but more handholding with water.d states china, russia and france. and with other countries play a major role such as india, south africa and brazil and germany, we have to reach out and work with others. this philosophy of bomb top first talk later has failed, to persist with it isa later has failed, to persist with it is a recipe for increasing nonproducing threats on security. i am often asked if i were promised provider order the use of nuclear weapons. it is an extraordinary question. would you order the indiscriminate killing of millions of people? indiscriminate killing of millions of people ? would indiscriminate killing of millions of people? would you risk such contamination of the planet that all life could exist across large parts of the world? if circumstances arose when was a real option, to represent a complete and cataclysmic failure, it would mean world leaders had already triggered a spiral of labour is committed to actively pursue disarmament under the nuclear non—proliferation treaty, and we're co

. >> it was after my 16th birthday that there started being touching and handholding and kissing. there were times towards the end of the year where he actually took me out of the dorm at night to kiss. >> reporter: that teacher was 27-year-old angus mairs. when he took an interest, she welcomed it. >> he was young and personable. outgoing. he paid a lot of attention to me and that was flattering. >> reporter: he was married, and also her dorm adviser. >> he was constantly there. so the dorm adviser, you live in a dorm, they're there in the morning when you get up, they're there in the evening when you go to bed. >> they're supposed to look out for you? >> they're supposed to look out for you. >> you said he began to touch you more, leave and you would kiss. at some point the relationship became sexual? >> yes. >> your first sexual relationship? >> yes. >> reporter: just after sophomore year mairs moved to seattle. she says the relationship continued through cross country flights and letters like these which cheyenne says shows mairs writing, it scares me sometimes to realize how

taking direct aim at theresa may, the labour leader said there should be no more handholding with mr. there is a sharp distinction between a government which is willing to stand up for this country, willing to make sure this country is properly defended, and a labour party led byjeremy corbyn that would simply chuck away our ability to defend ourselves. i think that is crazy. hundreds of thousands marched against the iraq war in 2003. mr corbyn‘s allies believe many former members of labour who have left the party in protest have come back under his leadership. jeremy corbyn has put forward his position on foreign affairs proudly, for his core support. but for labour candidates, this could be a liability. it is up to you to decide who you want to fly the flag for britain. let's speak to our assistant political editor norman smith. jeremy corbyn has taken a gamble today to put his views on foreign policy, which many labour supporters, many labour mps might find uncomfortable, at the centre of his campaign because his team have taken the view there is no point trying to play down his l

so no more handholding donald trump.icy. in this election, it‘s become clear that a vote for the conservatives would be a vote to escalate the war in syria, risking military confrontation with russia, adding to the suffering of the syrian people and increasing global insecurity. the message — when facing terrorism, time somehow to rely on peace and diplomacy. but what about britain‘s nuclear deterrent, and jeremy corbyn‘s lifelong opposition to nuclear defence? for a potential prime minister, it‘s become a nagging question, a live election issue, and he knew it. i‘m often asked if, as prime minister, i would order the use of nuclear weapons. it‘s an extraordinary question, when you think about it. would you order the indiscriminate killing of millions of people? would you risk such contamination of the planet that no life could exist across large parts of the world? that sounded like a no. he wanted nuclear defence reconsidered, too. we cannot obviously decide what a review would decide, otherwise you wouldn‘t have a rev

and when teresa made did meet with president trump january 17 that handholding at the white house waswise move. the protests started off. >> but then the case they were mistaken. and then not to come for the case that was mistaken of the foreign sector. [laughter] >> i embarrassed to tell you mr. speaker i was mistaken for mr. trump and it is a very humbling experience. >> what about president from coming to parliament? and with the automatic right and from banning certain countries. and with that bin by president from by even cast more strongly into the in the westminster but as far as this place is concerned that our opposition to racism and sexism in support for quality above the law that is the important consideration in the house of commons. >> the winter months writing out through the political agenda could this man held? and with those 2 billion panels of social care. and these people it turned out many were tradesmen. into the with those insurance contributions as a scottish nationalist. >> so the path of aspiration i think that is a decision to make headlines were bad with th

so no more handholding donald trump.vernment will conduct a robust and independent foreign policy. in this election, it's become clear that a vote for the conservatives would be a vote to escalate the war in syria, risking military confrontation with russia, adding to the suffering of the syrian people and increasing global insecurity. the message — when facing terrorism, time somehow to rely on peace and diplomacy. but what about britain's nuclear deterrent, and jeremy corbyn's lifelong opposition to nuclear defence? for a potential prime minister, it's become a nagging question, a live election issue, and he knew it. i'm often asked if, as prime minister, i would order the use of nuclear weapons. it's an extraordinary question, when you think about it. would you order the indiscriminate killing of millions of people? would you risk such contamination of the planet that no life could exist across large parts of the world? that sounded like a no. he wanted nuclear defence reconsidered, too. we cannot obviously decide wha

than simply outsourcing defence and prosperity to the whims of donald trump's white house, no more handholdingernment will conduct a robust and independent foreign policy. the message, when facing terrorism, to rely on peace and diplomacy, but what about britain's nuclear deterrent? and jeremy corbyn‘s lifelong opposition to nuclear defence, or potential prime minister that has become a nagging question, a live election issue, and he knew it. -- a live election issue, and he knew it. —— fora a live election issue, and he knew it. —— for a potential prime minister. i am often asked if i would order the use of nuclear weapons, it is an ordinary question when you think about it, would you order the indiscriminate killing of millions of people? would you risk such contamination of the planet that no life could exist across large parts of the world? if circumstances arose where there was a real option, it would represent a com plete a real option, it would represent a complete and cataclysmic failure, it would mean world leaders have already triggered a spiral of catastrophe. that sounded like a no

taking direct aim at theresa may, the labour leader said there should be no more handholding with mre is a sharp distinction between a government which is to stand up for this country, willing to make sure this country, willing to make sure this country is properly defended, and a labour party led by jeremy country is properly defended, and a labour party led byjeremy corbyn that would simply chuck away our ability to defend ourselves. i think thatis ability to defend ourselves. i think that is crazy. hundreds of thousands marched against the iraq war in 2003. mr corbyn‘s allies believe many former members of labour who have left the party in protest have comeback under his leadership. jeremy corbyn has put forward his position on foreign affairs proudly, in double his core support. but the campaigners, think this could be a liability. it is up to you to decide who you want to fly the flag for britain. our assistant political editor norman smith is in central london where jeremy corbyn just made that speech. how controversial was the speech?” think team jeremy corbyn have followed th

when teresa may did visit president trump, not everyone was convinced that handholding at the white houseas a wise move. the prime minister said the new president was welcome to come t britain for a state program-- visit. >> once famously declared he would not go to new york and casey was mistaken for mr. truma , is there any chance mr. trump will not come to london on a state visit unless he's mistaken for the foreign secretary? >> i'm embarrassed to tell you mr. speaker that i was mistaken for mr. trump i think in newcastle, but also in york. a very humbling experience as you can imagine for me. >> what about president trump coming to parliament? the speaker said it was not an automatic right. john spoke about the president's executive order banning people from entering the us from certain countries. >> after the imposition of the migrant than by president trump i'm even more strongly oppose to an address by president trump and westminster hall. as far as this place is concerned, i feel very strongly that our opposition to racism and sexism and our support-- support for it quality of th

taking direct aim at theresa may, the labour leader said there must be no more handholding with donaldcountry under mr corbyn would not be safe. there is a sharp distinction between a government that is willing to stand up for this country, that is willing to make sure this country is properly defended and a labour party led byjeremy corbyn, that would simply chuck away our ability to defend ourselves. i think that is crazy. hundreds of thousands marched against the iraq war in 2003. mr corbyn's allies believe many former labour members who had left the party in protest, are back under his leadership. farfrom shirking his previous points of view, jeremy corbyn's put forward his position on foreign affairs proudly, aiming to bolster his core support. but for many labour candidates out campaigning, mr corbyn's stance on this issue is a vulnerability. that manifesto will have a strong narrative towards the armed forces. people will want to see that because they are hearing tory narrative attacking opposition but the manifesto will speak for itself. as the party leaders pitch for power in

than simply outsourcing defence and prosperity to the whims of the trump white house, so no more handholdingct a robust and independent foreign policy. the message, when facing terrorism, time somehow to rely on peace and diplomacy. but what about britain's nuclear deterrent? and jeremy corbyn‘s lifelong opposition to nuclear defence? for a potential prime minister it has become a nagging question, a live election issue, and he knew it. i am often asked if as prime minister i would order the use of nuclear weapons — it is an extraordinary question when you think about it. would you order the indiscriminate killing of millions of people? would you risk such contamination of the planet that no life could exist across large parts of the world? if circumstances arose where there was a real option, it would represent a complete and cataclysmic failure, it would mean world leaders had already triggered a spiral of catastrophe. that sounded like a no, he wanted nuclear defence reconsidered as well. we cannot obviously decide what a review would decide otherwise we would not have a review. and what

will take longer.they will probably need to be -- there will probably need to be a little more handholding. i think those people will be in place overtime, but it takes time. the chairman of the federal reserve's term does not end until february 2018. there will not be a trump appointee running the fed, and that is a critical spot, until early next year. david: sounds like overall, you are cautiously optimistic on the regulatory front. brian: yes. that is a very fair way of putting it. i remain cautiously optimistic that the trump regulatory agenda remains on track. the legislative agenda is being derailed. david: brian gardner, thank you so much for joining us here in washington. back to you. alix: thank you so much. coming up, more on our top story. a full line of guests to react to washington this morning, including a key member of the house intelligence committee. in the market, here is where we stand. it is political risk that spreads to the u.s.. dollaries and the broadly weaker across the board. money flowing into the annex. vix up. gold up. oil up as well. this is bloomberg. ♪ >> t