Democrats suck

[Kaos]

I still doubt he'll listen to anyone but himself. Remember he's the one that said, "I’m speaking with myself (regarding foreign policy), number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things."

At this point, who gives a fuck what you doubt?  Remember you're the one who voted for Bernie "Giveaway" Sanders.

[Snaggletiger]

I still doubt he'll listen to anyone but himself. Remember he's the one that said, "I’m speaking with myself (regarding foreign policy), number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things."

I could while away the hours, conferrin' with the flowers
Consultin' with the rain.
And my head I'd be scratchin' while my thoughts were busy hatchin'
If I only had a brain.

[The Prowler]

At this point, who gives a fuck what you doubt?  Remember you're the one who voted for Bernie "Giveaway" Sanders.

Yes, I voted for Bernie Sanders and I'd do it again. That doesn't change the fact that President Trump will likely only listen to Trump.

[Kaos]

Yes, I voted for Bernie Sanders and I'd do it again. That doesn't change the fact that President Trump will likely only listen to Trump.

"likely" 

This is the sort of shit the media peddles too.  I saw some big thing where the democrats were running their goofy yaps about impeachment.  The entire basis for it was "well if he does this or if he does that, it could be considered a violation..." 

That's such bullshit. 

If I drive over to my neighbor's house and kill his dog, that'd be bad. So let's go ahead and get the arrest started.  You know, in case I "likely" do it. 

 

[The Prowler]

The media is beginning to breakdown what Trump said...which was basically the same thing he has said in his campaign rallies, just with a softer tone.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/02/28/fact-checking-president-trumps-address-to-congress/


http://reverbpress.com/politics/lie-trump-gives-lie-riddled-teleprompter-speech-media-falls/

[AUChizad]

The media is beginning to breakdown what Trump said...which was basically the same thing he has said in his campaign rallies, just with a softer tone.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/02/28/fact-checking-president-trumps-address-to-congress/


http://reverbpress.com/politics/lie-trump-gives-lie-riddled-teleprompter-speech-media-falls/

At the risk of preaching to the choir, which I'm loathe to do...all 13 of those accusations of "lies" are various degrees of bullshit.

I'm tired of the media crying wolf, obscuring when he actually is lying and validating "Fake News" claims.

1.   â€œWe have begun to drain the swamp of government corruption by imposing a five-year ban on lobbying by executive branch officials — and a lifetime ban on becoming lobbyists for a foreign government.”

Everything he said there is true. He signed a five-year ban on lobbying and lifetime ban on foreign lobbying for executive officials. “Yeah but still” it’s “not enough” because it didn’t apply to Congress (which he explicitly says in the quote), and because it only applies to the agency they were a part of, which A) he doesn’t imply otherwise and B) No one wants you to lobby for an agency you had nothing to do with.

2.   â€œWe’ve defended the borders of other nations, while leaving our own borders wide open, for anyone to cross — and for drugs to pour in at a now unprecedented rate.”

The data is “mixed”, but they’re going to cherry pick the contradictory part. Meth & heroine are seized at the border at increasing rates, but that’s irrelevant because marijuana isn’t, which obviously is due to legalization, and he didn’t mention specifically anyway.

Also, they say net immigration increased almost 20% from the previous year but since it hasn’t also increased since its peak in 2000, saying it increased when it has is somehow false.

3.   â€œSince my election, Ford, Fiat-Chrysler, General Motors, Sprint, Softbank, Lockheed, Intel, Walmart, and many others, have announced that they will invest billions of dollars in the United States and will create tens of thousands of new American jobs.”

The Ford CEO explicitly said he was canceling plans to build a plant in Mexico as a “vote of confidence” in Trump’s “pro-business” environment. (http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/03/news/economy/ford-700-jobs-trump/) Walmart also explicitly credited Trump for their ability to add 10,000 jobs (https://www.wsj.com/articles/wal-mart-to-create-10-000-u-s-jobs-in-nod-to-trump-1484649003). It’s not a stretch that when the pro-business president takes office after 8 years of crippling regulation, that can have a positive effect on employment rates.

4.   â€œWe’ve saved taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars by bringing down the price of the fantastic new F-35 jet fighter, and will be saving billions more dollars on contracts all across our government.”

Despite 4 Pinochios, Lockheed explicitly credited Trump for “helping accelerate negotiations” and “drive down the price” of the F-35 jet fighter.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/03/politics/f-35-lockheed-martin-cost-reduction/

5.   â€œWe have cleared the way for the construction of the Keystone and Dakota Access Pipelines — thereby creating tens of thousands of jobs — and I’ve issued a new directive that new American pipelines be made with American steel.”

“Yeah but still” if you apply an “annualized” methodology, which is not what he said, the numbers change. And combined, with their nitpicky methodology, still equals “tens of thousands” like he said.

And he said he issued a “NEW directive that NEW American pipelines be made with American steel”. “Yeah but still”, they already built about half the steel for these not-new pipelines and he failed to travel to the past to apply his directive retroactively.

6.   â€œAs we speak, we are removing gang members, drug dealers and criminals that threaten our communities and prey on our citizens. Bad ones are going out as I speak and as I have promised throughout the campaign.”

Here they can’t make up their mind if his enforcement is routine and standard so they can call him saying he’s “cracking down” a lie, or unique cause for alarm so they can raise hysteria. The statement here is that he is currently deporting “gang members, drug dealers, and criminals”, which is indisputably true.

7.   â€œBy finally enforcing our immigration laws we will raise wages, help the unemployed, save billions and billions of dollars and make our communities safer for everyone.”

They concede the numbers check out, but criticize the sources he’s citing for not taking in “other factors” they deem that it should. Again, cherry-picking methodology.

8.   â€œMillions lifted from welfare to work is not too much to expect.”

Their explanation as to why this is untrue is a bizarre non-sequitur regarding the definition of "welfare" that doesn’t at all contradict anything he says there, which isn’t even an attempt at a statement of fact to begin with.

9.   â€œNinety-four million Americans are out of the labor force.”

It’s an “absurd Four-Pinocchio claim based on a real number”. They say themselves the numbers 100% check out but deem it an “absurd” lie because “yeah but still” some people aren’t looking for jobs. Another case where that doesn’t at all contradict WHAT HE SAID that is factually correct.

10.   â€œAmerica has spent approximately $6 trillion in the Middle East, all this while our infrastructure at home is crumbling. With this $6 trillion we could have rebuilt our country — twice.”

Again, cherry-picking methodology. Then saying it’s also untrue that we could have spent the money on infrastructure because Obama wanted to, but was unsuccessful at getting it through GOP-led Congress. Not unreasonable that the GOP president might have more success. Doesn’t negate his statement anyway just because the previous president agreed with him, which he never says otherwise.

11.   â€œThe murder rate in 2015 experienced its largest single-year increase in nearly half a century. In Chicago, more than 4,000 people were shot last year alone — and the murder rate so far this year has been even higher. This is not acceptable in our society.”

More cherry-picking timelines. He explicitly is talking about single-year increases, and the data supports that. It doesn’t become untrue because it was declining before that. They also say he “cherry picked” Chicago as an outlier, but he’s not trying to conflate Chicago crime with aggregate crime. He’s talking about one specific city’s horrific violent crime epidemic.

12.   â€œJamiel’s 17-year-old son was viciously murdered by an illegal immigrant gang member, who had just been released from prison. Jamiel Shaw Jr. was an incredible young man, with unlimited potential who was getting ready to go to college where he would have excelled as a great quarterback. But he never got the chance. His father, who is in the audience tonight, has become a good friend of mine.”

They acknowledge this is 100% true, but now suddenly politicians aren’t allowed to use anecdotes in speeches as if he were the first to do this.

13.   â€œI can tell you the money is pouring in. Very nice.”

Again, they’re building a straw man so they can call it a lie. He didn’t say the money was “pouring in” the US or to some NATO savings account. It's coming in to NATO who are spending it

[Kaos]

At the risk of preaching to the choir, which I'm loathe to do...all 13 of those accusations of "lies" are various degrees of bullshit.

I'm tired of the media crying wolf, obscuring when he actually is lying and validating "Fake News" claims.

Everything he said there is true. He signed a five-year ban on lobbying and lifetime ban on foreign lobbying for executive officials. “Yeah but still” it’s “not enough” because it didn’t apply to Congress (which he explicitly says in the quote), and because it only applies to the agency they were a part of, which A) he doesn’t imply otherwise and B) No one wants you to lobby for an agency you had nothing to do with.

The data is “mixed”, but they’re going to cherry pick the contradictory part. Meth & heroine are seized at the border at increasing rates, but that’s irrelevant because marijuana isn’t, which obviously is due to legalization, and he didn’t mention specifically anyway.

Also, they say net immigration increased almost 20% from the previous year but since it hasn’t also increased since its peak in 2000, saying it increased when it has is somehow false.
The Ford CEO explicitly said he was canceling plans to build a plant in Mexico as a “vote of confidence” in Trump’s “pro-business” environment. (http://money.cnn.com/2017/01/03/news/economy/ford-700-jobs-trump/) Walmart also explicitly credited Trump for their ability to add 10,000 jobs (https://www.wsj.com/articles/wal-mart-to-create-10-000-u-s-jobs-in-nod-to-trump-1484649003). It’s not a stretch that when the pro-business president takes office after 8 years of crippling regulation, that can have a positive effect on employment rates.
Despite 4 Pinochios, Lockheed explicitly credited Trump for “helping accelerate negotiations” and “drive down the price” of the F-35 jet fighter.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/03/politics/f-35-lockheed-martin-cost-reduction/
“Yeah but still” if you apply an “annualized” methodology, which is not what he said, the numbers change. And combined, with their nitpicky methodology, still equals “tens of thousands” like he said.

And he said he issued a “NEW directive that NEW American pipelines be made with American steel”. “Yeah but still”, they already built about half the steel for these not-new pipelines and he failed to travel to the past to apply his directive retroactively.
Here they can’t make up their mind if his enforcement is routine and standard so they can call him saying he’s “cracking down” a lie, or unique cause for alarm so they can raise hysteria. The statement here is that he is currently deporting “gang members, drug dealers, and criminals”, which is indisputably true.
They concede the numbers check out, but criticize the sources he’s citing for not taking in “other factors” they deem that it should. Again, cherry-picking methodology.
Their explanation as to why this is untrue is a bizarre non-sequitur regarding the definition of "welfare" that doesn’t at all contradict anything he says there, which isn’t even an attempt at a statement of fact to begin with.
It’s an “absurd Four-Pinocchio claim based on a real number”. They say themselves the numbers 100% check out but deem it an “absurd” lie because “yeah but still” some people aren’t looking for jobs. Another case where that doesn’t at all contradict WHAT HE SAID that is factually correct.
Again, cherry-picking methodology. Then saying it’s also untrue that we could have spent the money on infrastructure because Obama wanted to, but was unsuccessful at getting it through GOP-led Congress. Not unreasonable that the GOP president might have more success. Doesn’t negate his statement anyway just because the previous president agreed with him, which he never says otherwise.
More cherry-picking timelines. He explicitly is talking about single-year increases, and the data supports that. It doesn’t become untrue because it was declining before that. They also say he “cherry picked” Chicago as an outlier, but he’s not trying to conflate Chicago crime with aggregate crime. He’s talking about one specific city’s horrific violent crime epidemic.

They acknowledge this is 100% true, but now suddenly politicians aren’t allowed to use anecdotes in speeches as if he were the first to do this.
Again, they’re building a straw man so they can call it a lie. He didn’t say the money was “pouring in” the US or to some NATO savings account. It's coming in to NATO who are spending it

^^

Boom.

I sniffled.

[CCTAU]

Trump is still president. Still keeping promises . And still being fueled by the tears of pathetic whiney lefties like prowlie!


Life is starting to tilt back in favor of the alphas!

[Kaos]

Trump is still president. Still keeping promises . And still being fueled by the tears of pathetic whiney lefties like prowlie!


Life is starting to tilt back in favor of the alphas!

#mypresident

[AUChizad]

At the risk of preaching to the choir, which I'm loathe to do...all 13 of those accusations of "lies" are various degrees of bullshit.

I'm tired of the media crying wolf, obscuring when he actually is lying and validating "Fake News" claims.

So, to reel you back in a bit...

Here's the thing about these claims. What irks me specifically is their claims that WHAT HE SAID are lies, and then support those claims with "Well, technically it's true, BUT" just so they can pad his "lie count" and say he's the lyin'est liar who ever lied.

That is not to say that SOME of the points they make to "refute" his claims are not SOMEWHAT valid, but not in the context of calling Trump's statements outright lies. In the context of an editorial piece that says "Well, what Trump said may be true, BUT also consider the following in analyzing the overall point he's trying to make..." I'm fine with that. That would be a constructive and interesting way to form those criticisms. I'm just tired of the hyperbole.

[Godfather]

This is one of steps to end of the world type shit. First it's cats and dogs living together. Then Buzz falls in love with a yeti. Then Chizad defending Trump.

Get your houses in order folks.

[Kaos]

So, to reel you back in a bit...

Here's the thing about these claims. What irks me specifically is their claims that WHAT HE SAID are lies, and then support those claims with "Well, technically it's true, BUT" just so they can pad his "lie count" and say he's the lyin'est liar who ever lied.

That is not to say that SOME of the points they make to "refute" his claims are not SOMEWHAT valid, but not in the context of calling Trump's statements outright lies. In the context of an editorial piece that says "Well, what Trump said may be true, BUT also consider the following in analyzing the overall point he's trying to make..." I'm fine with that. That would be a constructive and interesting way to form those criticisms. I'm just tired of the hyperbole.

Only if they'd done the same in regard to the Mullah In Chief would this be acceptable.  They did not.

[War Eagle!!!]

This is one of steps to end of the world type shit. First it's cats and dogs living together. Then Buzz falls in love with a yeti. Then Chizad defending Trump.

Get your houses in order folks.

What if Buzz didn't know it was a yeti?

[Snaggletiger]

What if Buzz didn't know it was a yeti?

 

[dallaswareagle]

This is one of steps to end of the world type shit. First it's cats and dogs living together. Then Buzz falls in love with a yeti. Then Chizad defending Trump.

Get your houses in order folks.

Is the final end of days when everybody loves me?   


From Nostradamus:

The land shall be no more when the man from the one star region is no longer feared or hated.

[Buzz Killington]

What if Buzz didn't know it was a yeti?

Exactly.  What if said yeti was in out of full costume?