Are there other articles that talk about e.g. the coroner's conclusions? I had not heard those before

>> When Trump learned of Otto's condition, he doubled down on the order for Yun to rush to Pyongyang and bring Otto home. The North Koreans were unilaterally informed that an American plane would soon land in Pyongyang and that United States diplomats and doctors would get off. “The president was very invested in bringing Otto home,” said a State Department official who was involved in the case and who was not authorized to speak on the record. “Listening to him deliberate on this, he sounded to me a lot more like a dad.

> Now, that's not to fault the Trump administration for applying maximum pressure on North Korea for an American citizen ending up brain-damaged in its custody: Such behavior warrants punishment. Nor is it to imply that the senior government official lied to The New York Times about the intelligence reports, as some analysts suggested to me; that person seems to have correctly described them. But if the maverick boldness that the administration displayed in rescuing Otto represents the best of Trumpism, what followed once it was clear the reports were flawed encapsulates its troubling disregard for facts when a dubious narrative supports its interests.

You could say that the last sentence is critical but, Trump or no Trump, any government is using sometimes dubious arguments for its own interest. Never let go a crisis go to waste.

We (the United States) used Otto Warmbier as a propaganda tool, the media (as in many things to do with Trump) was complicit in this use. While in general, I don't like propaganda, I don't object however, to propaganda in this case - if some good comes of it. It's not the first time we've (as a country) invented a story from near whole cloth to sell something, and it probably wont be the last.

He also spends a great deal of time defending the NK hospital procedures and "likely" incarceration facilities.

I mean, personally I'm repulsed by NK. I'm repulsed that Trump treated their leader with dignity. I'm repulsed that this story implies that the north koreans didn't get a fair shake in the press.

And the statement from the coroner saying no evidence of head trauma.

Of course if all of this were lies it would be even worse for an American president to smile and shake hands with those responsible.

The article also sort of glosses over the way NK made up the charge against Otto and other foreigners - the regime abuses world citizens for personal gain.

That sounds like something you believe because you think it should be true :-)

“Listening to [Trump] deliberate on this,” said a State Department official, “he sounded to me a lot more like a dad.”

When I saw the word "hostage" misused in the title, I had the exact same feeling.

"Natural and in good repair" from the American doctor.

The family also refused an autopsy. Weird right?

Whether you want Warmbier to have been physically tortured or not, the evidence of his torture is not present. Which is important, because it contradicts the media story about Warmbier's experience.

To me it's really surprising that an omission of correcting the perception that Otto was beaten on the part of the Trump administration is evidence Trump used the situation or that North Korea did not violate any of Otto's human rights.

You don't get to make up elaborate torture scenarios and then use them to rebut the article. The point that the article is making is simple: the story spread throughout the media about what happened to Otto Warmbier does not align with discoverable facts. The claim was that he was beaten, so badly that his "teeth were rearranged". That appears not to have been the case.

Saddam Hussein was a horrible person, one of the most horrible leaders in the world. The Baathist Iraqi regime was an evil on par with that of North Korea; in some ways perhaps worse. Nevertheless, our adventure in Iraq, based on false intelligence, was perhaps the greatest foreign policy blunder of the last 100 years. Nobody can pretend that discrepancies in stories about the crimes of American enemies don't have particular valence today. This is important reporting. You'll have to do better than just making up stories in message board comments to tear it down.

I see your point about Iraq and the importance of story lines.

Yes, I am hiding my name.

Yes, of saying they "tortured" him, not that they beat him. Like I said, is that totally unreasonable to say? What else would have caused a severe cardiopulmonary event to an otherwise healthy person? There isn't any solid evidence of a suicide attempt. North Korea's official explanation is almost certainly a lie and I don't know what else one can conclude besides coming to a tortured conclusion that North Korea somehow didn't directly cause this man's death under duress in order to assert that Trump must have known this and it was all an elaborate political game of showmanship he was playing.

edit: not trying to be snarky.

Even using the word 'torture' at that time doesn't seem unreasonable or part of a conspiracy. What is the proper motive? To get people to label DPRK a terror sponsoring nation?

It seems like a very high expectation to place on a president to correct any false narrative being perpetuated or else be party to promoting them for political gain.

I'm putting more weight on objective observers. People with scientific backgrounds.

You are putting weight on grieving parents who refused an autopsy and a notorious liar.