Donald Trump's hypocrisy on Syria debunked: First he said "why do we care?" about it

According to The New York Times, Donald Trump said today that the chemical attack by Syria's Bashar al-Assad that killed 72 people including 11 children changed his mind about Syria. I quote:

Mr. Trump said the images of death inside Syria in the aftermath of the chemical attacks “crosses many lines, beyond a red line, many many lines.” And he said that the death of “innocent children, innocent babies, little babies” has made him reassess the situation and Syria’s president, Bashar al-Assad.

“It’s very, very possible, and I will tell you it has already happened, that my attitude toward Syria and Assad, has changed very much,” Mr. Trump said as he stood next to King Abdullah of Jordan in the Rose Garden for a news conference with reporters.

Well, that's a pretty hypocritical thing to say. You see, not only Trump knew Assad had used chemical weapons in the past, but he refused to do anything about it saying “Let Syria and ISIS fight. Why do we care?”

Oh yes, he said that. The New York Times published a fact-check of the Trump administration's statements blaming Barack Obama for the attack that took place 74 days into the Trump presidency. The "why do we care?" line was said by Trump in an interview with CNN in September of 2015.

And in May of 2016 Trump said to MSNBC that the United States had “bigger problems than Assad” and “I would have stayed out of Syria and wouldn’t have fought so much for Assad, against Assad.”

And after becoming president, Trump said regarding the fact tha Lidnsay Graham wanted the US to support Syrian rebels:

“Give me a break. I had to listen to Lindsey Graham talk about, you know, attacking Syria and attacking, you know, and it’s like you’re now attacking Russia, you’re attacking Iran, you’re attacking. And what are we getting? We’re getting — and what are we getting?”

One thing that should be pointed out is the following: Assad is supported by Vladimir Putin. Coincidence? Many will say no.

UPDATE (4-6-17): According to Turkey, autopsies of the victims of the chemical attack in Syria revealed the nerve agent Sarin was used in the attack. Even worse: Barack Obama did want to intervene militarily in Syria in 2013, but the Republicans in Congress rejected it. From the New York Times report from 2013:

Although Congressional leaders hailed his decision to seek the permission of lawmakers who had been clamoring for a say, the turnabout leaves Mr. Obama at the political mercy of House Republicans, many of whom have opposed him at every turn and have already suggested that Syria’s civil war does not pose a threat to the United States. His decision raises the possibility that he would be the first president in modern times to lose a vote on the use of force, much as Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain did in Parliament last week.