[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Just keep believing

steals from a charity,

I agree, the "willful self-dealing" in shifting some of the funds from his charity to his personal business was pretty crappy behavior. I objected to your use of the word "steals" as spin rather than accuracy. But, I admit, it's not that far off the mark.

And Pam Bondi ends up on his impeachment defense team, after getting a 25K "contribution" she settles the fake university case, given his typical definition and actions vis-a-vis friends and enemies, it apparently was very good for him in his mind.

OK. Big deal. Is this supposed to be unusual? Did she not qualify to be on his defense team. She did a good job. Good choice.

Originally Posted by detbuch Pelosi assaults the truth most of the time when she politically opens her mouth. As for sexual assaults, try Clinton who set the standard for doing it while being President, and being pretty violent about it in past escapades. It seems that our Presidents' sexual misconduct wasn't an important enough issue to expose or discuss until Clinton, and even that wasn't important enough to disqualify him from being President, a much admired one. Trump's "assaults" were mild compared to Clinton. And didn't occur while he was President.

So that's conjecture with a But Clinton

Yeah, it was conjecture, but I don't claim it is an impeachable offense.

Not BUT Clinton (and the past Presidents I alluded to), it's BUT context. Trump compared to what or who. And precedent as a means to evaluate Trump's behavior. All of which makes Trump's pre election sexual behavior a not-so-much, nor important enough to say he is not fit for office.

mocks the disabled,

Originally Posted by detbuch That's disputed.
Dispute this


It's been disputed that Trump was mimicking disabled gestures, rather, he was imitating a flustered response with its exaggerated flailing of hands. Which it does resemble to me. It doesn't look like a disabled response.

tears a child from their parents,

Originally Posted by detbuch Ahh . . . there's your ability to put a really positive spin on something.

No spin there

THE FACTS: Obama did not have a separation policy. The Trump administration didn't, explicitly, either, but that was the effect of zero tolerance, which meant that anyone caught crossing the border illegally was to be criminally prosecuted, even if they had few or no previous offences.

The policy meant adults were taken to court for criminal proceedings and their children were separated. In most cases, if the charge took longer than 72 hours to process, which is the longest time that children can be held by Customs and Border Protection, children were sent into the care of the Health and Human Services Department. Zero tolerance remains in effect, but Trump signed an executive order June 20 that stopped separations.

I don't see the "tearing" of children from parents in your FACTS. I see the word separation--sent into the CARE of the Health and Human Services Department. "tears a child from their parents is a negative frame--a spin.

pays off a porn star,

Originally Posted by detbuch Probably wasn't worth it. Hey, Congress has a fund for paying off sexual claims against Congress folks. Apparently, the fund has been tapped many times for millions of dollars. So it's OK for Congress to hush up and pay for those many claims, but Trump is a bad guy for paying it out of his own funds.

Is that a But Congress?

Nope. It is ACTUAL Congress. Putting Trump in context. Trump compared to whom. As far as his position in the federal government goes , he is not some unfit outlier in this regard--but I understand your need to spin that he is

insults a gold star family,

Originally Posted by detbuch The "gold star" family insulted the President. because obviously his great sacrifices are equal to the loss of their son


In a statement to ABC News, Gold Star father Khizr Khan and his wife, Gazala Khan, said they were saddened by Trump's "selfish and divisive" actions and his lack of empathy, which they believe have undermined the dignity of the office of the presidency.

"One more time, he has shown us that he is undeserving of the leadership of our great nation," the statement read.

I can see how Trump could take this as an insult. Of course, it would have been better if Trump faked it and took the high road by apologizing for what he may have done to hurt the Khans. But, unfortunately, Trump is not as thoroughly dishonest as you need to make him out to be.


calls nazis fine people,

Originally Posted by detbuch He never did that. That's not even pure spin. It's a blatant lie.
Better tell these guys


The speech that Trump made included specifically (a bit after the "good people on both sides" part) that he was not referring to the Nazis.

So, instead of what Trump actually said, you have to post a video of someone else talking. This is worse than spin. It is a total fraud. Trump never said Nazis are good people. He has said on several occasions, the opposite. I think, by now, you would know this. But I see how your lie fits your narrative and the truth doesn't. So you have to keep repeating that he said Nazis are good people.

denies science,

Originally Posted by detbuch He doesn't deny science. He sides with those, including scientists, who disagree on the causes and solutions for climate change. Saying that he denies science is pure spin.
He claims it's a chinese plot

So your video says nothing about a Chinese plot. I can't say this is actually spin, more like your just making stuff up.