Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No, it didn't. He was rightly ridiculed for it. Which is why I used it to respond to your post, which was equally ridiculous.
And my response to yours was just as inane as the "is is" pap. Obviously you can't show where Trump said "I" or "my" or you would have provided it instead of deflecting.
So since Spicer has a history of lying, we should just assume he's lying?
He's the mouthpiece for the Liar-in-Chief, so I would assume that every word Spicer says is also a lie. I wonder how he sleeps at night. Politicians lie, but Trump, the only president who isn't (or wasn't) a politician, has elevated lying into an art form. As for the healthcare thing, how can Trump be "done" negotiating on something he never negotiated on to begin with?
He's the mouthpiece for the Liar-in-Chief, so I would assume that every word Spicer says is also a lie. I wonder how he sleeps at night. Politicians lie, but Trump, the only president who isn't (or wasn't) a politician, has elevated lying into an art form. As for the healthcare thing, how can Trump be "done" negotiating on something he never negotiated on to begin with?
Trump's lying is different than other people lying. Trump's lying is pathological -- he has no moral objection. Lying, to him, is just a means of getting the things that you want. It's the same with promises.
This is what happened between JFK and French President Charles DeGaulle. President Kennedy met with DeGaulle regarding the Cuban missile crisis, which it was advantageous to let NATO allies know what the U.S. had discovered. In the middle of the discussion about the missiles our U-2 aircraft photographed in Cuba, Kennedy said, 'Here, let me show you the photos.' DeGaulle waved them off and said, 'No, no, no, no. The word of the president of the United States is good enough for me.'
Can you imagine any world leader taking the word of Trump at similar face value? I can't.
Excuses and BS. Mozilo's own employee's were lined up and waiting to testify against him. They didn't even try.
The (D)'s were too afraid of losing Wall Streets money so they did nothing. In one of the greatest political ironies ever, all the money could not save them from this stabbing of the people in the back.
Classic! I was struck with your reply that no one had answered your question in all the years you have been asking. Odd, because I did answer that question, some time ago, and more than once, but you don't even remember! Or is it something else perhaps? I might have even included that same article which does in fact describe much of what else happened beyond your simple "lies, lies, lies" explanation for all things "promised." I've read similar explanations and narratives in any case.
Given all you can quickly dismiss as excuse or BS, and all you seem to know that should have easily transpired, you must work in the Justice Department or somewhere deep in the center of these controversies to know all you do with such absolute certainty. This is the only way your quick judgment and want to hang Obama from the highest tree can be explained.
Ultimately you might ask yourself another question of many that might help to enlighten yourself a bit (though not necessarily make you feel any better), do you really think Obama had more to lose than gain by looking the other way as you suggest? You really think Obama needed Wall Street money after getting elected the first time, or the second time?
If so, perhaps you can connect those dots with REAL facts that demonstrate Obama's true intentions or fears, in quantifiable verifiable terms. In any case, if in Obama's judgment he felt best not to push further for prosecution of these easy win cases as you claim, there would have to be a far better reason or explanation than yours, because Obama did NOT need Wall Street money.
Consider this as well. When Obama was actually running the first time, he might have taken not even $20 million from the "securities and investment" sector of campaign contributions, hardly a drop in the bucket of over $775 million raised! Then Obama came down pretty hard on the same industry with new restrictive legislation they were altogether against.
Conclusion: your theory and rationale for your theory to explain what happened between Obama and those who didn't end up in jail is unfounded, not congruent with the facts or sound reason.
Nobody knows if Mexico will or won't pay for the wall as of yet so that argument is moot.
Moot? This and the rest of your comments are truly amazing to read, amazing to believe anyone can be so wanting to mentally reorganize the events happening around them only in such a way that preserves their pre-determined mind-set.
Moot?
The wall is apparently getting built to the tune of billions of dollars over as many years that will likely have Trump gone before it is even completed, if in fact it gets completed. According to what possible scenario in your mind is it possible that Mexico will pay for Trump's wall? You are waiting for further word of what possible sort that can possibly explain other than this too was an empty false promise that Trump used to win voters like you?
Regarding all these comments about Plan A vs Plan B, all ridiculous really, when first off recognizing there really was not even a Plan A let alone a Plan B. Plan A was not viable or passable for all the obvious reasons that anyone willing to follow this story can't help but conclude. Just about all the support that "Plan A" got from the GOP was mostly just to support Ryan, but mostly, even the GOP didn't want to go back to their constituents explaining such onerous legislation. There really was no Plan A!
Of course there was no Plan B either!
That Spicer or anyone else tries to twist the truth about any of this by hiding the ball with this semantic or that, Trump meant this, not that, is a nice try and maybe effective for some dim wits, but the truth is obvious. We waited all this time, "giving Trump a chance" as his supporters kept insisting (and rightfully so).
Chance given, and after all these years to deliver this garbage at this "now or never" moment as Trump insisted, is something only Trump supporters can defend as defensible. Otherwise, no one in their right mind can do so...
OK How would he do this? He was never given the chance to do so. Remember the Republicans voters and politicians were fighting it since Day 1. This was even before the "If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor," comment to help bully pulpit the law through. The Republicans won the House for 2011 and kept it from then until Obama's last day. How would Obama be able to "fix it" with people who are NOT willing to work at all and block any Senate bill that would have come in over the next four years? Forget about trying to fix in Obama's last two years, the Republicans owned the Senate as well.
He would have hired some policy wonks during his campaign and asked them to come up with a fairly detailed outline of how to amend the ACA in order to make it "cheaper, better, cover more people, and government pays".
Edited to add - oops, sorry, I thought you were asking how Trump would do it.
I agree with you that the Rs have hated the ACA since day 1, and have made it their objective to hobble it as much as possible, even though they can't muster the votes for repeal.
Last edited by jacqueg; 03-27-2017 at 10:58 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.