[Pete Svarrior]

But like I said above, wasn't the whole thing based on Bolton and Pence essentially threatening to topple North Korea's government ? (ie. the Lybia model)I'd be pissy too if someone did that.

I don't think Trump cares if North Korea is upset. It's very much a "pray I do not alter [the deal] any further" situation.

Clearly the best course of action is to shrink it a little and make it his signature.

Avatar, perhaps?

[Lord Dave]

But like I said above, wasn't the whole thing based on Bolton and Pence essentially threatening to topple North Korea's government ? (ie. the Lybia model)I'd be pissy too if someone did that.

I don't think Trump cares if North Korea is upset. It's very much a "pray I do not alter [the deal] any further" situation.

I disagree.  Trump does not like it when someone gets angry at him.  Trump does not like it when someone threatens them, even if it's justified.
This isn't a "pray I don't alter the deal" kinda thing.  This is a "I'm in charge and you will not raise your voice at me!"  Especially since nothing actually changed.  Trump didn't change any part of the deal or meeting.  He just reacted to NK's reaction.

And given how much Trump is pro-meeting, even after he wrote but didn't send the letter(just said he did and showed it), I honestly think this is a ploy from his own administration to kill the meeting.

Look at who said it.  Wasn't Trump.  Trump was saying how great Kim Jong Un was.Look at the letter.  It's a mix of Trump and someone else.  Like they wrote a diplomatic letter then put in Trump speak in to make it sound like it was from him.Look at Trump's reason for the cancelation.  "Kim Jong Un was angry". 

Trump wants this meeting.NK wants this meeting.Trump didn't even cancel it.  Not really.  It's going on ahead as planned.
What I think happened was Bolton and Pence basically riled NK up in the hopes that Trump would decide, on his own, that he needs to cancel the meeting because we all know that the only way to get Trump to listen to you, is to make him think it was his idea.  Or say it on Fox news.(They did both this time).

[Pete Svarrior]

I disagree.  Trump does not like it when someone gets angry at him.  Trump does not like it when someone threatens them, even if it's justified.

That's not disagreeing with me, that's telling me I'm correct. Trump doesn't care if North Korea's feelings are hurt. They are to behave, not to threaten him, and to play along with his insanity. They were not doing that, so the summit was briefly cancelled. They fell back in line, so the summit is back on. It'll likely continue wobbling.

[Lord Dave]

I disagree.  Trump does not like it when someone gets angry at him.  Trump does not like it when someone threatens them, even if it's justified.

That's not disagreeing with me, that's telling me I'm correct. Trump doesn't care if North Korea's feelings are hurt. They are to behave, not to threaten him, and to play along with his insanity. They were not doing that, so the summit was briefly cancelled. They fell back in line, so the summit is back on. It'll likely continue wobbling.

Oh that's what you meant.I thought it was more like "Trump ignored the angry outburst cause he doesn't care."

Yeah, he doesn't care if he pisses anyone off, just that they kiss his ass.

[Pete Svarrior]

Yeah, that is what I meant. Sorry if I was unclear before

[Lord Dave]

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/05/31/615759943/trump-says-hell-pardon-dinesh-dsouza-who-pleaded-guilty-to-campaign-finance-frau
Oh look, more corruption.At this point he might as well just pardon everyone whose ever championed a republican cause and be done with it.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/05/31/615691882/pompeo-meets-with-top-north-korean-official-in-hopes-of-reviving-singapore-summiAnd hey, they're still meeting and trying to salavage it or keeping it going?  I thought it was basically back on in all but in tweet.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/05/31/615747709/russias-lavrov-meets-with-kim-jong-un-as-pompeo-tries-to-salvage-summitAnd this is exactly what Kim wants: World wide recognition.  He's got two nations now vieing for his attention.
This works well for him.  He'll get a great deal from Trump since Trump will not be the US president who saw NK make a deal with Russia that gave them military protection and economic security while denuclearizing.

[Rushy]

I mean, the whole point of electing Trump was so he could be a dick to the entire world. He's currently doing exactly what he was elected to do. This has and will continue to baffle his political opponents.

[Lord Dave]

Well, Trump has officially uncanceled the summit.

[Pete Svarrior]

I mean, who wouldn't agree to reinstate the summit after receiving a very large letter?

[Lord Dave]

https://www.npr.org/2018/06/01/616175971/top-north-korean-official-visits-president-trump-at-white-house
Apparently he hasn't opened it or seen the letter yet.
Guess he just wanted a big envolope as a gift.or a Pen Pal.

[Roundy]

www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2018/06/02/bill-maher-says-his-trump-orangutan-jokes-are-not-same-as-roseannes-ape-tweets.html

Wtf, of course it's not the same. "Orange" is not a race. The Right is really grasping at straws to try to show that the Left is just as offensive and bigoted as they are.

[honk]

No, no, fair is fair. I say we let them have Maher.

[Rushy]

www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2018/06/02/bill-maher-says-his-trump-orangutan-jokes-are-not-same-as-roseannes-ape-tweets.html

Wtf, of course it's not the same. "Orange" is not a race. The Right is really grasping at straws to try to show that the Left is just as offensive and bigoted as they are.

Why is one ape joke deemed okay, while another is not? They both involve appearance.

I think the hypocrisy is pretty clear. Roseanne Barr gets canned for one ape joke, while dozens of liberal commentators compare Trump to an orangutan and nothing happens.

[Roundy]

Why is one ape joke deemed okay, while another is not? They both involve appearance.

Roseanne wasn't fired for mocking someone's appearance, she was fired because her joke was shockingly racist. Obviously there's a difference.

[Roundy]

No, no, fair is fair. I say we let them have Maher.

They can keep Samantha Bee (whose offense was worse than Maher's but still not as bad as Roseanne's) for all I care; I'm not a fan of Maher's (indeed, I believe he may have crossed a line at some points in his career) but right is right.

[Lord Dave]

Ya know, politics aside, isn't it the right of the company to fire them if they feel they did something bad?
Each company has to make their own decision on the subject.  You can be mad at HBO but they're doing what they consider is in their best interest based on their core audience.

There is no law that states a public figure, spouting hate speech, must be fired.(cause that would go against the 1st amendment)

[Rushy]

Why is one ape joke deemed okay, while another is not? They both involve appearance.

Roseanne wasn't fired for mocking someone's appearance, she was fired because her joke was shockingly racist. Obviously there's a difference.

How was it shockingly racist? She mocked a white woman for supposedly looking like an ape. Now, say he's "orange" or what-have-you, but Trump is actually a white man. So, again, what's the real difference here?

Why is one some sort of epic racist slur and the other is a-okay?

[Roundy]

Why is one ape joke deemed okay, while another is not? They both involve appearance.

Roseanne wasn't fired for mocking someone's appearance, she was fired because her joke was shockingly racist. Obviously there's a difference.

How was it shockingly racist? She mocked a white woman for supposedly looking like an ape. Now, say he's "orange" or what-have-you, but Trump is actually a white man. So, again, what's the real difference here?

Why is one some sort of epic racist slur and the other is a-okay?

Valerie Jarrett has African-American parents and the slur referred to her parentage. This really isn't hard to understand.

[Rushy]

Why is one ape joke deemed okay, while another is not? They both involve appearance.

Roseanne wasn't fired for mocking someone's appearance, she was fired because her joke was shockingly racist. Obviously there's a difference.

How was it shockingly racist? She mocked a white woman for supposedly looking like an ape. Now, say he's "orange" or what-have-you, but Trump is actually a white man. So, again, what's the real difference here?

Why is one some sort of epic racist slur and the other is a-okay?

Valerie Jarrett has African-American parents and the slur referred to her parentage. This really isn't hard to understand.

How is a joke regarding an image of a white woman suddenly a slur about her parents? They're certainly not both of one race. And I hate the term "African-American" because that actually says nothing about their skin color. Elon Musk is African-American and he's whiter than I am.

It sounds like you're the one grasping for straws here. Suddenly a joke about her appearance also has to include her parents, which are obviously white or very close to being white considering Valerie's skin color. So, again, why is this racist and other ape jokes are not? Are you not allowed to use ape jokes if a person's family happens to be a different race? Your apparent line drawn between these jokes sure requires a lot of assumptions about it. Should I start assuming that calling Trump an ape is just anti-Semitic because his son-in-law happens to be Jewish?

[honk]

Orangutan jokes are a racist slur against orange people.