Meme & Quote Thread

Julio3000 said:
Well, there are plenty of things that bubble up from unnamed sources that are unverifiable (the familiar "Trump rages at the TV" story, for example) but I do imagibe there are plenty of things which are verifiable, as well. And I'd put that track record of veracity there against Sarah Sanders any day.
Click to expand...

Could you name one "unnamed sources" piece with respect to Trump that has been corroborated?

I can't think of one.
 
Julio3000 said:
That's not my point of entry here. It's that SHS saying it's "categorically false" means less than nothing.
Click to expand...

Because she's a member of Trump administration?

A lot of nit-picking and arguing from an abstract pretense going on here.

She's a spin doctor. When a spin doctor issues a categorical denial ... that's usually a sign.
 
Hawk said:
I guess where I end up here is: Who denying this story would you believe?
Click to expand...

Well, that's a fair point, because I don't think that it would serve Mattis's interests for him to publicly diverge from the party line, even if he did so in private. So, point taken. But what that suggests is that someone inside the administration is lying. Who, why, and to what end?
 
Hawk said:
Because she's a member of Trump administration?

A lot of nit-picking and arguing from an abstract pretense going on here.

She's a spin doctor. When a spin doctor issues a categorical denial ... that's usually a sign.
Click to expand...

Ugh.
 
Julio3000 said:
Ugh.
Click to expand...

I'm just saying.

When you paint yourself into such a rigid corner, you leave yourself pretty exposed.

There are about a hundred different ways that question could be handled without accepting real culpability.

This response is not one of them.
 
In a statement on Wednesday, Pentagon spokesperson Dana White called the Times' story "blatantly false."
 
Hawk said:
I honestly don't have any idea what you are referring to.
Click to expand...

Pretty much all of the manifold stories about high-profile departures from the WH were preceded by anonymously sourced stories to that effect. Pick one: Tillerson, McMaster, Porter, etc. ad nauseam.
 
So the relationship to Trump is tangential. I was hoping for one of the stories that related to him specifically.
 
Julio3000 said:
The story at issue doesn't relate specifically to Trump.
Click to expand...

That's not how I'm seeing it reported.

The lede:

WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Jim Mattis urged President Trump to get congressional approval before the United States launched airstrikes against Syria last week, but was overruled by Mr. Trump, who wanted a rapid and dramatic response, military and administration officials said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/17/us/politics/jim-mattis-trump-syria-attack.html
 
Hawk said:
That's not how I'm seeing it reported.

The lede:

WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Jim Mattis urged President Trump to get congressional approval before the United States launched airstrikes against Syria last week, but was overruled by Mr. Trump, who wanted a rapid and dramatic response, military and administration officials said.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/17/us/politics/jim-mattis-trump-syria-attack.html
Click to expand...

Buuuut ... why is that less about Trump than him canning a senior member of his administration? I don't understand the parameters here.
 
So Mattis, to a greater or lesser degree, was off the reservation, and it was leaked, but no one wants to go on the record confirming it. Why is this anything other than business as usual?

I guess we just wait for Mattis's book tour.
 
Julio3000 said:
Buuuut ... why is that less about Trump than him canning a senior member of his administration? I don't understand the parameters here.
Click to expand...

You don't see that story framed as a direct, personal disagreement between Trump and Mattis?

Omarosa or Porter or McMaster leaving the White House isn't really in the same league.

I asked for an example of a single story that had been corroborated, specifically relating to Trump and his behavior.

Like "****hole countries" or whatever else.

I honestly lost track of how many unverified reports have been touted as foregone conclusions, simply because they support a narrative. Then people forget, and also often forget that they were never supported by actual fact-based reporting in the first place.
 
Julio3000 said:
So Mattis, to a greater or lesser degree, was off the reservation, and it was leaked, but no one wants to go on the record confirming it. Why is this anything other than business as usual?

I guess we just wait for Mattis's book tour.
Click to expand...

The idea that Mattis, who is on the Congressional record late last year explicitly supporting renewal of the AUMF, went "off the reservation" here is just kind of silly, frankly.
 
I don't think it that far fetched - this isn't the first time a President, any President, didn't take the advise of DOD.
Lincoln ...
the original story you felt needed rapid response was he took the advise of his Cohen lawyers over DOD.
Which isn't that far fetched either

Looking at Trump quotes over the past couple years " I know more than the Generals " etc etc etc

DOD talked Trump down after his "fire and fury" bluffs/rants/chest pounds

How many other stories of temper tantrums. The latest aimed at Nicki Haley --- you sound like Sturg wanting to have "what propaganda" packaged and tied in a neat little bow

you brought up Mattis. We don't even know if Mattis was in the room or in N Korea with Pompeo or Saudi Arabia cleaning up Jarad's mess.

Which brings us back to Stormy.
How many denials from the White House ?
I lost count
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top