Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 1:02:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2018 19:58:39 GMT
In all fairness, I'm pretty sure the right lost their poop when Obama said he'd talk with Kim Jong Un, and then criticized he didn't do enough.
IMO, Trump is the cat playing with the mouse Kim Jong Un. The Media thinks it's the other way around. In my opinion, the media editorials are so very bad, they're laughable. And now, I'm supposed to have lost my sh_t because... Trump is behaving exactly the way I thought he would behave? Nope. Not even a little bit. ETA - I totally misread that. Never realized you said Obama. Now it makes more sense!  Just saw your ETA, but I had already looked up this article regarding Obama and NK/Cuba, etc.: Vox Article
I totally agree about the media editorials. They're especially bad (or entertaining depending on the day and my mood  ) right now. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 1:02:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2018 20:03:01 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 1:02:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2018 20:11:33 GMT
After a hearing about mean, terrible, intolerant, snowflake liberals for what feels like forever, this thread is a hoot. Rife with hypocrisy and nastiness from those of you who have done nothing but drone on and on about us evil, mean liberals. jeremysgirl tried to engage respectfully and was told to kick rocks because apparently there wasn't enough deference shown to Dear Leader when she posted. Enjoy your litterbox, ladies! @#notLauren is as happy as a pig in, well, you know. And you know what they say. Roll around with pigs and you get dirty. I hope someone trots this thread out the next time one of you starts with the "mean liberals drove all the nice conservatives away" sob story. Y'all give as good as you get. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 1:02:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2018 20:31:30 GMT
I'm glad it happened, that he pulled it off to begin with. It's much more than any of our previous presidents have even tried to do. As for the outcome? Who knows? Kim is definitely untrustworthy, so whatever he signs probably doesn't "mean" much, but I'm glad Trump tried anyhow. I'm not opening up any liberal threads, because it really doesn't matter what he tried to do, it will be all wrong in their eyes. I'm tired of the negativity, the cussing, and wanting the USA to fail so Trump will resign or be impeached. I don't think he's going to resign or be impeached myself.
In all fairness, I'm pretty sure the right lost their poop when Obama said he'd talk with Kim Jong Un, and then criticized he didn't do enough.
Now the left is loosing their poop because Trump did meet with KJU, and are now criticizing he didn't do enough.
It's a vicious circle we go around in.
I'm remaining hopefully optimistic. This was the first meeting these two had, yet the left seems to think he should have achieved peace on the Korean Peninsula yesterday. I'll give it a little more time than that. 
I saw Congressman Adam Kinzinger being interviewed. When asked if he was bothered by Trump saying the military exercises were being stopped with SK, he explained those exercises do have importance, but it's a non-issue right now because there weren't any even scheduled in the near future. Coincidence? Who knows. You make some good points. Wondering, how do other conservatives feel about that? |
|
|
|
Post by #notLauren on Jun 12, 2018 20:41:53 GMT
Really? He got it because he was the first black US President. It certainly wasn't due to anything he did.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 1:02:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2018 20:45:11 GMT
In all fairness, I'm pretty sure the right lost their poop when Obama said he'd talk with Kim Jong Un, and then criticized he didn't do enough. I have no clue what that even means. IMO, Trump is the cat playing with the mouse Kim Jong Un. The Media thinks it's the other way around. In my opinion, the media editorials are so very bad, they're laughable. And now, I'm supposed to have lost my sh_t because... Trump is behaving exactly the way I thought he would behave? Nope. Not even a little bit. ETA - I totally misread that. Never realized you said Obama. Now it makes more sense! . I probably should ignore this but it’s too darn funny to pass up. I may be , what did you call me, tone deaf, but if you really believe trump is a cat playing with Kim Jung un the mouse then you are living in world that doesn’t exist. But I sure did get a good chuckle when I read it. Thank you. 😁 |
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 12, 2018 20:48:25 GMT
Wondering, how do other conservatives feel about that? About Kim going to the White House? If we get to an actual de-nuke status, sure. Why not? The co-training exercises with SK really do ramp up NK's posturing and ballistic testing. As long as they are actually complying with de-nuking (not the fake compliance we've had with the Middle East) than it makes sense to take a step back on our drills. It's not as if the US is going to lose all sense of what's going on on the Korean Peninsula by missing drills for a short term. We'll still be in active communication with SK regardless. |
|
|
|
Post by #notLauren on Jun 12, 2018 20:48:26 GMT
This is exactly why we are asking liberals to stay off this thread. Couldn't you just say "I disagree" instead of taking a "dig" at her for her belief?
You really suck. What color is the sky in your bitch-world Fered.
|
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 12, 2018 20:54:17 GMT
Really? He got it because he was the first black US President. It certainly wasn't due to anything he did. If they had awarded him the prize for being the first black US President, or even for being the first biracial or biracial/black US President, I'd be 100% behind the decision. But they didn't. Stupid on the part of the prize commission. They squandered that historic opportunity quite badly. |
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jun 12, 2018 20:55:48 GMT
Really? He got it because he was the first black US President. It certainly wasn't due to anything he did. See, if I were you, I'd cry about how you're poking the puppy. But I just finished scraping a giant dog turd off of my son's shoe and I don't have it in me to deal with another piece of shit. Especially a racist piece of shit. 😘 |
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 12, 2018 20:56:41 GMT
I may be , what did you call me, tone deaf, but if you really believe trump is a cat playing with Kim Jung un the mouse then you are living in world that doesn’t exist. But I sure did get a good chuckle when I read it. Thank you. Whatev. It's not nearly as funny as a lot of the stuff you post about on the daily. |
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jun 12, 2018 20:56:46 GMT
Really? He got it because he was the first black US President. It certainly wasn't due to anything he did. If they had awarded him the prize for being the first black US President, or even for being the first biracial or biracial/black US President, I'd be 100% behind the decision. But they didn't. Stupid on part of the part of the prize commission. They squandered that historic opportunity quite badly. Thank you for addressing the issue in an intelligent manner. |
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jun 12, 2018 20:58:24 GMT
This is exactly why we are asking liberals to stay off this thread. Couldn't you just say "I disagree" instead of taking a "dig" at her for her belief? You really suck. What color is the sky in your bitch-world Fered. And yet you chortle gleefully while your dog Gia stinks up every "liberal" thread here. Maga! |
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 12, 2018 21:02:10 GMT
If they had awarded him the prize for being the first black US President, or even for being the first biracial or biracial/black US President, I'd be 100% behind the decision. But they didn't. Stupid on part of the part of the prize commission. They squandered that historic opportunity quite badly. Thank you for addressing the issue in an intelligent manner. It's bothered me this whole time. |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Jun 12, 2018 21:04:41 GMT
If they had awarded him the prize for being the first black US President, or even for being the first biracial or biracial/black US President, I'd be 100% behind the decision. But they didn't. Stupid on part of the part of the prize commission. They squandered that historic opportunity quite badly. Thank you for addressing the issue in an intelligent manner. I don't think it had anything at all to do with President Obama's race. I think people are forgetting just how unpopular GWB was during that time period - particularly internationally. I always saw it as a purely political fu to GWB. I fully expect whoever is President after Trump to be awarded at least the peace prize - although wouldn't be surprised to see a whole new prize for them. |
|
|
|
Post by #notLauren on Jun 12, 2018 21:05:28 GMT
This is exactly why we are asking liberals to stay off this thread. Couldn't you just say "I disagree" instead of taking a "dig" at her for her belief? You really suck. What color is the sky in your bitch-world Fered. And yet you chortle gleefully while your dog Gia stinks up every "liberal" thread here. Maga! Actually, you're wrong. I avoid the "liberal" threads like the plague. I challenge you to find a single post by me on any of those threads within the last few months. And if you don't are you willing to leave here? And take your nasty with you. |
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jun 12, 2018 21:06:26 GMT
Thank you for addressing the issue in an intelligent manner. I don't think it had anything at all to do with President Obama's race. I think people are forgetting just how unpopular GWB was during that time period - particularly internationally. I always saw it as a purely political fu to GWB. I fully expect whoever is President after Trump to be awarded at least the peace prize - although wouldn't be surprised to see a whole new prize for them. This was always my feeling on the matter. I appreciate that you and lefty broached the subject of race without being bombastic. I think this is a fascinating issue. |
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jun 12, 2018 21:09:58 GMT
Thank you for addressing the issue in an intelligent manner. It's bothered me this whole time. I always found it so odd that Obama was awarded the peace prize so hastily. To his credit, I sensed that even he felt it was odd. |
|
DEX
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,404 
|
Post by DEX on Jun 12, 2018 21:12:32 GMT
The Nobel Peace Prize for 2009
The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.
Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.
Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population.
For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges."
Oslo, October 9, 2009
|
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jun 12, 2018 21:23:40 GMT
The Nobel Peace Prize for 2009
The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.
Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.
Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population.
For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges."
Oslo, October 9, 2009
I know the reasons that were given by the committee, but it still rung hollow with me. And I'm an independent. I liked a lot of what Obama did, and i objected to a lot of his actions, too. So far, I feel like history will show that he was a great President. But I also thought that about Bill Clinton and time has proven that some of the things I approved of did not end well for the American public. At any rate, I felt that the award was hasty and that it should have gone to someone with a body of work that proved a commitment to long lasting peace. President Obama hadn't even had a chance to prove this when he was awarded the prize. |
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jun 12, 2018 21:26:05 GMT
Wondering, how do other conservatives feel about that? About Kim going to the White House? If we get to an actual de-nuke status, sure. Why not? The co-training exercises with SK really do ramp up NK's posturing and ballistic testing. As long as they are actually complying with de-nuking (not the fake compliance we've had with the Middle East) than it makes sense to take a step back on our drills. It's not as if the US is going to lose all sense of what's going on on the Korean Peninsula by missing drills for a short term. We'll still be in active communication with SK regardless. Respectfully asking, why do you feel we can trust the word of Kim Jong Un over the word of the Iranians? |
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Jun 12, 2018 21:28:09 GMT
The Nobel Peace Prize for 2009
The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.
Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.
Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population.
For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges."
Oslo, October 9, 2009
As I said - it was more a commentary on GWB than President Obama's short presidency. |
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jun 12, 2018 21:42:42 GMT
And yet you chortle gleefully while your dog Gia stinks up every "liberal" thread here. Maga! Actually, you're wrong. I avoid the "liberal" threads like the plague. I challenge you to find a single post by me on any of those threads within the last few months. And if you don't are you willing to leave here? And take your nasty with you. I'm enjoying reading and engaging with peas that I respect and believe to be intelligent. I'm also enjoying the fact that my posts here bother frothers like you and Gia. I guess it even bothers you when us nasty liberals criticize Obama. Seems like you just want to be a big meanie and poke the puppy, too. Wah wah wah. I think I'll stay right here and discuss whatever I feel like discussing, thanks 😘😘😘😘 I'm not like you. I dont need to pretend hairflip and then come back under another name when my beliefs are challenged. I don't cry or pout. I just punch back like your boy Trump. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 1:02:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2018 21:46:19 GMT
The Nobel Peace Prize for 2009
The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.
Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.
Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population.
For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that "Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges."
Oslo, October 9, 2009
As I said - it was more a commentary on GWB than President Obama's short presidency. Actually it was all about this one paragraph and had very little to do with Bush IMO “Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population.” |
|
|
|
Post by #notLauren on Jun 12, 2018 21:49:07 GMT
Actually, you're wrong. I avoid the "liberal" threads like the plague. I challenge you to find a single post by me on any of those threads within the last few months. And if you don't are you willing to leave here? And take your nasty with you. I'm enjoying reading and engaging with peas that I respect and believe to be intelligent. I'm also enjoying the fact that my posts here bother frothers like you and Gia. I guess it even bothers you when us nasty liberals criticize Obama. Seems like you just want to be a big meanie and poke the puppy, too. Wah wah wah. I think I'll stay right here and discuss whatever I feel like discussing, thanks 😘😘😘😘 I'm not like you. I dont need to pretend hairflip and then come back under another name when my beliefs are challenged. I don't cry or pout. I just punch back like your boy Trump. Stay as long as you like. No froth here. Just be as polite and pleasant to others here as people are asking. Even when they say something you don't like or agree with. And if you are as effective in your live as Trump is, then you'll have lived a great life. Hope you make it. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Nov 24, 2024 1:02:33 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2018 21:53:05 GMT
This is exactly why we are asking liberals to stay off this thread. Couldn't you just say "I disagree" instead of taking a "dig" at her for her belief? You really suck. What color is the sky in your bitch-world Fered. And yet you chortle gleefully while your dog Gia stinks up every "liberal" thread here. Maga! Well, first they are political threads, not liberal threads. They're supposed to be open to everyone. Second, the problem is not that I HAVE a differing opinion, it's that you don't like that I do and dare to express it. That was made very clear yesterday when I was asked why I don't just respond with the same opinion as everyone else, but was bitched at for the one that differed. |
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Jun 12, 2018 22:06:14 GMT
At any rate, I felt that the award was hasty and that it should have gone to someone with a body of work that proved a commitment to long lasting peace. President Obama hadn't even had a chance to prove this when he was awarded the prize. Well, see, that's why I think they were so very short-sighted in their reasoning. It took hundreds of years of slowly moving changes for slavery to begin to be eradicated in America. (Slavery was present in every state at one time.) We fought a terrible Civil War to put a national end to the legality of slavery, and have since then been progressively changing and enforcing our laws to better cover all of our citizens equally. Obama's election was the culmination of a tremendous body of work over nearly 400 years on the part of America as a whole, and I have no hesitation in awarding it to the man Obama for his singular achievement of being elected on that foundation. Respectfully asking, why do you feel we can trust the word of Kim Jong Un over the word of the Iranians? I wouldn't feed his word to dogs. There's no meat to it. However, there is a great deal of desperation behind these negotiations. The Korean War is coming to a close and if Kim Jong Un is going to come out of it alive and with some power remaining, he really doesn't have any other choice but to play ball. The Iranians were not held to the fire as NK is now being held. They were allowed to manipulate negotiations and come out ahead. Where's the surprise that they are still a fierce enemy? |
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jun 12, 2018 22:21:08 GMT
At any rate, I felt that the award was hasty and that it should have gone to someone with a body of work that proved a commitment to long lasting peace. President Obama hadn't even had a chance to prove this when he was awarded the prize. Well, see, that's why I think they were so very short-sighted in their reasoning. It took hundreds of years of slowly moving changes for slavery to begin to be eradicated in America. (Slavery was present in every state at one time.) We fought a terrible Civil War to put a national end to the legality of slavery, and have since then been progressively changing and enforcing our laws to better cover all of our citizens equally. Obama's election was the culmination of a tremendous body of work over nearly 400 years on the part of America as a whole, and I have no hesitation in awarding it to the man Obama for his singular achievement of being elected on that foundation. Respectfully asking, why do you feel we can trust the word of Kim Jong Un over the word of the Iranians? I wouldn't feed his word to dogs. There's no meat to it. However, there is a great deal of desperation behind these negotiations. The Korean War is coming to a close and if Kim Jong Un is going to come out of it alive and with some power remaining, he really doesn't have any other choice but to play ball. The Iranians were not held to the fire as NK is now being held. They were allowed to manipulate negotiations and come out ahead. Where's the surprise that they are still a fierce enemy? Thanks for answering my question. I agree that Un is desperate, but I'm cynical about this actually working. Regardless of my feelings about Trump as a person, I hope this heralds the beginning of the true deuclearization of NK. I will give him full credit if it does. |
|
|
|
Post by pierkiss on Jun 12, 2018 22:33:22 GMT
I'm glad it happened, that he pulled it off to begin with. It's much more than any of our previous presidents have even tried to do. As for the outcome? Who knows? Kim is definitely untrustworthy, so whatever he signs probably doesn't "mean" much, but I'm glad Trump tried anyhow. I'm not opening up any liberal threads, because it really doesn't matter what he tried to do, it will be all wrong in their eyes. I'm tired of the negativity, the cussing, and wanting the USA to fail so Trump will resign or be impeached. I don't think he's going to resign or be impeached myself.
In all fairness, I'm pretty sure the right lost their poop when Obama said he'd talk with Kim Jong Un, and then criticized he didn't do enough.
Now the left is loosing their poop because Trump did meet with KJU, and are now criticizing he didn't do enough.
It's a vicious circle we go around in.
I'm remaining hopefully optimistic. This was the first meeting these two had, yet the left seems to think he should have achieved peace on the Korean Peninsula yesterday. I'll give it a little more time than that.
I saw Congressman Adam Kinzinger being interviewed. When asked if he was bothered by Trump saying the military exercises were being stopped with SK, he explained those exercises do have importance, but it's a non-issue right now because there weren't any even scheduled in the near future. Coincidence? Who knows.
One thing that's really bugging me is the thought of KJU going to the White House. I was getting knots when the North Korean officials were there a couple of weeks ago, and I don't think anybody from that regime, especially KJU, should ever be allowed in there.
Why shouldn’t KJU be welcomed into the White House? If we are having diplomatic talks with him isn’t it reasonable to eventually extend an invitation to him? I know that he is a dictator, however he is the leader of North Korea. Is there some rule or unwritten rule that the White House does not welcome all leaders here for talks? Are there other countries that we do not welcome the leaders to the White House? |
|
|
|
Post by katieanna on Jun 12, 2018 22:34:52 GMT
The first time a US president has met with a North Korean leader was a historic moment. Other than that, I'm just waiting to see what the outcome will be. I'm not ready to be all enthused just yet. What are the thoughts from conservatives on the meeting, what was signed and what it all means? Or could mean. I'm glad it happened, that he pulled it off to begin with. It's much more than any of our previous presidents have even tried to do. As for the outcome? Who knows? Kim is definitely untrustworthy, so whatever he signs probably doesn't "mean" much, but I'm glad Trump tried anyhow. I'm not opening up any liberal threads, because it really doesn't matter what he tried to do, it will be all wrong in their eyes. I'm tired of the negativity, the cussing, and wanting the USA to fail so Trump will resign or be impeached. I don't think he's going to resign or be impeached myself.
Considering everything, Trump is probably (up to this point) one of our most successful presidents in a long time. I don't know what the NK meeting will have accomplished in the long run - that remains to be seen - but at least, Trump has the guts to put action to rhetoric. That in itself is a political miracle. |
|
) right now. 
