Unlike LS[,]tamada and giggles[,] us in the uk except [accept] our leader has made a mess of the country and is clueless what to do even her closest allies and high[-]ranking party members have jumped into the life raft we don't look for excuses as to why we know who is to blame we don't look for scapegoats or blame everyone because he or she messed up, we don't to my knowledge attempt to use fake news or throw out reporters at press conferences because they don't like there [their] questions. [runon sentence, should be 2 or 3 separate sentences]
Like papafarang says as soon as any member on here criticize or say's [says] things that certain members disapprove of immediately there [they're] Anti - American or Trump haters.
Is Englich yore furst langidge, vlad? I'm beginning to notice a pattern of here.
No head of state should endure rude, disrespectful behavior from people invited to attend a function -- not a individual or a president.
Bugger me Giggles... do you have any idea how much your abso-frigin-lutely ridiculous last comment plays to the whole, farcical "The Emperor's New Clothes" children's story that your "...so presidential; I'll be boring" DJT is playing out in real-time?
Never mind. Since you seem to have already relegated yourself to the less-accomplished, faceless legions of peripatetic forum grammar and spelling police, let's not dwell on your shortcomings too much, OK?
Always the same from you Giggle I can see right through you blame others or simply dodge the subject. Who gives a flying blah blah if the grammar or punctuation is not correct ? It's a chat room not a court of law.
"Timothy Kelly, a US district court judge, announced on Friday that Mr Acosta should have his credentials reinstated immediately so he can enter the White House and carry out his job.
The temporary restraining order requires the reporter’s access be restored until a full hearing on the case is made. The judge was appointed to the bench by Mr Trump last year."
There are two very important components to Judge Kelly's ruling.
1. Not a violation of the First Amendment.
2. Due process is the issue (5th Amendment)
Ironic, since LIBs weren't willing to give due process to Judge Kavanaugh. LIBs said the hearings were nothing more than a job interview and not a courtroom, so due process wasn't relevant. Well guess what? The White House press briefings aren't a courtroom either. Just another example of how LIBs attempt to contort the law to match their agenda.
Acosta has accomplished what the bad junior high school student manages to do: ruin a decent classroom atmosphere. There are now going to be rules for everyone -- specific rules -- that everyone must follow as part of their due process. They'll probably have to sign off on them, too.
In the case of the junior high student, they usually arrive with no home training, so teachers can't assume the child's understanding of respectful behavior. In Acosta's case, he's an a55hole who has now created parameters that he and all of his colleagues must now follow. Just as the fellow students in the junior high classroom will hate what their classmate troublemaker has done to their classroom, Acosta's colleagues aren't going to be happy with the bullshiggity that he has foisted upon them.
Now a simple violation of the new Acosta rules will mean the expulsion of a misbehaving reporter.
This is a great example of how bad behavior is usually what creates more rules. There was no need for this until Acosta.
There are two very important components to Judge Kelly's ruling.
1. Not a violation of the First Amendment.
2. Due process is the issue (5th Amendment)
Ironic, since LIBs weren't willing to give due process to Judge Kavanaugh.
Completely agree with you on the Kavanaugh hearings. They were somewhere between a circus and a lynch mob. I blame Senators Grassley and Feinstein equally.
LIBs said the hearings were nothing more than a job interview and not a courtroom, so due process wasn't relevant. Well guess what? The White House press briefings aren't a courtroom either. Just another example of how LIBs attempt to contort the law to match their agenda.
Not so much. I watched the original tape. One of the WH staffers tried to wrest the microphone from Acosta's hand while he was speaking. That was inappropriate. She had no business trying to grab the microphone out of his hands. He was asking hard questions, sure. But microphones like this can be controlled individually. One assumes that the WH has the best equipment. Wouldn't it have been easier for them just to turn his microphone off if they wanted to stop him?
Then they doctored the tape. The difference, while small, is easy to see when the tapes are viewed side by side. Why the fraud? Trump's complete lack of manners and civility, and the tone that he sets for the WH, continues to get him into trouble. You know from our past conversations here that I like and agree with much of what Trump has done for the country. But that doesn't change the fact that he's an ignorant, unethical, ill-mannered boor who seems to be completely lacking in moral values.
Not so much. I watched the original tape. One of the WH staffers tried to wrest the microphone from Acosta's hand while he was speaking. That was inappropriate. She had no business trying to grab the microphone out of his hands. He was asking hard questions, sure. But microphones like this can be controlled individually. One assumes that the WH has the best equipment. Wouldn't it have been easier for them just to turn his microphone off if they wanted to stop him?
I can't believe that you're blaming an intern for acting on cue from the President to move the mic to another journalist. The President called on "Peter" for his question before the intern ever moved to retrieve the mic -- her job. Each time the President signaled that Acosta's time was up, the intern attempted to retrieve the mic from Acosta. And you're blaming HER? That is pathetic. I realize that you dislike Trump immensely, but to blame an intern ... pathetic.
At 1:26 of the C-Span video, Trump says, "Peter, go ahead." signaling the end of Acosta's time. ONLY THEN, did the intern move to retrieve the mic. Repeated statements of "That's enough" from the President resulted in continued efforts to retrieve the mic. Only when the President stood and allowed Acosta to ask another question at 1:39 did the intern also stop. It is apparent to anyone watching that the intern acts on cue from the President. At 1:50, Trump steps away from the podium after telling Acosta again, "That's enough. Put down the mic." Acosta finally gives up the mic to the intern. Please note that Peter continued standing during the entire time because Trump had called on him already at 1:26.
Pathetic. Blaming an intern.
Then they doctored the tape. The difference, while small, is easy to see when the tapes are viewed side by side. Why the fraud? Trump's complete lack of manners and civility, and the tone that he sets for the WH, continues to get him into trouble. You know from our past conversations here that I like and agree with much of what Trump has done for the country. But that doesn't change the fact that he's an ignorant, unethical, ill-mannered boor who seems to be completely lacking in moral values.
You haven't kept up with videogate. The tape wasn't "doctored." When used in other formats, there is a natureal change in speed and numbers of frames. There was a loss in the number of frames, but each frame was in its original state. There was no alteration of any frame. You're saying that fast-forwarding or slow motion is doctored? There's a new LIB definition for everything these days. Is that where you got this analysis? I've seen all of the outlandish "doctored" claims. The frames where Acosta makes contact with the intern are IDENTICAL.
You can whine about tone all you wish, but there was no lack of manners on the part of the President when answering Acosta's "challenge" and even wanting to move on to another journalist. It wasn't until Acosta refused to stop -- Acosta's tone and his manners -- that the tone of the President changed toward Acosta.
And the fact remains, pulling the hard pass had NOTHING to do with any freedom of speech. Due process. I look forward to the enforcement of new decorum rules in White Press briefings. The press will be more unhinged than they have been already.
I can't believe that you're blaming an intern for acting on cue from the President to move the mic to another journalist. The President called on "Peter" for his question before the intern ever moved to retrieve the mic -- her job. Each time the President signaled that Acosta's time was up, the intern attempted to retrieve the mic from Acosta. And you're blaming HER? That is pathetic. I realize that you dislike Trump immensely, but to blame an intern ... pathetic.
Yes, I blame her. It was inappropriate and rude of her to attempt to physically remove the microphone from Acosta's hand. That's what I blame her for. She should have asked him for it; and if he refused to give it up, the staff could simply have turned it off. The next questioner already had a microphone in his hand at the time. Even assuming that Acosta was being rude, that does not excuse her rudeness.
At 1:26 of the C-Span video, Trump says, "Peter, go ahead." signaling the end of Acosta's time. ONLY THEN, did the intern move to retrieve the mic.
Right. And you'll note that Peter had his own microphone. There was no need for any type of physical confrontation; and she shouldn't have tried to take it from his hand by force.
She was out of line. And that's exactly what I'm talking about. Trump has no manners; and as President, he sets an example which some WH staff inevitably follow, particularly those young and inexperienced. If he wanted the microphone removed from Acosta by force, he should have asked the Secret Service. Instead, this young woman took it upon herself to do that, -- Trump didn't even ask her to. It was wrong.
You can whine about tone all you wish, but there was no lack of manners on the part of the President when answering Acosta's "challenge" and even wanting to move on to another journalist. It wasn't until Acosta refused to stop -- Acosta's tone and his manners -- that the tone of the President changed toward Acosta.
I don't disagree. In fact I never said anything like that. Trump has a general lack of manners; however, I agree that in this incident, there was nothing at all wrong with his behavior.
President Donald Trump invited the Pope for lunch on his mega yacht. The Pope accepted and during lunch, a puff of wind blew the Pontiff's hat off, right into the water. It floated off about 50 feet, then the wind died down and it just floated in place. The crew and the secret service were scrambling to launch a boat to go get it, when Trump waved them off, saying "Never mind, boys, I'll get it.”
The Donald climbed over the side of the yacht, walked on the water to the hat, picked it up, walked back on the water, climbed into the yacht and handed the Pope his hat.
The crew was speechless. The security team and the Pope's entourage were speechless. No one knew what to say, not even the Pope.
But that afternoon,NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, and CNN reported: "TRUMP CAN'T SWIM!"
President Donald Trump invited the Pope for lunch on his mega yacht. The Pope accepted and during lunch, a puff of wind blew the Pontiff's hat off, right into the water. It floated off about 50 feet, then the wind died down and it just floated in place. The crew and the secret service were scrambling to launch a boat to go get it, when Trump waved them off, saying "Never mind, boys, I'll get it.”
The Donald climbed over the side of the yacht, walked on the water to the hat, picked it up, walked back on the water, climbed into the yacht and handed the Pope his hat.
The crew was speechless. The security team and the Pope's entourage were speechless. No one knew what to say, not even the Pope.
But that afternoon,NBC, CBS, ABC, MSNBC, and CNN reported: "TRUMP CAN'T SWIM!"
Hahahaha, good one Tony. Yes but Mr Trump can walk on water, lol.
The Department of Transportation just joined the list of agencies to receive a salary donation from President Trump.
One day after rolling out a major infrastructure plan, the White House announced that Trump's fourth-quarter salary of $100,000 will go to rebuilding what Press Secretary Sarah Sanders called "our crumbling infrastructure."
Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao accepted the donation in the press briefing room on behalf of her department.
Trump's donation is only a small fraction of what he wants to spend on infrastructure in the coming years. The White House on Monday announced a proposal to spend $21 billion on infrastructure in fiscal year 2019, which would be a part of a larger spending plan that dedicates $200 billion to infrastructure over the next 10 years.
The spending on federal programs would lead to an investment of $1.5 trillion on roads, bridges, waterways and railways, the White House says.
Since taking office, Trump has donated each of his salaries to federal agencies. His previous donations have gone to the National Park Service for battlefield infrastructure, the Department of Education to fund a summer camp and the Department of Health and Human Services to battle the opioid crisis.
Sure, it's a drop in the bucket, but what other politicians are making regular donations to fix problems of their own creation? How much did the Messiah give back?
I cannot believe that the ''''''''UDON'''''''' forum is back to Trump bashing again. I did not realise there were so many Farangs in this city that do not have real lives.
I'm beginning to notice a pattern of here.
