Donald Trump defended his admiration for Russian President Vladimir Putin at a forum here Wednesday focused on national security issues, even suggesting that Putin is more worthy of his praise than President Obama.And who has been one of the prime-movers in dividing the country? Donald the Birther:
“Certainly, in that system, he’s been a leader, far more than our president has been a leader,” Trump said. “We have a divided country.”
Donald Trump's running mate Mike Pence admitted Wednesday that he believed President Obama was born in the U.S. — a stark contrast to the years of refusals by the GOP nominee to do so. ... Pence's obvious statement marked a sharp departure from Trump, who as recently as this past weekend again refused to disavow his years-old "birther" claims that Obama was not born in the U.S.Trump is a race-baiter and the best bud for white supremacists. He admires dictators and thugs like the Kim Jong-un (who just outlawed sarcasm), Saddam Hussein and Vladimir Putin, whose political foes seem to end up in jail or the morgue.
Can you imagine the uproar in "conservative" circles if a Democrat who was running for president said nice things about Kim Jong-un? Or Putin? They'd lose their fucking minds. And if Hillary Clinton played as fast and loose with reality as does Trump, they'd definitely lose their shit.
The only time that Trump isn't lying is when he tells people how great he thinks he is. For he is truly a legend in his own mind.
UPDATE: Republicans in the Senate are doing their very best impression of an ostrich.
But, to be fair, what choice do they have?
13 comments:
It turns out that he's been played; not by Putin, who only said that he was "bright" in Russian and got mistranslated, but by the right wing press who repeated it so he heard it. Fareed Zakaria asked Putin about it and Putin snapped at him and set him straight. It seems the word they were translating as "brilliant" from Russian isn't that kind of brilliant, it means something closer to shiny, or colorful, both of which apply to Trump a lot more than brilliant does. But since Trump still thinks Putin called him brilliant, he thinks Putin is just ducky.
-Doug in Oakland
I believe the GOP is tolerating Trump,as they know they can stop him.They want him to win as a repub,but they think they can keep a rein on him...good luck,with executive orders!But I would love to see another hot first lady!
"They want him to win...but they think they can keep a rein on him"
That kinda rings a bell. A very ugly-sounding bell.
Deadstick, no kidding.
"And if Hillary Clinton played as fast and loose with reality as does Trump, they'd definitely lose their shit."
Yeah, remind me again about the classified emails and her claims of innocence?
Methinks there is a double standard in your judgement.....
B: Listen to Elijah Cummings question James Comey about the classification status of those emails.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syU0WZovTFg
-Doug in Oakland
Dude: It's called a "whitewash". Cummings r team no matter what. Even Comey stated that she had broken the law...but she didn't mean to....Which matter not for everyone else...
The bottom line:
She used her own server either for conveneince or so she could do off the books emails.
She handles, on that server, classified info, or info she SHOULD HAVE KNOWN WAS CLASSIFIED. (If she was too stupid to know, then she is too stupid to be president(which I don't believe)...pick one. Guilty or Stupid...can't have both, can't have neither).By handling, on that private unsecured server, she broke the law. Military personnel have been imprisoned for lesser "mistakes" in handling classified info.
But the main point of my previous statement is that there is a double standard here. You condemn Trump for "playing gast and loose with reality....and yet you accept the same behavior from Hillary....why? He may well be delusional. She is obviously lying or confused. (I bet lying, but am not sure)...
I'd like somebody to find the long list of conservatives who were outraged when the Bush administration ran a private email server and deleted 22 million emails, despite the law that required them to be preserved for archival purposes.
Of course, that list doesn't exist.
First I heard that there was proof of such a thing... I heard rumors, but never substatiated ones. You telling me the Press let that go? As much as they hated "W"? I find that hard to believe....
Got more than rumors? If so, I will be outraged. Thing is, if true, well, we found out later.... After the Fact, as it were. I can't go back and fix it...Although I wish that there had been someone worth voting for that election....."W" was the least of the weasels... We KNOW Hillary is a liar and has knowingly done criminal acts BEFORE being president.....What will she do when she is President? Kill more people as they find her doing bad things? I mean, so far the list is fairly long.....
I still think Donald will be a better pres...if only because the Press will be bothering to watch him more closely.
What she will do is fail to appoint a supreme court justice specifically for the purpose of overturning Roe v Wade.
Also, fail to appoint thousands of Republicans to positions in government who would go on to do what Republicans in government do and leave us to repair the damage for the next decade just like last time.
And with a little luck, she will fail to squander another eight years in inaction about climate change so perhaps Florida and West Oakland can remain above sea level.
-Doug in Oakland
You probably won't listen to Joy Reid because she's liberal, but she had someone on who made sense over the communication protocols at the state dept. and sounded like he knew what he was talking about:
http://crooksandliars.com/2016/09/joy-reid-and-kurt-eichenwald
-Doug in Oakland
dinthebeast:
With the exception of the Roe V wade thing, I fail to see the downside of your whine.... Of course, with that will come a diminution of the 2nd Amendment....
"Government isn't the solution to the problem....It IS the problem".
History shows this is true.
From another point of view, it is all those Democrats in government now that are causing issues.....and if there are issues that need to be fixed, why, with all those Democrat operatives working now, haven't they fixed the problems in the past 7.5 years?
And your linkin your last post.....she makes a lot of statements...Just because someone says something doesn't make it true. The first guest flat out lied. I too had Classified and Secret clearances. What he says is NOT true. But don't believe me. Research it yourself. Lies and innuendo don't get it for me. Facts do. Bothe
Fact: Hillary misused her private server....To break the law or just out of conveneience DID we don't know. She DID put classified data on the server. She DID do what others have been prosecuted for: Mishandle secret data. (Comey even said so in his statement...."but her INTENT wasn't to break the law" so they gave her a pass. You or I would be imprisoned for such actions. Lies won't get it. Bother to learn what the truth about handling of such data are. Don't believe me either. Take the time to learn, and not just believe what someone says. . Just because she is on MSNBC doesn't make her well informed nor especially truthful.
As far as Pay for Play? Lots of rumors. Lots of coincidences. No proof that she did anything...yet. While often where there is smoke there is fire, I gotta wait for the fire before I condemn someone on that count. So until there is real proof, I ignore it. Same,-Same for Donald Trump. SHOW ME PROOF. I doubt you can.
You wanna take this off CM.s comments, I will gladly take it to email. Not fair to her to argue here. Feel free to email me. Find it vial my "about me" page....
My original point stands. There are two standards you are using to evaluate the actions of our candidates. If you would evaluate the actions of your chosen one as critically as the way you do Trump, she looks less and less palatable. I really don't like either of them... But I can at least look at both equally. You, apparently, can't
Do you happen to remember a man named Rumsfeld? How about Yoo? Ashcroft, perhaps? How about Whitman? (not a man, but still a Republican appointee) Gonzalez perhaps? Brown, maybe? Wolfowitz? Feith? Libby?
I don't want to live through that again, and Trump is not any smarter than Cheney, so how will it be better?
As for your last charge, I have evaluated the policy positions of the candidates, and that's what I make my decision by. I don't cheerlead for Hillary much here because I know she has policies not popular here and I respect that. So perhaps we should just drop it, we are never going to agree, or most likely influence each other at all.
-Doug in Oakland
Post a Comment