I’m thinking out loud here, but someday CNN will do a retrospective on this administration. I know they can spend time talking about the rise to power, that’ll take a fair bit of time, but how will they possibly explain the utter cluelessness of this guy and others in his administration for the sheer stupidity (not ignorance, because that implies they knew better) of their actions and policies. 45 soundly believes he came away from Kim a clear winner and yet this missile stuff is front and center less than a month later.
How in the world will history see this as any kind of leadership?
How will they explain their criminal unwillingness to have on air anchors look the camera in the eye and proclaim Trump is a malignant narcissist, a sociopath and an inveterate liar? No news organization hesitated to proclain Pol Pot a murderous thug. It’s what he was. Media didn’t debate the ethics of saying it. Kirk Douglas didn’t concede Joseph McCarthy was a patriot and a hero, he stood up to him.
Media can concoct all the retrospectives they want, when I look in the rear view mirror all I’ll see is a collection of enablers perpetuating this cruel farce.
LA Times:
How dare that lying dog take advantage of our president’s pure heart and noble faith in humanity.
Seoul Dispatch:
How dare that lying dog take advantage of our president’s pure heart and noble faith in humanity.
While North Korean leader Kim Jong-un did follow through with one agreement he made with Trump — to return the remains of U.S. soldiers who were killed in the Korean War
I wish people would stop saying this. Kim sent back *some* remains, which may or may not be that of U.S. soldiers (and may or may not be human; some previous returns have included animal remains), but only a few hundred out of somewhere in the range of 5-10 thousand. That is certainly not "return[ing] the remains of [all] U.S. soldiers," which is what is implied.
