director pompeo: yes. senator: the burma military are engaged in a vicious destruction of this culture. this brutal campaign has already driven over 600,000 rohingya survivors to bangladesh. what's your message to the burma military with regard to how you view muslim leadership inside of burma, who are fighting to protect the very existence of this muslim minority inside of burma? senator: american diplomats have and must continue to do our level-best to stop this strategy -- this tragic activity, and that's the burmese military in particular who is responsible for that. senator: well, i think it is important that there be a moral clarity that is uttered by the secretary of state, by the president of the united states, about the muslim population of the planet. you know, leaving an impression that somehow or other they are less entitled to full protection or respect for their commitment to human rights, i'm afraid says to those who wish to use the member population as an excuse for actions that would other

pompeo would infuse u.s. warm policy with his views that muslim is a monolith that they might fight. -- notot inconsistent only inconsistent, but will compromise our nation's ability to conduct effective diplomacy with muslim committees around the country, their allies, and internationally. i would argue further that would impede us to would receive adequate representation from our government. thank you. >> thank you very much for interfaith alliance for organizing this. i direct the shoulder to shoulder campaign, a coalition of religious denominations and organizations that have come together to stand collectively against and a muslim bigotry in the united states. membership includes the conference of affleck bishops, of bishopsnference and other unions. groups came together and are religious police and political persuasion, we stand that this country must continue to better its commitment to religious freedom, neutrality, and respected all of us rely on this common commitment unless we stand together to uph

like mike pompeo. and so it wasn't a coincidence when a presidential candidate stood up and said if you elect me i will ban on muslim some entering the united states, he wasn't laughed off the debate stage. he was left off the debate stage because this conspiracy of islamophobia had penetrated the mainstream because of its access to people like the nominee to be the secretary of state. that is disqualifying to me. that is not about mike pompeo's views. it's not about my differences with the policies he is going to espouse as secretary ofs state. that speaks to his qualifications. and so this is one of the most important debates that we're going to have. and these are exceptional times for both of us, republicans and democrats, dede with an initiation that conducts its self very differently than others. but when it comes down to it i don't think that by casting a no vote i'm violating the traditions of this body, which have admittedly given deference to the president in some of these choices. for cabine

pompeo has those qualities so i will be voting no on his nomination. i yield the floor. >> as i said earlier this week in committee i am generally disappointed to be casting a vote against a secretary of state nominee. i believe the united states needs an effective leader on the global stage but at the end of the day as i i consider directr pompeo's nomination including his hearing, his past statements and recent revelations, i have lingering concern along three broad themes. mr. pompeo failed to express any tangible diplomatic strategies for which he would advocate to advance american interests. he failed to be forthright with a committee and finally i don't have a satisfactory answer to the question which mike pompeo might ask to cast a vote on. virtually during his nomination where he had an opportunity to address all these concerns, director pompeo offered contradictorynt statements and s less than forthcoming when pressed on a number of issues. given the opportunity to outline the strategies, he would advocate with the administration to deal with

pompeo: no. menendez: this has a connotation of foreign policy. this is about russia. respond,ding how you what she would do if you were looking at mandatory sanctions the administration has yet to impose, looking at how we are going to kill us a russia -- russia that such to interfere with our elections and across the world -- it is not fo r me simply a question of interest, a question of understanding, what you were asked, how you responded, and what you did. i am happy to talk about the administration's work on russia and our work on sa nctions. the president has discussed the russian investigation with you? pompeo: i will not discuss my private investigations with the president. i am happy to answer questions about our administrations politics, the work we are doing. i have provided and spoken with special counsel robert mueller, who requested an interview and i cooperated. your colleagues on the senate intelligence committee have asked for information from me. the leaders o thow -- of those

pompeo: no. menendez: this has a connotation of foreign policy. this is about russia. respond,ding how you what she would do if you were looking at mandatory sanctions the administration has yet to impose, looking at how we are going to kill us a russia -- russia that such to interfere with our elections and across the world -- it is not fo r me simply a question of interest, a question of understanding, what you were asked, how you responded, and what you did. i am happy to talk about the administration's work on russia and our work on sa nctions. the president has discussed the russian investigation with you? pompeo: i will not discuss my pvate investigations with the president. i am happy to answer questions about our administrations politics, the work we are doing. i have provided and spoken with special counsel robert mueller, who requested an interview and i cooperated. your colleagues on the senate intelligence committee have asked for information from me. the leaders o thow -- of those tw

joining us to talk to us about mike pompeo. a little bit about the hudson institute. what is its positioning? >> we're dedicated to promoting u.s. international leadership. we are center right. we do a lot of work on international affairs, on u.s. national security. and economics as well. >> when it comes to mike pompeo specifically, you had an op-ed. >> i think he has a chance to be a transformative secretary of state. he has the full confidence of the president. this is a man if you know him, he's a strategic thinker. he has got a very impressive background. he graduated first in his class at west point. went to harvard. was a successful businessman. served three terms in congress as -- in the house of representatives. served on the intelligence committee. has an amazing grasp of public policy. he has an ability to connect with people. he's great listener. has strong convictions, but knows that the president is the one who is largely calling the shots. he's there to advise the president. they've developed a terrific relations

amy: that is mike pompeo in 2015. zaid jilani, if you could talk about this and how it is being discussed right now. connections to a number of anti-islamic groups, not to mention these kind of views. >> i think this is exactly the kind of thing that we would expect congress to start interrogating pompeo on today when he has his first hearing before the foreign relations committee folks. pompeo not only has appeared and made some sort of offensive remarks here and there, he has actually been a booster of an organization called act for america, which is led by a woman named brigitte gabriel, who argued very strongly that the essential problem with terrorism are basically centralized to the religion of islam. our diplomats across the world have to deal with very large muslim population. most of our conflicts are with muslim majority populations. it is very unclear whether mike pompeo actually knows how to speak diplomatically, whether he can ask lisa press these sorts of use -- even if he was doing this as a political p

pompeo. so i will heed that admonition madam president and not question the motivation. the vote is either yes or no of this nomination. i would simply observe this. mike pompeo is a highly qualified nominee, a distinguished former member of the house of representatives. he served with accomplishment and great dignity and ability as director of the cia. he graduated first in his class in the united states military academy at west point and went on to serve to graduate with distinction at the harvard law school and served as editor-in-chief of "the harvard law review." this is a manin of great intellt and ability and great accomplishment so without impugning the motives of anyone who would vote no i think they observe they will be voting a highly accomplished and qualified nominee. when the shoe w was on the other foot during the obama administration i along with members with an almost unanimous majority of members of my caucus in favor of the confirmation of hillary benton to be secretary of

pompeo. and so i will heed that admonition, madam president, and not question the motivation of any senator who votes either yes or no on this nomination. i will simply observe this. mike pompeo is a highly qualified nominee, a distinguished former member of the house of representatives. he served with accomplishment and great dignity and ability as director of the cia. he graduated first in his class from the united states military academy at west point, and went on to serve, to graduate with distinction at the harvard law school and served as editor in chief of the harvard law review. so this is a man of great intellect, a man of great ability and great accomplishment. without impugning the motives of anyone who would vote no, i simply observe ill be voting against highly accomplished and qualified nominee. when the shoe was on the other foot during the obama administration, i along with members, overwhelming, almost unanimous majority of members of my caucus voted yes in favor of theti con

pompeo should be supportive. mr. president

pompeo is in charge. he said we can tear up our agreement with iran even though they have fallen through on their -- followed through on their part just because mr. trump and mr. pompeo have decided they don't like it. who would negotiate with a united states that has so little respect for the standing of its promises? i cannot in good faith vote in favor of mr. pompeo for the reasons i have outlined, but there is another reason i cannot vote for him, one that is deeply personal to me. shortly after the boston marathon attack, then-congressman pompeo accused muslim leaders of being silent about the bombing and even said they were potentially complicit in the attack. after the marathon bombings, all of boston grieved together, including our muslim leaders. our muslim communities helped massachusetts emerge stronger and more united. to suggest otherwise is insulting to the boston marathon bombing victims and to our muslim american brothers and sisters. when he was shown to be wrong, mike pompeo refused to a

pompeo. so i will heed that admonition madam president and not question the motivation. the vote is either yes or no of this nomination. i would simply observe this. mike pompeo is a highly qualified nominee, a distinguished former member of the house of representatives. he served with accomplishment and great dignity and ability as director of the cia. he graduated first in his class in the united states military academy at west point and went on to serve to graduate with distinction at the harvard law school and served as editor-in-chief of "the harvard law review." this is a manin of great intellt and ability and great accomplishment so without impugning the motives of anyone who would vote no i think they observe they will be voting a highly accomplished and qualified nominee. when the shoe w was on the other foot during the obama administration i along with members with an almost unanimous majority of members of my caucus in favor of the confirmation of hillary benton to be secretary of

he told me he is leaning against .ight mike pompeo -- against mike pompeo. >> what are rand paul's principal objections so far? rachel: he objected to mike pompeo's military interventionist policies, his advocacy for the war in iraq and potential military intervention in iran over its nuclear program during the obama administration. >> as you mentioned a moment ago, chris coons leaning against voting for the mike pompeo nomination. give us a sense why senate democrats are proposing his nomination. rachel: democrats have cited, in addition to the director's previous opposition to the iran deal, his past statements equivocating the russian government interference in the 2016 elections, some objectionable comments he made about muslims and their potential complicity in terrorist attacks if they were not condemning them, as well as his stances against gay civil rights. and also the sense that he, a number of senators don't think he will tell president trump things he does not want to hear. there is concern about who will and whethero jump they will speak truth to power. >> do you think the meeti

he felt like pompeo was withholding by not that holding that. another senator, when i asked if she had any objections, she said she did not. she cited the need to have diplomacy on north korea as a reason for voting to confirm mike pompeo. host: late in the week, heidi heitkamp lending her support saying she would support the nomination of mike pompeo when it comes to the senate floor. let's go back to the count in the foreign relations committee. your tweet, saying pompeo is one vote away from historic negative confirmation. what do you mean by historic? what happens if it is reported out unfavorably? guest: i used the word historic because to our knowledge it has never happened before. they did not begin releasing the votes of executive meetings until the 1920's. so far back as we have history, there has never been a negative vote of a secretary of state nominee by the committee. in the actual vote, there's three things that could happen. they could vote favorably, which they don't have the votes to do. they could vote unfavorably, which they

pompeo. some of the organizations here are 5013's the organizations. 501(c) may are not exercise their prerogative. you will hear from scott simpson , maia berry, and catherine or sport, the director of shoulder to shoulder campaign. when they get appear, i will begin. is dedicatedliance to protecting fate and freedom. we take as our mission championing true religious freedom. especially individual rights, and unitinglicies diverse voices to challenge extremism and build common ground here in the united states. we are concerned with the domestic agenda, but the integrity of the united states policy depends on united dates domestic policy. it is especially when we seek to uphold and protect and defend the constitution, necessary that we keep a concerned vocus on those who take that oath. case, thely, in our rights of the first amendment. to that end, interfaith alliance has questions that we would like to see asked of mr. pompeo in his confirmation hearing as he -- ford for this radical this c

pompeo should be supported. i yield the floor. >> congressional report assessment order leader chuck schumer about the mike pompeo nomination. he explained why he's voting against. >> i'm going to oppose the nomination of secretary pompeo. i met with him several times while he was cia director. we have very good discussions. i was pleasantly surprised he took a stronger stand on russian sanctions from the president did. then we talk foreign policy and i'm going to wait and hear his hearing. i was disappointed so i asked for a second meeting. we do not talk foreign policy issues. i asked two things. i said first to me more important than the great decisions that a secretary of state has to make his rule of law in america. would he be willing since there's not many in the administration to speak out publicly and forcefully that the president should not fire mueller rosenstein she demurred. i said now that your secretary of state you're in a different situation which you walk back the nasty comments he has made abo

pompeo's hearing -- at mr. pompeo's hearing, i became very disappointed. first the president has shown in word and deed that he often directs foreign policy by impulse ee ratically and consistent -- erratically and inconsistently. the fact that we were dealing with several hot spots in the world, north korea, iran, syria, venezuela, russia, means we need someone at the state department who not only values diplomacy but is willing to check the president's worst instincts. unfortunately, mr. pompeo's testimony and of course public testimony is the real test, it did little to convince me that he would be a strong tempering influence on an often erratic president. he didn't convince me that he would be the kind of secretary that most of us believe secretary mattis is, who is able successfully to check the president when the president might go off base. but even more disappointing was mr. pompeo's tepid responses to questions about his commitment to bedrock principles like rule of law. as important and difficult as our foreign policy decisions are, the nation i

pompeo has a great relationship with the president. i do believe "to speak on behalf of the president and not be undercut as former secretaries of state was, is important. but relationship means that you value the relationship more than the truth. have youelationship hesitant to push back and say, this is not the best way to proceed? i wonder. we didn't choose if there is a nato manias friday. we didn't choose when the president fired the secretary of state tillerson and the timing of that. we didn't choose as to when he nominate director pompeo. would inches when director pompeo got his information in on his questionnaire. we ditches when he got his answers to the questions that were pumped up to him by members of the committee. while i appreciate there's a nato summit, it is not fair to the essence of vote -- an to cast a affirmative vote for a nominee who otherwise in our view is flawed. i would just say that we cleared today's vote. meeting ina second case there was a need for a second meeting tomorrow. they are voting no, maybe d.

pompeo has played a critical role in those efforts. the secretary of state who defend american interests abroad protecting national security and making the world safer place. he has been the best at everything he's put his mind to. he was first in his class at west point. a graduate of the harvard law school. he served our country in the military. his run businesses before serving in congress. mike has the resume, the character, and the record and results to make him an exceptionally qualified leader for this job. as we weighed in limbo without a secretary of state lives are on the line. national security is on the line, our freedom is on the line. i urge my colleagues to stop putting politics before america's national interest. his body passed hillary through secretary of state with 94 votes. i urge them to make the best decision for country their constituents back home and join me in confirming mike pompeo as the next secretary of state. >> thank you. glad to be here today to be on the senate floor

pompeo's only past offense. mr. pompeo has suggested homosexuality is, quote, perversion, an insinuation mr. mr. pompeo ever-so-cleverly did not address when questioned by my colleague senator booker. at the c.i.a. he also canceled a pride month event, which featured a discussion on the importance of diversity and an appearance by the parents of matthew shepherd, a young man beaten, tortured, and left to die in wyoming on account of his sexual orientation. how can the united states stand with the lgbtq people in chechnya who have been the victims of violence simply because of who they love, if our nation's top diplomat has disparaged who they are? the offenses continue. followingthe horrific patriot's day bombing in boston, he alleged that american muslim leaders were, quote, potentially complicit in violent acts for failing to speak out. under my questioning at the confirmation hearing, he refused to apologize for these comments. why was i concerned? it happened in boston. why was i concerned? because the muslim le

amy: that is mike pompeo in 2015. zaid jilani, if you could talk about this and how it is being discussed right now. connections to a number of anti-islamic groups, not to mention these kind of views. >> i think this is exactly the kind of thing that we would expect congress to start interrogating pompeo on today when he has his first hearing before the foreign relations committee folks. pompeo not only has appeared and made some sort of offensive remarks here and there, he has actually been a booster of an organization called act for america, which is led by a woman named brigitte gabriel, who argued very strongly that the essential problem with terrorism are basically centralized to the religion of islam. our diplomats across the world have to deal with very large muslim population. most of our conflicts are with muslim majority populations. it is very unclear whether mike pompeo actually knows how to speak diplomatically, whether he can ask lisa press these sorts of use -- even if he was doing this as a political p

on these three tests i don't believe director pompeo measures up. first, the belief in the separation of powers. if we aren't standing up for article one powers no one else will. the founding fathers were clear that when it came to military engagement is the congress and only the congress that has the ability to declare war. admittedly or is so much fuzzier concept today than it was when armies were marching against each other and tidy peace treaties. so i understand declarations of were harder today when enemies never go away. but i ask a series of questions of director pompeo at the hearing wish to leave me with confidence that he understood there still must be some places in which only the congress can declare hostility. i don't believe the president has the ability to take action against the syrian regime without the confirmation of congress. there's members of his own cabinet that believe the same thing. secretary mattis counseled him to come to congress for us. so i queried about it and i asked if there is any attack launched against the unite

what changes when pompeo comes in? >> that is the ultimate statement of how donald trump feels about diplomacy and the importance of the state department is the fact that you have had the yawning gaps in staffing. i think pompeo has gotten more sway with president trump. when you talk about trying to get the state department rolling the way he wants to he has the president's ear in a way that rex tillerson never did. >> we take a look now at what has happened in the last few minutes, a couple of minutes ago in the halls of the capitol. we want to get to beirut. mike pompeo will talk syria. he will talk about the situation developing in the mid east. bill, we are now hearing this morning from allies internationally -- i heard from white house sources a lot of discussion about working with the uk and france on any action moving forward and new statements from assad himself. what do you know? >> reporter: so kelly o'donnell used the word back pedaling. so at the same time as president trump was tweeting that any attack co

pompeo said he disagrees with the characterization of his comments. there's nothing to characterize, he made these comments on the for the house of representatives. it's a part of the public record. how can he effectively represent america to muslim leaders around the world who are just as interested as we in preventing religious motivated violence. he claimed the statements were meant to demonstrate extremism requires the most credible voices to take them in stand against violence. he would be considered the most credible diplomatic voice from the world. how could muslim nations ever feel respected when his voice such tape. he cowrote an article on migrants that blame sweden's radical immigration policy on political correctness. mayor, spill leader in finding pathways to protect syrians, iraqis fleeing the death and destruction of war. sheltering seeking shelter from oppression and burma in addressing the other refugee crisis will stop political correctness or moral responsibility. america is a nation built by immigrants and refugees. many companies

mike pompeo for secretary of state. i respect the members concerns , iut reading a precedence know how demanding in training this was today. i will vote yes. >> that is what i would have expected to -- expected. let us have a vocal -- roll call. atno. 11:00 p.m. >> no. >> no. >> no. >> no. >> no. >> no. >> no. mr. chairman? >> yes. 11 ayes, 9 noes. >> i think we have done the right thing and i want to thank senator kunz. with that, it completes the .ommittee's business without objection, the committee will stand adjourned. announcer: c-span, where history -- unfoldsaily daily. c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies. today, we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme and public policy events in washington dc and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. coming up tonight on c-span, our live landmark pieces series continues next with the 1969 court decision in the case of tinker versus des moines. for

pompeo will be my fourth. in each case i have supported the president's nominee to serve as secretary of state. president obama's choices for secretary of state would certainly have not been my choices. in the case of secretaries clinton and kerry, there were numerous issues where we had substantial disagreements. i believed that as to the secretary of state, however, the president was entitled to deference as to his choice, and that choice deserved bipartisan support because their credibility as the top diplomat is strengthened by bipartisan support. another important factor is that with secretary pompeo, world leaders will know that he speaks directly on behalf of the president, something that has been an issue in the past. this quality is very, very important for a secretary of state. director pompeo is more than qualified to serve as secretary of state. in fact, at this point because of his service at the c.i.a., director pompeo is uniquely positioned to be a very successful secretary of state. no other pl

in the end, mike pompeo gets confirmed in republican s line p and vote for mike pompeo. republicans have the votes to confirm if they want to put those votes up so let's see what happens. >> maybe with a negative recommendation or no recommendation from the foreign relations committee. hanging in the balance is gina haspel to be cia director. her confirmation hearing delayed. maybe because they think if pompeo doesn't get confirmed, you don't need to go through the agony of trying to confirm her. >> look, to her -- she's a controversial nomination and, you know, the -- i think the democrats are going to look at her. she brings this issue of torture is a big issue. and putting her in there i think would be tough. >> rick tyler, ron, thanks for being ,here. >>> more ahead, we'll be right back.histil smuggled booze and dodged the law. even when they brought you in, they could never hold you down. when i built my family tree and found you, i found my sense of adventure. i set off on a new life, a million miles away. i'm heidi choiniere, and this is my ancestry story. now wit

secretary pompeo: let me take the second one first. i do look forward to getting to work in washington. i'll be out there on tuesday. and i've talked about this a lot. i just met with a great group of state department officers who work here at the mission. they may have been demoralized, but they seemed in good spirits. they are hopeful that the state department will get its swagger back, that we will be out doing the things that they came onboard at the state department to do. to be professional, to deliver diplomacy, american diplomacy around the world -- that's my mission set, is to build that esprit and get the team on the field so that we can effectuate american diplomacy. i know that the state department and the people there can do that. with respect to the jcpoa, we talked about it some today. i'm confident that that'll be a topic on my trip throughout the middle east as well, not only talking about the concerns that president trump has expressed consistently, but talking about ways to potentially address those shortcomings, fin

i will vote for mike pompeo to be the next secretary of state. i want our state department to be functioning as fully and vibrantly and it's gross of lance we can around the world. with that, area urge my colleagues to put partisanship aside and confirm mike pompeo as our next secretary of state. >> i rise to join you and others on the floor hoping that we have moved this week to support the confirmation mike pompeo was nominated to be secretary of state. we had this morning in the joint session importance of our country those who tear their defense of freedom and security to stand up for that. there are threats all over the globe. everybody realized that mike pompeo would have the knowledge she needs to do the job. he has the experience and he has the support of the president you be representing. historically until recently years this body dealt with form policy as if we're sure bipartisanship starts at the waters edge. partisanship and that the waters edge. that was evidenced in the secretary of state's job confirming people to important positi

pompeo. and so i will heed that admonition, madam president, and not question the motivation of any senator who votes either yes or no on this nomination. i will simply observe this. mike pompeo is a highly qualified nominee. a distinguished former member of the house of representatives, he served with -- with accomplishment and great dignity and ability as director of the c.i.a. he graduated first in his class from the united states military academy at west point and went on to serve -- to graduate with distinction at the harvard law school to serve as editor in chief of the harvard law review. so this is a man of great intellect, a man of great ability and great accomplishments. without impugning the motives of anyone who would vote no, i simply observe that they will be voting against a highly accomplished and qualified nominee. when the shoe was on the other foot during the obama administration, i along with members -- with the overwhelming, almost unanimous majority of members of my cauc

host: the idea that pompeo would not push back on trump over issues? guest: i'm offended by the analogy that you used about the vice president, as someone who has an excellent relationship with the president. he gives advice and does so quietly behind the scenes. as director >> as director pompeo has done the same. he doesn't only want yes-men around. his someone who listens to his advisors. president obama has refused evidence that action needed to be taken after the military action after the searing chemical weapons attack. including the possibility of inspections of other military facilities in iran that were left off the original deal where weapons could be developed, i think we are going to be in a situation where the president may give the europeans another few months to say show me some changes before we fully exit. think that is probably the right policy. they have now got the message with the nomination of mike pompeo as secretary of state, who is skeptical of the deal. john bolton will continue the skepticism of the iran deal. europeans need

pompeo qualified? host: yes. all, as far asf his background, he graduated first in his classroom a military academy -- i'm not sure which 1 -- he also was a member of congress for many years, a successful businessman, the director of the cia -- what better qualifications can anybody give to this country tha n know with the worldview and situations are that would affect our country? host: missouri is next, republican line, dan. caller: how are you? host: go ahead. caller: i guess according to the pompeo is notmike allowed to have this own thinking? it just seems like everything that we do -- i mean, they are always hacking us. can we not have our own thinking? can we not have her own belief? you get thatid assessment of what democrats thought of mr. pompeo? caller: you know, they are attacking him for saying -- for being against homosexuality? notan, like i asked, are we allowed to have our own thinking? are we not allowed to have our own beliefs? host: what do you think his inking on things will bring to the secr

we know mike pompeo is up to the task. after all, we confirmed him with a be comfortable and bipartisan majority to lead the c.i.a. in one of the most sensitive positions in our government, the quality of his leadership was directly linked to the security of the american people. west point valedictorian, harvard law, u.s. army officer, a successful businessman, three-term congressman, serving on the house intelligence committee. this is the resume that mike pompeo brought to the top job at the c.i.a. with the support of a bipartisan supermajority of the senate and by all accounts his tenure there has been a big success. the caliber of mike's leadership and the quality of his counsel have won him the respect of our national clandestine service and the confidence of the president. just recently director pompeo undertook sensitive conversations with directives of north korea to lay the groundwork for efforts aimed at denuclearizing the korean peninsula. as he steps into this new mission as secretary of state, he clearly enjoy

we're watching mike pompeo. he has arrived to face the senate hearing for his confirmation hearing to be become the next secretary of state. the president's pick mike pompeo to add to your thoughts earlier, bill, talking on iran's dangerous behavior and fixing the egregious flaws in the iran deal. he said they have had too low a price to pay for their dangerous behavior and expected to announce the strategy to counter iran that will raise that cost. >> bill: as we wait for this, our apologies to anyone at sam's club. it was a cute line. mike pompeo will be there in a moment. he has a close relationship with president trump. it's a relationship that has grown as the two men have spent more time together. mike pompeo is the one who would brief the president every morning and it was in these meetings that their relationship start evidence to blossom and it has led from a position at the cia and being nominated to secretary of state which gets us ready for the potential and possibility of this grand summit between t

pompeo. you can see that on c-span, c-span radio app at 5:00 this afternoon. senator dianne feinstein, the anking member of the foreign relations committee on the sunday shows yesterday. she talked about the u.s. approach particularly to north what should be done there. but she also hinted about the pompeo and ctor mike the vote he faces in front of the foreign relations committee become secretary of state. here's senator dianne feinstein from yesterday. a beginning. they are a threat to the united states. i very much welcome this approach and the fact that the presidents will have an opportunity to meet and the new establish perimeter of a relationship. >> it was revealed this week director mike pompeo had made a secret trip to north korea. you've said you have serious doubts about whether he is qualified to be secretary of state. his ou've questioned commitment to diplomacy. bit e things that were a put-off to me about mr. pompeo were a lot of his statements and that's the past now. i think

i'd like to say a few words this morning about mike pompeo, our c.i.a. director and the president's extraordinary choice to serve as secretary of state. in recent days, the world learned director pompeo had undertaken initial conversations with kim jong-un directly -- easter weekend -- to discuss denuclearizing the korean peninsula. obviously he has the confidence of the president, engaged in the most sensitive undertaking one could imagine in today's world, and yet so many on the other side are suggesting they have reservations about this outstanding nominee. pursued with clear-eyed realism and clear objectives, this is a worthy effort. north korea has been a perplexing problem for president after president after president, and mike pompeo is on the point of this effort, which hopefully will finally lead to some outcome. although every commander in chief has insisted that it would be unacceptable for north korea to obtain an icbm, it is this administration that finds itself having to actually achieve that objective because time has run out. so, as a mat

pompeo, if he's confirmed, hopefully the state department will lead the negotiated through pompeo. what happens if the u.s. president and the north korean dictator get together, can't come up with a decision on what to do and things don't go well? >> well, that's not good. i think this summit, the reason i've supported it, things couldn't get worse in the korean peninsula. the fact that they had this meeting, pompeo and kim jong-un, sort of -- >> shepard: i can think of something worse with great respect, sir. i can think of something a lot worse. >> what you want to do is instead of from the bottom to the top, you want the top to the bottom to send a message to the peninsula, to the world, that some potential break through is possible. the worry it is is that the president won't be prepared. there's no secretary of state. we just got the national security adviser, no ambassador to south korea. things are moving in the right direction. early june, you know, that still has some time. the worry i have, shep is that overexpectations. north korea is not going to denuclearize. for us, d

we did not choose as to when he nominated director pompeo. we did not choose as to when director pompeo got all of his information in on his questionnaire. we did not choose when he got members of back to the committee. while i appreciate that there is a nato summit, i think it is that iso suggest that the essence of why we have to cast a vote, and affirmative vote for a nominee who would otherwise in many of our views be flawed. we cleared today's vote. we cleared a second meeting in case there was a need for a second meeting tomorrow. some people said they were voting now. maybe they are voting yesterday. but the bottom line, in anticipation, in order to give a fair opportunity to this nominee, he cleared a hearing today, a meeting notice and for tomorrow as well. putting that all in context is important for people to understand. this is not about simply being adversary to the president. this is about the due diligence of article one and the views as to whether or not this is a secretary of state nominee who does -- who deserves the vote of

pompeo and they had a meeting today. this is happening right at the time that we've learned mike pompeo had actually gone to pyongyang to try to set up the parameters for a possible meeting with kim jong-un. he met with kim jong-un. yet it looks like he's going to have a hard time getting confirmed in the senate. >> this is congress reaching, i think, an incredibly low point. here we have -- and i spoke to director pompeo on north korea a few weeks prior to his going over there because he didn't disclose he was going there. this man understands the issues, dana, and he also knows the profile of kim jong-u.n. he went over there to stress test kim jong-un's stress test. the fact that the president is moving towards a summit tells me there's an opportunity for progress. think about it. director pompeo is involved as a principle player in the most significant diplomatic effort that we've had in terms of a major achievement in 70 years. if this actually does happen, if we are on the cusp of denuclearizing north korea. why wou

who have been following mike pompeo's career. one of the senators in the room noted when he was a congressman, he was opposed to the idea of a president unilaterally striking other countries without congressional approval. whether it be libya or syria. now all of a sudden, that's a position that seemed to have changed to a certain extent. p.j., let me come to you, sir. mike pompeo, is he a shoo-in? >> i don't think he's a shoo-in. but i think he has some -- shown that he is qualified to be, you know, the secretary of state. there are some, you know, questions. i thought senator booker had some very sharp questions about, you know, his personal views regarding things like gay rights and how that might influence how he manages his department or represents american values around the world. by the same token, i think he had -- he showed a strong institutional imperative in sharp contrast to rex tillerson. he understands the importance of resources. as we just talked about, he understands the importance of having a full team on the pl

this meeting with pompeo is a

we have gotten a look at pompeo's prepared remarks. we know he is putting distance between himself and rex tillerson. he is talking about filling some vacancies. for folks critical of tillerson pompeo will try to cast

pompeo can do this job? john: just like we will see with president trump's macron and with angela merkel, things with pros -- things with president trump our personal. -- are personal. he feels very comfortable with mike pompeo who is the sitting cia director, so he has briefed the president several times per week. are other meetings, he is on the phone with the president as things are happening around the world. they have a good personal rapport and they happen to agree. that morning when the president left the white house, he was asked what he had just fired rex tillerson, depending on the day and who you talk to -- talked to , he said >> and i did not see eye to eye -- he said rex and i did not see eye to and he has said nothing but the opposite about mike pompeo. he wants a secretary of state that he trusts when he is out and about around the world, on the phone with world leaders, that they are on the same sheet of music. host: what is the skill set that mr. pompeo brings to the position should he get i

and the drama involving pompeo arguably isn't even about pompeo. it's about the president. let's bring in msnbc correspondent garrett haake outside the room where the foreign relations committee is meeting right now. he has big breaking news. and nbc's halle jackson is at the white house where we are expecting the french president to arrive any moment now. garrett, what is the breaking news? >> katy, as is so often the case with this president the news comes from twitter. although it's not the president's account making the news. but rand paul's in a series of tweets just now the kentucky senator says he spoke with president trump several times today. he spoke again with mike pompeo about some of his views. and after those conversations, he has decided to change his position and says he will vote for mike pompeo to be the president's next secretary of state. now, this changes the storyline here in this committee hearing almost entirely now. pompeo should be able to get through this committee with a favorable vote on a party line vogt. >> wow stereo we have not heard yet how