Are Trump's purported remarks about the troops disqualifying?

[jaypatriot]

Well they should be disqualifying. So should the "grabbing" remark from 2016 just before the election. But 60 million voters or so will put up with anything from him.

Wait until you start seeing and hearing all of those incredibly stupid and embarrassing statements from Biden over the years and then ask us if 60 million voters are willing to put up with anything from Biden.

 

[jaypatriot]

thanks for sharing your opinion.

That's all I'm offering is my opinion. But if I pay you something, will you believe me?
Just post your name and address here and I'll write you a check.

 

[jaypatriot]

It's a poll - it's asking for opinion, not the 'truth'.

In a perfect world it is my opinion and that of many, that a comment like this should turn the entire electorate off the president. The poll fairly well shows that. However we do not live in that perfect world and a lot of his supporters are willing to forgive comments like this, and others.

Nothing to do with 'CNN'.

You mean his supporters are willing to forgive Trump for comments he didn't make?
WOW. They really are forgiving, aren't they.

 

[jaypatriot]

Reread your post.

You are purposely spreading misinformation.

Look at the OP. If this is true, should it be disqualifying? Regarding a statement a Trump never even made.

This is a maliciously clever method of defaming Trump, without even having to prove that he actually made any statements like this.

The liberal media is dividing and destroying our country, not Trump.

Like the question, Do you still beat your wife? Answer yes or no.

 

[uptower]

Wait until you start seeing and hearing all of those incredibly stupid and embarrassing statements from Biden over the years and then ask us if 60 million voters are willing to put up with anything from Biden.

Attempts to change the subject used to be less lazy and conspicuous.

 

[jaypatriot]

I hate Trump, and I think he probably said that. Nevertheless, unless these anonymous come forward and identify themselves this seems like shoddy journalism.

Really!! A Left of center magazine suffering from subscriber loss promoting shoddy journalism. Outrageous!!

 

[jaypatriot]

I don't need to know their names. The story was vetted by a respected news outlet, and supported by the AP. Insisting on names seems like you want to play Trump's HOAX game.

You don't want to know the names of the people who reported that the president said some of the most vile things a president could say about the military? And it could cost him the presidency? That's not important to you?
If you going to be destroyed by someone's testimony, wouldn't you want to know who that person was?
This is not a whistleblower situation. This is libel and slander that could affect an election. But you already know that.

 

[uptower]

You mean his supporters are willing to forgive Trump for comments he didn't make?
WOW. They really are forgiving, aren't they.

Well Trump fans seem to be dead sure it is not true. Despite little evidence of their own - except what was it, Sarah Sanders or someone vouching for him? Well let's look at the evidence.

1. Trump has said such things in the past - on tape.
2. Multiple sources, that the press including even Fox News finds reliable, have corroborated it.
3. The only person disputing it is Huckabee-Sanders, a known liar.
4. Trump, also a known liar, has also denied saying the things in #1 that we still have on video, which means he's likely lying about both, definitely about #1.

There's more than enough reason to suspect it's true. It's entirely possible and not at all unimaginable coming from his fat orange lips. It is quite plausible, given his record of running his mouth and similar things we know he has said. It's hearsay, we know, but it's also classic Trump.

So whether he did indeed screw up this time as well or whether it's just the other heinous things he has said about vets and POWs, my original point stands - his base will forgive anything he says. So yes they are really forgiving.

And it could cost him the presidency? If you going to be destroyed by someone's testimony, wouldn't you want to know who that person was?

The dude survived an impeachment for something highly illegal that everyone knows he did including those who exonerated him. It's a bit hysterical to say one more ***ty comment by Trump could cost him his job after all he's said and done and gotten away with. A few more swing voters might tick a different box but that's about it. His base isn't going anywhere. Unfortunately this is not the moment that will 'destroy' Trump. He's said (and done) far worse and survived.

 

[ReubenSherr]

Well Trump fans seem to be dead sure it is not true. Despite little evidence of their own - except what was it sarah Sanders vouching for him? Well let's look at the evidence.

1. Trump has said such things in the past - on tape.
2. Multiple sources, that the press including even Fox News finds reliable, have corroborated it
3. The only person disputing it is Huckabee-Sanders, a known liar
4. Trump, also a known liar as also denied saying the things in #1 that we still have on video.

Well we still don't know for sure, but there's more than enough reason to suspect it's true.

Lol what?

Which named sources are corroborating that Trump said this? What has Trump said in the past degrading the military, that was caught on tape? What has Huckabee-Sanders lied about lol? I think you're confusing her with Brian Stelter.

There's more evidence that Pelosi ordered mob hits. And that Biden is controlled by the Communist Party of the U. S.

Revealed: JFK Worried Pelosi's Dad Was Associated With Organized Crime

The leader of the US Communist Party just endorsed Biden – and that should speak volumes | News Break

 

[uptower]

I don't need to know their names. The story was vetted by a respected news outlet, and supported by the AP. Insisting on names seems like you want to play Trump's HOAX game.

It's called moving the goalpost. If a few s***kickers like us on an internet forum don't know the names of valued anonymous sources vetting by the press than I guess those sources can no longer be trusted. So, names please or it never happened.

It lets them conveniently play the 'fake news' card and the You Know Nothing Jon Snow.

 

[uptower]

Lol what?

Which named sources are corroborating that Trump said this? What has Trump said in the past degrading the military, that was caught on tape? What has Huckabee-Sanders lied about lol? I think you're confusing her with Brian Stelter.

There's more evidence that Pelosi ordered mob hits. And that Biden is controlled by the Communist Party of the U. S.

Revealed: JFK Worried Pelosi's Dad Was Associated With Organized Crime

The leader of the US Communist Party just endorsed Biden – and that should speak volumes | News Break

You want named sources to dish dirt on Trump? Those are the ones who have already left and they're big names: Tillerson, Comey, Kelly, Mattis.

Otherwise, inside sources have always been unnamed. They are still likely working in the WH and don't wish to lose their jobs or security clearances. That's the way it works, and it's worked against Democrat presidents as much as Republicans: there'll be anonymous leaks in the future that help the other side's narrative just as much so don't cry about it now. It's always been that way, so suck it up and don't pretend it matters.

And no, we are not changing the discussion to Pelosi. Nobody cares and it is not relevant. It's a lazy deflection.

 

[Puigb]

No, because Trump accurately stated he could shoot someone on 5th avenue and not lose support.

The Republican base WILL not abandon him as long as he's president. Once he's no longer in office, THEN will they pretend they never voted for or supported him. But while he's in power? He's their guy, and they will be damned if the let the EVIL "LIBRULS" win.

 

[Mustachio]

The big news today is that Trump has apparently said things in private that are remarkably similar to things he's already said in public.

Instead of getting into whether it's plausible whether or not he really said what the Atlantic reported, I'm curious whether folks believe that if he did say it that it would be disqualifying for a would-be commander-in-chief.

Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’

I voted no but maybe I misunderstood what you meant. Should calling veterans who died or were captured losers disqualify an individual from being fit for office? Of course, it demonstrates an astonishing lack of ability to critically think and more or less proves that person is a sociopath. But Trump's base won't go against him for saying it, because he didn't say it, and if he said it he didn't mean it, and if he meant it Hillary sells babies for a global cabal. And QAnon or something.

I'm glad that the world is examining Trump's thinking and he will be exposed to almost universal agreement that he is a horrible human being, but I had friends from high school who lost their lives overseas and the thought of a President calling them losers? What an ignorant coward that moron is. Usually the stupid things he says can't make me angry, but I can't help but think of the good people I knew who risked their lives and a President calling them losers. Trump would have been MIA or dead within 10 minutes of deployment last seen taking selfies in a Falllujah brothel.

 

[ReubenSherr]

And no, we are not changing the discussion to Pelosi. Nobody cares and it is not relevant. It's a lazy deflection.

Apparently, it's the only way to get through to you that Trump DID NOT MAKE THOSE STATEMENTS.

And creating a thread with the theme "If this IS true, how awful is it?" purposely misleads readers (and posters) into believing there is merit to the claim.

Since that still doesn't seem to hold weight or importance to you, imagine reading a 20 page discussion of Pelosi's mob ties, or Joe's ties to the U. S. Communist Party. There is just as much evidence of those claims as there is evidence that Trump was disrespectful to veterans.

 

[uptower]

No, because Trump accurately stated he could shoot someone on 5th avenue and not lose support.

The Republican base WILL not abandon him as long as he's president. Once he's no longer in office, THEN will they pretend they never voted for or supported him.

Actually I think they'll go on and bitterly claim he was the 'best president evah' and the cult of worship will continue. But yeah, they'll never admit he has said or done anything wrong.

 

[Nickyjo]

You don't want to know the names of the people who reported that the president said some of the most vile things a president could say about the military? And it could cost him the presidency? That's not important to you?
If you going to be destroyed by someone's testimony, wouldn't you want to know who that person was?
This is not a whistleblower situation. This is libel and slander that could affect an election. But you already know that.

Give us a break. Trump constantly says “a lot of people are saying,” never identifying who. Face it. There could be a video of Trump saying this on Fifth Ave and he wouldn’t lose some of his supporters.

 

[uptower]

Apparently, it's the only way to get through to you that Trump DID NOT MAKE THOSE STATEMENTS.

And creating a thread with the theme "If this IS true, how awful is it?" purposely misleads readers (and posters) into believing there is merit to the claim.

WaPo, the Atlantic, AP and Fox - FOX, dammit - have all independently confirmed the story with their sources. How long can you bury your heads in the sand and pretend this is somehow about Pelosi?

 

[distraff]

The big news today is that Trump has apparently said things in private that are remarkably similar to things he's already said in public.

Instead of getting into whether it's plausible whether or not he really said what the Atlantic reported, I'm curious whether folks believe that if he did say it that it would be disqualifying for a would-be commander-in-chief.

Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’

Yes it would if he said that but he wouldn't be disqualified. He has said many disqualifying things without any long-term impact.

 

[Oborosen]

The big news today is that Trump has apparently said things in private that are remarkably similar to things he's already said in public.

Instead of getting into whether it's plausible whether or not he really said what the Atlantic reported, I'm curious whether folks believe that if he did say it that it would be disqualifying for a would-be commander-in-chief.

Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’

Seeing as the only time he made such comments as close to the ones being alleged. They were all directed at one person.

So we have yet another instance, where people are getting upset over something that we don't even know was actually said. In fact, we have conflicting evidence from others that shows otherwise.

So I think another answer that should've been on your poll was. "I don't think it actually happened" Because that's what this is starting to look like.

 

[uptower]

So I think another answer that should've been on your poll was. "I don't think it actually happened" Because that's what this is starting to look like.

Actually more press services and sources are coming forward.

 

[Oborosen]

Actually more press services and sources are coming forward.

About alleged sayings, yes.

This isn't the first time that we've had this and it's not the first time that such has turned out to be false.

 

[Helix]

That's all I'm offering is my opinion. But if I pay you something, will you believe me?
Just post your name and address here and I'll write you a check.

Tweety also thought that money could buy him legitimacy. it didn't.

 

[Overitall]

I don't need to know their names. The story was vetted by a respected news outlet, and supported by the AP. Insisting on names seems like you want to play Trump's HOAX game.

You’re smart enough to know that what we see here is standard political tactics. It’s a game that’s been honed by politicians for decades. If the allegations are true why hold on to them until just sixty days before the election? Didn’t these anonymous sources care enough about these fallen soldiers to bring forth the charges when they occurred? I know you don’t care but it’s a devastating charge to accuse anyone of behind anonymity. The sources are either cowards or opportunists. Maybe both.

 

[LouC]

Disqualifying?

To be president?

I had to vote no.

Technically, via the Constitution, they are not disqualifying remarks.

Disgusting and despicable, yes, technically disqualifying, no.

But folks should weigh them well when making their decision in this upcoming presidential election.

There is no reason those claims should be dismissed considering all the overt evidence of Trump's disdain for the military, except when pretending he holds our military in any high regard, so as to garner fan support.

Now, the many comments our ersatz president has made in defense of Vladimir Putin and Russia in regards taking Putin's word, without reason, over our vast and broad intelligence agencies pertaining to the interference in our elections. Then Trump's total disregard of reporting by our intelligence infrastructure on the likely Russian bounty payments to terrorists for killing coalition forces, how he has publicly discounted this. Let us not forget his most recent shade he has once again give Putin and Russia in the recent poisoning of Putin's rival, with Donny denying it could have been done by his pal Putin, because he hasn't seen any evidence it was.

Now those could very well be, arguably, Constitutionally disqualifying comments based upon how they could very well be argued as treasonous as Treason is defined by the U.S. Constitution, essentially "adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort".

 

[RetiredUSN]

The big news today is that Trump has apparently said things in private that are remarkably similar to things he's already said in public.

Instead of getting into whether it's plausible whether or not he really said what the Atlantic reported, I'm curious whether folks believe that if he did say it that it would be disqualifying for a would-be commander-in-chief.

Trump: Americans Who Died in War Are ‘Losers’ and ‘Suckers’

Get back to us when Trump sends the troops into 2 unwanted wars.

Like Bush and Obama.