Koroush, I'd be happy to dispute facts. Unfortunately you seem to have a difficult time differentiating between where facts start and your opinions begin. I've never said the NK deal is complete. It's in progress and we'll see where things end up if a deal is finalized. But there have been signs of progress that can't be denied. Overstated by Trump, sure, but more progress and positive signs than we've seen in years. I'm not sure what "facts" you even presented. But you've presented conclusions and outcomes already when discussions and negotiations are still ongoing. And if by "facts" you mean your conclusion that "Trump is being played badly by Kim Jong Un. So even the "he's a bad guy but he's doing good things" argument doesn't hold. The simple fact is that he's an incompetent moron, who is harming not only the USA, but the entire planet." You've proven my point.

David, I'm not giving Trump sole credit, or even the majority of it. But for people to deny that he's played no role is ridiculous. South Korea's President Moon and Australia's Prime Minister Turnbull have both given Trump credit for the talks.

Also to say that the past presidents have given nothing to NK is incorrect. NK received $1.3 Billion in food and energy assistance. So to say that they gave the same as Trump has is incorrect. Sanctions were also lifted, which also helped to provide cash to the NK leadership. 

Kevin , Thanks for adding.....well, nothing....at least nothing of value to

the discussion other than providing a perfect example of the ad hominem attacks I was talking about.

The Wednesday hearing is public, which could be interesting. Shame from a transparency perspective that two other testimonies will be behind closed doors.

Clearly Cohen has questionable morals himself and his testimony will have to be viewed through that filter, but he was unquestionably well-positioned to know key information about financial arrangements between Trump and Russia.

While the Trump administration is quick to point out that Cohen is a convicted felon, they are not quick to point out that those convictions stem from actions on Trump's behalf, such as facilitating secret payments to pornstars/models and lying to Congress in order to hide details of Trump's dealings with Russia.

What's the whole point of your cut and paste timeline? Is it to show that Trump overstates things in his tweets? If so you're not exactly making any new discoveries. I've stated the same thing in this thread. So what?  You then go completely off the rails and make the conclusion that because Trump makes vast overstatements, that any NK deal - which is currently still being discussed - is a failure. That makes no sense. You draw conclusions and state those as "facts" before an ongoing negotiation is even over! Before any negotiated agreement is even completed for you to read and judge!  

Again you never address the things I mention as progress in the talks with NK - You know, the facts of no more missiles being fired over Japan, deescalating threats to Guam and the US, negotiations and visits between North and South Korea in an effort to finally conclude a 60 year war. All you do is respond by saying Trump is an idiot and will get played while ignoring these positive developments. Is everything concluded and all is well? No, not yet. Maybe there will be a good dal, a bad deal, or no deal, but it would be nice to wait and see how negotiations are finalized before proclaiming Trump a failure.

It amazes me that you still can't seem to differentiate where your facts end and your opinion starts. You see everything you state as facts. You always revert to personally attacking Trump and his supporters with name calling. As if that strengthens your argument. It doesn't. And that's the point I keep making that you just can't seem to grasp.

Brian MIller wrote: Yeah. Like it doesn’t matter WHY he’s a convicted felon, just that he is one, so nothing he says should be believed.

Previously you said this...

You did the same thing, no?  You "stated as fact" that "signs of progress...can't be denied" while also later hedging that there is actually no negotiated agreement and that we must all wait until the final outcome.  I'd call pot/kettle but am afraid it would fall on deaf ears.

"signs of progress" can be denied, in fact have been denied, since shortly after the very first summit.  That you insist that they can't be, that it's incontrovertible truth that to deny them is some sort of universally accepted fallacy, is absurd.