Q: Some years ago a woman on our staff came into my office to, basically, tell me off and complain to me about others and about myself. This woman had not been very supportive of me in my role ever since I began working there. I couldn’t figure out if she was arrogant or lacking in self esteem. During this meeting / confrontation, she told me, in no uncertain terms, just what she didn’t like about some recent decisions I had made. I listened to her speak for about 30 minutes. She, quite methodically, tore me apart. Initially, I had planned to hear her out, make a few vague remarks, and send her on her way, thinking that maybe she just needed to be heard. But about 20 minutes into her harangue, I had a change of heart. I decided that, if she asked for a response for me, if she asked my advice, I was going to tell her exactly what I thought. She did, in fact, ask me for a response. I asked her if she was a happy person, and said that I suspected that she was not, as she came across as a bully and was acting like a horrible person. She sat and looked at me, then burst into tears. I waited. Looking up, she said, “Yes, you are correct. I am a horrible person. And I am miserable. What can I do?” We spent some time discussing what she could do, and (even though I didn’t want to take the time to do it) I asked her if she would like a mentor — me? She said that she would like such a thing. This woman and I ended up becoming fairly, no, very good friends and she has been one of my strongest supporters. I didn’t expect that. The woman complained about the staff - before a confrontation - after a meeting - not enough information - during a meeting
A: during a meeting


Q: SEOUL — South Korean Foreign Minister Kang, Kyung-wha said on Wednesday that the U.S. and South Korea jointly made the decision to suspend combined military exercises scheduled for August, but would not confirm if her government was given advanced notice before U.S. President Trump announced his intention to cancel the drills, after he met with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un in Singapore on June 12. “We have made it clear that this is a goodwill gesture to strengthen the dialogue momentum at this point, but they are not irreversible. They could quickly come back should we see the dialogue momentum losing speed or North Korea not living up to its denuclearization commitment,” said Foreign Minister Kang. During a press briefing in Seoul, the foreign minister said she was in in close communication with U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo about the drills directly following the Singapore summit. And while the announcement canceling the exercises came suddenly, Kang said, South Korea was also considering this option to keep diplomatic momentum moving forward following the U.S.-North Korea summit where Kim reaffirmed his commitment to the “complete denuclearization” of North Korea. The now cancelled Ulchi Freedom Guardian exercises normally held in August usually bring in 3,000 more American troops from abroad and involve 50,000 South Korean troops. No decision has yet been made whether the other large-scale joint exercise held in the spring would be suspended as well. At the Singapore summit Trump said he would cancel the “war games” that he said were both enormously expensive and “provocative,” as an act of good faith and in response to North Korea’s commitment to denuclearization, its continued suspension of nuclear and missile teats, and the recent closing of its nuclear testing site. North Korea has long called for the end of these joint military exercises that it says are offensive “rehearsals for war.” In the past U.S. officials refused to suspend the joint drills, that they defended as defensive in nature... What does Kane probably think of Mike Pompeo? - he is level headed for seeing the importance of canceling the - not enough information - he can save them money - he had the right to have the drills cancelled
A: not enough information


Q: Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s longtime personal lawyer who is under investigation for his business dealings, has provided legal advice to Fox News host Sean Hannity, one of Trump’s most prominent media supporters. The dramatic revelation came Monday during a court hearing in New York where lawyers for Cohen and Trump argued for permission to determine whether thousands of pages of documents FBI agents seized from Cohen last week should be subject to attorney-client privilege. U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood appeared to reject the idea, saying that a “taint team” created by prosecutors to set aside privileged documents is a “viable option,” while a court-appointed outside lawyer known as a “special master” may also play a role in determining which records can and cannot be viewed by prosecutors. The disclosure about Hannity, who also hosts a nationally syndicated talk radio show, came after prosecutors indicated that Cohen performed “little to no legal work” and had just one client: Trump. In response, Cohen’s lawyers said that Cohen has represented three clients in the past year — Trump, GOP fundraiser Elliott Broidy and a third “publicly prominent individual” who wished to remain anonymous. Cohen's lawyers identified Hannity as the third unnamed client only after Judge Wood ruled that it must be made public. In a statement, Hannity sought to minimize his relationship with Cohen, saying he had never retained him as a lawyer. “Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter,” Hannity said. “I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective." “I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party,” Hannity said. Fox News also responded to the revelation. "While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity's informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in... How long was the meeting between Fox News and Hannity? - About a day - Under an hour - not enough information - About a week

A: Under an hour