If there's one thing that grinds my gears it's fake "news". I would hope that one day anything that is stamped with the term "news" should be 100% accurate. Much like the labeling of organic food.

I'm happy to see a story that addresses this


The rise and rise of fake news
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-37846860

I would hope that one day anything that is stamped with the term "news" should be 100% accurate.

maybe....some day...in.....utopia....

I just wonder how many people don't realize that there is nothing that says news has to be true.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I just wonder how many people don't realize that there is nothing that says news has to be true.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well . . . it's all relative . . . depends on context . . . and intent . . . if you didn't intend your fake to be a lie, then it's OK.

I just wonder how many people don't realize that there is nothing that says news has to be true.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

deep thinking today :hihi:

deep thinking today :hihi:

someone has to do it in a world of mouth breathers.

someone has to do it in a world of mouth breathers.

haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa...

You mean like Halliburton, all about Oil, and stuff like that?

Agree.

Don't BS me....I get all the real news in my Facebook feed....Its all I need to know about what's going on.

Don't BS me....I get all the real news in my Facebook feed....Its all I need to know about what's going on.

If it gets made into a meme it goes straight into the history books. Definite facts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There was just an interesting story about fake news on the Esquire site.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

According to a Sunday report by The New York Times, campaign staff members have taken control of the Republican presidential candidate’s Twitter account in an attempt to keep him from another one of his infamous rants just before voters head to the polls.

http://people.com/politics/donald-trump-twitter-banned-run-by-campaign-managers/

Sadly this isn't fake news

If it gets made into a meme it goes straight into the history books. Definite facts.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think they are building a new wing at The Smithsonian dedicated to historical memes.

According to a Sunday report by The New York Times, campaign staff members have taken control of the Republican presidential candidate’s Twitter account in an attempt to keep him from another one of his infamous rants just before voters head to the polls.

http://people.com/politics/donald-trump-twitter-banned-run-by-campaign-managers/

Sadly this isn't fake news

sounds kinda like when they had to put Obama on the teleprompter because he kept saying stupid and offensive things and they had to shut his wife up all together due to her acid tongue.....nothing new...:)

This is a scary thing. If you control the entire media and the two federal law enforcement agencies, what can stop you from doing whatever you want? CNN is basically a super pac for the hag.

Hackers have become the new journalists and journalists have become political hacks. WTF.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Some deep thinking going on here Nebe...

.....Don't be bogarting,pass it on over.

BTW It was the aliens all along.

Some deep thinking going on here Nebe...

.....Don't be bogarting,pass it on over.

BTW It was the aliens all along.
Is that what probed your caboose ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

sounds kinda like when they had to put Obama on the teleprompter because he kept saying stupid and offensive things and they had to shut his wife up all together due to her acid tongue.....nothing new...:)

seem your facts dont jive again

but hea if he cant control himself on twitter .. we'll trust him with the Country. thats easy....

Don't BS me....I get all the real news in my Facebook feed....Its all I need to know about what's going on.

Sadly your correct and most memes are from conservative leaning and not correct here is one example .... they left out he hired robbers to steal from the DNC

seem your facts dont jive again

but hea if he cant control himself on twitter .. we'll trust him with the Country. thats easy....

I get it...so Trump's twittering is a bigger disqualifier than Hillary's emailing and handling of sensitive information and lack of honesty and transparency in that regard?....makes sense....I personally, could care less about Twitter and anything that happens there...a huge disqualifier for me is someone who's been proven incompetent and completely dishonest when entrusted with authority...that she's yet to be held accountable demonstrates the degree of corruption existing within our government...promoting her is insanity unless you approve of her corrupt style and the further degradation of the stature of our institutions.....however loathsome Trump may be...I "trust" him far more than the Clintons and their hangers on with the office....it's not saying much for either of them, but the Clinton's history of abject corruption with and in everything they have ever touched is nearly as as concerning as the number of supporters who dismiss it all out of hand....

I'll save you the time of a reply....none of the above is factual, Hillary has a great resume and is simply the victim decades of right wing operatives setting her and her husband up to appear that they are corrupt, amoral pillagers of government

You would have made a great German in the Late 1930's
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You would have made a great German in the Late 1930's
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

that's original....I don't like Trump...don't plan to vote for him....but for crying out loud....what he writes on Twitter is a problem and everything that we know, not only regarding hillary's email but the rest of the family's dealings is not??

we're electing a president that is supposed to uphold and defend the Constitution and maintain the integrity of our institutions ....she's demonstrated herself incapable of that....Trump sucks but he doesn't have a thirty year track record of government corruption....democrats seem very comfortable with democrat government corruption..you live in RI Eben...you see it every day....I don't believe he'll abuse the office to the degree that the Clinton's have previously and I'm sure are already planning to do

re 1930's germany

if Trump were to win and then betray the public trust...there's a long line of republicans and journalists anxious to hold him accountable

there is clearly no one on the democrat side or in the MSM to hold the Clinton's accountable for any actions,,,that is a frightening prospect

Sadly your correct and most memes are from conservative leaning

You mean like these that have come across my Facebook feed in the past 24 hours.....

that's BS and you know it....both sides are equally as guilty of this.

they left out he hired robbers to steal from the DNC

....Well they also left out how she bypassed security measures and Ignored classification levels for her convenience....so let's consider that one a wash

that's original....I don't like Trump...don't plan to vote for him....but for crying out loud....what he writes on Twitter is a problem and everything that we know, not only regarding hillary's email but the rest of the family's dealings is not??

we're electing a president that is supposed to uphold and defend the Constitution and maintain the integrity of our institutions ....she's demonstrated herself incapable of that....Trump sucks but he doesn't have a thirty year track record of government corruption....democrats seem very comfortable with democrat government corruption..you live in RI Eben...you see it every day....I don't believe he'll abuse the office to the degree that the Clinton's have previously and I'm sure are already planning to do

re 1930's germany

if Trump were to win and then betray the public trust...there's a long line of republicans and journalists anxious to hold him accountable

there is clearly no one on the democrat side or in the MSM to hold the Clinton's accountable for any actions,,,that is a frightening prospect

A rare post worthy of consideration.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

that's original....I don't like Trump...don't plan to vote for him....but for crying out loud....what he writes on Twitter is a problem and everything that we know, not only regarding hillary's email but the rest of the family's dealings is not??

we're electing a president that is supposed to uphold and defend the Constitution and maintain the integrity of our institutions ....she's demonstrated herself incapable of that....Trump sucks but he doesn't have a thirty year track record of government corruption....democrats seem very comfortable with democrat government corruption..you live in RI Eben...you see it every day....I don't believe he'll abuse the office to the degree that the Clinton's have previously and I'm sure are already planning to do

re 1930's germany

if Trump were to win and then betray the public trust...there's a long line of republicans and journalists anxious to hold him accountable

there is clearly no one on the democrat side or in the MSM to hold the Clinton's accountable for any actions,,,that is a frightening prospect

"what he writes on Twitter is a problem and everything that we know, not only regarding hillary's email but the rest of the family's dealings is not?? "

NOW you're coming around to liberalism. You see, we should focus on all of Trump's ethical lapses, and ignore all of Hillary's ethical lapses. Because in that light, you have to admit, she compares favorably!

"democrats seem very comfortable with democrat government corruption.."

Two very, very different sets of rules, that's for certain.

This is a scary thing. If you control the entire media and the two federal law enforcement agencies, what can stop you from doing whatever you want? CNN is basically a super pac for the hag.

Hackers have become the new journalists and journalists have become political hacks. WTF.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Great post. One CNN contributor was also the head of the DNC, who was let go by CNN for emailing Hillary debate questions ahead of time. And she said last night, that "my conscience is clear". This woman, Donna Brazil, cheated, she got caught cheating, and she is still the head of the DNC. She also got caught lying about it, because she had denied sending Hillary the questions.

Also at CNN, you have a high profile host (Chris Cuomo) advising viewers not to pay attention to any network that is giving any coverage to Hillary's hacked emails, because we can't have anything critical being said about her.

Great post. One CNN contributor was also the head of the DNC, who was let go by CNN for emailing Hillary debate questions ahead of time. And she said last night, that "my conscience is clear". This woman, Donna Brazil, cheated, she got caught cheating, and she is still the head of the DNC. She also got caught lying about it, because she had denied sending Hillary the questions.

Also at CNN, you have a high profile host (Chris Cuomo) advising viewers not to pay attention to any network that is giving any coverage to Hillary's hacked emails, because we can't have anything critical being said about her.
Jake tapper is about to be tapped for the unemployment line. Supposedly, he's the source of the leak.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The worst part of this whole election is that even after it is done we will still have to deal with the losing party bitching and moaning about why they lost....

Is that what probed your caboose ?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No,that was WAY more painful.

Or maybe it was all in my head?

Raider Ronnie called it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/20/business/media/how-fake-news-spreads.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=b-lede-package-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

https://youtu.be/lYChqtFygRQ

https://youtu.be/rsJj2s6hliM

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If there's one thing that grinds my gears it's fake "news". I would hope that one day anything that is stamped with the term "news" should be 100% accurate. Much like the labeling of organic food.


I think this is fake NEWS :lama:

and really you LOVE it -LOL

Hillary Won the election :hihi:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38231532

the son's gone will the father be next ??

His father, Michael Flynn Snr, Mr Trump's pick to be US national security adviser, has also shared fake news.

How can you be picked to be the next the National security advisor and share or even worse think some of this stuff is Real??

problem is Wayne..when it comes to sex and money and the Clintons..anything is within the realm of possibility:rotf2:


word of the day...week, year...for the disgruntled liberati .."Fake News"


I listened to Jim and Marjorie out of Boston yesterday while driving around NE....pretty sure they couldn't get through 1 minute of broadcast time without they or one of their guests dropping the phrase "Fake News".....then there was "climate deniers"....over and over with regard to the Gore visit to Trump Palace.........Marjorie first decried "Fake News" then suggested that Trump "ought be particularly concerned about climate change because where he lives, Manhattan, is already almost completely under water".....this was news to me...someone should warn the folks planning to go down there for the New Year's Eve celebration to bring masks and snorkels.....I was excited :rolleyes:to hear one of their lefty guests state that STATES would need to play an important role in exercising their rights against mandates and dictates that might come down from the Federal Government under Trump......wish this woman and her friends were consistent on this because while the two hosts agreed wholeheartedly with her on this issue NOW....I don't think the left had any problem with the FEDS exerting their will and trampling states rights when Obama and his crew was running things...the big concerns were pot and the ability to get an abortion after 5 months in the womb....big issues for the left I guess?

funny that the left is so consumed with the importance facts, literal meanings for words and phrases and the quality of the news after the Clinton years through the Bush years and now the Obama years where wordsmithing has become a celebrated art form for the left, meanings are what you chose to make them depending on your necessity the time, the only absolute is that there are no absolutes, you can say one thing one day and mean something completely different the next and lying is a compassionate and fun way to deal with those that you dislike and perfectly acceptable because it is part of the human condition...."everybody does it" :)

How can you be picked to be the next the National security advisor and share or even worse think some of this stuff is Real??

VP Pence said the son was not part of the transition team. Later it was confirmed he was. This admin. has already lied more than any other admin.

This admin. has already lied more than any other admin.



that's a good one.... :hihi:

So within a few hours a member of the transition team lies, the national security advisor lies and the VP lies. Pathetic. And all we get is the typical snarky response.

So within a few hours a member of the transition team lies, the national security advisor lies and the VP lies. Pathetic. And all we get is the typical snarky response.

everybody does it, ask Eben...especially politicians...i would worry too much :kewl:

Unfortunately, I agree everbody does it. Parlty a result of every statement being examined w/a fine tooth comb. I just think Trump is taking it to a new level.

word of the day...week, year...for the disgruntled liberati .."Fake News"

funny that the left is so consumed with the importance facts, literal meanings for words and phrases and the quality of the news after the Clinton years through the Bush years and now the Obama years where wordsmithing has become a celebrated art form for the left, meanings are what you chose to make them depending on your necessity the time, the only absolute is that there are no absolutes, you can say one thing one day and mean something completely different the next and lying is a compassionate and fun way to deal with those that you dislike and perfectly acceptable because it is part of the human condition...."everybody does it" :)

Because some are trapped in the bubble of fake language invented by leftist thought and "news," it is hard for them to accept what you say here as genuine. Emotionally, they probably "feel" that what you say is "fake."

We are constantly bombarded with slanted "news" about how black lives matter, how "conservatives" are basically racist, homophobic, sexist, islamophobic, full of hate, and on and on. And yes, these "news" (or memes) are repeated by Democrat politicians and their staff, including President Obama's staff, even by Obama himself. Hillary based her campaign on such fake language.

Does that make it right if Trump's potential staff "shares" so-called fake news? Obviously not. But if it is not part of their campaign rhetoric, or political face to, and "shared with," the public, should it "disqualify" them. If so, the whole Democrat administration should be disqualified. I'd be willing to go along with that trade-off.

Some are a little too prone to fake outrage.

It sad that the "right" has lost so "much" of its "morals" that people now make "excuses" for people's lies.

It sad that the "right" has lost so "much" of its "morals" that people now make "excuses" for people's lies.

That sentence is loaded with fake language.

It sad that the "right" has lost so "much" of its "morals" that people now make "excuses" for people's lies.

Anthony Weiner told you to say that, didn't he?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It sad that the "right" has lost so "much" of its "morals" that people now make "excuses" for people's lies.

think of it as a football game...the left team has succeeded in getting away with favorable calls throughout the first half...chop blocks, mugging receivers, late hits on the quarterback all seemingly go unnoticed by the officials...so in the second half right team decides to play the style of play that the left team has established with the help of those who are supposed to be officiating, in fact, some of those officiating are tired of the less than admirable tactics from the left team and realize that they are incorrigible so they resist the urge to reach for their flags ....the coaches and players on the left team sideline scream with incredulity with each infraction not understanding why penalties are not being called.. though before halftime they were filled with glee each time they benefited from a non-call .....it's not that the right team has lost morals or is simply making excuses...it's that they've likely resolved to playing by the established rules in order to stand a chance at the end....the cognitive dissonance that you and many on the left are experiencing is not due to the fact that the right is not outraged(there is outrage if you choose to look but tempered probably thanks to years of being ignored and impugned...desensitized perhaps....or call it more "tolerant" you could say :scream: maybe ambivalence).... you are frustrated that you can't hold the two sides to different standards in order to maintain an advantage....this can be quite maddening apparently:huh:

"just win baby" :humpty:

think of it as a football game...the left team has succeeded in getting away with favorable calls throughout the first half...chop blocks, mugging receivers, late hits on the quarterback all seemingly go unnoticed by the officials...so in the second half right team decides to play the style of play that the left team has established with the help of those who are supposed to be officiating, in fact, some of those officiating are tired of the less than admirable tactics from the left team and realize that they are incorrigible so they resist the urge to reach for their flags ....the coaches and players on the left team sideline scream with incredulity with each infraction not understanding why penalties are not being called.. though before halftime they were filled with glee each time they benefited from a non-call .....it's not that the right team has lost morals or is simply making excuses...it's that they've likely resolved to playing by the established rules in order to stand a chance at the end....the cognitive dissonance that you and many on the left are experiencing is not due to the fact that the right is not outraged(there is outrage if you choose to look but tempered probably thanks to years of being ignored and impugned...desensitized perhaps....or call it more "tolerant" you could say :scream: maybe ambivalence).... you are frustrated that you can't hold the two sides to different standards in order to maintain an advantage....this can be quite maddening apparently:huh:

"just win baby" :humpty:

Good post. We nominated goody-two-shoes in 08 and 12, it didn't work. The media said John McCain fathered his adopted daughter in an affair, and they said Romney was a heartless tycoon. So there is no benefit to nominating a man of integrity, except for the better treatment you get on Foxnews.

Sometimes you need someone who will elbow back. Enter Mr Trump.

It's also worth noting that Trump's ethical lapses (there are many) are not applicable to everyone else in the party. All things considered, I find the air quite tolerable on our side.

Anthony Weiner told you to say that, didn't he?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm a little confused what does Anthony weiner have to do with my comment?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That word Morals....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That word Morals....
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No one says he had morals but you didn't see people here talking about "false outrage" or it's not a big deal like you do with Trump's constant lying. In fact when the Anthony Weiner news came to light everybody said how sleazy it was nobody tried defending him. that's the difference
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It's also worth noting that Trump's ethical lapses (there are many) are not applicable to everyone else in the party. All things considered, I find the air quite tolerable on our side.

Of course his ethical lapses are not applicable to anyone else. Most people recognize that. However you find something you don't like about a Democrat and you apply that to everybody. By the way do you know the manufacturer of Confederate flags? I'd like to purchase some stock in the company since they have been very prevalent since Donald Trump got elected president. Glad you like the air up there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

By the way do you know the manufacturer of Confederate flags? I'd like to purchase some stock in the company since they have been very prevalent since Donald Trump got elected president.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

gets stranger by the post :hs:

Of course his ethical lapses are not applicable to anyone else. Most people recognize that. However you find something you don't like about a Democrat and you apply that to everybody. By the way do you know the manufacturer of Confederate flags? I'd like to purchase some stock in the company since they have been very prevalent since Donald Trump got elected president. Glad you like the air up there.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yesterday you accused the entire "right" of losing so "much" of its "morals" because some have defended Trump (which, I guess, you think is immoral). Yet you think, I guess, that it is wrong to apply to all Democrats something that is not nice about one Democrat.

And now you're implying, I guess, that there is some not nice thing about Trump which is connected to, or inspires a love for, the Confederacy. And that, a mirror image of applying to everybody what is about one person, you now apply to one person (Trump) something pertaining to a whole segment of people.

Aside from your hypocrisy, would you be speaking code, or blowing a dog whistle, implying, or actually saying, that Trump is a racist? Or that he actually does not love America nor does not want to make it great, but actually hankers to the greatness of the Confederate States? Or something like that?

That's the kind of fake news that the Democrats constantly propagate. And have been doing for many years. That's why their outrage over trump seems fake to me. Is he different now than all the years before he ran for President? How come there wasn't this constant barrage of "news" about what a racist, sexist, homophobic, hateful person he was all those years? How come he was actually a celebrity? Befriended by the "left" even more than by the "right"?

That's why it's about politics--his audacity to run against the left and their anointed next-in-line. That's why the Democrat rage over certain fake news is fake rage to me. They've disseminated so much fake news over the decades that it seems to flow effortlessly out of their every orifice.

Scottw's football analogy explains a lot of what passes over you. Probably, Democrat fake tactics have been so pervasive and unchecked by the very media which approved and fed into it with its own fakery that it has been accepted as a norm, was normalized to the point where it wasn't noticed as anything peculiar. Certainly, it was never alluded to as fake news. Even though much of it was.

gets stranger by the post :hs:

Put your critical thinking cap on.

And tell us again how his lies are not a big deal.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Put your critical thinking cap on.

And tell us again how his lies are not a big deal.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

which one exactly?

which one exactly?

Any of them. Do only some lies concern you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

or it's not a big deal like you do with Trump's constant lying.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Care to show me where I claimed that.....

All I did was point out somebody on the "Left" who pretty much sums up "Lack of Morals"
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Care to show me where I claimed that.....

All I did was point out somebody on the "Left" who pretty much sums up "Lack of Morals"
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I should have said like you "see here", not that you do and I apologize for that. I have not seen you defend his lying. When I use my phone and the voice activation some things are written incorrectly.

I agree weiner has a lack of morals and no one here or elsewhere said it's not a big deal like we're seeing with Trumps lying.'s
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Put your critical thinking cap on.

And tell us again how his lies are not a big deal.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"Put your critical thinking cap on."

Harry Reid didn't regret or apologize about saying that Romney didn't pay taxes for 10 years. When he was asked about his lie, his reply was "Romney didn't win, did he?"

So put your critical thinking cap on. C'mon now. Think. Why do politicians lie? Would Hillary's lies have been a big deal to you if she had won?

Maybe you don't think her lies were all that bad. I don't think that Trump's lies are all that bad. Most of them were not actually lies. Mostly exaggerations, sarcasms, mistakes, or outright distortions of what he actually said . . . Hillary didn't win, did she?

What goes around, comes around. Always been that way.

It's very difficult to be totally honest to the American people about political reality. Probably because "political reality" has become an oxymoron.

To begin with, there must be a defined, if not an absolute, framework of government with a defined process of governing in order for there to be a semblance of a coherent political reality. The abandonment of the political framework on which this country was founded was begun long ago and has been gradually eroded ever since.

And before that framework, there must be a reason to create it and its process for governing. There must be an idea, a principle that motivates the creation of the framework. The principles of our founding have also been gradually distorted and lied about. We are at a point where most of our people don't even know what they or the framework are. There are many who believe they should be forgotten, discarded. There are many who feel we should restore them.

What is the political reality in that mix of opposing views?

If we don't have a common definition of what it means to make the government work well, what must politicians say to us in order to get elected? Must they tell us what they think most want to hear? And how do that "most" arrive at thinking what they want to hear?

Being totally honest will turn off half or more of our morally, ideologically, and politically divided people. Trump has long been in the business of understanding and persuading people. He learned how to schmooz, fib, tell white lies, and some biggies, better than Hillary. Also better than Romney or McCain.

Hillary didn't win, did she? What else do you need to know?

That's how its been done for a long, long time. As smart as Romney is, he didn't understand something as simple as that. As dumb as Harry Reid usually appears to be, he did understand that. Hillary understood it, but didn't have the personal goods, the charisma, the ability to connect with enough diverse people, to pull it off.

Is that a good thing? You and I would probably agree that it's not so good. That it should be better. That it should be much, much more honest. My solution is to connect the vast majority of us under common principles. The most basic principles which can connect diverse and even opposing beliefs. And to devise a framework of government to support that connection. And to teach and instill in all our people a jealous loyalty to those principles and the framework that supports them.

Oh . . . wait . . . we already did that.

Why I didn't consider Trump's so-called lies to be a big deal is because what's left of our original framework and principles, which would be a real glue to unite us rather than the fake mess we have now, could possibly be led to gradual restoration by appointing judges who would actually support, defend, and abide by that constitutional framework.

Then, if we can restore that original connection that the people of this country had, whatever lies the politicians think they must tell us in order to win will easily be exposed as political unreality if they contradict those principles and that framework which connect us.

Otherwise, we can continue to flounder in the unreal political morass of opposing ideologies which persuade us with lies, slander, and sleaze. And we can continue to bitch about who are the biggest liars.

Does that help answer your question?

Any of them. Do only some lies concern you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

be specific......you seem to label everything he says as a lie.....actions concern me....statements, not so much...unless it's your guy..then I'm deeply concerned.....we're told these politicians sometimes often make erroneous statements when they are tired from doing politician stuff...and Trump has been very, very busy you know....

don't think that Trump's lies are all that bad. Most of them were not actually lies. Mostly exaggerations, sarcasms, mistakes, or outright distortions of what he actually said . . . Hillary didn't win, did she?



Trump being Trump:biglaugh:

can't even imagine what the State of the Union will be like:grins:

be specific......you seem to label everything he says as a lie.Pls. point out where I have ever said anything remotely close to that....actions concern me....statements, not so much...unless it's your guy..then I'm deeply concerned..I don't know if that is your usual snarkiness or a double standard?...we're told these politicians sometimes often make erroneous statements when they are tired from doing politician stuff...and Trump has been very, very busy you know....

I agree they make erroneous statements (like Obama stating he visited 57 states - most people let mis-statments like that go and if they don't there are petty people. I do remember it being brought up here a few times though).

3 min. doing a search came up with the following:

Says that at a campaign rally President Barack Obama "spent so much time screaming at a protester, and frankly it was a disgrace."

"Thousands of Americans have been killed by illegal immigrants."

Says Barack Obama "is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth

"Nearly half of African-American children under the age of 6 are living in abject poverty."

"Wikileaks also shows how John Podesta rigged the polls by oversampling Democrats, a voter suppression technique."

"14 percent of noncitizens are registered to vote

"Ford is moving all of their small-car production to Mexico."

The stories from women saying he groped or forced himself on them "largely have been debunked."

those are lies??

what you fail to grasp is those things this are both debatable and meaningless...as is Obama and the 57 States he visited...

what has changed much to your disliking is that one side has apparently realized that holding their guy to a much higher standard is a big disadvantage....the left sounds like the woman who spends years trying to change her husband, ideally to be more like her...and when she succeeds she hates it and wants a divorce...it appears as though many on the right have simply relented to hold, Trump, at least and who knows for how long...to the standards that the dems have set...must be quite maddening

you really like Politifact....here is an actual "lie" that actually affected Americans in a profound way....nothing on your list reaches this level of dishonesty and deception

so much so that it gained "lie of the year" honors

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/dec/12/lie-year-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/

VDH did a fabulous job recently analyzing the things that Obama touted in his last State of the Union as his "successes".....are these
"lies"...this is consequential policy stuff unlike debunked groping stories

Assessing the Obama Legacy—Against His Own Mileposts
The president’s stated priorities have not turned out well.
By Victor Davis Hanson — December 8, 2016

In his 2016 State of the Union address, President Obama summarized his achievements. That same night, the White House issued a press release touting Obama’s accomplishments.

Now that he will be leaving, how well did these initiatives listed in the press release actually work out?

“Securing the historic Paris climate agreement.”

The accord was never submitted to Congress as a treaty. It will be ignored by President-elect Trump.

“Achieving the Iran nuclear deal.”

That “deal” was another effort to circumvent the treaty-ratifying authority of Congress. It has green-lighted Iranian aggression, and it probably ensured nuclear proliferation. Iran’s violations will cause the new Trump administration to either scrap the accord or send it to Congress for certain rejection.

“Securing the Trans-Pacific Partnership.”

Even Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton came out against this failed initiative. It has little support in Congress or among the public. Opposition to the TTP helped fuel the Trump victory.

“Reopening Cuba.”

The recent Miami celebration of the death of Fidel Castro, and Trump’s victory in Florida, are testimonies to the one-sided deal’s unpopularity. The United States got little in return for the Castro brothers’ propaganda coup.

“Destroying ISIL” and “dismantling al Qaeda.”

We are at last making some progress against some of these “jayvee” teams, as Obama once described the Islamic State. Neither group has been dismantled or destroyed. Despite the death of Osama bin Laden, the widespread reach of radical Islam into Europe and the United States remains largely unchecked.

“Ending combat missions in Afghanistan and Iraq.”

The Afghan war rages on. The precipitous withdrawal of all U.S. peacekeepers in 2011 from a quiet Iraq helped sow chaos in the rest of the Middle East. We are now sending more troops back into Iraq.

“Closing Guantanamo Bay.”

This was an eight-year broken promise. The detention center still houses dangerous terrorists.

“Rebalancing to the Asia-Pacific region.”

The anemic “Asia Pivot” failed. The Philippines is now openly pro-Russian and pro-Chinese. Traditional allies such Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea are terrified that the U.S is no longer a reliable guarantor of their autonomy.

“Supporting Central American development.”

The once-achievable promise of a free-market, democratic Latin America is moribund. Dictatorships in Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua remain impoverished bullies. All have been appeased by the U.S.

“Strengthening cybersecurity.”

Democrats claimed Russian interference in the recent election. If true, it is proof that there is no such thing as “cybersecurity.” The WikiLeaks releases, the hacked Clinton e-mails and the Edward Snowden disclosures confirm that the Obama administration was the least cybersecure presidency in history.

“Growing the Open Government Partnership.”

The NSA scandal, the hounding of Associated Press journalists, some of the WikiLeaks troves, and the corruption at the IRS all reveal that the Obama administration was one of the least transparent presidencies in memory.

“Honoring our nation’s veterans.”

Obama’s Department of Veteran Affairs was mired in scandal, and some of its nightmarish VA hospitals were awash in disease and unnecessary deaths. Secretary of Veterans Affairs Eric Shinseki was forced to resign amid controversy. Former Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano apologized for issuing an offensive report falsely concluding that returning war vets were liable to join right-wing terrorist groups.

“Making sure our politics reflect America’s best.”

The 2016 presidential campaign was among the nastiest on record. WikiLeaks revealed unprecedented collusion between journalists and the Clinton campaign. Earlier, Obama had been the first president in U.S. history to refuse public campaign money. He was also the largest fundraiser of private cash and the greatest collector of Wall Street money in the history of presidential campaigns.

“Protecting voting rights.”

Riots followed the recent presidential election. Democrats, without merit, joined failed Green Party candidate Jill Stein’s recount in key swing states they lost. Progressives are berating the constitutionally guaranteed Electoral College. State electors are being subject to intimidation campaigns.

“Strengthening policing.”

Lethal attacks on police are soaring.

“Promoting immigrant and refugee integration and citizenship awareness.”

The southern U.S. border is largely unenforced. Immigration law is deliberately ignored. The president’s refugee policy was unpopular and proved a disaster, as illustrated by the Boston Marathon bombings, the San Bernardino attack, the Orlando nightclub shooting, and the recent Ohio State University terrorist violence.

Note what Obama’s staff omitted: his doubling of the U.S. debt in eight years, the unworkable and soon-to-be-repealed Affordable Care Act, seven years of anemic economic growth, record labor nonparticipation, failed policy resets abroad, and a Middle East in ruins.

Why, then, has the president’s previously sinking popularity suddenly rebounded in 2016?

Obama disappeared from our collective television screens, replaced by unpopular candidates Clinton and Trump, who slung mud at each other and stole the limelight.

As a result, Obama discovered that the abstract idea of a lame-duck Obama was more popular than the cold reality of eight-year President Obama.

He wisely adjusted by rarely being heard from or seen for much of 2016.

So Obama now departs amid the ruin of the Democratic party into a lucrative post-presidency: detached and without a legacy.

I agree they make erroneous statements (like Obama stating he visited 57 states - most people let mis-statments like that go and if they don't there are petty people. I do remember it being brought up here a few times though).

3 min. doing a search came up with the following:

Says that at a campaign rally President Barack Obama "spent so much time screaming at a protester, and frankly it was a disgrace."

"Thousands of Americans have been killed by illegal immigrants."

Says Barack Obama "is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth

"Nearly half of African-American children under the age of 6 are living in abject poverty."

"Wikileaks also shows how John Podesta rigged the polls by oversampling Democrats, a voter suppression technique."

"14 percent of noncitizens are registered to vote

"Ford is moving all of their small-car production to Mexico."

The stories from women saying he groped or forced himself on them "largely have been debunked."

Hillary didn't win, did she?

Yes those in fact are all lies.

So again, pls. point out where I said "everything" Trump says is a lie.

Yes those in fact are all lies.

So again, pls. point out where I said "everything" Trump says is a lie.

I wrote "you seem to label everything he says as a lie"

can you cite an instance where you declared Trump truthful?:rolleyes:...oh...wait...when he said he wanted to date his daughter....that was probably truthful...

I've only discussed a fraction of his statements. In fact, a fraction of his lies.

I've only discussed a fraction of his statements. In fact, a fraction of his lies.

So what? What's the big deal about what you've discussed? What's so important about it?

THE WAY ELECTIONS HAVE BEEN WON HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED OVER A LONG PERIOD OF OUR HISTORY.

Hillary didn't win, did she?

Yes those in fact are all lies.

So again, pls. point out where I said "everything" Trump says is a lie.


I've only discussed a fraction of his statements. In fact, a fraction of his lies.




I listen to Trump lie out and out daily and say to myself who believes his crap.



Unfortunately, I agree everbody does it(lying). Parlty a result of every statement being examined w/a fine tooth comb. I just think Trump is taking it(lying) to a new level.

QUOTE=PaulS;1113448]No one says he had morals but you didn't see people here talking about "false outrage" or it's not a big deal like you do with Trump's constant lying.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

:deadhorse:

Trump should twitter out that he will be the most honest president in our history....bigley....that would send the moonbats right over the moon....or at least into aroma therapy

:deadhorse:

Trump should twitter out that he will be the most honest president in our history....bigley....that would send the moonbats right over the moon....or at least into aroma therapy

Still don't see where I stated "everything" he said was a lie - try again.

Your "bar" is set awfully low.

Your "bar" is set awfully low.

this is correct

Yes those in fact are all lies.

.

Once the primaries ended, it was assured that a morally bankrupt, serial liar was going to be POTUS.

The GOP nominated Ward Cleaver in 2012, it didn't stop your side from claiming that he was a heartless tycoon who had no empathy for dying women, or for kids, or puppies...

I don't like his morals any more than you do. Character wasn't on the ballot in 2016.

lie

noun
1.
a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood.

verb (used without object), lied, lying.
5.
to speak falsely or utter untruth knowingly, as with intent to deceive.
Synonyms

not to be confused with

Definition of misspeak
misspokeplay \-ˈspōk\misspokenplay \-ˈspō-kən\misspeaking
transitive verb
1
: to speak (as a word) incorrectly
2
: to express (oneself) imperfectly or incorrectly <claims now that he misspoke himself>

Trump issue is not that he Misspeak's on the contrary his willingness to double down on his statements when his figures and claimed facts are show to be false... this behavior makes him a liar..

Trump issue is not that he Misspeak's on the contrary his willingness to double down on his statements when his figures and claimed facts are show to be false... this behavior makes him a liar..

His issue was to get elected. He accomplished that. Now, his issue is to make America great again. Actually, he said "We" will make America great again. But first he'd better consult with you on the definition of great. Then, after clearing that up, he can get on with it.

lie


Trump issue is not that he Misspeak's on the contrary his willingness to double down on his statements when his figures and claimed facts are show to be false... this behavior makes him a liar..

no one said he "Misspeak's"(well, you just did)....in fact it's pretty widely acknowledged that he's loose with the truth and facts to the point where it can be pretty amusing when he gets on a roll, the degree to which it's willful and sinister is debatable.....in most cases I suspect what you perceive as is "lie" is rather simply, and nothing more, the fact that he has a differing view and perspective than you may hold on a given subjects, what you perceive as a "lie" by Trump is actually your inability to view the world through the prism through which he looking...probably the result of your lack of tolerance of differing viewpoints and a closed-minded inability to grasp the world outside your bubble.........so it's not really Trump....it's you...:hihi:

Originally Posted by detbuch

"I don't think that Trump's lies are all that bad. Most of them were not actually lies. Mostly exaggerations, sarcasms, mistakes, or outright distortions of what he actually said . . ."

Krauthammer really nails it...

The most amusing part of the Trump transition has been watching its effortless confounding of the media, often in fewer than 140 characters.

An epidemic of constitutional chin-tugging and civil-libertarian hair-pulling immediately breaks out. By the time the media have exhausted their outrage over the looming abolition of free speech, judicial supremacy, and affordable kale, Trump has moved on.

Trump so thoroughly owns the political stage today that the word Clinton seems positively quaint and Barack Obama, who happens to be president of the United States, is totally irrelevant.

Trump will continue to tweet and the media will continue to take the bait. Highly entertaining but it is a sideshow.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/442902/republican-congress-policy-donald-trump-tweets-theatrical-interventions

the verbal gymnastics are amazing to support his lies (based on the definition of a lie ) not what I FEEL is a Lie Scott your argument is and excuse to accept what he say's as OK .. He is the POTUS elect .. no longer a TV host and whats scary is the wiliness of people like you and others to not see this as a problem going forward... And the right had the nerve to complain about the lefts Blind faith in Obama...

what is his Idea of Great ?? seeing he hasn't outlined any Markers to measure His Idea of Great .. maybe you all can explain it .. for us


unusually or comparatively large in size or dimensions:
A great fire destroyed nearly half the city.
2.
large in number; numerous:
Great hordes of tourists descend on Europe each summer.
3.
unusual or considerable in degree, power, intensity, etc.:
great pain.
4.
wonderful; first-rate; very good:
We had a great time. That's great!
5.
being such in an extreme or notable degree:
great friends; a great talker.
6.
notable; remarkable; exceptionally outstanding:
a great occasion.
7.
important; highly significant or consequential:
the great issues in American history.

what is his Idea of Great ?? seeing he hasn't outlined any Markers to measure His Idea of Great .. maybe you all can explain it .. for us



I'm still trying to figure out Bigley...what was Obama's Idea of "Hope and Change" and "Fundamental Transformation"? and which one of Trumps "lies" (based on your definition of a lie )have I supported?...

perhaps he'll "grow" into the position as we were told Obama would do in time :kewl:

Trump uses language similarly to Biden, whom the left adores. If Biden runs in 2020 against Trump, it should be a verbal Barnum and Bailey.

But I think Trump is even better than Biden at it--as PaulS said, he takes it to another level.

Trump uses language similarly to Biden, whom the left adores. If Biden runs in 2020 against Trump, it should be a verbal Barnum and Bailey.

But I think Trump is even better than Biden at it--as PaulS said, he takes it to another level.

if Biden was smart enough to figure out how to Tweet, he be right up there...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YF5TomeiMrc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YF5TomeiMrc


Stefan Basil Molyneux is an Irish-born Canadian blogger/vlogger

Supports a Stateless society

Supports the Voice of men a strongly antifeminist and frequently accuses feminists of being misandrist in their mindset. another 1st

But again thanks for posting a Canadian blogger's opinion As real new's and TRUTH

the left invented fake news...and deemed(s) it perfectly acceptable as long as it furthered(s) their cause....if it hampers their cause...it's the worst thing to be foisted on mankind.....silly leftists :rtfm:

leftist definition of "fake news" = "anything news that disagrees with our world view" :hihi:

Stefan Basil Molyneux is an Irish-born Canadian blogger/vlogger (this is definitely the worst kind)

Supports a Stateless society (you should have read the rest of the paragraph in WIKI)

Supports the Voice of men a strongly antifeminist and frequently accuses feminists of being misandrist in their mindset. another 1st (definitely not the 1st)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3ij1-VB9YA

But again thanks for posting a Canadian blogger's opinion As real new's and TRUTH

what ever happened to open minds, tolerance and diversity????

the left invented fake news...and deemed(s) it perfectly acceptable as long as it furthered(s) their cause....if it hampers their cause...it's the worst thing to be foisted on mankind.....silly leftists :rtfm:

leftist definition of "fake news" = "anything news that disagrees with our world view" :hihi:

Fake news is probably the third oldest profession.

But with the concoction of real news, fake news, opinion, entertainment, marketing, and bias we are now down the rabbit hole. News gets frequently whitewashed, ignored, twisted, and mix in the current bias in news reporting it is difficult to decipher the real from the fake, when it confirms your inherent bias.

The Press, the fourth but independent leg of a free government, is required to be both a conveyor of what is good within a government and to be a watchdog when government is bad. I do not know what is worse, a press that is paid for and managed by the Government (RT in Russia for example) or a press that chooses not to be the watchdog, but instead be a sycophant.

Isn't "fake news" just a hipster rewording of what we used to call "misinformation"???

Now, instead of being used to mislead an enemy it's being used to mislead a nation.

Stefan Basil Molyneux is an Irish-born Canadian blogger/vlogger

Which is relevant . . . how?

Supports a Stateless society

What he means by the State may well be different than what you mean by it. He is by no means anti-society. He doesn't support the power of the State as it has evolved in its present form of massive top-down power over individuals. Most libertarians do not support Statism.

Supports the Voice of men a strongly antifeminist and frequently accuses feminists of being misandrist in their mindset. another 1st

What do you mean by "feminist"? Most women don't consider themselves feminists. The number that actually do has dwindled. He is not anti-women. He is married. Claims to love women. And doesn't consider them as unequal. He actually believes women have the power to make society more peaceful and productive by their choices in whom they marry and have children by.

But again thanks for posting a Canadian blogger's opinion As real new's and TRUTH

I posted an articulate, intelligent, insightful person's opinion. It didn't occur to me to check out his credentials before I heard what he has to say. I think what he said was correct. I didn't hear anything that I considered lies. He was pointing out the bigger picture (I know you like to refer to the big picture) of what is actually fake in the "news."

Your Wikipedia bio of him was limited and not totally unbiased. There are, however, more scathing bios of him on the net. And also more positive and inclusive ones. None of them add to or detract from the video I posted. For me, in respect to the video, they are irrelevant. I don't agree with everything Molyneux says (and I have watched several videos), and don't have strong opinions about him as a person. But I find his opinions and interviews interesting and informative. And, even more, an alternative to the warmed over intellectually limited version of the main stream news, which, to me, has a lot of fakeness.

His credentials as a "mere" blogger are far more impressive than you imply. But, if a narrow, slanted description of the messenger is the important message for you, rather than the message itself, I understand how that works.

I like this little item by him:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArKPZyfZUFs

I posted an articulate, intelligent, insightful person's opinion. It didn't occur to me to check out his credentials before I heard what he has to say. I think what he said was correct. I didn't hear anything that I considered lies. He was pointing out the bigger picture (I know you like to refer to the big picture) of what is actually fake in the "news."

Your Wikipedia bio of him was limited and not totally unbiased. There are, however, more scathing bios of him on the net. And also more positive and inclusive ones. None of them add to or detract from the video I posted. For me, in respect to the video, they are irrelevant. I don't agree with everything Molyneux says (and I have watched several videos), and don't have strong opinions about him as a person. But I find his opinions and interviews interesting and informative. And, even more, an alternative to the warmed over intellectually limited version of the main stream news, which, to me, has a lot of fakeness.

His credentials as a "mere" blogger are far more impressive than you imply. But, if a narrow, slanted description of the messenger is the important message for you, rather than the message itself, I understand how that works.

I like this little item by him:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArKPZyfZUFs

It didn't occur to me to check out his credentials before I heard what he has to say.

Nor did I. I checked them( credentials ) before I heard what he said I checked them after ... And it was insightful to why he said what he said... I am curious did you come across him on the web or thru an email ? I call these feeder clips sent out by like minded people who's
bigger picture tend to include T foil hats

It didn't occur to me to check out his credentials before I heard what he has to say.

Nor did I. I checked them( credentials ) before I heard what he said I checked them after ... And it was insightful to why he said what he said... I am curious did you come across him on the web or thru an email ? I call these feeder clips sent out by like minded people who's
bigger picture tend to include T foil hats

I like to judge what is said by the words that are actually spoken or written. Checking the background of who spoke the words can be insightful. Or it can be misleading. Checking the background can lead to varying and contradictory conclusions. And those conclusions can more easily be concocted to fit the checker's version depending on the T foil hats he wears than if the actual spoken or written words in question are honestly examined.

In a court of law, it is the guilt or innocence that is to be determined. Motivation can enlighten as to why a crime is committed. But the existence of an actual crime, and the who is responsible for it, is foremost what is to be established. Ending an investigation and discussion at possible motivations leaves the jury with nothing substantial to come to a meaningful verdict about anything. Without the prosecution claiming or proving that any crime was committed leaves the jury wondering for what purpose they have been assembled.

I checked Molyneux's background available on the net, found your Wikipedia entry, and found another which made him out to be a horrible person and another which made him look good. None of them had any impact on my opinion of his video.

The source of information, for me, is far less relevant than the actual information. I notice, from your other discussions, as in the WikiLeaks and the "interpretation" of the Constitution, that you value peripheral things more than actual text. It didn't seem to matter to you if the leaks were true or not as much as who the source of the leaks was. It doesn't matter to you what the actual words and their actual meanings as written in the Constitution are, rather it is more important for you what "interpretations" of those words can be concocted by five people. And here you are even implying that the source for my finding the video is more important than what is in the video.

And, here, as in other instances where I have provided a video or an article, you totally ignore a discussion of what is presented and dismiss it with extraneous, peripheral insinuation.

Casting aspersions of T foil hattery can rebound back to you. You seem to think that because something is presented by other than some mainstream media outlet (that is if it isn't a "right wing" mainstream media), it is part of a "like minded" conspiracy of Tinfoilers--fake news. Well, the sources on which you depend are also loaded with fake news. Ironically, you imply that coming across something on the web can tend to include T foil hats. Yet you checked Molyneux out on the web.

You might try to actually discuss the actual words on the video.

Isn't "fake news" just a hipster rewording of what we used to call "misinformation"???

Now, instead of being used to mislead an enemy it's being used to mislead a nation.


Great observation .. unfortunately it is a hipster rewording

but its not the hipster's who create it or the one who believe it ...

CNN is going down the drain much like the Democratic party

can the witch hunt end now?

CNN is going down the drain much like the Democratic party

can the witch hunt end now?

Witch hunt:biglaugh: But you were all over Bengazi w/no evidence - right? Another double standard.

You need to read the paper. Millions to Flynn and Manafort

And tell us about the communists you posted about earlier.

fake news

so they didn't get millions or your accusing people of being communists?

I didn't read the paper
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Where did you get your news?

Witch hunt:biglaugh: But you were all over Bengazi w/no evidence - right? Another double standard.

You need to read the paper. Millions to Flynn and Manafort

And tell us about the communists you posted about earlier.

No evidence of her wrongdoing in Benghazi?

Her state department left Stevens there, long after most other nations had pulled their ambassador

Her state department refused repeated requests from Stevens fpor more security

Every public statement she made blamed a fellow US citizen for Gods sake, and his video (while her private statements said it was terrorism)

No evidence of wrongdoing? You say so...

Flynn has an issue with ethics, no doubt.

And to his point, CNN is an absolute laughing stock. Getting Hilary debate questions ahead of time, producers admitting air that they are making stuff up...

The Benghazi incident was a fact. It actually, indisputably happened. What was being investigated was who was responsible. Hillary alleged that an obscure video was responsible. That was not proven to be true. In fact, it seemed likely that the video was no more responsible than all the other mantras concocted to explain terrorism. What was substantiated was that an attack of that sort was very likely given the conditions in Libya and the threats that were broadcast by Al Qaeda linked cells. What was also concluded by the investigations was that the incident could have been avoided. Proper precautions were not taken. Nor was it even prudent to keep the Benghazi compound functioning. Other embassies had already pulled out. And Hillary was the head of the department responsible for the Benghazi outpost and its security.

On the other hand, there is no known actual incidence of Trump colluding with Russia to interfere or tamper with the election. There is a prolonged and constant investigation attempting to prove accusations that something happened. There is a presumption of Trump's guilt for something that has not been verified to exist. There is no evidence that the thing he is accused of being guilty of even happened. There is an investigation that is not founded on, nor informed by, evidence. It is, instead, a search for evidence. A search for unknown evidence to confirm an unsubstantiated event.

Free Dictionary definition of "witch hunt": "An investigation carried out ostensibly to uncover subversive activities but actually used to harass and undermine those with differing views."

Show me the man and I'll find you the crime.... Lavrentiy Beria
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

CNN, excluding Tapper, is generally acting like a poorly wrapped Rachel Maddow network. I usually watch CNN, probably 80% of my cable news. The errors and bias are frequent and glaring.

Yesterday they had John Podesta on going over some of the Russia stuff, well you can say he was expertly trolled by Russia so I guess that makes him an expert. Then of course he was to offer his opinions on all things Trump - not that there would be any bias given there...


Show me the man and I'll find you the crime.... Lavrentiy Beria
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Hahaha - too deep

Where did you get your news?

not from CNN that is for sure

I did not see Fox news firing people and retracting stories that were made up just for ratings. Now I see the NYT retracting Russia stories as well.

I have concluded even if this witch hunt ends, the but hurt left will continue to disrupt and antagonize the president. I would like to see him do his job.

Bruce, So they didn't lie about the meeting with Soviets, where acting as agents w/o registering? - Isn't not registering a crime?

Butt hurt - seems like Benghazi was purely butt hurt. Pls. remind me again of who got fined, indicted or arrested?

And again - who are the communists? Sounds like McCarthy. I thought we were done with that type or politics but sadly, I guess not.

And again - who are the communists? Sounds like McCarthy.

The Communists are the ones that forcefully redistribute by Gun

The Socialists are the ones that forcefully redistribute by Law and Decree

Bruce, So they didn't lie about the meeting with Soviets, where acting as agents w/o registering? - Isn't not registering a crime?

Butt hurt - seems like Benghazi was purely butt hurt. Pls. remind me again of who got fined, indicted or arrested?

And again - who are the communists? Sounds like McCarthy. I thought we were done with that type or politics but sadly, I guess not.

I don't know who "they" is but if you are referring to a politician, then you can call it a lie if you want to, everyone knows politicians lie. I am not sure what question or context they were asked to be given a proven lie for an answer. Not sure what this has to do with evidence of collusion either. The Russians did what they wanted and put doubt about the election, so they got accomplished their goal and attention is being wasted on the subject looking for a guilty party to punish. There is no evidence Trump had anything to do with russian hacking.


Benghazi was about Americans lost their lives needlessly, the anointed one was negligent in her duties. I don't think those families of the dead are butt hurt, more like looking for justice after the fact.

I did not mention communists in this thread anywhere, you brought that up and John graciously answered that.

Enjoy the weekend

I don't know who "they" I told you earlier - flynn and Manafort - you know those 2 guys in the Trump inner circle.is but if you are referring to a politician, then you can call it a lie if you want to, everyone knows politicians lieI don't think every politician lies - Trump constantly does, Pence (like others) hardly at all.. I am not sure what question or context they were asked to be given a proven lie for an answer. Not sure what this has to do with evidence of collusion either. The Russians did what they wanted and put doubt about the election, so they got accomplished their goal and attention is being wasted on the subject looking for a guilty party to punish. There is no evidence Trump had anything to do with russian hacking.I never said he did but everyone who has talked to him states he has never asked about it either which for the Pres. of the US certainly is unusual.


Benghazi was about Americans lost their lives needlessly, the anointed one was negligent in her duties. I don't think those families of the dead are butt hurt, more like looking for justice after the fact.So many, many investigations just to pin some blame on some is ok but an investigation into whether the Russians interfered w/our elections is "witch hunt". - got it.

I did not mention communists in this thread anywhere, you brought that up and John graciously answered that.No, you did in another thread.

Enjoy the weekend

I should have said Bengahzi was a "witch hunt" in post 100, not "butt hurt".

Have a great weekend - slay some fish on the MS!

The witch hunt is not the looking into Russian hacking for which there is ample evidence. The witch hunt is the investigation of Trump supposedly colluding with the Russians to interfere with the election, for which there is no evidence.

I should add to that

Usually an investigation happens when a crime has been committed. In this case no evidence of any crime hence witch hunt.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I should add to that

Usually an investigation happens when a crime has been committed. In this case no evidence of any crime hence witch hunt.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So what was the crime that caused multiple investigations into Bengahzi? I believe Flynn and Manafort not registering as foreign agents are crimes.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Benghazi was not about a crime. It was about what went wrong. Being wrong, being incompetent, being unsuited for your responsibility, are not crimes.

There is all this hullabaloo about Trump being unfit to be President. That would not be a crime. If it were shown by his past performances that he was not doing what was needed to successfully run his businesses, that may have been enough to demonstrate that he was not to be trusted to run the executive office of the federal government.

Hillary demonstrated by her incompetence in Benghazi, in her choice of email server, in the Russian reset, in her meddling in Syria and Libya, that she was not a trustworthy candidate for the highest and probably the most difficult job in the land. Her advocacy for the removal of qaddaffi certainly was a precursor of the Benghazi mess.

I believe Flynn and Manafort not registering as foreign agents are crimes.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

from the WashPo

"Deliberately failing to file as a foreign agent may result in a felony criminal charge accompanied by steep monetary civil penalties. In practice, however, the Department of Justice generally encourages voluntary compliance and prosecutions under the act are “quite rare,” said Joseph Sandler, an attorney who specializes in political law, including FARA. The Justice Department generally allows people to register retroactively(I think they both registered retroactively) if questions arise about their past activities and the law requires no late fees or other penalties.

Criminal charges for violating FARA have typically been reserved for cases involving foreign agents whose conduct ran afoul of U.S. foreign policy interests. They often come as a package of other criminal charges, like espionage."

Donald J. Trump‏Verified account
@realDonaldTrump
Follow
More
Numerous states are refusing to give information to the very distinguished VOTER FRAUD PANEL. What are they trying to hide?
Donald J. Trump‏Verified account
@realDonaldTrump
Follow
More

Crazy Joe Scarborough and dumb as a rock Mika are not bad people, but their low rated show is dominated by their NBC bosses. Too bad!
Donald J. Trump‏Verified account
@realDonaldTrump
Follow
More
Our new American Energy Policy will unlock MILLIONS of jobs & TRILLIONS in wealth. We are on the cusp of a true energy REVOLUTION.Donald J. Trump‏Verified account
@realDonaldTrump
Follow
More
The failing @nytimes writes false story after false story about me. They don't even call to verify the facts of a story. A Fake News Joke!
Donald J. Trump‏Verified account
@realDonaldTrump
Follow
More
So they caught Fake News CNN cold, but what about NBC, CBS & ABC? What about the failing @nytimes & @washingtonpost? They are all Fake News!


I guess Fox news is the only one not fake since he re tweets them all the time ... not sure how long his supporters are willing to cling to the most un presidential man in the world ... who now want the whole USA voting histories of all Americans names and all other data .... but thats not what communists do

Benghazi was about Americans lost their lives needlessly, the anointed one was negligent in her duties. I don't think those families of the dead are butt hurt, more like looking for justice after the fact.

I did not mention communists in this thread anywhere, you brought that up and John graciously answered that.

Enjoy the weekend


Benghazi was about Americans who lost their lives doing their Job!! then being used by republicans at political pawns . its that simple but again fact dont matter


June 10, 2017 U.S. Soldiers Killed In 'Insider Attack' In Afghanistan why are we not blaming Rex Tillerson ????? i know hes not running for POTUS

Benghazi was about Americans who lost their lives doing their Job!! then being used by republicans at political pawns . its that simple but again fact dont matter

There "job" was not to be abandoned, defenseless, under chaotic conditions rife with terrorism, lawlessness, and signal warnings of imminent danger. It should not be that simple. Your comment is simple minded (or simplistic to use a word you've liked before) and it certainly isn't fact.

June 10, 2017 U.S. Soldiers Killed In 'Insider Attack' In Afghanistan why are we not blaming Rex Tillerson ????? i know hes not running for POTUS

Is the State Department responsible for the military?

Benghazi was about Americans who lost their lives doing their Job!!

think of it as a factory where many workplace safety issues existed and the potential dangerous consequences were pointed out to the CEO and upper level management but were ignored because they were more concerned about appearance and a bunch of people died unnecessarily as a result........

Is the State Department responsible for the military?

point taken then why not go after Maddox they wont .... and we know why ( and for the record thoses Troops were killed doing their job as well and shouldn't be used as pawns as the 3 in Benghazi were ...


There "job" was not to be abandoned, defenseless, under chaotic conditions rife with terrorism, lawlessness, and signal warnings of imminent danger. It should not be that simple. Your comment is simple minded (or simplistic to use a word you've liked before) and it certainly isn't fact.

not even close to what happened but i understand your need to repeat the rights version of events ..

can you tell me how many people theses men saved by their actions ?? of course you cant because thats not part of the narrative... the right wanted people to think they were the only ones on the ground

US Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other US nationals are killed in the attack. More than 30 Americans are evacuated.

I find it amazing how you discount the Russian investigation from the start ... but still cling to the Benghazi issue after how many investigations and hearings provided no evidence of the rights claims of what happened

think of it as a factory where many workplace safety issues existed and the potential dangerous consequences were pointed out to the CEO and upper level management but were ignored because they were more concerned about appearance and a bunch of people died unnecessarily as a result........

Donald Trump quote that there were “600 requests” for security upgrades from U.S. officials based in Benghazi, Libya.

But the shorthand description of “600 requests” has left a misleading impression — so much so that many reporters and lawmakers appear to believe that all of these requests were ignored. As Trump indicated, some people may believe these were all requests from Ambassador Stevens, even though few if any are likely from Stevens.Ambassador Stevens was the senior

Funny Trump pushing Fake information / and no he is against it

Man in Charge in Libya and he felt safe enough to be Away from the main Libyan embassy and stay in Benghazi 11 h 57 min 645 away by car

Donald Trump quote that there were “600 requests” for security upgrades from U.S. officials based in Benghazi, Libya.

But the shorthand description of “600 requests” has left a misleading impression — so much so that many reporters and lawmakers appear to believe that all of these requests were ignored. As Trump indicated, some people may believe these were all requests from Ambassador Stevens, even though few if any are likely from Stevens.Ambassador Stevens was the senior

Funny Trump pushing Fake information / and no he is against it

Man in Charge in Libya and he felt safe enough to be Away from the main Libyan embassy and stay in Benghazi 11 h 57 min 645 away by car

that you immediately go to Trump in a discussion of Benghazi is quite telling:bl:

point taken then why not go after Maddox they wont .... and we know why ( and for the record thoses Troops were killed doing their job as well and shouldn't be used as pawns as the 3 in Benghazi were ...

So if you're killed doing your job, no questions should be raised. Even if your job is not actually to kill or be killed. Sounds like excellent moral equivalence.


There "job" was not to be abandoned, defenseless, under chaotic conditions rife with terrorism, lawlessness, and signal warnings of imminent danger. It should not be that simple. Your comment is simple minded (or simplistic to use a word you've liked before) and it certainly isn't fact.

not even close to what happened but i understand your need to repeat the rights version of events ..


Oh, pardon me, I keep forgetting that the lefts version is actually always the correct one. At least the politically correct one.

can you tell me how many people theses men saved by their actions ?? of course you cant because thats not part of the narrative... the right wanted people to think they were the only ones on the ground

US Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other US nationals are killed in the attack. More than 30 Americans are evacuated.

Those that were saved has always been acknowledged and been grateful for. Where do you get that it hasn't been?


I find it amazing how you discount the Russian investigation from the start ... but still cling to the Benghazi issue after how many investigations and hearings provided no evidence of the rights claims of what happened

Hey, PaulS brought up Benghazi. You didn't find it amazing when he brought it up. And you weren't shy about adding your opinion about it. It wasn't me who still clings to Benghazi. And where do you get that there is no evidence of the right's claims of what happened? Do you even know what those claims are?

Hey, PaulS brought up Benghazi. You didn't find it amazing when he brought it up. And you weren't shy about adding your opinion about it. It wasn't me who still clings to Benghazi. And where do you get that there is no evidence of the right's claims of what happened? Do you even know what those claims are?

Those that survived agree with the "rights claims of what happened " because that's what happened .
The lefts claim of confusion and false narratives also happened however they won't except it .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why Exposing Fake News Matters | James O’Keefe and Stefan Molyneux

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rdl6mVUY9ac