i m not sure they d want to go that route and if we didn t tell them, the situation worse. i m not sure where lindsey graham is getting his information and frankly getting the odds. the real problem is a couple of things. one, there is a potential for miscalculation. i mean if we have these bombers flying so close to the north korean coastline, what if someone take as pots shot at one of those? so there s this kind of crisis issue we need to deal with, and i thought secretary tillerson was trying to allude to that, some kind of communication challenge, but instead seemed to go back into the issue of communicating for the purpose of having talks with a apparently no purpose to the talks. seems as if we are totally stuck. that there is no way to change this calculus right now? it s not looking good right now, but certainly we have a chinese president, fresh out of a party congress looking as strong as ever inviting the
south korean president to china. china looks like they d like to deal with this and i wonder, where s our diplomacy? the answer, no diplomacy unless you have diplomats and mr. tillerson anies this is a one-man operation. it s not. he needs teams of people out there in all kinds of different places. well, i don t know if those teams will ever get appointed in the tillerson era as fast as it appears to be coming to an end. ambassador chris hill, as always out of denver, colorado tonight, thank you. up next, is one of the president trump s judicial nominees ready for a lifetime appointment to the bench? you be the judge. have you ever tried a jury trial? i have not. civil? no. criminal? no. bench? no. state or federal court? i have not. ( ) more people shop online for the holidays than ever before.
and i think this issue whether we ought to sit down, talk to the north koreans about nuclear weapons or the weather is not today s issue right now. so before this tillerson popping up his head about talks, no preconditions and then, of course, the sort of the mini walk-back today, we were sitting on this odd comment from lindsey graham, perhaps, a future replacement to tillerson at the state department, might be a 70% chance of some sort of military action against north korea the next time they test something. do you get the sense if the north koreans test another nuclear weapon our response is not going to be diplomatic? i do not get that sense, because the military response and an overt response of that kind, say a bombing strike of some kind, we would have to be informs the south koreans ahead of time, they d need to protect 20,000 south koreans.