Reports (w/ multiple sources) detail Trump's pattern of disrespecting military casualties (2 Viewers)

TaylorB said:

Eating babies doesn't sound like something Trump would do. Disrespecting the military (that he lied 4+ times to avoid joining) does.

Pointing out an article being questionable is not, by itself, defending Trump. Instinctively disbelieving and expressing doubt about every negative piece of information about Trump is. You're on the record for pages and pages disputing a bipartisan Senate report that's harmful to Trump. Unless there's a recording of him saying it, you're never going to believe it.

The fact that Trump is a proven habitual liar is not proof the story is true. It is proof, however, that his denials should be disregarded for the same reasons as his denials about Stormy Daniels, his real estate efforts in Moscow, etc.

Click to expand...

You got me. I've defended every negative thing about Trump. You have a record of still believing the Russiagate narrative even after the Mueller report, IG report, Page & Strzok texts, Mueller prosecutors withholding evidence against Flynn that contradicted their case.

#BlueAnon

SaintForLife said:

You got me. I've defended every negative thing about Trump. You have a record of still believing the Russiagate narrative even after the Mueller report, IG report, Page & Strzok texts, Mueller prosecutors withholding evidence against Flynn that contradicted their case.

#BlueAnon

Click to expand...

Don’t try to derail this into another different subject.

CoolBrees said:

I mean the timing is an Article by the Atlantic- a non-partisan publication btw- not from the DNC or Huffington Post or something.

I would HOPE of they were going to levy such strong armed accusations they would take their time and make sure it is accurate.

Click to expand...

The Atlantic is non-partisan? They do have excellent non political articles.

SaintForLife said:

Is something being plausible the new standard for all anonymous Trump stories? How does this scenario sound to you:

Click to expand...

I get it... I'm not a fan of the anonymous sources stuff either... I will gladly admit that up to a certain level, I just don't really give a shirt when it comes to Trump... The ends justify the means with him in my view.

I understand and appreciate the issues that can and do result from constant anonymous sourcing.. but if it hurts Trump and helps get him out of office I'm pretty much okay with it. I don't feel that same way about any other person or party except for Trump, and while I know it's not "good," I genuinely feel that if it helps to get Trump out of office it's the lesser of the evils. Obviously you feel different and that's fine, but that's about as honest as I can be about it.

MT15 said:

Don’t try to derail this into another different subject.

Click to expand...

For the 1000th time, stop trying to act like a moderator. Also try reading the post I responded to before you start with your personal snark. Taylor brought up the Senate report on Russia. I responded to his post.

Brandon13 said:

I understand and appreciate the issues that can and do result from constant anonymous sourcing.. but if it hurts Trump and helps get him out of office I'm pretty much okay with it. I don't feel that same way about any other person or party except for Trump, and while I know it's not "good," I genuinely feel that if it helps to get Trump out of office it's the lesser of the evils. Obviously you feel different and that's fine, but that's about as honest as I can be about it.

Click to expand...

Good to know. That seems to be a common theme here on the MCB. As long as it hurts Trump it's okay even if it's not true.

SaintForLife said:

You got me. I've defended every negative thing about Trump. You have a record of still believing the Russiagate narrative even after the Mueller report, IG report, Page & Strzok texts, Mueller prosecutors withholding evidence against Flynn that contradicted their case.

#BlueAnon

Click to expand...

Yes, I still believe the GRU and IRA engaged in covert election interference for Russia, and that Trump's inner circle welcomed Russia's help, all while Trump lied about the biggest deal of his life in Moscow. I don't know if that's the Russiagate narrative, as you've always used that term very loosely, but if the Russiagate narrative consists of those general things, that's what I believe.

I also believe it's most likely true that Trump disparaged the military and has little respect for fallen heroes. Everything with Trump is zero-sum and transactional: admiration for military heroes *by definition* detracts from admiration of him, because to him, there is only a finite amount of admiration to go around. And because there's such a huge contrast between him -- a draft dodger -- and people who actually sacrificed to make the country better. Quite simply, Trump doesn't see value in honoring people who aren't Trump.

I really don't know if the story is true; it sounds true, and I don't think the Atlantic's sources are made up. And it would probably help me out if the sources would come forward. I'm mainly just pushing back on the instinctive suggestion that this is all made up, as if it isn't right on brand for Trump, and on the implication that you'd potentially come around to believing it if you only knew who the sources were. The world is just about out of potential sources you'd lend any credibility to outside of twitter accounts defending Trump.

SaintForLife said:

Hmmm. 60 days out from an election, unnamed sources, "confirmation" by more unnamed sources, the main part of the story isn't true, unbelievable reason for the sources to not go on record, named sources denying it happened, Votevets already has an ad on it, & the sources waited 2 years to say anything about it. Sounds fishy too me.

Click to expand...

I remember when he cancelled his New Hampshire rally, after the listless and underwhelming turnout in Tulsa, because of inclement weather and rain.

Here's a shot of NH that day:

efil4 said:

Says a whole lot about who you are.

Click to expand...

just want to highlight this because the discussion is starting to get heated, and I don't want to interject through deleting or modifying posts.

I think you make a strong case for the believability of Trump's statement and it's totally reasonable to discuss the likelihood of Trump saying it or not saying it, because it does provide something in the way of context or precedent. Aside from that, talking about the posting tendencies has been something in the thread and the board at large.

But the last line quoted above is too close to the 'address the post, not the poster'. So let's just try and stay away from taking that last accusatory step.

Wow. A Fox News national security correspondent is confirming the Atlantic's reporting:


I'm thinking Trump's next 4-D chess move will be to start railing about Democrat-run cities filled with antifa protestors and rioters, or some sort of other distraction. Should be a fun weekend.

The one thing that liars hate more than being confronted with the truth to the lie they told is being lied to or lied on themselves. Right now, Trump is fuming because he's lying to defend something that he actually did. He would be absolutely apoplectic if this was all a lie being told about him and it is getting traction.

SaintForLife said:

Good to know. That seems to be a common theme here on the MCB. As long as it hurts Trump it's okay even if it's not true.

Click to expand...

It's a common theme in partisan politics period to not care about the truth if it damages your opponent. There are a lot of people here that you disagree with politically, but I bet you that the ones you do agree with politically would mostly be just as partisan and not care about the truthfulness of damaging accusations towards the opponent.

There's a line somewhere that I think even with Trump shouldn't be crossed with anonymous sourcing, but this didn't get to that threshold for me.

SaintForLife said:

Good to know. That seems to be a common theme here on the MCB. As long as it hurts Trump it's okay even if it's not true.

Click to expand...

Do you dispute that the Atlantic story is true? Do you have a basis for it? It seems very much in character - it’s hardly out of left-field, he’s made similar statements in public.

When Fox News is confirming stuff like this





the defenders (even though there only appears to be one here at the moment) either need to reconsider their defense or, I guess, switch to that other, nuttier cable channel that I hear about.

Life comes at some people fast.

EmBeeFiveOhFour said:

When Fox News is confirming stuff like this



the defenders (even though there only appears to be one here at the moment) either need to reconsider their defense or, I guess, switch to that other, nuttier cable channel that I hear about.

Click to expand...

Damn. Biden needs to beat Trump over the forking head with this at the debate.

EmBeeFiveOhFour said:

When Fox News is confirming stuff like this





the defenders (even though there only appears to be one here at the moment) either need to reconsider their defense or, I guess, switch to that other, nuttier cable channel that I hear about.

Click to expand...

It’s always the same language too - losers and suckers.

Brandon13 said:

I'm not trying to be an arse, but how do we know they didn't just make that up back then?

Click to expand...

We know it's not true because Trump explained it. He said that he was so upset that he couldn't go to the event that he "called home" and told Melania how broken up he was about not being able to go. I mean, she was on the trip with him and wouldn't have been "home" for him to call, but still, that shows that he was distraught.