Donald Trump Jr. to join Steve King for Iowa pheasant hunt

Donald Trump Jr. to join Steve King for Iowa pheasant hunt

Donald Trump Jr. will be in Iowa next month to join U.S. Rep. Steve King for the congressman’s annual pheasant hunt. “Happy to announce @DonaldJTrumpJr will be hunting with us this year at my annual Col. Bud Day Pheasant hunt on opening weekend of Oct. 28th,” King posted to Twitter on Monday. A campaign spokesperson confirmed Trump’s attendance at the event, which marks the start of Iowa’s pheasant season. Trump Jr. is President Donald Trump’s eldest son. He has been a prominent campaign surrogate for his father and took over management of the Trump Organization following his father’s inauguration. Trump Jr. has come under fire after it was revealed he met with a Kremlin-linked attorney during


Donald Trump Jr. Ditched Secret Service to Go Moose Hunting

Donald Trump Jr. gave up his Secret Service detail in mid-September to go on a moose-hunting trip in the Yukon, according to a report in The New York Timesthat details one reporter’s quest to locate the eldest son of the president during his adventure. Trump voluntarily abandoned the protections when he traveled to the sparsely populated northwest Canada territory, where he spent a week with a few friends and a hunting bow. Trump Jr.’s Secret Service protection has since been reactivated.

Hunting is down in the US. The Trump administration wants to change that


  • There are 2.2 million fewer hunters in America now than in 2011
  • Zinke was recommended by Donald Trump Jr., an avid hunter
  • Last week Zinke issued a new secretarial order designed to increase access to various public lands for hunters and fishers

Washington (CNN)Toy gun grasped firmly in his hand and a grin plastered wide across his face while he played “Big Buck Hunter Pro,” Ryan Zinke could have been a kid at an arcade. But the Interior secretary and former congressman was actually in the department cafeteria showing off the arcade game installed to commemorate hunting season.

“To highlight #sportsmen contributions 2 conservation I installed Big Buck Hunter in the employee cafeteria. Get excited for #hunting season!” Zinke tweeted from his personal account Tuesday.
But Zinke is not toying around when it comes to his support of hunters and fishers.
Hunting in the United States is down. A US Fish and Wildlife Service survey released last week found that there are 2.2 million fewer hunters in America now than in 2011. And the new administration is poised to change that.
On his first day in office back in March, Zinke issued two orders, one which overturned a recent ban of lead ammunition and fish tackle on Fish and Wildlife Service lands and waters. Last week Zinke issued another secretarial order designed to increase access to various public lands for hunters and fishers.
Zinke’s passion for expanding hunting rights on public lands is both personal and political. A Montanan, the secretary has been known to hunt in his spare time. During his short stint in Congress, he was a member of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation. He was spotted attending their annual dinner last Wednesday, a source told CNN, just two days before he issued the most recent secretarial order.
“What really kind of expedited this whole thing, was last week the US Fish and Wildlife put out a survey saying that hundreds of Americans were enjoying the outdoors, but within that survey they found that hunting was down,” Heather Swift, Interior spokesperson said when asked about last week’s secretarial order. “And the big thing that the secretary hears over and over again is that people just don’t have access to land.”
Politically Zinke also owes a lot to hunting, angler and conservation lobbyists who were largely responsible for supporting him for the position of Interior Secretary earlier this year. The issue was especially important to Donald Trump’s son Don Jr., an avid hunter and active member of the Boone and Crocket Club, who helped with the search for Interior secretary.
“Mr. Zinke was the pick of the litter, not the best litter ever, but he was definitely the pick and that’s why we advocated for him and that’s why Jr. advocated for him as well,” said Land Tawney, the president of the Montana-based Backcountry Hunters & Anglers, a non-profit sportsmen’s organization.
Zinke and the Interior have recently made a big show of their support of hunting groups. In addition to the “Buck Hunter” game he gifted Interior employees, the department declared Thursday that October would be National Hunting and Fishing Month.
The declaration also generated the support of the National Rifle Association.
“Hunters, anglers, and target shooters are the best conservationists who contribute so much through the Pittman-Robertson and Dingell-Johnson Acts,” said Richard Childress, NRA vice president. “Last year, they contributed $1.2 billion toward conservation and protecting our natural resources. We need more mentors taking young people out and teaching them to hunt and fish, so I’m glad Secretary Zinke is promoting hunting and fishing at the federal level.”
But despite Zinke’s clear efforts to woo hunters and anglers, not all of his decisions have gone over well with the conservationist-minded group. For example, Zinke’s leaked recommendationsto the White House to shrink the boundaries of national monuments and open up some of the land to the fossil fuel industry and loggers — first reported Sunday by the Wall Street Journal — were met with opposition and confusion.
“With what’s leaked it’s super troubling. Any reduction on these monuments is an attack on the Antiquities Act,” said Tawney. “All monuments are at risk now. They can become political footballs in our eyes.”
Conservationists who want to expand their access to hunting on public park lands and at monuments are as weary of opening up national park land to fossil fuel industries as environmentalists are, since both value sustaining the land as is.
“We can have all the access we want to a concrete parking lot, but that access doesn’t mean anything if that fish and wildlife habitat isn’t there,” said Tawney.
Another pro-hunting group says what they are seeing within Interior is a fight between access and conservation.
“On the access front the department has been good. Access to our own public lands is a lot harder today than it ever has been, and that is in part introduced with the decline in hunting numbers we’ve seen,” said Whit Fosburgh, president and CEO of the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership, a non-profit coalition of conservation organizations and outdoor related businesses.
“On the conservation side however, I think it’s a much less rosy picture,” Fosburgh said. “It’s been a lot more about expanding development, opening up to oil and gas. There has been no proactive conservation vision espoused for our public lands.”
Fosburgh said that the hunting community started getting “a little bit critical” of Zinke after he first announced the National Monument Review earlier this year. And he’s skeptical of just how far the secretarial order will go.
“They use hunting and fishing for an excuse for our changes in monuments,” he said. “All of the ones under review already allow hunting and fishing very clearly.”
Fosberg’s criticism is similar to what environmental groups said following the secretarial order last week.
“Don’t be fooled: the Trump Administration is pretending to be granting hunting and fishing rights that are already guaranteed by law and policy,” said a statement from the Center for American Progress, a left-leaning thing tank. “The real story is that, with this announcement, the Trump administration is trying to create a distraction from their plans to dramatically reduce the size of America’s national monuments, which would be the largest elimination of protections on wildlife habitat in US history.”
Nevertheless, Fosburgh said most pro-hunting and conservation minded groups are still hoping for the best with the Trump administration.
“We’re very prepared, and we have been from day one. We supported his nomination and we are prepared to work with Secretary Zinke,” he said. “We’re not going to just say it’s a lost cause in September of the first year of the administration.”

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke’s Hunting And Fishing Revival

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke's Hunting And Fishing Revival

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke is leading a revival. It’s not the kind that occurs under a big tent full of folding chairs, fiery sermons and hallelujahs, but the kind that occurs when hunters, fishermen and outdoorsmen in general feel liberated from the shackles of an overbearing federal government; when they experience anew the freedom to take their guns and gear into America’s wild places and fish and hunt the way their fathers and grandfathers fished and hunted before them.

Zinke set the tone for this revival on his first day as Interior Secretary. He did so by repealing the Obama administration’s lead ammunition ban—a ban which served as a last slap in the face to hunters and fishermen everywhere.

Zinke set the tone for this revival on his first day as Interior Secretary.The Obama-era ban was contained in National Fish and Wildlife Service’s Director’s Order 219. The order came from Director Dan Ashe and required regional directors to work with state-level agencies to begin phasing out the use of lead ammunition on federal land. This included requiring the “Assistant Director, Migratory Birds, in consultation with National Flyway Councils and individual states, … [to] establish a process to phase in a requirement for the use of nontoxic ammunition for recreational hunting of mourning doves and other upland game birds.”

The Obama administration avoided calling the order an all-out ban by fashioning it so that its implementation occurred over a period of time rather than all at once.

On March 3, 2017, Breitbart News reported that Zinke had repealed the ban, and that the repeal was one of his first actions as interior secretary.

The reason Zinke made this one of his top priorities upon taking office is that he understands that hunters and fishermen are a crucial part of wildlife conservation: They preserve a balance in nature whereby fish and wildlife are kept at sustainable levels, rather than being able to overpopulate and ruin food supplies and habitat. And he also understands that hunters and fishermen bring a tremendous amount of money into the U.S. economy annually.

On Sept. 1, 2017, Fox News published a column by NRA-ILA’s Chris W. Cox, in which Cox observed:

Zinke knows that America’s hunters and anglers are the backbone of successful fish and wildlife management in the United States. In 2016 alone, $1.1 billion in hunter and angler excise revenues was invested by the 50 state fish and wildlife agencies to fund wildlife projects benefiting all wildlife—game and non-game species alike.

Crucially, Zinke also acknowledges the role hunting and fishing play as traditions in America. For example, a childhood in a state like Kentucky is marked by the time a son and his father spend getting ready for hunting season. They plan the hunt, tend the food plot, build the tree stand, study the movement and habits of the deer, then go out on opening day intent on bringing home food the family can eat and stories the father and son will share for the rest of their lives.

Cox put it this way:

[Zinke] also understands … within our own local communities, hunting and angling is an important tradition that’s often passed down through the generations and enjoyed by the entire family, helping to forge lifelong support of wildlife conservation and the full appreciation of our fish and wildlife resources.

In short, Zinke’s convictions about the importance of hunting and fishing mean more opportunities for outdoorsmen. This is seen via announcements like the Department of the Interior’s Aug. 9, 2017, announcement that Secretary Zinke was expanding “hunting and fishing opportunities at 10 national wildlife preserves.”

This expansion will result in responsible conservation practices, money for the U.S. economy and traditions that link generations together over time.

AWR Hawkins is the Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and host of Bullets with AWR Hawkins, a Breitbart News podcast


Posted: Apr 19, 2017 6:38 PM PDTUpdated: May 12, 2017 4:25 PM PDT

BOZEMAN –(Update 4-21-17) MISSOULA- Republican candidate for Montana’s lone seat in Congress, Greg Gianforte came under fire this week over his intentions to go prairie dog hunting with his guest to Montana, Donald Trump Jr.

(see previous story below)

Gianforte took time to talk about his hunt with the first son Friday during his many fundraisers in Montana.

Donald Trump Jr arrived at Glacier Park International Airport in Kalispell with Gianforte and Senator Steve Daines Friday afternoon to a crowd of hundreds of supporters.

For more on the Kalispell event, you can click the link HERE

Later in the afternoon Gianforte and the first son traveled to Hamilton for a rally fundraiser at the Hamilton Fairgrounds. It was there that ABC FOX Montana’s David Winter asked Gianforte about the ‘backlash’ he received about his intentions to do some prairie dog hunting from animal activists.

Gianforte responded to our David Winter by giving a message to those who haven’t tried hunting prairie dogs….”You should try it, because its fun.” the candidate told us.

Also during his speech in Hamilton Gianforte revealed a similar message to his crowd.

His supporters of roughly five hundred people cheered.


We are learning more about Trump Junior’s plans for Saturday morning and it’s sparking some controversy with local environmentalists. The Ravalli Republic reported that Gianforte told a crowd in Hamilton Monday that he plans to take Donald Trump Jr. Out to shoot prairie dogs.

It’s important to note that shooting prairie dogs in Montana is completely legal, but at least one wildlife advocate says it is far from ethical.

Dave Pauli Senior Advisor for Wildlife Policy with the Humane Society of The United States said, “I was disappointed I guess that any national or international politician or celebrity would have the opportunity to come to Montana in the spring and their first choice of things they want to do is shoot prairie dogs.”

In a Facebook post posted on Wednesday, Pauli voiced his frustrations about the idea of Gianforte and Trump Jr. Spending their time in Montana shooting prairie dogs.

The Facebook post has garnered a lot of attention with more than 300 likes and 400 shares in just a few hours. And there are plenty of comments on both sides of the issue.

Ruth Gessler Farnsworth simply said, “Awful.”

While Jeremy Parish said, “totally legal and encouraged. Just like the coyote slaughter in most states.”

Shane Scanlon Communication Director for Greg Gianoforte says Ginaforte is proud to hunt in Montana. Scanlon released a statement saying…

“Hunting is a big part of gain forte’s life; he’s a sportsman and an outdoorsman and tries to get out when he can. He’s just looking to have a good time with Donald Trump Jr. and shooting some prairie dogs this weekend.”

Pauli says he’d rather see the duo hit a shooting range.

Trump Junior’s first appearance in Montana will be on Friday in Kalispell, from there he will visit Hamilton and close out his trip in Bozeman.

He’s attending several fundraisers for Gianforte who is running against Democrat Rob Quist for Montana’s lone congressional seat.

The right is mad over Kathy Griffin’s gruesome Trump video. The left asks: Remember Ted Nugent?

May 31 at 4:01 PM

At a time of strong partisan divide, when one side messes up, the other pounces like a bird of prey.

That happened after comedian Kathy Griffin, who supported Hillary Clinton, posted a 12-second video of her holding what appeared to be President Trump’s bloody, severed head. It immediately drew ire from conservatives, as well as some liberals. By Wednesday, CNN had dropped the comedian from its annual New Year’s Eve program, which Griffin has co-hosted with Anderson Cooper since 2007.

As the backlash against Griffin continues, many on social media have pointed out what they see as a double standard.

Play Video 0:29
Kathy Griffin’s full apology to Trump for severed head photo shoot
Comedian Kathy Griffin apologized for a picture of her holding a prop of President Trump’s severed head on May 30. Griffin came under fire from both conservatives and liberal figures for the image. (AP)

A few times within the past several years, a well-known conservative activist got in hot water over hateful comments about former president Barack Obama. In those instances, though, there was no image of a bloody head; just Ted Nugent’s pointed words, some of which prompted a Secret Service investigation. Trump would later host the hard rocker at the White House — a recent memory that many on Twitter brought up in the aftermath of Griffin’s controversial post.

Their cumulative sentiment: Both spewed hatred. Griffin was punished for it. Nugent became a White House guest.

You old enough to remember your silence at Ted Nugent calling for Obama to be hanged? No? So pipe down now, too. Grown-ups got this. 

Remember that time you sought and accepted the endorsement of violently racist pederast Ted Nugent for your presidential bid? Good times. 

Ted Nugent called for the death of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. He then got invited to the White House. Your argument is null. 

Nugent, a gun rights activist, is known for his heated remarks about Obama that stretch back to at least 2007, when the former president was competing against Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination. Nugent went on a rant onstage during a concert and said vile things about both Obama and Clinton, using expletives to refer to both.

Five years later, Nugent made an impassioned plea for support for then-Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney during a National Rifle Association Conference in St. Louis. At that time, Obama was running for reelection.

“We need to ride into that battlefield and chop their heads off in November,” he said of the Obama administration in April 2012. He added: “If Barack Obama becomes the next president in November, again, I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year.”

Nugent said he was simply trying to excite voters. But the Secret Service nevertheless asked to talk to him so he could explain his comments. A Secret Service spokesman confirmed the investigation at that time but declined to give details.

You will not be surprised to learn that Spicer ducked a reporter’s question about Ted Nugent by claiming not to know what he said.

Two years later, during a hunting and outdoor trade show in Las Vegas in 2014, he called Obama a “communist-raised, communist-educated, communist-nurtured subhuman mongrel” and a “gangster” who weaseled his way into the presidency.

Nugent apologized for using the term “subhuman mongrel” during an interview with conservative radio host Ben Ferguson a month later. Ferguson then asked whether Nugent was directly apologizing to Obama, to which he replied, “Yes.”

But the controversial remarks didn’t stop there.

In a lengthy Facebook post last year, Nugent said Obama and Clinton should be tried for treason and hanged over their handling of the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya.

Despite his history of making inflammatory statements, Nugent, along with former Alaska governor Sarah Palin and musician Kid Rock, became Trump’s dinner guests at the White House in April. Trump had invited Palin, who brought Nugent and Kid Rock with her. Nugent posted a picture of him shaking Trump’s hand as the president sat at his desk during the visit.



Ted Nugent, Sarah Palin and Kid Rock visited the White House for dinner with President Trump

Did Sarah Palin, Ted Nugent and Kid Rock go too far in mocking Hillary Clinton’s portrait?

Trump pulls US out of Paris deal: What it would mean

Pulling the United States out of the Paris climate deal would have unforeseen consequences for President Trump, his international agenda and U.S. climate policy.

It would leave the world’s superpower outside an accord meant to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that includes nearly every other country in the world, aside from Syria and Nicaragua.

While it is not entirely clear that Trump has made up his mind to end U.S. participation in the deal, sources say that at a minimum, he is leaning in that direction.Here’s how to interpret and understand the decision.

Trump is playing to the base

Trump has called the pact a “bad deal” for the United States, and made withdrawing from it a key component of his “America First” campaign platform.

At an April rally, he called the agreement “one-sided,” and said “the United States pays billions of dollars while China, Russia and India have contributed and will contribute nothing.”

Given his past statements and promises, it isn’t hard to see why Trump would want to pull the United States out of the deal.

Yet the decision has provoked a furious internal battle within the White House, pitting Trump’s family members Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner against adviser Steve Bannon and EPA administrator Steve Pruitt.

Pulling the United States out of the deal means Trump is siding with Bannon and his base over the objections of centrists in his government — and the business community.

Exxon Mobil Corp. and many large American businesses urged Trump to stay in the deal, arguing it would maintain U.S. influence over future talks.

“By remaining a party to the Pars agreement, the United States will maintain a seat at the negotiating table to ensure a level playing field so that all energy sources and technologies are treated equitably in an open, transparent and competitive global market,”

Exxon CEO Darren Woods wrote in a May 9 letter to Trump.

By pulling out of the Paris accord, Trump would be signaling he’s willing to take on supporters of the deal who are usually his allies — in order to back his core base of supporters.

Many Republicans on Capitol Hill are likely to support pulling out of Paris — 20 leading Senate Republicans, including Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) asked Trump to do just that last week.

Withdrawing from Paris would greatly please conservative groups, who have orchestrated an all-out push in opposition to the pact.

Robert De Niro on Trump’s America: a ‘tragic, dumbass comedy’

The actor hits out against the Trump administration in a speech at Brown University when receiving an honorary doctorate

‘You are graduating into a tragic, dumbass comedy’ … Robert De Niro.
‘You are graduating into a tragic, dumbass comedy’ … Robert De Niro. Photograph: Dado Ruvic/Reuters

Robert De Niro has said that the US has become a “tragic, dumbass comedy” under Donald Trump, and urged students to “work to stop the insanity” of his presidency. The actor made the comments during a commencement ceremony speech at Brown University in Rhode Island, where he was receiving an honorary doctorate of fine arts.

“When you started school, the country was an inspiring, uplifting drama,” he told students. “You are graduating into a tragic, dumbass comedy. My advice is to lock the [university’s] Van Wickle Gates and stay here.

“But if you do leave, work for the change. Work to stop the insanity. Start now so the class of 2018 will graduate into a better world.”

Watch Robert De Niro’s speech to Brown University students

De Niro has been highly critical of Trump since his election win last November. Earlier this month he said that the Trump administration had shown “mean-spiritedness” in its budget proposal, which advocated cutting arts funding. De Niro also suggested that Charlie Chaplin would not be allowed into the US todaydue to Trump’s strict immigration policy.

Before Trump’s election win, De Niro came under fire for saying he would like to punch him in the face. He later revised his comments, adding that he would have to “respect” the fact that Trump was president.

As Kim Jong Un Continues Missile Tests, Typhoon Trump Moves Toward the Koreas



With the deployment of nuclear submarines and carrier battle groups, President Trump is acting very tough, but he seems to know only China can save the day.

HONG KONG—Loose lips sink ships, and U.S. President Donald Trump’s lips are about as loose as they get. But what might lie behind his gaffes? And what might lie ahead of them? In the looming showdown with North Korea, the answers are potentially apocalyptic.

For the moment we can only guess what Trump told Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe last week about his North Korea strategy. “It’s a big problem. It’s a world problem and it will be solved at some point,” Trump declared to the press at his meeting with Abe before the G7 summit in Italy. “It will be solved, you can bet on that.”But how does one “solve” a problem like North Korea?

Soon there will be three U.S. aircraft carrier battle groups cruising near the peninsula. But on Monday, Kim Jong Un staged another successful missile test—just the kind of operation the Trump administration has vowed to stop.

“As we agreed at the recent G7, the issue of North Korea is a top priority for the international community,” Abe told reporters in brief televised remarks on Monday after the latest missile test. “Working with the United States, we will take specific action to deter North Korea.”

There are clues to Trump’s thinking, and it keeps turning toward Beijing. His tweeted reaction to the latest provocation by Pyongyang: “North Korea has shown great disrespect for their neighbor, China, by shooting off yet another ballistic missile…but China is trying hard!”

 But “trying hard” may not be enough.

We now know that during an April 29 phone call between Trump and his Philippine counterpart Rodrigo Duterte, amid praise for extrajudicial killings of alleged drug dealers and addicts—“an unbelievable job on the drug problem”—Trump called North Korea’s Kim Jong Un a “madman with nuclear weapons.” And Trump asked Duterte’s opinion about whether Kim is “stable or not stable.” (Some would see irony in this, given the two people who were talking.)

The American president also let slip that the United States had “a lot of firepower over there,” and boasted, as he is wont to do, with some highly classified specifics: he told Duterte two nuclear submarines had been dispatched by the Pentagon to the region.

So, three carriers, two nuclear submarines . . .

Trump sounded amazed at the potential destructive power he commands. “I’ve never seen anything like they [the subs] are, but we don’t have to use this, but he could be crazy, so we will see what happens.”

Actually, we have a pretty good idea what would happen if full scale warfare breaks out. Diplomats talk about “the tyranny of proximity,” and U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis sketched out the scenario Sunday on CBS’s Face the Nation: It would be “probably the worst kind of fighting in most people’s lifetimes,” he said. “The North Korean regime has hundreds of artillery cannons and rocket launchers within range of one of the most densely populated cities on Earth, which is the capital of South Korea. And in the event of war, they would bring danger to China and to Russia as well.”

Trump told Duterte, “We can’t let a madman with nuclear weapons let on the loose like that. We have a lot of firepower, more than he has, times 20, but we don’t want to use it.”

Mercurial as ever, Trump recently told Bloomberg News that he would be “honored” to meet Kim, echoing a notion that he shared on CBS’s Face the Nation regarding his opinion of the North Korean dictator’s savage grip on his office: “A lot of people, I’m sure, tried to take that power away . . . And he was able to do it. So obviously, he’s a pretty smart cookie.”

Duterte, in his chat with Trump, didn’t seem to share that view. “He is not stable, Mr. President, as he keeps on smiling when he explodes a rocket,” the Philippine strongman said. “But it seems from his face he is laughing always and there’s a dangerous toy in his hands which could create so much agony and suffering for all mankind.”

The Duterte phone call transcript was leaked from the Philippines, and The Intercept and The Washington Post both published it online in full last week. In it, there was a lot of talk about China, East Asia’s most dominant power broker and one of North Korea’s few backers (at least, until recently).

What now are Pyongyang’s weekly launches of short- or medium-range ballistic missiles, a prelude to the development of intercontinental ballistic missiles that might reach as far as Seattle, have been described as a defiant show of power toward South Korea’s new president, Moon Jae-in, but they are equally aimed at China and even the United States, which has 80,000 troops stationed in South Korea and Japan.

China, as Duterte told Trump, “is the last country he should rebuke.”

So Kim Jong Un has proven himself to be an unreasonable dictator, and Beijing is losing patience. For the second month in a row, Chinese imports of North Korean coal have been zero. The airport in Dandong, a northeastern Chinese city, confirmed that flights operated by Air Koryo, which transports passengers between China and North Korea, have been suspended. Chinese tourism companies have been eliminating tours to the hermit kingdom; half-day tours of Pyongyang, which is visa-free for some Chinese travelers, are becoming skeletal. Cross-border commerce, which provides consumer goods to the general population in North Korea, has been in a rut.

Even though relations between China and South Korea have been rough because of Seoul’s adoption of the American THAAD missile defense system, officials of the two nations have been meeting to repair ties.

During one of the sessions, Chinese state councilor Yang Jiechi, who is a senior policy advisor to the Chinese President Xi Jinping, said that the two nations must work together to guard against North Korean threats. A special envoy, Lee Hae-chan, has been dispatched by the new South Korean president to keep communication channels with Beijing open and smooth.

Not only has the Chinese Communist Party been withholding meaningful financial support for Pyongyang’s elite, it has slowly but surely made suggestions about how the Chinese state apparatus would react to armed conflict in the Korean Peninsula. In late April, an op-ed circulated in Chinese Communist Party mouthpiece Global Times had a tidy note buried near its end: “If America performs surgical strikes in North Korea, China will only intervene diplomatically, but not militarily.” (The op-ed, which was written in Chinese, has been taken offline.) Its author, whose name was not in the byline, even suggested that somebody should cut off most, but not all, of North Korea’s energy supply to emaciate the regime.

Trump must walk a tightrope. To counter China’s aggressive territorial grabs in East and Southeast Asia means provoking the CCP—exactly the sort of provocation sparked by the presence of two nuclear submarines and overt freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea. But containing North Korea means that two superpowers need to get along in the same sandbox and work in concert.

During Trump’s visit to Vatican City, Pope Francis asked the American president to be a “peacemaker,” gifting him a small sculpture of an olive tree that, as the pope said, symbolizes peace. But when it comes to North Korea, American action—diplomatic, military, or any other form—may be insufficient on its own, no matter the intention.

Last month, when discussing the possibility of reining in North Korea, Duterte offered this sobering truism to Trump during their phone conversation: “At the end of the day, the last card, the ace, has to be with China. It’s only China. [Kim Jong Un] is playing with his bombs, his toys, and from the looks of it his mind is not working well and he might just go crazy one moment. China should make a last ditch effort to tell him to lay off. China will play a very important role there.”