Now of course the news will find new things to obsess about. But as I was talking in my Periscope last night, the news is totally lost in the weeds. Trump and the White House are trying to make sure that the risk of nuclear war is lowered in all the hot spots around the world. He's trying to calm down the Middle East and maybe actually make something work. North Korea denuclearization. So Trump is up here working on the very top priorities. And his enemy press, if we can say that, is talking about, well did he say would or wouldn't? And then there's a new one down in the weeds, the unimportant stuff.

The new one is that apparently this summit with Putin, the second one, was in the news and announced when Dan Coats, who's the Director of National Intelligence I believe, was on stage at some event being interviewed. And he learned of it by somebody reading it off their phone in public while he was in front of the crowd. Now if he didn't see it, Coats was very funny because he did a sort of a comedic double-take with, what did you say? And made it clear that he didn't know anything about it.

Now the media reported this as, he was on fire. How can Trump make such a decision and not even inform his Director of National Intelligence, who has to learn about it while he's giving a speech? It's the worst thing in the world. It was Andrea Mitchell who was interviewing him and told him about it.

So here's my feedback on that. That's my feedback to the entire story that Coats wasn't in the loop. So here's the thing. Whose decision? It wasn't Trump's. What if Trump had talked to everybody and gotten all their feedback? What would they have said? They would have said, I think don't do it, because that last one went so poorly.

Do you know who says don't do it because the last one went so poorly? People who believe history repeats. Do you know what history never does? It never repeats. It can't, because the situation changes. The fact that we observed something happening in the first summit changes what can happen in the second summit. Trump got practice. Trump learned what works and what doesn't. Trump's taking the home-field advantage. Trump's going to make sure probably that there's some kind of progress or something to announce. The bar is lower because of the lesson. So nothing is the same.

What do you think Trump's advisers would have told him to do? They would have told him not to do it. Did he need to ask them for their advice when he already knew what they would say and it wasn't going to be what he decided to do? There's only one person who needs to make the decision. It wasn't Dan Coats. And it doesn't really matter how he found out, because Trump made the decision. People probably should have told Dan Coats a little sooner. I assume somebody in his organization might have heard wind of it before the media. And you know what, even if Trump, I don't know if this happened, but even if Trump had told the media before he told even one person, am I okay with that? Yep. Totally okay with that. Whose decision is it? Trump's decision alone. His decision alone. What does everybody else have to do with that decision? They find out about it after he makes it. So that Dan Coats found out about it after he makes it, is that ideal? No, probably not. Wouldn't it look better if everybody knew and they were on the same page? But does it matter? No, it does not.