Yes, Trump lies. Everyone acknowledges that. But for the Slimes to use exaggerations, or call it a "lie" when Trump says "I think" X or Y happened or if he got a fact simply wrong but didn't necessarily LIE about it, just tells you how low they have sunk.
Some examples?
1) “ICE came and endorsed me.” (Only its union did.)
Yeah, some "LIE" Jake. lol
2) “A reporter for Time magazine — and I have been on their cover 14 or 15 times. I think we have the all-time record in the history of Time magazine.” (Trump was on the cover 11 times and Nixon appeared 55)
Slimes hitting him on a "I think" lie. Remember when they would do that to Hillary and Obama all the time? lmao
3) "And the previous administration allowed it to happen because we shouldn't have been in Iraq, but we shouldn't have gotten out the way we got out. It created a vacuum, ISIS was formed.” (The group’s origins date to 2004.)
How dishonest is the Slimes being here? ANY honest broker knew Trump was talking about ISIS moving into Iraq and forming its CALIPHATE, and that he was NOT speaking of the terrorist groups inception year.
I could have listed many, many others Jake but 3 is more than enough to show just how low, untrustworthy and despicable the Slimes and the lib media have become.
Crash and burn, Mav. lol
And do you really believe when Trump puts "I think" before an untruth that makes it less than a lie? LMAO! He does that as a fig leaf to absolve himself. Just like he prefaced his LIE about the so-called Comey Tapes with, "James Comey better hope there are no tapes." Now scurry off to eat your next Trump shit sandwich.
You stink, Jester. lol (what an awful movie).
Jack, it's time to stop trying to defend the indefensible. So, everyone knows and acknowledges it. So, that's the new normal. The leader of the free world is a blatant liar, which means no one can trust what he says, and you think there are no consequence for that? You think that that has no impact upon how our friends, allies and enemies respond to us? I believe it does, and not in a good way.
Are you as senile as Jake or in your rush to defend the Slimes did you just skim my post? I called him a liar Matt in that post and many, many, many, many, many other times here as well but in your world, I am "defending" him. Oh, ok. lol.
My point, since it escaped you due to your TDS, is that the Slimes does NOT need to lie, overstate or exaggerate the case as they clearly did. So much so that Jake could barely mount any defense at all to my OP.
No matter who won the 2016 election, America was going to have a "blatant liar" as a president Matt. Again, a point I have made on numerous occasions here. And yes, yes, yes...I know Matt. Hilary is SO much more pious than Trump.
The American people seem to disagree:
1. I never said you didn't call him a liar. It just seems to me you don't give a damn that he is, which is evident in your ignoring my question to you regarding how his lying affects how our friends, allies and enemies view and respond to us! 
2. No, I don't agree with you that Hillary is in the same camp with Trump, regarding truthfulness. That's your claim, but I'm quite certain, our friends and allies would much more readily trust and believe what she would say than Trump!
3. More pious? Why would you use that word? I can't see why anyone would use that word when referring to a politician.
But, yes! Having read all I've read about Trump and his life, and the same regarding Hillary, she's head and shoulders above him. I've got nothing against someone voting for Trump because s/he believed in him, though I can't understand why one would do so. However, you are just showing what a political hack you are when you try to equate Trump's moral standing, or lack of it, with Hillary's.
I can admit, and have admitted many times, that BOTH Trump AND Hilary are POS, but unlike you, I don't go down the ridiculous and absurd route of twisting myself into a pretzel in trying to justify which one of them is MORE moral.
A "political hack" would only make the case that ONE of them is more moral, and that one would just happen to align with that person's political bent.
And which one of us is doing that? Hmmmmmm.....
But he's about as "Fair and Balanced" as Faux News. Hell, earlier today I put up a post calling into question the WaPo's judgement for publishing info that could harm intelligence sources. But you won't see me waving it about to prove I'm non-partisan.
Never have I ever said I was "non-partisan" as that word implies a certain neutrality or impartiality re: politics. I am clearly on the conservative side of the fence, I would never argue that, but I am just NOT an ideologue.
I'll smack down Trump when he deserves it and I'll defend him when I feel the lunatic left goes too far.
The label still fits whether you've used it yourself or not. You seem desperate to appear reasonable and even-handed when, in reality, 99% of the time you are spewing partisan talking points. And actually, I can't recall any recent posts that qualify as the rare 1%.
Oh, and I'm feeling heavenly, Duncer, TYVM.
Present your case why you believe Hillary is the same or worse than Trump, morally speaking!
But, better yet, and more to my point, do you believe that our friends and allies trust Trump more than they would have trusted Hillary?
What I have said repeatedly is that they are both POS and that I didn't feel the need to parse and look into everything thing each has done and said their entire adult lives in some vane and frivolous attempt to determine who is of a higher moral fabric.
My reasons were stated months ago and are attached.
As to your "friends and allies" question, it would be which friends and which allies?
Certainly I believe Israel, the Saudi's, Jordan etc would trust Trump more. The French, Germans, Canadians, etc would probably trust Hillary more.
They, all as a group, would face the same dilemma as the American people would for both of them are untrustworthy to a roughly equal extent per all the polling that I can recall.
In fact, many times Hillary fared worse than Trump in trustworthiness:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/poll-just-12-percent-of-dems-see-clinton-as-honest-and-trustworthy/article/2599417
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/25/4-brutal-poll-numbers-that-greet-hillary-clinton-at-the-democratic-national-convention/?utm_term=.d800b4614c4b
don't trust Trump, or what he says all that much. He just bought them off, so they don't criticize him at all, to his face!
And, let's be honest; how many years have the Republican's been at it, and how many millions of dollars has been spent, prosecuting and smearing the Clintons? Do you really think any politician could have a solid approval rating, regarding honesty, among those polled in the sound-bite crowd?
Everyone knows I openly supported Trump, but no one can point to anywhere that I have ever claimed he was more "moral" or even more honest than anyone except perhaps LTM or Hadji. lol
Only a political hack and diehard partisan could make the argument that EITHER Trump or Hillary were either honest or moral.
Let me put it this way, Would ANYONE here pay a single cent to spend time with either Trump or Clinton, and by Clinton I mean Hillary of course, personally I'd love to get drunk with Bill Clinton and swap whore mongering stories, lol. But I digress. Expect to perhaps spit in their respective faces, would anyone here really want to meet either of the choices we had for POTUS?
Let me clarify my position about Trump, I supported him for POTUS, and I supported him standing up to the MSM and the political establishment and I "like" many of his ideas for the country, but do I like HIM? Fuck no, I have never liked Trump the man, nor have I been deluded into thinking he is a great or honorable man, but he is/was the best person for the job on the ballot and by no means do I regret my vote knowing that Hillary was the only other option.
The only thing you said here that isn't total crap is "Yes, Trump lies." Trying to mince words to make excuses for Trump is outlandishly stupid.
was like the BS laffy, matt and hywy post here but with a little color. I stopped reading halfway through.
The author refered to the Iraq war as an invasion. Did I miss something? Right or wrong, it was not an invasion. Ok, so Trump was on the cover of Time Magazine 11 times, not 14 or 15. Big deal. The BS continued throughout the oped.
The New York Times has lost all respect as a major news organization. They continue to print articles that promote their liberal agenda. Even the lefty looney toons see through their BS.
-- Modified on 6/24/2017 1:55:29 PM
