Tweet
.
-
“Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.” - Groucho Marx -
Trump on Fox & Friends, talking about King Jong Un:
"He's the stronghead. He speaks and his people sit up and [pay] attention. I want my people to do the same"
Unclear if he's referring to his staff or the American people. Either way, this is a shit comment.Comment
-
lets put strozak in charge of the Hillary email and the trump collusion probes--let him text his Gf that we'll stop him "trump" from being president then investigate and find no evidence of bias by the fbi.
so trump puts in 8 million or so from his own pocket--has a no expense charity that issues out 19 million --no salaries to anyone
the breathless reporting of cnn nbc made it sound like trump and family were skimming millions from vets. instead I hjear the funds in question amount to less then 300K
no doubt those trumps are crooks and hopefully a criminal probe comes from this.
as someone on this site puts it so eloquently
yawnComment
-
The lawsuit says it's closer to $3M of inappropriate dispersed funds. But hey, let's suppose it's "only" $300,000 like you claim. You're saying that if anyone misuses or steals $300,000 from a charity that has incompetent oversight, then that person should in no one way ever be punished? I'm sure you apply those rules consistently across the board.Originally posted by crashcourse View Post
Oh wait. Of course you don't. This is another "Trump doesn't have to obey the law because I like him" circumstance. Remember when you Trumpists flipped your shit when Fox reported Clinton Foundation funds were used for Chelsea's wedding? How the hell is this different?
Comment
-
It's not a big thing, but Trump repeated something on Fox & Friends that demonstrates just how casually and easily he lies in order to make himself look good. The first time he said this, you could write it off to him just misspeaking. But when he repeats it, you can't really interpret it other than to say it's a lie.
He says that he had numerous parents of Korean War dead begging him to help get their remains returned to the US. Parents asked this of him. Anyone who served in Korea is, at a minimum, in their mid to late 80's. The odds that he spoke to a bunch of 110 year-olds clamoring for the return of their children is non-existent.
I know this is nit-picky and unimportant in the grand scheme of things. But why should anyone believe this man on important subjects when he lies so frequently and blatantly on minutiae in ways to make himself look better?Comment
-
There's nobody to call them on that shit. Politicians do not face consquences for those 100%-bullshit whoppers they tell to support policy outcomes. Media problem. Americans are pretty clearly tired of "scandals", be they real or fabricated or non-issues declared to be such. Only time for the partisan-gain angle now; no time for the rule-of-law question. Setting aside the frog-in-boiling-water problem, it's interesting that media keep rushing to cover the scandal despite nobody caring to read about it. They love tax havens, for example, but hate covering the very substantial policy response to it. I don't think the media are biased, but I do they they're pretty bad at covering policy, and that's a real problem:
https://www.cjr.org/analysis/fake-ne...tion-trump.php
"Of the 1,433 articles that mentioned Trump or Clinton, 291 were devoted to scandals or other personal matters while only 70 mentioned policy, and of these only 60 mentioned any details of either candidate?s positions..."
"The research team investigated this question, counting sentences that appeared in mainstream media sources and classifying each as detailing one of several Clinton- or Trump-related issues. In particular, they classified each sentence as describing either a scandal (e.g., Clinton?s emails, Trump?s taxes) or a policy issue (Clinton and jobs, Trump and immigration). They found roughly four times as many Clinton-related sentences that described scandals as opposed to policies, whereas Trump-related sentences were one-and-a-half times as likely to be about policy as scandal..."Comment
-
I know this is nit-picky and unimportant in the grand scheme of things. But why should anyone believe this man on important subjects when he lies so frequently and blatantly on minutiae in ways to make himself look better?
Not at all nitpicky, IMO. What do we really and truly think is going to happen to the political process in this country if we keep ignoring grift and continue to fail to understand enough about policy to know what our politicians/grifters are saying about it?Comment
-
Originally posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
I disagree with you and the esteemed senator from the land of Molson and maple syrup on the relative importance of this. He, of course, meant the children asking to get their dead parents out of Korea. Read something in WaPo last week about some group asking, iirc.
There is so much to get upset with Trump over. This is not one of them imo.
"The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is sometimes hard to verify their authenticity." -Abraham LincolnComment
-
The Trump charity shit is sketchy. So, was the Clinton Foundation stuff years ago. I do enjoy seeing the partisans flip, though.
And the obligatory, "Yeah, we flipped, but you flipped, too!" stuff is better than the "When our person did the same thing, it was different than when your person did the same thing."
Makes me smile."The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is sometimes hard to verify their authenticity." -Abraham LincolnComment
-
And to the people defending Trump's charity by saying he wrote a big check to make up for the misappropriated funds, that is generally not considered exculpatory. If I work for a bank and take money for a trip to Vegas, hit my numbers on the roulette wheel and pay it back later, I can still be charged with theft. You cannot take something for personal use and be cleared just because you return it when caught and demand you are innocent."The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is sometimes hard to verify their authenticity." -Abraham LincolnComment
-
And I think Trump will face the exact same sentence the Clintons faced with their foundation issues."The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is sometimes hard to verify their authenticity." -Abraham LincolnComment
-
If you think that's what he meant, fair enough. He's repeated the "parents have asked me" line multiple times at this point so he was losing the benefit of the doubt with me. But it's possible he's just gotten this all mixed up, repeatedly.Originally posted by AlabamAlum View Post
And yes, I acknowledged it's absolutely a small thing. He told a much bigger whopper this morning when he said the IG report completely exonerated him. It didn't even address anything he or his campaign did.Comment
-
If it's true. But how would that be different? The Clinton Foundation isnt under investigation for it and never was or will be. That's how.Originally posted by Dr. Strangelove View PostComment
-
He's in his 70's and speaking off the cuff, you tend to get statements stuck in your head that you have said and repeat them. Again and again until called on it. Rote memory doesn't really allow for critical reflection of one's words.Originally posted by Dr. Strangelove View Post
Yeah. I think that's what he meant because it makes no sense to lie about it. Children asking (correct) is at least as much of a plea to emotion as a parent asking (incorrect).
Your mileage may vary.
Last edited by AlabamAlum; June 15, 2018, 09:47 AM."The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is sometimes hard to verify their authenticity." -Abraham LincolnComment
-
Anyone else notice the lack of pro Trump text messages in that report? Anyone notice all the anti Hillary texts in that report? There were none.
curious that the IG would suggest FBI wide anti bias training but determine that there was no bias lol
this isnt the FBI as a whole. This is the top echelon, all of them had Hillary's back. Yes there was collusion. Yes there was obstruction. Yes there was insubordination. Not with Trump, but in the FBIComment
Comment