>>Trying to distance the US from international court (I was ok with his threats and actions cutting money to organizations the biting the feeding hand in the UN)

The US has never been party to the international court: all the Trump administration did was say so.

Here's Bill Clinton on the topic: The United States should have the chance to observe and assess the functioning of the court, over time, before choosing to become subject to its jurisdiction. Given these concerns, I will not, and do not recommend that my successor, submit the treaty to the Senate for advice and consent until our fundamental concerns are satisfied.

No wailing greeted that declaration. Then the Bush administration was absolutely opposed, in 2002 even threatening to withdraw funding of some UN operations unless the Security Council agreed to permanent exemption of US citizens from the international court. The UK engineered a compromise, with US exemption granted annually until the Abu Ghraib scandal.

While the Obama administration reduced what HRC described as US "hostility" towards the court, at the end of Obama's time the US was only an "observer" in the court.

Now Trump comes along and says that the sky is blue and all the likes of you and I can see, is aghast observers acting as if it's the worst thing a President ever did.

This will please Bill: the Bush administration behaved in quite a warlike fashion on this one. It even passed legislation requiring POTUS to "use all means necessary and appropriate to bring about the release of any U.S. or allied personnel being detained by, on behalf of, or at the request of the International Criminal Court". That was subsequently watered down, but when you think of the "all means necessary" available to POTUS, I can only imagine the fake news response were something similar enacted today.