The moment President Trump meets Chairman Kim at the DMZ and becomes the first sitting President to enter North Korea: pic.twitter.com/VwqGAEmmxz
— The White House 45 Archived (@WhiteHouse45) June 30, 2019
The Wall Street Journal reports Trump Steps Into North Korea as Two Sides Agree to Restart Nuclear Talks
Mr. Trump then became the first sitting U.S. president to step inside North Korea, calling it a great honor and stopping for photos. The two walked some 19 steps into the North, then returned to the boundary—where the president posed a question to Mr. Kim.
“Would you like to come over?” he asked.
Mr. Kim agreed, and made an unexpected visit to the “Freedom House” building on the South Korean side.
There he sat down with Mr. Trump and answered several questions, saying he had been surprised by the last-minute U.S. request to meet.
The two leaders, joined by several members of their nuclear teams, then headed into a closed-door meeting that lasted nearly an hour. They emerged with the commitment to jump-start nuclear talks, which had stalled after February’s summit in Vietnam ended abruptly without a deal.
“We’re not looking for speed. We’re looking to get it right,” Mr. Trump said after the meeting. “We’re on a very good path. This was a terrific day.”
President Trump: “I actually stepped in with Chairman Kim — I stepped in to North Korea and they say, and they say that’s a historic moment… Many people, I noticed, from Korea were literally in tears crying. Crying, because this big thing. It’s a big thing.” pic.twitter.com/P5uEtThqNK
— The Hill (@thehill) June 30, 2019
The meeting was supposed to be brief but lasted over an hour.
Newsweek called it a “Clown Show”
“What a clown show”: Trump’s DMZ meeting with North Korea’s Kim Jong-Un prompts divided reactions from leaders, expertshttps://t.co/k4VvC6NwBv
— Newsweek (@Newsweek) June 30, 2019
“Ex-State Dept official confirmed Trump approved $2M to be paid to N Korea for Otto Warmbier’s release,” said noted Trump critic @funder. This SHOULD end his presidency. It’s grotesque.”#TrumpRewardsOttosMurdererhttps://t.co/2xFw9aUast
— Grant Stern (@grantstern) June 30, 2019
Washington Post Blasts Trump
This president of the United States is in the business of enabling and propping up murdering dictators, and the only profit seems to be the minor personal compliments that they give him. Kim Jong Un hasn’t conceded anything to deserve this kind of gesture. https://t.co/e67jTcD2wn
— Jamil Smith جميل كريم (@JamilSmith) June 30, 2019
More Blasts
Trump meets with Kim Jong Un at the DMZ and becomes the first US president to enter North Korean territory. On a lighter note: Two power-hungry narcissists walk into a bar in North Korea… pic.twitter.com/krwK2JREqE
— Amee Vanderpool (@girlsreallyrule) June 30, 2019
Trump gave North Korea very thing they’ve been seeking for decades; legitimacy!
Regardless of what happens w/Presidency in future, Kim Jon Un can point out to everyone a US President honored him on more than one occasion; this allows Kim to continue his ruthless rule!!
SAD!— Abigail Doull (@abigail_doull) June 30, 2019
My Take
One can question Trump’s motives, but this was a good move.
He should try the same with Cuba and Iran. Tariffs and sanctions have gotten Trump nowhere.
But roadblocks remain. North Korea wants sanctions removed first, the US wants to see progress first.
Mike “Mish” Shedlocks
The President of the United States should not shake hands or sit down with any dictator, ever. “Why not?” say morally tone deaf libertarians. Because you don’t make a deal with a murderer. That condones and enables evil. And it’s even less practical than making a deal with a con man.
Unfortunately the U.S. has been in the business of enabling evil for quite some time, so this is nothing new.
How childishly naive. Yeah, let’s have a nuclear conflict because we can’t talk to murderous dictators.
Every North Korean city destroyed and at least two million North Korean persons (1.5m of them civilian) killed largely by the US during the Korean war, and you are taking the moral high ground?
Where did I claim that all past actions of the US are moral? I would be first to agree that 20th century US foreign policy was awful. But we were talking about what the POTUS should or shouldn’t do now.
Who cares what the warmonger media says. F them. Trump did something right. Hopefully sanctions ease so less kids have to die just because they were born in a dictatorship
I think Trump gave us a show here. That show is him giving us a clear clue as to what is going on behind the scenes which he cant or doesnt feel he can tell us directly. That message is one that peace is going to be formalised, and perhaps even followed by reunification at some point.
Seems to me odd that a lot in the media dont like this message. I wonder why that is?
The only problem is every time Trump zigs and zags in his trademark chaos people in North Korea lose their heads.
I couldn’t care less. What does making handshakes on both sides of the DNZ have to do with anything? It’s just political posture on both sides.
The sheer amount of press, and subsequent “authority”, the Juntas of the decaying West, and the Kim dynasty, have both been able to sucker out of their similarly pliant and well indoctrinated sheeplings; by playing along and pretending some isolated, illegitimate communist backwater incapable of developing a rice cooker, have somehow developed their own, no strings, nukes; has got to be one of the most spectacular demonstrations of how “world’s political elite vs everyone else”, not “nation state vs nation state”, is the true game being played.
It took real cajones for DJT to do that, because aside from some deranged Nork ruining his day, it would have been the perfect time and place for the Deep State to kill two birds with one stone. It is ironic that the MSM, which for years scolded US leadership for not talking to the Russians, North Koreans, etc., are now outraged (unhinged, judging by those Tweets) that DJT would dare to talk them.
You know an issue has become political (instead of logical) when your opinion about it depends on what your political party says.
If Obama had done this, a lot of the current critics would be demanding that he get a Nobel for this.
SMF gets best comment of the day
All the morons who prefer war instead of diplomacy don’t understand the saying… Keep you’re friends close, and your enemies closer. Peace just may break out.
Not sure what will happen with NK, but on a global scale there is no chance of peace breaking out. Conditions are ripe for not only more war, but far more sectarian conflict/civil war within individual countries. We’re (US) already fighting in 7-8 countries and there is no sign of the MIC stopping. The 21st century will be bloody!
Peace will not break out as long as the commanders’ careers and the coffers of the defense industry stand to gain by war. They will find a way to frighten congress, the president and the public into warfare. This happened under Ike, Johnson, Nixon, and both Bushes. What have we gained from the Korean War, the Vietnamese War, Desert Storm, and the others? Only bigger defense budgets and commanders who retired to work for the defense contractors and retire rich. Their principal task is to invent enemies to attack.
The world is no safer. But we are a peace loving nation.
Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity. George Carlin.
The purists who denounce any rapprochement with “tainted” leaders (usually echoing humanitarian indignation points fed to them by the MSM with little room for the much broader world of indignities or relative context) prefer to be “right” in their splendid isolation than to attempt engagement, whatever the outcome. They do not seem to realize that this rarified moral high ground does not change anything but reinforces the conditions in which the subjects of their indignities live.
If you put “tainted” in scare quotes does it become a nice little euphemism for mass murderer?