American war dead are "Losers and Suckers," per Trump

[volinsd]

My gut feeling is that these allegations are a mashup and blending of true comments mixed in with a few quotes taken out of context.

I'm certain Trump had bad things to say about McCain. I also think that Trump was probably doing what he normally does and speaks off the cuff and had a stream of consciousness moment... similar to the bleach/coronavirus comments that were taken out of context. I'm sure he probably questioned the purpose of Vietnam and some of these other wars, asking what the soldiers really died for. But in typical hater fashion, his enemies used those comments and spun them into a hit piece.

This has been what I've been thinking too. Just coudn't word it right. Thanks @Rasputin_Vol

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

People are comparing Trump’s latest speech to the totalitarian regime in '1984'
“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

No no no... you can't reference George Orwell and be a supporter of thought crimes and "some animals are more equal than others".

 

[hog88]

Something like 101 of 113 stories Bob Woodward published on Watergate were from anonymous sources. They all turned out to be true. (don't remember the exact numbers)

W&B was provided actual evidence by their anonymous source.

 

[BowlBrother85]

Looks like you're doing a little snipping there too. He says "He is a war hero" twice. Once to correct himself and then again before he adds "because he was captured". Which is true. That is literally why he is considered a hero. Then he made his tacky joke.

Donald Trump began the whole statement by saying that John McCain was not a war hero. Trump then quickly backtracked, but then he implied that having been captured, was some sort of mark against McCain's military service. Coming from another Vietnam war veteran that would be easier to stomach, then it is coming from someone who actively avoided service in the Vietnam war. It takes quite a bit of gall to disparage the service of a veteran, when you were not willing to serve yourself.

 

[VolnJC]

My gut feeling is that these allegations are a mashup and blending of true comments mixed in with a few quotes taken out of context.

I'm certain Trump had bad things to say about McCain. I also think that Trump was probably doing what he normally does and speaks off the cuff and had a stream of consciousness moment... similar to the bleach/coronavirus comments that were taken out of context. I'm sure he probably questioned the purpose of Vietnam and some of these other wars, asking what the soldiers really died for. But in typical hater fashion, his enemies used those comments and spun them into a hit piece.

Exactly what I said a couple days ago..and possibly a reason for the anonymous sources

 

[lawgator1]

My gut feeling is that these allegations are a mashup and blending of true comments mixed in with a few quotes taken out of context.

I'm certain Trump had bad things to say about McCain. I also think that Trump was probably doing what he normally does and speaks off the cuff and had a stream of consciousness moment... similar to the bleach/coronavirus comments that were taken out of context. I'm sure he probably questioned the purpose of Vietnam and some of these other wars, asking what the soldiers really died for. But in typical hater fashion, his enemies used those comments and spun them into a hit piece.

He is reported to have said those things specifically as a reason not to go to honor those soldiers. If it was stream of consciousness thats even worse because it reveals the absolute depth of his lack of empathy, honor, or character.

 

[BowlBrother85]

My gut feeling is that these allegations are a mashup and blending of true comments mixed in with a few quotes taken out of context.

I'm certain Trump had bad things to say about McCain. I also think that Trump was probably doing what he normally does and speaks off the cuff and had a stream of consciousness moment... similar to the bleach/coronavirus comments that were taken out of context. I'm sure he probably questioned the purpose of Vietnam and some of these other wars, asking what the soldiers really died for. But in typical hater fashion, his enemies used those comments and spun them into a hit piece.

The "taken out of context" excuse is a crutch. You haven't even addressed the most damning comments being attributed to him... it has nothing to do with McCain or even with the Vietnam war. It is these:

According to eyewitnesses, after a White House briefing given by then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joe Dunford, Trump turned to aides and said, "That guy is smart. Why did he join the military."

and....

While standing next to the grave of John Kelly's son on Memorial Day, Trump asked Kelly, "I don't get it. What was in it for them?"

How do you take things like that out of context? He either said them and they are horrible... or he didn't say them. There is no room for misinterpretation.

 

[lawgator1]

The "taken out of context" excuse is a crutch. You haven't even addressed the most damning comments being attributed to him... it has nothing to do with McCain or even with the Vietnam war. It is these:

According to eyewitnesses, after a White House briefing given by then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joe Dunford, Trump turned to aides and said, "That guy is smart. Why did he join the military."

and....

While standing next to the grave of John Kelly's son on Memorial Day, Trump asked Kelly, "I don't get it. What was in it for them?"

How do you take things like that out of context? He either said them and they are horrible... or he didn't say them. There is no room for misinterpretation.

Exactly, he did or he didn't. Given his penchant for lying every moment of the day, you cannot accept his denials.

 

[SamRebel35]

Exactly, he did or he didn't. Given his penchant for lying every moment of the day, you cannot accept his denials.

What about the denials of a dozen other people who were there, some of whom hate his guts and would love to see him taken down?

 

[hog88]

What about the denials of a dozen other people who were there, some of whom hate his guts and would love to see him taken down?

All liars.

 

[SamRebel35]

Exactly, he did or he didn't. Given his penchant for lying every moment of the day, you cannot accept his denials.

And what do you make of the timing of all of this? You think it is a coincidence that this is coming out in September before an election?

 

[BowlBrother85]

What about the denials of a dozen other people who were there, some of whom hate his guts and would love to see him taken down?

These comments are not alleged to have all taken place at once. No one person would have been present for all of them.

 

[newyorkvol]

Exactly, he did or he didn't. Given his penchant for lying every moment of the day, you cannot accept his denials.

So, not all lies are equal?

This is the second paragraph of The Atlantic story: “In a conversation with senior staff members on the morning of the scheduled visit, Trump said, ‘Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.’”

John Bolton just denied this as happening. It was the basis of the entire article. It’s now devolved into opinion and conjecture that “I could see him saying that” on other occasions.

I’m not defending his morals. But to propagate lies in order to prove his moral failings seems to be counter productive.

 

[BowlBrother85]

So, not all lies are equal?

This is the second paragraph of The Atlantic story: “In a conversation with senior staff members on the morning of the scheduled visit, Trump said, ‘Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.’”

John Bolton just denied this as happening. It was the basis of the entire article. It’s now devolved into opinion and conjecture that “I could see him saying that” on other occasions.

I’m not defending his morals. But to propagate lies in order to prove his moral failings seems to be counter productive.

It was not the basis of the entire article, or even the most serious allegation. It was one of several allegations made over a period of time.

 

[BowlBrother85]

And what do you make of the timing of all of this? You think it is a coincidence that this is coming out in September before an election?

Of course not. There are no coincidences in politics. Would Republican Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin be trying to have hearings into Burisma Holdings next month if not for the election?

 

[Y9 Vol]

Some serious butt hurt up in here.

 

[newyorkvol]

The "taken out of context" excuse is a crutch. You haven't even addressed the most damning comments being attributed to him... it has nothing to do with McCain or even with the Vietnam war. It is these:

According to eyewitnesses, after a White House briefing given by then-chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Joe Dunford, Trump turned to aides and said, "That guy is smart. Why did he join the military."

and....

While standing next to the grave of John Kelly's son on Memorial Day, Trump asked Kelly, "I don't get it. What was in it for them?"

How do you take things like that out of context? He either said them and they are horrible... or he didn't say them. There is no room for misinterpretation.

The either/or scenarios are what I believe continues to divide us. “There is no room for misinterpretation” is an conflict generating statement. As soon as I say, “There is room for misinterpretation,” we have conflict.

I spent quite a few years in the military around some very smart people. The comment, “Why are you in the military?” was not uncommon. So, there is context. Just type written on a page, it has certainly does have negative connotations. But is there any chance it was said in jest or sarcastically?

 

[newyorkvol]

It was not the basis of the entire article, or even the most serious allegation. It was one of several allegations made over a period of time.

Correct. It was the lead example.

 

[hUTch2002]

[VIDEO=]
So far fetched to believe said that, huh?

I wasn’t referring to what he said about McCain where he made comments about the guy while he was alive and in a joking manner. I’m talking about this BS story the MSM is lying about. You people never understand humor or context when it comes to Trump. It’s hilarious!

 

[hUTch2002]

No, I said Donny Bonespurs who is a draft dodger and who called McCain a "loser" and "not a war hero" for being captured probably did call the dead soldiers "losers and suckers". I wasn't discussing Biden.

So you won’t be voting for Biden then?

 

[lawgator1]

So, not all lies are equal?

This is the second paragraph of The Atlantic story: “In a conversation with senior staff members on the morning of the scheduled visit, Trump said, ‘Why should I go to that cemetery? It’s filled with losers.’”

John Bolton just denied this as happening. It was the basis of the entire article. It’s now devolved into opinion and conjecture that “I could see him saying that” on other occasions.

I’m not defending his morals. But to propagate lies in order to prove his moral failings seems to be counter productive.

From Fox News:

The source said that during the trip, the president was not in a good mood, angry at something the French president had said and questioning the need to go to two cemeteries. Trump apparently was warned he'd get bad press for canceling. The source also said there was no security reason not to drive to the cemetery, which was about 40 miles from Paris.

“The president drives a lot. The other world leaders drove to the cemeteries. He just didn’t want to go,” the source said.

So we know he is lying when he says he didn't go because of the rain. Others went, he just didn't want to because he was in the midst of a hissy fit at the French President.

According to the former official, Trump also had said of the Vietnam War: “It was a stupid war. Anyone who went was a sucker.” But sources said Trump did not use that term to refer to war dead interred at Aisne-Marne.

I mean, so kudos to the President for only saying that about Vietnam Vets? Hooray for him, I guess.

Separately, this former official also heard the president say of American veterans: "What’s in it for them? They don’t make any money?" Multiple sources have confirmed Trump said something to this effect during a 2017 visit at Arlington cemetery, as described in the Atlantic piece, though one insisted Trump was not being derogatory.

How any serviceperson, or especially family member of one lost in war, could ever support such a douchebag to be freaking Commander in Chief is beyond me. I just don't get it. The man is a complete jerk and shows disrespect for the military like its a sport.

Further, regarding accounts of the president’s July 4th military parade planning, the source said that during a planning session at the White House after seeing the Bastille Day parade in 2017, the president said regarding the inclusion of wounded veterans, “That’s not a good look” and “Americans don’t like that.”

He's right in the sense that it makes people uncomfortable. But of course that is not an excuse to insult them or in any way dismiss them or their sacrifice. Because you don't like the look? Wow. No wonder pretty much all Republicans with just a modicum of class have at this point disavowed the guy.

 

[SamRebel35]

These comments are not alleged to have all taken place at once. No one person would have been present for all of them.

A "fact" that was conveniently added by the editor once the whole damn lie began to unravel. Pardon me for being more skeptical of The Atlantic and their obvious biases than of Donald Trump. Trump is often a belligerent doofus, but there is no reason for him to have said these things and every reason for a left wing rag to cite anonymous sources to cause a conveniently timed scandal.

 

[BowlBrother85]

A "fact" that was conveniently added by the editor once the whole damn lie began to unravel. Pardon me for being more skeptical of The Atlantic and their obvious biases than of Donald Trump. Trump is often a belligerent doofus, but there is no reason for him to have said these things and every reason for a left wing rag to cite anonymous sources to cause a conveniently timed scandal.

It's not just the reporting of Jeffrey Goldberg from The Atlantic, now that Jennifer Griffin of Fox News has independently confirmed that at least some of these allegations are being made by multiple former Senior Trump Administration Officials. You want to make it completely about The Atlantic... but it's not.

Is Fox News "a left-wing rag" too?

 

[newyorkvol]

From Fox News:



So we know he is lying when he says he didn't go because of the rain. Others went, he just didn't want to because he was in the midst of a hissy fit at the French President.





I mean, so kudos to the President for only saying that about Vietnam Vets? Hooray for him, I guess.



How any serviceperson, or especially family member of one lost in war, could ever support such a douchebag to be freaking Commander in Chief is beyond me. I just don't get it. The man is a complete jerk and shows disrespect for the military like its a sport.



He's right in the sense that it makes people uncomfortable. But of course that is not an excuse to insult them or in any way dismiss them or their sacrifice. Because you don't like the look? Wow. No wonder pretty much all Republicans with just a modicum of class have at this point disavowed the guy.

So again, I’m not defending his morality. In fact, I have no respect for him as a man or President. My objections are the means by which all this is being done. It’s a classic “the end justifies the means.” Whatever needs to be said/done to get him out of office has been checked off as acceptable.

 

[hog88]

It's not just the reporting of Jeffrey Goldberg from The Atlantic, now that Jennifer Griffin of Fox News has independently confirmed that at least some of these allegations are being made by multiple former Senior Trump Administration Officials. You want to make it completely about The Atlantic... but it's not.

Is Fox News "a left-wing rag" too?

They need to name a couple of these "FORMER Senior Trump Administration Officials."

For the life of me why would a former official be afraid to be a named source?