Sounds reasonable to me.
As to the bold part, I’ve said here that Trump might indeed know little about Pearl Harbor. I would not be willing to say that it’s likely that he knows next to nothing, as I really have no idea, but I also wouldn’t rule it out.
On brand.
Yeah, but so what? You’re focused on the “shabby journalism” instead of taking the larger point which is that DJT is an idiot. No amount of “shabby journalism” is EVER going to change that.
You are correct. In fact, that is the main reason I made my original post, even though I didn’t mention it specifically. To call anything at that Yahoo link “journalism” is an insult to the word. I’ve said more than a few times that no one needs to gin up phony, unsupported accusations against Trump such as the Pearl Harbor nonsense when he has done so many obvious things that more than adequately demonstrate his unquestionable idiocy.
It is not a phony, unsupported accusation.
In this thread there are links to the actual page of the book where…
[ol]
[li]It is stated that Trump is ignorant of Pearl Harbor.[/li][li]An example demonstrating this is provided.[/li][li]John Kelly’s reaction to this example is described.[/li][li]And the steps John Kelly took to rectify things are described.[/li][/ol]
You’re not convinced by this. Great. We get it.
That doesn’t magically make it phony or unsupported.
Same sort of thing over here: 1 + 1 = math is hard!
Agreed. I withdraw “phony” and “unsupported.” I stand by the rest.
Again, you provided a link where you said a Trump campaign official was making smears. I said there were no smears at that link, only *legitimate *political tactics. And that is the case. You were wrong. Now, I could make a snide comment such as, reading comprehension is hard! but I will refrain from doing so. I prefer to respectfully, and with evidence, back up what I say.
I also provided a second link which says Trump’s campaign strategy against Hillary was smears.
Sorry that I cannot do your thinking for you.
Come on, Sky. I was only commenting on the specific link you gave. You can’t just go back and bring up something that I didn’t address directly.
But let me ask you this, because maybe we just have a different definition of “smear”. To me, things like “low energy Jeb”, “Sleepy Joe”, and “Pocahontas” aren’t smears, they are childish insults and name calling. To me a smear is what I think is the classic meaning of the word is: an attempt to damage the reputation of someone by accusing them of crimes or immoral behavior, when there is no evidence of such things. This is the context of what I commented on.
As for Hillary, without going back to your post which I don’t remember, yes, Trump tried to smear her during the election. On that we certainly agree.
Trump probably not aware what he had for lunch yesterday.
I tend to forget stuff like that, too, and I’m not even as old as DJT.
Calling DJT an idiot sounds like Saddam and Hitler being dismissed as madmen. Morons and lunatics don’t hold power for long. DJT is obviously [insert epithets here] but a cretin he ain’t. Do not underestimate - that’s a losing game.