President Donald Trump

Eventhorizon said:
Spiritual is fine but I think you may have the definitions mixed up. Just as food for thought.

spir·it·u·al
ˈspiriCH(o͞o)əl/
adjective
  1. 1.
    relating to or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.
    "I'm responsible for his spiritual welfare"
    synonyms: nonmaterial, incorporeal, intangible; More

  2. 2.
    relating to religion or religious belief.
    "the tribe's spiritual leader"
Click to expand...
I don't have a thing mixed up. Quite to the contrary..
 
MistyWrites said:
I don't have a thing mixed up. Quite to the contrary..
Click to expand...
He has just tried to justify Trump mocking a disabled reporter by citing a bs source that states Trump basically mocks everyone he disagrees with as if they were disabled. I guess that makes it OK. (The mental gymnastics on that one!) There is no debating this person. He is not capable of seeing other perspectives. He won't examine yours. He doesn't even examine his own.
 
acd said:
He has just tried to justify Trump mocking a disabled reporter by citing a bs source that states Trump basically mocks everyone he disagrees with as if they were disabled. I guess that makes it OK. (The mental gymnastics on that one!) There is no debating this person. He is not capable of seeing other perspectives. He won't examine yours. He doesn't even examine his own.
Click to expand...
Sorry the facts speak for themselves. Perhaps turn your scrutiny upon yourself.
 
acd said:
He has just tried to justify Trump mocking a disabled reporter by citing a bs source that states Trump basically mocks everyone he disagrees with as if they were disabled. I guess that makes it OK. (The mental gymnastics on that one!) There is no debating this person. He is not capable of seeing other perspectives. He won't examine yours. He doesn't even examine his own.
Click to expand...
Yes, to all of it. Pathetic really.. . And again, more sad in the end for him, than for those who argue against his "stance".. Standing up for a bully because he is an equal opportunity bully doesn't make much sense, indeed. Birds of a feather?
 
Eventhorizon said:
Sorry the facts speak for themselves. Perhaps turn your scrutiny upon yourself.
Click to expand...
Oh be quiet and don't talk to her like that.. Go scrutinize yourself EH. She's got more sense in her little finger than you in your entirety.. and I'm not sorry for saying that.
 
MistyWrites said:
Oh be quiet and don't talk to her like that.. Go scrutinize yourself EH. She's got more sense in her little finger than you in your entirety.. and I'm not sorry for saying that.
Click to expand...
She started it and it's not like I am just going to sit back and absorb the BS.
 
MistyWrites said:
Yes, to all of it. Pathetic really.. . And again, more sad in the end for him, than for those who argue against his "stance".. Standing up for a bully because he is an equal opportunity bully doesn't make much sense, indeed. Birds of a feather?
Click to expand...
This is you clearly shooting down an alternative explanation. This is you not accepting others ideas.
 
clinton-versus-trump.png
Oh heck yes.. I love political wrestling. Lets get some suplex's going!! Forget the issues and lets yell at each other!
 
Eventhorizon said:
This is you clearly shooting down an alternative explanation. This is you not accepting others ideas.
Click to expand...
This is me telling you one bully blows just as much as another, EH.. . And arguing for a bully as a president doesn't mean you have an "idea" of any substance worth accepting at all. When you get an argument / idea that can hold water, give me a call, until then, I'll plan to die by the phone waiting.
 
MistyWrites said:
This is me telling you one bully blows just as much as another, EH.. . And arguing for a bully as a president doesn't mean you have an "idea" of any substance worth accepting at all. When you get an argument / idea that can hold water, give me a call, until then, I'll plan to die by the phone waiting.
Click to expand...
Look, you don't like Trump and perhaps for good reason. Don't change the facts though to support the fact you don't like him. Trump is known for making physical gestures to show people he's talking about as being agitated. If you don't like that fine but saying its more than that isnt fair. You could saying its his way of signaling to aliens and be as correct.
 
Eventhorizon said:
@Pin
This seems to be the truth regarding the mocking accusation.



Investor's Business DailyInvestor's Business -


COMMENTARY

Fake News: Trump Did Not Mock Disabled Reporter And Other Lies From The Left
GUEST-jackson-011717-newscom.jpg


Reprints
Meryl Streep, who makes millions of dollars doing what preschoolers do on the playground every day, has dragged up again the accusations that Donald Trump mocked a disabled reporter.

While making an acceptance speech earlier this month at the Golden Globe Awards, Streep said it broke her heart that "the person asking to sit in the most respected seat in our country imitated a disabled reporter, someone he outranked in privilege, power, and the capacity to fight back."

Fake tough guy Robert De Niro followed with a letter telling her he shared her "sentiments about punks and bullies." Trump is no delicate blossom but it's a bit amusing watching the mafia of popular culture censure others as if it's a bastion of geniality and tolerance.

But back to the charges against Trump: Is it asking too much for these people who are constantly attacking him to actually know what they are talking about? To be honest brokers of information? To be just a bit judicious?

Quite clearly the only response has to be yes, it is too much. Because if they were to deal with the facts, their meme would collapse.

The incident in question is Trump supposedly mocking New York Times reporter Serge Kovaleski, whose hand and arm movement on his right side is impaired due to arthrogryposis. Video from 2015 seems to indicate that Trump was indeed cruelly imitating the man.

But the media are too lazy and those suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome are too nasty and small-minded to look deeper. The truth is, Trump has often used those same convulsive gestures to mimic the mannerisms of people, including himself, who are rattled and exasperated.

Why couldn't the mainstream media look this up? Gavin McInnes of TheRebelMedia.com and Taki's Magazine did, and he has the video evidence to show that Trump has a history of flailing his arms to make a point. It isn't something he reserved for Kovaleski.

McInnes wasn't alone — Catholics 4 Trump ably made the same case. So have others. If these people could do the research, why couldn't the legacy media, with all its resources, do the same?

And here's another point: Why have we seen no images of Kovaleski moving the way Trump is moving? In every video and photograph of Kovaleski we've seen, he is calmly standing still with his right arm held firm against his chest. He's not waving his arms uncontrollably.

Why would Trump imitate a man who has difficulty moving at least one of his limbs by madly thrashing his own?

The answer to all these questions is this: The media and their political handlers constructed a fake news talking point against Trump and ran with it. The truth would have derailed their anti-Trump, anti-Republican, anti-conservative agenda.

This, of course, is not the only Trump lie the media and the TDR sufferers have tried to immortalize. McInnes, a controversial and provocative fellow who has described himself as a "western chauvinist" and "anarchist," covered the Top 10 Trump Myths last week. It's a skillful takedown of the narrative that was carefully crafted to vilify Trump — and by extension the deplorables who voted for him or against Hillary Clinton — and delegitimize his presidency.

The lesson here is while the Democrats, and the branch of the DNC that's also known as the media, are doing all they can to smear Trump as a depraved, crude and hateful man, the people who best fit under those terms are his accusers.

INVESTING RESOURCES
Click to expand...
The article you've presented me with doesn't use any citations for any of its claims, especially about organization "Catholics 4 Trump." How am I supposed to know this organization is even real without any citations?

This is supposed to be the proof of innocence, the organization which allegedly provides proof of President Trump using similar gestures in the past in reference to himself and others.

I'm not sold for the following reasons: the article immediately attacks the career of Meryl Streep, the article seems more interested in emotional appeals than citing evidence, the article explicitly has a bias against "the media."

Not to sound facetious, but is this the quality of news that you regularly consume EH? This article is of severely poor quality.
 
Eventhorizon said:
Look, you don't like Trump and perhaps for good reason. Don't change the facts though to support the fact you don't like him. Trump is known for making physical gestures to show people he's talking about as being agitated. If you don't like that fine but saying its more than that isnt fair. You could saying its his way of signaling to aliens and be as correct.
Click to expand...
This one .... does NOT qualify as an idea / argument of any substance EH.. sorry. Game over.
 
From what I have seen, Eventhorizon tends to abandon logic for emotion and opinion during arguments, so there's really no need to waste energy over his provocations or contradictions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top