USA Today op-ed: will Trump ever hit rock bottom

[sharon45]

News
Sen. Gillibrand says President Trump won't silence her after Tweet

This might be news, but it's also expected, so they are just merely reporting an ad.

 

[sharon45]

That's behind the scenes speculation, which a lot of your list figures in, and while I don't say that these can't possibly be true, I also can't outright agree with them that they are true either.

Did you miss the part where he bragged to the Russians the day after he fired Comey? The quote from the New York Times:

"I just fired the head of the FBI. He was crazy, a real nut job," Trump said, according to The Times. "I faced great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off."

The next day he told NBC (about the firing):

"When I decided to just do it, I said to myself — I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story,"

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-nut-job-james-comey-russia-2017-5

That's not "behind the scenes speculation," that's Trump's own words.

For me it is, because I like to see Trump talk for himself. I want to see his vocal and facial expressions matched with his choice of words, and I also want to review a lot more of that in context.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Sometimes an asshole is just that.....an asshole. And he is one of the lowest.

Look, people may not believe this, but I haven't liked Trump ever since I first heard about him in the early 80s, except I also harbor a great interest in correctly analyzing politics, so to more accurately do that, I need to be able to set my personal feelings aside, and try to see things objectively.

Oh my goodness! Its a rational free thinker who tries to see things objectively and without bias on a free thinker board. The shock!

 

[Ford]

Did you miss the part where he bragged to the Russians the day after he fired Comey? The quote from the New York Times:



The next day he told NBC (about the firing):

"When I decided to just do it, I said to myself — I said, you know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story,"

http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-nut-job-james-comey-russia-2017-5

That's not "behind the scenes speculation," that's Trump's own words.

For me it is, because I like to see Trump talk for himself. I want to see his vocal and facial expressions matched with his choice of words, and I also want to review a lot more of that in context.

Why not just yell "fake news!" and call it a day?

It seems that you're setting the bar unreasonably high. Do you also reject all other reporting in which public officials are quoted without video recordings of the quotes in question, or is that just for Trump?

 

[blastula]

Playball,

I agree he is an asshole. But I see him as so without having to make assumptions or put words in his wherever. Doing so only makes the reporter look less credible and Trump look misunderstood, even when Trump is what they say he is.

Media reporting that Trump said something he didn't are not the media's best. They're partisan hacks, some are just sloppy, and some I assume are fine people. Some anti-Tump click bait will do anything for clicks.

Just look at them. It's blatant. It's fake news. And as it drowns out legitimate criticism it makes people question if Trump is really as bad as he is. It helps him keep his supporters from turning on him.

You people (you, sharon, trebeard) are having struggles with language usage. From the editorial:

With his latest tweet, clearly implying that a United States senator would trade sexual favors for campaign cash, President Trump has shown he is not fit for office. Rock bottom is no impediment for a president who can always find room for a new low.

Lightweight Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a total flunky for Chuck Schumer and someone who would come to my office “begging” for campaign contributions not so long ago (and would do anything for them), is now in the ring fighting against Trump. Very disloyal to Bill & Crooked-USED!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 12, 2017
​

White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Tuesday dismissed the president's smear as a misunderstanding because he used similar language about men.

They never said Trump called her a whore verbatim. They said he implied it. They then quote the entire tweet and even give the White House's spin on it. Where's the fake news?

Trump knows he doesn't have to call her a whore outright because he can merely imply to give himself some deniability cover and then his willing dupes all across the world buy into and provide more cover him. Good job, gang.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Sometimes an asshole is just that.....an asshole. And he is one of the lowest.

Look, people may not believe this, but I haven't liked Trump ever since I first heard about him in the early 80s, except I also harbor a great interest in correctly analyzing politics, so to more accurately do that, I need to be able to set my personal feelings aside, and try to see things objectively.

Oh my goodness! Its a rational free thinker who tries to see things objectively and without bias on a free thinker board. The shock!

Seems funny how so many seem to not like Trump, but keep defending his nakedness.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Trump knows he doesn't have to call her a whore outright because he can merely imply to give himself some deniability cover and then his willing dupes all across the world buy into and provide more cover him. Good job, gang.

He didn't imply it. People are reading into it. As noted above, the exact same quote could and pretty much has been said by Trump about men, and then it wasn't taken as being sexual.

 

[Elixir]

Oh my goodness! Its a rational free thinker who tries to see things objectively and without bias on a free thinker board. The shock!

Seems funny how so many seem to not like Trump, but keep defending his nakedness.

Maybe they don't like teh trumpster, but like the nakedness. Never ascribe to malice that which stupidity is sufficient to explain.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Oh my goodness! Its a rational free thinker who tries to see things objectively and without bias on a free thinker board. The shock!

Seems funny how so many seem to not like Trump, but keep defending his nakedness.

Jimmy, this could be a learning experience for you. Just because you don't like somebody doesn't mean you should never defend them or call for fair treatment towards them, including not misconstruing what they say.

 

[Elixir]

Oh my goodness! Its a rational free thinker who tries to see things objectively and without bias on a free thinker board. The shock!

Seems funny how so many seem to not like Trump, but keep defending his nakedness.

Jimmy, this could be a learning experience for you. Just because you don't like somebody doesn't mean you should never defend them or call for fair treatment towards them, including not misconstruing what they say.

I rely on my Spider Sense. When it tingles really bad, I know someone is lying (sometimes even the liar doesn't know it). So I put them on "ignore".

 

[blastula]

Trump knows he doesn't have to call her a whore outright because he can merely imply to give himself some deniability cover and then his willing dupes all across the world buy into and provide more cover him. Good job, gang.

He didn't imply it. People are reading into it. As noted above, the exact same quote could and pretty much has been said by Trump about men, and then it wasn't taken as being sexual.

Sure, that's your spin, but you didn't answer why the editorial is fake news.

 

[Elixir]

... the exact same quote could and pretty much has been said by Trump about men, and then it wasn't taken as being sexual.

I don't believe you. Let's see it - link, please. And it needs to "pretty much" say "come to my office “begging” for campaign contributions not so long ago (and would do anything for them),"

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Oh my goodness! Its a rational free thinker who tries to see things objectively and without bias on a free thinker board. The shock!

Seems funny how so many seem to not like Trump, but keep defending his nakedness.

Jimmy, this could be a learning experience for you. Just because you don't like somebody doesn't mean you should never defend them or call for fair treatment towards them, including not misconstruing what they say.

Never vs keep (repeatedly)

Today on paying attention to context.

 

[sharon45]

For me it is, because I like to see Trump talk for himself. I want to see his vocal and facial expressions matched with his choice of words, and I also want to review a lot more of that in context.

Why not just yell "fake news!" and call it a day?

It seems that you're setting the bar unreasonably high.

Merely for my opinion to be stated. I also don't post in many threads, political or otherwise, because I realize that I am not informed enough to comment.

Do you also reject all other reporting in which public officials are quoted without video recordings of the quotes in question, or is that just for Trump?

I don't even bother to make it my business. I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with other people wanting to speculate and argue about a supposed Russian connection with Trump or claims of Michael Flynn's guilt, I just don't speak of them.

 

[sharon45]

Playball,

I agree he is an asshole. But I see him as so without having to make assumptions or put words in his wherever. Doing so only makes the reporter look less credible and Trump look misunderstood, even when Trump is what they say he is.

Media reporting that Trump said something he didn't are not the media's best. They're partisan hacks, some are just sloppy, and some I assume are fine people. Some anti-Tump click bait will do anything for clicks.

Just look at them. It's blatant. It's fake news. And as it drowns out legitimate criticism it makes people question if Trump is really as bad as he is. It helps him keep his supporters from turning on him.

You people (you, sharon, trebeard) are having struggles with language usage. From the editorial:

With his latest tweet, clearly implying that a United States senator would trade sexual favors for campaign cash, President Trump has shown he is not fit for office. Rock bottom is no impediment for a president who can always find room for a new low.

Lightweight Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a total flunky for Chuck Schumer and someone who would come to my office “begging” for campaign contributions not so long ago (and would do anything for them), is now in the ring fighting against Trump. Very disloyal to Bill & Crooked-USED!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 12, 2017
​

White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Tuesday dismissed the president's smear as a misunderstanding because he used similar language about men.

They never said Trump called her a whore verbatim. They said he implied it. They then quote the entire tweet and even give the White House's spin on it. Where's the fake news?

I didn't call it fake news, since the article is just their opinion, I said that I don't agree that it was implied.

Trump knows he doesn't have to call her a whore outright because he can merely imply to give himself some deniability cover and then his willing dupes all across the world buy into and provide more cover him. Good job, gang.

See, I remember all of the talk that Republicans and even many Democrats had for what they simply believed was implied by the speech from Senator/Secretary Kerry, Senator/President Obama, and many others, and I certainly did not like that, as probably lots of members here didn't either.

 

[Toni]

Playball,

I agree he is an asshole. But I see him as so without having to make assumptions or put words in his wherever. Doing so only makes the reporter look less credible and Trump look misunderstood, even when Trump is what they say he is.

Media reporting that Trump said something he didn't are not the media's best. They're partisan hacks, some are just sloppy, and some I assume are fine people. Some anti-Tump click bait will do anything for clicks.

Just look at them. It's blatant. It's fake news. And as it drowns out legitimate criticism it makes people question if Trump is really as bad as he is. It helps him keep his supporters from turning on him.

You people (you, sharon, trebeard) are having struggles with language usage. From the editorial:

With his latest tweet, clearly implying that a United States senator would trade sexual favors for campaign cash, President Trump has shown he is not fit for office. Rock bottom is no impediment for a president who can always find room for a new low.

Lightweight Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a total flunky for Chuck Schumer and someone who would come to my office “begging” for campaign contributions not so long ago (and would do anything for them), is now in the ring fighting against Trump. Very disloyal to Bill & Crooked-USED!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) December 12, 2017
​

White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Tuesday dismissed the president's smear as a misunderstanding because he used similar language about men.

They never said Trump called her a whore verbatim. They said he implied it. They then quote the entire tweet and even give the White House's spin on it. Where's the fake news?

Trump knows he doesn't have to call her a whore outright because he can merely imply to give himself some deniability cover and then his willing dupes all across the world buy into and provide more cover him. Good job, gang.

I don't see it as 'fake news' so much as manufactured outrage.

I detest Trump--always have. It's worse now that he has power and is probably slipping in terms of cognitive abilities and mental acuity and if he's not slipping, then he's pretty cynical at how he is playing that role. There is almost nothing about him that is not overblown, bloviating, egomaniacal and false, in my opinion. His current position horrifies me and disgusts me and makes me terribly afraid for what will happen to the US and to the world. I wish I were exaggerating or being dramatic, but I'm not.

That said, Trump didn't actually call Gillibrand a whore. Claiming that she would do anything sounds about right. She certainly had no problem stabbing a fellow Democratic Senator in the back for little cause other than her own ambition and she has zero problem claiming to be a big strong woman while claiming to have very bruised feelings because Trump was mean to her and implied she whored herself around for political gain. Basically proving that Trump is correct: She will do anything for political gain. I think she's making Hillary Clinton look like the Good Witch Glinda in terms of warmth and compassion and caring by comparison.

I absolutely would not be even a tiny bit surprised if this were a pre-arranged little contretemps between her and Trump, for the benefit of both.

 

[laughing dog]

So what in your estimation would have been the Fair And Balanced^TM way to report this story?

By quoting the tweet and taking it for what it actually says, that she's a flunky, a lightweight, begs for campaign contributions and would do anything for them. Is that not enough to malign him with? He actually said all that.

What he did not say is that she's a whore.

You may assume he wouldn't say the same witth he same wording about a male senator, but I would not make that assumption. "He comes 'begging' for contributions and would do anything for them, the lightweight flunky" is something I wouldn't be at all surprised to hear from Trump. Not even a little.

He didn't call anybody a whore. That's bad reporting and misrepresentation.And you are doing the same by declaring plain English reading of what Trump said is him calling her a whore.

If a woman is willing to do anything for money, that includes trading sex for money. Which means Trump did implicitly call Gillenbrand a whore. Whether he meant to imply that is a different question, but there is no doubt that his words imply she is a whore.

[
I don't like having to defend Trump.... but there you have it.

Well, it is the "liberal" thing to do.

I think what is really interesting about this story is not what Trump said, but the USA Today took such a strong stand.

 

[Worldtraveller]

Trump knows he doesn't have to call her a whore outright because he can merely imply to give himself some deniability cover and then his willing dupes all across the world buy into and provide more cover him. Good job, gang.

He didn't imply it. People are reading into it. As noted above, the exact same quote could and pretty much has been said by Trump about men, and then it wasn't taken as being sexual.

Well, I'm also not implying that you're a water carrying stooge for a self proclaimed (we do have that one video) sexual harrasser who backed an alleged (with lots of consistent allegations) child molester, but you know, I'll let everyone else make their own opinion. That's how it works right? Since I totally didn't say it directly, it's cool.

Also, I know I'm relatively new to this forum, but there are several people in this claiming to hate having to defend the trumpster fire, yet they are pretty consistent about it. Kinda makes it seem like you don't hate it so much as you hate having to admit that you still support such a horrible human being, but you don't want to say that part out loud....

 

[sharon45]

Trump knows he doesn't have to call her a whore outright because he can merely imply to give himself some deniability cover and then his willing dupes all across the world buy into and provide more cover him. Good job, gang.

He didn't imply it. People are reading into it. As noted above, the exact same quote could and pretty much has been said by Trump about men, and then it wasn't taken as being sexual.

Well, I'm also not implying that you're a water carrying stooge for a self proclaimed (we do have that one video) sexual harrasser who backed an alleged (with lots of consistent allegations) child molester, but you know, I'll let everyone else make their own opinion. That's how it works right? Since I totally didn't say it directly, it's cool.

The thing is, Trump used very common and general language in his tweet, while your message above is a bit more specific. Now, I can't vouch for how good a search engine this archive has that the article posted, http://www.trumptwitterarchive.com/archive but if you simply type in things like "begging" or "do anything," it automatically gives out a list of Trump's tweets with those phrases.

Also, I know I'm relatively new to this forum, but there are several people in this claiming to hate having to defend the trumpster fire, yet they are pretty consistent about it. Kinda makes it seem like you don't hate it so much as you hate having to admit that you still support such a horrible human being, but you don't want to say that part out loud....

I sure don't hate talking about it, because I have an attraction to politics from about all sides.

 

[Ford]

The thing is, Trump used very common and general language in his tweet

But how do you know that was really Trump? I mean I want to see his vocal and facial expressions matched with his choice of words before I judge that he actually delivered this tweet personally and it wasn't just fake news.

See what I did there?