with him that will be key. and in this case the new veterans affairs secretary will have a really good and thorough understanding given his background i mean he understands these types of issues our last administrator although you know we certainly we

wanted and were a bill to work with him in congress was not a veteran and so having an admiral there who was also a physician and this is going to be something good that we see in charge of the administration but look here's the problem you've got a bloated infrastructure first off the v.a. does many things well they you know we have administrate our records they do the g.i. bill they do a whole myriad of things with honors at burial and so many good things that take care of our veterans. ok let's set that aside now and talk to health care pieces it's become an. issue with bloat waste fraud abuse in some cases this is nothing new the evidence is just mounting more and more and yet i look at my own experiences larry as a military retiree fought the same wars maybe you know couple more actions than rather just you know serve in a time of war and coming home and qualifying for v.a.

health care if i can get care locally through the doctor of my choice with my tri care system and i can do it with a co-pay and i've experienced the same if not more of the experiences than the veterans being treated with the v.a. why can't they have that same choice they need to have that choice they don't need to have these wait times they don't need to have all of this stuff or we just have it as some you know kind of self-fulfilling it's the second largest bureaucracy in in the federal government and we have to look at it differently if the true motive is taking care of our veterans ok we're all going to find common ground if the true motive is protecting infrastructure and protecting the v.a. health care system is an entity of itself it's broken it doesn't need to be protected it needs to be absolutely turned on its head townsend thanks so much you always appreciate talking with you. you bet larry thank you so much for having me

it's been reported that special counsel robert muller has told donald trump's attorneys that the president is a subject of his investigation but is not considered a criminal target at this point what are the implications of this and what's the difference between being a subject and a target let's talk about that with our good friend richard payne there professor of law at the university of minnesota he was the chief white house ethics lawyer during the administration of george w. bush and is currently the vice chair of citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington he joins us from minneapolis ok richard what what is what is the point of being a person of interest but not the subject of a criminal investigation a subject on the top what's the difference. well it's suggests that this boy at the special counsel was not. gathered sufficient evidence to charge

the president criminally. but the president's conduct is certainly of interest to the special counsel we all know that there is some evidence of obstruction of justice by the president with respect to the russian vest a geisha in the firing of james comey among other things and that's certainly enough to entrust the special counsel and robert mueller and his team will ask questions of the president about his motives for they called me firing presumably and other matters and colluding brass whether they sought to fire robert mueller himself but at this point it does not appear that they have or at least are not letting on if they do have. evidence that would justify it from the prosecution of the president and i think that's basically where a very of us is this believe that the investigation would pay based on what we say and so far there's or is this the president's conduct is this is an attempt to

definitely get him to appear. across the desk from his demotion well i think it's that attach to it to be candid with the president's lawyers that he is he's the subject of an investigation of this investigation. he's a person of interest but he's not being targeted with criminal charges that doesn't mean that the situation couldn't change based on what the president tells the special counsel on a third direct conflicts between what the president says and what other people say happened there are contradictions that's something though the national council's going to look into and it could result in criminal charges against the president but we're not at that point yet but a way if you are a target do they have to tell you your target. they usually do not although what they can't there was a lie to you in the course of questioning and saw they say or you're not

a target whatever that means it's quite ambiguous language. but they you know they do need to be honest in their communications with someone they're questioning and so i would not expect robert miller's team to be secretly saying well the president's a target tell him he's not a target for criminal charges that's not the way they would conduct business and i hate that could result in serious complications if you want to have a prosecution later on so i would i would suggest that it's pretty much exactly as robert miller's team is saying it is at this point in time. to report to the. lawyers useful tearing a report about the president's actions while in office and potential obstruction of justice and what do you make of that. well the president's actions in office are extremely troubling his firing a chance combing the explanation of the firing of james comey one explanation being

given official capacity and then quickly soon thereafter a very different explanation given to the russian ambassador in front of television and tweets so there is evidence substantial evidence of obstruction of justice by this president whether it rises to criminal obstruction of justice is another matter and that is a very hard case to prosecute criminal obstruction of justice and i think robert mueller at this time needs to gather more information or to make that decision this could be something that he ends up handing off to congress and sighing while. this is something you out of a look at the house and senate judiciary committee with respect to possible impeachment and removal but at this time i'm not quite a prosecutor for criminal obstruction of justice for whatever reason you need you can you can commit obstruction of justice without it being criminal. for

purposes of pace but yes i mean president clinton was paid for what a mad at the perjury. if the republicans that controlled the senate with enough votes they would have convicted him but he was never criminally charged with perjury it didn't rise to the level where we could be criminally charged as perjury is lying about his relationship with ms lewinsky that's an example of something where congress has the right to interpret the basement clause as it chooses and to decide whether the obstruction of justice of volved is a high crime or misdemeanor whatever that means and i think it's quite a bit more serious than lying about just sex life what do you think about all this fuss about scott pruitt the e.p.a. administrator who's seemed to be against the environment and now is in trouble. when he seems is dealing with a lobby is getting a break is his or do you make of that behavior and it could possibly be criminal.

well he's one of the more ethically challenged cabinet members and a very at the quite challenged administration. the violation of the gift rules is probably not criminal and must as a quid pro quo the lobbyist says why you do what i want i'll give you the cheap apartment but he's getting a room for fifty dollars a night washington days say and i challenge anyone to find a room for fifty dollars a night in washington d.c. he only pays for the nights when he's actually there that's a hotel type arrangement and they usually cost two hundred dollars a night or more five hundred some more dollars at the trump hotel of course but only foreign governments maybe can pay that high price is but the bottom line is that. this is clearly a gift from the lobbyist. violate a number of other ethics rules or is squandering government money and extra salary extra pay for his political cronies over at the environmental protection agency or

someplace environmental pollution agency or whatever they're doing what over there but he's certainly not somebody who is. an example of precious. conduct as a public servant but this administration has so many people behaving this way it's awfully hard to figure out who's worse you think you'll still be at the v.a. in a month i don't know where he'll be in a month there was talk of moon lovat of the attorney general's office and having jeff sessions late but i assume the only objective lawyer would be trying to fire robert mueller and anybody to get themselves involved in that is asking for jail time so i would think that robert that's got to be a lot better off just they had a.p.a. with that fit the dollar a night range and with a lobbyist rather than and end up becoming a guest of the government in the penitentiary i mean this firing a robber miller is a very very bad idea for anybody wants to get close to what riches owes thanks very

much. thank you very much regent thing to a professor of law university of minnesota vice chair of citizens for responsibility and ethics in washington and thank you 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 don't forget use the politicking hash tag and that's all for this edition of politicking.

the be . the big.

russia's u.n. envoy described the allegations in this. case as absurd during a tense meeting at the security council. archytas it's a district where the crime rate has been blamed on gangs of migrant teenagers. plus a campaign for israeli women to keep their seats on airplanes instead of switching with the ultra orthodox jewish man is blocked by the authorities. are broadcasting live direct from our studios in moscow this is our international. to have you with us now world powers have concluded a meeting at the u.n. security council on.