• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Did Trump insult widow of Niger GI?

warak said:
get off your self appointed pedestal moon.

you condone and inflame it coming from the right but reject it as "gasp, how could you" when it comes from the left.


in the words of a great musician..."So put a quarter in your ass 'cause you played yourself "
Click to expand...

I’m no right winger
 
Do I think the Obama administration engaged in spin? Yes.

Do I think that is relevant to what Clinton might have told families the day after the attack? Not really.

Do I think this is overall a big nothing burger related to some other fabrications that have occurred since 2000? Absolutely.

Call it what you will.
 
So in one case, JHMD has taken loads of circumstantial evidence to conclude that the only result is that Hillary Clinton is an evil liar.

In another case, he has taken circumstantial evidence to insist that the board left is delusional not to believe the account of Kelly and Trump, while at the same time completely ignoring the direct evidence that Kelly was not telling the truth in another part of this commentary.

You really can't make this stuff up.
 
Eric Trump's wife is saying she has seen a transcript of the call. How did she get that? I guess there is a tape Trump is hiding.
 
ChrisL68 said:
So in one case, JHMD has taken loads of circumstantial evidence to conclude that the only result is that Hillary Clinton is an evil liar.

In another case, he has taken circumstantial evidence to insist that the board left is delusional not to believe the account of Kelly and Trump, while at the same time completely ignoring the direct evidence that Kelly was not telling the truth in another part of this commentary.

You really can't make this stuff up.
Click to expand...

I asked four times for a reason---any reason---that Trump would actually insult this woman. The only poster willing to offer up a response (sincere thanks, ITC) said essentially "Inability."

45 minutes later, Moonz posts a link to an audio tape of Trump demonstrating a gracious kindness to someone in precisely the same context. There goes the lone theory you all, in all of your limitless talent and wisdom, could muster up.
 
jhmd2000 said:
I asked four times for a reason---any reason---that Trump would actually insult this woman. The only poster willing to offer up a response (sincere thanks, ITC) said essentially "Inability."

45 minutes later, Moonz posts a link to an audio tape of Trump demonstrating a gracious kindness to someone in precisely the same context. There goes the lone theory you all, in all of your limitless talent and wisdom, could muster up.
Click to expand...

https://www.ogboards.com/forums/sho...-of-Niger-GI?p=2965760&viewfull=1#post2965760
 
jhmd2000 said:
I asked four times for a reason---any reason---that Trump would actually insult this woman. The only poster willing to offer up a response (sincere thanks, ITC) said essentially "Inability."

45 minutes later, Moonz posts a link to an audio tape of Trump demonstrating a gracious kindness to someone in precisely the same context. There goes the lone theory you all, in all of your limitless talent and wisdom, could muster up.
Click to expand...

you're trolling, right?

you have to be trolling, yet you do appear to be serious

you yourself agreed that it was highly likely Trump half-assed his way through the call

you did this about 17 pages ago

and if he half-assed his way through this call, then yeah, it's likely that he misspoke, because he has words, the best words

and so if he misspoke, he likely could have offended the widow

this ain't hard
 
thatguy2016 said:
you're trolling, right?

you have to be trolling, yet you do appear to be serious

you yourself agreed that it was highly likely Trump half-assed his way through the call

you did this about 17 pages ago

and if he half-assed his way through this call, then yeah, it's likely that he misspoke, because he has words, the best words
Click to expand...

Intending to actually insult is not the same thing as stumbling for words. One is actually worthy of the square-pegged condemnation you all are attempt to cram into this round hole. But that's just libporn and never made any sense.
 
Multiple Gold Star families have said they have received calls or correspondence from Trump. Thus, he blatantly lied that he had been in contact with all Gold Star families.
 
jhmd2000 said:
I asked four times for a reason---any reason---that Trump would actually insult this woman. The only poster willing to offer up a response (sincere thanks, ITC) said essentially "Inability."

45 minutes later, Moonz posts a link to an audio tape of Trump demonstrating a gracious kindness to someone in precisely the same context. There goes the lone theory you all, in all of your limitless talent and wisdom, could muster up.
Click to expand...

So to be clear, you are suggesting that an recording of someone speaking can determine whether someone else is telling the truth, correct? For example, if a certain someone claimed that a person made certain statements during a speech, but the tape did not reflect those statements being made, we could then use that to conclude that the certain someone was not accurate in their claims, correct?

And to follow your line of thinking even farther down the road, if that certain person was not accurate in their statements, that calls into question their credibility on other issues, right? Some might even call that person a liar, correct?

I'd hate to think your determination of who is telling the truth and who is lying (or your desire to hold them accountable for the same) is based on their political affiliation. So do me a favor and prove that is not the case.
 
jhmd2000 said:
Intending to actually insult is not the same thing as stumbling for words. One is actually worthy of the square-pegged condemnation you all are attempt to cram into this round hole. But that's just libporn and never made any sense.
Click to expand...

most reasoned arguments here and elsewhere are actually claiming he insulted her unintentionally (by for example, not using her husband's name)
 
DeaconSig said:
So to be clear, you are suggesting that an recording of someone speaking can determine whether someone else is telling the truth, correct? For example, if a certain someone claimed that a person made certain statements during a speech, but the tape did not reflect those statements being made, we could then use that to conclude that the certain someone was not accurate in their claims, correct?

And to follow your line of thinking even farther down the road, if that certain person was not accurate in their statements, that calls into question their credibility on other issues, right? Some might even call that person a liar, correct?

I'd hate to think your determination of who is telling the truth and who is lying (or your desire to hold them accountable for the same) is based on their political affiliation. So do me a favor and prove that is not the case.
Click to expand...

When a video tape capture somebody saying something they denied saying, then the explanation could vary from lying, mistaken or even both.
 
jhmd2000 said:
Outrage-worthy? Of course. Because Trump.
Click to expand...

yeah, in part, because he chose to politicize the very act of calling gold-star families earlier that week

you seriously don't get that this is a(nother) self-inflicted wound?
 
jhmd2000 said:
Outrage-worthy? Of course. Because Trump.
Click to expand...

You admit that you don't believe he prepared to speak with a new widow. You then absolve him for his lack of preparation which, at best, led to him misspeaking.

I wonder if you forgive your associates for that type of negligence.

"Well hell, Sparky! You're telling me that the Judge granted summary judgment against the client because you failed to prepare and accidentally claimed that our client had no damages? No big deal, son. We'll just let the malpractice carrier deal with it. Try and give it a better effort next time!"

I feel like there is someone on this board who spends a ton of time telling others that they should hold certain populations to the same standards that they would hold their own family. Any idea who that is?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top