This topic has been locked by a moderator.
False equivalency at its finest.
Only the lines you’ve connected in your mind could lead to such a conclusion.
Yeah, because I’m the only one crazy enough to believe that a politician could do something just as illegal as any normal person could do, LOL.
False equivalency at its finest.
Only the lines you’ve connected in your mind could lead to such a conclusion.
Yeah, because I’m the only one crazy enough to believe that a politician could do something just as illegal as any normal person could do, LOL.
Did you try to misinterpret what he was saying? I don’t know where any of that came from.
False equivalency at its finest.
Only the lines you’ve connected in your mind could lead to such a conclusion.
Yeah, because I’m the only one crazy enough to believe that a politician could do something just as illegal as any normal person could do, LOL.
Did you try to misinterpret what he was saying? I don’t know where any of that came from.
Did you think that maybe Jay and I just see it differently and that my answer had nothing to do with what you seem to think it does? I do not believe it to be a false equivalency, Jay does, no big deal.
False equivalency at its finest.
Only the lines you’ve connected in your mind could lead to such a conclusion.
Yeah, because I’m the only one crazy enough to believe that a politician could do something just as illegal as any normal person could do, LOL.
Hillary Clinton stole classified information, fled the country, and intentionally disseminated it to news organizations?
You consider their alleged crimes to be “just as illegal”. This is a false equivalency because 1) if Hillary were guilty, it would be of some form of negligence (willful or not), not treason, and 2) Hillary hasn’t been charged with a crime even after extensive FBI investigation, no matter how much you wish she had been.
False equivalency at its finest.
Only the lines you’ve connected in your mind could lead to such a conclusion.
Yeah, because I’m the only one crazy enough to believe that a politician could do something just as illegal as any normal person could do, LOL.
Did you try to misinterpret what he was saying? I don’t know where any of that came from.
Yes. This represents a pattern of behavior. I don’t know if it’s a debate tactic to shift the goalpost and therefore his argument or just an obtuse misreading of the facts.
MTFBWY…A
I cringe. It’s just awkward looking at these two together.
Especially after how apparent the love the Obamas’ shared was.
I cringe. It’s just awkward looking at these two together.
Especially after how apparent the love the Obamas’ shared was.
“Like my trophy wife? Well, don’t get too attached. I’m trading her in once she hits 50.”
During the inauguration there was a moment where they “kissed” by touching cheek-to-cheek. It was so super awkward.
I’m guessing the pussytape didn’t help things any.
During the inauguration there was a moment where they “kissed” by touching cheek-to-cheek. It was so super awkward.
I’m guessing the pussytape didn’t help things any.
I was fully prepared for a divorce had Trump lost the election.
I’m 99% sure she wanted him to lose.
I’m 40% sure he wanted to lose.
And Trump has already (probably) broken the law.
http://gizmodo.com/trump-deletes-misspelled-tweet-which-may-be-illegal-1791466204
Answer: Yes.
False equivalency at its finest.
Only the lines you’ve connected in your mind could lead to such a conclusion.
Yeah, because I’m the only one crazy enough to believe that a politician could do something just as illegal as any normal person could do, LOL.
Hillary Clinton stole classified information, fled the country, and intentionally disseminated it to news organizations?
You consider their alleged crimes to be “just as illegal”. This is a false equivalency because 1) if Hillary were guilty, it would be of some form of negligence (willful or not), not treason, and 2) Hillary hasn’t been charged with a crime even after extensive FBI investigation, no matter how much you wish she had been.
False equivalency at its finest.
Only the lines you’ve connected in your mind could lead to such a conclusion.
Yeah, because I’m the only one crazy enough to believe that a politician could do something just as illegal as any normal person could do, LOL.
Did you try to misinterpret what he was saying? I don’t know where any of that came from.
Yes. This represents a pattern of behavior. I don’t know if it’s a debate tactic to shift the goalpost and therefore his argument or just an obtuse misreading of the facts.
How do you know it represents a behavior if you don’t even know whether it’s a debate tactic or an obtuse reading? We differ in opinion on their matter of guilt and this is what you come up with?
😦
The most concerning issue for the Trump administration is the size of the crowd at the inauguration. I don’t understand why I should care, or why the president should.
https://youtu.be/9AjjVMAdWm4?t=1h33m20s
Because Trump’s entire brand is “winning.”
And because the country already proved that they don’t care how many lies or told or how outrageous the lies are. Because Hilary will always be worse no matter what they do or say.
Great that we already have the president and his press secretary lying to the American people (about something incredibly petty). And then turn around and blame the “dishonest media” for simply reporting facts.
On his first full day as Baby-in-Chief…
On his first full day in office, President Trump visited the Central Intelligence Agency’s headquarters to express his gratitude for the intelligence community, which he had repeatedly railed against and recently likened to Nazis.
What Trump delivered Saturday was a campaign-style, stream-of-consciousness airing of grievances — at the Senate for delaying confirmation of his nominees; at critics for questioning whether he is smart and vigorous; and at journalists, whom he called “the most dishonest human beings on earth” and accused of lying about the size of his inauguration crowd.
I’ve never seen a person lie so brazenly and obviously directly to the public and just shrug it off with more lies than Trump.
Today.
President Trump said:
[…] The media is dishonest, make it seem like I had a feud with the intel community. […] Probably everyone in this room voted for me.
Earlier this week.
Keep Circulating the Tapes.
END OF LINE
(It hasn’t happened yet)
Great that we already have the president and his press secretary lying to the American people (about something incredibly petty). And then turn around and blame the “dishonest media” for simply reporting facts.
I was absolutely shocked at the whining. From both him and his press secretary. Shouldn’t the President be above such petty shit? I mean. If only one person showed up the the inauguration, I would expect the President to just move on to the next important piece of business the next day. But to get up and just moan and then straight-up lie about it? And people say Liberals are pathetic. Give me a break.
And I dunno what’s worse, the lies or the lies told to cover up the lies, or the fact that there are people staunchly defending him and his lies who don’t realize these lies he’s telling now are probably indicative that maybe his campaign promises weren’t 100% truth.
Keep Circulating the Tapes.
END OF LINE
(It hasn’t happened yet)
I like how he stood at the CIA, in front of the wall with the stars on it honoring those who lost their lives, and lied his ass off in front of them all.
What a fucking asshole.
Don’t worry, he’ll get what’s coming to him. After he dies, he’ll be reincarnated as a pauper with perfect hair.
I wish I believed in hell.
http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/01/21/snl-katie-rich-tweet-barron-trump-homeschool-shooter
Bunch of whiny losers. Trump and his supporters have become the “PC police” of the right.
Trump spent much of his speech – which he gave in front of a memorial wall that honors the 117 CIA officers who have fallen in the line of duty – focusing on the size of the crowd size at his inauguration, his appearance on magazine covers and saying he “has a running war with the media.”
“Former CIA Director Brennan is deeply saddened and angered at Donald Trump’s despicable display of self-aggrandizement in front of CIA’s Memorial Wall of Agency heroes,” Nick Shapiro said in a statement. "Brennan says that Trump should be ashamed of himself."
http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/21/politics/trump-to-cia-i-am-so-behind-you/
I really don’t understand the point from either side, the whining of the Trumpets, or the gloating about the smaller crowd by the anti-Trumpers.
Logic and common sense can naturally deduce the myriad of reasons for a smaller crowd in 2017 vs 2009.
First, Obama was the first black President, or half-black President to be precise, so his inauguration was a far more historical event than the average inauguration. This tends to bring in more looky-loos.
Second, Washington D.C. is located in a heavily Democrat city (you can tell by the high crime rate and high level of poverty). Additionally, the area also has a high number of black residents, so naturally the crowd will be bigger seeing that it’s far easier for these folks to get to the inauguration than it is for Mid-Western Republicans.
Third, there was rioting, violence, and all kinds of civil disorder occurring throughout the city in 2017, so a lot of people who might have attended decided against it in order to avoid personal harm or risk. This wasn’t a factor in 2009 because I don’t recall any Conservative groups trashing Washington on the election of Obama.
Fourth, and let’s just face the facts, Dems have a much better ground game in that they tend to spend way more money on making crowds look bigger at major events. They put a larger focus on collecting funds to bus people in and put people up in hotels that otherwise wouldn’t go. Republicans , for whatever reason, just don’t tend to do this and tend to have a “if they want to come, they’ll find a way” attitude. I know I do.
So, in conclusion, who should really care what the crowd looked like. I know I don’t, so far I’ve personally been impressed with some of what Trump as done. I have no clue if he’ll screw up, if he’ll be magnificent, or if he’ll just be meh. Who really knows, and anyone who claims to know is speaking through pure bias.
“despicable display of self-aggrandizement”
Sums it up perfectly. And yes he should be ashamed of himself, but he has zero shame to spare.
