Sunday School 11/22/20: Extra Credit

Last week, I said that many GOP officials were "weaselly scaredy cats" for not standing up to the president's assault on our election systems and processes. 

In yesterday's Sunday School, I quoted Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, who said that we're "beginning to look like a banana republic" and that

I just don't think that there are a lot of profiles in courage, frankly... I mean - we all know how vindictive the president can be, how powerful his Twitter account is, and how he can really pressure Republicans and go after them. Very few of us are willing to stand up.

In yesterday's This Week classroom, former NJ Gov. Chris Christie took his stand, more firmly than he had immediately after the election. Here's his exchange with George Stephanopoulos, who opened the door for Christie.

And Chris, let me begin with you. I remember well, in the hours after president Trump's speech on -- early Wednesday morning, the day after the election, you said it's incumbent on him to come forward with the evidence. There have now been 34 court cases the president has lost. We saw Pennsylvania last night. We saw Pat Toomey, the senator from Pennsylvania, say it's time for the president to enable this transition; it's time for the president to concede. The president's response was to attack Pat Toomey on Twitter. Is it finally time for this to end?

Christie was clear in his response -- and it's what every Republican should be saying. 

Yes, and -- and here's the reason why. The president has had an opportunity to access the courts. And I said to you, you know, George, starting at 2:30 a.m. on Wednesday morning, if you've got the evidence of fraud, present it. And what's happened here is, quite frankly, the content that the president's legal team has been a national embarrassment, Sidney Powell accusing Governor Brian Kemp of a crime on television, yet being unwilling to go on TV and defend and lay out the evidence that she supposedly has.

This is outrageous conduct by any lawyer. And notice, George, they won't do it inside the courtroom. They allege fraud outside the courtroom, but when they go inside the courtroom, they don't plead fraud and they don't argue fraud. This is what I was concerned about at 2:30 in the morning on Wednesday night. Listen, I've been a supporter of the president's. I voted for him twice. But elections have consequences, and we cannot continue to act as if something happened here that didn't happen.

You have an obligation to present the evidence. The evidence has not been presented. And you must conclude, as Tucker Carlson even concluded the other night, that if you're unwilling to come forward and present the evidence, it must mean the evidence doesn't exist. That's what I was concerned about starting on election night, and I remain concerned today.

I think it's wrong. I think what you've heard lots of Republicans starting to say this; I said it on election night; and I hope more say it going forward. Because the country is what has to matter the most. As much as I'm a strong Republican and I love my party, it's the country that has to come first.

Heck, author John Bolton took a stand. I am no fan of his, but even he managed to find a dollop of conviction, now that his book's out and he's no longer under Trump's thumb. Bolton spoke with Jake Tapper in the CNN SOTU classroom. 

In response to Tapper's question on whether this is "essentially a nonviolent attempted coup," here's what Bolton had to say.

I think that gives Trump too much credit. I think he's just playing for time, in hopes that something will emerge that allows him either to have a good reason why he's lost or, in his mind, maybe still to win. But I think that simply emphasizes the need for senior Republican leaders to join those who have begun to come out and say Trump's behavior is inexcusable.

Look, the Republican Party is not going to be saved by hiding in a spider hole. We need all of our leaders to come out and say the election is over. We're not talking about an abstract right to use -- for Trump to use his legal remedies. We have passed that. We're three weeks after the election. He doesn't have any evidence. He doesn't have any legal theories. 

Look, for those who are worried about Trump's reaction, there's strength in numbers. The more who come out and say, he doesn't represent us, he is not following a Republican game plan here, the safer they will be.

He also said of Republicans,

Well, I don't think we are a bunch of cowards, but I do think it's a character test, which is why people have to speak up. The longer Trump rambles through our electoral system causing damage without Republican opposition, the more the Democrats are going to say that it is a Republican Party characteristic, and that you can't trust them with the instruments of government. I think, if we have -- people don't have to say what Trump's doing is outrageous. Just say it's wrong. I will be satisfied with that.

I think it's very important for everybody to understand that, at noon on the 20th of January, Donald Trump is no longer president. The dynamic changes enormously. I'm not saying he's going to disappear. That's, unfortunately, not going to happen...

But it's not the same as his -- him being able, as he did on Friday, to haul people into the Oval and put pressure on them. That's all going to be gone. You can -- you can say what you think without worrying about a Trump Twitter rant that will just be a bunch of damp squibs by that point. And that's what people need to understand. Far better to start that process now than to wait for him to cause more damage.

Yes -- it would be far better to not allow him to cause more damage - it's easy to agree with him on that, as much as I find agreeing with him disagreeable.  

For your Extra Credit, I ask you to take a stand, too. Write, call or email your elected officials, regardless of party, and tell them what you think about this. Send a letter to your local paper, TV station, radio station - wherever you can find a platform to make your voice heard. Social media is just as good as any of the traditional media outlets. 

Don't let the president do any more damage.  

See you around campus. Wear your mask, and please, honor whatever regulations are in place where you are. 

Sidebar: Sunday School 9/13/20 Extra Credit

For the second time in less than a month, I'm offering you the closing thoughts of Jake Tapper, just before signing off from CNN's State of the Union.

Back on August 23rd, he spoke of the callousness of the president (and of his daughter-in-law), and of his support for a conspiracy-theory-supporting Islamophobe for Congress, and his complete lack of empathy. You know - the characteristics of a person who would pretty much do anything to get elected.

And this week? Take a look at was what was on his mind.

Perhaps like so many Americans you've been trying to find a way to spend some time with your family, your children, safely engaged in some form of recreation. Education in a time of pandemic can be really tough and nothing is more clear about our government's failure to protect us then the fact that for so many American kids it's considered unsafe to go into a classroom.

The virus has not been contained. The widespread quick testing needed remains elusive. It's a huge failure by president Trump on down.

So then maybe you seek this respite and you subscribe to Disney+, Disney's streaming service, and you turn on their new live action film Mulan, fun, nice, family-friendly. But maybe you stay for the credits. And you see Disney thank the propaganda authorities of the ruling Chinese Communist Party in Jinjiang.

That's right. Not only did Disney film this move, Mulan, in the epicenter of the part of China where the US State Department estimates the Chinese government has detained as many as 2 millionth ethnic Uighurs and other Muslim minority groups in internment camps, places China claims are for re-education and job training, but the US government says they are subjecting Uighurs to torture and cruel and inhumane treatment.

But not only did they film Mulan there, Disney also thanks a local police department in their credits, a police department that was sanctioned by the U.S. government for its role in running these concentration camps.

Now, Disney's CFO says it's standard to, quote, acknowledge in the film's credits the national and local governments that allowed you to film there, unquote.

Really? How standard is it to film in an area where the local government has concentration camps and is being accused of genocide? I guess we should be happy no parts of Fantasia needed to be filmed in occupied Poland.

And, look, it's not just Disney. The star of the film went on Chinese social media and shared a Chinese state media image expressing support for the police in Hong Kong cracking down on pro-democracy protestors. Of course, that's just one person, a young actor. That's not the big problem. The big problem is Disney thanking people accused of committing genocide. Why? Money.

So, who cares about the concentration camps, right? It's an immoral position and one we've seen from the NBA, which was forced to cancel a training camp held in the same region of China. And, of course, sadly with president Trump who, John Bolton writes in his book, told Chinese President Xi Jinping that China should continue building these concentration camps for the mass detention of Uighur Muslims because President Trump thought that, quote, was exactly the right thing to do, unquote.

This summer two Uighur organizations lodged a complaint against the government of China at the International Criminal Court accusing the Chinese government of genocide, torture, and crimes against humanity.

This is the government to whom the NBA is bowing and president Trump is giving approval and Disney is openly thanking.

After a horrible genocide, the Holocaust, the world came together and pledged never again, never again. The NBA, president Trump, and the Walt Disney Company, they're making those words meaningless.

What's Tapper telling us? 

That we're better than this. That there's more to being a Great America than making money, or making movies. And sometimes, it's not worth it to get exactly what we want if we compromise what we believe in. And that the ends don't justify the means. 

Sadly, it seems these things have been forgotten recently. And, I think, it would do us well to remember them going forward. 

Sunday School 6/21/20

Happy Father's Day, everyone.  Ready to dive in to the classrooms?  

CNN's State of the Union and Jake Tapper's conversation with Preet Bharara, CNN Senior Legal Analyst and former US Attorney from the Southern District of NY.

Bharara was there to talk about the firing of Geoffrey Berman, the most recent US Attorney for the SDNY. First off, he said he doesn't know if Berman will testify before any Congressional committees. Reflecting on his own experience after he was fired by Trump, he said that lots of folks wanted to hear from him, but the standard operating procedure is not to talk about ongoing investigations, even when you're no longer in office. 

And about impeaching Barr? He'll leave that up to Congress, but did say 

...the attorney general of the United States made a public misrepresentation about whether or not Geoff Berman as stepping down from office.  It was clearly not the case. It was clearly a falsehood... and I think that conduct alone shows there's some sort of unfitness for office... I know it's not the biggest thing in the world... but you make a representation that's not true, that's a problem for most people in any profession. It's a particular problem if you're the attorney general of the United States of America.

And Bharara said all of this probably stems from the president wanting Berman gone, and that it wasn't a case of the department losing confidence in Berman, since he was offered other positions within the DOJ.  And, 

Given that fact, and the weirdness of it, and all the other evidence that the president wasn't happy with how things were going in the Southern District, and wanting to make sure that they were stayed and they kept their place, stayed in their lane, that lane being loyalty to the president, I think it's a reasonable conclusion that the decision to get rid of Geoff Berman was not done in good faith.

Hard to disagree with him on that.

Chuck Todd had Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) on Meet the Press.  Schiff said he can't accept the explanation that Trump was "just trying to do a favor for a golfing buddy" by moving him to the US Attorney position in New York City,

given the pattern and practice of the president in seeking to use the justice system to reward friends, punish enemies, protest people he likes, and Bill Barr's willingness to carry that water for the president.

Schiff, like Rep. Jerry Nadler, who talked with Jake Tapper, said he hopes that Berman will testify before Congress. He also said 

It's, you know, I think, the most disastrous mismanagement of the Justice Department in modern memory. And like so much of what we have seen (with) this administration, it doesn't come as a surprise anymore. But yet, it's completely demoralizing to the people in the Department and dangerous to the rule of law. 

Moving on to Bolton, Schiff said he's seen the excerpts of the book, but hasn't read it yet - and "there's a tremendous amount to be disturbed about the substance of" the excerpts.

... we warned during the (impeachment) trial that you could only count on Donald trump to do what's right for him, not what's right for the country. And John Bolton says that is exactly this president's pattern and practice...

Todd reflected back on a pre-impeachment conversation he had with Schiff, about Bolton and not forcing him to testify, and he wondered if Schiff regretted not having fought harder to get Bolton's testimony in the House before voting on the Articles of Impeachment. Schiff said no.

I think, indeed, our decision has been vindicated by the fact that we are still in court now over a year later trying to get (Don) McGahn to testify. Bolton said he would sue us if we subpoenaed him. We would still be trying to get John Bolton's testimony today. 

And, he said, the House "made the case" when they urged the Senate to call Bolton during the trial, that "the senators would one day have to explain why they didn't want to hear from him when they had the opportunity. " 

He also said Bolton lacked the "basic courage and patriotism" and that it was "only greed that made him come forward in this book..."  It's hard to disagree with Schiff, too.

Finally, a quick check-in with Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who talked with Jon Karl on This Week with George Stephanopoulos. Here, too, the conversation started out with the Geoffrey Berman thing.  

Karl wondered if he thought that Berman would actually testify. Jeffries said he hoped at some point the Judiciary Committee would hear from him,

because I think he has a lot to say about a continuing pattern of chaos, crisis and corruption that we have seen from the Trump administration from the very beginning until this very day.

Karl pointed out that the president "gets to hire, gets to choose, nominate, appoint, in the case of acting US attorneys" - so doesn't he also have the right to fire them?  Jeffries pointed to the "long tradition...of there being no political interference" between the executive and the DOJ,

which is the primary vehicle at the federal level for ensuring that there's equal protection under the law, liberty and justice for all, anchored in the principle that we are a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, not a government of a dictator or a monarch or a king.

He added that Nadler has the "full support" of the Speaker on wanting to have a hearing on this type of interference between the White House and Justice. 

Karl then asked whether John Bolton was right in his criticism about how the House handled the impeachment, keeping it so narrowly focused. That's a no.

Not at all. John Bolton is a political opportunist and a profiteer. He had the opportunity to step forward and participate in the House impeachment inquiry and share any information he had about wrongdoing by president Trump and other members of his administration, and he declined. 

And, he said, it was the Senate that committed malpractice in terms of acquitting Trump, and "now it's in the hands of the American people.

Karl's final question: If the Dems retain the House, should Nancy Pelosi step aside so there could be a black Speaker of the House? 

Not at all. Nancy Pelosi has done a phenomenal job as speaker leading our 'for the people' agenda... She has been a legendary speaker working with a historically diverse caucus, leading us forward. And I look forward to her continuing to do so in the next Congress.

See you around campus, in accordance with all applicable CDC guidelines, of course. 

TGIF 6/19/20

Oh, what a week it was... Here's just a slice.

Take John Bolton. Liar, or teller of the most secrety of our secrety stuff? Money-hungry man without a conscience, or money-hungry man without a conscience? A would-be do-gooder, if only there'd been a subpoena, or a man who doesn't really give a rat about our country and protecting it from the Trumpeters?

Could he be all of those rolled into one? Seems like the answer is yes, or sorta kinda maybe. Here's one take on it, from The Atlantic. The author, Thomas Wright, gives a litany of reasons (and likely not a full list, it sounds) of why he's no fan of Bolton, only to land here:

But I have to acknowledge that Bolton behaved honorably as national security adviser when he told his staff to report illegality to the White House lawyers. He also defended those who served under him against Trump loyalists. He is right to publish his book. If he gives a full accounting of what he saw as national security adviser—and from a recent article in The New York Times and an excerpt in The Wall Street Journal, it seems he might have—he deserves credit for it regardless of what he did or did not do during the impeachment hearings and trial. He will have done the nation a service.

ABC's Martha Raddatz has Bolton exclusively, Sunday night; check your local listings.

And speaking of John Bolton, Mick Mulvaney - remember him, the acting chief of staff who was exiled to Ireland to serve as chief groundskeeper or something at Trump's golf course?  Among other things, Mulvaney said something to the effect that no one else who was in The Room Where it Happened mentioned anything inappropriate. And I had to laugh at that - as if Mulvaney, Pompeo, or others still in Trump's universe would recognize anything as being in appropriate? I mean, they thought an obvious quid pro quo was nothing other than a perfect phone call, for Pete's sake.

And speaking of Pete's sake, here's the question NBC's Peter Alexander asked at the presser today.

Why does the president keep hiring people who are dumb as a rock, overrated, way over their heads, whack' and incompetent?

The answer, from Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany? Trump likes "countervailing opinions" and likes to balance his own opinion with those who disagree with him, similar to Lincoln's Team of Rivals model. Except that the words Alexander used in his question are Trump's words, used to describe former staffers - and they did actually apply to Bolton, she added.

And, McEnany went on to say that even the FAILING NEW YORK TIMES!!! which is often FAKE NEWS!!! and which NOBODY READS ANYWAY!! because they're losing subscribers left and right has criticized Bolton. Except, I have to correct the part about the Times losing subscribers left and right - because they didn't have any 'right' ones, right? I mean left? Or something?

Mulvaney, for his part, felt safe in saying that the president isn't good at hiring people.

And speaking of the president, he's having his love-fest tomorrow in Tulsa OK, against the advice of Drs. Anthony Fauci and Deborah Birx, according to this NBC News report. I guess the docs are part of the 'team of rivals' on the White House Coronavirus Task Force?  Anyway, a couple of days ago, Fauci said he would not ("of course not") attend any of Trump rallies, being in a high-risk category, and he added

outside is better than inside, no crowd is better than crowd, and crowd is better than big crowd.

And speaking of crowds (sheesh, this whole post reads like an ad for Segues, doesn't it?), the president had this to say about what might happen in Tulsa.

And, now we learn how it will be "a much different scene" - some 250 National Guard soldiers will be there, unarmed except for shields, batons, and pepper spray, to help keep the peace. Of course, it could have been a very much different scene entirely, but the Oklahoma Supreme Court refused to issue an injunction keeping the rally from going on as planned, saying there was no law requiring masks or physical distancing.

And speaking of the National Guard, it seems some of the folks who were called to duty helping out with coronavirus efforts will be one day short of the 90-day deployment requirement for benefit eligibility.

The issue arose after the administration decided to end federal deployment orders for National Guard members on June 24. The decision would leave some who were placed under federal orders in late March just short of reaching a 90-day threshold that would allow them to collect retirement benefits early, before turning 60. The date also would cut short access to some GI Bill benefits, though that could be earned later.

Which stinks, especially when "we love the military." I can't imagine that no one knew that picking this specific date - a seemingly random Wednesday - would ensure that so many folks who put themselves on the line when asked to, who were away from their families helping protect the country from an invisible Chinese enemy, were going to be treated this way.

I'll leave you with this closing thought. My Sonofa Gov, Andrew Cuomo, is ending his daily coronavirus briefings. No word on whether he's also ending his participation in the Cuomo Brothers show on CNN.

TGIF, everyone.

Wondering on Wednesday (v194)

Ready... Set... Wonder

The impeachment trial continues in earnest today, likely ending before 11PM if all goes well, compared to yesterday's day-into-night-into-morning marathon. Part of me wonders what more the House Managers and the Trump team could possibly say for up to 24 hours that they haven't already said - although, for the president's team, maybe they learned something yesterday and will be better prepared to actually offer a defense? I wonder...

I also wonder who was the rocket scientist who came up with the now-and-hopefully-forever rejected idea of doing any 'horsetrading' on witnesses for the trial. From this Bloomberg article, 

Some Republicans have suggested the could be open to calling witnesses such as acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and former National Security Advisor John Bolton if Republicans are allowed to call Joe and Hunter Biden as well as the unidentified intelligence community whistleblower.

While Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has said "that trade is not on the table," I honestly wonder why any Democrat would even consider going along with any request to allow people who are completely outside the actions taken by president Trump to testify, no matter what 'trade' they might get in return. 

First-term Indiana Republican Senator Mike Braun said that "the idea of witnesses will not get anywhere if it's not reciprocal" but there is no reciprocity when you're comparing Mulvaney and Bolton - people with direct knowledge of what was going on, according to all of the witnesses who testified in the House - to the Bidens, neither of whom 

• had any direct or indirect dealings with president Trump;
• had any direct or indirect dealings with President Zelensky;
• had any direct or indirect dealings with anyone in the current administration;
• had any direct or indirect involvement with the Ukrainian aid; or
• had any direct or indirect involvement with whatever drug deal Giuliani and Mulvaney were cooking up. 

As Joe Biden pointed out, the impeachment is a "constitutional issue. We're not going to turn it into a farce or political theater." Why is that so hard to understand, I wonder?

Moving on to something more entertaining, there's Kentucky's junior Senator Rand Paul, who said earlier today that there are 45 senators who are willing to dismiss the impeachment charges; the remaining senators are "wanting to hear a little more." this totally contradicts fellow Kentuckian Mitch McConnell, who said last week that there's "little or no sentiment" to dismiss without first hearing the presentations from the House managers. 

But it was his comments on the potential of John Bolton testifying.  Echoing comments from #IMPOTUS himself, Paul pointed to Bolton's tenure and tried to figure out what the right answer would be.

It's unknown. Some people who have talked to him think that he has an axe to grind, that he's angry he was publicly fired by the president. But he also has a history of believing in unlimited powers for the president. 

Which one is the guiding light for John Bolton at this point? Axe to grind and books to sell? Or, be a player and say, 'even if I'm gone, he's doing what I want on Iran and other things?'

Hey, Rand Paul, here's an idea: maybe Bolton is going to be a patriot,  and say, 'even if I'm gone, and even if Trump's doing what I want on Iran and other things, I don't care - and I'm going to do the right thing and tell the truth?'  

Wouldn't that be fun, I wonder? 

Sunday School 8/5/18

I dropped in on three classrooms this morning - Fox News Sunday, to hear what president Trump's national security advisor John Bolton and Florida Senator Marco Rubio had to say; Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan talking to Kellyanne Conway, and NBC's Meet the Press with Senators Amy Klobuchar and Roy Blunt talking with Chuck Todd.

There was lots of talk on most of the shows about the president's 'enemy of the people' comments, about Russia  and North Korea, and about the upcoming elections. Here are a few highlights from each of the conversations.

First, John Bolton:

• "Unequivocally" we had nothing to do with the alleged assassination attempt on Venezuela's President Maduro. It might have been something he orchestrated himself, or maybe it was something else.
• Trump talking about the Russian hoax means "the idea that somehow the Russians directed and controlled his campaign or direct and control his administration" or that there was some kind of conspiracy.
• Or, he means the hoax is "the idea that the Trump campaign was  beneficiary of a converted effort together with the Russians to affect the 2016 election."
• And when Trump mentions Russia and China and North Korea? "There's no question that Russia was the principal violator in 2016" and that they're the leading violator this year, but "It does not exclude the potential for others to meddle" and like Trump, I guess, we all need to be focused on the other guys, too.

Next, Marco Rubio:

• Trump thinks the Mueller investigation is just about collusion, but Rubio "believe(s) it's in the best interest of the United States of America and the American people for that investigation to run its course for all the truth to come out. I think that's the best thing that could happen for him, and I think it's the best thing that could happen for the country.
• Trump has to decide, with his lawyers, whether or not to sit down with Mueller.
• Kim Jung Un is "more than willing to tear apart facilities that are no longer necessary for old missiles because he's got newer ones that work better."

Kellyanne Conway:

• On Trump not directly echoing the sentiments of his entire national security team, "there continue to be active cyber security - cyber warfare campaigns, if you will, by North Korea, Iran, China, certainly Russia, and this president wants to make very clear that he was not the president in 2016 when evidence of Russian interference and meddling in our democracy in 2016 was presented to that president and his security team and buried because they wanted the other person to win and indeed thought she would win the presidency. This president is not burying it."
• When Trump says Russian hoax, "he means the investigation and some others on TV never under oath wanting to suggest that somehow Russian meddling in the 2016 election was successful in changing a single vote or indeed the electoral outcome."
• Or, "and when he talks about the hoax, he's talking about this fantasy, this unproven fantasy that somehow the campaign that I successfully managed for the successful part of the campaign was in cahoots with Russians."
• On the whole 'enemy of the people' stuff, she had a lot to say but the best was "I don't mention the journalists by name but I'm much more interested in the work of Alex Acosta, our labor secretary than Jim Acosta, because he's presiding over an economic boom. Doom was predicted, boom is what we have in our economy."

Roy Blunt:

• On election security: "I think the one areas where both the Congress and local officials and the federal government and local officials need to be working together is to be sure that whatever happens on election day, there is confidence that that's what really happened. 
• On whether there should be federal money every year for election security: "...I don't want this to become an annual entitlement. You know, the worst possible funding is distant money and local decision making on how to spend it" so he'd like there to be more guidance on what states and localities can do with the money.

Finally, Amy Klobuchar:

• On the statement by Dan Coats, Director of National Intelligence, about "doing everything we can to have legitimate elections," she expressed concern "that you could have a hack that finally went through. You have 21 states that were hacked into. They didn't find out about it for a  year. And that's one of the reasons we want to pass our bill, so that there's now a requirement that they tell the individual Secretaries of State immediately so they can protect themselves.
• On a comment by Elizabeth Warren that the criminal justice system is racist: "For people who have been victimized and have been a victim of a crime, they need a criminal justice system that works for them... we know that there is racism in the system that needs to be fixed, that's why we have started instituting body cameras, which is a great solution, doing things on eyewitness ID, and I think the solutions are there for us. We just have to reform the system."

Lots to chew on there, if you're so inclined.

See you around campus.

Sunday School 5/13/18

Trying to get back into the swing of things after a couple of weeks of spring break here.

Today, I checked in on a couple of classrooms, starting with Fox News Sunday, where host Chris Wallace talked with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

Pompeo, as you know, just returned from his second trip (but first as SecState) to North Korea, and brought with him three former prisoners - NOT hostages, as Wallace called them, repeating the error made by the president and others. 

For clarification, let's see what our friends at Merriam-Webster have to say about these two words, starting with the wrong one.

And, here is the correct term to describe the three folks who were released by North Korea.

Anyway. 

Pompeo also spent time doing groundwork on the upcoming one-day summit between Trump and Kim Jong Un on June 12th. There was quite a bit of talk about the summit, relations between Trump and Kim, and related topics - no surprise there.  Wallace noted, that, other than Dennis Rodman, Pompeo had probably spent more time with Kim than any other American; Pompeo noted Rodman has way more rebounds.

They also talked about the Iran nuclear deal, discussions with our European allies, and trying to get something fixed there. Pompeo noted that Trump's withdrawal from the deal was not aimed at the Europeans, and that he had "worked hard over the short time" he's been SecState to fix things, and he will continue doing that.

My mission that I've been given by president Trump is to work to strike a deal that achieves the outcomes that protect America. That's what we are going to do and I'll be hard at it with the Europeans in the next several days.

Similarly, regarding peace in the Middle East, now that we're moving the shell of our embassy to Jerusalem on Monday,

So, the peace process is most decidedly not dead. We're hard at work on it. We hope we can achieve a successful outcome there as well.

Perhaps the most noteworthy comments came in response to Wallace asking what the vision for the State Department is under Pompeo. After noting hopes that he hadn't peaked in the first two weeks, he continued (with emphasis added)

But it's pretty clear, we've got to go put the diplomatic team on the playing field. It should be the United States State Department that is at the front of American foreign policy, delivering solutions to solve America's problems without resorting to military force. And so, I'm going to build the team, we're going to get our swagger back, and the State Department will be out front in every corner of the world leading America's diplomatic policy, achieving great outcomes on behalf of president Trump and America.

Is it just me, or did that statement take a whole bunch of air out of the Jared Kushner sails? 

Why no, it's not just me. Here's a headline from Haaretz.com.

Perhaps the president will be going to Jared less often now? 

Where to next? CNN's State of the Union with Jake Tapper, who spoke with Trump's National Security Advisor John Bolton, who also talked about our leaving the Iran nuclear deal. Tapper asked him whether we were going to sanction European companies doing business with Iran. 

Bolton suggested that Europe would come along, while Tapper pointed out that was not consistent with what he was hearing from diplomats; they are planning on staying in the deal, rather than joining us. Here's Bolton's take on that.

And - they may try to do so, in - in part because, I think, despite the complete consistency of president Trump in his opposition to the deal, opposed to is as candidate Trump, opposed to it as president-elect Trump, opposed to it as president Trump, many people, including apparently former Secretary of State John Kerry thought that we would never get out of it.  Now, I don't know how to explain why people could miss what the president was saying. So I think, at the moment, there's some feeling in Europe that they're really surprised we got out of it, really surprised at the reimposition of strict sanctions. 

I think that will sink in. 

On North Korea, Bolton seemed willing to give more details than Pompeo did in the Fox classroom; here are some of his comments.

So, on the denuclearizing side itself, that means all aspects of their nuclear program. Clearly, the ballistic missile program, as with Iran, with the intention of being a delivery system for nuclear weapons, that has got to go. I think we need to look at their chemical and biological weapons programs as well. The president is going to raise other issues, the Japanese abductees, the South Korean citizens who were kidnapped. There are a lot of issues to discuss...

Tapper's next guest was Vermont's Bernie Sanders, to talk about what the Democrats are facing in the midterm elections and 2020. And, since Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat, I decided to weed my garden instead of listening to him.

See you around campus.