The United States boycotted the 1980 Olympics in Moscow over the Russian invasion of Afghanistan. In 2019, the “President of the United States” said that Russia was correct in invading Afghanistan.
https://www.newstimes.com/technology/businessinsider/article/Trump-endorses-the-1979-Soviet-invasion-of-13504318.php
What good is a slush fund if you have to waste big chunks of it on a construction project?
Perhaps they think they can just split up the money when no one is looking.
Well, for a real project (public or private), one of the first steps would be spending money on feasibility. I don’t know if any of the $5 billion is earmarked for that, but one would hope.
Feasibility studies are for losers.
Or, as Tan the Conman sees it all:
Environmental Impact Statements? Loser!
Financial Disclosure Statements? Impertinent loser!
Competitive Bidding Process? Are you kidding me, you loser?
Comply with federal regulations? Regulations are for losers!
It’s all starting to make sense to me now. The $5B is for the pre-feasibility-study study group — which will be meeting at a Trump facility. Only when they’ve exhausted that money will the process move on to an actual feasibility study.
Excuse me, the nurse says my bath and wet packs are ready now …
ETA: Cute, Monty. Reeeeaaaaallll cute.
What a fuck.
And every one of his die-hards are changing their reality as he proceeds to change his description of it. I forget who it was who suggested keeping a daily journal during eras of fascism to keep track of how the truth warps into fabulosity.
Many will be pissed off at Donald tomorrow as the networks have given in to his demand for prime-time access to helpless television audiences:
https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/07/media/networks-trump-border-security-speech/index.html
Odds are that they’ll treat it the same way they’ve treated the addresses-to-the-nation made in years past by respectable Presidents. Unfortunately.
Hell, FOX ought to be the only one to run it.
Oh, I don’t know. I could use a tragic comedy right about now. Trump is sure to deliver.
I think, if any of the networks give Trump time, they should give Pelosi time too. At the very least I expect fact checking after his speech. That’ll keep the networks busy for a while.
As I said elsewhere, if Nancy Pelosi says he’s lying, it can be labeled partisan fake news. The Dems should have time to rebut as Dems, but only after the networks have presented their own fact-checking (as you suggest). Or, if not the networks, then Politico or some other non-partisan entity.
I like the idea of a 20-min delay and fact checking in real time. With pop-ups. Easy to prepare, 'cause everyone knows what he’s going to say.
Sadly, if the mainstream media or fact checking websites contradict Trump, then they’re labeled as fake news and said to have a liberal bias.
I had a Trump supporter tell me that Snopes couldn’t be trusted because it’s liberal. :rolleyes:
It’s standard procedure for the opposition party to be given air time following a presidential address. Every State of the Union has a rebuttal speech. So after Trump blathers tomorrow about “emergencies” the rebuttal writes itself. Just get any Democrat to present the same kind of fact-checking that is given in the media every time Trump opens his mouth, and the job is done.
What pissed me off the most about that interview was when she said Trump doesn’t want the 800,000 people to be hurt but he never wants to have to call a widow like the one in California. And said that should never happen here when we have a way to prevent it. Then proceeded to talk about how we value life in the U.S. and that’s what makes us special. Really, really? Children being killed in their schools when we have ways we could prevent it doesn’t sound like we value life that much. I’d like to see her get so upset over hundreds of those lives lost. But that will never happen. When Americans kill Americans it’s just the price of freedom.
Sorry for the gun debate derail, but damn, priorities in this country are so fucked up.
Ha, as if.
Obama held a 2014 policy speech on immigration. The media snubbed him.
“The question of whether, or how, to treat Trump differently from other presidents in light of his relentless dishonesty is an interesting one. But it’s noteworthy that just a few years ago, the networks were comfortable refusing to air a primetime Barack Obama speech about immigration on the grounds that the topic was “overtly political.””
I don’t get cable so I can’t get CNN the usual way, but one of the snippets that was posted to YouTube yesterday had the talking heads debating whether the networks would carry Donny Two-scoops’ address or not. One of them pointed out most of the OTA networks have streaming services that they could put the speech on without interfering with their main revenue source.
Of course, finding one of those services might be beyond the capability of your typical MAGAt so Fox will be obliged to displace Lethal Weapon.