He says plenty then does 180 degree turns. Better said - he just says plenty such as criticizing executive orders when he campaigned, but now he loves them.

He said he'd repeal Obamacare on Day 1. Accomplished?

He said he'd build a big beautiful wall on the Mexican border, & Mexico would pay for it. Status? Can't even get Congress to allocate funds for the "advance payment until Mexico reimburses us" of the first 100 yards of construction.

The list goes on & on.

There has been a chance of major conflict, aka war, with North Korea for many years. The reality of that situation just has not been expressed so bluntly before by a US President. The potential isn't any different, just the tone.

The Reuters interview which that quote comes from:

Exclusive: Trump says 'major, major' conflict with North Korea possible, but seeks diplomacy
By Stephen J. Adler, Steve Holland and Jeff Mason | WASHINGTON

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Thursday a major conflict with North Korea is possible in the standoff over its nuclear and missile programs, but he would prefer a diplomatic outcome to the dispute.

"There is a chance that we could end up having a major, major conflict with North Korea. Absolutely," Trump told Reuters in an Oval Office interview ahead of his 100th day in office on Saturday.

Nonetheless, Trump said he wanted to peacefully resolve a crisis that has bedeviled multiple U.S. presidents, a path that he and his administration are emphasizing by preparing a variety of new economic sanctions while not taking the military option off the table.

"We'd love to solve things diplomatically but it's very difficult," he said.

In other highlights of the 42-minute interview, Trump was cool to speaking again with Taiwan's president after an earlier telephone call with her angered China.

He also said he wants South Korea to pay the cost of the U.S. THAAD anti-missile defense system, which he estimated at $1 billion, and intends to renegotiate or terminate a U.S. free trade pact with South Korea because of a deep trade deficit with Seoul.

Asked when he would announce his intention to renegotiate the pact, Trump said: “Very soon. I’m announcing it now.”

Trump also said he was considering adding stops to Israel and Saudi Arabia to a Europe trip next month, emphasizing that he wanted to see an Israeli-Palestinian peace. He complained that Saudi Arabia was not paying its fair share for U.S. defense.

Asked about the fight against Islamic State, Trump said the militant group had to be defeated.

"I have to say, there is an end. And it has to be humiliation," he said, when asked about what the endgame was for defeating Islamist violent extremism.

U.S. President Donald Trump looks out a window of the Oval Office following an interview with Reuters at the White House in Washington, U.S., April 27, 2017. REUTERS/Carlos Barria

XI 'TRYING VERY HARD'

Trump said North Korea was his biggest global challenge. He lavished praise on Chinese President Xi Jinping for Chinese assistance in trying to rein in Pyongyang. The two leaders met in Florida earlier this month.

"I believe he is trying very hard. He certainly doesn’t want to see turmoil and death. He doesn’t want to see it. He is a good man. He is a very good man and I got to know him very well.

"With that being said, he loves China and he loves the people of China. I know he would like to be able to do something, perhaps it's possible that he can’t," Trump said.

Trump spoke just a day after he and his top national security advisers briefed U.S. lawmakers on the North Korean threat and one day before Secretary of State Rex Tillerson will press the United Nations Security Council on sanctions to further isolate Pyongyang over its nuclear and missile programs.

The Trump administration on Wednesday declared North Korea "an urgent national security threat and top foreign policy priority." It said it was focusing on economic and diplomatic pressure, including Chinese cooperation in containing its defiant neighbor and ally, and remained open to negotiations.

U.S. officials said military strikes remained an option but played down the prospect, though the administration has sent an aircraft carrier and a nuclear-powered submarine to the region in a show of force.

Any direct U.S. military action would run the risk of massive North Korean retaliation and huge casualties in Japan and South Korea and among U.S. forces in both countries.

'I HOPE HE'S RATIONAL'

Trump, asked if he considered North Korean leader Kim Jong Un to be rational, said he was operating from the assumption that he is rational. He noted that Kim had taken over his country at an early age.

"He's 27 years old. His father dies, took over a regime. So say what you want but that is not easy, especially at that age.

"I'm not giving him credit or not giving him credit, I'm just saying that's a very hard thing to do. As to whether or not he's rational, I have no opinion on it. I hope he's rational," he said.

Trump, sipping a Coke delivered by an aide after the president ordered it by pressing a button on his desk, rebuffed an overture from Taiwan President Tsai Ing-wen, who told Reuters a direct phone call with Trump could take place again after their first conversation in early December angered Beijing.

China considers neighboring Taiwan to be a renegade province.

"My problem is that I have established a very good personal relationship with President Xi," said Trump. "I really feel that he is doing everything in his power to help us with a big situation. So I wouldn’t want to be causing difficulty right now for him.

"So I would certainly want to speak to him first."

Trump also said he hoped to avoid a potential government shutdown amid a dispute between congressional Republicans and Democrats over a spending deal with a Saturday deadline looming.

But he said if a shutdown takes place, it will be the Democrats' fault for trying to add money to the legislation to "bail out Puerto Rico" and other items.

He also defended the one-page tax plan he unveiled on Wednesday from criticism that it would increase the U.S. deficit, saying better trade deals and economic growth would offset the costs.

"We will do trade deals that are going to make up for a tremendous amount of the deficit. We are going to be doing trade deals that are going to be much better trade deals," Trump said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-exclusive-idUSKBN17U04E

I don't think many people, certainly no foreign leaders, give Trump any credibility anymore. His constant lying has pretty much made Trump unpredictable. His words mean nothing.

I don't think many people, certainly no foreign leaders, give Trump any credibility anymore. His constant lying has pretty much made Trump unpredictable. His words mean nothing.

As if any of us know what foreign leaders believe.

I don't think many people, certainly no foreign leaders, give Trump any credibility anymore. His constant lying has pretty much made Trump unpredictable. His words mean nothing.

As if any of us know what foreign leaders believe.

I think much of that is pretty obvious if you look around.

To the contrary, if you are on good terms with the President and Trump likes 'you' Mr or Mrs foreign leader it appears to me that the foreign leader stands to gain some influence in the outlook and positions of Trump. Therefore you have an opportunity as a leader of a foreign country to effect US policy in a certain way that perhaps wasn't possible before. Now, that may or may not in fact be good in terms of what that US policy is. Each case offers it's own example and evaluations.

To the contrary, if you are on good terms with the President and Trump likes 'you' Mr or Mrs foreign leader it appears to me that the foreign leader stands to gain some influence in the outlook and positions of Trump. Therefore you have an opportunity as a leader of a foreign country to effect US policy in a certain way that perhaps wasn't possible before. Now, that may or may not in fact be good in terms of what that US policy is. Each case offers it's own example and evaluations.

What I mean is that what Trump says publicly is not necessarily what he means. In contrast, it seems like foreign leaders have had an easy time manipulating him. Trump said he was going to declare China a currency manipulator. He meets with China's leader and poof, he changed his mind (and also learned that the North Korea situation is difficult after talking with him for 10 minutes). Trump said NAFTA was the worst thing that happened to the USA for 2 years and that the US was either pulling out or renegotiating it, and a couple phone calls with Mexico and Canada and now NAFTA is here to stay.

I don't think many people, certainly no foreign leaders, give Trump any credibility anymore. His constant lying has pretty much made Trump unpredictable. His words mean nothing.

As if any of us know what foreign leaders believe.

To the contrary, if you are on good terms with the President and Trump likes 'you' Mr or Mrs foreign leader it appears to me that the foreign leader stands to gain some influence in the outlook and positions of Trump. Therefore you have an opportunity as a leader of a foreign country to effect US policy in a certain way that perhaps wasn't possible before. Now, that may or may not in fact be good in terms of what that US policy is. Each case offers it's own example and evaluations.

What I mean is that what Trump says publicly is not necessarily what he means. In contrast, it seems like foreign leaders have had an easy time manipulating him. Trump said he was going to declare China a currency manipulator. He meets with China's leader and poof, he changed his mind (and also learned that the North Korea situation is difficult after talking with him for 10 minutes). Trump said NAFTA was the worst thing that happened to the USA for 2 years and that the US was either pulling out or renegotiating it, and a couple phone calls with Mexico and Canada and now NAFTA is here to stay.

I think I would agree with you that it seems as if Trump can be, I’d say ‘persuaded’ one way or the other after meeting with foreign leaders (except for Germany). Or I could say ‘informed’ of things from a different perspective. Manipulated? I don't think it is one in the same. I wouldn’t go that far.

Very importantly I would say also as people around him that know better how stuff works (fiscal policy, trade, etc) present facts and circumstances to him it has just as much impact on if his position changes or not. Say like a Janet Yellen on currency or Wilbur Ross on trade. We have a President who is learning on the job, something Obama was accused of as well. But this is quite different. With Trump and no history of elected office or government experience, I don't think anyone would honestly argue against the steep learning curve this President faces and it presents challenges and difficulties.

So it isn't just that a foreign leader meets with him and he goes 180, it may have some influence, yes. But so too do other people reporting to the President on whatever issue is at hand.

Take the currency manipulation. It is easy to say that because Trump and Chinese President got along well and in light of this North Korea situation that Trump is going to look the other way or forget about the currency manipulation. But truth is that China is not currently manipulating it’s currency therefore the Treasury Department could not label them a manipulator. I know you are already up to speed on these things, but here is a good story detailing the recent history of the issue:

Trump Isn’t Wrong on China Currency Manipulation, Just Late
Eduardo Porter - ECONOMIC SCENE APRIL 11, 2017

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/11/business/economy/trump-china-currency-manipulation-trade.html?_r=0

There are always so many other things in play outside of boiling it down to a simple quick take away as an attempt to paint a certain picture.

Same with NAFTA.

Trump has not said “it is here to stay” as you stated. The attempt will be to renegotiate it and the possibility of termination remains, which has been the position since he became President. Since Ross was confirmed as Commerce Secretary he has been saying that NAFTA talk with Canada and Mexico will be taking place "later in the year". The treat of withdrawal remains depending on the outcome of renegotiations.

Trump likes to throw out big talk and threats, superlatives and hyperbole. Does he have no credibility? Do his words mean nothing? He is the President of the United States and as such no matter who our President is the United States is going to remain a country that other nations will want to and need to work with on a variety of issues. They don't have to like him, it isn't about him, it is about one country dealing with another country for broad goals and objectives on the table. Do they turn their back on their ties or relationships with the US simply because a President speaks a certain way? That would be shortsighted. I suppose you are saying they would. I am saying they won't. We really don't know although I suspect one of us has a better chance of being right.

To the contrary, if you are on good terms with the President and Trump likes 'you' Mr or Mrs foreign leader it appears to me that the foreign leader stands to gain some influence in the outlook and positions of Trump. Therefore you have an opportunity as a leader of a foreign country to effect US policy in a certain way that perhaps wasn't possible before. Now, that may or may not in fact be good in terms of what that US policy is. Each case offers it's own example and evaluations.

What I mean is that what Trump says publicly is not necessarily what he means. In contrast, it seems like foreign leaders have had an easy time manipulating him. Trump said he was going to declare China a currency manipulator. He meets with China's leader and poof, he changed his mind (and also learned that the North Korea situation is difficult after talking with him for 10 minutes). Trump said NAFTA was the worst thing that happened to the USA for 2 years and that the US was either pulling out or renegotiating it, and a couple phone calls with Mexico and Canada and now NAFTA is here to stay.

He campaigned long & hard on the China's currency manipulation similar to building his stupid wall and repealing Obamacare. He probably backtracked on China being a currency manipulator in exchange for China putting pressure on North Korea. Not like he doesn't still believe China is a currency manipulator. Maybe this is his great deal making he brags about. Time will tell whether his discussions with China & China's influence pays off in North Korea.

Tonight the king goes to PA to campaign again just like he did with the NRA yesterday. Will he brag about about all the legislation he's gotten through on any (name one) of his campaign promises? Today saw him on TV bragging about his tremendous support. That dam fake news shows him in the low 40's. and way below Obama. That must blow his tremendous ego.

He campaigned long & hard on the China's currency manipulation similar to building his stupid wall and repealing Obamacare. He probably backtracked on China being a currency manipulator in exchange for China putting pressure on North Korea. Not like he doesn't still believe China is a currency manipulator. Maybe this is his great deal making he brags about. Time will tell whether his discussions with China & China's influence pays off in North Korea.

Tonight the king goes to PA to campaign again just like he did with the NRA yesterday. Will he brag about about all the legislation he's gotten through on any (name one) of his campaign promises? Today saw him on TV bragging about his tremendous support. That dam fake news shows him in the low 40's. and way below Obama. That must blow his tremendous ego.

My understanding is that from 2014 for many years prior China would have fit the criteria for being a currency manipulator. To the extent that Trump actually knew what the Treasury Dept's criteria for such labeling is or when they were or were not in violation is anyone's guess. So technically during the campaign season when Trump was calling for the manipulation label it wasn't applicable at the time. He was right they had been doing it, but wrong to say they currently were. So dropping it now appears to be the right thing to do based on the facts being what they are, absent of the North Korea situation. Sure he could've pushed back on them for their prior practices and taken a harder stance perhaps based on previous behavior, but it is water under the bridge and now there are new challenges on the horizon. It's a combination of things like most everything is.

Is the wall stupid? 2000 miles worth might be stupid. But the secure fence act of 2006 passed Congress and called for specific barriers in specific areas which were not complete according to the bill as passed. It isn't all stupid. Some locations can benefit from a greater presence of a physical barrier and others wouldn't benefit from it as much.

Repealing Obamacare is not my fight and the Republicans have fumbled that thing around to their own embarrassment now.

I watched some of his campaign style speech tonight. And I watched some of the WH Correspondent's dinner. Both were awful.

I watched some of his campaign style speech tonight. And I watched some of the WH Correspondent's dinner. Both were awful.

I wouldn't waste my time watch another of his campaign speeches which we'll probably see ongoing for the next 4 years to self reinforce that he won.

I thought the WH Correspondent's dinner actually had substance. The main thrust was on First Amendment which is critical given what is sitting in the WH currently. I thought both Woodward & Bernstein were very good. I also thought the comedian was effective in delivering the all important message on First Amendment. He was not as funny as some in prior years but still effective.

The chicken $hit of a prez is the first prez since Reagan to miss this. I believe Reagan missed because he was injured that year. Trump makes fake accusations against the media constantly and is thin skinned. I guess he couldn't take a few jokes thrown his way against by the media's entertainer. The media is doing their job - providing a balance to Trump's campaign vs governing as well as his truths vs his lies.