so, jeffrey lewis, welcome. you were talking about lowering expectation, what -- how dao'an lies what happened after the joint communique? was that better or not as good as you expected? >> i didn't lower my expectations quite far enough. you know, what the joint statement says on the issue that i care about, reducing the threat from north korea's nuclear weapons, is really just a reaffirmation of the statement that kim jong-un made to president moon, which uses the word denuclearization. and i think it's probably very important to say that that word denuclearization does not mean disarmament. and so i think that the two parties are as far apart as they have ever been. >> jeffrey lewis, there has been a round up, if you look on all the sort of instant analysis over the last several hours since this happened. there is quite a lot of skepticism about precisely that point and another point, which is the halting of the war games. but let me first press you on the denuclearization. the word was referred to a lot, pre

jeffrey lewis, congratulations on the book, thanks for being with us today. let's talk about -- >> it's a pleasure. >> -- the repatriation ceremony was long-awaited, the last ceremony was in 2007 when i was in pyongyang on that mission. and we don't know and we will not know until they do this very complicated forensic study as to how to pair this up with people who are missing and unaccounted for. there are 5,300 americans missing from that war zone. we're talking about 55, not the 200 that kim jong-un promised in singapore at the summit. >> yes. well, you know, one wants to take this very seriously. and every single rema maimain t get back is worthwhile, and that's worth doing. but, you know, i think we have to put this in the broader context of negotiations. what we've seen from the north koreans are a series of goodwill gestures which are welcome, but they fall far short of north korea agreeing to give up their nuclear weapons. and i think we're pretty far away still from having a normal relationship with north korea that isn't controlled by, you know, th

lewis and former counter terrorism official phil mud. >> can i ask you a question first? how crazy are all of these people? what is going on? goodness. >> there you go. >> answered jeffrey's question this morning. on the legal fronts here, first of all, did she break the law? i mean, d.c. is one party consent. this is the situation room. there are national security questions. >> clearly she committed a firing offense while being fired so i don't think it counts. i don't think this is a legal issue. i think this is an insight into the administration and the kind of people who work there and how they treat each other, which is bonkers. >> walter shab, obviously the former ethics czar said on cnn there's some irony that she's being told she's being fired for misconduct while she's committing misconduct. >> yes. there's a certain kind of comedic aspect to it for sure. one thing i would say this is not without precedent. we haven't seen this in a long time but if you go back far enough, you'll find that the reason richard nixon was wiretapping and taping all of his conversations with everybody was he then as we know heard from omarosa had a white house where people were going