1 minute ago, johnnybangkok said:

I think there is no denying he is the worst but why does he still musters such massive support in the US? He is now

openly courting white supremacists (as well as deranged hip hop stars), he has consistently denied the legitimacy of the 2020 elections, he instigated the storming of the capital and is currently defending no less than 19 legal actions. Now he is talkiing about changing the constitution for his own benefit. But none of it matters to his fan base who deflect, excuse or just simply bury their heads in the sand.

 

So what is it that appeals to quite so many that they will deny what they see with their own eyes or hear with thier own ears  in the defence of this man?

 

 

Courting white supremacists is a feature, not a bug.

11 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

I think there is no denying he is the worst but why does he still musters such massive support in the US? He is now openly courting white supremacists (as well as deranged hip hop stars), he has consistently denied the legitimacy of the 2020 elections, he instigated the storming of the capital and is currently defending no less than 19 legal actions. Now he is talking about changing the constitution for his own benefit. But none of it matters to his fan base who deflect, excuse or just simply bury their heads in the sand.

 

So what is it that appeals to quite so many that they will deny what they see with their own eyes or hear with thier own ears  in the defence of this man?

 

 

“So what is it that appeals to quite so many that they will deny what they see with their own eyes or hear with thier own ears  in the defence of this man?”

He validates their hatred and thirst for cruelty.

13 minutes ago, johnnybangkok said:

I think there is no denying he is the worst but why does he still musters such massive support in the US? He is now openly courting white supremacists (as well as deranged hip hop stars), he has consistently denied the legitimacy of the 2020 elections, he instigated the storming of the capital and is currently defending no less than 19 legal actions. Now he is talking about changing the constitution for his own benefit. But none of it matters to his fan base who deflect, excuse or just simply bury their heads in the sand.

 

So what is it that appeals to quite so many that they will deny what they see with their own eyes or hear with thier own ears  in the defence of this man?

 

 

There are always lots of people that want things to be super simple that favor strong man dictators. Especially in complicated times. But trump has got to be the most ridiculous clown of a wannabe strong man dictator there ever was. Perhaps the U.S. has gotten lucky so far to still have somewhat of a democracy, because he's so <deleted> at that role that so many crave to fill their soul hole. 

1 hour ago, rudi49jr said:

President bone spurs also called dead US soldiers ‘losers’ and ‘suckers’. He’s a real class act. It’s a mystery to me how anyone in the military could even consider to vote for Trump. 

Although those were allegations made anonymously and no one has ever put their name to those allegations and they were completely denied by Mr Trump .

   They quite possibly are false accusations and Trump never said those things 

14 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Although those were allegations made anonymously and no one has ever put their name to those allegations and they were completely denied by Mr Trump .

   They quite possibly are false accusations and Trump never said those things 

Trump denies a lot of things. But even Faux News confirmed it:

 

https://vietfactcheck.org/2020/09/25/did-trump-really-call-members-of-the-military-losers/
 

Claim: On Sept. 3, The Atlantic published an article claiming that President Trump called members of the American military that have died, or captured, in wars, “losers” and “suckers.”

Rating: This claim is MOSTLY TRUE. Although Trump has denied making those statements, a number of other news outlets, including Fox News, have confirmed The Atlantic’s reporting. In addition, there is a video of Trump calling the late Senator John McCain a “loser” for being captured during the Vietnam War.

2 minutes ago, rudi49jr said:

Trump denies a lot of things. But even Faux News confirmed it:

 

https://vietfactcheck.org/2020/09/25/did-trump-really-call-members-of-the-military-losers/
 

Claim: On Sept. 3, The Atlantic published an article claiming that President Trump called members of the American military that have died, or captured, in wars, “losers” and “suckers.”

Mush for brains cost the Republicans the senate with that comment. The good people of AZ took their revenge.

2 minutes ago, rudi49jr said:

Trump denies a lot of things. But even Faux News confirmed it:

 

https://vietfactcheck.org/2020/09/25/did-trump-really-call-members-of-the-military-losers/
 

Claim: On Sept. 3, The Atlantic published an article claiming that President Trump called members of the American military that have died, or captured, in wars, “losers” and “suckers.”

Rating: This claim is MOSTLY TRUE. Although Trump has denied making those statements, a number of other news outlets, including Fox News, have confirmed The Atlantic’s reporting. In addition, there is a video of Trump calling the late Senator John McCain a “loser” for being captured during the Vietnam War.

You are claiming its true because other media outlets reported on the original story from the Atlantic!!!!!!!!

   Like, if a person told a lie and four other people mentioned that person told a lie, that lie would become a truth ?

It doesn't really matter. He definitely did say the McCain comment which would have justifiably sunk the political career of anyone else. The comments about the WW1 soldiers are entirely in his sleazy bone spurs character and he never apologized for the McCain comment.

Defending Trump is a fool's errand. 

It doesn't really matter. He definitely did say the McCain comment which would have justifiably sunk the political career of anyone else. The comments about the WW1 soldiers are entirely in his sleazy bone spurs character and he never apologized for the McCain comment.

Defending Trump is a fool's errand. 

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

It doesn't really matter. He definitely did say the McCain comment which would have justifiably sunk the political career of anyone else. The comments about the WW1 soldiers are entirely in his sleazy bone spurs character and he never apologized for the McCain comment.

Defending Trump is a fool's errand. 

It's not Trump they are defending, it's his message. There's plenty of usurpers waiting in the wings to adopt the mantle. If anything, many Republicans are more hopeful of an indictment than dems.

3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

It's not Trump they are defending, it's his message. There's plenty of usurpers waiting in the wings to adopt the mantle. If anything, many Republicans are more hopeful of an indictment than dems.

I agree. Trump is obviously spiraling out of the picture, but tragically Trumpism has infected the American (and global) political scene and will be with us for a very long time. Definitely most republican politicians want to see Trump himself out of the picture ASAP. 

On 12/4/2022 at 8:09 AM, SunnyinBangrak said:

What are you talking about? This supposed to be a fact based news forum. Trump was a freedom fighter, a champion of free speech, a champion of LESS govt intervention in our lives, the complete opposite of fascism. The most "fascistic" thing in American politics ever was Biden's attempt to create a real life Ministry of Truth to hide his corruption and punish honest voices, to allow vile self serving lies to flourish. Nothing even comes close to this pure evil. 

 

“Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.”
George Orwell, 1984

Can you spot the irony ?
First you open with this:
"This supposed to be a fact based news forum"
You then follow up with this load of unsupported flannel:
"Trump was a freedom fighter, a champion of free speech, a champion of LESS govt intervention in our lives".

Talk about shooting yourself in your bone spur feet.

10 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

You are claiming its true because other media outlets reported on the original story from the Atlantic!!!!!!!!

   Like, if a person told a lie and four other people mentioned that person told a lie, that lie would become a truth ?

I really can’t follow your ‘logic’. If a person told a lie and four persons confirmed that that person told a lie, then it’s probably true that that person told a lie. Is that simple enough for you?

 

And didn’t you get the part that even Faux News confirmed it? That to me alone is enough evidence.

9 minutes ago, rudi49jr said:

I really can’t follow your ‘logic’. If a person told a lie and four persons confirmed that that person told a lie, then it’s probably true that that person told a lie. Is that simple enough for you?

 

And didn’t you get the part that even Faux News confirmed it? That to me alone is enough evidence.

If one newspaper printed a false story , and then four other newspapers also printed the same false story , they wouldn't make the original false story to be true .

   Do you mean "Fox news" "

Could you post a link to your claim where Fox news conformed it ?

4 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

If one newspaper printed a false story , and then four other newspapers also printed the same false story , they wouldn't make the original false story to be true .

   Do you mean "Fox news" "

Could you post a link to your claim where Fox news conformed it ?

I just did.

America’s greatest threat lies within

 

https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/3761699-americas-greatest-threat-lies-within/

6 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

If one newspaper printed a false story , and then four other newspapers also printed the same false story , they wouldn't make the original false story to be true .

I really don’t know what you’re on about. One source printed a story. Four other sources confirmed it was a true story. End of story.

1 minute ago, rudi49jr said:

I really don’t know what you’re on about. 

He's claiming the MSM don't have journalistic standards.

11 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Could you post a link to your claim where Fox news conformed it ?

https://www.syracuse.com/us-news/2020/09/fox-news-confirms-trump-mocked-us-troops-as-suckers-biden-calls-him-a-disgrace.html

4 minutes ago, rudi49jr said:

https://www.syracuse.com/us-news/2020/09/fox-news-confirms-trump-mocked-us-troops-as-suckers-biden-calls-him-a-disgrace.html

You link says this 

 

"allegedly mocked American war dead.

The president and his allies have dismissed the report in The Atlantic as false."

 

 

    That isnt proof is it . 

Do you have that faux/fox news link ?

2 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

You link says this 

 

"allegedly mocked American war dead.

The president and his allies have dismissed the report in The Atlantic as false."

 

 

    That isnt proof is it . 

Do you have that faux/fox news link ?

My link also says this:

 

Jennifer Griffin, a national security correspondent for Fox News, confirmed the president’s remarks Friday. “According to one former senior Trump administration official: ‘When the president spoke about the Vietnam War, he said, ‘It was a stupid war. Anyone who went was a sucker’, Griffin said.

7 minutes ago, rudi49jr said:

My link also says this:

 

Jennifer Griffin, a national security correspondent for Fox News, confirmed the president’s remarks Friday. “According to one former senior Trump administration official: ‘When the president spoke about the Vietnam War, he said, ‘It was a stupid war. Anyone who went was a sucker’, Griffin said.

What evidence did she give to back-up those claims ?

Seems like she was just rehashing the original Atlantic story and adding no new information or even naming anyone who claimed to have heard it 

50 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

If one newspaper printed a false story , and then four other newspapers also printed the same false story , they wouldn't make the original false story to be true .

   Do you mean "Fox news" "

Could you post a link to your claim where Fox news conformed it ?

 

15 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

What evidence did she give to back-up those claims ?

Seems like she was just rehashing the original Atlantic story and adding no new information or even naming anyone who claimed to have heard it 

Goodbye.

3 minutes ago, placeholder said:

 

She didn't name the people who claimed to have heard it , anonymous allegations and it doesn't prove anything .

   (BTW, I though Fox news was regarded as being untrustworthy ?)

4 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

She didn't name the people who claimed to have heard it , anonymous allegations and it doesn't prove anything .

   (BTW, I though Fox news was regarded as being untrustworthy ?)

Untrustworthy when reporting on politicians and causes it doesn't like. When it reports negative items on people that it supports or supported, that makes a very strong case for it being true.

4 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Untrustworthy when reporting on politicians and causes it doesn't like. When it reports negative items on people that it supports or supported, that makes a very strong case for it being true.

Griffen just spoke to the anonymous people who originally made they claim and surprise surprise, those people said it was true .

   

12 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Griffen just spoke to the anonymous people who originally made they claim and surprise surprise, those people said it was true .

   

First you write this:

What evidence did she give to back-up those claims ?

Seems like she was just rehashing the original Atlantic story and adding no new information or even naming anyone who claimed to have heard it 

 

And when I showed she wasn't rehashing the Atlantic story, you come up with a new objection. You're just wasting my time.

16 minutes ago, placeholder said:

First you write this:

What evidence did she give to back-up those claims ?

Seems like she was just rehashing the original Atlantic story and adding no new information or even naming anyone who claimed to have heard it 

 

And when I showed she wasn't rehashing the Atlantic story, you come up with a new objection. You're just wasting my time.

What further evidence did she provide ?

As far as I can see, she didn't produce any further evidence at all, she just said some anonymous people stated it was true, which isn't proof at all 

21 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

What further evidence did she provide ?

As far as I can see, she didn't produce any further evidence at all, she just said some anonymous people stated it was true, which isn't proof at all 

You said she was rehashing the Atlantic article. She dug up the people who spoke with the reporter for that article. Do you have any idea of how ridiculous your attempt at debunking is? Do you think it's likely that all these reporters are making this stuff up and jeopardizing their careers?