That dishonest media, refusing to report what Trump actually meant, and instead reporting on what he said. Also, dishonestly refusing to back-date his statements, as requested. Sad!
“This is the operative statement. The others are inoperative.”
- Ron Ziegler, Nixon Press Whore, 1973
Actually he tweeted
and
so… I don’t understand very well whether he’s proud to have caused his downfall or Sad!™
AIUI those guys got fired for *inviting *Trump to Mexico.
Right. And what makes the whole thing a bit more confusing is this quote:
from yesterday’s security forum. And it makes me believe that Videgaray (the ex-minister’s name) complained directly to Trump about the latter statement… just a hunch mind you.
Business Insider has tracked down Trump’s statements against the war in Iraq.
As Trump said, before we invaded, he vigorously denounced the invasion on Neil Cavuto’s show. If you have children in the room, you might want to make them leave, because this gets really explicit:
"Well, he has either got to do something or not do something, perhaps, because perhaps shouldn’t be doing it yet and perhaps we should be waiting for the United Nations, you know. He’s under a lot of pressure. I think he’s doing a very good job. But, of course, if you look at the polls, a lot of people are getting a little tired. I think the Iraqi situation is a problem. And I think the economy is a much bigger problem as far as the president is concerned.
"Well, I’m starting to think that people are much more focused now on the economy. They are getting a little bit tired of hearing we’re going in, we’re not going in, the — you know, whatever happened to the days of the Douglas MacArthur? He would go and attack. He wouldn’t talk.
“We have to — you know, it’s sort like either do it or don’t do it.”
That’s what I call straight talk.
“Well, its like that French guy with the eyes that could look three ways at the same time said, you either are or you aren’t! Now, if you are, you can do stuff, but if you aren’t, then nothing is all you can do!. You can’t do anything about something that doesn’t exist!”
I just re-found this nugget of… policy in Trump’s official positions posted on his site
- Wouldn’t that require a constitutional amendment?
- Why oh why doesn’t ANYONE question him about this and other official positions, readily available on his OFFICIAL website?
He has been questioned about it. Even Bill O’friggin’Reilly called him on it. His answer is a lot of big smart lawyers have mentioned to him that maybe everybody is wrong about what the Constitution says about birthright citizenship.
Profound.
I guess my point is that instead of listening to whatever claptrap the voices in his head tell him to say, he should be grilled on his “official” positions, in particular those which are listed on his friggin’ site.
And my point is that he was grilled on it. From my linked article:
Do you have some other ecample of his official policy you feel he hasn’t been questioned on? I am just saying that is a bad example.
And what do we do with the cannoli?
Well, I will admit you’re incredible!
You’re also posting a lot! Will you reach a thousand words a day soon?
You did this in 2012 as the election drew near and you were desperately predicting skewed surveys and a landslide for Romney.
Ah, good times, good times. I do fondly remember the “skewed polls”. Always gave me a laugh, they did.
Well, there are plenty of stupid ideas on his policies that should be mentioned over and over again. For instance the bit about the J-1 Visas (no “illegals” there, by the way):
which is… weird, since the J-1 Visa site says
However, the reason I also believe that there is a significant difference between questioning a candidate about something they said during a speech or an interview or whatever and something they publish in a more “official” manner, like a website. And instead of focusing on the former, anything weird or downright dangerous that is in the list of their official statements should be mentioned time and time again. Not in a “catch and release” manner, if you will.
Which is why, even though your mention of O’Reilly’s interview is appreciated, it is by far not enough (in my mind).
I’m astonished that no one is asking Trump these very reasonable questions:
Re: J-1 visas
At Chicago hotel and elsewhere, Trump used foreign student labor he vows to ban
But you know , in MSM’s defence, when a guy has a million crazy ideas it’s hard to choose what to focus on.
As others noted Trump did lie about him being against the Iraq invasion before it took place.
I also did notice (on the radio just a few hours back) that even NPR did not bother to tell their listeners that his doubling down on that lie was indeed a huge lie. :smack:
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/295059-esquire-magazine-trumps-lying-on-iraq-war
If you think this will not be an issue, I do think that by now it is clear that Trump will make policy based not only on faulty intelligence, but also on faulty memory or what he will conveniently believe that other leaders will tell him, or will make up himself to think he understood when it will lead to disaster. And he will believe that he is correct, even after it all falls down on him and all of us.
Samson would be proud.