Last week marked the historic meeting between President Trump and North Korea’s “Dear Leader” Kim Jong Un.  Predictably, the Left is in an uproar.  Remember what led up to the meeting in Singapore.  Donald Trump was elected in November 2016.  In January 2017, Trump met with Il Duce Obama at the White House.  Obama told Trump that North Korea would be his most urgent problem.  It was damn nice of Obama to mention it, after having ignored the problem for eight years.  Almost immediately after Trump became President, North Korea began threatening the U.S. and the rest of the world with nuclear weapons.  Provocative foreign action at the start of a new administration is nothing new.  Khrushchev decided that JFK was weak at a summit in Vienna, and two months later, started building the Berlin Wall.  In the opening months of the George W. Bush administration, a Chinese fighter plane collided with a Navy spy plane.  There was no need to test Obama for weakness, because he spent the beginning of his presidency roaming the world apologizing for previous U.S. actions.  Thus, it came as no surprise that, when the Iranians seized the crew of a Navy boat, Obama’s response was to pay a $1 billion cash ransom and then blame our Navy.  So, a new President being tested by a foe is pretty routine.  What’s important is how the President responds to the test.  In other words, does the President signal weakness or strength?  Without question, Donald Trump signaled strength, but Trump being Trump, and the Left being the Left, Trump was in for criticism no matter what he did or didn’t do.  The rhetoric between the U.S. and North Korea got pretty heated.  The Norks threatened to fire nuclear missiles at Guam and the U.S.  They shot a missile completely over Japan.  In August 2017, Trump warned that Nork attacks on the U.S. or any U.S. ally would result in “fire and fury.”  In September, at the U.N., Trump called Kim “Little Rocket Man.”  Kim responded in kind, calling Trump a “dotard.” The Left was aghast at this exchange.  Trump the Barbarian was going to insult us into a nuclear war.  No President could use such language about another world leader.  “Experts” warned that what worked in the Iowa primaries could backfire on the global stage, especially when it came to nuclear diplomacy with millions of lives on the line.   Joel Wit, a Korea expert at Columbia University warned, “if there’s something guaranteed to make it worse, it’s hurling personal insults at their leader.”  In short, Trump was going to blunder us into a nuclear war.  Fast forward to 2018.  After imposing strict sanctions on North Korea, encircling the peninsula with Navy carrier groups, and signaling that military operations were imminent, the Norks agreed to a summit, and now have signed a letter in which they agree to completely denuclearize their country.  In a sane world, one might expect that a turn away from imminent nuclear war on the boundaries of China and Russia, which would spare our military from suffering thousands of casualties, and save perhaps millions of lives in North and South Korea, might be regarded as a good thing.  However, given the advanced state of Trump Derangement Syndrome among the Left, it became just another chance to bash Donald Trump.  The Left complained:  Trump didn’t prepare enough for the meeting; the Norks may not live up to their agreement; Trump gave up everything and got nothing. That was a funny one.  Trump agreed to suspend joint military exercises with South Korea next Spring.  The Democrats, until 2017 content to allow the military to whither away, all of a sudden are worried about military preparedness.  Then there were the flags.  How dare Trump have the American flag and the North Korean flag side by side?  That’s hilarious, coming from people who are perfectly content with burning the flag.  The biggest hypocrisy, though, was the complaint that Trump treated Kim too politely, by shaking his hand.  Kim is a murdering dictator (and he surely is), how could Trump even meet him face to face?  Uh, remember last year, when you said Trump was being too hard on Kim, and you counseled diplomacy, and not provocation?  But Kim’s a brutal dictator.  Some idiot on MSNBC actually said that any President who held a friendly meeting with a  brutal dictator would be impeached.  Really?  Have these morons ever read a history book?  Granted, Kim Jong Un is a brutal dictator who has imprisoned and killed thousands of his people, who live in abject poverty.  But according to MSNBC, a President who meets such a leader on a friendly basis should be impeached, so I guess we should have impeached quite a few Presidents.  Let’s start with FDR and Truman.  They met with Josef Stalin, made Stalin our ally and provided him billions in food, fuel, planes, tanks, and other weapons.  Of course, Stalin was a brutal dictator who murdered, or starved to death 20 to 30 million of his own people.  And then there was the little matter of Russian troops raping every woman from the Polish border to Berlin, during which time FDR sat down with Stalin at Yalta, and after which, Truman shook hands with Stalin at Potsdam.

They sure were pretty friendly with Stalin.

Then there was Richard Nixon (who they almost impeached anyway).  He met with Mao in China, the same brutal dictator whose “Great Leap Forward” killed more than 30 million Chinese.  That’s more than the total population of North Korea.  Nixon also met with brutal dictator Leonid Brehznev, who imprisoned and killed thousands.

They look too chummy for MSNBC.  But, last, and certainly least, consider the exploits of Il Duce Barack Obama.  He met with brutal Cuban dictators Fidel and Raul Castro.  He normalized relations with Cuba, and got in return -NOTHING from two of the most repugnant, murdering Communist SOB’s who ever lived.

By the way, notice the murdering Communist SOB Cuban flag displayed alongside Old Glory?  And why is Obama sitting in front of the Cuban flag? Nobody on MSNBC complained about that.  They thought it was wonderful.  The bottom line on the Trump-Kim summit is that it represents a good start.  The Norks are not to be trusted, and they may not live up to their agreement, but Trump has gotten further than any of the “responsible” establishment Presidents ever got, and if the Norks renege, Trump will hammer them.