[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 63 (Wednesday, April 18, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Page S2242]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                       Nomination of Mike Pompeo

  Mr. President, later today I have the honor of meeting with the 
Director of the CIA, Mike Pompeo, who has been nominated by the 
President of the United States to become America's chief diplomat, the 
U.S. Secretary of State. I am looking forward to catching up with the 
Director about several global challenges and his priorities as the next 
Secretary of State.
  What confounds me as I stand here today is that many of our 
Democratic colleagues have made his nomination a partisan wedge issue. 
Diplomacy, which is what the State Department does, is supposed to be 
about bringing people together, not driving them apart. But sowing 
discord is what some partisans seem content on doing when it comes to 
Director Pompeo's nomination, and it is a shame.
  With the growing number of threats around the world, with heightened 
tension in North Korea and Syria, it is clear that we need an 
intelligent, qualified person in that position. It is time to put 
partisan politics aside and to confirm this nomination. There is no 
good reason why we shouldn't be able to do that. After all, the 
editorial board at the Washington Post argued persuasively that 
Director Pompeo should be confirmed. Fourteen Democrats supported him 
when the Senate voted last year to approve his nomination to lead the 
CIA.
  Back then, our colleague, the senior Senator from Virginia, said that 
he believed Pompeo would be an ``effective leader of the CIA at a time 
when the Agency is facing many challenges.''
  The junior Senator from Virginia added that Pompeo ``has a keen 
understanding of the CIA's role'' and was ``knowledgeable about our 
Nation's cyber threats.''
  Those seem like pretty nice compliments and pretty accurate 
assessments to me.
  But now some Democrats are saying they oppose Pompeo's nomination for 
the State Department. On what grounds? Is the CIA any less important a 
job than the State Department? To be for Director Pompeo as Director of 
the Central Intelligence Agency and against him for Secretary of State 
seems to be unreconcilable.
  Some have attempted to justify their opposition saying that he is 
somehow anti-diplomacy, but that claim is frankly false.
  We just heard last night of the news of Director Pompeo's trip to 
North Korea. Two Democratic Senators from Connecticut praised the 
groundwork that was being laid, saying they were ``glad'' that 
preparations were being made for upcoming negotiations on the 
denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula and that this is the sort of 
diplomatic effort on the part of Pompeo that is undoubtedly welcome.
  I agree with those comments. It is important to make sure that we 
exhaust all efforts to a diplomatic resolution on the Korean Peninsula, 
rather than see an armed conflict with so many innocent lives lost and 
so much bloodshed. So I applaud Director Pompeo and this administration 
for taking the diplomatic avenue so seriously and making that trip, 
laying the groundwork for the President's negotiation with Kim Jong Un.
  That raises the question: How possibly could Director Pompeo, in 
light of this news, be the warmongering, anti-diplomatic caricature 
that some Democrats have painted him to be? It is just not true. The 
Director's trip is not the only thing that established his diplomatic 
credibility.
  I have spoken about Director Pompeo's credentials on several 
occasions in the past. As we know, he graduated first in his class at 
the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, where he was an engineer. He 
served in the U.S. Army, earning the rank of captain, and he served as 
a cavalry officer in various parts of the world.
  When he went to law school, he graduated at the top of his class and 
practiced at a prestigious law firm. Then he went into business, 
founding an aerospace company, and later ran for the House of 
Representatives from his home State in Kansas.
  Those that know Mike know that ``brash,'' ``impulsive,'' and 
``reckless'' are not words you would ever use to describe him. He is 
not somebody looking to pick a fight with dangerous regimes or to flex 
military muscle unnecessarily.
  Actually, Director Pompeo is careful, thoughtful, and deliberate. He 
listens, he studies, and he gets along with people. Above all, he has 
the sort of experience we need in our next Secretary of State.
  It is true that he has military experience, but that doesn't 
predispose him to military conflict as the best way to resolve our 
disputes with other countries--to the contrary. And he has much more 
than just that experience.
  He served honorably on the House Intelligence Committee, and he has 
now served at the CIA for more than 1 year. So he has that vital 
intelligence background.
  As I said, he worked in law and business. So he understands the role 
of civil society and public institutions and building the durable rule 
of law in countries unlike our own.
  I hope our colleagues will remember these qualities in the days 
ahead, and I hope Director Pompeo will be confirmed on the floor in 
short order. It would be a grave mistake for this body to fail to 
confirm the next Secretary of State, particularly leading up to the 
important negotiations with regard to the nuclear weapons capacity of 
the North Korean regime. The likelihood that it could be resolved short 
of armed conflict should encourage all of us to continue to support 
those diplomatic efforts and to support Director Pompeo as the next 
diplomat in chief.