Fishing expedition by 1/6 commission

The Wasington Post is biased media that has blindly supported Biden. Seems that Biden's endless lies have finally become undefensible even for the Post and have to be publicly disclosed by the Post.

Bottomless-pinocchio-biden-other-recent-gaffes


1682725052790.png
 
I think there are different types of lie. Basically, a lie is telling someone something that is not true. You can have a 'white' lie where you spare someone more heartache.
Or you can have a deliberate untruth, where someone tells a story, they mention something, then in later conversation will say something that differs from what was previously said. Then of course the whole conversation is treated as being a total fabrication, probably because they were showing off to make themselves appear greater than others. Of course they usually have to tell other lies to back up the first lie.
Or, one can be accused of doing something and one tells a lie saying one didn't do it.
Col
 
We call statements that cannot be supported by facts lies when they are deliberate. The speaker knows the truth but tells a falsehood for his own advantage or to hurt some other party. Given Biden's mental state, it is unlikely he even knows he is pushing lies because he reads what's put in front of him. So calling them "lies" is probably unfair but that doesn't make the statements true.

Politicians use statistics to bend the truth so that it makes them look better. This is what we call spin. The puppeteers pulling Biden's strings are making his lips move. They manipulate the statistics so they can make "true" statements which are far from true in reality. It's like the 90% (I don't remember the actual number so cut me some slack here) of scientists think climate change is an existential threat and the world will end in 10 years. (somehow, we never count down from that number). It just comes and goes and no one says anything). Well, if you only poll the scientists who are likely to agree with you, you can get a pretty high percentage who will support your premise. Keep in mind that most research is funded by the government (you and me) and therefore, the studies are geared toward supporting the findings the government wants. Kinda' like the weapons of mass destruction that were never found in Iraq. Bush deeply wanted them, so they were "found" and the war against Iraq was "justified".

Once Biden loses the ability to read the teleprompter, they will just permanently hide him away. They already don't let him speak without a script. Look at the last "press conference". He had the questions ahead of time - all two of them - and he even had a picture of the reporter to help him to figure out who to call on. I don't know how they are going to let him participate in any debates. He'll have to have all the questions ahead of time and a teleprompter to read the answers.
 
You seem to know alot about lying
That's because I have a dictionary and don't subscribe to the concept of the left that changes the meaning of a word to be whatever they want it to be at the time they use it.

From the dictionary:
Lie
n.
1. A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood
2. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.
v.
1. To present false information with the intention of deceiving
2. To convey a false image or impression

White Lie
n.
A trivial, harmless, or well intentioned untruth

The problem with the media and the Democrats today is that anything they disagree with, they label as a lie and that is simply an egregious misuse of the word. Whether the statement is objectively true or false is irrelevant. If the left disagrees - the statement is a "lie". Therefore, every time Trump opened his mouth, he was "lying" because they disagreed with everything he said.

Notice that in all four definitions for Lie, "intention" is assumed which means that the person making the statement MUST know the statement is false. It isn't a lie just because you disagree with it or even if it is actually untrue but the speaker did not know it was untrue when he made the statement.

Until Trump Derangement Syndrome became an epidemic, we always gave people the benefit of the doubt. We assumed that if their statement was not true - and we knew that because we had facts that could prove the statement was untrue - that the person was not aware of his statement being untrue. That made our disagreement much more civil and productive.

But now we have ignorant people who banty the word around without having any concept of its actual meaning.
 
To be fair, most politicians are prone to telling lies in one way or another. Certainly in the UK the politicians try to use their status then when they get rumbled they try to squirm out of it by lying to the parliament. It's quite laughable really because it's obvious they are guilty and have broken parliamentary rules but still they protest their innocence.
If found guilty and it's serious enough, they can be removed as an MP, or even expelled by their party.
Col
 
We have a saying here. You probably have a similar one.

How do you know a lawyer is lying? His lips are moving. Since most politicians start out as lawyers, it applies to them in spades.

and another

What do you call 100 lawyers at the bottom of your pool? A good start;)
 
Did you know that in the UK, the word 'trump' is a slang word for flatulence? It always makes me smile when I play cards and someone might say 'I've just trumped you'.
Col
 
Reminds me of this product that's all over Mexico, just about any type of junk food pastry that comes wrapped sold at small shops and the like, is from a brand "Bimbo". Sometimes I tell my wife "I'm going to eat some Bimbo", just for the naughtiness that I feel while she soberly nods, "Ok honey - go for it, I know you're hungry"
 
:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

Never know what you hear

 
In the UK, we have just heard of a bloke called De Santos or something. Anyway, it seems he's going to stand against Trump in the Presidential election. Is he ok? Or yet another idiot that Americans here will slag off.
The big question being asked is :-
Is there anybody out of 300 million people in the USA who can be a good president?
Col
 
In the UK, we have just heard of a bloke called De Santos or something. Anyway, it seems he's going to stand against Trump in the Presidential election. Is he ok? Or yet another idiot that Americans here will slag off.
The big question being asked is :-
Is there anybody out of 300 million people in the USA who can be a good president?
Col

DeSantis is the one I am supporting - unless someone else appears more able-to-win the general election.

He is an awesome, normal, middle-aged guy with a wife and family. Again - a truly normal person.

I think you guys will like him if he becomes president. Conservative, yes, but just a regular guy, compared to the oddballs we have had lately.
 
DeSantis is the one I am supporting - unless someone else appears more able-to-win the general election.

He is an awesome, normal, middle-aged guy with a wife and family. Again - a truly normal person.

I think you guys will like him if he becomes president. Conservative, yes, but just a regular guy, compared to the oddballs we have had lately.
That's good, but has he the money to bribe and fix the election like Trump does? Also, can he run against Trump? Or is it one or the other?
Col
 
That's good, but has he the money to bribe and fix the election like Trump does? Also, can he run against Trump? Or is it one or the other?
Col

I didn't know you were part of the group that thinks the election was fixed I'm surprised!

No, he can actually win based on getting people to vote for him because he's an intelligent normal person. Looks a heck of a lot more normal than your Boris by the way
 
It will take a little time, but eventually a majority of Republicans will finally understand that Trump cannot win the election again and they will do what's best for the country and stop supporting him and support the one guy who can win the general election which is either DeSantis or Tim Scott
 
DeSantis is currently the governor of Florida. He was just re-elected to a second term and it took support from Trump to get him over the hump. Prior to Trump coming out and campaigning for him, he was losing. Trump turned his numbers around. So much for loyalty. Says a lot about his personal ethics.

He has been doing an excellent job as the governor of Florida. But running for president is a full time job. That means he will be collecting a paycheck as the governor but he won't be working for the people of Florida. He will be campaigning against Trump. I believe that if you already hold public office and you wish to run for a different office, you should resign from your current job. That is the honorable thing to do. The fact that DeSantis plans on taking his Florida paycheck while he has taken on another full time job leads me to believe that he is less than honorable. Interestingly, Florida had a state law that prevented just this thing. If you want to run for a different office than the one you hold, you have to resign. Guess what? That law was changed just so that DeSantis could keep his job as governor and still run for president. It is probably likely that DeSantis made that law change a contingency of his running for president:(

The third big problem with DeSantis is that his big donors are never-Trumpers. These are not people who are in favor of DeSantis. They want anyone EXCEPT the evil Orange man. They have convinced DeSantis, who is a politician when it comes right down to it (unlike Trump) that this is his opportunity and they have raised a lot of money to support his campaign. He is also using money that was left over from his Governor campaign and repurposing it for the new office he aspires to. I'm pretty sure that the people who donated to his campaign weren't thinking that he was going to abandon his job half way through his last term. If I were one of them, I'd be angry. Florida has a 2-term limit so he could easily have finished his second term and perhaps done some good convincing other Republican governors to adopt some of his programs. He could then have started working just in time on his 2028 run which Trump and Trump supporters would have helped with.

The media is already starting its anti DeSantis smear campaign. Although DeSantis isn't the existential threat that Trump is, he is still a threat to the left. But, being a politician, he won't rock the boat the way that Trump did. DeSantis has no intention of continuing Trump's campaign to drain the swamp.

I don't believe that DeSantis can beat Trump in the primary. The field will be too big and there are too many winner-take-all states. Trump just needs to beat DeSantis by a little in these states which is pretty easy with the vote split the way it will be. The fight between them will damage both of them so it almost doesn't matter who wins the primary. If it is DeSantis, no Trump supporter will vote for him in the general election so he has no shot at beating whoever the Dems run. If the fight gets really ugly, that will drive women away from Trump and so he will have a hard time beating the Democrat candidate.

All-in-all DeSantis running in this election is a bad idea. If he wins the primary he loses. If he loses the primary he loses. No Trump supporter will vote for him in 2028.

DeSantis has shown his true colors -
- He is disloyal
- He is dishonorable
- He is a politician and a member of the swamp which makes him part of the problem.
 
Last edited:
All the Trump supporters in my family and in laws are hoping for DeSantis. I think the avg voter isn't analyzing it quite to that depth
They just think about everything they've heard about Trump versus DeSantis and then they listen to DeSantis talks and he seems so persuasive and normal the question is who will all the swing voters vote for? If you're saying that Trump voters will refuse to vote Republican if DeSantis is the nominee well then I'm not even sure what to say about that, that shows extreme pettiness and not wanting what's best for the country.
 
I didn't know you were part of the group that thinks the election was fixed I'm surprised!
I'm not. I have no idea if it's fixed or not. I only read the British press and hear what Trump says and those on this forum.
Personally I couldn't care less who gets in, we never understand that system anyway. It seems you can have less votes and still win. I think you should vote in Elvis Presley as president, he'll be more animated than the current incumbent.
Col
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom