Sunday School 5/22/22

Let's dive in to your Sunday School lessons, starting with Margaret Brennan and former Dubya and Obama Defense Secretary Robert Gates in the Face the Nation classroom.

On the expansion of NATO, with Finland and Sweden applying to join the alliance, Gates gives Vladimir Putin a lot of credit.

...it's an amazing thing he's done because he's -- he's gotten Sweden to abandon 200 years of neutrality... one of his many huge miscalculations in invading Ukraine is he has dramatically changed the geostrategic posture of western Europe... 

Speaking of the Ukraine war and 'winning,' he said 

If winning means taking over the country and absorbing it into Russia, the whole country, I think that's very unlikely at this point... in terms of pushing on to Odessa or trying to bring a change of government in Kyiv or absorb Ukraine, I think if that's winning, I don't see that he can win. 

Brennan asked about Putin resorting to tactical nukes; Gates said the chance is "low, but not zero." Without any military purpose - "no large masses of Ukrainian forces that would be taken out," the only purpose would be 

to try and break the will of the Ukrainian people. And I think that moment has come and gone. I don't think that there's anything at this point that will break the will of the Ukrainian people.

Not only that, but according to Gates, in that neck of the woods, the winds "tend to blow from the west..." You get the drift of that, right? Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Gates says China can't make up for all the economic losses Russia is facing; he also thinks Xi Jinping will realize that he may have "totally underestimated the West," including America's leadership, Europe's coming together, and the power of the shared sanctions. And, he may have to take a hard look at his own military, given how things have gone for Putin, and ask himself if his military's as good as his people say it is. 

Brennan asked him about "polarization" in our country, which Gates has said was our "biggest threat." He hasn't seen a whole lot of improvement, although "there is one glimmer of hope," thanks to Xi and Putin - and it extends beyond the situation in Ukraine.

They've actually brought Republicans and Democrats together on Capitol Hill, and with the administration.... so maybe that's a foundation. Maybe there's a way to build on that. And, who knows, if you begin to get it in national security policy, maybe you can get it in some other places.

Next, let's head to the right and into the Fox News Sunday classroom, where Martha MacCallum chatted with Brian Deese, National Economic Council director. He's not a fan of the 'r' word, as MacCallum called it, but he sure is a fan of words.

While there are absolutely risks with inflation front -- first and foremost, this is what's most important, the United States is better positioned than any other major economy to bring inflation down and address these challenges without giving up all of the economic gains we've made, and that's because of the strength of our recovery. We have the strongest job market in modern history. Americans are getting back to work in jobs with higher pay. And that's meant that Americans can increase their savings, pay down their debt. Businesses are investing. Entrepreneurs are creating new businesses at record rates. And manufacturing is coming back to the United States at record rates as well...

MacCallum interjected, saying "I know that 'recession' is a technical term -- but you know... whether or not we hit that technical benchmark, Americans feel like they are in a recession... So, I'm asking for your opinion, as the economic advisor at the White House, should people be prepared in the United States that we are or will be in several months heading into a recession?"

Blah blah blah, "people should also take confidence that we are better positioned than any other country to navigate through this and keep our recovery going." blah blah blah 'What we need to do now --" 

And again, MacCallum tried to pin him down. "You know, so I'm just asking, what -- what do you recommend to them in terms of specifics and what they can do to try to whether this a little bit easier as we go through what you're calling a transition?"

Blah blah blah "these prices create real hardship and they also create uncertainty. We understand that" blah blah blah "top economic priority." We can do this, he said, 

First, we need to give the Federal Reserve the independence to do what it does. It has the tools to combat inflation. Second, we need to reduce costs and make things more affordable for families during this period. So, steps that we can take to reduce the cost of the Internet bills that families pay, or the prescription drug prices that they pay a really important right now. And, third, we need to bring down the federal deficit. Because of the president's policies, we've made a lot of progress on that front, the deficit down $1.5 trillion already this year. But we need to make more progress on that as well. That will help reduce price pressures in the economy.

Blah blah blah "we can navigate through to more stable growth that will generate better outcomes for families" blah blah blah "we're on the way. We've got to focus on inflation, and that's what this president is doing."

There was more, but you get the drift. High thump factor - lots of words - but I'm not sure if there was anything in it that mattered. He also talked with Dana Bash in the State of the Union classroom; perhaps there's something valuable in that interview.

Finally, Martha Raddatz talked with former Joint Chiefs chair Adm. Mike Mullen in the This Week with George Stephanopoulos classroom. Like Gates, he was moved by requests from Finland and Sweden to join NATO.

What strikes me... is how deeply neutral they had been for decades and decades and how concerned they obviously are with this threat that has been generated by Putin. And so, I’m encouraged by that. I’m encouraged by the unity of NATO. Almost every European I’ve spoken to considers the threat in Europe now existential to them and I think that speaks to the -- the move on the part of both Sweden and Finland. And I'm -- I'm encouraged by that. I don't think that it will cause, you know, a nuclear action on the part of Putin at this particular point.

He believes Putin originally wanted "to take Kyiv, overturn the government, put a puppet in as a leader," but now "he is going to do everything he possibly can to lose as little in the east as possible." Given that President Zelenskyy also wants that territory, 

I think we're in for a long one. It's going to be bloody. It's going to be visible. It's going to be what war is. I think we'll see Putin continue to devastate the infrastructure with respect to how he approaches it, the long-range weapons. I think what we've done to supply them has been extraordinary, quite frankly, and we need to continue to do that.

He's "encouraged" that communication channels between high-ranking Americans (Mark Milley, the Joint Chiefs chair, and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin) and their Russian counterparts have reopened. As to what the re-opened communications mean? He said it's hard to know, but it's a "big step... and hopefully" it's a start towards getting "some diplomatic outcome..."

All wars have to end. We need to be thinking more and more about what does that mean, what's on -- both sides, what is -- what's OK so that this is contained as opposed to exploding into a massive Holocaust for not just for the region but for the world.

Moving to North Korean, Mullen called it "deja vu all over again, from his father, and his grandfather, as well as Kim Jong-un himself." There's "no easy answer here," and there's no solution without Beijing.

And our relationship with China is -- is worsening, so that makes it -- solving this more difficult. I'm encouraged by the president's trip. I'm encouraged by the time he spent in South Korea and I know he just arrived in Japan. And I'm encouraged ... that they're working together, and that trilateral peace - Japan, South Korea, and the US - working together is really critical.

He said that Biden's meeting with the other three 'quad' countries - Australia, Japan, and India - is "fully critical to contain what will be a real challenge in North Korea" and its development of nukes.

Finally, because everyone in the classrooms was asked about baby formula, regardless of their role, Raddatz brought it up. I like the way he handled the question, championing the accomplishments of the US military.

..., I'm so encouraged by what our troops have been able to do. So, a C-17 that could fly howitzers, you know, into Germany to support Ukraine, turns around and -- and flies 71,000 pounds of baby formula back to the US. In two days. In two days, land in Indiana. 

Good on them. 

See you around campus.

Sunday School 5/5/19

There was a triple dose of Mike Pompeo this morning, and I'm not sure I can take it. Although, truth be told, I'm not sure I can take a triple dose of any single guest - it's not just him.

The conversations were very much the same in each classroom, so I broke them up a bit, touching on separate topics for each.

First up, his conversation with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday where they talked about Venezuela and Russian election meddling, among other topics.

On Juan Guaido, the democratically elected leader who's not in charge:

...we've made very clear that not only the United States but 50-plus nations support Juan Guaido and his national assembly in their efforts to beat back the - the horrific conditions... I watched women carrying babies across the border... They were having to make decisions about whether they could feed their baby on the second day or the third day, their sick children didn't have medicine, all of which was sitting in Columbia and Maduro has denied them.

On why Maduro is still in power, and it that will come to an end:

These thing sometimes take time...we know it's going to happen... The United States wants all other countries out of this nation and allow the Venezuelan people to restore their own democracy. We're confident that we're going to achieve that and I couldn't tell you what day, but it will happen.  

On why Trump did not get tough with Putin on election meddling:

I don't get your point. I'm confused - I'm confused. The administration that has been tougher on Russia than any of its predecessors  and yet you continue to be fixated on something that Robert Mueller wrote down. I'm - I struggle with that... Your viewers should not be misled. This administration has taken seriously the threat of election interference and we'll continue to do so.

Let's see how he addressed some other hot topics on the other shows.

TGIF 3/22/19

Ah! The first Friday of spring! 

Let's take a look at the week, starting with the late-breaking news we got today: the Mueller Investigation is over.

Yep - it's true. The confidential (as required by law) report has been turned in to William Barr, the AG, and he's already sent a letter to Congressional leaders letting them know he's get to them quickly with his initial summary of the report, maybe even this weekend.

We won't know for a while, at least until Barr gets back to Congress, how much of the report will be made public. Unless, of course, the Dems stop all of their other investigations and devote 100% of their time to trying to get the report released. Or, they could surprise me, and actually start trying to legislate and stuff.

The end of the investigation should be a good week for someone - just not sure who.  Maybe Mueller, who can go back to being his kind old self.

Moving on to North Korea, Chairman Kim had a good week, as the president tweeted today that he was cancelling sanctions that the US Treasury Department had decided to implement against some Chinese shipping companies. Why would Trump do that? Sarah Sanders gave us the scoop:

President Trump likes Chairman Kim and he doesn't think these sanctions will be necessary.

Sadly the good week for North Korea was a bad week for the Treasury Department; being undercut, apparently without warning, doesn't leave a good taste in anyone's mouth, I'm sure.

Speaking of without warning, Bibi Netanyahu is having a good week, it seems. First, he gets invited to spend a couple of days at hanging at the White House while he's in town to speak to AIPAC, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, and then the president decides (again) to tweet about policy, saying that it's time the US recognized Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights. 

Honestly -- just, here's a tweet, just here's a tweet, and then he moved on to free speech on campuses and then on from there to celebrating World Down Syndrome Day.  Just a typical day in the life of the 45th president. Never mind that Netanyahu is, again, in the think of a rough election campaign, and of course there are those indictments, but all in all, I think he had a good week.  

With the Mueller report, the sanction reversal, and the policy reversal on the Golan Heights, I'm not sure whether the United States had a good week or a bad one -- I guess we'll have to wait and see. 

What else was out there? Oh, yes -- seems Jared and Ivanka are using personal devices to handle official business, with Jared using an app to copy text messages and forward them to his official government account. 

So I guess that means that Hillary Clinton's having a good week, since there's now nothing wrong with that she did. 

TGIF, everyone. How was your week?

Sunday School 2/3/19

Today we've got the Super Bowl edition of Sunday School, as president Trump sat for an interview with Margaret Brennan, host of Face the Nation on CBS.

Among the topics they discussed and my summation of each):

• the shutdown, the national emergency at the border, Nancy Pelosi (BAD!)
• the kerfuffle with the intelligence folks and whether or not Trump feels they're intelligent; (SMART!)
• ISIS, Syria and Afghanistan; (WINNING)
• his Cabinet and how they're acting; (GREAT PEOPLE!)
• the NFL, the USMCA, Barron and the national anthem; (GREAT PRODUCT!)
• racism; (LOOK AT ALL THE BLACK PEOPLE WORKING!)
• the Russian witch hunt; and (HILLARY'S EMAILS)
• Venezuela, North Korea and China (DEALS!)

Let's dive in, shall we?

Sunday School 11/18/18 (pt 4)

In the final part of the president's interview with Chris Wallace, we learn about his toughest decision, his relationship with the military, and how he ranks his own performance, which I'm saving for last.    The first three parts of the interview are available here, here and here.

Wallace asked Trump about term limits. The question is a piece of work:

Can you envision a situation - you talk about six more years. Can you envision a situation well into your second term where you think you're so good for the country and so essential to the progress of the country that you would try and amend the Constitution so you could serve a third time?

Fortunately, Trump didn't take the bait.

No, no. .. Just won't happen, it's not -- I think the eight-year limit is a good thing, not a bad thing.

On the Veterans Day weekend debacles, including Trump's insistence that it was the Secret Service that prevented him from going to the first cemetery, not the weather, which came up previously in the interview as well.

Wallace did not ask why Trump did not join his fellow world leaders for the trip to the Arc de Triomphe; he and Putin both arrived separately. It reminded me of the time Trump rode behind as the other leaders walked, together, at the G7 summit in Italy. He did ask why Trump failed to go to Arlington National Cemetery on Veterans Day.

I should have done that, I was extremely busy on calls for the country. We did a lot of calling as you know...I probably - you know, in retrospect, I should have and I did last year and I will virtually every year.

He did not do it last year either - he was out of the country, but what's another lie?

But we had come in very late at night and I had just left, literally, the American Cemetery in Paris and I probably assumed that was fine and I was extremely busy because of affairs of state - doing other things. But I would have - I would have done it. 

OK, sure. Calls and affairs of state and other things.  Notably, there are no readouts of any Veterans Day calls on the White House website, for what it's worth.

On why he hasn't visited our troops in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Well, I think you will see that happen. There are things that are being planned. We don't want to talk about it because of - obviously because of security reasons and everything else. But there are things that are being planned. As you know I was very much opposed to the war in Iraq. I think it was a tremendous mistake, should have never happened. 

I don't think anybody's been more with the military than I have, as a president. In terms of funding, in terms of all of the things I've been able to get them, including the vets. I don't think anybody's done more than me. 

I've had an unbelievably busy schedule and I will be doing it. On top of which you have these phony witch hunts. On top of which - I mean, we've just been very busy. But I will be doing that. '

What an incredibly insensitive thing for the Commander-in-Chief to say, don't you think? Especially when one looks at his unbelievably busy schedule aligned with his own words to us before he was elected.

• I'm going to be working for you. I'm not going to have time to play golf. (Trump statement, August 2016) 
• Trump Has Spent 150 Days, or 25% of His Presidency at Trump Golf Clubs (August 2018 Newsweek headline)
• Trump has visited a Trump property or held a rally on more than half of the days in the past three months (September 2018 Washington Post article)

Why I would have loved for a follow up question - you know a, "what, do you think I'm stupid?" or something, but instead Wallace switched gears, telling Trump that Republicans who like what he's doing but dislike that he's so divisive.

I think if I was a, you know, more modified, more moderate in that sense, I don't think I would have done half of the things that I was able to get completed. With that being said, other than you have to have a certain ability to fight back and as you know, people have - you know, they take strong stance on me both ways, you know, love and hate. I'd like to see it a little bit, maybe, right down the middle.

But tone is something that is important to me. But a lot of times you can't practice tone because you have people coming at you so hard that if you don't fight back in a somewhat vigorous way, you're not going to win. And we have to win. This country has to win.

We have a lot of victories coming and I think if I - if I go too low-key, we're not going to have those victories.

Now, mind you, Wallace posed his question after talking about Trump's negative comments about Mia Love, April Ryan, Yamiche Alcindor and Abby Phillip. I wasn't sure that being victorious over a Republican Senator and three reporters, all women of color, was so important to our country, were you?

Wallace also asked Trump about his toughest decision as president; Trump said North Korea, and that he's got a very good relationship with Kim Jong Un, even though, Wallace asked, that they might still be working on nukes?

Yes, Maybe they are. Maybe they're not. I don't believe that, I don't. And you know, could. And which is - if it  - if that's the way it goes, that's the way it goes. You know, I go with the way we have to go. But so far, it's been good. We have a good relationship. We made, I think, some great decisions for the - for the people of this country.

And I do, you know, I put America first and other countries should put themselves first. It's not like we're  - we should put - and everybody else should be second to us. No, other countries are proud of their countries and their leaders should put their countries first. But we were putting our country in many cases last. We were more worried about the world that we were worried about the United States. That's not going to happen with me. 

Note again his disregard for the United States intelligence community: maybe it was Russia, maybe it was somebody else. Maybe they are testing nukes, maybe they aren't. Maybe it was the Crown Prince, maybe it wasn't.

Maybe he believes the experts, maybe he doesn't.

Maybe he understands that disagreeing with the sum total of our best and brightest intelligence folks shows us as untrustworthy to our allies, maybe he doesn't.

The final exchange we'll look at between the two of them is this one:

CW: Where do you rank yourself in the pantheon of great Presidents? There is Lincoln and Washington, there's FDR and Reagan. Do you make the top 10? 

Trump: I think I'm doing a great job. We have the best economy we've ever had.

CW: So, where do you rank yourself?

Trump: ... I would give myself, I would - look I hate to do it but I will do it. I would give myself an A+ - is that enough? Can I go higher than that? 

See you around campus, where we grade on a more realistic curve. 

The World According to Russia

What really happened at #HELLinHELSINKI2018 may never be known, unless the translator is compelled to tell us. We saw the American president's version of what Supposably happened; I thought it would be fun to check out what the Russian President said happened.  

Let's take a look

Thank you so much. Shall we start working, I guess? 

Distinguished Mr. President, ladies and gentlemen. Negotiations with the President of the United States Donald Trump took place in a frank and businesslike atmosphere. I think we can call it a success and a very fruitful round of negotiations. 

So, it would seem there was some deal-making going on, right? Because otherwise, this would have been just a discussion, a conversation, or 'a couple of white presidents sitting around talking' I think.  

We carefully analyzed the current status – the present and the future of the Russia/United States' relationship – key issues of the global agenda.

It's quite clear to everyone that the bilateral relationship are going through a complicated stage and yet those impediments - the current tension, the tense atmosphere - essentially have no solid reason behind it. The Cold War is a thing of past. The era of acute ideological confrontation of the two countries is a thing of remote past, is a vestige of the past.

What's not clear is whether Putin thinks Russia and America share an ideology? He and Trump may share one - you know, building hotels for rich people in all the right places, for example, but I'm not sure anyone else agrees our two countries share the same ideology, much less acute one (sorry, couldn't resist). 

Today both Russia and the United States face a whole new set of challenges. Those include a dangerous maladjustment of mechanisms for maintaining international security and stability, regional crises, the creeping threats of terrorism and transnational crime, the snowballing problems in the economy, environmental risks and other sets of challenges.The situation in the world changed dramatically.

Right: Russia supports Assad, the butcher of Syria, and they continue having designs on Ukraine and Crimea (those hotels, you know), and our economy is doing just fine, we're told daily (hourly?) and our environmental issues will be gone soon with Trump's deregulation, and climate change doesn't exist, so what the heck is Putin talking about other than his own aggressive tendencies (and our bashing of NATO?)

We can only cope with these challenges if we join the ranks and work together, hopefully we will reach this understanding with our American partners.

If would have been interesting if there had been 'partners' in the room, rather than just Vlad and Donny to join ranks. 

Today's negotiations reflected our joint wish, our joint wish with President Trump to redress this negative situation in the bilateral relationship, outline the first steps for improving this relationship to restore the acceptable level of trust and going back to the previous level of interaction on all mutual interests issues.

Again with the negotiations.  What were the two of them negotiating?

As major nuclear powers, we bear special responsibility for maintaining international security... we mentioned this during the negotiations. It's crucial that we fine-tune the dialogue on strategic stability and global security and nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

We submitted our American colleagues a note with a number of specific suggestions.

#ShowTheNote. #ShowTheNote. #ShowTheNote.

We believe it necessary to work together further to interact on the disarmament agenda, military and technical cooperation. This includes the extension of the strategic offensive arms limitation treaty. It's a dangerous situation with the global American anti-missile defense system. It's the implementation issues with the INF treaty. And, of course, the agenda of non-placement of weapons in space.

Here comes a good part - from the hacker to the hacked; from the meddler to the meddled:

We favor the continued cooperation in counter-terrorism and maintaining cyber security.

He mentioned the "truly great, one of the best ever"according to Trump World Cup as an example of our cooperation, but he didn't mention the 2016 president election, which was a supreme example of "cooperation" by the two sides, would you agree?

We also mentioned a plethora of regional crises. It's not always that our postures dovetail exactly, and yet the overlapping and mutual interests abound.

Abounding over to Syria, which Trump mentioned as a topic of conversation

We have to look for points of contact and interact closer in a variety of international fora. Clearly, we mentioned the regional crisis, for instance Syria. As far as Syria is concerned, the task of establishing peace and reconciliation in this country could be the first showcase example of this successful joint work. Russia and the United States apparently can act proactively and take leadership on this issue and organize the interaction to overcome humanitarian crisis and help Syrian refugees to go back to their homes...

And he talked about how we at least communicate enough to keep from having "dangerous incidents and unintentional collisions in the air and on the ground. As when Russian fighter jets buzzed our ships and stuff. 

Also crushing terrorists in the south west of Syria. The south of Syria should be brought to the full compliance with the Treaty of 1974 about the separation of forces, about separation of forces of Israel and Syria. This will bring peace to Golan Heights and bring a more peaceful relationship between Syria and Israel and also to provide security of the state of Israel. 

Mr. President paid special attention to the issue during today's negotiations. And I would like to confirm that Russia is interested in this development and this will act accordingly. Thus far, we will make a step toward creating a lasting peace in compliance with the respective resolutions of the Security Council, for instance the resolution 338.

He talked about the Korean peninsula and and thanked Trump for his personal engagement there., and also talked about the US withdrawal from the JCPOA - that's the Iran nuclear deal. 

Well, the U.S., our U.S. counterparts are aware of our posture. Let me remind you that thanks to the Iranian nuclear deal, Iran became the most controlled country in the world. It submitted to the control of IAEA. It effectively ensures the exclusively peaceful nature of Iranian nuclear program and strengthens the nonproliferation regime.

And he mentioned Ukraine. 

...we paid special attention to the bona fide implementation of Minsk agreements by Kiev. At the same time, the United States could be more decisive and nudging the Ukrainian leadership and encourage it work actively in this.

And the economy.

We paid more attention to economic ties and economic cooperation. It's clear that both countries, the business of both countries, are interested in this. American delegation was one of the largest delegations in the St. Petersburg Economic Forum. It featured over 500 representatives from American businesses.

We agreed, and President Trump, we agreed to create the high level working group that would bring together captains of Russian and American business, entrepreneurs and businessmen know better how to articulate this successful business cooperation, will let them think and make their proposals and suggestions in this regard.

Oh yeah - the elections. The part where the president believed the foreign dictator instead of the entire US intelligence community.

Once again, President Trump mentioned the issue of the so-called interference of Russia when the American elections and I had to reiterate things I said several times, including during our personal contacts that the Russian state has never interfered and is not going to interfere in the internal American affairs, including the election process.

And there was the Independence Day visit to Russia by a Republican congressional delegation, which was well received there, if not so much here.

As far as...I think you know that recently we hosted the American congressmen delegation and now it's perceived and portrayed almost as a historic event, although it should have been just a current affairs, just business as usual. And in this regard, we mentioned this proposal to the president. We have to think about the practicalities of our cooperation but also about the rationale, the underlying logic of it.

As to the future, Putin is looking for people with expertise to help make it better.

And we have to engage experts on bilateral relationship, who know history and the background of our relationship. The idea is to create an expert council that would include political scientists, prominent diplomats and former military experts in both countries, who would look for points of contact between two countries, that would look for ways on putting the relationship on the trajectory of growth.

And finally:

In general, we are glad the outcome of our first full-scale meeting because previously we only had a chance to talk briefly on international fora. We had a good conversation with President Trump and I hope that we start to understand each other better and I'm grateful to Donald for it. Clearly, there are some challenges left when we were not able to clear all the backlog but I think that we made the first important step in this direction.

Thank you for your attention.

Trump: We love you, Vlad!

OrangeVerse XXXIV: Supposably

Yes, I know it's not supposedly not supposably, but since I'm quoting the president, well, you know. And supposably, here's what happened when presidents Trump and Putin had their private meeting at  #HELLinHELSINKI2018.

 Supposably I

We made significant
progress towards addressing
some of the worst conflicts on Earth. 
So when I met
President Putin for
about two and a half hours
we talked about numerous things.
And among those things
are the problems that you see in the
Middle East where they are
very much involved
we're very much involved.

Supposably II 

 I entered the negotiations

with President Putin from a position

of tremendous strength.

Our economy is booming. And our military 
is being funded $700 billion this year

$716 billion next year.

It will be more powerful as a military 
than we've ever had before.

Supposably III

President Putin and I addressed

the range of issues starting with 
the civil war in Syria... 

We also spoke of Iran...

As most of you know

we ended the Iran deal

which was one of the worst deals

anyone could imagine and

that's had a major impact on Iran

and it's substantially weakened Iran

and we hope that at some point Iran

will call us and we'll maybe make a 
new deal or maybe we won't.

But Iran is not the same country

that it was five months ago

that I can tell you...

They've got some big problems
 that they can solve probably 
much easier if  they deal with us
so we'll see what happens

but we did discuss Iran.

 Supposably IV

We discussed Israel

and the security of Israel

and President Putin is very

much involved with us

in a discussion with Bibi...

A major topic of discussion was

North Korea and the need

for it to remove its nuclear weapons.

President Putin agrees with me 100 percent...

Discussions are ongoing

and they're going very very well.

We have no rush for speed...

We have no time limit.

We have no speed limit

We have -- we're just

going through the process.

But the relationships are very good.

President Putin is going 
to be involved in the sense that he is with us. 

He would like to see that happen.

Supposably V

Perhaps the most important issue

we discussed at our meeting...

was the reduction of nuclear weapons

throughout the world. 

The United States and Russia

have 90 percent as I said

and we could have a big impact. 

But nuclear weapons is I think,

the greatest threat of

our world today. 

And they're a great nuclear power.

We're a great nuclear power.

We have to do something

about nuclear.

And so that was a matter that we discussed

actually in great detail and

President Putin agrees with me.

Supposably VI

The matters we discussed are profound

in their importance and have

the potential to save millions of lives.

I understand the many disagreements

between our countries but I also

understand the dialogue - 

and when you think about it -

dialogue with Russia or dialogue

with other countries.

So if we get along with them, great.

If we don't get along with them

then, well, we won't get along with them...

Supposably VII

I thought that the meeting I had
with President Putin was really
strong. I think that they are willing 
to do things that frankly I wasn't sure
whether or not they would be willing to do 
and we'll be having future meetings
and we'll see whether or not
that comes to fruition
But 
we
 had
a
very
very 
good
meeting

TGIF 6/15/18

Thank freaking goodness it's Friday!  Have you had enough of this week yet? I sure have - let me count the ways.

First, we had the painful G7 meeting in Canada, in which, we're told, president Trump said that he could send 25 million Mexicans to Japan and Prime Minister Abe would be out of office in no time; that all the terrorists are in Paris, and of course, all the nonsense about Canada, and attacking our other allies, and suggesting that Russia get back in, and that Obama is to blame for, well, pretty much everything.

Net neutrality officially ended, leaving it open for service providers to slow down traffic for people who don't want to pay more for faster moving bits and bytes; block or otherwise demote content from competitors, and so on -- all things the Trump administration argued were ridiculous and would not hurt consumers because they probably wouldn't even happen so we need to just let net neutrality die.

Then we had the highfalutin' rootin-tootin' holy salutin' summit between Trump and Kim Jong Un, of whom the president said, he's a great negotiator. Coming from the Artist of The Deal, them's some pretty strong words of praise. And it must be true, because it doesn't appear Kim gave up anything in return for a lifetime of handshakes  - and that salute - and a movie trailer. Don't forget the movie trailer. Now, the fact that North Korea has previously promised some level of the 'denuke' process that Trump says we will get. And there was that whole war games comment. All I could think of was Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy and that computer...

We had the pro-net neutrality administration all up in arms when a federal judge decided that an AT&T-Time Warner merger was just fine (even with Fake News CNN in the mix) and it wouldn't hurt consumers in the least, honest.

We've got all those kids in detention along the border, because the Bible tells us it's OK or something like that. Or maybe it's because it's the Democrats' fault, not the Bible's. The story changes so many times in a day or two, it's hard to keep track. But as long as we fully fund the border wall that Mexico's going to pay for, it's all good.

And the IG report - the one that proves that there was "no collusion" even though the report had nothing whatsoever to do with determining whether or not there was collusion? Yeah, that happened too.

Finally, I think every single media outlet said something along the lines of 'Trump said numerous things that were misleading' or 'not totally accurate'  or 'maybe incomplete', with only people on Twitter calling out the lies - repeated lies - about North Korea, kids ripped out of the arms of their parents, and the IG report, among other topics.

And only people on Twitter were calling out the media's complicity in allowing Trump to lie with impunity each and every day. Today was just like the first 500 or so days of this administration, after all.

I don't know about you, but I could really use a drink. Or, whatever it is that Rudy Giuliani's having.

TGIF.

Wondering on Wednesday (v136)

Well, well, well, another Wednesday has appeared as if by magic on the calendar. 

What do we have to think about tonight? We've got your DoTruKiJoNoKo summit,which surely dropped a whole lot of wondering in my lap, I have to say.

There was the "Baby, you can spy my car" part, where Trump and Kim wandered out to take a look at Trump's limousine, then turned around and wandered back inside. My first thought was that Trump wanted to prove his 'car' was bigger than Kim's, but then I started wondering how long it would take for Trump to start having the Secret Service run alongside Cadillac One the way Kim's security folks trot alongside his car. I mean, after all, we might be getting a $30M parade just because Trump was in France on Bastille Day...

And of course that was the somewhat weird comment about how fast Kim would start de-nuking.  Here's what Trump told Sean Hannity, his personal talking head:

I just think that we are now going to start the process of denuclearization of North Korea. I believe that he's going back and will start it virtually immediately. And he's already indicated that.

So -- I wonder, are we only going to get 'virtual' denuclearization, or will we get the real thing?

And if  denuclearization is going to happen, and once they get a little bit into the process, they won't be able to stop, and we're going to have lots of people around to verify that it's really happening, I wonder (again) why Trump just had us walk away from the Iran deal, which we had been verifying all along?

And what about that whole 'war games' thing? Stopping our joint training exercises with South Korea because they're provocative - and even worse, they're EXPENSIVE! We can save A LOT OF MONEY if we stop training our military, for sure we can. Just ask the Navy, who lost 17 sailors in preventable ship accidents in 2017 alone.

The crew was unprepared for the situation in which they found themselves through a lack of preparation, ineffective command and control, and deficiencies in training and preparations for navigation.

And, I have to wonder, how much could we cut out of the hundreds of billions in additional military spending Trump got in his budget, if we just stopped our war games and practicing and other not fighting all over the world? It's got to be tens of billions of dollars, right?  And we could devote that money to the Wall that Mexico's building for us, right? It's a #winning-#winning situation right there!

And finally, there was The Movie.

Destiny Pictures presents a story of opportunity...  A new story. A new beginning. One of peace. Two men, two leaders, one destiny.

It's got all the kitsch, all the imagery, all the shots of Ego 1 and Ego 2, giant flags and giant pyramids... I mean, the anti-fake news administration pulled out all the stops for their fake movie trailer. No irony there, right?

In the end, could this summit have been anything other than an episode of the Celebrity Apprentice, I wonder?  Dennis Rodman crying in an interview; Trump showing off the toys, all kinds of over the top 'deals' and 'feels' and 'touches' and surprises... the only thing missing was Omarosa. 

Oh darn, she's already been fired.

Sunday School 6/10/18

Oh dear - the classrooms were quite boisterous today!  There was a whole lot of posturing going on, and name calling, and tit-for-tatting and all that kind of stuff.  Let's take a look, shall we?

There were two Trumpeters making the rounds today: Peter Navarro, who's the president's trade advisor, and Larry Kudlow, the director of Trump's National Economic Council.

Navarro was the more over the top of the two, speaking with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday about that backstabbing, traitorous blankety-blank we used to call Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.  Wallace led into Navarro's tirade by mentioning Trudeau's statements about going ahead with promised retaliatory tariffs, which are to take effect on July 1st. Trump responded as he usually does (my words, not Wallace's) by calling his opponent names - 'weak' and 'meek and mild' and 'very dishonest'.  And Wallace asked if that was really how we wanted to deal with our 2nd largest trading partner. I recommend fastening your seat belts for the response.

Chris there's a special place in hell for any foreign leader that engages in bad faith diplomacy with president Donald J. Trump and then tries to stab him in the back on the way out the door. And that's what Bad Faith Justin Trudeau did with that stunt press conference. That's what Weak, Dishonest Justin Trudeau did. And that comes right from Air Force One. 

Well, except Navarro admitted those were his special place in hell words, not Trump's.

And I'll tell you this, to my friends in Canada, that was one of the worst political miscalculations of a Canadian leader in modern Canadian history. All Justin Trudeau had to do was take the win... Trump did the courtesy to Justin Trudeau to travel up to Quebec for that summit. He had other things, bigger things on his plate in Singapore... He did him a favor and he was even willing to sign that socialist communique. And what did Trudeau do -- as soon as the plane took off from Canadian airspace, Trudeau stuck our president in the back. That will not stand. 

Whoa.  The United States participating in a G7 summit is a 'courtesy'? What did he have on his plate that is more important than representing our country at a meeting of our closest allies? I mean, it might have been a courtesy if Melania had attended, but I'm not sure at what point the president of the US doing his job should be considered a courtesy, especially since he has nothing else on his plate, by his own admission.

But wait - there's more!

And as far as this retaliation goes, the American press needs to do a much better job of what the Canadians are getting ready to do because it's nothing short of an attack on our political system and it's nothing short of Canada trying to raise it's high protectionist barriers even higher on things like maple syrup and other goods.

Well, cheese and crackers, not maple syrup!!!  I don't know where Navarro's been lately, but Canada retaliating against the US in a trade war is not an attack on our political system. That's actually what Russia did, but you know, these pesky details are hard to remember, if you've been living under a rock.

Navarro went on to bash Canada for NAFTA, saying we'd have a great deal on that existing deal, if only the Canadians would deal with Trump instead of trying to deal with Congress, blah blah blah, yadda yadda yadda.

They are just simply not playing fair. Dishonest. Weak.

 Navarro was reminded of his earlier statement that no one would retaliate against our new tariffs, with Wallace pointing out Canada's $13B, and the EU's $3B in tariffs since our announcement. In response, Navarro talked about Germany, where we says we have a $151B annual trade deficit, and not only that - not only that, but

Germany has tariffs on autos four time higher than our tariffs on the equivalent German imports here and they sell us three times as many cars as we sell them.

Because we like German engineering almost as much as the Germans do, maybe?

So on the issues alone, we have allies strategically. But when it comes to these trade disputes, these allies basically are robbing us blind. The president is not going to put up with that.  

Nope -he's going to tweet about it, and send minions out to yell at our allies.

Kudlow, for his part, didn't declare a final resting place for Trudeau; in fact, he made it a point to talk about how directly involved he was with the Prime Minister, as if tooting his own horn would make everything right with the world. Here are some of the high points of his conversation on Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan.

Regarding why the president called Trudeau weak and dishonest:

Well, to be honest with you, Prime Minister Trudeau - by the way, I respect. I have worked with him in good faith, getting through a good communique on Friday and Saturday. So, he holds a press conference. The president is barely out of there on a plane to North Korea, and he starts insulting us. You know, he starts talking about US is insulting Canada. We are not -- we, Canada, are not going to be pushed around. 

Brennan noted that Trudeau was talking about the trade tariffs.

That's correct, and in general, OK, it was an attack on the president. "We're going to have retaliatory tariffs." Now, these are things that the prime minister said before, basically, but he didn't say them after a successful G7 communique, where president Trump and the others all worked in good faith to put a statement together, which, by the way, almost nobody expected to happen. In fact, reporters were asking me before the trip whether the president was going to show up at all. He did. He negotiated. He directed his team, myself and others. We worked it out. We used good language that was acceptable. 

At which point Brennan noted

And the the president reneged on that G7 statement.

Kudlow:

No, No, I'm sorry.  And then Trudeau decided to attack the president. That is the key point. And yes, you know, if you attack this president, he is going to fight back.  But here is the key point, Margaret. The president is going to negotiate with Kim of North Korea in Singapore. It is a historic negotiation. And there is no way this president is not going to stand strong, number one. He is not going to allow other people to suddenly take potshots at him hours before that summit. And number two, Trudeau should have known better.

On and on it went, and it went on and on on CNN's State of the Union as well.  Let's pick up when Tapper reminds Kudrow that Trump is known for this kind of thing.

JT: But president Trump does that all the time, though, doesn't he?

LK: No, he doesn't.

JT: He doesn't say things for domestic consumption? 

LK: No, the point is, if you are going through a treaty process, a communique, and you have good faith... And those leaders were together. I mean, I was right smack in the middle of it on Friday night and Saturday morning. You don't walk away and start firing bullets. Now, look

JT: I can't believe that an adviser to president Trump is saying that - because president Trump does that all the time.  He does things for - for domestic consumption.

LK: Jake, not in -- not after you pull a treaty or a deal together...

 JT: Why walk away from it just because of something Justin Trudeau said for domestic consumption.

LK: No, not something. Look you -- yes, for domestic political consumption. But it was a global statement. The whole world listened to what he said. Look, you're reporting it here in Washington, as you must.  

 JT: Sure.

LK: I get that. You just don't behave that way, OK? It is a betrayal, OK? He is essentially double-crossing -- not just double-crossing president Trump, but the other members of the G7, who were working together and pulling together this communique. You know, you never get everything you want. There are compromises along the way; president Trump played that process in good faith. 

So I ask you, he gets up in the airplane and leaves. And then Trudeau starts bashing him in a domestic news conference? I'm sorry, that is a betrayal. That is a double-cross. It pains me, because I like Trudeau. I was working with him. We were together putting words on paper.... 

It pains me to keep going, to keep paying attention. It pains me that none of them realize, or admit, that if the president hadn't acted like a two-year old and resorted to name-calling, no one would be paying any attention to the fact that the Canadian Prime Minister reiterated comments he had made previously to everyone, including government officials, media outlets from both countries, and to Kudrow himself. 

It pains me that the president of the United States is a big crybaby, a big bully...  I can go on, but that pains me too.

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.

Wondering on Wednesday (v132)

What's on the "hmmm...." list tonight?

Three Americans were brought home from North Korea tonight, and the president deserves credit for making it happen. He may or may not have said anything directly to anyone to make it happen, but it was Mike Pompeo, Trump's Secretary of State, who brought them home. I wonder, will he get any credit for this from the left, or will Fox News be alone in their adulation of the president for this accomplishment?

Staying in the same vein, I had seen it suggested a couple of weeks ago that Trump was deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize, and that some Republican Congressman was kicking off the process to get his name into the mix. Now, I agree that progress has been made with North Korea, and that if there is an agreement to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula, that would be a significant achievement. But.as Trump showed us just this week, a negotiated agreement is only, well, it's only an agreement until someone decides to tear it up, so the talk of the Nobel Prize may very well be premature - no wondering there.

But what I am wondering is, who was the reporter today who asked the president if he thought he deserved the Nobel Prize? And what possible answer was expected? I wonder if it was the one Trump gave?

Everyone thinks so, but I would never say it... The prize I want is victory for the world. Not even for here -- I want victory for the world, 'cuz that's what we're talking about. So that's the only prize I want.

Ah, yes. The only prize he wants. Well, that and Gina Haspel confirmed as CIA director, since Ronny Jackson didn't make it to the finish line as head of the VA.

Haspel will probably happen, even though Rand Paul is a no, and John McCain is urging others to be  no votes too.  Joe Manchin, the West Virginia senator who has said he's a yes, is hardly a surprise - he votes with the Rs quite a bit, it seems.

And speaking of West Virginia, I kinda wonder how the state - and the country - dodged the bullet when the delightful Don Blankenship (China people, Cocaine Mitch, etc. etc. etc.) finished last in the Republican primary to take on Manchin in the fall?

Even more than that, I wonder who made the Mitch McConnell 'Narcos' meme, and what more they'll have to offer?