lawrencesummers wrote: » Biden is unable to hold it together coherently when he is reading off script. Its sad to say that Trump might actually look good debating him. It will be carnage.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » Have you actually ever watched a Trump press conference? He has a script and the moment he looks away from.it he comes out with nothing but absolute stupidity.
Quin_Dub wrote: » Go back and watch the 2015 debates with Clinton , he was a rambling shambles even then. No Puppet.. No puppet , you're the puppet. He debates like a child And any of his recent unscripted interviews or Pressers have been an incoherent shambles.. Try reading a transcript of any of them, they are just appalling..
Carfacemandog wrote: » This really isn't great timing, what with the daily press conferences and Q&A sessions that are already doing him massive harm. Senate Intel report confirms Russia aimed to help Trump in 2016https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/21/senate-intel-report-confirms-russia-aimed-to-help-trump-in-2016-198171 "Tuesday's bipartisan report, from a panel chaired by North Carolina Republican Richard Burr, undercuts Trump's years of efforts to portray allegations of Kremlin assistance to his campaign as a "hoax," driven by Democrats and a “deep state” embedded within the government bureaucracy."
Evidence recently declassified by DNI Richard Grenell and Attorney General Barr revealed that as early as July 2016 British intelligence operative and FBI informant Christopher Steele was involved in an FBI investigation of Trump. The same evidence showed that the FBI was repeatedly warned that Steele was susceptible to Russia disinformation and that U.S. intelligence had "concluded some of his Hillary Clinton-funded dossier’s claims about Trump were false information planted by Moscow’s intelligence services." - - - - Experts agreed that efforts by Russia to provide false negative information about Trump to Christopher Steele "undercut the notion that Moscow was trying to defeat Clinton and help Trump." It has become widely accepted that Russia's hacking of DNC emails meant that they were trying to help then-candidate Trump win in 2016, but this newly declassified information supports the other theory—that Russia was simply trying to sow division and election discord in the United States.
notobtuse wrote: » pjmedia.com
MadYaker wrote: » Again parroting the same sh!t. Only morons genuinely believe this stuff. Trump supporters are immune to logic and reason. Polls not looking good for trump https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/ With a recession on the horizon how is he going to turn that around?
Boggles wrote: » lol
notobtuse wrote: » As usual attacking the source not the content.
Boggles wrote: » I laughed at the "source" because it a loon conspiracy site. Hardly surprising you are the way you are if that is what you will your head with.
Cody montana wrote: » Bias much? It’s very reputable! At LEAST he’s not quoting/plagiarising the White House again. “Overall, we rate PJ Media to be Questionable based on extreme right wing bias, promotion of propaganda and conspiracies as well as numerous failed fact checks.“
notobtuse wrote: » As usual attacking the source not the content. The usual ploy for those who... GOT NOTHING!
duploelabs wrote: » You're still to respond to those points. You said you're too busy earlier, yet you're still able to post rhetorical jibberish So cmon then... Address them
notobtuse wrote: » I’ll see your Senate Intel report confirms Russia aimed to help Trump in 2016, and raise you a Newly Declassified Evidence: Russia Didn't Try to Help Elect Trump in 2016.https://pjmedia.com/trending/newly-declassified-evidence-russia-didnt-try-to-help-elect-trump-in-2016/
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » Wem You often attack "the source" when people post a link to CNN!
Carfacemandog wrote: » Yeah, that's not what it said at all. Hence the 'lol' response from someone else for using pjmedia a few posts up. What happened here is that William Barr - the guy who got his role by writing a long letter to Trump about how he would defend him no matter what, then completely misrepresented and lied about the Mueller report, then lied about claiming he didn't know if Mueller had issue with it (Mueller had written to him explicitly about that, and had said as much in front of the Senate) - declassified info from Inspector General Michael Horowitz's report which noted errors and omissions in warrants for Carter Page who was an advisor to Trump. What else did Horowitz find in his report your article refers to? That those warrants were still fully justified, and the FBI had more than enough evidence to begin investigations based on all the additional information they had provided.. Basically, you saw and raised me absolutely nothing. Horowitz has also shot out at Trump for firing investigator general Michael Atkinson for refusing to cover up the Ukraine whistleblower scandal for which he has since been impeached, and several republican senators openly admitted he outright broke the law in doing so. Meanwhile, a bipartisan senate investigation has today unanimously found that Russia did interfere in the 2016 election to help Trump, just as the Mueller report itself did.
notobtuse wrote: » No, I attack CNN for who the sham media organization they are... no posting of links necessary. If anything I usually attack the post and if I do attack the source I give reasons behind it... Unlike the majority of my stalkers here. Actually... go ahead and find where I DID attack CNN for someone's post. Good luck with that Kemosabe. As usual I highly doubt you'll find something and just move on to the next worthless accusation against me.
lawrencesummers wrote: » - Against death penalty Irrelevant, individual states decide death penalty - Against Private Prisons Will he give back the donations private prisons have given the Dem party? This is nonsense, he’s not going to be able to cancel contracts and in power there is a lot more money to be had in political contributions from private prison owners. Neither will they have the money to buy or build new prisons. - Against for-profit charter schools, So what, he’s not going to do anything about it. - For campaign finance reform Sure he is, but he’s not going to change it when the donations start coming his way if he gets elected. - Tax corporations and wealthy to pay for infrastructure If you believe this is going to happen in any constructive way then your very naive - Raise corporate taxes Something that may well cost jobs. Nice move joe. - Better social safety net With no details on how. - Better global relations and trade As critical as anyone wants to be of Trump, he has brought in some good trade deals for the US, and better global relations wouldn’t take much, you couldn’t actually have a lower level to start from. The only way is up here - Less discrimination based on LGBT or race This is just sad. His target isn’t to eliminate it, it’s just to improve it. Says a lot really. - More efficient and compassionate refugee / asylum immigration Wouldn’t take much, couldn’t be worse. - Better response to disasters / emergencies Wouldn’t take much. Couldn’t be worse - Less stupid things that causing worry What in the name of FAWWK is this doing in a political manifesto. Is he going to go house to house brining in the clothes off the line if rain is due, or help unemployed people with their CV’s??? - More progressive judges Sure, he’s gonna retrain them is it? Or send them on a course or something? What a joke of a thing to say. - Respect for rule of law - Respect for government traditions and institutions Sure, how? - Expert-driven policymaking I’m sure the current administration claims their policymaking is expert driven, what Joe is saying is that he will bring in his own experts. - Accuracy as a constraint on government communications Yea, because when the other party gets in they will be balanced about everything. Sure. - No more favoritism of conservative media, no more propaganda relationship between the White House and Fox News Good for you joe, you won’t have a relationship with Fox News. That’s a shock. - No more saying ****ty things about political opponents and disfavored demographic groups Great. But quickly followed by 2 ****ty things about political opponent. - President no longer watches 4 hours of Fox News every day or goes golfing multiple times a week - President no longer spends hundreds of millions of dollars on near-weekly vacations Not only are these points lacking substance, costings,, evidence or concrete targets they are ranging from the simplistic to the absurd, and his website is as vague about these as well. He’s a ****ing terrible candidate.
notobtuse wrote: » The Horowitz report was worthless. He didn’t have investigative powers and could only make a conclusion based on what the scumballs he interviewed told him. Hey... That’s our story and we’re sticking to it. It would be as if someone ‘investigator’ asked Himmler, Goebbels, Goering, and Hess about the persecution of the Jews before and during the war. And they all said there was no such thing. So the ‘investigator’ concludes there was no persecution of the Jews all those lovely Nazis did nothing wrong. Somehow, I think you’d believe it.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Oh Obtuse, you're entirely incapable of accepting the fact that the commander in chief does nothing. He's only started doing press conferences because he can no longer do rallies. He's handled this crisis atrociously, I feel like it will take a year or even longer to realise the extent of how many unnecessary deaths have occurred. In the months to come, you will point at the WHO(who may have failed to some extent) and China(Similar). But you'll be incapable of pointing at POTUS who was warned. Who actively diminished the severity of the crisis and still does to some extent. He is not guiding anyone, he is given undue confidence to the average citizen. His staff actively tried to warn him but he actively avoided them. This is a crisis that will be remembered throughout the century. The likes of the UK and US will be remembered as nations that elected morons/entertainers. As a result, they ended up with incompetent leaders that endangered the public. They became more obsessed with ratings and popularity. It's utterly bleak. You or Pete will respond with jabs at the democrats and the likes. An endless performance while being entirely incapable of admitting fault. I say this as a person with family members who have been directly affected in the US.
Boggles wrote: » If coherent public speaking was a prerequisite to win the White House, Trump wouldn't be in there. When he goes off script he sounds like he has an acute brain injury.
Cody montana wrote: » I'll take on a few points.Less discrimination based on LGBT or race This is just sad. His target isn’t to eliminate it, it’s just to improve it. Says a lot really. You will never eliminate discrimination, why do you find less discrimination to be sad? Trump banned Trans people from the military, pushed for his justice department to make it legal for LGBT people to be fired for being gay, banned people from Muslim countries and called other African countries ****holes, called Mexicans rapists, called people who chanted "Jews will not replace us" as very fine people.- Tax corporations and wealthy to pay for infrastructure If you believe this is going to happen in any constructive way then your very naive Why? Tax the wealthy, more money comes in. The Trump tax cut pushed the deficit towards a trillion. Trump has completely failed on infrastructure. Last time he banged his hand on the table and stormed out of a meeting with Nancy Pelosi.More progressive judges Sure, he’s gonna retrain them is it? Or send them on a course or something? What a joke of a thing to say. Erm, he's going to nominate them, as opposed to Mitch and Trumps conservative judges who are trying to take rights away from people. You actually haven't made a single valid point. "So what" and "Wouldn't take much" is not a counter argument.BTW, your bias is very passionate.
MadYaker wrote: » At least Biden is capable of answering questions at a press conference. Also, is that the same Horowitz report that was supposed to exonerate trump?
lawrencesummers wrote: » As long as those questions don’t go outside asking what his favourite color is then it should be fine.https://youtu.be/oihV9yrZRHg
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » Random 15 minute youtube video? How about telling us what the pertinent part is or what point to skip to?
lawrencesummers wrote: » No. Watch it all because his incoherent nonsense and inability to talk effectively is visible across the entire video. There is one point that’s horrendous, but if I posted that limited clip people would be cribbing that i only posted a portion of the video. He is an utterly terrible speaker.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/dbba4c22aa1d352d2cdbb076e36aea8c.svg)