Donald Trump Presidency discussion Thread VI

aloyisious

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Not a single one of them have said the aid was held up on Trump's orders. Trumps only interest in Ukraine was the investigation, there not trying to impeach him for having an interest in the investigation into corruption by members of the party calling for impeachment.

Do you believe Mick Mulvaney would order a hold on the funds movement all on his own without getting it approved by Don first, given that the funds were approved by the GOP-controlled Senate? The OMB was told by Mick to NOT release the funds and examine if the purpose intended for the funds use was good value. Mick's last job, before Don appointed him as his White House Chief of Staff, was running the OMB so he would be aware [from experience in both positions] of the politics and risks behind putting a hold on the Senate approved-funds for Ukraine.

brooke 2

rosser44 wrote: »

He looked and sounded so dejected

Dr. Hill seems well able for the GOP members of the committee

Dr. Hill was astoundingly fantastic! Her account of what the Russians did to Georgia when no one came to their aid, was spellbinding. She set out very clearly why the US should help Ukraine. It was amazing the way she demolished those Republican schmucks!!

AtomicHorror

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Not a single one of them have said the aid was held up on Trump's orders.

That's not true- David Hale was told by OMB that the hold was on the orders of the President. I think others had the same response from OMB and testified to that.

If OMB were mistaken (or all of those who testified were lying), then why has Trump not simply named the person who did order the hold?

brooke 2

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Oh Fiona hill is a great witness. She’s made ambassador Sondland look like a spoofer.

Which he most definitely was! He came across as a bit of a showboating fool, but he did provide some light relief at times!!

Outlaw Pete

Leroy42 wrote: »

The mere fact that he is spending all his time defending himself to the media ..

All his time? Ah come on, just because the MSM have focused almost every second on impeachmentapalooza doesn't mean that the POTUS has been.

He hosted Erdogan at the WH last week, and yesterday he presented National Medal of the Arts:


https://twitter.com/WhiteHouse/status/1197599273958957058

The day before that he opened a new Apple manufacturing plant in Texas:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1197316106236481539

Day before that launched new legislation with regards to Health Care pricing transparency:

https://twitter.com/SecAzar/status/1195431583613947904

Now I know people will have some problem with the above examples for some reason or other but I'm not posting them to say they're all amazingly positive things, but rather to show that while this circus has been taking place Trump has been getting on with the job he was elected to do.

I get it though, as if they were to give much focus to the actual work Trump does each day, then that would mean that whenever he plays a round of golf they wouldn't be able to suggest that that's all he ever does.

Midlife

It's astounding that some people are so blinkered on this.

You could argue - 'so what?'. That's acceptable. But at this stage to say that the white house wasn't trying to leverage aid to gain a leg up is just ignoring reality.

And regardless of what side you're on, to pretend that a political system where you can pay 1 million to become the ambassador to the EU, never take notes, correct your story twice and then rat out everyone else is anything other than totally messed up and corrupt is also insane.

I get the drain the swamp thing. People think there's too much waste etc. But to get rid of experts and appoint random wealthy people who are utterly inexperienced in their new roles? I mean who can agree with that?

Regarding Ukraine, it's clear what happened and he's guilty as hell. He was playing by the wrong rules. Don turned away all the critical voices he needed to make the transition to politics. He surrounded himself with fawning yes men and women and clearly no-one got the message through to him that the rules have changed since he made the transition from business to politics.

The lauded 'deal making' and 'best people' that we were told about was all total nonsense. He's clearly out of his depth and is unwilling to learn.

That's not to say a sizeable chunk of the US won't vote for him again.

Then we'll have four more years of lies, nothing happening and his supporters citing state visits as achievements.

In a way, it' s great that he and his administration have been so utterly incompetent at everything. Imagine an effective group of people in there.

Outlaw Pete

everlast75 wrote: »

Sondland said unequivocally there was a qpq

He's a bs'er, as Fiona Hill pretty much testified. He can't be trusted to parse what other people told him Trump said.

QPQs require a precondition and as testified, Trump never mentioned any to him.

Castor: Did the President ever tell you about preconditions, for ANYTHING?

Sondland: No.

https://twitter.com/TimMurtaugh/status/1197201275500343296

Midlife

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

He's a bs'er, as Fiona Hill pretty much testified. QPQs require a precondition, he said Trump never mentioned any to him.




https://twitter.com/TimMurtaugh/status/1197201275500343296

Can I ask your personal opinion?

Do you think Trump never tried to use state aid to have a pop at Biden?

Or

Do you think there just isn't and won't be enough evidence to show it?

Igotadose

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

The day before that he opened a new Apple manufacturing plant in Texas:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1197316106236481539

He lied, of course. The plants been there since 2013.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/11/21/20975979/donald-trump-apple-plant-austin-texas-tim-cook

everlast75

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

He's a bs'er, as Fiona Hill pretty much testified. He can't be trusted to parse what other people told him Trump said.

QPQs require a precondition and as testified, Trump never mentioned any to him. [/url]

1) Trump quoted Sondlond when he read from his sharpie whiteboard. If he's a BS'er, why are Trump supporters and indeed Trump himself use what Sondlond said to clear him?

2) trump was empathetic in terms of saying no quid pro quo to Sondlond. That was AFTER he became aware there was an issue. Is screams guilt

3) if sondlond revising his testimony is enough to label him untrustworthy, why do you believe for one moment whatever comes out of Trump's mouth, given he is such a prolific liar?

4) if you take Hill's word on the character of Sondlond, why do you refuse to acknowledge the rest of her testimony, in relation to what Rudy was up to and how that helps the Russians?

the timeline and transcript sets all of the facts out. Whether Trump, Sondlond or anyone else says there was or was not a QPQ, the memo transcript and facts set out the delay and what happened. Facts are stubborn things. "I need you to do me a favour though". "Me" by the way - not the Country. He knew the announcement of an investigation was for his benefit, not the U.S. to think otherwise is nonsense.

Sondlond had emails from Pompeo etc. Whether sondlond is credible or not, his emails are. The upper tier knew what was happening.

Now, either we are to believe that Trump knew nothing and his employees were free lancing a scheme to benefit Trump's own reelection in which case Trump is not capable of running an administration or hiring the best people, or he knew exactly. The transcript backs up the fact that he did know.

One last point - you can claim that not speaking to the investigators is clever so that no one self implicates, but to the average joe it looks guilty as hell. Its showing in the polls.

everlast75

Igotadose wrote: »

He lied, of course. The plants been there since 2013.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/11/21/20975979/donald-trump-apple-plant-austin-texas-tim-cook

Anyone who reads proper news contributors knows this.

Outlaw Pete

Midlife wrote: »

Do you think Trump never tried to use state aid to have a pop at Biden?

Short answer: No.

Very long answer: the reason most of you (collective you: be it left-leaners, liberals or just plain DT haters) feel the way you do is because you have only focused on one single narrative for three years and missed everything else that has been going on. It's been the disportionate olympics: from Russiagate; through 'Kavanaugh-gate'; through 'Nazis-are-fine-people-gate'; through 'Meryl Streep saying he mocked disabled journalists-gate'; through 'Immigrants-are-animals-gate' (etc etc) right up to where we are now with 'He tried to bribe Ukraine to investigate a 2020 opponent-gate'.

So why would any of you feel any different than you currently do when your opinions are not informed as a direct result of what you have chosen to pay attention to and not to pay attention to. Of course you all feel Trump's only reason for requesting that the Bidens' Burisma dealings get investigated would be personal and motivated by the fact Biden might be on the ballot in 2020.

But, if you at least try and see things from Trump's REAL perspective, taking on board all that he was accused of, from being a Russian agent, to a traitor, to someone who'd pay prostitutes to urinate in a bed just cause Michelle Obama had slept in it, and also take on board what he had been told (even if some of it was false) about the role Ukraine played in it all, with regards to a Ukrainian politician releasing the documents that led to his campaign manager being linked with corruption, and that very same politician being a source for that Steele dossier .. and it really shouldn't be a much of surprise that Trump would be of the belief that Ukraine tried to 'take him down' in 2016 and that he would jump at the chance to have that all investiigated.

So that brings us to the Bidens and Burisma. So why mention them to Zelensky? Well: the video of Biden bragging that he had Ukraine's prosecutor fired went viral, and the stuff about Hunter had also been splashed all of the media too, from the NY Times to The Hill. Also, note that Trump prefaced the request with: 'There's a lot of talk' and 'People want to find out' and so clearly he believes this needs to be 'looked into' because of what he is hearing from others. Who are those others? Could be Rudy or it could be US Intel, but he mentions AG Barr first and so that would lead me to believe that there has been some discussion of maybe an official investigation into Budens-Burisma going on and that is why he sought Ukraine's cooperation there.

One quote from Mulveney during that presser which never gets quoted is:

"No, the money held up had absolutely nothing to do with Biden. There’s no question."

Now don't confuse any of the above with my saying that I don't think there could have been a transactionary aspect to it all, one way or t'other, but that's just how these things are, and I think that's what Mulveny was trying to say, but made a bags of it. I think for sure Trump would have spoken with Mulveney, Rudy and Sondland with regards to him only wanting to give aid to Ukraine if their days of corruption were behind them and wanting Zelensky to maybe do something to show that he was serious in that regard. That investigations into the alleged meddling of the Ukrainians in 2016 may have been mentioned during these discussions, does not therefore make it a QPQ.

For a start, even if that was a decided upon condition which Trump wanted at one state of feeling Zelensky out with regards to his seriousness about fighting corruption, there's nothing to say he wouldn't soften on it a week later. So evidence of Trump even saying he would not release aid until Ukraine committed to having investigations, wouldn't be the smoking gun that the democrats would no doubt treat it as should such a thing come to light.

Have a feeling my short answer will be more appreciated than my long one.

Leroy42

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

All his time? Ah come on, just because the MSM have focused almost every second on impeachmentapalooza doesn't mean that the POTUS has been.

This is the actual line that I wrote

The mere fact that he is spending all his time defending himself to the media, rather than dealing with what would be a massive problem tells you all you need to know

You are absolutely right, I should have said that he is spending all his with the media. But rather than deal with the substantive point, ie the fact he isn't dealing with the apparent rogue associates working for him namely Rudy, Mulvaney, Pompeo, but instead instead trying to claim with the issue that effects him directly.

Leroy42

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Not a single one of them have said the aid was held up on Trump's orders. Trumps only interest in Ukraine was the investigation, there not trying to impeach him for having an interest in the investigation into corruption by members of the party calling for impeachment.

Do you agree that the aid was held back for a period of time?
If you do, and everyone accepts that it was, then you either face the prospect that it was based on a Trump order or that unelected, special advisors appointed by Trump have decided amongst themselves to go rogue and are now making up foreign policy against the wishes of POTUS.

In one he is directly accountable, in the other you have a POTUS completely unable to run his own administration and is nothing more than a figure head. Either way is not a good luck for apparently the most powerful man in the world.

Christy42

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Short answer: No.

Very long answer: the reason most of you (collective you: be it left-leaners, liberals or just plain DT haters) feel the way you do is because you have only focused on one single narrative for three years and missed everything else that has been going on. It's been the disportionate olympics: from Russiagate; through 'Kavanaugh-gate'; through 'Nazis-are-fine-people-gate'; through 'Meryl Streep saying he mocked disabled journalists-gate'; through 'Immigrants-are-animals-gate' (etc etc) right up to where we are now with 'He tried to bribe Ukraine to investigate a 2020 opponent-gate'.

So why would any of you feel any different than you currently do when your opinions are not informed as a direct result of what you have chosen to pay attention to and not to pay attention to. Of course you all feel Trump's only reason for requesting that the Bidens' Burisma dealings get investigated would be personal and motivated by the fact Biden might be on the ballot in 2020.

But, if you at least try and see things from Trump's REAL perspective, taking on board all that he was accused of, from being a Russian agent, to a traitor, to someone who'd pay prostitutes to urinate in a bed just cause Michelle Obama had slept in it, and also take on board what he had been told (even if some of it was false) about the role Ukraine played in it all, with regards to a Ukrainian politician releasing the documents that led to his campaign manager being linked with corruption, and that very same politician being a source for that Steele dossier .. and it really shouldn't be a much of surprise that Trump would be of the belief that Ukraine tried to 'take him down' in 2016 and that he would jump at the chance to have that all investiigated.

So that brings us to the Bidens and Burisma. So why mention them to Zelensky? Well: the video of Biden bragging that he had Ukraine's prosecutor fired went viral, and the stuff about Hunter had also been splashed all of the media too, from the NY Times to The Hill. Also, note that Trump prefaced the request with: 'There's a lot of talk' and 'People want to find out' and so clearly he believes this needs to be 'looked into' because of what he is hearing from others. Who are those others? Could be Rudy or it could be US Intel, but he mentions AG Barr first and so that would lead me to believe that there has been some discussion of maybe an official investigation into Budens-Burisma going on and that is why he sought Ukraine's cooperation there.

One quote from Mulveney during that presser which never gets quoted is:



Now don't confuse any of the above with my saying that I don't think there could have been a transactionary aspect to it all, one way or t'other, but that's just how these things are, and I think that's what Mulveny was trying to say, but made a bags of it. I think for sure Trump would have spoken with Mulveney, Rudy and Sondland with regards to him only wanting to give aid to Ukraine if their days of corruption were behind them and wanting Zelensky to maybe do something to show that he was serious in that regard. That investigations into the alleged meddling of the Ukrainians in 2016 may have been mentioned during these discussions, does not therefore make it a QPQ.

For a start, even if that was a decided upon condition which Trump wanted at one state of feeling Zelensky out with regards to his seriousness about fighting corruption, there's nothing to say he wouldn't soften on it a week later. So evidence of Trump even saying he would not release aid until Ukraine committed to having investigations, wouldn't be the smoking gun that the democrats would no doubt treat it as should such a thing come to light.

Have a feeling my short answer will be more appreciated than my long one.

Even if he did it it wouldn't be a smoking gun? Ah here at a certain point you have to admit the evidence you require is a bit much!

Why do you think Trump cared so much about corruption in the Ukraine? Why the Ukraine? He has shown to be fairly neutral at best to corruption in other countries? He doesn't care about corruption in the Ukraine and I see no evidence to make that ridiculous assumption. He was interested in Biden. Show me Trump caring about corruption elsewhere. Ukraine's days of corruption are still not behind them. Does he care at the moment? Did he care about Saudi Arabias many issues while repeatedly helping them out? Is he happy Israel with plenty of corruption accusations there is fine given he has entirely rolled over like a lap dog to them?

Trump wanted dirt on Biden. End of. Trump is corrupt and has tried to use public funds to benefit his own businesses (and succeeded though failed on the G7 summit) and doesn't care. How many pieces of his staff were corrupt? Is he that bad a judge of character that he couldn't tell till they were forced to resign or jailed?

Meanwhile a mere accusation of altering a document that may or may not have been irrelevant is enough to entirely justify the investigation into the Mueller probe as a success.

Quin_Dub

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

He's a bs'er, as Fiona Hill pretty much testified. He can't be trusted to parse what other people told him Trump said.

QPQs require a precondition and as testified, Trump never mentioned any to him.




https://twitter.com/TimMurtaugh/status/1197201275500343296

I think the single best description of the Trump/Sondland phone call where Trump repeatedly says "I want Nothing , No Quid Pro Quo" etc. is that it's like a scene from a Mafia Movie where the mobster is on the phone and knows that the police are listening in so he starts loudly protesting his innocence and denying any knowledge of the crimes being mentioned by the guy on the other end of the phone.

We now have a mountain of sworn evidence from multiple people that they were acting on Trumps orders to withhold aid and a WH meeting until Ukraine announced an investigation into Biden/Burisma.

We are supposed to believe that a phone call with Trump (a man with what can at best be described as a "limited" vocabulary) where he actually uses the phase "No Quid Pro Quo" isn't suspicious ??

A phone call that occurred a few hours after he was informed that a complaint about Quid Pro Quo had been submitted and was being taken seriously ?

Seriously - That's the defence here?

drunkmonkey

AtomicHorror wrote: »

That's not true- David Hale was told by OMB that the hold was on the orders of the President. I think others had the same response from OMB and testified to that.

If OMB were mistaken (or all of those who testified were lying), then why has Trump not simply named the person who did order the hold?

It is True, your making the leap from a delay on funds to the commander & chief giving a direct order to hold funds until the Biden investigation is announced publicly. That is you taking a stated fact to say it didn't happen, making an assumption out of your own head and saying it did happen.

Again nobody has Testified that Trump gave a clear and direct order to withhold the funds because of Biden. That is the cold hard reality of the situation the Democrats can't face up to.

They've failed miserably at this impeachment and are going to get their Royalty and party ripped to shreds if this goes to the Senate and the Senate starts calling witnesses, it's all down to Trump, he'll make the call if he wants a quick trial or not, it could be to his advantage to take the long road and keeps the Dems busy while he runs away with the 2020 election. He's probably sick of the fake news like the majority of people so could be all done away with quickly. That would be an awful shame as we wouldn't get to the bottom of the democrats corruption.

moon2

Outlaw Pete wrote:

Also, note that Trump prefaced the request with: 'There's a lot of talk' and 'People want to find out' and so clearly he believes this needs to be 'looked into' because of what he is hearing from others. Who are those others?

He uses this rhetoric so frequently that I really think you nailed the pertinent question on the head:

Who are those others?

Do they exist?

Billy Mays

drunkmonkey wrote: »

It is True, your making the leap from a delay on funds to the commander & chief giving a direct order to hold funds until the Biden investigation is announced publicly. That is you taking a stated fact to say it didn't happen, making an assumption out of your own head and saying it did happen.

Again nobody has Testified that Trump gave a clear and direct order to withhold the funds because of Biden. That is the cold hard reality of the situation the Democrats can't face up to.

They've failed miserably at this impeachment and are going to get their Royalty and party ripped to shreds if this goes to the Senate and the Senate starts calling witnesses, it's all down to Trump, he'll make the call if he wants a quick trial or not, it could be to his advantage to take the long road and keeps the Dems busy while he runs away with the 2020 election. He's probably sick of the fake news like the majority of people so could be all done away with quickly. That would be an awful shame as we wouldn't get to the bottom of the democrats corruption.

Lot of random capitalised words in that post?


Is that you Donald?

Christy42

moon2 wrote: »

He uses this rhetoric so frequently that I really think you nailed the pertinent question on the head:

Who are those others?

Do they exist?

Probably the same people who would have proof that Russia did not meddle in the 2016 election within 2 weeks (promise made by Trump in 2017). Or the same people sending him birther evidence. Aka they don't exist

Outlaw Pete

Igotadose wrote: »

He lied, of course. The plants been there since 2013.

Like I predicted, someone would find fault with what he was doing, and here you are like clockwork, calling him a "liar" :rolleyes:

Given your accusation I Google'd the story and see that the leftist media have also been busy calling him a liar too. Quite incredible. Not just that he clearly made a bags of it, no, he's decided to try and see if he can lie and the World's media won't notice the lie.

The reason he was there as to announce the plan to build a 3-million-square-foot campus. A campus that will house 5,000 employees with the capacity to grow to 15,000.

But never mind that folks, Trump has said something which isn't technically true and so we can all call him a liar again today.

Yawn.


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1197492772850348034

DrumSteve

If trump was so concerned about corruption in the Ukraine, how many other companies and parties did he request were investigated?

Just out of curiosity.

DrumSteve

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Like I predicted, someone would find fault with what he was doing, and here you are like clockwork, calling him a "liar" :rolleyes:

Given your accusation I Google'd the story and see that all the leftist media have also been calling him a liar. Quite incredible. Not just that he clearly made a bags of it, no, he's decided to try and see if he can lie and the World's media won't notice the lie.

The reason he was there as to announce the plan to build a 3-million-square-foot campus. A campus that will house 5,000 employees with the capacity to grow to 15,000.

But never mind that folks, Trump has said something which isn't technically true and so we can all call him a liar again today.

Yawn.


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1197492772850348034

Something that isn't technically true... Ha your knocking it out of the park.

Thats still a lie.

Dohnjoe

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Like I predicted, someone would find fault with what he was doing, and here you are like clockwork, calling him a "liar" :rolleyes:

Given your accusation I Google'd the story and see that the leftist media have also been busy calling him a liar too. Quite incredible. Not just that he clearly made a bags of it, no, he's decided to try and see if he can lie and the World's media won't notice the lie.

The reason he was there as to announce the plan to build a 3-million-square-foot campus. A campus that will house 5,000 employees with the capacity to grow to 15,000.

But never mind that folks, Trump has said something which isn't technically true and so we can all call him a liar again today.

Yawn.

He's a pathological liar, I'm not sure what your point is here nitpicking just one of them.

Stallingrad

Given that Trump is so concerned with corruption can we expect him to withhold aid to Israel now that Benjamin Netanyahu is being indicted for bribery and fraud?

Quin_Dub

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Like I predicted, someone would find fault with what he was doing, and here you are like clockwork, calling him a "liar" :rolleyes:

Given your accusation I Google'd the story and see that the leftist media have also been busy calling him a liar too. Quite incredible. Not just that he clearly made a bags of it, no, he's decided to try and see if he can lie and the World's media won't notice the lie.

The reason he was there as to announce the plan to build a 3-million-square-foot campus. A campus that will house 5,000 employees with the capacity to grow to 15,000.

But never mind that folks, Trump has said something which isn't technically true and so we can all call him a liar again today.

Yawn.


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1197492772850348034

A few things.

His exact quote was

Today I opened a major Apple Manufacturing plant in Texas that will bring high paying jobs back to America.
Today Nancy Pelosi closed Congress because she doesn’t care about American Workers!

• He opened nothing , it's been there since 2013
• It's not an Apple facility , it's owned and run by Flextronics Inc.
• Apple are opening a new facility in Austin , but it's not a factory
• So ZERO Manufacturing jobs being added
• The jobs that Apple are adding are roles that have never been overseas , they are white collar development jobs (which I can almost guarantee will be mostly filled by Indian & Asian immigrants on H1 Visas)
• Congress was open today and doing stuff.
  

So - Not a single thing in the above quote from Trump is anywhere remotely true , Not "technically not true" or anything like that , just NOT TRUE.

Outlaw Pete

DrumSteve wrote: »

Something that isn't technically true... Ha your knocking it out of the park.

Thats still a lie.

Like I said, he clearly made a bags of what he was supposed to say, if he even had a grasp of what was happening at all that is, we're talking about Donald Trump here, not some great orator or evil genius. How many times do we have to have arguments based around the way Donald Trump has worded something before people start accepting that maybe, just maybe, he isn't articulate or all that intelligent.

If you watch the brief presser he gave on the day he says:

"We're seeing the beginnings of a very powerful, important plant .. "

That's true, and so it seems he thought that the new $1billion campus expansion was going to be part of where he was.

Right after that Cook starts explaining how it will be ten minutes away and you can see it's news to Trump from his expression. If anything the truth is more impressive anyway, than this lie he supposedly concocted about how the plant he was in was a new one. Maybe once in awhile given Trump the benefit is the way to go, although I can't see that happening anytime soon with some folk.

Leroy42

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Like I said, he clearly made a bags of what he was supposed to say, if he even had a grasp of what was happening at all that is, we're talking about Donald Trump here, not some great orator or evil genius. How many times do we have to have arguments based around the way Donald Trump has worded something before people start accepting that maybe, just maybe, he isn't articulate or all that intelligent.

That is actually really brilliant Pete, Kudos to you. So other people lie and con but Trump is just a stupid, inarticulate idiot and thus nothing he says can ever be taken as what he means.

Except of course when he says he didn't do something, then we he is back to being brilliant and telling it like it is.

Nobody is arguing except for posters like you. You want it both ways. Take him as right whenever it suits, and treat is an idiot when it doesn't.

If you really believe all that you just posted, how can you possibly such a person should be anywhere close to power, never mind POTUS?

Zubeneschamali

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

How many times do we have to have arguments based around the way Donald Trump has worded something before people start accepting that maybe, just maybe, he isn't articulate or all that intelligent

Or honest, truthful, trustworthy, honourable, ethical, decent, respectable, loyal, patriotic, or brave.

But hey, he is rich and famous and it's America, what more do you want?

PropJoe10

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Like I predicted, someone would find fault with what he was doing, and here you are like clockwork, calling him a "liar" :rolleyes:

Given your accusation I Google'd the story and see that the leftist media have also been busy calling him a liar too. Quite incredible. Not just that he clearly made a bags of it, no, he's decided to try and see if he can lie and the World's media won't notice the lie.

The reason he was there as to announce the plan to build a 3-million-square-foot campus. A campus that will house 5,000 employees with the capacity to grow to 15,000.

But never mind that folks, Trump has said something which isn't technically true and so we can all call him a liar again today.

Yawn.


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1197492772850348034

He is a liar, Pete. A cheating, lying, bullying idiot. Glad you might finally be on the road to figuring that out and glad that we've been able to help you along the road to enlightenment.