Reports (w/ multiple sources) detail Trump's pattern of disrespecting military casualties (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    nolaspe

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Nov 13, 2019
    Messages
    531
    Reaction score
    1,388
    Age
    47
    Location
    NOLA
    Offline
    Another article about trumps slipping support with the military
    =========================

    The weekend warriors in their Army surplus battle rattle, their paintball weapons and gun show specials are getting lots of love from this clown show’s commander in chief.

    “GREAT PATRIOTS!” President Trump tweeted, along with a video of the vigilantes flouting the law and causing disorder while cruising the streets of an American city.

    Meanwhile, the real defenders of freedom — the men and women of the U.S. military — aren’t getting love from Trump. And they’re sure not giving it.

    Unsurprising, given the way Trump didn’t even blink at reports that Russia was paying bounties to Afghan troops for American kills.

    Or that he was impeached for withholding military aid to Ukraine, putting global trust in America’s military at risk.

    Or that he keeps trying to take millions in military funding — gutting plenty of military projects right here in the D.C. region, including a day care for military kids — to build his wall.........


    VoteVets.org just posted this on fbook...

     
    So back to the fact that our sitting “president” hates military personnel and thinks our fallen heroes are suckers and losers...

    Exactly. He ran distraction by the book. Attempting to shift focus from the root issue that is the current CoC has a level of disdain for our service men and women that we have never seen before.
     
    Exactly. He ran distraction by the book. Attempting to shift focus from the root issue that is the current CoC has a level of disdain for our service men and women that we have never seen before.
    I honestly think he's got this disdain for our troops because they're a daily reminder of his time spent in Vietnam.
     
    Is it an explosive claim though when it just confirms a known pattern of behavior? I’d suggest it’s not.

    Well considering what he has done to men in service I. The past 60 days is plenty of time for him to ruin a life's work so I say not.
     
    I literally said recently that I'm not voting for him. I like to debate and the Democrats manufactured scandals and outrage is easy to spot and point out.

    I guess I need to expand my ignore list for the people here who purposefully misrepresent what I said previously.
    I didn’t say you were voting for him.

    I said you gave incompetence as a reason (for voters) to vote for him, which you did, and I said you support him, which you do with every single post you make here.

    Obfuscations aside, feel free to address any of the actual points in my reply.

    I would also suggest that the notion that you’re simply playing devil’s advocate in all of your posts and that you don’t support Trump is simply a lie on its face.
     
    Going after the owner of the Atlantic
    =========================

    New York (CNN Business) - President Donald Trump is coming after Laurene Powell Jobs, the philanthropist billionaire who owns The Atlantic and Axios. The sixth-richest woman in the world, Jobs is the widow of Apple co-founder Steve Jobs.

    Trump said Laurene Powell Jobs, who has a net worth of $33.3 billion according to Bloombergand $20.2 billion, according to Forbes, is "wasting money" Steve Jobs left her after he died by owning the magazine that published a damaging report about him last week........

     
    More to come?
    ==============
    New York (CNN Business)Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, said his magazine's story about Trump calling Americans who died in battle "losers" and "suckers," was just the tip of the iceberg.

    "I would fully expect more reporting to come out about this and more confirmation and new pieces of information in the coming days and weeks," Goldberg told CNN's Chief Media Correspondent Brian Stelter on "Reliable Sources" Sunday. "We have a responsibility and we're going to do it regardless of what he says."........

     
    I know why you liked my post :) Because I criticized Trump which I have done before. Most of those tweets I post show documents or articles that support what I'm talking about.

    Well, no, that wasn’t why. I feel like this is the better way to have a conversation. I understood you far better reading that one post than 20 posts of tweets. I even think we have some common ground, but that’s for another day.
     
    I have to add that I'd never heard the term "ableist" nor would I ever have considered an oddly capitalized passage a meme.

    Just saying.

    Yeah, this one has me puzzled. I read that type-style in a singsong, mocking 'voice'. How is that derogatory to the handicapped? Where did that come from? Is there some condition that makes you speak like that all the time or something?
     
    More to come?
    ==============
    New York (CNN Business)Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, said his magazine's story about Trump calling Americans who died in battle "losers" and "suckers," was just the tip of the iceberg.

    "I would fully expect more reporting to come out about this and more confirmation and new pieces of information in the coming days and weeks," Goldberg told CNN's Chief Media Correspondent Brian Stelter on "Reliable Sources" Sunday. "We have a responsibility and we're going to do it regardless of what he says."........

    It's almost like it was planned and coordinated. It's also interesting to learn that Goldberg was handpicked to help push the narrative for Obama Iran Deal:

    For those in need of more traditional-seeming forms of validation, handpicked Beltway insiders like Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic and Laura Rozen of Al-Monitor helped retail the administration’s narrative.

    Back in 2016 Goldberg didn't seem to be a fan of anonymous sources:

    The author mentioned by name two prominent D.C-based journalists: “For those in need of more traditional-seeming forms of validation, handpicked Beltway insiders like Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic and Laura Rozen of Al-Monitor helped retail the administration’s narrative,” Samuels wrote.

    Both rejected Samuels’ implication that they had actively marched in line behind the White House with regards to the deal, dutifully pushing out messaging crafted by Rhodes. Goldberg strongly objected to the assertion that he was “retailing” the deal for the White House and responded in a written piece for The Atlantic. He said he was never contacted by the Times to verify the claim.

    “I did not find this mention of my name amusing at all, because Samuels is making a serious, unsourced, and unsubstantiated allegation against me in an otherwise highly credible publication (one for which I happened to work, in fact),” Goldberg wrote in his magazine. “And he did so without disclosing that he holds a longtime personal grudge against me.”


    Between this and him pushing the lies to help get us into Iraq, he doesn't sound like a neutral credible journalist:

    The Atlantic writer, who himself has been given tremendous access to the White House,
     
    Last edited:
    Yeah, this one has me puzzled. I read that type-style in a singsong, mocking 'voice'. How is that derogatory to the handicapped? Where did that come from? Is there some condition that makes you speak like that all the time or something?

    Yes. It's not uncommon in the autistic community, for one.
     
    I saw that very recently. I wasn’t aware of it either before now.
     
    It's almost like it was planned and coordinated. It's also interesting to learn that Goldberg was handpicked to help push the narrative for Obama Iran Deal:

    For those in need of more traditional-seeming forms of validation, handpicked Beltway insiders like Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic and Laura Rozen of Al-Monitor helped retail the administration’s narrative.

    Back in 2016 Goldberg didn't seem to be a fan of anonymous sources:

    The author mentioned by name two prominent D.C-based journalists: “For those in need of more traditional-seeming forms of validation, handpicked Beltway insiders like Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic and Laura Rozen of Al-Monitor helped retail the administration’s narrative,” Samuels wrote.

    Both rejected Samuels’ implication that they had actively marched in line behind the White House with regards to the deal, dutifully pushing out messaging crafted by Rhodes. Goldberg strongly objected to the assertion that he was “retailing” the deal for the White House and responded in a written piece for The Atlantic. He said he was never contacted by the Times to verify the claim.

    “I did not find this mention of my name amusing at all, because Samuels is making a serious, unsourced, and unsubstantiated allegation against me in an otherwise highly credible publication (one for which I happened to work, in fact),” Goldberg wrote in his magazine. “And he did so without disclosing that he holds a longtime personal grudge against me.”


    Between this and him pushing the lies to help get us into Iraq, he doesn't sound like a neutral credible journalist:

    The Atlantic writer, who himself has been given tremendous access to the White House,
    Question: If Goldberg's reporting was independently verified by multiple other news sources, unless that independent verification used sources other than the four for Goldberg's article, we should just dismiss Goldberg's reporting?

    Is that your position?
     
    More to come?
    ==============
    New York (CNN Business)Jeffrey Goldberg, editor-in-chief of The Atlantic, said his magazine's story about Trump calling Americans who died in battle "losers" and "suckers," was just the tip of the iceberg.

    "I would fully expect more reporting to come out about this and more confirmation and new pieces of information in the coming days and weeks," Goldberg told CNN's Chief Media Correspondent Brian Stelter on "Reliable Sources" Sunday. "We have a responsibility and we're going to do it regardless of what he says."........


    I'm thinking I need to get some more popcorn from the store...
     
    During a CNN interview on Friday Goldberg was asked about why Bolton's account of the trip being canceled was different from the claim in his article. Goldberg said this about Bolton's account:

    “I’m sure all of those things are true,”

    He says it around the 3:00 mark:

     
    Muchin denies hearing Trump say what Griffin claimed Trump said at the Pentagon meeting.

    Also those sources that "confirmed" the Atlantic article never heard Trump say the alleged comments.


    Fox News national security correspondent Jennifer Griffin doubled down on her previous reporting which claimed President Donald Trump disrespected veterans and war dead, adding that Secretary of Treasury Steve Mnuchin was in the room with the president when he disparaged four-star generals.

    Griffin reported Mnuchin was at the Tank meeting in the Pentagon on July 20, 2017, when Trump allegedly called four-star generals “losers,” “dopes,” and “babies”– calling his claim to have never heard the president speak that way “patently false.”

    “I confirmed with people who were present at the meeting that the president used those exact words in a meeting at the Pentagon,” she said. “I also circled back with my sources this weekend that confirmed that the president did not go, or did not want to go to the Aisne-Marne cemetery in France to honor the American war dead when he could no longer fly by helicopter and that one of the president’s favorite words that he uses when he’s angry is ‘loser.'”

    She noted that her sources include two former senior Trump administration officials who were on the trip to France with the president — adding that although they didn’t hear him make those comments at the cemetery, they have heard him say that anyone who fought in the Vietnam War was a “sucker.”

     
    SFL, you’re contending Trump never said any of those things? Because what you are posting doesn’t make me think the original article was wrong in any substantive way. In fact, we said right from the beginning that it could be true that they canceled the helicopter due to weather and it could still be true that Trump said what was alleged. Fact is, Trump wasn’t prevented from going to the cemetery by weather. If he wanted to go he still could have gone. Therefore he didn’t want to go. Plain as that.

    If the article is wrong, General Kelly could set the record straight, but he doesn’t. Neither has any other person who has any credibility (meaning any person who hasn’t been known to lie to cover for Trump in the past), except maybe John Bolton, and he said he didn’t hear it but it sounded like something he would say.

    This is pretty much beating a dead horse at this point, at least to me. We get it, you don’t believe the story. But you never will. Most people do believe the story. It tracks with his previous comments and his known personality. 🤷‍♀️
     
    SFL, you’re contending Trump never said any of those things? Because what you are posting doesn’t make me think the original article was wrong in any substantive way. In fact, we said right from the beginning that it could be true that they canceled the helicopter due to weather and it could still be true that Trump said what was alleged. Fact is, Trump wasn’t prevented from going to the cemetery by weather. If he wanted to go he still could have gone. Therefore he didn’t want to go. Plain as that.

    If the article is wrong, General Kelly could set the record straight, but he doesn’t. Neither has any other person who has any credibility (meaning any person who hasn’t been known to lie to cover for Trump in the past), except maybe John Bolton, and he said he didn’t hear it but it sounded like something he would say.

    This is pretty much beating a dead horse at this point, at least to me. We get it, you don’t believe the story. But you never will. Most people do believe the story. It tracks with his previous comments and his known personality. 🤷‍♀️
    If the sources couldn't even get a central claim right does that give you much confidence in the rest of the story? Griffin's sources didn't even hear Trump say what they claim. It sounds like a game of telephone.

    Plenty of people who were there have claimed on the record it's not true. It's possible that some could be covering for Trump. That's why it's important for the sources to go on record so the details can be matched up to see if those sources even heard it firsthand. I don't know if Trump said it or not, but I know I don't believe the article from anonymous sources and Goldberg has a credibility problem as well.

    Bolton said if he would have heard Trump say that he would have written an entire chapter on it.

    So if Kelly came forward and refuted the article then you would believe him? There are rumors that Kelly is the source which would be odd because he stayed in his post and later became Trump's chief of staff.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom