A Book about the Anti-Trump Conspiracy

Well, yes. That's why I keep introducing specific things that Trump has said or done. Take us through your reasoning that leads you to conclude the media is misreporting things. What "total blitz"? For example, I'm looking at today's New York Times front page, and regarding actual news (not the editorial section) there's only one article about Trump, Trump Threatens Iran in Tweet, Warning of Dire ‘Consequences’. I've read the article, and you could read it, too, then we could discuss whether you really think it reflects a "total blitz" of anti-Trump rhetoric. Fox News has their own article that though shorter says pretty much the same thing: Trump warns Iran's Rouhani to stop the threats or suffer historic consequences. Provide an example. Point us to these signs you're interpreting.--Percy

Asking you to support your opinions with evidence and argument is not only reasonable, it's in the Forum Guidelines:

4. Points should be supported with evidence and reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions.

--PercyEdited by Percy, : Fix formatting.

I think it odd that the part of the electorate that most loudly demands the ongoing right to bear arms for, amongst other things, the purpose of keeping government in line, gets cranky when someone gets shouted at in a restaurant. They seem to have lost their own plot vis a vis how careful politicians should need to be about pissing people off.ABE - Jar's earlier post pretty much covered my thinking.Edited by Capt Stormfield, : No reason given.

But you follow the news, right? You *did* see the news reporting the meetings with Kim Jung Un and Putin, didn't you? Assuming you do follow the news (because if you don't then you have no right to an opinion about what it says), you should explain what you're reading or watching in that news that is leading you to your conclusions. Good idea. Would this be, for example, the leftist party line that the rightist party line agrees with about Trump's performance in Helsinki? If not, tell us what you're talking about? If you don't follow the news, how do you know it has a leftist party line (again, we're not talking about the editorial portions - all news outlets have them, including Fox News and Breitbart). I post long lists because you rarely respond to points I make, so after a while I gather them into a list so they are not forgotten. But you didn't answer anything. You typed a few words of response to each point. I posted detailed explanations of the problems with everything you said, but you barely responded. Message 79 and Message 88 are still there. You ignored almost all of both messages, and in the couple points we discussed you eventually ceased replying. So all those issues are still open and unaddressed. Open a new thread to discuss them, if you like, but keep in mind that one and two sentence brush-offs aren't answers. My certainty is that your guess is wrong. Pick a news article you don't like and let's go through it. All immigration is restricted. Followers of Islam will be screened just like all other immigrants.--Percy

It isn't slander. It's his own words that condemn him.

So once again, you know "the truth" without actually having any information on the subject.

It's his literal words taken out of context, misquoted, twisted to mean something entirely different, headlined in a way to imply something they are not and so on. That you all can't see this is very sad. Marc9000 is doing a creditable job of trying to describe this on the Trump Bashing Thread.

Then please provide examples.

No I don't follow the news. I see headlines on the internet, sometimes I read part of the story. Sometimes I hear it on the car radio when I'm being driven somewhere. I get the basic gist of some things. and I see some of what gets written on the Trump Bashing Thread which makes me sick. I cannot stomach what the Left is doing to him and to the nation, I really can't. I have to shut it out or it will kill me.Sometimes I wish I were up on this so I could argue it but I can't do it and that is that. I wanted the thread to represent an alternative view to the Trump Bashing Thread, but forget it. You win, I lose, the Left wins, the nation loses.

In other words you can’t stand to see any criticism of Trump, no matter whether it is deserved or not. You neither know nor care about that.The imaginary conspiracy is just an excuse to present yourself as righteous.You have no problem with Pizzagate even though there is no doubt that it is virtually all invented - because you are fine with spreading hate against Democrats. But when Trump acts in ways that even Newt Gingrich finds unacceptable you get upset that the media reports it. If you want to talk about bias and a lack of objectivity start with that. You’d have to look hard to find a more extreme example.

You keep saying this, but you never provide examples. Today's papers are quoting Trump's late night tweet threatening Iran and quoting the tweet:

quote:

---

To Iranian President Rouhani: NEVER, EVER THREATEN THE UNITED STATES AGAIN OR YOU WILL SUFFER CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE. WE ARE NO LONGER A COUNTRY THAT WILL STAND FOR YOUR DEMENTED WORDS OF VIOLENCE & DEATH. BE CAUTIOUS!

---

An article quoting Trump's tweet verbatim and writing about it cannot be considered "taken out of context, misquoted, twisted to mean something entirely different, headlined in a way to imply something they are." Here's the Washington Post article: Trump stokes Iran tensions with threats of dire consequences for Tehran. Give it a read and you'll see that nothing was misquoted, taken out of context, twisted, or misimplied.I looked up the same topic at Fox News and Breitbart, but Fox News only had a video (I prefer the printed word) and Breitbart's article was so brief as to not be worth mentioning.--Percy

Then what qualifies you to comment on it? For example... For example... For example... For example... Then you should never have started this thread. Don't you think the drama is getting a bit old? Like years and years old? Yeah, sure. As if you don't post appeals to sympathy like this over and over again, then resume posting aggressively and antagonistically. You are not the topic. Leave you and your feelings out of this, especially since after all this time they're obviously just false ploys.Some examples, please.--Percy

Nonsense. When he compares a black person to a monkey, that is not being taken out of context. He is not being misquoted; it's right there on Twitter in black and white. It is not being twisted.ABE:Sorry, it was Roseanne Barr who compared a black woman to a monkey. However, it's very easy to find racist quotes by Trump.Edited by ringo, : Factual error.

I would think that if Trump were worried about context, he wouldn't make so much use of a medium that's limited to 280 characters.

And of course, the context is the rest of his Twitter posts.