There is some rationale backing Kim Jong-un's actions, which are survival - survival for his regime, survival for his country. And he has watched, I think, what has happened around the world relative to nations that possess nuclear capabilities and the leverage they have, and seen that having the nuclear card in your pocket results in a lot of deterrence capability. The lessons that we learned out of Libya giving up its nukes and Ukraine giving up its nukes is, unfortunately, if you have nukes, never give them up.

With what Trump is doing now, provoking North Korea, risking actual destruction of part of the US, he is violating the system's rules on its own terms. He's committing an actual threat against US national security. And you would think that in just pragmatic political terms in Washington, that is the kind of thing that could be grounds for impeachment. But as long as he sits in that chair, it's true, the commanders are obligated to obey his order.

Hillary Clinton isn't that different from Obama in terms of policy.

I think it's true that if Trump wins, there will be a real activist mobilization, no doubt about it.

In fact, as far as one can tell, Obama seems to have killed more civilians during his first year than Bush did in his first year, and maybe even than Bush killed in his final year.

One of the priorities of a Trump administration will be to immediately start narrowing the legal space that activists have to mobilize.

Some people have made the argument, well, Donald Trump is bad, but Hillary Clinton may be worse, or there's really no difference. That's insane. That's completely insane.