William R. Richardson

I think the first step has to be--and I think you in the Senate can do this. You could not fund that wall.

A wall is also a symbol of rejection, that we are saying to Mexico, you are not welcome.

I think if you look at what the Congress has pushed forward in the past, President George W. Bush, a path to legalization.

The wall is a huge mistake. It is a geopolitical mistake. It is unworkable. It is going to cost $50 billion. Mexico is not going to pay for it.

This is an economic security issue too.

Henry Kissinger has a very tall order. It's like trying to tame a bucking bronco. But Kissinger is a very respected figure. And I hope he knocks some sense into Donald Trump.

I think Hillary has to show that she can get things done and Bernie Sanders, for all his good policies and progressive face, does not have a record of passing legislation.

As a former Secretary of Energy and Governor of New Mexico, I can assure you that WIPP in our lifetimes has the same chance of accepting weapons-grade plutonium that Yucca Mountain has for accepting spent nuclear fuel. It is self-deluding…

We need some kind of cyber attack agreement with our allies, with our friends. This is out of control. This is like a new kind of conflict.

China has not exactly helped us when it comes to moderating North Korea.

I suspect the most, the glaring and strongest sanction that would be proportional would be the banking sanctions.

I think what the administration needs to do, first of all, yes, find a way to publicly state what we know. Get the facts, make sure that the facts are 100 percent.

The impasse is that what we're saying the North Koreans, 'Look, we're ready to talk to you but you've got to take some concrete steps towards denuclearization. Stop sending those missiles out. Stop detonating nuclear weapons. Behave…

What needs to happen is the Six-Party countries, South Korea, the United States, Japan, Russia, China, especially China that has leverage over North Korea, need to say to the North Koreans, 'Look, release these three individuals.'

I think the goals have to be clear -- deescalate the conflict. Get Ukraine and Russia to talk to each other.

It's a positive sign, the fact that you had all the foreign ministers in one room, especially Ukraine and Russia, although Russia refused to talk directly with a Ukrainian.

The real fear, the real danger is the uncertainty, because what you have now is a totally new situation. Kim Jong Il is gone. There's an untested new leader designated by his father, but there's a cult of personality, a line of succession…

That's the biggest danger that I think is overlooked, the fact that they have sold nuclear materials. They did it to Syria. There's reports they did it with Pakistan. They did it with Burma.

There can't be a future, there can't be a Libyan government with Gadhafi still around.

It's basically saying it's not regime change, but there can't be a future, there can't be a Libyan government with Gadhafi still around.

I do believe we need to look at covert programs to help them. Look, these are rebels; these are young people. They want to recapture their country.

Well, look, it's reached a point where this is one of the most tyrannical regimes of all-time, responding against their own people with these huge atrocities. And the question is, what is the international community going to do?

Eventually you have to stand with those that are being oppressed, and what's the positive with standing with Gadhafi? It's zero.

I think we're reaching a point where the violence in Libya, Gadhafi's acting like a butcher, that the time has come for the international community or the United States to see it as a viable option.

Their rhetoric of the North Koreans on the two women has been muted. It hasn't been on the standoff of nuclear issues of testing. But that is good news. There is not a charge of espionage. So I see some positive hopeful signs to getting…