Reporter: "After 3 1/2 years, do you regret all the lying you've done to the American people?
— Pod Save America (@PodSaveAmerica) August 13, 2020
Trump: "All the what?"
Reporter: "All the lying."
Trump: "That who has done?"
Reporter: "You have done."
Trump: "Uhhh." pic.twitter.com/gNcndCwZyA
Friday, August 14, 2020
Mr President, Do You Regret All The Lying You Have Done to the American People?
Update 8/17: the reporter who asked this question was Shirish Date of the Huffington Post.
Anyone know who this reporter is?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
59 comments:
Three big news stories:
1. Trump brokered a peace agreement between Israel and UAE. This deal is expected to lead to peace agreements between Israel and other Arab countries.
2. Former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith will plead guilty to falsifying an e-mail in order to get FISA approval for the Obama Administration to wire-tap the Trump campaign. It's expected that others in the Obama Administration who were involved in spying on the Trump campaign will be indicted.
3. A rude reporter called Trump a liar.
IMHO #1 and #2 are quite a bit more important than #3.
P.S. Here's a video of Kamala Harris implying that her attacks on Biden during a debate were lies. You can see her laughing about lying in a debate. My point is that all politicians lie.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/08/kamala-harris-americas-least-sincere-person.php
Blogger David in Cal said...
Three big news stories:
-------------------
I take it you think covid is no worse than flu
that “It’s going to disappear. One day it’s like a miracle—it will disappear.”
that HCQ will cure the virus
The pandemic is “getting under control.”
That “We now have the lowest Fatality (Mortality) Rate in the World.”
that the intelligence test he took really proved something?
that sending children to school will be safe
ETC
160,000 death. How many would it have been with a competent Potus.
And now we have piracy (oil tankers taken) to contend with
Do you really think that "Israel signs historic deal with UAE that will 'suspend' West Bank annexation" is good news for Palestinian territory. Did they sign up to this deal?
"... cracks in the deal became quickly apparent after its announcement on Thursday, with Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, saying there was “no change” to his annexation plans, while the UAE insisted that it “immediately stops annexation”."
"... The official Palestinian news agency reported the Palestinian ambassador to the UAE was being recalled."
"President Donald Trump abruptly ended a Saturday news conference after a reporter challenged him on a lie about veterans health care he has told more than 150 times.
Trump, speaking at his Bedminster, New Jersey, golf club, had claimed again that he is the one who got the Veterans Choice program passed -- adding, "They've been trying to get that passed for decades and decades and decades and no president's ever been able to do it, and we got it done."
In fact, former President Barack Obama signed the Choice program into law in 2014. The law, which allowed eligible veterans to be covered by the government for care provided by doctors outside the VA system, was a bipartisan initiative spearheaded by two senators Trump has repeatedly criticized, Bernie Sanders of Vermont and the late John McCain of Arizona." - https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/08/politics/trump-veterans-choice-paula-reid/index.html
"... to get FISA approval for the Obama Administration to wire-tap the Trump campaign."
I know that Trumpists are comfortable with alternative facts, but for anyone else, it is worth noting that the Obama administration was not surveilling the donald trump campaign.
Layzej - We know for sure that rogue intelligence agents were spying on Trump's campaign. They got approval to spy on former campaign worker Carter Page by providing false and misleading information to the FISA Court. In fact, there was no legitimate reason to wiretap Page. By wiretapping Page, they could read all his old e-mails. They could also get information about other people involved in the Trump campaign.
Technically, these investigators were part of the Obama Administration. However, I don't have proof that Obama and his top aides knew what was going on.
Cheers
thefordprefect - First of all, I think you agree with me that rude reporter's question was unimportant, compared to many other issues.
Question for you: What would President Biden or other Democrat have done differently from what President Trump did? Please base your answer on statements made by Biden and others at the time. Bear in mind, that Trump throughout was following the advice of Dr. Anthony Fauci.
Cheers
No he wasn't following the advice of Fauchi throughout. His obsession with hydroxychloroquine came from fox News not Fauchi. Remember when Trump was waxing lyrical about HCQ at one press conference (just take it, what have you got to lose) and a reporter wanted to ask Fauchi's opinion and Trump wouldn't let him? I'm pretty sure Fauchi wasn't telling Trump that coronavirus was just like the flu either.
The trouble is DiC by getting your news from sources like powerline and instapundit you are missing real scandals taking place now under your nose. Like the USPS being dismantled by someone with major conflicts of interest just before the election. Apart from anything else it's putting lives at risk as many people rely on it for delivery of medication. Then there's Republican operatives getting a mentally ill celibrity to be a presidential candidate so as to take a few votes off Biden.
Spying on a "low level person who had worked in a campaign", but was no longer involved, is different than spying on a campaign.
"This is a low-level person who worked in a campaign," Trump, Jr. told Fox News host Tucker Carlson Monday night. "I've seen the emails where somebody says 'this is someone who is no longer working on the campaign,' and I believe one of my family members responded 'who the heck is that individual, we've never heard of him.'"
The person in question is one who the Russians had tried to recruit as an asset, and who had passed documents to the Russians. I would think Trump would welcome FBI efforts to keep the Russians from infiltrating his campaign.
What would President Biden or other Democrat have done differently from what President Trump did?
Not lied to the American people about the scope of the issue and associated risks.
Layzej - Yes, Trump's early discussions were wildly, unrealistically optimistic. I cringed when he mentioned the small number of known cases and told us that these people would soon be cured. He completely ignored all the other unknown cases and the contagion factor.
However, in terms of actions, what would Biden have done differently than Trump did?
BTW when Trump was presenting his unrealistic view of the virus, I don't recall Biden publicly stating a more realistic view. Maybe I missed it.
Cheers
Lying is an action. And one with serious consequences in this case.
Fauchi wasn't in the white house at the time with the countries top experts advising him. However this was an article he wrote, published January 29th
The outbreak of a new coronavirus, which has already infected more than 2,700 people and killed over 80 in China, will get worse before it gets better. Cases have been confirmed in a dozen countries, with at least five in the United States. There will likely be more.
Diseases don't stop at borders or walls
The State Department has scheduled an evacuation flight and advised Americans against traveling to Hubei province, the epicenter of the outbreak, and is evacuating non-essential personnel.
Trump has blithely tweeted that “it will all work out well.” Yet the steps he has taken as president have only weakened our capacity to respond.
It's a good article. You should read it.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/01/27/coronavirus-donald-trump-made-us-less-prepared-joe-biden-column/4581710002/
Thanks for the link, JD.
Ironically, Biden wrote, "Diseases don't stop at borders or walls." Yet, when Trump closed the border with China and later with Europe, Biden criticized those moves. Nor did Biden recommend a more severe, earlier shutdown or wearing masks.
Cheers
Trump didn't close the border. Thousands still flew in. It's another example of Trump continually lying. Unfortunately most conservative sources repeat those lies and those lies cost lives. They are even now still claiming Trump was right about hydroxychloroquine. Here is another link.https://www.factcheck.org/2020/07/trumps-misleading-comments-on-biden-and-the-coronavirus/
David in Cal wrote:
"3. A rude reporter called Trump a liar."
What is rude about acknowledging the facts?
More reporters need to get in Trump's face about his endless lies.
Don't conservatives, who endlessly lecture us about morals and the decline of American values, care about telling the truth anymore?
David in Cal wrote:
"Nor did Biden recommend a more severe, earlier shutdown or wearing masks."
Biden held no office then, and wasn't even the presumptive nominee. It wasn't his place to make specific policy suggestions at a time of national crisis, or interfere with the government's immediate task at hand, serious as it was.
J. D. wrote:
>> Trump didn't close the border. Thousands still flew in <<
I think it was tens of thousands, wasn't it?
"NYT: Nearly 40k flew to U.S. from China after Trump's coronavirus travel ban,"
Axios, 4/4/20
https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-trump-china-travel-ban-45a2da12-8063-4ad9-ba28-61cdeb1ce0b3.html
David in Cal said...
>> BTW when Trump was presenting his unrealistic view of the virus, I don't recall Biden publicly stating a more realistic view. Maybe I missed it. <<
It wasn't Biden's place to do so, who wasn't even the presumptive Democratic nominee at the time, nor did any other US politician, D or R. They all had the class not to do so when the US was in a crisis.
David in Cal said...
>> In fact, there was no legitimate reason to wiretap Page. By wiretapping Page, they could read all his old e-mails. They could also get information about other people involved in the Trump campaign.
Technically, these investigators were part of the Obama Administration. <<
If the FBI, NSA, CIA, etc suspected there was the possibility the Russians were aiding the Trump campaign and that the two were in cahoots, for which there is certainly circumstantial evidence, doesn't the executive branch have a strong *obligation* to investigate if that's happening??
Were they supposed to just ignore that possibility???
Remember, Trump said, Russia, if you're listening, why don't you find HIllary's emails, and they hacked Podesta within 24 hours.
David in Cal wrote:
>> thefordprefect - First of all, I think you agree with me that rude reporter's question was unimportant, compared to many other issues. <<
David, we have a president who has lied dozens of times a day since taking office.
How can you possibly say that is unimportant?
What could be MORE important??
Correction: in my post at 1:52 PM I wrote "Fauchi wasn't in the white house at the time with the countries top experts advising him."
It was probably obvious from the context but it should have been Biden not Fauchi. Sorry.
J.D. - you can judge people by what they say, even if they're out of power. Biden's comments during the pandemic did not show any particular understanding of what needed to be done. In fact, he expressed disapproval of shutting down China and Europe. Even if those shutdowns were incomplete, Biden would have done less.
Cheers
David - I'm amused by your mention of the CIA. Page was working for the CIA. Page's supposedly suspicious activities were undertaken on behalf of the CIA. The FBI hid this information from the FISA Court. Clinesmith falsified documents and helped the FBI's Crossfire Hurricane Team omit exonerating evidence about Carter Page on four separate FISA applications. That's the crime to which Clinesmith is pleading guilty.
Cheers
David: The executive branch had the duty and obligation to investigate foreign interference in Trump's campaign. There is evidence such interference was welcomed, and that it happened. Trump welcomed foreign interference in his campaign for president.
David, you have no idea what Biden would have done were he president in Feb 2020, nor was it his role to make it known at the time. He doesn't mouth off on on every subject like Trump does, most of which come back to prove him a hypocrite (like on Ebola, golfing, vacations, etc).
On Carter Page, they should throw the book on the lawyer that falsified documents.
But none of this supports a "wire-tap the Trump campaign."
Trump campaign communications director Jason Miller said of Page, "He’s never been a part of our campaign. Period." and one of Trump's family members said "we've never heard of him".
On WWBD (What would Biden do): Trump has lied to Americans from day 1 about COVID. He hasn't stopped lying. How many lives would have been saved if Americans could make rational decisions based on an honest assessment of the risks?
Why is USA in such bad shape? I'd wager much of it has to do with the lies. Biden hasn't lied.
David - I suspect you may have been misled a bit from the way mainstream media covered the Carter Page story. Please read the entire article at the link. It includes several key details that are not being emphasized by the media.
https://thefederalist.com/2020/08/17/new-york-times-manipulates-fbi-lawyers-guilty-plea-to-hide-real-spygate-news/
Cheers
David, actually Biden DID give his opinion about Covid 19. It's in a Jan. 29 article that was posted by JD on this very site. Here's the link again
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/01/27/coronavirus-donald-trump-made-us-less-prepared-joe-biden-column/4581710002/
Biden was full of criticism for Trump, but he didn't mention the points that turned out to matter. His column:
1. Said nothing about shutting down people coming from China and Europe
2. Wrongly said walls wouldn't help prevent the spread of the virus
3. Didn't recommend countrywide shutdowns
4. Said nothing about the FDA's poor procedures for getting tests developed and approved
5. Said nothing about the shorting of ventilators, respirators and other PPE
6. Gave no hint about how the government might go about remedying the shortages
Cheers
you can judge people by what they say, even if they're out of power. Biden's comments during the pandemic did not show any particular understanding of what needed to be done.
It would be helpful if you provided examples. It seems to me this is another example of Trump's lies having consequences because some people believe them. I couldn't remember Biden making any statements saying the travel bans were wrong as you stated so I did a search. Trump says Biden called the ban xenophobic and that Biden had admitted he was wrong and had apologized for it. Neither statement is true. What Biden said was "This is no time for Donald Trump's record of hysteria xenophobia, hysterical xenophobia, and fear-mongering to lead the way instead of science,". He was talking in general not specifically about the travel ban. He was likely referring to Asian Americans saying they were being harassed partly because of Trump's language. Then Biden said in early March that travel bans would not stop the virus, that we needed a plan. He was right.
You say that we can judge people by what they say, even when they are out of power. OK, compare what Biden said to the comments Trump made several years ago about Obama's handling of the Ebola outbreak. He posted around one hundred hysterical fear-mongering tweets as well as appearancing on Fox News several times. In the end only two died, neither of them having contracted it on American soil. It's hard to see how even the most fervent Trump apologist wouldn't think Trump came out badly in that comparison.
DiC: The Federalist is a right wing, conspiracy rag. They were heavily critical of Trump until he became the Republican presidential candidate. Then they became his staunchest defender and any allegation made against him is called a hoax. They have also published a lot of misinformation about the pandemic including criticizing social distancing and suggesting that people should have coronavirus parties
Regarding the USA today article. To suggest that if Biden didn't lay out a complete plan of action in a newspaper article months before he was the chosen candidate and where he would have been limited to a predetermined number of words is a bit of a stretch. Note the headline says that Trump left us less prepared and that was the main focus of the article.
It's now August and there is no sign that Trump has learnt anything during the last seven months. Several months after the first deaths from coronavirus he crammed thousands of his supporters into an indoor stadium without masks including Herman Cain who was hospitalized two weeks later and died of coronavirus. No sane person would have done that.
Until recently he was still pushing hydroxychloroquine and due to him they have over sixty million doses of it stockpiled. Today the news is that he's moved on to a new drug, oleandrin, after the my pillow guy pitched it to him.
Everyone except his loyal fans knew that he would be useless if there were a real emergency and here we are.
David - Were the people who spied on Carter Page acting because they were trying to protect the Trump Campaign from foreign interference? Or were the acting against the interests of the Trump Campaign? Bad will is proved by
-- The e-mails between the two lovers, Strzok and Page,
-- The lack of legitimate evidence,
-- Reliance on Steele Dossier that nobody would vouch for, and
-- The lies to the FISA Court.
In addition, there's this:
If the investigators were trying to protect the Trump Campaign from foreign interference, they would have warned the Trump Campaign. However, they kept their covert actions secret from the Trump campaign.
Cheers
J.D. - I agree that The Federalist is right wing, at least as concerns economic issues. I don't know whether they're right wing on social issues.
However, IMO The Federalist is an accurate, upstanding publication. I don't think they're a "rag" or a "conspiracy monger". Do you have evidence to support those accusations?
Cheers
David, this is a post about Trump's lying. I can understand why you changed the subject and would rather discuss anything but that.
BTW, the reporter who asked the question was Shirish Date of the Huffington Post.
https://www.huffpost.com/author/sv-date
Trumpist's not upset by the lies. Upset someone would call him on it.
President Donald Trump abruptly ended a Saturday news conference after a reporter challenged him on a lie about veterans health care he has told more than 150 times.
Trump, speaking at his Bedminster, New Jersey, golf club, had claimed again that he is the one who got the Veterans Choice program passed -- adding, "They've been trying to get that passed for decades and decades and decades and no president's ever been able to do it, and we got it done."
In fact, former President Barack Obama signed the Choice program into law in 2014. The law, which allowed eligible veterans to be covered by the government for care provided by doctors outside the VA system, was a bipartisan initiative spearheaded by two senators Trump has repeatedly criticized, Bernie Sanders of Vermont and the late John McCain of Arizona.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/08/politics/trump-veterans-choice-paula-reid/index.html
However, IMO The Federalist is an accurate, upstanding publication. I don't think they're a "rag" or a "conspiracy monger". Do you have evidence to support those accusations?
It's basically just Trump supporting propaganda as your article shows. For a start she calls the investigations into Russian collusion a hoax eight times in the article. Every time she says Russian collusion she appends the word hoax so the reader cannot be in any doubt that Trump was the innocent party. In fact not only was Barr wrong to spin the report as having cleared Trump, Mueller actually said that his interpretation of the report was wrong. As the following link shows the report highlighted many issues
https://time.com/5610317/mueller-report-myths-breakdown/
Also she claims that an intelligence source said that the NYT article was so bad that it was "beyond Pravda" but she doesn't say who this source is or who they work for. Nor does she mention them again. They could be one of her Fox News colleagues for all we know. The irony of all this is that the FBI directors statements before the last presidential election may well have tipped the balance in favour of Trump.
Well right on cue a bipartisan committee tells us that Paul Manafort was a grave counterintelligence threat and according to the vice chairman of the committee there was a “a breathtaking level of contacts between Trump officials and Russian government operatives". So much for it being a hoax. Remember as well that Trump said he knew that Russia didn't interfere in the election because he asked Putin and he assured him they hadn't. But let's all concentrate on the real issue here that according to Trump and his enablers Obama spied on his campaign and Trump wouldn't lie to the electorate would he?
Layzej - I have watched a bunch of Trump's news conferences. He ends all of them abruptly.
Cheers
J.D. - The Mueller investigation did clear Trump. The Report was written by high-powered lawyers, who are enemies of Trump. They wrote a Report to try to sound suspicious. However, the bottom line is that they found no wrongdoing. If they had found wrongdoing, they would have brought charges.
The Steele Dossier was one the key justifications for the Mueller investigation. This document was paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign. NOBODY vouched for the accuracy of the Steele Dossier, not even Steele. The investigation was based on a hoax.
Cheers
Layzej - I have watched a bunch of Trump's news conferences. He ends all of them abruptly.
I think you may have missed the point of that article. It was more about the 140 lies about something obviously untrue and indefensible, not so much the fact that he couldn't answer to being called on it.
The Mueller investigation did clear Trump.
Can you point out one charge that the Mueller investigation found him innocent of? The report "does not conclude that the president committed a crime", as investigators decided "not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgment that the president committed crimes".
The Report was written by ... enemies of Trump
Mueller was appointed by Trump's own government.
NOBODY vouched for the accuracy of the Steele Dossier
Only two claims in the dossier have been shown to be inaccurate. Many have been shown to be accurate.
My impression was that pretty much everyone agreed that Mueller was as straight as they come in DC.
On the other hand, the full Mueller report never has been released. Wonder why. Americans deserve to read it. Barr is as corrupt as Trump and should also be impeached.
Amusing comment from another blog. It goes to show that people react differently to things
Last week one of the WH Fake News Hack Corp literally asked the POTUS if he felt he should apologize to the American people for three years of lies. Trump just casually moved to the next question without reaction like he was stepping around a pile of dog poop.
Cheers
David - Regarding Mueller and the Report: My knowledge is based on conservative sources, to the best of my memory.
1. Mueller was supposed to be above reproach, but he really wasn't. He looked great, but his performance as FBI head was flawed. He led the false prosecution of the alleged Olympics bomber, Richard Jewell. Also, read about this cover up at the link:
I don’t think he or most people understand how bad Mueller’s actions were – “chilling,” is how a Clinton federal judge in 2006 described the former FBI director’s attempts to cover up a massive frame-up by Boston G-men decades earlier.
https://www.bostonherald.com/2019/01/30/howie-carr-muellers-hands-dirty-in-old-fbi-frame-up/
2. Mueller was over the hill. His Congressional testimony showed that he wasn't really running the investigation. He was unaware of key items. The investigation was entirely run by partisan Democrats. In particular, the lovers Strzok and Page said in their e-mails that they were out to destroy Trump.
3. The Mueller Commission chose what to not make public from the Mueller Report. There's no reason to believe that they withheld incriminating information.
Take these for what they're worth.
Cheers
Sheesh. Mueller was appointed by Trump's own government. He went into it with the presumption that a president cannot be charged with a crime. The fact that Trump was not charged with a crime does not mean he didn't commit one. Read the report to find out what they found.
Layzej - Did the Report say Trump had committed a crime?
Cheers
Layzej - Regarding the "Steele Dossier"
What is the Steele Dossier? It's just a list of statements.
Should this document receive any attention at all? Only if someone reliably vouches for its accuracy.
However, Steele himself doesn't vouch for its accuracy. It turns out the person who gave the info to Steele doesn't vouch for its accuracy. It's just some words on a piece of paper which nobody vouches for.
Cheers
"Did the Report say Trump had committed a crime?"
They took the position that they could not even say he had committed a crime because without a formal charge Trump would never be able to clear his name before a court of law.
You need to read the document to understand the findings. Simply trusting the president and his protectors on this is not a path to the truth.
"Should this document receive any attention at all?"
Intelligence agencies should never pay any attention to raw intelligence? That is clearly ridiculous. Especially since in this case only two statements have been shown to be false, and much of it has been corroborated.
David in Cal wrote:
"My knowledge is based on conservative sources...."
And that's your problem right there -- instead of reading decent news sources, you trust things only that's the fit your pre-conceived biases.
chilling,” is how a Clinton federal judge in 2006 described the former FBI director’s attempts to cover up a massive frame up
I searched for this to try and find the context. After all if he was corrupt then that reflects not only badly on him but also the administration that chose him to conduct the inquiry. I eventually found that Carr linked to the relevant document in a Twitter thread. Surprise, surprise the judge doesn't say that Mueller's conduct was chilling but those conducting the case and that she wanted there conduct to be brought to the attention of the FBI director. Which was Mueller.
I also found an article by the same judge who says that previous to the Russia inquiry Mueller had a glittering career but that he had been too timid in taking the inquiries findings to their logical conclusions.
For instance...
Nor does it make sense that he refrained from concluding the president was guilty because of DOJ’s practice to refrain from public comment on evidence in cases where charges are not brought...
While he listed in detail at least 10 instances in which Trump attempted to obstruct justice, he would not pull the trigger; he would not draw the conclusion that seems obvious from the report. He wouldn’t take that step, even though hundreds of former federal prosecutors did so in a May 6 letter...
He badly miscalculated. He stayed in his lane, but no one else did. Attorney General William Barr spun Mueller's conclusions, disparaging him and his work. President Trump took the cue and claimed "no collusion, no obstruction" when that's not what the report says. Conservative media followed suit. Mueller wholly misjudged the political climate in which his careful, lawyerly report would be received.
I've also quoted to you how a Republican appointed judge and Mueller himself said that Barr had lied about the reports conclusions. It was not a hoax. You've been duped.
Here is a link to the Judge Gertner article https://amp.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2019/07/25/mueller-testimony-nancy-gertner
The investigation was entirely run by partisan Democrats. In particular, the lovers Strzok and Page said in their e-mails that they were out to destroy Trump.
This is wiki quoting a Trump supporting paper.
A comprehensive review in February 2018 of Strzok's messages by The Wall Street Journal concluded that "texts critical of Mr. Trump represent a fraction of the roughly 7,000 messages, which stretch across 384 pages and show no evidence of a conspiracy against Mr. Trump"
They then went on to say that the texts criticized figures in both parties including advocating a special counsel investigation into the Clinton email inquiry. You've been listening to Trump again.
David -- I do follow both conservative and liberal news sources. You have said that you do the same. However, you didn't follow conservative sources sufficiently to be aware of their harsh criticisms of Mueller.
Cheers
J.D. - You're partly right about the Wall Street Journal. The editorial page is quite conservative, although they're not crazy about Trump. The news pages are not conservative at all.
Cheers
you didn't follow conservative sources sufficiently to be aware of their harsh criticisms of Mueller.
Didn't JD show that the criticisms were nonsense? You can't really fault someone for avoiding nonsense. There are conservative voices that don't promote nonsense after all.
Post a Comment