Trump Attacks The United States on Russian State-Owned TV..

     

Click Here to Read About the Republican Nominee Attacking the US on Russian-Owned TV

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump criticized U.S. foreign policy and the American political press corps Thursday during an interview on RT America, a state-owned Russian television network.

Asked during the RT America interview what has surprised him most about the political process, Trump unloaded on the American press.

“Well, I think the dishonesty of the media. The media has been unbelievably dishonest,” Trump responded. “I mean they’ll take a statement that you make which is perfect and they’ll cut it up and chop it up and shorten it or lengthen it or do something with it.”

“And all of a sudden it doesn’t look as good as it did when you actually said it. But there’s tremendous dishonesty with the media. Not all of it, obviously, but tremendous dishonesty,” he said.

Wait is that Trump or Bobby Sak complaining about the media???

We definitely have different levels of reading comprehension.  I read that as Trump bashing GW Bush,Obama and Hil-Liar's foreign policies not the US as a whole.

2012 - Romney mocked by Dems for calling Russia our #1 enemy.
2016 - Trump mocked by Dems for being friendly to Russians.

Trump complaining about other's dishonesty.

Lied about being against the Iraq war from the start.

Lied about being against intervention in Libya.

Lied about the number of illegal immigrants in the U.S.

Lied about violent crime rates in the U.S.

Lied about getting a letter from the NFL.

Lied about not knowing David Duke.

Lied about bullets dipped in pigs blood.

Lied about Muslims dancing after 9/11.

Lied about Obama wanting to bring in hundreds of thousands of refugees from Syria.

That is off the top of my head. I am sure there are 578,523,759 more lies that he has told in passing.

When a liar accuses another liar of being dishonest, does his accusation carry any weight?

LooseGoose wrote:2012 - Romney mocked by Dems for calling Russia our #1 enemy.
2016 - Trump mocked by Dems for being friendly to Russians.

Still telling that stupid story? Here, I will link to where you are a bit clueless...

https://spartanswill.forumotion.com/t11463p120-never-any-media-bias-well-maybe-just-a-little-all-the-time#316776

You are such an independent thinker...

Turtleneck wrote:Trump complaining about other's dishonesty.

Lied about being against the Iraq war from the start.

Lied about being against intervention in Libya.

Lied about the number of illegal immigrants in the U.S.

Lied about violent crime rates in the U.S.

Lied about getting a letter from the NFL.

Lied about not knowing David Duke.

Lied about bullets dipped in pigs blood.

Lied about Muslims dancing after 9/11.

Lied about Obama wanting to bring in hundreds of thousands of refugees from Syria.

That is off the top of my head. I am sure there are 578,523,759 more lies that he has told in passing.

When a liar accuses another liar of being dishonest, does his accusation carry any weight?

I thought we were just to assume people running for offices are habitual liars no matter who they represent?

I think a lot of people in general are liars, so you might be making a relatively safe assumption.

CheesySpartan wrote:

Turtleneck wrote:Trump complaining about other's dishonesty.

Lied about being against the Iraq war from the start.

Lied about being against intervention in Libya.

Lied about the number of illegal immigrants in the U.S.

Lied about violent crime rates in the U.S.

Lied about getting a letter from the NFL.

Lied about not knowing David Duke.

Lied about bullets dipped in pigs blood.

Lied about Muslims dancing after 9/11.

Lied about Obama wanting to bring in hundreds of thousands of refugees from Syria.

That is off the top of my head. I am sure there are 578,523,759 more lies that he has told in passing.

When a liar accuses another liar of being dishonest, does his accusation carry any weight?

I thought we were just to assume people running for offices are habitual liars no matter who they represent?

The difference is that TN will compile or copy/paste a list like that for Trump but not for Hills. Even though she's a congenital liar too. But don't mistake that for him being a partisan, oh no - he's an independent thinker that splits things right down the center.

It's not a copy/paste job, Goose. Off the top of my head.

Unlike you, I enjoy learning and do not visit Breitbart, much less any other partisan site, every morning for talking points. I value the information I gather. Do I pay more attention to Trump? Yes. But that is because Clinton is from the long line of scheming politicians we are used to dealing with, while Trump is cut from the same cloth as the fire breathing conservative populists of Europe. I prefer neither - both dishonest and corrupt - but consider one to be far more dangerous and threatening to the economy and key political principles unique to America than the other.

Remember, when somebody told you to do a little independent research to verify some of your faulty data, you responded with "I don't have time for that." But you sure have time to read Newsbusters all day and post links here.

LooseGoose wrote:2012 - Romney mocked by Dems for calling Russia our #1 enemy.
2016 - Trump mocked by Dems for being friendly to Russians.

Who is changing their opinion goose?

https://mobile.twitter.com/williamjordann/status/774230137097379840

And today Bill Clinton will tell you how "Make America Great Again" is racist.....forgetting he's used it many times in the past.

Moving goal posts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!'

And of course all those Trump lies - they're a lot worse than playing up the execution of a brain damaged prisoner to knock your cheating scandal off the front pages.

Trump's a pig and a liar - I freely acknowledge that. Many, many prominent Republicans have said they won't vote for him.
Hillary Clinton is a liar, an unindicted felon and is willing to do anything to be President. How many Dems have repudiated her?

I'm not voting for either.

But now tell me again how fucking righteous the Dems are? Both parties nominated unworthy candidates. The difference is that EVERY prominent Democrat is sticking with Hills.

That Time The Clintons Lied About Bill’s Mistress And Then Let A Mentally Disabled Man Be Executed To Distract Us

Turtleneck wrote:Moving goal posts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!'

Yes, talking about Hillary's lies is moving the goal posts when all you want to do is talk about Trump's lies.

They both fucking lie.

Over
and
Over
and
Over again.

I don't think anything either candidate says will dissuade their core supporters.

What truly suprises me is how the Trump campaign is regaining the Evangelical vote. I understand why they dislike HRC but find it fascinating that suddenly they will support a person who has been married 3 times and within those 3 marriages started affairs with the next wife while still being married to the previous one. Trump has also supported pro-choice until very recently.

In the case of wife #2, Trump married Ms Maples about two months after their daugher was born and he started seeing wife #3 while he was still married to wife #2.

All this blows the moral litmus test Evangelicals have held both Clintons to for decades right out of the water.

But maybe all that morals stuff is possible of being on a slinding scale depending on which political platform you support.

GRR Spartan wrote:I don't think anything either candidate says will dissuade their core supporters.

What truly suprises me is how the Trump campaign is regaining the Evangelical vote.  I understand why they dislike HRC but find it fascinating that suddenly they will support a person who has been married 3 times and within those 3 marriages started affairs with the next wife while still being married to the previous one.  Trump has also supported pro-choice until very recently.

In the case of wife #2, Trump married Ms Maples about two months after their daugher was born and he started seeing wife #3 while he was still married to wife #2.

All this blows the moral litmus test Evangelicals have held both Clintons to for decades right  out of the water.

But maybe all that morals stuff is possible of being on a slinding scale depending on which political platform you support.

And their other option is to vote for a woman that supports abortion on demand, is an inveterate liar and has covered up her husband's numerous affairs and at least one rape.  That's a really great "other" choice.  They both suck as candidates, the difference is that they KNOW what they're going to get politically and on the Supreme Court with Hills, with Trump there's at least a small chance they might get conservatives that support THEIR agenda.   With Hills there is ZERO chance of that, understand better now?  

Religion is their crutch to justify their previously pious attitudes.

Now it's okay to vote for a self-admitted philanderer who has stated his personal Viet Nam was worrying about the std's he may have picked up when he was playing the field.  Evangelicals flopping like tunas on this  which I see as no different than the right to life about faces we see when they reach for an exception when their daughter gets pregnant.

Look no further than the upper Mi GOP House member who has made Pro-Life a centerpiece of his campaigns and come to find out his wife had an abortion as a high school student. Once again that was different for some reason but now she has Jesus on her side so it's okay to work to deny others a choice she took advantage of.

Evangelicals have  been following situational ethics for the last 40 years and this is no different.

So he should divorce her?

You do realize that part of religion is forgiveness and redemption?

Just another example of I took advantage of the law but now I've found Jesus so you can't have the same options I had.
No one was holding a gun to the state reps wife's head in HS to force her to take that course of action. She had the same adoption choices that are still available today.
More situational ethnics.

Trump has thrown in with the Russians and we knew it when he hired Manafort. There are business opportunities in Russia and possibly more importantly Putin's hand picked group of oligarchs have billions in cash they want to invest outside of Russia.