President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Is that "fake" news?

Or "errant" news?

 

They're absolutely right in both instances. Don't play linguistic semantics. You don't have the game.

 

Why didn’t the Russians try this hard and give opposition research to Hillary against trump?

 

You posted that link with the comment "So true." Someone very quickly pointed out that it is a public school. It took three or four people pointing it out before you finally responded and you still couldn't admit you were wrong. You admitted that the tweet was wrong, but not that you had it wrong as well. Once again you posted something from Twitter without bothering to understand it. Your ignorance regarding education was on full display here.

I did some reading about the program. There are already others like it in other places, though obviously the support from James is a unique component. How about, for shits and giggles, you do some research and learn what the hell you are talking about on a subject you raised.

 

I don't get the "even". Is Stephens a fan or defender of the president?

 

Trump is not conservative in virtually any sense of the word. I can't think of any reason a conservative would feel compelled to defend him.

 

He's a conservative commentator.

Conservative commentators have been conspicuously absent from the fake news/incitement debate.

 

This post disproves your thesis.

 

So the people who elected him have no responsibility to defend him?

Or even to defend their vote?

 

It came from a premise that the U.S. military was disrespectful of Islam.

It’s no different than the Rolling Stone story about rape at UVa.

When you write a story, in which you’ve reached your conclusion first, and then set out to find your evidence, one way or another, you don’t get to excuse it as a simple mistake.

 

Great pull from 13 years ago. Now do Hannity. Any night will do.

 

US admits Koran abuse at Cuba base

The US military confirmed yesterday that soldiers and interrogators at Guantánamo Bay did desecrate copies of the Koran.

Brigadier General Jay Hood, who led an inquiry into the allegations, confirmed that there had been five cases of intentional or unintentional mishandling of the holy book. They included getting copies wet, standing on a Koran during an interrogation, and 'inadvertently' spraying urine on a copy.

But the Guantánamo commander said he found no evidence to support a further allegation that US personnel flushed a Koran down a toilet at the camp in Cuba. That claim, in a magazine article, led to anti-American riots in Afghanistan, Pakistan, India and Indonesia in which 16 people died and more than 100 were injured.