The Briefing Room
General Category => Politics/Government => Topic started by: Suppressed on January 15, 2018, 04:09:15 am
-
TRUMP MISQUOTES HIMSELF WHILE CLAIMING WALL STREET JOURNAL MISQUOTED HIM ABOUT KIM JONG UN
BY JASON SILVERSTEIN ON 1/14/18 AT 9:38 AM
U.S.
http://www.newsweek.com/trump-misquotes-himself-kim-wall-street-journal-780973 (http://www.newsweek.com/trump-misquotes-himself-kim-wall-street-journal-780973)
Let’s go to the tape. Again and again.
President Donald Trump on Sunday misquoted himself in a tweet complaining about how he had supposedly been misquoted in a scrutinized Wall Street Journal interview. The Journal soon released audio of the interview to prove the president said what it reported, and the White House followed up minutes later with a seemingly identical recording trying to prove the Journal wrong.
Trump on Twitter took issue with the most notorious line from his Thursday interview: When he said “I probably have a very good relationship with Kim Jong Un,†the North Korean dictator who has been threatening for months to launch a nuclear attack on the United States.
[...]
-
Trumpers, you know the drill. Your hero is in deny mode. Don't yet switch to "it was brilliant" mode yet, despite him releasing proof he said it.
-
Don't worry. The cleanup crew will be out there soon telling us all that we didn't hear what our lying ears heard or that Trump really meant something else and we just don't get it because we aren't stable geniuses.
-
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on whether he said "I'd." The funnier quote he's made lately was about libel laws.....
You can’t say things that are false — knowingly false — and be able to smile as money pours into your bank account.
:silly:
-
Trump lies as easily as he breathes.
-
WSJ is smart to have a recording of the interview because if it's something negative, Trump will always deny he said it. I keep saying he's like the little boy who smashes a vase and when his mother asks, "who broke the vase," he says "not me."
This whole administration operates on lies and denial. In a way I feel sorry for Sarah Huckabee Sanders or any press secretary or staffer because they have to lie to protect the boss, often from himself.
-
WSJ is smart to have a recording of the interview because if it's something negative, Trump will always deny he said it. I keep saying he's like the little boy who smashes a vase and when his mother asks, "who broke the vase," he says "not me."
This whole administration operates on lies and denial. In a way I feel sorry for Sarah Huckabee Sanders or any press secretary or staffer because they have to lie to protect the boss, often from himself.
Tom Nichols on twitter nailed it about Trumpers and it can easily be applied to Trump and his fans on any number of issues. They hated Goldman Sachs till Trump filled his administration with GS people. They said Trump was gonna build a 50 foot wall from the gulf to the pacific and now declare that the rhetoric was only symbolic.
Trump's lying is habitual and infectious.
Trumpers who reject all of the evidence staring them in the face about collusion and subsequent obstruction remind me of a joke Soviets used to tell about Brezhnev's legendary ability to be in denial about the mess in the old USSR. /1
After a summit, Brezhnev, Gerald Ford, and other world leaders take a break and go on a safari, where they manage to catch a live elephant. /2
They make up an elaborate schedule for guarding the beast, but when Brezhnev's turn comes he gets drunk and falls asleep, and the elephant trots away. /3
The next morning, when asked about their catch, Brezhnev guilelessly says, "What elephant?" Astonished, Ford then grills him: didn't we agree to hunt an elephant? Yes, Brezhnev says, we did indeed. /4
Didn't we catch one? Oh yes, we did, a fine one. And didn't we agree to guard it? Of course, we all did. "So," Ford fumes, "where's the elephant, damn it?" /5
Brezhnev nods thoughtfully for a moment and asks, "What elephant?" /6
-
It's been reported by other news sources, that it depends on what one hears in the audio.
-
WSJ is smart to have a recording of the interview because if it's something negative, Trump will always deny he said it. I keep saying he's like the little boy who smashes a vase and when his mother asks, "who broke the vase," he says "not me."
Dang! You're right. The hair even looks similar....
(https://i.imgur.com/a7Ulkfk.jpg)
-
It's been reported by other news sources, that it depends on what one hears in the audio.
I have poor hearing, but I tried listening several times , both with and without hearing aids and on 3 different devices. On my tablet and phone, it's unclear what he said, but on my laptop, I can definitely hear "I" instead of "I'd." "I'd" is the word that fits since it's obvious Trump's relationship with Kim is not good, but "I'd" is not the word I'm hearing.
When Trump makes a prepared speech, he is crystal clear and he sounds professional. But off the cuff and in interviews, he screws up and sounds like an idiot. I really wish he would stop doing interviews and talking without some preparation. Maybe he should have the questions ahead of time so he will have prepared answers instead of flying blind. I don't really like that sort of thing, but it's obvious Trump can't say anything on his own.
Of course, suggestions like that make me a Trump hater in the eyes of his fans, so... :shrug:
-
Misquoting himself? Is that something a "very stable genius" would do? :silly:
-
Personally, I like the way he puts the William Shatner inflection on Kim....Jong....Un.
-
Personally I like how desperate the NTs look when they make an issue out of something so trivial
-
Collectively, we laugh at your onion-skinned response to any ridicule of him.
-
Collectively, we laugh at your onion-skinned response to any ridicule of him.
Clearly, Trumpers' opinions are very important to you.
-
Collectively, we laugh at your onion-skinned response to any ridicule of him.
@edpc
Thin skinned? I appreciate the entertainment. oh wait I don't mean to offend. We're laughing WITH you and not AT you.
really
-
Refreshing to see another substantive discussion on policy disagreements.
Oops, my bad. I’m at the wrong place. Never mind.
-
Refreshing to see another substantive discussion on policy disagreements.
Oops, my bad. I’m at the wrong place. Never mind.
@aligncare
I wouldn't look for that on a thread with the title this one has. just saying Its a hit piece from the get go
-
His detractors told us from the very beginning it would be a mistake to elect Donald Trump. I see from the daily barrage of ginned up outrage they’re working very hard to make it so.
-
His detractors told us from the very beginning it would be a mistake to elect Donald Trump. I see from the daily barrage of ginned up outrage they’re working very hard to make it so.
@aligncare
I fought against him up until shortly before the general election. However, now he is our President and has made policy changes, judicial nominees and other actions which are far far better then expected.
yes he's colorful and embarrassing but he has given us no indication he will sell this country out from under us.
-
Refreshing to see another substantive discussion on policy disagreements.
Oops, my bad. I’m at the wrong place. Never mind.
Yes, I have to agree with you on this.
-
Personally, I like the way he puts the William Shatner inflection on Kim....Jong....Un.
Sounded to me like he was having trouble remembering Kim's name.
-
@edpc
Thin skinned? I appreciate the entertainment. oh wait I don't mean to offend. We're laughing WITH you and not AT you.
really
Perhaps I should go on a 3AM Twitter rampage against your mockery. Oh wait, I actually don't care, but Trump does. Childish.
-
Sounded to me like he was having trouble remembering Kim's name.
@Applewood
Now THAT is substantial policy discussion
-
Perhaps I should go on a 3AM Twitter rampage against your mockery. Oh wait, I actually don't care, but your guy does.
@edpc
Now dont go getting all personally offended. I told you we were laughing WITH you.
-
Perhaps I should go on a 3AM Twitter rampage against your mockery. Oh wait, I actually don't care, but your guy does.
A president appointing conservatives to the judiciary (many more than just Gorsuch), slashing onerous federal regulations, pushing action on sane immigration policies, and signing legislation to allow folks to keep more of their own money should be proclaimed as your guy, too. Unless you’re just giving us lip service about your conservative bona fides.
-
His detractors told us from the very beginning it would be a mistake to elect Donald Trump. I see from the daily barrage of ginned up outrage they’re working very hard to make it so.
And Trump supporters are very touchy about any comment that is less than adoration for their hero, Every less than fawning comment means those who don't approve of every burp that comes out of Trump's mouth must be these evil anarchists trying to overthrow the government. There always has to be some ulterior motive behind every critical comment. I can assure them there is not.
Maybe it's time Trump supporters stop listening to overblown conspiracy theories and just accept the fact that not everyone is going to fall on their knees to worship their hero. To my knowledge, freedom of speech still exists in this country and if I have something to say that displeases the Trump fans, so be it. Until and unless Trump supporters take that right away, I'm going to say what I think. So stop whining, grow up and just live with it.
-
And Trump supporters are very touchy about any comment that is less than adoration for their hero, Every less than fawning comment means those who don't approve of every burp that comes out of Trump's mouth must be these evil anarchists trying to overthrow the government. There always has to be some ulterior motive behind every critical comment. I can assure them there is not.
Maybe it's time Trump supporters stop listening to overblown conspiracy theories and just accept the fact that not everyone is going to fall on their knees to worship their hero. To my knowledge, freedom of speech still exists in this country and if I have something to say that displeases the Trump fans, so be it. Until and unless Trump supporters take that right away, I'm going to say what I think. So stop whining, grow up and just live with it.
Physician heal thyself.
-
A president appointing conservatives to the judiciary (many more than just Gorsuch), slashing onerous federal regulations, pushing action on sane immigration policies, and signing legislation to allow folks to keep more of their own money should be proclaimed as your guy, too. Unless you’re just giving us lip service about your conservative bona fides.
The only reason we have Gorsuch is because the Senate wouldn't hold a vote on Garland.
They rolled a hard 7 and got lucky on the election result. Trump doesn't even have a Schoolhouse Rock understanding of what happens in government. Someone gave him a SC nominee list, pointed to the name on the top and said, "That guy." He said, "OK, he'll be the greatest judge ever."
An important post court of appeals nominee is an oil company lawyer and part time magistrate in Roswell. Three of the latest judiciary appointees were previous Obama nominees. Two more were connected to people in the admin and one of those was embarrassingly unqualified. Yet another withdrew after 2015 comments were discovered saying trans people were part of Satan's plan. Impressive vetting. Just because they got confirmed under the 'right guy' doesn't mean they're qualified or will make the best rulings.
The tax bill is fine, but it could have been much better. They rushed it through under the gun and had to scrap a couple nice provisions due to sloppiness and not meeting parliamentary requirements. It was either ineptitude or sabotage. In any case, Trump was willing to sign anything so he could finally have a 'win' instead of waiting for the better deal. That's been reinforced by his comments at the immigration conference.
-
The only reason we have Gorsuch is because the Senate wouldn't hold a vote on Garland.
They rolled a hard 7 and got lucky on the election result. Trump doesn't even have a Schoolhouse Rock understanding of what happens in government. Someone gave him a SC nominee list, pointed to the name on the top and said, "That guy." He said, "OK, he'll be the greatest judge ever."
An important post court of appeals nominee is an oil company lawyer and part time magistrate in Roswell. Three of the latest judiciary appointees were previous Obama nominees. Two more were connected to people in the admin and one of those was embarrassingly unqualified. Yet another withdrew after 2015 comments were discovered saying trans people were part of Satan's plan. Impressive vetting. Just because they got confirmed under the 'right guy' doesn't mean they're qualified or will make the best rulings.
The tax bill is fine, but it could have been much better. They rushed it through under the gun and had to scrap a couple nice provisions due to sloppiness and not meeting parliamentary requirements. It was either ineptitude or sabotage. In any case, Trump was willing to sign anything so he could finally have a 'win' instead of waiting for the better deal. That's been reinforced by his comments at the immigration conference.
:thumbsup:
-
Trump lies as easily as he breathes.
Technically, a misquote is not a lie. Being wrong is different from lying.
-
@aligncare
I fought against him up until shortly before the general election. However, now he is our President and has made policy changes, judicial nominees and other actions which are far far better then expected.
yes he's colorful and embarrassing but he has given us no indication he will sell this country out from under us.
Exactly, @driftdiver :laugh:
All my life, in business and playing baseball (sports)...success comes from focus and dedication to goals. RESULTS ORIENTED.
And just as in business and team sports, sometimes we deal with abnormal personality types because their money is green...or they can split the gap to the wall on a bounce with RISP.
-
Trumpers, you know the drill. Your hero is in deny mode. Don't yet switch to "it was brilliant" mode yet, despite him releasing proof he said it.
OH, yeah, baby.
I know the drill. Your happy little fingers could not wait to get over here and post something REALLY inconsequential because you think it makes Trump look bad.
-
The only reason we have Gorsuch is because the Senate wouldn't hold a vote on Garland.
They rolled a hard 7 and got lucky on the election result. Trump doesn't even have a Schoolhouse Rock understanding of what happens in government. Someone gave him a SC nominee list, pointed to the name on the top and said, "That guy." He said, "OK, he'll be the greatest judge ever."
An important post court of appeals nominee is an oil company lawyer and part time magistrate in Roswell. Three of the latest judiciary appointees were previous Obama nominees. Two more were connected to people in the admin and one of those was embarrassingly unqualified. Yet another withdrew after 2015 comments were discovered saying trans people were part of Satan's plan. Impressive vetting. Just because they got confirmed under the 'right guy' doesn't mean they're qualified or will make the best rulings.
The tax bill is fine, but it could have been much better. They rushed it through under the gun and had to scrap a couple nice provisions due to sloppiness and not meeting parliamentary requirements. It was either ineptitude or sabotage. In any case, Trump was willing to sign anything so he could finally have a 'win' instead of waiting for the better deal. That's been reinforced by his comments at the immigration conference.
Trump announced around 50 judges by September 15, 2017, more than that of any recent president at that point in their presidency. There are still 120 vacancies to fill due to a recalcitrant Senate. The few you referenced were duds.
So what’s your point? Because I don’t get it. All I noticed about your post is that it reeks of contempt for the president. I can therefore discard with a clear conscience whatever cryptic point you were attempting to make.
-
Trump announced around 50 judges by September 15, 2017, more than that of any recent president at that point in their presidency. There are still 120 vacancies to fill due to a recalcitrant Senate. The few you referenced were duds.
So what’s your point? Because I don’t get it. All I noticed about your post is that it reeks of contempt for the president. I can therefore discard with a clear conscience whatever cryptic point you were attempting to make.
He's nominated around 75 to date.
-
Trump announced around 50 judges by September 15, 2017, more than that of any recent president at that point in their presidency. There are still 120 vacancies to fill due to a recalcitrant Senate. The few you referenced were duds.
So what’s your point? Because I don’t get it. All I noticed about your post is that it reeks of contempt for the president. I can therefore discard with a clear conscience whatever cryptic point you were attempting to make.
My point is those are the ones we know about and I doubt many were even aware of it at all. What else are we going to discover going forward? Do we even care or are we supposed to just nod and clap because someone who says he's a Republican after changing political affiliations 5 times appointed them?
-
My point is those are the ones we know about and I doubt many were even aware of it at all. What else are we going to discover going forward? Do we even care or are we supposed to just nod and clap because someone who says he's a Republican after changing political affiliations 5 times appointed them?
Of course we care. What else would you have us do?
Supposedly Trump has indicated he wants youth and a 'conservative' bent in his nominees. I guess we'll see.
-
My point is those are the ones we know about and I doubt many were even aware of it at all. What else are we going to discover going forward? Do we even care or are we supposed to just nod and clap because someone who says he's a Republican after changing political affiliations 5 times appointed them?
@edpc
To use a baseball analogy you find it only acceptable to hit a grand slam each and every time. As base hit or even a double is unacceptable. It must be totally perfect or its an abject failure.
Me personally? I'm satisfied pushing back the dogs of war even just a little bit.
-
@edpc
To use a baseball analogy you find it only acceptable to hit a grand slam each and every time. As base hit or even a double is unacceptable. It must be totally perfect or its an abject failure.
That's the problem right there; too many people think politics and government is a team sporting event that just requires cheerleaders to 'win' games and payouts for office pools.
Pathetic.
-
@edpc
To use a baseball analogy you find it only acceptable to hit a grand slam each and every time. As base hit or even a double is unacceptable. It must be totally perfect or its an abject failure.
Me personally? I'm satisfied pushing back the dogs of war even just a little bit.
To use a different analogy, 7 out of 50 is a failure rate of about 1 in 7. If you're OK with that on something like judiciary assignments, that's fine. Those odds are just slightly better in standard Russian Roulette.
-
To use a different analogy, 7 out of 50 is a failure rate of about 1 in 7. If you're OK with that on something like judiciary assignments, that's fine. Those odds are just slightly better in standard Russian Roulette.
@edpc
Ahh so Trump controls the judicial confirmation process. Ya see I did not know that, I always thought it was Congress.
-
That's the problem right there; too many people think politics and government is a team sporting event that just requires cheerleaders to 'win' games and payouts for office pools.
Pathetic.
@INVAR
Actually I was trying to simplify it for ease of communication. Guess that went over your head like just about everything else.
Good day
-
@edpc
To use a baseball analogy you find it only acceptable to hit a grand slam each and every time. As base hit or even a double is unacceptable. It must be totally perfect or its an abject failure.
Me personally? I'm satisfied pushing back the dogs of war even just a little bit.
Thank you very much. I couldn’t put my finger on it. Exactly what was edpc criticizing.
You’re analogy was spot on.
Never before have so many searched for so long to find fault in one man, something, anything!
-
@INVAR
Actually I was trying to simplify it for ease of communication. Guess that went over your head like just about everything else.
Good day
(https://i.imgflip.com/ozbuk.jpg)
-
(https://i.imgflip.com/ozbuk.jpg)
@INVAR
I've met him. He doesn't have all those fancy raised tattoo things in real life.
-
@edpc
Ahh so Trump controls the judicial confirmation process. Ya see I did not know that, I always thought it was Congress.
Go back and read the part I said about vetting. That's the failure I'm talking about. He controls that.
-
The directors of the firm hired to continue the credits after the other people had been sacked, wish it to be known that they have just been sacked.
The credits have been completed in an entirely different style at great expense and at the last minute.
-
Go back and read the part I said about vetting. He controls that.
@edpc
Uh huh, right, yep still trying for that grand slam aren't ya.
-
@edpc Uh huh, right, yep still trying for that grand slam aren't ya.
Why would I? Against the hapless Trump team I can walked and steal the other three bases easily. More likely to score on three balks, however.
-
Why would I? Against the hapless Trump team I can walked and steal the other three bases easily. More likely to score on three balks, however.
@edpc
So which part is a balk?
Reducing federal regulations
Killing ISIS
Getting a fine man on the Supreme Court
Making our ROE in a war zone sane
Theres more, now he has had trouble getting anything through Congress. The NTs rarely seem to place any blame on Congress though, why is that?
-
@edpc
So which part is a balk?
Reducing federal regulations
Killing ISIS
Getting a fine man on the Supreme Court
Making our ROE in a war zone sane
Theres more, now he has had trouble getting anything through Congress. The NTs rarely seem to place any blame on Congress though, why is that?
I have already addressed the Supreme Court issue. Now, you're scuffing the ball to get some action on your pitches with the other stuff. It's like that list of huge accomplishments that gives him credit for a traveling and seeing things.
You can find plenty of threads where I have blamed Congress for quite a bit and wondered why he is now choosing to cozying up to them when they were never on his side to begin with. He's not a serious man with a serious agenda or he would have conducted himself differently.
You can find examples in post 445 here....
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,299301.msg1574085.html#msg1574085 (http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,299301.msg1574085.html#msg1574085)
Post 2 here......
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,299434.msg1574330.html#msg1574330 (http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,299434.msg1574330.html#msg1574330)
and post 461 here.....
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,299301.msg1574473.html#msg1574473 (http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,299301.msg1574473.html#msg1574473)
There are tons of others.