Important Announcement regarding the Alternative Views Subforum

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Also it took him 41 days to say "he doesn't have any tapes of Comey conversations". He never says no one has them.

It took Trump's lawyers 41 days to come up with this.

But you are OK that it took many months to learn that Trump is not under investigation, until we learn that he may be under investigation?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

But you are OK that it took many months to learn that Trump is not under investigation, until we learn that he may be under investigation?

I am not fine with the politics and bipartisanship. I think Trump's administration has more leaks than any I have ever seen and I learned that one reason for that is that Trump watches the news and his underlings realize this is one way for them to bring something before him when they can't get a meeting.

I am happy that since Mueller has been appointed most of this stuff has been completely shut off.

I am glad that someone is doing a thorough investigation that we can trust and doing it in a professional way without the leaks.

I also am not fine that our President is tweeting at all hours of the day. I realized that he used this effectively to win the election. But now that he is president it makes him out to be a fool.

For example "Comey needs to hope there are no tapes" and then 41 days later "I don't have any tapes, someone else might, I don't know, but I didn't make any tapes".

I used to think that the oval office was secure from being bugged by anyone that was not authorized by the President. Even if that is not true I would feel better if you pretended it was. But the president of the US doesn't have any idea if the oval office is being bugged by someone else?

He had 41 days, couldn't they bring in someone to do one of those electronic sweeps to see if there are any bugs? Either Trump is a complete idiot or he thinks I am. Either way I am angry.

[zeek]

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...pgtype=article

There is simply no precedent for an American president to spend so much time telling untruths. Every president has shaded the truth or told occasional whoppers. No other president — of either party — has behaved as Trump is behaving. He is trying to create an atmosphere in which reality is irrelevant.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by zeek

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...pgtype=article

For months the NYT has informed us that the Trump administration has colluded with the Russians. For months we have heard suspicions, rumors, insider leaks, falsities, and lies -- but not a single shred of actual evidence about Trump colluding with the Russians.

Now we hear that Obama knew back in August 2016 that the Russians attempted to interfere with our election, BUT DID NOTHING. He ignored the facts because Hillary was assured of winning. It was guaranteed.

For most of Americans, the New York Times has no credibility zeek.. Sorry but you have become one of the Swamp People.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

For months the NYT has informed us that the Trump administration has colluded with the Russians. For months we have heard suspicions, rumors, insider leaks, falsities, and lies -- but not a single shred of actual evidence about Trump colluding with the Russians.

Now we hear that Obama knew back in August 2016 that the Russians attempted to interfere with our election, BUT DID NOTHING. He ignored the facts because Hillary was assured of winning. It was guaranteed.

For most of Americans, the New York Times has no credibility zeek.. Sorry but you have become one of the Swamp People.

This is the one truth to emerge that is not in dispute. Obama handled the intelligence about Russian meddling in a partisan, political way.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

This is the one truth to emerge that is not in dispute. Obama handled the intelligence about Russian meddling in a partisan, political way.

Romans 2.1 aptly describes nearly every attack on Trump.

Whatever they accuse him of is exactly what they are guilty of. Without exception.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Romans 2.1 aptly describes nearly every attack on Trump.

Whatever they accuse him of is exactly what they are guilty of. Without exception.

The beauty of Trump is that if someone goes after him he will take them down too, so in the process of impeaching Trump they are going to wind up blowing up the entire swamp. Ironically fulfilling his campaign goal.

Perhaps the best Bible reference would be Samson bring the entire house down upon himself.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by Ohio

For months the NYT has informed us that the Trump administration has colluded with the Russians. For months we have heard suspicions, rumors, insider leaks, falsities, and lies -- but not a single shred of actual evidence about Trump colluding with the Russians.

Now we hear that Obama knew back in August 2016 that the Russians attempted to interfere with our election, BUT DID NOTHING. He ignored the facts because Hillary was assured of winning. It was guaranteed.

For most of Americans, the New York Times has no credibility zeek.. Sorry but you have become one of the Swamp People.

I think you mean that the NYT has no credibility for most fans of "Fox and Friends."

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by zeek

I think you mean that the NYT has no credibility for most fans of "Fox and Friends."

Fox News Corp. has the highest journalistic standards, and their ratings reflect it.

Where are the retractions for all of the NYT's false reports about Trump and the Russians?

At least CNN fired a few employees for their false reports. Have you seen the latest Veritas sting video of CNN's producer admitting that all their Russian stories were just BS and hyped for ratings?

[zeek]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Fox News Corp. has the highest journalistic standards, and their ratings reflect it.

Bahaha!

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by zeek

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...pgtype=article

Surely you didn't mean there is no precedent for a President telling untruth, so your issue isn't the lie, it is the amount of time spent on the lie?

Can you explain how Nixon and LBJ cannot be viewed as a precedent?

[zeek]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Surely you didn't mean there is no precedent for a President telling untruth, so your issue isn't the lie, it is the amount of time spent on the lie?

Can you explain how Nixon and LBJ cannot be viewed as a precedent?

Surely you read the acknowledgement that " Every president has shaded the truth or told occasional whoppers."

Duplicity isn't unusual among politicians and a degree of self-delusion is common among people of power. But, Trump exceeds even Nixon and LBJ in the frequency and pervasiveness of lies. Nixon was able to dissemble because he knew when he was lying and when he wasn't. Trump doesn't seem to know the difference. For him, adherence to objective truth is irrelevant. All that matters is winning.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by zeek

Surely you read the acknowledgement that " Every president has shaded the truth or told occasional whoppers."

Duplicity isn't unusual among politicians and a degree of self-delusion is common among people of power. But, Trump exceeds even Nixon and LBJ in the frequency and pervasiveness of lies. Nixon was able to dissemble because he knew when he was lying and when he wasn't. Trump doesn't seem to know the difference. For him, adherence to objective truth is irrelevant. All that matters is winning.

And you know these are all "lies" because "reputable" sources like CNN told you so???

[zeek]

Originally Posted by Ohio

And you know these are all "lies" because "reputable" sources like CNN told you so???

I know they are lies when he contradicts himself which he does it seems like nearly every day.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by zeek

Surely you read the acknowledgement that " Every president has shaded the truth or told occasional whoppers."

Duplicity isn't unusual among politicians and a degree of self-delusion is common among people of power. But, Trump exceeds even Nixon and LBJ in the frequency and pervasiveness of lies. Nixon was able to dissemble because he knew when he was lying and when he wasn't. Trump doesn't seem to know the difference. For him, adherence to objective truth is irrelevant. All that matters is winning.

Once again I see lots of precedent for Trump's behavior, even if you think it is more extreme, more excessive. There was plenty of concern for both LBJ and Nixon that at times they had gone nuts.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Once again I see lots of precedent for Trump's behavior, even if you think it is more extreme, more excessive. There was plenty of concern for both LBJ and Nixon that at times they had gone nuts.

But Trump is just beginning. Like bro Ohio likes to state : Let's give him a chance.