When the South Korean boy band/K-pop sensation BTS takes the stage in Seoul this June, ending a four-year touring hiatus, it will mark more than just a comeback — it will validate one of the shrewdest soft-power decisions in recent memory.  

In 2022, at the absolute apex of their global dominance, the group’s seven members chose to fulfill their mandatory military service rather than seek exemptions, which would almost certainly been granted. Their management company, HYBE, supported the decision. The world got a masterclass in how cultural power is created. 

The cynics predicted career suicide. Instead, BTS demonstrated that soft power isn’t built on avoiding obligations — it’s built on embracing them. When they reunite on stage, they’ll do so with enhanced credibility, having proven their success didn’t exempt them from the responsibilities of ordinary citizens. Americans remember Elvis taking a similar course at the height of his fame.  

The great thing about soft power is that, while generated by creative individuals and companies, it’s to the entire nation’s benefit. Like economic and martial power, soft power generates influence that can be used to bolster a nation’s standing. Examples of soft power abound from Britain’s cricket legacy and rock ’n’ roll ‘invasion’ of the 1960s to French and Italian cinema to America’s NBA, jazz music and Hollywood’s entertainment machine. Now, South Korea is stepping up.

Thus, it is almost tragic that while BTS was serving in the military, the ecosystem that made the band possible faces mounting scrutiny. South Korea has become expert at creating cultural phenomena that captivate the world — and equally expert at treating the architects of that success with suspicion once they achieve scale. This is a pattern South Korea cannot afford.   

South Korea’s cultural preeminence did not emerge from a government plan. It sprang from creative ambition, commercial ruthlessness, and just enough regulatory space for experimentation. The K-pop system requires massive capital investment, sophisticated global distribution and executives willing to bet nine figures on whether teenagers in Jakarta and São Paulo will stream the same songs. 

Yet, there’s a reflex in South Korean public life that treats popularity itself as evidence of wrongdoing. Bang Si-hyuk, the producer who built HYBE and shaped BTS into a global phenomenon, now faces legal scrutiny over stock transactions — the kind of corporate governance questions that seem to emerge almost inevitably once South Korean companies achieve sufficient scale.   

The particulars matter less than the pattern: bold risk-taking generates soft power, then invites investigation once it succeeds. 

Executives who might build the next BTS or international TV steaming sensation like, ‘Crash Landing on You,’ watch what happens to those who came before and recalibrate their ambition accordingly. In cultural soft power, this reflex is potentially fatal. 

South Korea’s competitors are watching. China has spent billions trying to manufacture soft power through state-directed enterprises. The PRC has largely failed — because audiences smell propaganda. South Korean free enterprise is succeeding in creating cultural exports that are simultaneously local and universal, specific enough to feel authentic in Seoul and accessible enough to travel across the globe.  

This is South Korea’s opportunity. Japan was given a similar window in the 1990s with anime and video games, but largely failed to capitalize on the trend because of governmental missteps. South Korea could easily repeat that mistake and lose the global influence that comes with serious national soft power. 

South Korea needs to recognize soft-power assets as strategic resources. France protects its luxury brands because Paris recognizes these companies project French taste globally in ways no government agency could. South Korea should ask: What institutional arrangements allow us to maintain standards while protecting our champions? 

South Korea’s cultural preeminence did not emerge from a government plan. It sprang from creative ambition, commercial ruthlessness, and just enough regulatory space for experimentation. 

BTS’s decision to fulfill their national military service obligations demonstrates what’s possible when artists, companies and national interest align voluntarily. HYBE supported that choice. But South Korea can’t count on such choices being made repeatedly if the system treats success as inherently suspect.

In June 2026, when BTS embarks on a global tour generating billions in economic impact and incalculable goodwill toward South Korea, remember this moment almost didn’t happen. The members could have sought exemptions. Instead, they chose service and came back stronger. 

But South Korea can’t count on such choices if the message to cultural entrepreneurs is that success invites scrutiny. The next generation is watching, deciding whether to aim for global impact or settle for domestic safety.

South Korea stumbled into becoming a cultural superpower. It doesn’t have to stumble out of it. But that requires recognizing that the bold, imperfect figures who build global cultural enterprises are assets to be protected, not problems to be managed. 

BTS made their choice — they bet on their country. Now, South Korea needs to decide if it’s going to bet on the people who create the next BTS, or put them under investigation instead. 

George Washington Plunkitt was born into poverty in 1842 but rose through the ranks of the Democratic Party machine of New York, the famed ‘Tammany Hall,’ to become a state representative and a state senator. He also became quite wealthy along the way.

Plunkitt always defended his machine and its methods — and the money they made him. Plunkitt would gladly defend the practices of Tammany, rebutting charges of corruption with the standard reply that ‘nobody thinks of drawin’ the distinction between honest graft and dishonest graft. There’s all the difference in the world between the two.’

Plunkitt’s brazenness lives on in the modern-day machines of the left, found in the deep-blue jurisdictions of the country. With the focus on the bilking of Minnesota taxpayers by the Somali community of the Twin Cities (many citizens, many not), voters across the country are still in shock as the story has unfolded since 2022. The lights shone on the Gopher State should get much brighter now, and after that, I have a follow-up that will make the swamp of the Twin Cities seem like a puddle.

The Minnesota story has been hiding in plain sight, with superb reporters from one of the original blogs of more than 20 years ago, Powerline, poring over the scandal for years.

Powerline’s founders John Hinderaker and Scott Johnson, and more recently their colleague Bill Glahn, have continued to dig and report, dig and report, dig and report on the ‘Somali connection.’

In recent weeks, the story caught fire with the help of reporting by Ryan Thorpe and Christopher Rufo of the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal and by Fox News. That ‘Minnesota is drowning in fraud,’ as Thorpe and Rufo put it, has now become a national story. Pray that it is the first of many.

‘There’s an honest graft, and I’m an example of how it works,’ Boss Plunkitt would say. ‘I might sum up the whole thing by sayin’: I seen my opportunities and I took ‘em.’

Turns out the defendants, the indicted and the convicted in the Gopher State saw their opportunities as well, and they put Tammany to shame when it came to scale and speed.

The conmen of Minnesota bilked the state out of vast piles of cash through a variety of plays, the most infamous of which is, for the moment, ‘Feeding Our Future.’ It took truly extraordinary efforts by Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and the state’s attorney general, Keith Ellison, to turn their eyes the other way to allow that scam and soon others to flourish. The possessed girl in ‘The Exorcist’ had nothing on Walz and Ellison when it came to turning their heads.

We have former Attorney General Eric Holder and former White House Counsel Dana Remus to thank for elevating the massive fraud ring run primarily out of the Somali American and Somali community in the Twin Cities to the nation’s attention.

Why? Because that pair made Walz much more than an obscure governor of a deep-blue state. That duo was primarily responsible for ‘vetting’ the 2024 Democratic nominee for vice president as one of Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris’ potential running mates. The dynamic duo of Holder and Remus either wholly missed the massive cons run on Walz’s watch or judged them not significant enough to derail his candidacy.

During ‘Brat Summer,’ the legacy media abandoned its past practices and joined in the effort to push the worst pair of candidates to the finish since Alf Landon and Frank Knox got blown out by FDR in the 1936 referendum on Roosevelt’s New Deal.

Holder blessed Walz, and Holder’s fans in the Manhattan–Beltway corridor followed suit. Media elites blessed Holder’s judgment in turn.

Big mistake.

Now Walz is part of the national Democratic Party’s brand and refuses to go away, choosing to concentrate his efforts on running for a third term as governor next year — and apparently hoping he might be the party’s standard-bearer in 2028. Instead, ‘Feeding Our Future’ broke out of the Minnesota news ghetto and onto the national stage.

‘Run Tim Run’ should be the GOP’s chant, alongside ‘Run Gavin Run,’ because just like Walz, California Gov. Gavin Newsom has some industrial-level explaining to do.

No, I’m not referring to the California governor’s French Laundry debacle. And no, not the devastating fires that tore through L.A. in January. Not even his indicted former chief of staff. No, the exact parallel to Walz’s woe is the Newsom administration’s handling of COVID-era relief for the unemployed — a statewide con run by political cons.

The Pandemic Unemployment Assistance program (PUA), like the Lost Wages Assistance plan, was devised and funded by Congress to keep alive Americans left unemployed or with their businesses shuttered by COVID lockdowns. Like standard unemployment programs, these COVID-era programs were primarily run through state unemployment insurance offices and other state agencies.

The COVID lockdowns were unprecedented, and the public health ‘authorities’ responsible for advising and administering them should never be taken seriously again.

Many of those bureaucrats, drunk on new authority, stepped forward when elected officials sought guidance on what to do about the mysterious and deadly disease imported from China. (Their dismissal of the lab-leak theory speaks to their actual, as opposed to presumed, expertise.)

When lockdowns became the solution du jour, Congress rightly understood that they were shutting down the livelihoods of tens of millions of Americans and flooded the country with life-saving money — three times.

It was not just the Minnesota Somali community that had ‘seen their opportunities and took ‘em.’ So, too, did the cons of California: the real, honest-to-goodness cons of the California penal system — inmates for whom available time to scheme and scam is abundant.

Ask your favorite AI engine, ‘How much fraud was perpetrated against the California Employment Development Department during COVID?’ The answers will vary, but the floor on the cost of the fraud is $20 billion. The ceiling is more than $30 billion.

The Golden State’s EDD is ‘run’ by a director, and Gov. Newsom, who took office in 2018, has appointed two: Rita Saenz and Nancy Farias. COVID arrived on Newsom’s watch, and he and his appointees should own the fraud that followed. They make the Walz–Ellison team look like pikers when it comes to ignoring fraud.

In his first term, President Trump stood up Operation Warp Speed, and Congress rightly decided to (1) spend federal dollars to lessen the lockdown pain and (2) leave the payment of most public benefits to state agencies, while COVID business loans were handled by private-sector banks as the Federal Reserve and Treasury Department innovated in a variety of ways to prevent an economic crash.

The years following the mishap at the Wuhan lab demonstrated the vast incompetence of the American administrative state but also the necessity of a federal government to pick up the tab when ‘scientists’ lose their collective minds and, for example, counsel the closure of schools.

The official timeline has COVID appearing in Wuhan in December 2019 and reaching U.S. shores a month later. We may never know when the first cases were diagnosed by the Chinese Communist Party, and we are not in a position to investigate the horrific fraud and consequent disaster for which General Secretary Xi Jinping is responsible.

But President Trump could order a six-month deep dive into the financial fraud that followed in the U.S., not just in Minnesota and California — though those are the ‘patient zeroes’ for never allowing a crisis to pass without enriching the state’s worst actors.

Could President Trump stand up a time-limited panel to investigate fraud perpetrated on state agencies during COVID? Yes. Might that panel torch a few GOP reputations along the way? Inevitably.

But the interest in the Minnesota Somali shakedown should be a demand signal for accountability across the country.

President Trump often acts in the mold of Teddy Roosevelt, who, like 45–47, was never afraid of a headline — provided he provoked it.

Now is the time for the president to ask a handful of the smartest, most respected people in the country to sort through the wreckage of the COVID era’s many state governments’ responsibilities and ‘initiatives’ and report in rapid fashion — and in clear English — the scale of fraud perpetrated upon state agencies.

Make your search-and-publicize team smart and fast. Putting Johnson and Hinderaker as co-chairs of a strike team devoted to compiling the facts as we know them today would ensure accuracy and fine writing.

And give them a deadline: Aug. 31, 2026. Voters deserve to know how their state governments worked during COVID — or didn’t — before they vote again.

For Social Security it has been a miserable year. 

After President Donald Trump unleashed Elon Musk and DOGE on the Social Security Administration, the agency lost more staff in a shorter period of time than ever before in its 90-year history. Fortunately, public outcry and pushback from congressional Democrats saved Social Security from a 50% cut to staffing and the closure of scores of field offices as Trump and his administration had announced back in March. So, somehow, those dedicated workers remaining at the Social Security Administration have still managed to keep the agency running — without missing a single monthly benefit payment. 

There are not many public or private insurers in the world who can claim to never have missed a monthly benefit payment in 90 years. 

This is good news for 71 million Americans — many of whom depend on their earned benefit every month as a lifeline. But we are not out of the woods yet. The agency has been gutted. Enormous damage has been done to customer service and to the agency’s ability to process claims.

Just as many are demanding that Trump’s deep cuts to healthcare be restored, so too must Trump’s deep cuts to Social Security be restored, as the two are inextricably linked. Sixty-four million Medicare recipients will see a reduction in their Social Security benefits in 2026 due to Trump’s Medicare price hikes that will cut into their Social Security cost-of-living adjustment (COLA), making life more expensive for seniors. This is the greatest erosion of the Social Security COLA in nearly a decade, and the first time that Medicare premiums exceeded $200 per month. 

With the Social Security Administration’s staffing now reduced to a 60-year low and baby boomers swelling the number of active beneficiaries to an all-time high, the agency is struggling badly, and the American people are paying the price. Wait times to get to a person in a field office or to talk to a person on the 1-800 line have become longer and longer.  

As the Trump administration claims that things have never been better, millions of Americans are having a very different experience. In fact, more people today now die waiting in line for their initial disability determination than at any time since President Dwight Eisenhower signed the disability portion of the act into law in 1956. Even just recently, Trump and DOGE risked 300 million Americans’ personal data from the Social Security Administration. They have robbed Americans of customer service and peace of mind.

Conditions have grown so bad – Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works, has called for Social Security Commissioner Frank Bisignano’s resignation. It proves to be a telling illustration of the deep concern experts have for the damage done to the agency. 

None of this had to happen. It was made to happen. As a candidate, Trump vowed all through the campaign that he would protect Social Security. Instead, he wrecked the program’s customer service, took a chainsaw to its functions and maligned its reputation with false claims of waste, fraud and abuse.

In a time of great political division, Social Security remains the most strongly supported program in America. In fact, 80% of Americans are concerned whether Social Security will be available when they retire and want it to be strengthened, made better — not hacked to pieces, privatized or liquidated. 

This is a democracy moment. Social Security should be a bipartisan issue. All lawmakers — Republicans, Democrats and Independents alike — need to come together to deliver on its promise of a secure retirement after a lifetime of hard work. 

President Donald Trump spearheaded major changes to the Kennedy Center Honors ahead of the highly anticipated awards ceremony. 

Founded in 1978, the Kennedy Center Honors recognize a handful of performing artists every year for their lifetime contributions to culture. The Kennedy Center Honors, which are presented by the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C., are considered the nation’s top lifetime achievement award for the performing arts.

After returning to the White House in January, Trump, 79, became chairman of the Kennedy Center board and has since undertaken efforts to reshape the honors program — pushing for a glitzier, star-studded celebration. 

In August, Trump announced this year’s lineup of honorees, which included country legend George Strait, Hollywood star Sylvester Stallone, rock band KISS, Broadway icon Michael Crawford and Grammy Award-winning singer Gloria Gaynor.

‘The 48th Kennedy Center Honorees are outstanding people, incredible, we can’t wait… in a few short months since I became chairman of the board, the Kennedy Center, we’ve completely reversed the decline of this cherished national institution,’ he said in his speech.

From overhauling the honoree selection process to unveiling a new medallion, here’s a breakdown of how the Kennedy Center Honors have been revamped under Trump. 

Trump-led selection process 

Since the Kennedy Honors’ inception, the honorees were chosen by a bipartisan committee that worked with the Kennedy Center’s artistic staff, the Board of Trustees, external arts advisors, and the Center’s president and Honors team. 

While U.S. presidents have historically participated in the ceremonial aspects of the Honors including hosting a White House reception and attending the gala, they typically have not been directly involved in the selection process. 

However, Trump said he played a major role in choosing the 2025 honorees during an August event at the Kennedy Center to announce the recipients. 

Though there was a Special Honors Advisory Committee that made recommendations, Trump appeared to confirm that he made the final choices.

When reporters asked Trump how involved he was in selecting the 2025 honorees, he responded, ‘I was about 98% involved… they all came through me.’

‘I turned down plenty, they were too woke,’ he continued. ‘I had a couple of wokesters. No, we have great people. This is very different than it used to be.’

While taking aim at the state of Hollywood awards shows, Trump took a swipe at the Oscars.

‘Look at the Academy Awards — it gets lousy ratings now, it’s all woke,’ he said. ‘All they do is talk about how much they hate Trump, but nobody likes that. They don’t watch anymore…’

Trump concluded his ‘very long answer’ by saying he ‘was very involved’ in the selection of the Kennedy Center Honorees.

New medallion

For 47 years, the medallion received by the honorees had remained unchanged. The Honors medal hung from wide satin ribbon in five bright rainbow colors that formed a V-shape around the honoree’s neck. 

The gold circular medallion was shaped like a starburst and featured an abstract representation of the Kennedy Center building and was handmade by the same family for nearly five decades. Throughout the awards show’s history, the medallions were handmade by the Baturin’s, a Washington D.C.- based family of artisans and metalworkers. 

In a press release issued on Tuesday, the Kennedy Center announced that the medallions ‘have been re-imagined and donated by Tiffany & Co.’

‘As the first American high jewelry house, Tiffany & Co. has played a defining role in American luxury culture for nearly two centuries – making them the ideal collaborator to design the Honors medallion,’ the press release continued. 

‘The brand-new medallion features a gold disc etched on one side with a depiction of the Kennedy Center. The building is flanked by rainbow colors representing the breadth of the arts celebrated when receiving the Honor. The reverse side bears the Honorees’ names in script above the date of the Medallion Ceremony, December 6, 2025. The medallion hangs from a navy-blue ribbon, a color associated with dignity and tradition.’

Massive governance shake-up ahead of the Honors

n February, Trump announced a major shakeup of the Kennedy Center leadership. He revealed that he had decided to immediately fire multiple Kennedy Center board members appointed by former President Joe Biden and other prior trustees, including the chairman, and fill that role himself.

Trump claimed he and the former chair David Rubenstein along with the ousted board members ‘do not share [the same] vision for a Golden Age in Arts and Culture,’ according to his announcement on Truth Social.

‘We will soon announce a new Board, with an amazing Chairman, DONALD J. TRUMP!’ he added. 

Trump also criticized Kennedy Center programming, including drag shows, under the prior administration.

‘Just last year, the Kennedy Center featured Drag Shows specifically targeting our youth — THIS WILL STOP. The Kennedy Center is an American Jewel, and must reflect the brightest STARS on its stage from all across our Nation. For the Kennedy Center, THE BEST IS YET TO COME!’ Trump said on Truth Social. 

He later replaced the former members with 14 other members, including allies including second lady Usha Vance and ‘God Bless the USA’ singer Lee Greenwood. 

The new board elected Trump as chairman on Feb. 12. Trump dismissed long-serving Kennedy Center president Deborah Rutter and appointed his ally Ric Grenell – who became the U.S.’s first openly gay cabinet member under the first Trump administration when he served as acting director of national intelligence – as interim executive director amid the board overhaul. 

More mainstream-pop culture class of nominees 

The 2025 honorees including KISS, Gloria Gaynor, George Strait, Sylvester Stallone and Michael Crawford indicated a shift toward recognizing artists from more mainstream, pop culture fields rather than the cross-disciplinary lineups of prior years. 

During the first two decades after the Honors were founded, the recipients were mainly from the world of classical arts with some notable exceptions including actor James Cagney, actress Lucille Ball and film director Elia Kazan. 

In the mid-1990s, the Honors began expanding toward mainstream entertainment, honoring more pop musicians, rock artists, film and television actors and Broadway stars. The expansion accelerated through the 2000s and 2010s and into the 2020s.

In addition to mainstream artists, past honoree classes have always included representation from classical music, jazz, dance, opera or composition.  However, 2025’s lineup features no honoree from those disciplines, marking a first in modern program history.

The 2025 honorees chosen under Trump’s direction are entirely from rock, disco, country, film and Broadway.

In the Kennedy Honors Center’s August press release announcing the honorees, Grenell said, ‘For nearly half a century, this tradition has celebrated those whose voices and visions tell our nation’s story and share it with the world.’ ‘This year’s Honorees have left an indelible mark on our history, reminding us that the arts are for everyone.’

Trump will host the Honors 

At the August event to announce the honorees, Trump announced that he will host the Kennedy Center Honors gala, becoming the first president in history to host the event. 

‘I’ve been asked to host. I said, I’m the President of the United States. Are you fools asking me to do that? ‘Sir, you’ll get much higher ratings.’ I said ‘I don’t care. I’m President of the United States, I won’t do it.’ They said, ‘Please,” Trump told reporters.

Trump went on to say that his Chief of Staff Susie Wiles also asked him to host the Honors. 

‘I said, ‘OK, Susie, I’ll do it.’ That’s the power she’s got,’ he said. ‘So I have agreed to host. Do you believe what I have to do? And I didn’t want to do it, OK? They’re going to say, ‘He insisted.’ I did not insist, but I think it will be quite successful, actually.’ 

‘It’s been a long time. I used to host ‘The Apprentice’ finales and we did rather well with that,’ Trump added, referring to his long-running NBC reality competition show.

‘So I think we’re going to do very well, because we have some great honorees, some really great ones.’

During Trump’s first term, he and First Lady Melania Trump did not attend the Honors or host the traditional White House reception for the honorees.

In 2017, honorees including Norman Lear and dancer Carmen de Lavallade announced that they would not attend a White House reception hosted by Trump in protest.

The White House subsequently issued a statement that read: ‘The president and first lady have decided not to participate in this year’s activities to allow the honorees to celebrate without any political distraction.’

Trump and Melania also did not attend in 2018 and 2019. In 2020, the Honors were postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic and instead took place in May 2021, with a revamped format including smaller, socially-distanced and virtual tributes.

The 48th Annual Kennedy Center Honors will take place on Dec. 7 at the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C. and will air Dec. 23 on the CBS Television Network and on Paramount+

The Senate is quietly winning the battle over states’ abilities to craft their own artificial intelligence (AI) regulations, but there is still a desire to chart out a rough framework at the federal level. 

The issue of a blanket AI moratorium, which would have halted states from crafting their own AI regulations, was thought to have been put to bed over the summer. But the push was again revived by House Republicans, who were considering dropping it into the annual National Defense Authorization Act. 

However, Republicans in the lower chamber have pulled back from that push, even as the White House has pressed Congress to create a federal framework that would make regulations more cohesive across the country. 

A trio of Senate Republicans, Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri, Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who banded together to block the original proposal, cheered the provision’s apparent rise from the grave.

Hawley told Fox News Digital that it was good news that the provision would not be included in the defense authorization bill, but warned that ‘vigilance is needed, and Congress needs to act.’

‘I mean, for everybody out there saying, ‘Well, Congress needs to act and create one standard,’ I agree with that,’ he said. ‘And we can start by banning chat bots for minors.’ 

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who chairs the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation committee, initially pushed for a moratorium to be included in Trump’s One Big, Beautiful Bill. His position on the issue has been to unchain AI to give the U.S. a competitive edge against foreign adversaries like China.

But that attempt was nearly unanimously defeated over the summer and stripped from the bill. And Cruz hasn’t given up.

‘The discussions are ongoing, but it is the White House that is driving,’ Cruz told Fox News Digital. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., acknowledged that getting the moratorium into the defense authorization bill would be difficult earlier in the week.

‘That’s controversial, as you know,’ Thune said. ‘So, I mean, I think the White House is working with senators and House members for that matter to try and come up with something that works but preserves states’ rights.’

Trump declared last month that the U.S. ‘MUST have one Federal Standard instead of a patchwork of 50 State Regulatory Regimes,’ and argued that over regulation at the state level was threatening the investment, and expected growth, of AI. 

The White House reportedly drafted an executive order that would have blocked states from regulating AI that would have withheld certain streams of federal funding from states that didn’t comply with the order, and enlisted the Department of Justice to sue states that crafted their own regulations.

So far, Trump has not taken action on the order. 

Blackburn, who was the leading player in thwarting Cruz’s previous attempt to assert an AI moratorium into Trump’s marquee tax bill, also wants some kind of federal framework, but one that is designed to ‘protect children, consumers, creators, and conservatives,’ a spokesperson for Blackburn told Fox News Digital in a statement. 

‘Senator Blackburn will continue her decade-long effort to work with her colleagues in both the House and Senate to pass federal standards to govern the virtual space and rein in Big Tech companies who are preying on children to turn a profit,’ the spokesperson said.

And Johnson, another key figure in blocking the moratorium earlier this year, argued to Fox News Digital that it was an ‘enormously complex problem. It’s my definition of a problem.’ 

But unlike his counterparts, he was more skeptical about Congress producing a framework that he would be comfortable with.

‘I’m not a real fan of this place,’ Johnson said. ‘And I think we’d be far better off if we passed a lot fewer laws. I’m not sure how often we get it right. Look at healthcare, look at how that’s been completely botched.’ 

‘What are we gonna do with AI? Hard to say, but we just don’t go through the problem-solving process,’ he continued. ‘And again, I’m concerned, the real experts on this have got vested interests. Whatever they’re advising is, can you really trust them?’