I don't claim to know it all. I just know that Trump is a liar and many of you guys don't give a shit. Cohen testifies and all that is said on here is that you can't trust a thing he says because he's a proven liar. It's such blatant hypocrisy it's hard to fathom.
Let's just say if you had asked me that BEFORE 2016, I would have likely replied with an absolute American Intel Agencies, sadly, seeing what your favorite President did to them, politicizing/weaponizing them, until there is a deep cleansing of all their top brass, I will question all of their Intel from here on out. That answer your question?
CONVICTED liar, there's a difference. Let's see how straight up you are, who did you vote for in 2016?
It isn't that I don't care, it is just that NOTHING he has done or is accused of would have persuaded me to vote for the Hildebeast. On top of that, his judicial appointments, tough stance on illegal immigration and reduction in regulatory burden is exactly why I voted for him.
If the left cared about facts. The MSM and @SnacktimeKC wouldn’t be able to show their face in public. But, he’ll just keep waiting on the Mueller report. I mean, it’s gotta e in there somewhere bout Russia. Right? I mean , with all these facts being thrown around y the MSM and @SnacktimeKC Posting Politifake links, it’s there somewhere, right?
What was the objective? Obama bowed to the point of deprecation to allies for zero gain in some cases. Further if you want associating with a dictator to be bad Trump has a LONG way to go before matching Obama. Personally I could give a rip about anything but the out come. Had Obama given him a hummer on live TV but he destroyed his nukes and set his people free I would have applauded Obama's effort. However we both know that such an action would not have happened even if it was Trump's wife instead (a step up from Obama most would agree ) That said so far Trump has not 'achieved' anything. However the Clintons enhanced his nuclear capability, Bush called him out with no large positive effect that I recall but also no negative effect. Obama was kind of a neutral on NK. I cannot recall any progress but he didn't enable them like the Clinton machine did. So far Trump is neutral to small positive on NK. Still a work in progress.
It could happen but so far appeasement on the nuclear front has made things more dangerous (decades of Soviets, Iran deal, North Korean deals) while standing up for self defense was part of the end of the cold war. While insane Un realizes that his longevity should he launch a nuke is less than in any other action he can take. Shoot if he did so China might invade him to precede us. Now the mad mullahs are a bit less predictable because they are doing G__s work vs thinking they are G_d like Un.
Hey. Look at the punk ass ghost that decided to show up. What up, bitch. You want to answer questions now or have you had enough time to read your MSM talking points?
Except that Trump operates in the opposite way than traditional discussions which have given NK a big win every time. Trump is negotiating with Kim first with the detail people meeting later. Bringing up Wambier is just a way to attempt to scuttle the talks in order to deny Trump any victory. It's a sad commentary on the state of our political scene today.
If the Korean Peninsula unified tomorrow and KJU went away, no more standoff there, and a prosperous peace broke out, it still wouldn’t be enough. No point in arguing about it.