2 minutes ago, tomazbodner said:

When you mention "Be Best" - She's one of the few (if not only) FLOTUS that has publicly disputed POTUS by literally humiliating him through her official statement for his racist remarks. I wish she did that more often. The man deserves it.

Got some documentation for that. When I googled it all I turned up was variations of Melania Remains Silent.

2 minutes ago, tomazbodner said:

I wish she did that more often.

 

2 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Got some documentation for that. When I googled it all I turned up was variations of Melania Remains Silent.

Google LeBron James then.

 

CNN (of all) made a documentary on her:

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/14/politics/melania-trump-woman-of-mystery-cnn/index.html

 

Not sure you can see the whole episode but there are some highlights on above link.

9 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

15 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Am I right to assume that those who constantly accuse Trump for 'this' and blame him for 'that', you've all met him? I make that assumption based on the fact you all seem to know him awfully well. 

 

Who's "blaming" him for anything?

 

What an odd defense?

That's the sort of thing Trump minions say when they have NOTHING. 

Yes, Melania thinks Kim is terrific, a wonderful guy, and his country has great potential. She also like Putin and Xi. But we both dislike Macron, Merkel, Morrison, Ardern, and most of the other leaders of nations who used to be our allies.

 

Before I turned the world order on it's head, and started coddling dictators and spurning allies. 

3 minutes ago, tomazbodner said:

Google LeBron James then.

 

CNN (of all) made a documentary on her:

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/14/politics/melania-trump-woman-of-mystery-cnn/index.html

 

Not sure you can see the whole episode but there are some highlights on above link.

I'm not going to sit through an entire video. You do it and let me know at what time the corroborating evidence appears.

Anyway, in the accompanying article there was this gem from her:

"In 2011, she went on ABC's "The View," and said, like her husband, that she felt Barack Obama needed to show his birth certificate, expressing suspicion over where he was born."

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/14/politics/melania-trump-woman-of-mystery-cnn/index.html

 

4 minutes ago, mike787 said:

Ah ok....whatever, they met or didn't....and how does this matter???  How does this directly impact Thailand, my TM30, visa applications, my bowels, health, etc...

So lies don't matter.

Maybe they chat on skype?

 

He calls her 'Mer-a-nia' and she calls him 'Kim-ee'. 

22 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Am I right to assume that those who constantly accuse Trump for 'this' and blame him for 'that', you've all met him? I make that assumption based on the fact you all seem to know him awfully well. 

18 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

Who's "blaming" him for anything?

 

What an odd defense?

 

He's been in the public eye for 50 years, had a long-running TV reality show and has never been shy about sharing his innermost thoughts. Most know him as well as they know the drunk down at the end of the bar, or our racist Grandpa telling us about "the coloreds" at Thanksgiving.

 

 

 

 

Perhaps we're doing Forethat an injustice? Maybe he meant it as an honest, if foolish question and now that we've told him the answer is negative, he will gratefully accept this information and move on.

18 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

Who's "blaming" him for anything?

 

What an odd defense?

 

He's been in the public eye for 50 years, had a long-running TV reality show and has never been shy about sharing his innermost thoughts. Most know him as well as they know the drunk down at the end of the bar, or our racist Grandpa telling us about "the coloreds" at Thanksgiving.

 

 

 

 

Who's "blaimng him for anything"?

 

Let's see. Just checking the first dozen of posts in this thread we have:

Quote

 

• This must be pathological.
• What is good for her, that she kept her mouth shut while het husband told again a clear lie?
• This guy has no idea what the emoluments laws are all about.
• He is itching for an indictment.
• Trump lies like no human being I've ever seen. 
• Melania to Trump: "You can keep lying all you want, but keep my name out of it you freakin psycho." 
• Does anybody remember the last day he didn't lie?

 

 

I was just thinking that maybe FLOTUS have read up on Kim Jong Un..? Judging by the comments quoted, the posters on here seem to know Trump awfully well... so the question is if they have met him?

2 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Who's "blaimng him for anything"?

 

Let's see. Just checking the first dozen of posts in this thread we have:

 

I was just thinking that maybe FLOTUS have read up on Kim Jong Un..? Judging by the comments quoted, the posters on here seem to know Trump awfully well... so the question is if they have met him?

Let's see, what happens if you tell 13,000 documented and clear lies or so in under 3 years?

1 minute ago, Forethat said:

so the question is if they have met him?

 

Irony.

 

 

We haven't met trump so we can't comment on him.

 

Melania hasn't met Kim - but "has read up on him" - so she "knows" him, according to her husband.

 

Precious.

 

 

For the most part those are "judgements", rather than blame or accusations.

 

 

16 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I'm not going to sit through an entire video. You do it and let me know at what time the corroborating evidence appears.

Anyway, in the accompanying article there was this gem from her:

"In 2011, she went on ABC's "The View," and said, like her husband, that she felt Barack Obama needed to show his birth certificate, expressing suspicion over where he was born."

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/14/politics/melania-trump-woman-of-mystery-cnn/index.html

 

Basically you're saying you're too lazy to check the evidence, then pull out something from 10 years ago that suits your agenda.

1 minute ago, tomazbodner said:

Basically you're saying you're too lazy to check the evidence, then pull out something from 10 years ago that suits your agenda.

No, I'm saying that you should be as specific as possible when you cite a source. Because it's your evidence. If you don't want to bother to put the time into doing that, then why should I?

5 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Let's see, what happens if you tell 13,000 documented and clear lies or so in under 3 years?

I'm confident that his political opponents will claim this to be a lie, making it 13,001. What I'm saying is that I'm not so sure it IS a lie, I'm saying it could just as well be semantics. I say this based on what in my opinion is a just as well documented fact: he has a slight tendency to engage his mouth too quickly in situations where semantics is an important factor. But that doesn't mean he's lying. Not all time. And the question is whether this is one of them.

 

BTW, do you know him?

6 minutes ago, Forethat said:

he has a slight tendency to engage his mouth too quickly in situations where semantics is an important factor.

 

Correct.

 

Awesome attribute for a used-car salesman.

 

Maybe less so as pOTUS.

 

 

12 minutes ago, Forethat said:

I'm confident that his political opponents will claim this to be a lie, making it 13,001. What I'm saying is that I'm not so sure it IS a lie, I'm saying it could just as well be semantics. I say this based on what in my opinion is a just as well documented fact: he has a slight tendency to engage his mouth too quickly in situations where semantics is an important factor. But that doesn't mean he's lying. Not all time. And the question is whether this is one of them.

 

BTW, do you know him?

Funny, on the one hand, you offer a defense of what Trump meant by Melania knowing Kim is that she learned about him but had no personal contact. On the other hand, you're asking people if they know Trump personally, as though that's relevant.

Doublethink much?

et another one of his litany of lies, it would be nice if a reporter asked about how, when, where and why the FLOTUS met the dictator.

Great bloke to know dispatches relatives and friends with anti aircraft guns, lives in luxury while his fellow countrymen freeze and starve to death.

 

 

3 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Funny, on the one hand, you offer a defense of what Trump meant by Melania knowing Kim is that she learned about him but had no personal contact. On the other hand, you're asking people if they know Trump personally, as though that's relevant.

Doublethink much?

No. I'm defending anyone, especially not Trump. What I did was to point out that posters on here often say things about Trump despite having never met him. Yet they seem to know him awfully well. And those posters now claim that FLOTUS is unable to exercise that very principle herself? 

 

Let me rephrase: Is there a chance that POTUS referred to his wives increased knowledge of Kim Jong Un's persona? That he wasn't actually lying, he was simply dealing with FLOTUS increased knowledge the same way posters on here do when they comment on his mental status?

 

Personally, I don't know. I'm simply asking a question. 

44 minutes ago, Forethat said:

I'm confident that his political opponents will claim this to be a lie, making it 13,001. What I'm saying is that I'm not so sure it IS a lie, I'm saying it could just as well be semantics. I say this based on what in my opinion is a just as well documented fact: he has a slight tendency to engage his mouth too quickly in situations where semantics is an important factor. But that doesn't mean he's lying. Not all time. And the question is whether this is one of them.

 

BTW, do you know him?

"What I'm saying is that I'm not so sure it IS a lie, I'm saying it could just as well be semantics. I say this based on what in my opinion is a just as well documented fact: he has a slight tendency to engage his mouth too quickly in situations where semantics is an important factor. But that doesn't mean he's lying. "

No, he is lying, no 2 ways about it.

 

" No. I'm defending anyone, especially not Trump.  "

Yes, you are.

Edited August 27, 20196 yr by stevenl

I say this based on what in my opinion is a just as well documented fact: he has a slight tendency to engage his mouth too quickly

 

 

MM continuously, and his ramblings have no semblance of truth , he lives in an altered reality.

 

3 hours ago, stevenl said:

This must be pathological.

I expect more logical comments from my 8 yo granddaughter.

5 minutes ago, Forethat said:

No. I'm defending anyone, especially not Trump. What I did was to point out that posters on here often say things about Trump despite having never met him. Yet they seem to know him awfully well. And those posters now claim that FLOTUS is unable to exercise that very principle herself? 

 

Let me rephrase: Is there a chance that POTUS referred to his wives increased knowledge of Kim Jong Un's persona? That he wasn't actually lying, he was simply dealing with FLOTUS increased knowledge the same way posters on here do when they comment on his mental status?

 

Personally, I don't know. I'm simply asking a question. 

What sort of things are people saying that would require a personal acquaintance with Trump? And if some people are saying such things, who cares? There's so much evidence of his constant false utterances and statements about matters of public importance.

 

As for there being a chance, anything's possible. But how probable is it? English makes a pretty clear distinction about this sort of thing by using "knowing" someone for a personal connection and "knowing about" someone for knowledge not based on acquaintance.

9 minutes ago, scorecard said:

I expect more logical comments from my 8 yo granddaughter.

So you don't consider it pathological lying when someone makes around 13,000 clear and verifiable lies in less than 3 years?

9 minutes ago, Forethat said:

No. I'm defending anyone, especially not Trump. What I did was to point out that posters on here often say things about Trump despite having never met him. Yet they seem to know him awfully well. And those posters now claim that FLOTUS is unable to exercise that very principle herself? 

 

Let me rephrase: Is there a chance that POTUS referred to his wives increased knowledge of Kim Jong Un's persona? That he wasn't actually lying, he was simply dealing with FLOTUS increased knowledge the same way posters on here do when they comment on his mental status?

 

Personally, I don't know. I'm simply asking a question. 

Geez man, what a bunch of ridiculous nonsense.  The WH spokesperson came up with some flimsy excuse because that's all they can do.  And you guys take it as the gospel.  How about just go by what Trump said?  Trump was lying as he often does.  And he does this because he has so little confidence in his own judgement that it needs to be backed up by someone else more credible, i.e., Melania.  It's like when Trump makes a controversial remark and has to include "many people agree with me."  No need to defend the indefensible.   

1 minute ago, bristolboy said:

What sort of things are people saying that would require a personal acquaintance with Trump? And if some people are saying such things, who cares? There's so much evidence of his constant false utterances and statements about matters of public importance.

 

As for there being a chance, anything's possible. But how probable is it? English makes a pretty clear distinction about this sort of thing by using "knowing" someone for a personal connection and "knowing about" someone for knowledge not based on acquaintance.

Nothing of what people say about Trump requires a personal acquaintance with Trump. That's my point.

 

Lie this time or semantic co**up? Considering the history of lies and semantic co**ups from Trump I am not betting on anything. Coin toss?

 

Heads...

1 minute ago, Forethat said:

Nothing of what people say about Trump requires a personal acquaintance with Trump. That's my point.

 

Lie this time or semantic co**up? Considering the history of lies and semantic co**ups from Trump I am not betting on anything. Coin toss?

 

Heads...

Please. There is extensive documentation of Trump's lies and falsehoods. Not so much of his semantic co**ups. And given that in this particular case it's very basic English we're dealing with, the odds are overwhelming that he was lying once again.

Just now, bristolboy said:

Please. There is extensive documentation of Trump's lies and falsehoods. Not so much of his semantic co**ups. And given that in this particular case it's very basic English we're dealing with, the odds are overwhelming that he was lying once again.

I'd say a rough estimate is that the vast majority of what in left wing media is claimed to be "lies" are semantic co**ups or simply incorrect statements. But there's a huge difference between being incompetent and telling lies. I'm not saying he hasn't been caught lying, but the accusations are often taken out of thin air. 

7 minutes ago, Forethat said:

Nothing of what people say about Trump requires a personal acquaintance with Trump. That's my point.

 

Lie this time or semantic co**up? Considering the history of lies and semantic co**ups from Trump I am not betting on anything. Coin toss?

 

Heads...

So what you are trying to say is that we dont know trump but can know him because of his many statements. So Melania has never met Kim but can also know him because of his statements etc.

 

The problem with that is we know all about trump because he is a media whore who craves attention so much he lies just to get his name in lights.

 

On the flipside Kim is a recluse, he likes to be hidden and only pips his head up when he actually needs something. Nothing public about him is ever good, everything about him is bad. So Melania would have no reason to like him.

Just now, Forethat said:

I'd say a rough estimate is that the vast majority of what in left wing media is claimed to be "lies" are semantic co**ups or simply incorrect statements. But there's a huge difference between being incompetent and telling lies. I'm not saying he hasn't been caught lying, but the accusations are often taken out of thin air. 

Really? The difference is rather that Trump sometimes lies intentionally and sometimes just tells falsehoods he believes. The latest one I can recall is something about wind power being a failure in the USA. He probably believes it, because it suits him to, but it's demonstrably false.