Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Perhaps This Is One Reason The So-Called "anti-Trump Brigade" Take Such A Stance.
Yet another U-Turn from Dear Donald.
https:/
No doubt the clamorous pro-Trump people will have excuses ready - or perhaps designate it fake news, in the true style of their idol.
https:/
No doubt the clamorous pro-Trump people will have excuses ready - or perhaps designate it fake news, in the true style of their idol.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Canary42. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
// //'mis-speaking' is simply not an option when you hold that office - unless of course you are singularly ill-equipped to do so …. //
Haaaa! Like "I did not have sex with that woman", Clinton. What Trump said is ludicrous - but just saying. //
Not comparable at all.
Clinton was lying - he knew he was lying, and he decided it was expedient to lie. That is what politicians do.
I am not for one minute excusing Clinton's behaviour, or lying about it.
But let's be clear about the difference.
Clinton lied because he thought he could lie his way out of a tricky situation, and he was wrong - but he knew exactly what he was doing, he took a risk, it didn't pay off.
Trump hasn't got a clue what is going on. He didn't 'mis-speak', he just thought he'd be nice to his new BFF. When he got back the real powers told him to set things straight, so he mumbled some garbage about 'mis-speaking', which as I said, is not an option for a President.
Clinton was a liar, Trump is a buffoon.
Everyone can make up their minds which they think is worse, and which did, or is doing the most damage.
Haaaa! Like "I did not have sex with that woman", Clinton. What Trump said is ludicrous - but just saying. //
Not comparable at all.
Clinton was lying - he knew he was lying, and he decided it was expedient to lie. That is what politicians do.
I am not for one minute excusing Clinton's behaviour, or lying about it.
But let's be clear about the difference.
Clinton lied because he thought he could lie his way out of a tricky situation, and he was wrong - but he knew exactly what he was doing, he took a risk, it didn't pay off.
Trump hasn't got a clue what is going on. He didn't 'mis-speak', he just thought he'd be nice to his new BFF. When he got back the real powers told him to set things straight, so he mumbled some garbage about 'mis-speaking', which as I said, is not an option for a President.
Clinton was a liar, Trump is a buffoon.
Everyone can make up their minds which they think is worse, and which did, or is doing the most damage.
Andy-hughes, //Clinton was a liar, Trump is a buffoon.//
Haha! A first from a Trump basher. Trump is not a liar.
Jim, you’re jumping in with both feet again. This particular conversation isn’t about excusing his behaviour.
ichkeria, //He’s guilty of misclaiming that he misspoke//
But he hasn’t misclaimed it. He very definitely claimed it.
Tell the truth, chaps. It's so much easier. ;o)
Haha! A first from a Trump basher. Trump is not a liar.
Jim, you’re jumping in with both feet again. This particular conversation isn’t about excusing his behaviour.
ichkeria, //He’s guilty of misclaiming that he misspoke//
But he hasn’t misclaimed it. He very definitely claimed it.
Tell the truth, chaps. It's so much easier. ;o)
Ah, but it is, Naomi, even if you personally might not be using it that way. It's pervasive in modern political commentary (or, if it's always been around, then it's more noticeable) to rely on "what about-ism" to deflect attention from criticism. Trump gets away with a lot because his supporters can't seem to shut up about what Hillary and Bill Clinton got up to.
By bringing it up yourself, it lends weight to that line of defence: Trump is bad, but so was Bill Clinton, so that makes it all right then (so the argument runs). And, if you weren't using it that way, then why bring it up at all?
By bringing it up yourself, it lends weight to that line of defence: Trump is bad, but so was Bill Clinton, so that makes it all right then (so the argument runs). And, if you weren't using it that way, then why bring it up at all?
Jim, //Ah, but it is, Naomi//
Ah, but it isn’t, Jim. It began as a joke – hence the laughter - after andy-hughes claimed that those guilty of ‘misspeaking’ (what nonsense that word is!) are unfit for office - and anneasquith, eagerly grasping the wrong end of the stick as usual, eagerly jumped in.
//By bringing it up yourself, it lends weight to that line of defence: Trump is bad, but so was Bill Clinton, so that makes it all right then (so the argument runs).//
Your arguments might run like that – but mine don’t. I never have believed that two wrongs make a right.
//And, if you weren't using it that way, then why bring it up at all?//
See my first paragraph.
Ah, but it isn’t, Jim. It began as a joke – hence the laughter - after andy-hughes claimed that those guilty of ‘misspeaking’ (what nonsense that word is!) are unfit for office - and anneasquith, eagerly grasping the wrong end of the stick as usual, eagerly jumped in.
//By bringing it up yourself, it lends weight to that line of defence: Trump is bad, but so was Bill Clinton, so that makes it all right then (so the argument runs).//
Your arguments might run like that – but mine don’t. I never have believed that two wrongs make a right.
//And, if you weren't using it that way, then why bring it up at all?//
See my first paragraph.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.