The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

For Fair-minded readers: Were Donald Trump's offices wiretapped? Options
TheParser
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 2:43:05 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/21/2012
Posts: 3,997
Neurons: 18,724
Dear Fair-Minded Readers:

1. President Trump recently claimed that before his election, the telephones in his New York City offices were wiretapped.

2. He said that President Obama had been responsible.

3. Some people feel that President Trump actually meant either President Obama personally OR someone in President Obama's government (WITHOUT President Obama's knowledge) OR even someone in a foreign government was responsible.

4. President Trump did not reveal his proof.

5. Congress is scheduled to discuss President Trump's claim.

6. The head of the FBI (which is something like a police department for the whole United States) says that there is NO proof of what President Trump said.

7. Besides Democrats, even some of President Trump's fellow Republicans feel that President Trump was wrong to say that without proof.

8. President Trump's spokespeople say that President Trump still believes that someone did, in fact, tap his telephones.


Since you are fair-minded people, please consider carefully what someone once said some years ago:


"Absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence."

-- Zach Corrigan



Have a nice day!


Gary98
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 3:15:57 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/23/2014
Posts: 1,554
Neurons: 1,864,486
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
Accusation without proof, isn't that false accusation?

Should Trump have accused NSA of failing to guard its secret, he could be sounded more reasonable and convincing.

Donald Trump's offices were wiretapped. Everyone is being wiretapped. Likely not by Obama.
taurine
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 4:03:47 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 4/20/2016
Posts: 251
Neurons: 28,812
Accusation without a proof is not a false accusation. Uncorroborated, yes; unsubstantiated, yes. But false until proved its falsehood, no.
Ash_Lingua
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 4:10:36 PM

Rank: Member

Joined: 12/19/2014
Posts: 65
Neurons: 282,475
Location: San Francisco, California, United States
Please, sir, read President Trump's own words. He did not accuse 'Obama', or 'someone in Obama's administration', or 'Obama's people'. he quite clearly accused Obama, himself, and called him bad or sick.

Do you not hold people accountable for what they say, deliberately, in writing, (and without the excuse of misspoken words in haste that might be misinterpreted or taken out of context)?

Perhaps President Trump should check his facts instead of firing off tweets based on opinion pieces aired on Fox News and about which Fox's own news anchor, Shephard Smith responded: "Fox News cannot confirm Judge Napolitano’s commentary. Fox News knows of no evidence of any kind that the now President of the United States was surveilled at any time, in any way, full stop”. When that accusation was flatly and fully denied not only by Obama but by every American intelligence agency that Obama could have used, President Trump turned to blaming British Intelligence. They rarely reply to this sort of thing, but this time they were outraged - not perhaps for being thought nefarious enough to interfere in an American election, but for being stupid enough to do so.

Yes, you are right, lack of evidence of a thing is not proof it did not happen.

However, accusing someone of a crime without a shred of proof, for political or any other gain, is called slander amd libel.

Gary98
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 4:23:55 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/23/2014
Posts: 1,554
Neurons: 1,864,486
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
taurine wrote:
Accusation without a proof is not a false accusation. Uncorroborated, yes; unsubstantiated, yes. But false until proved its falsehood, no.


OK. Right. Thanks.
OnTheVerge
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 4:58:46 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/7/2014
Posts: 199
Neurons: 300,386
Location: San Francisco, California, United States
Please be advised that in American law, "Absence of Evidence is most assuredly Evidence of Absence" !

While it is true that the media is not an American court of law and Twitter is not a legal brief, for a sitting president, in this case 45, to accuse his immediate predecessor, Barrack Obama, of a federal crime and, when asked, provides no evidence or proof of any kind, it is called slander and libel.

Slander and libel at this level are federal crimes and can have severe legal penalties. Not to mention the fact that it shows a severe lack of Honour, Integrity, and Sincerity to the citizens of the U.S. and to the World.

If you choose to believe what the likes of Mark Levin, Breitbart news and Fox's Andrew Napolitano have to say, that is your prerogative and your right. As a fair-minded reader and American though, I cannot, in good conscience, stand by and let the lies told by this man who calls himself president go unchallenged.

If you are a fair minded reader, then neither should you be able to!?




While timorous knowledge stands considering, audacious ignorance hath done the deed
Gary98
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 5:09:15 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 7/23/2014
Posts: 1,554
Neurons: 1,864,486
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
Absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence. Absence of Evidence is at least partial if not full Evidence of Absence.

Absence of evidence obviously does not mean evidence of presence.
tunaafi
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 5:16:30 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/3/2014
Posts: 3,889
Neurons: 50,971
Location: Karlín, Praha, Czech Republic
Applause Applause Applause , Ash Lingua

Far away is close at hand in images of elsewhere – The Master of Paddington.
tunaafi
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 5:23:12 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/3/2014
Posts: 3,889
Neurons: 50,971
Location: Karlín, Praha, Czech Republic
OnTheVerge wrote:
Please be advised that in American law, "Absence of Evidence is most assuredly Evidence of Absence"


I agree with the rest of what you wrote, but the sentence above seems very unlikely to me.


Far away is close at hand in images of elsewhere – The Master of Paddington.
palapaguy
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 7:04:38 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/28/2013
Posts: 129
Neurons: 5,678
Location: Calabasas, California, United States
Please take your politics to a proper forum. This is not a proper forum.
tunaafi
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 7:21:13 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/3/2014
Posts: 3,889
Neurons: 50,971
Location: Karlín, Praha, Czech Republic
palapaguy wrote:
Please take your politics to a proper forum.

This is the Politics forum.

Far away is close at hand in images of elsewhere – The Master of Paddington.
Al-Man
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 7:23:50 PM

Rank: Newbie

Joined: 3/19/2017
Posts: 3
Neurons: 27,025
Location: Launceston, Tasmania, Australia
I have to say it is a incredibly sad incitement of the political system in the U.S. today that such a buffoon could be elected to any public office, let alone the presidency. I would say your whole election process could do with changing, but realistically that won't happen as there are to many vested interests in maintaining the Status Quo. I have to say it has made America a laughing stock and a potentially dangerous ally. Shouting loudly and often does not make something true no matter how many ways you interpret it. I would hope there would be a way to remove such a dangerous paranoid lunatic from office before he does some irreversible damage. His supporters will no doubt continue to try and shout down any one who dissagrees with their crazy ideas regardless of evidence, truth, or common sense.
That's me finished. I hope sanity will prevail.
Regards. Al-man
dkf
Posted: Sunday, March 19, 2017 8:17:56 PM
Rank: Newbie

Joined: 7/19/2014
Posts: 8
Neurons: 11,403
Al-Man wrote:
I have to say it is a incredibly sad incitement of the political system in the U.S. today that such a buffoon could be elected to any public office, let alone the presidency. I would say your whole election process could do with changing, but realistically that won't happen as there are to many vested interests in maintaining the Status Quo. I have to say it has made America a laughing stock and a potentially dangerous ally. Shouting loudly and often does not make something true no matter how many ways you interpret it. I would hope there would be a way to remove such a dangerous paranoid lunatic from office before he does some irreversible damage. His supporters will no doubt continue to try and shout down any one who dissagrees with their crazy ideas regardless of evidence, truth, or common sense.
That's me finished. I hope sanity will prevail.
Regards. Al-man


Well, you can say there are structural reasons, status quo, etc. But a whole lot of misguided, self-centered or delusional people voted for this lying, uniformed, unstable, narcissistic, intellectually lazy clown. Everything I said was a plain as the smirk on his face. And I didn't even have to add bigoted, corrupt, fraudulent huckster, which doesn't take much more digging to find out. At least 45% of the people who voted were ok with that. These are people who we all know. What was their excuse? My guess: they are either (i) unpatriotic; (ii) willfully ignorant; (iii) bigots; (iv) filled with anger enough to destroy everything; or (v) stupid enough that they were only sending a "message." Trump didn't embarrass America, these people did.
TheParser
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 9:19:30 AM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/21/2012
Posts: 3,997
Neurons: 18,724
I have read most of the posts in this thread, and I wish to thank those members for expressing their opinions.

I especially commend them for staying on topic and not attacking the OP with personal insults.

(It was also very nice to notice that some new members participated in this thread. I hope that they continue to contribute to the forums.)



Have a nice day!
OnTheVerge
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 9:46:29 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/7/2014
Posts: 199
Neurons: 300,386
Location: San Francisco, California, United States
tunaafi wrote:
palapaguy wrote:
Please take your politics to a proper forum.

This is the Politics forum.


Thanks Tunaafi, for both your response to me and in correcting palapaguy. However, in America, one is innocent until proven guilty and the burden of proof lies with the accuser. With that in mind, the absence of evidence is evidence of absence by default if you are not then willing to supply evidence when requested.

Do the laws in the Czech Republic reflect a different Standard? If so, in what way, it would be interesting to know?



While timorous knowledge stands considering, audacious ignorance hath done the deed
tunaafi
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 10:17:31 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/3/2014
Posts: 3,889
Neurons: 50,971
Location: Karlín, Praha, Czech Republic
OnTheVerge wrote:
However, in America, one is innocent until proven guilty and the burden of proof lies with the accuser. With that in mind, the absence of evidence is evidence of absence by default if you are not then willing to supply evidence when requested.


Thanks. It appears that I misunderstood 'absence of evidence is evidence of absence'.

To be honest, I am not sure that I completely understand it now. Is it simply a way of say 'if no evidence has been produced (to support a claim, for example), this does not necessarily mean that there is no evidence; it means simply that no evidence has been produced?


Quote:
Do the laws in the Czech Republic reflect a different Standard?


As an immigrant (legal!) here, I cannot claim a deep knowledge of the Czech legal system.


Far away is close at hand in images of elsewhere – The Master of Paddington.
Drag0nspeaker
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 10:52:42 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 9/12/2011
Posts: 25,238
Neurons: 131,330
Location: Livingston, Scotland, United Kingdom
In my opinion . . .

In perfect logic, 'absence of evidence' does not exactly equal 'evidence of absence' or 'evidence that it did not happen'.

However, in almost all legal systems, 'absence of evidence' is considered to be equivalent to 'evidence of absence' or 'evidence that it did not happen'.

A person is accused of doing something.
There is no evidence.
He is considered innocent. - It is not considered "in doubt" - he is innocent until proven guilty.

*************
If one person publicly accuses another person of a crime, yet can produce no evidence, then that person is guilty of libel or slander (depending on whether the accusation was published in writing or in oral form).

li·bel n.
1.a. The legally indefensible publication or broadcast of words or images that are degrading to a person or injurious to his or her reputation.

slan·der n.
1. Law Oral communication of false and malicious statements that damage the reputation of another.

American Heritage Dictionary

This is true in the USA and in Britain, and very similar in other western countries (I don't know about elsewhere).

****************
One thing I don't understand is in the original post, it says:

1. President Trump recently claimed that before his election, the telephones in his New York City offices were wiretapped.
2. He said that President Obama had been responsible.
3. Some people feel that President Trump actually meant either President Obama personally OR someone in President Obama's government (WITHOUT President Obama's knowledge) OR even someone in a foreign government was responsible.


How is it possible to say that President Obama did it - then for people to believe that it meant "someone did it without President Obama's knowledge"?
Even less "someone from another country did it"!

It says he did it or 'had it done' - that can't mean someone else did it without his knowlegde.



*****************
From what I can gather (I'm not an expert), the original news articles (in Breitbart and NYT) accused the Justice Department of doing it - which was then misunderstood by Mr Trump to mean 'The President' did it.

I can't see how a President of the USA can make such a mistake.

There are three branches to the US government.
Legislative (Senate and House of Representatives) - which makes and amends laws which follow the constitution.
Executive - about five thousand people led by the President - plus the military under the Chiefs of Staff. These enforce the laws from the Legislative Branch.
Judicial - which is there to handle cases where a law has apparently been broken.

The Judicial branch does not even come under the President. Surely the President knows this - doesn't he?





Wyrd bið ful aræd - bull!
Hope123
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 11:31:36 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 5,745
Neurons: 34,471
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
I wonder if the British Agencies now have a slander claim against Spicer who accused them of colluding with Obama in the surveillance. And since he represents Trump, who then blamed Fox News, are they all liable? Spicer sort of apologized for Fox News but not himself, and then said it wasn't an apology. Can governments sue other governments for slander/libel? Might solve a lot of problems in this world.

What about the media, including the German correspondent, being accused of delivering fake news. Maybe they should look into some slander/libel charges against Trump.


(What happened to the "buck stops here"? First the Yemen debacle was the Generals' fault, and now the German correspondent, called Fake News right on TV, was told by Trump he should check with Fox News when it was Trump's own representative who said it?)

Welcome to the Forums, dkf and Al-Man!

I see Drago added to his post while I wrote - I shall read it now.

Edited - quote Drago -

"From what I can gather (I'm not an expert), the original news articles (in Breitbart and NYT) accused the Justice Department of doing it - which was then misunderstood by Mr Trump to mean 'The President' did it.

I can't see how a President of the USA can make such a mistake."

Exactly. Either unknowledgeable, careless with words, or both. He has had it in for Obama ever since the "birther" movement he started and his anti Obama videos and comments about how he would stay in the White House and not golf etc. - lol - he was in Mar a Lago again this weekend.

It is his supporters who are trying to spin it as being figurative.

Apparently Comey "talks" today? Hope he says something of substance one way or the other and doesn't punt the ball.




A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. Albert Einstein
Ash_Lingua
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 11:47:08 AM

Rank: Member

Joined: 12/19/2014
Posts: 65
Neurons: 282,475
Location: San Francisco, California, United States
Perhaps I misunderstood TheParser; I took him to mean by 'evidence of absence', 'absence of wrongdoing' i.e.,
'absence of evidence' doesn't mean there is an absence of wrongdoing.

Otherwise, evidence of absence doesn't mean anything that I can unravel in a social/legal context. Of course, it has a significance in a scientific enquiry where direct evidence is often scant; then meaning has to be inferred from the secondary evidence, as in palaeontology or physical anthropology.

Parser?
progpen
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 11:53:42 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/2/2015
Posts: 1,224
Neurons: 136,508
Location: Princeton, Minnesota, United States
One item that needs to be explained is the news that FBI Director Comey has confirmed that the FBI has been investigating ties between the current administration and Russia since July 2016. What we have already seen is the right wing extremists shrieking that this is the wiretapping that was tweeted about.

If the current administration is saying that they are now (and have been) above the law, then they will need to start making their case. Otherwise, we can only ask why did the FBI release information about Clinton's email at such a strategic time during the election process, but we are only now hearing from Comey about the invstigation into Trump? Trump and the campaign knew of the investigation of them, but called the news reports "fake news" and instead, got out his red crayon and, with ALL CAPS and lots of exclamation points, went on his tirade about wiretaps.

This entire 'wiretap' thing is a diversion, plain and simple.

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ― Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
OnTheVerge
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 11:57:35 AM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/7/2014
Posts: 199
Neurons: 300,386
Location: San Francisco, California, United States
Drag0nspeaker wrote:



The Judicial branch does not even come under the President. Surely the President knows this - doesn't he?




In this case, perhaps not! Unfortunately, our current president seems to be under the misguided belief that all three branches of the government are his to command, no questions asked! Almost everything he has done has broken with decades of standard and protocol followed by every commander in chief since FDR.

This, coupled with the fact that he has absolutely no idea how government works, especially one as enormous as the USA, can ultimately lead to disastrous consequences for all!

He may have come in to break up business as usual, however, as any good businessman will tell you, one must know how the business works (in this case the US government) before one can effectively change it for the better.


While timorous knowledge stands considering, audacious ignorance hath done the deed
OnTheVerge
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 12:16:07 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/7/2014
Posts: 199
Neurons: 300,386
Location: San Francisco, California, United States
tunaafi wrote:
OnTheVerge wrote:
However, in America, one is innocent until proven guilty and the burden of proof lies with the accuser. With that in mind, the absence of evidence is evidence of absence by default if you are not then willing to supply evidence when requested.


Thanks. It appears that I misunderstood 'absence of evidence is evidence of absence'.

To be honest, I am not sure that I completely understand it now. Is it simply a way to say 'if no evidence has been produced (to support a claim, for example), this does not necessarily mean that there is no evidence; it means simply that no evidence has been produced?


Quote:
Do the laws in the Czech Republic reflect a different Standard?


As an immigrant (legal!) here, I cannot claim a deep knowledge of the Czech legal system.


Exactly, if no evidence has been produced (to support a claim or accusation), this does not necessarily mean that there is no evidence; it means simply that no evidence has been produced and therefore, by law, it is felonious to make claims or accusations without providing evidence! Evidence that congress, by the way, asked him to produce, or retract the statement. He has done neither!

He continues to blame everyone for the false accusations except the one responsible for them, himself!



While timorous knowledge stands considering, audacious ignorance hath done the deed
Hope123
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 12:18:42 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 5,745
Neurons: 34,471
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Quote Progpen "This entire 'wiretap' thing is a diversion, plain and simple."

I think people agree on this point no matter which group they cheer for. But IF it IS an UNFOUNDED claim, he should be held accountable for libel/slander with serious consequences. He accused someone of a felony. He should not be able to say (and do as OTV mentions) whatever he wants and get away with it.

The president should not be above the law. Edited - or the Constitution.




A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. Albert Einstein
Oscar D. Grouch
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 12:24:49 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/26/2014
Posts: 493
Neurons: 789,279
TheParser wrote:
8. President Trump's spokespeople say that President Trump still believes that someone did, in fact, tap his telephones.


I'm sure it was the Russians!


Hope123
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 12:46:23 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 5,745
Neurons: 34,471
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
Twitter Comments since Comey Interview Started -

Eric Holder @EricHolder
Intell hearing today - bottom lines so far:

1)Trump campaign under investigation and
2)Trump tweets about Obama are bogus.


Team Pelosi @TeamPelosi

Nancy Pelosi: Donald Trump owes Barack Obama—and the American people—an apology for his unsubstantiated wiretapping claims. ReTweet if you agree!

OC @OhioCitizen
@TeamPelosi No Supreme Court seats will be filled until we find out if Trump is legit.

From this last tweet - The Russian investigation may affect the Supreme Court Justice they are vetting right now. ?


A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. Albert Einstein
tunaafi
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 1:24:30 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/3/2014
Posts: 3,889
Neurons: 50,971
Location: Karlín, Praha, Czech Republic
Hope123 wrote:
But IF it IS an UNFOUNDED claim, he should be held accountable for libel/slander with serious consequences. He accused someone of a felony. He should not be able to say (and do as OTV mentions) whatever he wants and get away with it.


Typical 'liberal' garbage.

Millions of patriotic Americans (an overwhelming majority if you take into account the rigging of the election) voted for their esteemed leader precisely because he was a neophyte politician, not hidebound by un-American hypocritical 'liberal' concepts of literal truth.

When the alternative facts are brought to light, Barrack Hussein Obama will be revealed as the criminal he has always been, and the world will accept President Trump's claims as FACTS, as true as anything he has ever said in his life.


Far away is close at hand in images of elsewhere – The Master of Paddington.
Hope123
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 3:19:58 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 5,745
Neurons: 34,471
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
tunaafi wrote:
Hope123 wrote:
But IF it IS an UNFOUNDED claim, he should be held accountable for libel/slander with serious consequences. He accused someone of a felony. He should not be able to say (and do as OTV mentions) whatever he wants and get away with it.


Typical 'liberal' garbage.

Millions of patriotic Americans (an overwhelming majority if you take into account the rigging of the election) voted for their esteemed leader precisely because he was a neophyte politician, not hidebound by un-American hypocritical 'liberal' concepts of literal truth.

When the alternative facts are brought to light, Barrack Hussein Obama will be revealed as the criminal he has always been, and the world will accept President Trump's claims as FACTS, as true as anything he has ever said in his life.
Applause

Just to clarify for any readers not familiar with English and sarcasm, this is a good example. I state this because I semi-know Tuna's positions on this topic and his propensity for satire.

::

That reminds me -

Did you hear about the article with a title something about Trump's budget is good for the country and here's why? It was hilariously shared on the 1600 Daily News (govt) by someone who did not bother to read it first. It was a satirical piece.

A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. Albert Einstein
tunaafi
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 3:52:59 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/3/2014
Posts: 3,889
Neurons: 50,971
Location: Karlín, Praha, Czech Republic
Hope123 wrote:
Tuna's ... propensity for satire.

Were you male rather than a member of the fairer sex (whom honour, courtesy, humility and generally cringeworthy obsequiousness compel me to treat with perfumed respect), I should call you out for that blot on my escutcheon.

As it is, I shall content myself with thinking of two words (that I know will be in the minds of all fair-minded members): FAKE NEWS.

I could no more write satire than our beloved leader could utter a falsehood
.

Far away is close at hand in images of elsewhere – The Master of Paddington.
Hope123
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 4:49:36 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 5,745
Neurons: 34,471
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada
tunaafi wrote:
Hope123 wrote:
Tuna's ... propensity for satire.

Were you male rather than a member of the fairer sex (whom honour, courtesy, humility and generally cringeworthy obsequiousness compel me to treat with perfumed respect), I should call you out for that blot on my escutcheon.

As it is, I shall content myself with thinking of two words (that I know will be in the minds of all fair-minded members): FAKE NEWS.

I could no more write satire than our beloved leader could utter a falsehood
.


Hey, no need to "pretend" to give me preferential treatment!

Digression - When I played singles tennis against my husband, the first time he tried to give me soft serves as he did for all his female opponents, I told him to do his normal hard serve. He always won, but my game improved as I did learn how to return many of those fast serves. Besides, he usually screwed up his serve when he tried to serve more softly.

BTW - you do make me laugh on here with your wit - so accept a compliment. Just say, "Thank you". :)

A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. Albert Einstein
Ash_Lingua
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 4:53:08 PM

Rank: Member

Joined: 12/19/2014
Posts: 65
Neurons: 282,475
Location: San Francisco, California, United States
Tuna, better quit while you're a head (sic), lest we think thou doth protest too much.

or not enough.

The clock strikes thirteen, I must to my bed, sometimes we err less, to think what lies unsaid.
Romany
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 6:52:09 PM
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/14/2009
Posts: 11,801
Neurons: 35,690
Location: Brighton, England, United Kingdom

The entire world now knows that the President of the United States lies. This is not libel, slander or 'bile', but a fact verifiable by anyone with access to a computer. Even people from his own 'side' have had to admit this because, of course, one simply cannot deny facts. Well, not in the real world.

And now, because he will not admit to telling yet another whopper, he has foolishly proved he is willing to CHANGE THE WORLD rather than tell the truth. He has now insulted two Governments - changed the whole balance of alliances - ripped out decades of amity with the UK, shamed himself and his country by proving publicly that he is the only First World leader who doesn't know how NATO works;or what the Geneva Convention is. He has turned the US into a force that has lost all credibility on the world stage. He has also upset the governments of Mexico, Iraq, Australia, Japan, North Korea, China and Germany; and threatened trade links all over the world....

I think that its all getting a little too out of hand now, for anyone to just close their eyes and continue to repeat 'fake news', or 'sore loser' or 'lefties'.

One can only support the current occupant of the White House if one can condone lies. And agree that a fact is capable of subjective interpretation as an 'alternative fact'. One must also have solid reasons as to what can excuse a grown man from imitating a disabled person in public. Then one would have to accept a leader who costs his country 3 million dollars each weekend, and a million every day to prove that he is 'different' and will not herd his family together; but who cuts money to Meals on Wheels, and Education, and Clean Water & fresh air programmes.

The facts that are pumped out at us 24/7 on media can only be avoided if one deliberately chooses to ignore them.

People who repeatedly, steadfastly, determinedly, refuse to accept facts; simply can't be reasoned with. If one is having a discussion with someone who regards truth as malleable in any way, then how can there ever be common ground? The sands are always shifting between one's feet. Truth must never be allowed to be forgotten, misinterpreted, or cheapened. Not even by the President of the United States.



tunaafi
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 7:11:50 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/3/2014
Posts: 3,889
Neurons: 50,971
Location: Karlín, Praha, Czech Republic
Hope123 wrote:
[ accept a compliment. Just say, "Thank you". :)


Thank you.

Far away is close at hand in images of elsewhere – The Master of Paddington.
tunaafi
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 7:25:05 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 6/3/2014
Posts: 3,889
Neurons: 50,971
Location: Karlín, Praha, Czech Republic
Romany wrote:
He has now insulted two Governments - changed the whole balance of alliances - ripped out decades of amity with the UK, shamed himself and his country by proving publicly that he is the only First World leader who doesn't know how NATO works;or what the Geneva Convention is. He has turned the US into a force that has lost all credibility on the world stage. He has also upset the governments of Mexico, Iraq, Australia, Japan, North Korea, China and Germany; and threatened trade links all over the world.


He's doing pretty well, apart from that. And that's fake news anyway, so it doesn't count.

Why are you shrill, gay-loving, immigrant-excusing, feminist, anti-life, godless, anti-American 'liberals' always so negative when something you hysterically don't believe in actually works?


Far away is close at hand in images of elsewhere – The Master of Paddington.
Hope123
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 9:47:49 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 3/23/2015
Posts: 5,745
Neurons: 34,471
Location: Burlington, Ontario, Canada


A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. Albert Einstein
progpen
Posted: Monday, March 20, 2017 10:39:31 PM

Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 10/2/2015
Posts: 1,224
Neurons: 136,508
Location: Princeton, Minnesota, United States
tunaafi wrote:
Romany wrote:
He has now insulted two Governments - changed the whole balance of alliances - ripped out decades of amity with the UK, shamed himself and his country by proving publicly that he is the only First World leader who doesn't know how NATO works;or what the Geneva Convention is. He has turned the US into a force that has lost all credibility on the world stage. He has also upset the governments of Mexico, Iraq, Australia, Japan, North Korea, China and Germany; and threatened trade links all over the world.


He's doing pretty well, apart from that. And that's fake news anyway, so it doesn't count.

Why are you shrill, gay-loving, immigrant-excusing, feminist, anti-life, godless, anti-American 'liberals' always so negative when something you hysterically don't believe in actually works?


Damn you are good, Tuna.

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter. ― Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS
Forum Terms and Guidelines. Copyright © 2008-2017 Farlex, Inc. All rights reserved.