- Joined
- Mar 26, 2018
- Messages
- 2,545
- Reaction score
- 560
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
The left does it too, just saying.
Actually, it is a reflection of the Trump cult’s total inability to face reality and endless appetite for deflecting away from whatever subject matter is at hand to shriek “but Clinton” or “but Obama”.
The left does it too, just saying.
:lamo
Actually I flat out ignore you for obvious reasons. If you approached any conversation with a shred of intellectual integrity you would get a different result.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
well trouble, if you want to try to justify trump being a pathological liar then you should at least find a lie from President Obama. Its not a lie for Susan Rice to read incorrect CIA talking points. And I have to chuckle, “wah wah Bush didn’t lie, the CIA was wrong” seems to be the lying conservative narrative to excuse bush for lying us into Iraq. Sure you had other excuses such as "er uh we found WMDs" and "something something 9-11" but "golly, the CIA was wrong" was the excuse you guys settled on. anyhoo, this is me proving what you posted is not a lie.
Rice claimed, in her appearances, that the attack had grown out of a spontaneous protest against the anti-Islam film Innocence of Muslims. She didn't make this up; it was the CIA's assessment at the time.
But this claim turned out to be wrong. While some of the attackers really were incensed by the film, closed circuit footage from the diplomatic building showed that there was no protest.
https://www.vox.com/2015/10/12/9489389/benghazi-explained
And the memo was loaded with qualifiers. That alone shreds your "narrative". So now you have to decide to cling to the lie or admit its not a lie. Now if you cling to the lie you then need to admit that 3000 Americans died, 10s of thousands were injured and hundreds of thousands Iraqis died because Bush lied because that's your standard (fyi, he did lie but your standard is "said something that wasn't true").
The left does it too, just saying.
Thank you for the vague "nuh uh you're a liar" post. I cant help but feel you cut and ran from my posts exactly because of the intelligence and integrity with which I responded to your posts. Here's the post that made you cut and run from a thread you started
Rather than attack me with empty snide one liners, by all means present an argument. I am more than willing to engage a position of substance.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
I'm ignoring the whataboutObama stuff in your post...
Trump said most of the Fed employees affected by the shutdown were Democrats. Did you miss that little nugget? I've seen analysis that shows him to be off in that statement, but it gets into the weeds of parsing "affected", and I don't want to go there. The point is what Trump said his EO did. That explains his intent.
The onus is not on me to fix your argument.
The conclusion was "Therefore, any/all discussion containing logical thought, is likely to be a 'trigger' used to terminate the flow of ideas." You are correct in that I cannot understand how you made the logical leap from your premises to this conclusion. I also contend than no one else does either.
I prefer to point out faulty reasoning when I see it. I view it as my little way of performing a small service to the world.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?