Posted by Tina
President Trump and First Lady Melania Trump were greeted warmly and thanked by family members, congregants, hospital staff, police officers and families, and others in Pittsburgh on Tuesday when they came to offer comfort and pay their respects following the despicable slaughter of innocent lives at the Tree of Life synagogue. Video and photos available at BizPac Review.
The hate filled group that chose to use this tragedy as a bludgeon to harm the President and First lady are the same people pretending to favor civility.
As for the media, an intentinally partisan partial story is irresponsible reporting. It’s the reason half the country (or more) cheers when Trump calls out “fake news.”
Hey mainstream media TDS progressive, keep up the good work. Let me hand you some rope. You will be hoisted by your own petard. Bless your tiny little heads. Damn, I love you.
Most of us have learned how to interpret any news from FNM (Fake News Media.) For those who have recently returned from living on Uranus, try this:
If FNM reports a large crowd of protesters disrupted a Trump rally, it means three vagrants complained they had to find another place to shoot up when they were rousted from the main entrance.
If FNM and/or Chris report that Obama set up the framework for today’s economy, it means today’s economy is booming.
If FNM reports that other nations have begun to dislike the U.S., it means those nations have been told to pay their damn overdue bills.
If FNM reports that the immigrant horde heading for our southern border are all peaceful families craving a better life, it means there probably are two or three folks in the caravan who meet that description.
If FNM complains that Trump is picking on them, well, take another look at their other reports. They report, you decide.
Tina, a number of congressional Republicans, and local Republicans were invited to attend with the President, and refused. This is a fact. This is not fake.
The President went anyway … and nobody spit on him … as he, himself, tweeted … the Office of the President was treated with all due respect. The man, himself, is speedily becoming a moral pariah.
Republicans in a heavily Democrat town just prior to an election. This is not unusual behavior. Also, “refused” is a lot different than declined.
There were plenty of Democrats that didn’t want Obama anywhere near them in the last election. Wonder why? Couldn’t have been the lousy economy and expensive, broken healthcare.
Your candidate was a criminal and a liar who garnered quite a bit of support for herself. Don’t asssume that morality is something you own…we KNOW better.
“Couldn’t have been the lousy economy”
You’re right, it couldn’t have been, because the economy was by no metric “lousy” in 2016. You are simply revising history in your own mind, just as you flushed the economic downturn of the end of Bush’s tenure down the memory hole.
You denied positive economic news all through the Obama years…now that Trump is coasting off Obama’s success, he gets all the credit.
Just shameless.
As usual when speaking of economic realities you are full of beans.
I addressed this in another area so I won’t repeat…again.
2016 actually sucked. 5% (low estimate) unemployment, and 1.6% growth in GDP. Sheesh Chris, you should check your facts before making asinine pronouncements.
Now, after the 2018 economic analyses come out, there will be a better measure of how and if Trump policies have made a difference, if any.
I can guarantee this, if the data shows a significant improvement, there is no way in hell that Chris will acknowledge it is a result of Trump policies. He will credit Obama. If it shows a significant decline, there is no way in hell that Chris will credit Obama for it and will blame Trump.
Do you see how this works? Chris isn’t really very bright, inspired or clever. He just parrots the party line and regurgitates a rather mundane, boorish, run-of-the-mill Rat political demagoguery.
2016 actually sucked. 5% (low estimate) unemployment, and 1.6% growth in GDP. Sheesh Chris, you should check your facts before making asinine pronouncements.
You fail to answer Reagan’s question: compared to what?
At the height of the recession unemployment was almost 10%. It was cut in half during Obama’s two terms. Even at the beginning of 2015, unemployment was at 5.7%, so the 2016 numbers were an improvement.
Yes, unemployment continued falling under Trump–but more slowly than it did under Obama.
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
Again, you gave no credit to Obama for the falling unemployment numbers, and now you want to give Trump all the credit for continuing (and actually slowing)) trends started under Obama? That just doesn’t make sense, Pie.
and 1.6% growth in GDP.
True, that was lower than it was in 2015, which was 2.6% (higher than the GDP growth in 2017).
Everyone but Chris remembers the Bush era recession was declared over in June 2009, just six months after Obama took office. Yet, for the next eight years Obama blamed Bush for the mess he inherited.
Meanwhile Chris believe Obama deserves the credit for Trump’s accomplishments almost two years after he took office.
Trump could have 0% unemployment, 5% GDP and cure cancer and he’d find some way to credit Obama.
Everyone but Chris remembers the Bush era recession was declared over in June 2009, just six months after Obama took office.
No, of course I remember that. I also remember that from 2010 onwards, job growth and falling unemployment were nearly uninterrupted. I also remember that you denied these numbers as they were happening, and that you continue denying them now.
But why would you stop? You elected a denier…of Obama’s unemployment numbers, of his birth certificate, of climate change, of his own previous positions, and of basic facts and reality itself…and you have no incentive to change.
Let’s hope you’re given one in a few days.
The Fake News media continues to earn their name. Trump’s Tweets, his addressing their lies at his rallies and us sharing the truth on the internet is why Trump’s approval rating is up to the 60% range in some area. Did you all see how many thousands were at his rally in Florida yesterday?
Cite the “fake news” articles that claimed all of Pittsburg was opposed to Trump’s visit. Or are you claiming merely reporting on the protests is “fake news?”
I didn’t see “hate-filled” protesters or uncivil behavior from the crowd in Pittsburg. You can cite evidence of that, too, if you have it.
Helpful reminder that the term “fake news” became a talking point after Russia planted fake news stories designed to help Donald Trump. Trump himself spread fake news constantly during the campaign, and continues to do so today. The idea that the mainstream media in general is “fake news” was Trump’s own rebranding—the only thing he has ever been good at—in classic “I’m rubber, you’re glue” fashion.
Hey, has Trump provided evidence that Obama’s birth certificate is fake yet? Or that Ted Cruz’s father helped kill JFK? Or about the nonexistent riots in California the other day? Or that Obama “wiretapped” him? Or that thousands of Muslims cheered 9/11 in New Jersey? Or that unemployment under Obama reached 42%? All fake news, and a very short list.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/dec/13/2016-lie-year-fake-news/
“Or that Obama “wiretapped” him? ”
I’m certain the President is well aware of the evidence being collected that shows 4 FISA warants were obtained, most likely illegally, to spy on his campaign. Evidence began to surface as early as January 2017.
December, 2017, National Review, “Was the Steele Dossier Used to Obtain a FISA Warrant Against Trump’s Campaign?”
July, 2018, The Federalist, “10 Key Takeaways From The Released FISA Warrants Against Carter Page”
What? CNN didn’t tell you?
This has quieted down during the election season but it has not gone away.
Carter Page is suing The DNC and Perkins Coie.
Perhaps you think political chatter is unusual. I don’t. Most of it doesn’t affect me or my nation much. Both parties have engaged in hard ball, hitting below the belt, down and dirty ads and accusations, semi-true or spun. Dirty politics is one thing…criminal activity to affect a campaign or take out a sitting president is quite another.
“What? CNN didn’t tell you?”
The Page affair was covered quite a lot by CNN. Had you paid attention to their coverage and less to right-wing blogs, maybe you’d be more informed on the issue.
The FISA warrants were not for “spying on the campaign,” but on Page himself, for legitimate reasons of national security. Page was shady as hell, and you should be asking yourself why Trump staffed his campaign with so many shady, corrupt, and incompetent people. (For God’s sake, Cohen was his fixer for years. That doesn’t set off alarm bells for you?)
The charges that there was something inappropriate about the Steele dossier being used to get a warrant on Page were shown to be completely bogus. The FBI told the court that they suspected the person funding the dossier was a political rival of Trump. The court did not care, because who funded it didn’t matter one whit; what mattered was that they found the charges in the dossier credible. (It also was not the only evidence presented in the application for the warrant.) There is no valid argument that any of this was illegal.
And none of it supports Trump’s bogus charge that Obama personally wiretapped him.
Perhaps you think political chatter is unusual. I don’t. Most of it doesn’t affect me or my nation much. Both parties have engaged in hard ball, hitting below the belt, down and dirty ads and accusations, semi-true or spun. Dirty politics is one thing…criminal activity to affect a campaign or take out a sitting president is quite another.
As are false, baseless accusations of such. What other president has, without evidence, tweets out an accusation against his predecessor of criminal activity? None. Yet another norm shattered by Trump…and you just accept it.
Will you ever give up that arrogant attitude. It’s quite unattractive, Chris.
The investigations are not yet complete and reports are not yet in. You have been wrong before.
The Federalist, “10 Key Takeaways From The New York Times’ Error-Ridden Defense Of FBI Spying On Trump Campaign”
And there’s more…will you read the entire article and consider it could be true? Are you curious at all?
More:
Your partisan media has helped to smear the reputations of many innocent people, one of them is Carter Page. They have acted as gatekeepers in this scandal, very unprofessional. This will not end well for them or the party they work so hard to protect.
We wouldn’t need blogs and other forms of alternative media were they doing their jobs with honor.
From the Federalist:
The F.B.I. investigated four unidentified Trump campaign aides in those early months, congressional investigators revealed in February. The four men were Michael T. Flynn, Paul Manafort, Carter Page and Mr. Papadopoulos,
Three out of four of these people have pled guilty to or been convicted of serious crimes, so I don’t know how you think this helps you. Why do you think this demonstrates inappropriate actions by the FBI? They were monitored because they needed to be. Some of them before they even worked for the Trump campaign.
None of this supports Trump’s lie that Obama wiretapped him.
Your partisan media has helped to smear the reputations of many innocent people, one of them is Carter Page.
You have no idea if Page is innocent. You just believe it because you want to.
Re: “The FBI told the court that they suspected the person funding the dossier was a political rival of Trump. The court did not care, because who funded it didn’t matter one whit; what mattered was that they found the charges in the dossier credible.”
THANK YOU CHRIS!!!
But it did matter much much more than a whit and that is precisely the problem. The court took a dossier the FBI presented as credible when the FBI, in fact, knew it was not credible. Moreover any reasonable judge would have realized that the damned thing was badly tainted horse pucky and would have told the FBI to shove it.
Imagine the FBI getting a FISA by using a cooked up dossier that you are a pedophile while knowing it was not credible and had been paid for by someone wanting to destroy your life. Am I getting through to you? Is the concept of improper procedure something you can grasp? Are you completely ignorant of proper procedure?
The court took a dossier the FBI presented as credible when the FBI, in fact, knew it was not credible.
This is not true. There is literally no evidence of this.
Comey did say that parts of the dossier were “salacious and unverified,” but no one from the FBI has gone on record as saying the whole dossier was not credible, and we don’t even know which parts were included in the FISA application.
Moreover any reasonable judge would have realized that the damned thing was badly tainted horse pucky and would have told the FBI to shove it.
And yet four Republican-appointed judges did not think so…why should I trust your reasoning above theirs?
Imagine the FBI getting a FISA by using a cooked up dossier that you are a pedophile while knowing it was not credible and had been paid for by someone wanting to destroy your life.
Again, the FBI did not “know” it was not credible. We still don’t know how credible any of it was. And again, the person who paid for the dossier does not matter. Where do you think evidence against people in court often comes from? From people who don’t particularly like them. The notion that Clinton funding the dossier somehow discredits it is ridiculous.
Thank you Pie.
The fact is the court would have had the opportunity to care HAD THEY KNOWN that the political party in power funded and helped to create a phony dossier that later involved FBI and DOJ employees who then used that information against an opposition party candidate (and then president). Good Lord…that’s a huge abuse of power. HUGE!
And that is precisely what the evidence collected thus far shows.
The other piece of so-called evidence used to get the FISA warrant to spy on Page was an article, leaked to the press by then Senate Democrat leader Harry Reid, about the unsubstantiated dossier. The CIA advised against leaking it and Reid did it anyway. The court was never told about the political connection to Reid…may have thought the article preceded and led to the acquisition of the dossier.
It looks like the court was purposely deceived.
This is MUCH bigger than Watergate. It involves emloyees of the government, the Hillary campaign, the DNC, and Barack Obama.
Read and Learn.
The fact is the court would have had the opportunity to care HAD THEY KNOWN that the political party in power funded and helped to create a phony dossier that later involved FBI and DOJ employees who then used that information against an opposition party candidate (and then president). Good Lord…that’s a huge abuse of power. HUGE!
Ridiculous.
We know for a fact, because we have seen the primary source documents, that the court was explicitly told by the FBI that the dossier was likely funded by an opposing campaign during the 2016 election.
This was during the primaries, so the court could have thought that it was funded by a Republican. But obviously, they would have considered the possibility that Clinton funded the dossier.
And the court did. Not. Care.
Nor did three subsequent judges.
Because who funded the dossier did not matter one whit to its credibility.
You just invented that standard, because you have no knowledge of the subject. You only have what you want and need to be true in the moment.
“Page was shady as hell,”
There has been no trial only accusations rendered shady by the information gleaned from the Congressional hearings (not blogs that simply report the findings made available). You would know about that evidence if you didn’t buy the fake news designed to protect Hillary and others and destroy Trump.
“…and you should be asking yourself why Trump staffed his campaign with so many shady, corrupt, and incompetent people.”
Like Obama didn’t? Is there anyone in your party that isn’t shady?
Forbes, “ACA Architect: ‘The Stupidity Of The American Voter’ Led Us To Hide Obamacare’s True Costs From The Public”
Then Obama himself lied repeatedly to the American people to get the damn bill passed.
Eric Holders DOJ was caught spying on journalists:
Fast and Furious, Benghazi, Hillary’s private server, the IRS scandal, the Pigford scandal…the scandals and lies are too numerous to mention. The last lie was perhaps when Obama himself declared his administration “scandal free.”
Trump is an outsider in this game. He depended on advice from others and removed people when they became questionable, if they didn’t responsibly step down. Some of the so-called “shady, corrupt, and incompetent” people are not as they are accused. Michael Flynn and Carter Page being two off the top of my head!
It’s not to bright to make such ugly pronouncements from a position such as yours…and with such arrogance too. One day you’ll feel like a fool if you’re lucky.
Carter Page was only with the campaign for a short while…possibly one reason he was targeted.
This is a very serious scandal Chris. It sits outside of partisan politics because it effects us all. The rule of law and the idea that no one is above the law are being undermined. I suggest you do some reading.
“Yet another norm shattered by Trump…and you just accept it.”
Bad move, Chris. Jimmy Carter was perhaps the first former president to break the “former presidents go into retirement and keep their mouths shut” rule. He’s done it repeatedly. In fact your party has quite a record of interfering by trying to go around the president in foreign affairs particularly.
The accusations are backed up by quite a trail of evidence, Chris. Crimes, potential crimes, and corruption are all in the mix. And if the left power structure can send Scooter Libby to jail for getting the date wrong for a dinner while not even being the guilty party (who magically escaped prosecution) then Hillary and a good number of people who served under Obama in the FBI, DOJ, IRS, and Justice Department deserve the heat of sunlight placed on them with appropriate consequences for misdeeds.
Do yourself a favor and learn something about how things are done in corrupt DC circles.
Talk about whataboutism, Chris is a master. Refusing to turn a critical eye towards the propagandist arm of the fake news MSM makes perfect sense for this anti-intellectual, emotionally driven, partisan demagogue.
No, pointing out that Trump rebranded the term “fake news,” a term which gained popularity in relation to his lies and the lies of his supporters, to slander the media outlets which exposed his lies isn’t whataboutism. It’s literally a critique of whataboutism.
For my remarks to be whataboutism, I would have had to have implied that Tina’s critique of the news she mentions being “fake” didn’t matter, without an actual rebuttal. But I specifically asked her for evidence that the news stories she’s talking about are fake. That isn’t whataboutism.
You should really stop using words you don’t know the meaning of.
Chris, I wasn’t commenting on your specific argument with Tina about Pittsburg.
You seem to completely forget about Obama’s and Hillary’s charges of fake news. As for whataboutism, that was a general comment on how you operate, not what is going on in this specific thread. So, allow me to follow suit (ironically but with no disavowal) and engage in some whataboutism that you have historically fallen back on out of habit — Go look up fake news accusations from your side of the political spectrum.
Oh, and then there is this bit of fun, since you are so big on lies and fake news —
8 Times Hillary Clinton Pushed Fake News
You think I would click on a Breitbart link?
Why?
It’s disturbing on many levels because Chris represents a sizable segment of the population.
For once I agree with Jon Stewart.
Jon Stewart Sums Up How Trump Plays the Media Like a Fiddle: He Appeals to ‘Their Own Narcissism’
https://ijr.com/jon-stewart-trump-plays-the-media/
He also plays the left wing propagandist MSM overlords, the Democrat Party, like a fiddle. Baiting them into extremist rhetoric. As much as I dislike Trump’s style, driving them foaming-at-the-mouth nuts WORKS — FOR — ME. I feel their pain.
I keep remembering the military education Trump received prior to college. He’s been trained in both strategic and tactical battle planning. He’s playing the Dems and the media and they’re too stupid to know it.
He dangles a verbal carrot in front of their noses and they fight each other to get it, while making fools of themselves.
Hahaha! I rest my case. The Dems are going batshi% crazy because they’re desperate. Popcorn time!
‘Grab Them By The Ballot’: Women Pose Nude Urging People To Vote For Democrats:
“Ten leftist women, determined to give their all for the cause, posed stark naked for a series of photographs with only a ballot covering their genitals to urge people to vote for Democrats on November 6.
The series was named, in a reference to Donald Trump’s infamous “grab’em by the p***y” remark, “Grab Them By The Ballot.” Trump’s comment became public late in the 2016 election season.
The photo series was organized by Dawn Robertson, 48, who wanted women of different shapes, sexual orientations, and races to demonstrate their unified opposition to the Republican Party. Robertson said her effort was precipitated by the #MeToo allegations against various celebrities as well as what she termed the GOP’s attack on women’s reproductive rights and transgender people’s rights.
I want them to know that their voice matters and this is serious s***.” (ROTFLMAO)
https://www.dailywire.com/news/37899/grab-them-ballot-women-pose-nude-urging-people-hank-berrien?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=dwbrand&fbclid=IwAR1-aTDz27xQyYO6wIM7ajzfRSejzFw5QNlSed-Gs4oqLHGU-ei7nae6A90
Re: Chris
Cite the “fake news” articles that claimed all of Pittsburg was opposed to Trump’s visit. Or are you claiming merely reporting on the protests is “fake news?”
I didn’t see “hate-filled” protesters or uncivil behavior from the crowd in Pittsburg. You can cite evidence of that, too, if you have it.
1) Who made the assertion that the fake news was “ALL of Pittsburg was opposed to Trump’s visit.”
2) CNN and MSNBC gave plenty of air time to protesters politicizing the event, where the heck were you? In fact, they focused on it.
The “fake” news from CNN and MSNBC is nuanced in the sense they gave plenty of air to the protests instead of focusing on the actual issue at hand, Trump’s visit to mourn with the victims who appreciated his appearance. They essentially made the protest by covering it, as the protesters knew they would. In other words, they happily worked in concert with the protestors to politicize a day of mourning.
But heck, nothing wrong with that, eh Chris? You should be a happy camper.
“In other words, they happily worked in concert with the protestors to politicize a day of mourning”
Because….it makes Trump look bad. To hell with the families and friends of the dead, to hell with propriety and respect, to hell with setting aside politics in a moment of grief to responsibly cover the leader of our country as he honors the dead on behalf of the American people.
They saw an opportunity to demean Trump and took it.
Slime!
Why the biased left-wing media doesn’t report on hate crimes against Jews explained.
————–
The New York Times Just Made A STUNNING Admission About Why Leftists Often Refuse To Call Out Anti-Semitism:
“Contrary to what are surely the prevailing assumptions, anti-Semitic incidents have constituted half of all hate crimes in New York this year, according to the Police Department. To put that figure in context, there have been four times as many crimes motivated by bias against Jews — 142 in all — as there have against blacks. Hate crimes against Jews have outnumbered hate crimes targeted at transgender people by a factor of 20.
During the past 22 months, not one person caught or identified as the aggressor in an anti-Semitic hate crime has been associated with a far right-wing group, Mark Molinari, commanding officer of the police department’s Hate Crimes Task Force, told me.
Those motives range from racial hatred to religious hatred. But the Times story reveals far more than that. The Times admits that the Left has routinely ignored anti-Semitism in the city thanks to its inability to formulate a narrative blaming the Right. The Times explains:
If anti-Semitism bypasses consideration as a serious problem in New York, it is to some extent because it refuses to conform to an easy narrative with a single ideological enemy.”
https://www.dailywire.com/news/37888/new-york-times-just-made-stunning-admission-about-ben-shapiro?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=dwbrand&fbclid=IwAR0X7C-RS3Zi_o1jS_Gc5Yi3JObsEJOyl4M7J3vBFPAZ4ufC80y229RYRZU
One of the increasingly rare occasions when the NYT is half way honest. It must because they fear losing the last remnants of paying, self hating Jewish customers when they are losing everyone else save chroniclers of the “Everything Fit To Print” unintentional comedy.
By the way, you can thank the NYT for unilaterally removing “an” from the vocabulary of English grammar? I dinna ken. “An” is a beautiful thing.
Chris: “At the height of the recession unemployment was almost 10%. It was cut in half during Obama’s two terms.”
Yeah, with smoke and mirrors.
2016, RT, “Majority of jobs added under Obama administration are temp, part time – study”
2016, Marketwatch, ”
Nearly half of college grads are underemployed. But they’re not literally baristas”
2016, Pew Research, “Increase in living with parents driven by those ages 25-34, non-college grads”
2016, Daily Caller, “Obama Kept His Promise, 83,000 Coal Jobs Lost And 400 Mines Shuttered”
2016, Washington Times, “No, Obama, you presided over a loss of manufacturing jobs, and failed to deliver on exports”
2015, CNN Money, “Obama says wages are growing. They’re not”
2016, National Review, “Obama’s Pretty Words Cannot Beautify His Ugly Economy ”
People like you with government jobs may not have noticed but one hell of a lot of other people did. Do you give a rats butt about them? NO…your mind is closed and winning politically is more important to you.
One more thing. The housing crash and banking problem was addressed by Bush before Obama took office:
Had he worked for ALL of the American people instead of pursuing his own agenda he would have enacted policies that addressed the recession to get Americans back to work. Instead, he enacted policies that killed jobs and prolonged any real recovery. Hence the stagnation in jobs, wage growth and the myriad problems that flow from bad economic policy. 18 months is the average for recovery after recession. Obama managed to stretch it out to nearly eight years.
After reading the above comments from Chris, it’s obvious he wishes for an Obumble third term. But nobody else does!
Now, this IS funny watching Obama panic while trying to preserve his legacy created with his phone and pin, instead of the approval of Congress.
Unhinged! Without a teleprompter, Obama loses it while attacking Trump:
https://mediaequalizer.com/martin-walsh/2018/11/unhinged-without-a-teleprompter-obama-loses-it-while-attacking-trump?fbclid=IwAR3qbpv0tma6kAYIQIuLsHaBkXMS6ci9nm6U6GxBHTEnwd6bH6_ICUzP4eo
Peggy this by Obama is hilarious…
“This is not spin. That’s not exaggeration. That’s not trying to put a positive glow on things. That’s lying,” Obama said, arguing that Trump and Republicans are lying about their positions on critical issues such as Obamacare and medicaid.
…since one of his architects for Obamacare admitted lying to the “stupid” American people to get it passed and he was named, as you often point out, liar of the year for his big lie about Obamacare.
They think they are omnipotent…and invisible when they lie. Mind boggling.
You can trash Obama for his lies about the ACA until the end of time for all I’m concerned.
But at the end of the day, it’s all you have, in comparison to your current president who tells an average of 30 lies a day.
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-telling-worse-lies-serial-liar-fact-checking-journalist-alleges-1200769
I understand.
It’s all you have.
Tina, it’s not just the lies they did tell us, it’s the lies they didn’t tell us that hurt us too if not more.
Remember it was Michelle’s college classmate’s company that got the no-bid contract for $678 million to set up the enrollment websites that didn’t work? Then there were similar problems with each state, where some never did work. If my memory is right the cost to taxpayers for this con came in around $3 trillion.
MICHELLE OBAMA’S PRINCETON CLASSMATE IS EXECUTIVE AT COMPANY THAT BUILT OBAMACARE WEBSITE:
“First Lady Michelle Obama’s Princeton classmate is a top executive at the company that earned the contract to build the failed Obamacare website.
Toni Townes-Whitley, Princeton class of ’85, is senior vice president at CGI Federal, which earned the no-bid contract to build the $678 million Obamacare enrollment website at Healthcare.gov. CGI Federal is the U.S. arm of a Canadian company.”
https://dailycaller.com/2013/10/25/michelle-obamas-princeton-classmate-is-executive-at-company-that-built-obamacare-website/
Also, remember when Obama said he would guarantee that ObamaCare would not cost taxpayers a single dime? Yeah, another whopper lie he hid from us.
CBO: ObamaCare Increases Deficit by $1.35 Trillion:
“Buried in a new report by the Congressional Budget Office is the latest admission that ObamaCare was sold on a foundation of lies.
Back in 2009, President Barack Obama told a joint session of Congress that “our health care system is placing an unsustainable burden on taxpayers.” “Put simply, our health care problem is our deficit problem. Nothing comes close. Nothing else.”
The president’s speech was designed to be all things to all people: ObamaCare would cover millions of uninsured Americans at no extra cost to taxpayers.
Regarding the health law’s fiscal neutrality, President Obama was emphatic.
“First, I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits – either now or in the future. I will not sign it if it adds one dime to the deficit, now or in the future, period. And to prove that I’m serious, there will be a provision in this plan that requires us to come forward with more spending cuts if the savings we promised don’t materialize.”
Before concluding his pledge, the president couldn’t resist taking a swipe at his predecessor.
“Now, part of the reason I faced a trillion-dollar deficit when I walked in the door of the White House is because too many initiatives over the last decade were not paid for – from the Iraq war to tax breaks for the wealthy. I will not make that same mistake with health care.”
http://cfif.org/v/index.php/commentary/56-health-care/2449-cbo-obamacare-increases-deficit-by-135-trillion
Worst president in US history!!!
Re Chris Regarding The Fake Dossier: “Again, the FBI did not “know” it was not credible.”
Utter nonsense. The dossier is full of discredited information, the FBI knew it and used it to mislead a FISA judge.
Your really are a piece of work. I often wonder how people as intentionally blind and ignorant as you are manage to draw breath much less, ostensibly, get in a position of authority teaching young children. You should have your teaching credentials revoked.
Facts:
An independent unit inside the FBI reviewed Steele’s reporting and assessed the document as “minimally corroborated.”
FBI Director James Comey said the dossier was “salacious and unverified” in testimony before Congress.
The FBI “cited extensively” from a Yahoo news report in its initial FISA application that was based on information Steele was fired for leaking.
The FBI effectively used the dossier to corroborate the dossier, and incorrectly told the court Steele was not the source for the Yahoo news article.
Chris asks, “You think I would click on a Breitbart link? Why?”
Why not? What are you afraid of? Are you afraid you might get “triggered” and have to spend the next week huddled in your “safe space” clutching a plush doll?
I pity Chris, but more than that I pity the children who must suffer him.
FBI Director James Comey said the dossier was “salacious and unverified” in testimony before Congress.
As you’ve been shown before, and as I just said, this is a lie. He said parts of the dossier were salacious and unverified.
Why would you try this lie on me after I pre-emptively rebutted it? To what end?
Chris asks, “You think I would click on a Breitbart link? Why?”
Why not? What are you afraid of? Are you afraid you might get “triggered” and have to spend the next week huddled in your “safe space” clutching a plush doll?
I’m “afraid” of wasting my time on a lying, white nationalist website.
But then, I’m here…so I guess you have a point.
To reiterate Chris’ claim on the Steele Dossier: “Again, the FBI did not “know” it was not credible.”
This is patently absurd, idiotic and ignorant given the facts.
Regarding Reading a Breitbart Article: I read Salon, Huffington Post, Slate and Mother Jones (to name a few) on a regular basis.
Yeah, what a bubble I live in your sniveling coward. You really are the same presumptuous, bigoted and stupid ***hole you have always been.
Chris: “You think I would click on a Breitbart link? Why?”
Curiosity! Intellectual curiosity.
Had you done it you would have discovered that the article contained direct quotes and video examples of Hillary citing fake news and creating it!
It’s called responsibly informing yourself.
Intellectually curious people, who responsibly inform themselves, neither cite Breitbart nor humor those who do.
But you’ll never realize that, because you are not intellectually curious, nor responsible, nor informed.
Hence, you are Breitbart’s target audience.
In normal people circles, the name “Breitbart” is most associated with a guy who got a black woman fired by creating “fake news” to tar her as a racist when she was actually speaking of overcoming racism.
And that was before the site went to complete shit.
But you can enjoy your bubble.
To reiterate Chris’ claim on the Steele Dossier: “Again, the FBI did not “know” it was not credible.”
This is patently absurd, idiotic and ignorant given the facts.
Regarding Reading a Breitbart Article: I read Salon, Huffington Post, Slate and Mother Jones (to name a few) on a regular basis.
Yeah, what a bubble I live in you sniveling snowflake coward. You really are the same presumptuous, bigoted and stupid ***hole you have always been.
One last comment on the Steele Dossier and Chris Pigheadedness —
Yes, Chris, Comey did testify that parts of the dossier were salacious and unverified.
Evidently this translates to our commenting genius that the FBI did not “know” the document was not credible or that some of it was actually credible. Wow, talk about filling in a lot of blanks! There may be a reason assumption begins with ass.
No one in the FBI has stated any of the dossier is credible, but evidently because Comey testified that parts were salacious and unverified, dossier as a whole is credible, at least credible enough to shop to an FBI friendly FISA judge.
That is completely asinine and absurd in light of the evidence at hand. The FBI would have to be as stupid as Chris to think that document credible. The FBI as a whole is not that stupid, but maybe “parts” were.
It should be fairly obvious at this point that a small politically motivated cabal within the FBI willingly mislead a FISA judge using a dossier that was known to be not credible. But you go ahead and live in your bubble Chris.
“No one in the FBI has stated any of the dossier is credible,”
But Comey did say that the source was credible.
But former FBI Director James Comey said he believed from the outset that the British intelligence officer who wrote the report was a “credible source.”
“It was coming from a credible source, someone with a track record, someone who was a credible and respected member of an allied intelligence service during his career,” Comey said, referring to former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele. “And so it was important that we try to understand it, and see what could we verify, what could we rule in or rule out.”
…“It, at its core, was consistent with the other information we’d gathered during the intelligence investigation,” he said of the dossier.
Comey said there were three goals behind the Russian effort, which are “at the core” of the dossier: to “dirty up the American democracy”; to damage Hillary Clinton in her candidacy because Russian President Vladimir Putin “personally hated” her; and “to help Donald Trump become elected president.”
“Those allegations are at the core of the Steele dossier, and we already knew that was true from totally separate information. And so at its core, it said something that was consistent with what we believed,” Comey told Stephanopoulos.
Comey said he was aware of who funded the report, which Steele compiled for Fusion GPS, a political research firm co-founded by former Wall Street Journal reporter Glenn Simpson.
“I was told at some point that it was — the effort had originally been financed by a Republican source to develop material, opposition research on Donald Trump,” Comey told Stephanopoulos. “Then after the Republican nominating process ended, the effort was taken up and funded by a Democratic-aligned group trying to get opposition research on Trump. … I never knew … who the groups were, but I knew it started with Republicans paying for it and then Democrats were paying for it.”
But when asked if he thought the document was credible, Comey referred to its source.
“Well, certainly the source was credible. There’s no doubt that he had a network of sources and sub-sources in a position to report on these kinds of things. But we tend to approach these things with a bit of a blank slate, trying to figure out, ‘So what can we replicate?’ This guy, who’s credible, says these things are true. Okay. That means we should try and replicate that work to see if we can develop the same sources,” Comey said.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/comey-believes-source-steele-dossier-credible/story?id=54488781
It seemed to me that Comey was trying to avoid confirming or denying any specific part of the dossier. Since the claims are still being investigated, this is not unusual.