`

john bolton

Trump Threatening Mexico With NAFTA Deal

Is Trump right in calling out Mexico for taking advantage of NAFTA “the cash cow” while not doing anything to prevent illegal immigration into the US? Is Bolton going to talk Trump out of meeting with Kim Jong Un? Does the US have any national security concerns to stay involved in Syria? Former US Deputy Undersecretary of Defense, Jed Babbin joins Dan and John to discuss.

Related Content

Trump’s New Foreign Policy Team

Was it a power play by the Chinese in scheduling a meeting with the North Koreans? Did the Iran deal set a bad precedent and lead North Korea into thinking they could get away with a similar agreement? Is it time to put more financial pressure on Russia? Senior Editor for the Washington Free Beacon, Bill Gertz joins Dan and Scot to discuss.  

Related Content

Trump Taking A Harder Line Against Russia

After expulsion of Russian diplomats, maybe Trump isn't Putin's man in DC after all? Is there a disconnect between Trump’s language regarding Russia and actual policies put in place? With Bolton and Pompeo now in the picture, should we be expecting a harder line against Iran and a step closer out of the Iran deal? AEI scholar, Gary Schmitt joins Dan and Scot to discuss.

Related Content

McMaster Out, Bolton In

Everyone, including McMaster himself, knew he was on his way out, but is the timing interesting considering a potential meeting between Trump and Kim Jong in May? What’s up with House Republicans passing a $1.3 trillion spending bill? Is there anything other than salaciousness from the Stormy Daniels story? Anchor of Special Report on Fox News, Bret Baier joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

North Korea’s New Olive Branch

Should we believe the latest overture by North Korea through South Korea that Kim Jong-un is open to disbanding his nuclear weapons program? Has the DC press corps’ love affair with Kim Jong Un’s sister made them forget the last 25 years of North Korean propaganda? Former US Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy. We're coming to you from Charles Equipment Energy Systems, our friends here in Des Plaines, part of our AM560/Signature Bank Business Tour, and it's always fun to be here. They're in the business of providing energy solutions, big-time energy solutions. They've been responsive in hurricanes, for example, where the power is out, they're the ones who bring the huge generators down to... Jacobson: Yeah, they have generators the size of semi trucks that they bring down to help people...well, to give them electricity, so that they can clean up the area, and eat, and just...survive. Proft: So, we're talking about big energy solutions here, and we'll be talking to the gentlemen who operate this company...one of whom is an excellent cook. Jacobson: Oh yeah, Mike? You can say his name, man. Proft: And he's a bit of a character, too. We'll be talking to him at the bottom of the 7 o'clock hour so you want to stay tuned for that. Yesterday, Jeanne Ives...so we talked about this show, both with Jeanne Ives and Alderman Napolitano, Anthony Napolitano of the 41st Ward, far Northwest side there, the Edison Park area. They held a joint press conference yesterday to talk about that City Key ID that has made national news, we've talked about it on this show, when your Alderman, Amy, Ameya Pawar was on Tucker Carlson, and got his lunch handed to him? (Jacobson: Oh yeah, oh yeah, oh yeah.) So, Jeanne Ives and Napolitano doing a joint presser in their shared interest to not allow this ID that "Tiny Dancer" has concocted to be used as a form of identification for the purposes of voter registration for people who are in this country illegally. Jacobson: That's ALL it's used for. On the...Ameya Pawar said "Well, then I could take the train with it too." Well, what does that mean? No, you need a Venture card to take the train. Proft: Well, the point is if you want to use this new ID card to check out a library book or to get a Venture card, FINE. The only issue, and this was finely tailored, the legislation that Ives has filed, is it cannot be used for voter registration, cannot be used for voter registration. And we'll pick up that discussion in a little bit, but here right now we have our friend Ambassador John Bolton joining us. John Bolton, former United States Ambassador to the UN joins us now, and the timing couldn't be better because there's some breaking news. The New York Times reporting that Kim Jong-un saying that North Korea is willing to start talks with the US on giving up its nuclear weapons according to South Korea, per their little confab in Pyongyang... Jacobson: Pyongchang...PF Chang's... Proft: Pyeongchang in North Korea. Not ABC News version. Recently, and so let's get more insight on that from Ambassador Bolton, thanks for joining us Ambassador Bolton, appreciate it. Bolton: Well, glad to be with you, thanks for having me. Proft: So, do you...how much stock do you put in this New York Times report about what the South Koreans are saying, or is this just Kim Jong-un trying to manipulate and propagandize? Bolton: Look, this is the umptiumpth offer by North Korea to talk about giving up their nuclear weapons, we've been doing this for 25 years. The North Koreans have pledged in written international agreements four times during that period to give up nuclear weapons, they've lied about it every time. So I'd like to say, when you've tried something for 25 years and failed, what makes you think in year 26 it's going to be any different? Now, why are the North Koreans doing it now? I think precisely because they are so close, after 25 years of trying, to being able to deliver nuclear weapons on target in the United States. CIA director Mike Pompeo said a few weeks ago that he thought that they could master all the complexities that were necessary to do that "within a handful of months", HIS phrase, "a handful of months". So I think talking now, talking about a freeze on testing and,you know, maybe just freeze the American and South Korean military maneuvers that were postponed because of the Olympics and we'll just talk about it, and at the end of six months, the North Koreans will have deliverable nuclear weapons if we fall for it. Jacobson: So you think this is all just a cat-and-mouse game? Bolton: Yeah, I think this is all just a little diversion. "Isn't it exciting to talk to North Korea?" Honestly, it's when you've talked to them so many times in the last 25 years that it's hard to keep count, again somebody has to provide some compelling evidence of why talking to them now will make a difference. And what I fear is that next people say "What an amazing breakthrough!" as if they've forgotten the last 25 years of history, the news media are very good at that, they have short attention spans. But people say "Well, we have to help create the proper atmosphere, and we need to prime the pump a little bit, and we need to show good faith." All of which is code language for "make some concessions". Which the North Koreans would happily put in their pocket, as they have since going back to the Korean War Armistice negotiations in 1953, that's the way they negotiate. So, the Trump Administration has said previously they are happy to talk to North Korea, but we won't let up any of the pressure on North Korea. I think that's the absolute minimum, the pressure needs to be increased as they get closer to achieving their objective but I have no doubt that in parts of the State Department they're breaking out the champagne saying "Great! Let's head to Beijing for more talks and let's keep the party going!" That's a way of GUARANTEEING that North Korea gets deliverable nuclear weapons, which by the way they will be HAPPY to sell to anybody with the right amount of money. Proft: And also, too...I mean a part of this is the DC Press Corps' love affair with Kim Jong-un's sister, the Gold medalist in diplomacy at the Pyeongchang Games according to the DC Press Corps, his propaganda minister and sister. And I just wonder if North Korea is seizing on all of that goodwill foisted upon North Korea through his sister to then bring the South Koreans in, and make it look like there's some reproach ma (?), and as you say the entire thing, including as it pertains to South Korea, is diversionary. Bolton: Yeah, as we saw, there's a new diplomatic first here. Kim Jong-un met with representatives of South Korea. Well, big deal! His father met with representatives of South Korea on more occasions, I think, than we can count. We know that South Korea funded North Korea's participation in the Olympic Games, it's another way...the North Koreans are the best grifters and tadgers...I mean they make Wimpy and his offer, you know "How about a hamburger today, and I'll pay you tomorrow?", they make him look like a piker. And there's just more of this coming, you can see it. It's very...it's very dangerous, and nobody should be deceived by it, but I'm sure the usual suspects will be deceived by it. Jacobson: Well, besides talking, they also set up a hotline where they can talk, you know President Moon and Kim Jong-un, they can speak freely and directly to each other. And then there's this April summit, that's going to be held, you know, on the South Korean side of the Demilitarized Zone that divides the two countries. And do you think President Trump will soon get involved in this? Do you think there will actually ever be talks between Kim Jong-un and President Trump? Bolton: Well, I don't think there SHOULD be. Because I think simply the presence of the American president in the same room as Kim Jong-un gives him legitimacy that is beyond calculation and value. I really think this whole thing is just to tap for our attention while they're putting the last touches on their ballistic missiles and their thermonuclear warheads, as I said, Mike Pompeo thinks it will only take a handful of months. I don't know EXACTLY what that means, of course, but it sounds like before the end of this year, absent sabotage or other steps that might slow it down. So you know, it's just hard to credit that after 25 years or so of trying, the North Koreans have come within a handful of months, and then decided to say "Oh you know, we weren't THAT serious. We're prepared to give it up right now!" It's just...it doesn't wash, but there are lots of people looking for bridges to buy on the cheap, and I'm sure we're gonna hear from them in the next few days. Proft: I want to get your take on some of the developments in the whole Bob Mueller Special Counsel investigation, Russian collusion, and everything under that umbrella. Not just Sam Nunberg's bizarre day on the cable TV news networks, but also this story about the Australian diplomat that provided the FBI with the information that launched the FBI's Russia probe. The infamous conversation over cocktails with George Papadopoulus, this guy Alexander Downer, who's now the Australian ambassador to London...he also... Bolton: Right. I know Alexander Downer. He is a friend to the United States, whether he was a member of (?)...the administration, the conservative administration in the early part of the Bush administration. But whether he wholly understood what he was doing, whether it was others in the Australian government that really moved this along, I don't know. But yeah, it's really just another example of the reach of the Clinton Foundation, and why we're still looking at the tip of the iceberg here in terms of the information you have on so many of these fronts. So yeah, there's more here to look at, there's no doubt about that. Proft: Yeah, I mean you're talking about a $25M donation, that he apparently helped arrange, from Australia to the Clinton Foundation to support screening and medication to AIDS patients in Asia, that was back in 2006, but it's still something to kind of factor in, kind of in the interest of full disclosure and context. And I also wonder about what you...how you interpreted what Intel Chairman Nunes said the other day, that the person who was sharing or getting information from Russia was the...or the organization was the Clinton campaign. Bolton: Yeah, this is obviously tied to Nunes and (?). I've seen information that's not public, and I think it's entirely consistent with the argument that many in the Intelligence community have made, that the Russians were trying to sow distrust and erode faith in our public institutions, and even Mueller's indictment, that's only a piece of the puzzle, that's for sure. But, it tells that the Russians were prepared to help all kinds of candidates, even Bernie Sanders, and...the Green Party candidate, in an effort I think to cause confusion in the American electorate. So if they thought they could attract the Clinton campaign, I have no doubt they'd be prepared to try. There was certainly no principle reason for them not to. Proft: He is John Bolton, the former United States Ambassador to the UN. Ambassador Bolton, thanks as always for joining us, appreciate your time. Bolton: Thanks again for having me.

Related Content

Successes Of Trump's "Principled Realism" In Foreign Affairs

What should POTUS highlight at his first State Of The Union after the first year of his presidency on the foreign policy front? How much credit does Trump deserve from removing ISIS’ control and territory? Is he going to address the Taliban and their recent string of attacks? What are the odds of the survival of the Iran deal? Former US Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy. How has Trump principled, realistic foreign policy served American interests in Year One of his presidency? That's something that I'm sure he will tackle, at least in part, during his State of the Union address tonight. That was part of the conversation during the World Economic Forum in Davos last week, and there was a very interesting exchange between Israel Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu and Fareed Zakaria on the controversial...I GUESS...decision for Trump to move the US Embassy to Jerusalem, recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital...something that previous presidents had SAID...Trump was the only one that MOVED on it. And Bibi Netanyahu had this reaction to the President's decision, much to the chagrin one of one globalist named Fareed Zakari. Netanyahu (from tape): The seat of government is in Jerusalem. This has been the case for the 70 years of Israel's existence, that we're celebrating now. Jerusalem has been the capital of the Jewish people since the time of King David, that's only three thousand years ago. So President Trump made history by recognizing history, recognizing these indelible facts of the past and the present. And under ANY peace agreement, you KNOW that the capital of Israel will continue to be Jerusalem, and the seat of our government will continue to be in Jerusalem, so I think on the contrary, he did a great service for peace, because peace can only be based on truth, on reality. And denying the simple fact that Israel's capital is Jerusalem pushes peace backwards by creating an illusion, fantasy. Can't build peace on fantasy. Proft: For more on this topic, and this aspect of the President's remarks tonight, we're pleased to be joined by our friend John Bolton, former US Ambassador to the United Nations, Ambassador Bolton thanks so much for joining us again, appreciate it. Bolton: Well, good morning! Glad to be with you. Proft: So how would you summarize Trump's first year on the foreign policy front, and whether or not decisions like the decision in Jerusalem have advanced the cause of peace of the world over? Bolton: Well, I think he's had an awful lot of successes, but he faces an awful lot of problems, because a number of due bills left to him by the previous administration are coming due: the North Korea nuclear program, the Iran nuclear program, chaos in the Middle East and a whole range of other issues. But I think it's...there's been a lot of hysteria about what Trump's foreign policy is. I think it ends up being in the mainstream of conservative Republican thinking on most issues. That's depressing and boring for a lot of the critics, maybe for some of the supporters too, but I think that's the reality. I think it's what we desperately needed after eight years of Barack Obama. Jacobson: Well, the Palestinians are none too happy if the embassy is moved to Jerusalem, but President Trump the other day said he'd deny them foreign aid if they don't continue with peace talks. Bolton: Look, I think it's time...it's time to shake up the conditions in the Middle East. We've been pursuing the two-state solutions, so called, between Israel and the Palestinians, for about six or seven decades, it's not working out too well. And I think what Netanyahu said about peace ultimately being based on truth rather than illusion, it's just something you can't argue with. So acknowledging Jerusalem as Israel's capital and saying we're going to put our embassy there, does just recognize reality. And by the way, to the people who say it prejudices the outcome of the negotiations, that's just not true. Trump's own statement says he's not intending to do that. The embassy, whether it is built from scratch or, as it looks like now, converted from an existing consulate facility, will be in territory always recognized as WEST Jerusalem, WEST of the Green Line, NEVER under claim by the Palestinians. So this is just one example of an urban legend that's been out there for decades, it was never going anywhere. And the idea, for example, that the only people in the world for whom refugee status is inheritable, like DNA, are the Palestinians. That impedes the peace process as well. So the President withheld half of the operating budget of the UN Agency that works with the Palestinians, and as you say, he basically threatened to take off the table the direct aid that the United States gives the Palestinians, for which, by the way, we have ample statutory grounds, and some would say requirements, that the State Department hasn't yet met. So it's a painful reality that intrudes for some people, but I think it's the right thing to do. Proft: Ostensibly tonight the President will, in listing his successes, talk about crippling ISIS. Yesterday the Islamic State issued a new video, calling on "brothers in Europe, America, Russia, Australia, and elsewhere" to "kill them all, now it's time to rise". What is the state of the Islamic State, and how much credit does Trump deserve for removing them...removing their control from places like Syria and Iraq? Bolton: Well, I think that the Territorial Caliphate has largely been destroyed. I think there are still some pockets of resistance, our military says it's a few weeks until they're taken care of, I suspect that's right. And I think it was important to destroy the Territorial Caliphate, because it's holding territory that gives ISIS the color of legitimacy to its claim that it is indeed a legitimate Islamic Caliphate. But losing that territory doesn't mean that ISIS disappears. We know for a fact that a lot of its people got out of the Caliphate, and escaped to places like Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Afghanistan, and Pakistan to continue the terrorist attacks against the West, and I do think that they will continue. So, there's been an important victory. I do think that Trump's changing of the rules of engagement for American forces was helpful in that regard. But I think it was not helpful that we continued basically many of the policies of the Obama years, supporting the government of Iraq which is, sad today these days, a subsidiary of the government of Iran, the Ayotollahs basically control it. And that's one reason that we still face enormous threats in the Middle East; to Israel, to our Arab friends, as well as our own interests there as well. Jacobson: Do you think President Trump will address the Taliban? I mean, they killed 100 people, they filled an ambulance with explosives, and then earlier in the week 22 Americans were killed at the Intercontinental Hotel, a good friend of the show, Greg Selig, was there, hiding in-between mattresses, and he had this 13 hours of Hell, and they tracked him down and they killed him. I mean, there seems to be something there with the Taliban. Bolton: Well, I think the President was pretty forceful at lunch yesterday with the UN Security Council when he said "We're not gonna talk to those people." And ultimately, this argument that this group of fanatics and terrorists would sit down and have a nice corporate conference around a conference table was always delusional. I think you've got to defeat these people. It may take a long time, but if you want the terrorist threat eliminated, if you want to make sure they don't re-take Afghanistan, and provide a new base for ISIS or al-Qaeda to threaten Pakistan, with terrorists taking over there and getting their hands on Pakistan's arsenal of nuclear weapons, which is estimated publicly to be 60 or more, maybe up to 200. This is just something that...it's unpleasant, Americans don't like to deal with these long-term lingering infections, but that's what it is, and to preserve the safety of innocent civilians here in the United States, far better to deal with them over there than deal with them over here. Proft: Dr. Richard Benkin has a piece in American Thinker where he profiles a Pashtun village elder who is very complimentary of President Trump's policy. He talks about President Trump's...and Pashtun's generally speaking, a favored form of democratic rule...small D. He has...but this elder that he profiles suggests that Trump is right for calling out Pakistan for decades of lies and deceit, duplicity in the War on Terror. He says that successive US Governments have given Pakistan billions of dollars, and its people...for its people's welfare and to fight the War on Terror, and in return Pakistan has given us nothing BUT terrorism. This kind of in the North Waziristan area that kind of borders Afghanistan and Pakistan. And I wonder if that is a perspective, although anecdotal, that informs US policy, and Trump's policy, towards Pakistan...or at least it SHOULD, and thus the basis for us to retain some presence there. Bolton: Well, I think Trump's decision recently to withhold assistance from Pakistan was correct, I think from time to time you've gotta show 'em the cold steel, and that was a necessary decision. But, I think it's also important to remember, and I said this a moment ago, that they've got a substantial supply of nuclear weapons, and if the terrorists took control, we would find ourselves with Iran on steroids. So it's a difficult balance to walk, it's a country that every time you turn around you've got to grit your teeth and think about it. I had a friend, a colleague, at the State Department, who said that the government of Pakistan is the only government he knows that consists simultaneously of arsonists and firefighters. And, and, and...and, and that's about right, and that's why it's hard to deal with. But, if you walk away from them, China will basically insert itself as the dominant external power, you'll have this greater risk of even more proliferation of nuclear weapons and this risk of conflict with India rises as well. So, it's hard, and it does require a well thought-out strategy, which is something again, Trump inherited basically a vacuum in terms of strategic policy regarding Pakistan, and he's still gotta make one up. Proft: You talked about the prospect of Pakistan becoming Iran on steroids, if terrorists got a hold of the nuclear weapons...what about Iran, minus the steroids, the actual Iran, and Trump and his position on the Iran Nuclear Deal, and his position that it was the worst deal in American history, at least at a foreign policy level. What are you hoping he says about the survivability of that deal tonight? Bolton: Well, I think if he just repeats what he said before, it'll be a reminder to everybody in Congress that he's still waiting to see if they can come up with anything. I mean, I would have abrogated this deal on January the 20th, 2017, during the Inaugural Address, because it was a strategic mistake. It was the worst diplomatic deceit that the United States has ever suffered, and it hasn't gotten any better with age. So I'm...I'm...if you put me down as what my druthers would be, we would have been out of it long ago. But if it's not gonna come till May, so be it. This is a good time to work with our allies in Europe, and others around the world, to talk about the reality that is going to exist on that date in May when Trump pulls the plug on this thing, which I certainly hope he does. Proft: He is Ambassador John Bolton, former US ambassador to the United Nations, Ambassador Bolton thanks again for joining us, appreciate it. Bolton: Always glad to be with you, thanks for having me!

Related Content

Will The Olympics Lead To Denuclearization?

Did John Bolton’s mustache prevent him from being on the NSA? Should the world be more worried about North Korea potentially selling their nuclear technology to other bad actors? What is the general assessment of the Trump’s realist foreign policy agenda so far? Should everyone’s New Year’s resolutions be to avoid non-stories in mainstream media and focus on real-life events happening? Former US Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

View full transcript


Proft: Good morning, Dan and Amy. And well, there were a number of interesting excerpts from Michael Wolff's book "Fire and Fury", which has created a furor inside the Beltway. And among the subjects that were discussed in the excerpts that were released, personnel decisions in the early days of the Trump administration, conversations that were alleged to have occurred between Steve Bannon and Roger Ailes, formerly the head of Fox News, was at the time, about particularly foreign policy and national security posts, including national security adviser. And one of the names mentioned by Ailes was former US ambassador to the UN, John Bolton. But Steve Bannon worried about his physical appearance... Jacobson: Like Steve Bannon should be talking? I mean, "Sloppy Steve", according to one of President Trump's tweets? Proft: Well, see...I don't think Steve Bannon was up for NSA, but Bannon suggested that one John Bolton didn't look the part, according to the President, because of the signature mustache. Jacobson: The mustache makes the man! Please! Proft: Okay! Well John Bolton certainly thinks that! And we're pleased to be joined by our friend, former ambassador to the UN, John Bolton. Ambassador Bolton, thanks so much for joining us, appreciate it. Bolton: Yeah, and what a WONDERFUL morning, right? Jacobson: Yeah, how are you doing? Proft: Yeah, nobody likes to be criticized about their fashion sense, yours truly included. But, how did you react to that excerpt? Did you kind of laugh at it, or did it ring true to you? Bolton: Guys look, at this point....no, at this point, what else are you gonna do? And I just want to say, for those of you who watch The Kennedy Show on Fox Business Network, comes on normally in the 8 o'clock hour, I was on last night, and Kennedy gave a ROUSING endorsement to my mustache...so I told her I'm sure that would put me in great standing with the president. Proft: Well I mean, if she endorses it, then I say you keep it. Bolton: Right? What else do you need to know, right? Jacobson: But so, I mean...do you think that you did not get the position because President Trump does not like facial hair? We're not dealing... Bolton: I don't think so. You know, people should remember his father had a mustache, so unless you're, you know, deeply into Freudian stuff, I think this is all *Proft laughs over a few words* at this point. Proft: Alright, alright, alright, enough mustache talk. Jacobson: The silliness aside... Bolton: I'll be happy to continue on this stuff. Proft: Yeah, we'll be happy to get to the reason we have you on, and that's what's going on between your ears, your knowledge of geo-political matters. So let's start with Iran, and what you think the prospects are for...to borrow a phrase...regime change, with the protests that are rolling through the streets...and not just of Tehran? Bolton: Well, it's a very significant development, what's going on in Iran, and something that I think is a direct threat to the regime of the Ayatollah is what was called "The Green Movement" in 2009, when they were protesting the obviously fraudulent presidential elections that kept Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in office. There, the protests were just which candidate of the regime would take over. There's no opposition to the regime as such, at least none that was publicly visible. What we see now in these demonstrations, which are taking place in over 100 cities across Iran, is they are chanting "Death to Khamenei", the Supreme Leader, "Down with the Regime!" Now, this particular round of demonstrations may end, it may be repressed, but a line has been crossed here. And I think the regime is in trouble, I think it's much more fragile than its international appearance. I mean, you've got decades of economic mismanagement, I think that's where many of these protests get started, you've got nearly 70% of the population is under 30...they know they could lead a very different life. They can see it across the Gulf in Doha, Dubai and Abu Dhabi, they can see it on the internet. And there's enormous tension in the different ethnic groups in Iran. Persians are only 50% of the population. So there's a lot going on, and as I say, whatever happens with the current round of demonstrations, I think this is torqued up to a new level of threat to the regime. Jacobson: Do you think that President Trump should have inserted himself in supporting the protesters in his tweets? Bolton: Absolutely! I think that, number one, it was important to show, yet again, that Barack Obama is no longer President. A lot of people in foreign countries that don't know anything about the American political system, no reason that they should, they sort of assume one President's pretty much like another. That's obviously not the case as we understand, but I think it is important for the President to stand up and be clear about where the sympathies of our country lie. And there's a very direct analogy to some of the strong statements that Ronald Reagan made about the Soviet Union during the last days of the Cold War, when he called the Soviet Union "the evil empire", not Natan Sharansky and other dissidents inside prison camps. Many of them inside the Soviet Union said they heard Reagan, they heard other statements like that, and it gave them strength, it lifted their morale, it said "somebody on the outside understands what we're going through here", and it gave them...helped them increase the will to continue, it boosted their courage. So I think it's important that...that he did it, and that it was the right thing to do. Proft: The President's taken some heat this week for a tweet about how big his button is, in respect to Kim Jong Un's button in North Korea. You know, a little bit of hysteria from the DC Press Corps, that's nothing new, suggesting he's, you know, engaged in nuclear brinkmanship. I thought that tweet was kind of a little gratuitous and unnecessary, but the larger point about the Trump administration's position on North Korea consistent with the principled realist approach they are taking to geo-politics. Bolton: Well I think the Trump administration inherited very bad options from its predecessors. North Korea's made tremendous progress towards having the capability to deliver thermonuclear weapons to any target they want, really, around the world, but particularly in the United States. So he's had to try, in a very short period of time to identify policies that will put a lot more pressure on North Korea, whether it's through China, or greater sanctions. I don't think North Korea's ever going to voluntarily give up its nuclear weapons program, especially given how close it is to achieving something it's been after for 30 years. You know, we weren't able to pressure or talk them out of the program in the last 30 years, why did anybody think in the last six, nine, twelve months, they're certainly gonna say "Oh, well, we got 99% of the way there, but I guess we'll stop now." It's not gonna happen! So, unless you're prepared to see North Korea with nuclear weapons forever, you've got some pretty tough options you've got to look at. Not that anybody wants to see military force used, but just think about what it's like to live in a world where Kim Jong Un DOES have his finger on the button. And beyond that, can sell his nuclear technologies to Iran, to terrorist groups, to other would-be aspiring nuclear powers. So, you know, it's a desperate situation with respect to the threat of North Korea, but it also represents, potentially, the crashing and burning of 50 years or more of American counterproliferation policy, the effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. Because North Korea's success here would prove that if you just have the determination and the patience, you too can be a nuclear weapon state. That's a very bad lesson to be learned around the world. Jacobson: Well,we've the Olympics, in about 32 days they begin, and that hotline between North and South Korea has been re-opened, and they have a big conversation coming up January 9th. Do you think the Olympics could help lead to any type of denuclearization? Bolton: No, this is complete propaganda! And remember that in 2000 and 2004, the North and South Korea Olympic teams marched together under one flag, as I recall. During the presidential administrations in South Korea, Kim Dae-jung and Roh Moo-hyun, two presidents who had the same view, they called it the "Sunshine Policy"...that's sweet...about how to deal with North Korea. And it failed then, and it will fail now. The reason I think the North has opened this up is to distract attention, so that now people talk about "Oh, the Olympic Games!" In the meantime, their nuclear scientists and their ballistic missile technicians are working overtime to complete what they need to do to have that delivery capability. So you know, this is kind of a bait and switch affair for the North Koreans, they've got it in their playbook, they roll it out whenever they need to, and we shouldn't be suckered by it. Proft: Just thinking about the first year of the Trump administration, and they're basically encyclical describing the principled realist approach to foreign policy. You know, essentially...reducing the budget of the UN, pulling back foreign aid to Pakistan, supporting freedom protesters in Iran, marginalizing ISIS, new sanctions on Russia. For all of the talk about feckless foreign policy, or "he's in over his depth in respect to all of these complicated international matters," seems like that there is kind of a consistent thread that's emerging, consistent with how they've described their approach to all of these countries, whether they're allies of convenience or open hostile countries. And I just wonder what your general assessment of the administration and his national security team is, a year in? Bolton: Yeah, I mean there's a long list of things; recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capitol, and the national security statement is, as you mentioned...but all of these things, I think, are in the mainstream of conservative Republican foreign policy. So you get the media that gets its hair on fire each morning with a couple of tweets that come out, when you look at, as you say, almost exactly a year's worth of policy, and it would be hard to distinguish what Trump is doing in the White House from what Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Jeb Bush would have done in the White House. So, you know, it's hard...it's hard not to kind of react when the media gets on a tear, but I'm just steeling myself, I'm kind of working on my self-discipline, just to continue to ignore what the mainstream media say and just actually focus on real events in the real world, not what's in the newspapers or what's on NBC, ABC, and CBS. Proft: A good New Year's Resolution for us all. He is former US ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, Ambassador Bolton, thanks for joining us, appreciate it. Bolton: Oh, great to be with you, thanks for having me!

Related Content

Another Non News Story Revealing The Agenda Of The Mainstream Media

Did NBC conveniently wait until the day President Trump was traveling to Vegas to meet with victims and their families to release the Tillerson comments that were allegedly said in July? Should the FBI wait to comment on possible motives or potential ISIS affiliation until the investigation is concluded? Could childhood disturbances and gambling debts, common hardships for a lot of people, possibly lead someone to become a mass murderer? The Vegas shooter’s motive remains a complete question mark. Former Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Foreign Policy Establishment In DC

How realistic is a regime change in North Korea? How do we convince China to apply economic pressure on North Korea? What’s in it for China to keep a Kim Jong Un regime in power? Is the American business community on board with possible economic sanctions? Was Sebastian Gorka done in by the "courtier class" inside DC's foreign policy establishment? Did the Trump administration lose its America first foreign policy initiative? Former U.S. Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton joins Dan and Amy to discuss.

Related Content

Is Putin A Liar?

ISIS has been pushed out of Mosel, what does that portend for the future of Iraq? Should we celebrate the Syrian ceasefire? Is Putin a liar? If the Left is so worried about meddling in US elections, why are they so uninterested in domestic voter fraud? Did Trump have a successful G20 summit substantively only to undermine it rhetorically? Dan & the Chicago Tribune's Kristen McQueary asked former Ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton.

RELATED CONTENT

End The N. Korea Threat By Ending N. Korea

Since Dennis Rodman's shuttle diplomacy failed, what can be done to avenge Otto Warmbier and end Kim Jong-un? Is the North Korea threat growing? Is ending North Korea the only way to end the North Korea threat? Should the U.S. impose sanctions? Dan & Amy asked former US Ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton.

RELATED CONTENT

Bolton: Not Likely To Be Part Of Trump Administration

John Bolton, Former Ambassador to the UN, joined Dan Proft & Amy Jacobson to discuss the appointment of Dan Coates to Dir. of National Intelligence, why the lack of deployed American aircraft carriers is concerning, and whether or not he will join the Trump administration.

Related Content

Dan & Amy Interview Former U.S. Ambassador to the UN John Bolton

Will ISIS fail on its own? To the extent POTUS strategy is discernible, is it equal to the task?What tools should the intelligence community have to combat radical Islamic terrorism?

Amb. Bolton addresses these and other issues.

related content