It won't be long now...

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dur...2OpBIvhFxRDF18

Names of Obama officials that unmasked Flynn being revealed today. Drip drip drip.

in the immortal words of martin luther king

how long? not long

It's about damn time. I've been asking for 3 years why Trump wouldn't just give the order to release every single document which he suggested he would do but never did. Now the new head of DNI that Democrats opposed as "un-qualified" is on a tear releasing everything out there.


Thing is, none of it will matter to Democrats though hopefully enough Independents will take notice. The Democrats long ago decided that the ends, removing Trump from office, justified the means, any means, including bringing false charges and when confronted with the truth, simply continue to lie because they know the MSM will back them in their lies.


Maybe one of the remarkable things said and left on the table with no clear resolution was Samantha Power, saying she didn't sign all those un-masking orders. Then who the hell did and why didn't somebody, the FBI find out? Oh, wait, silly question right? Asking the FBI to investigate a matter that might help Trump? And how the Hell does Christopher Wray, current head of the FBI keep his job after stone walling the release of all this information for so long?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dur...2OpBIvhFxRDF18

Originally Posted by gfejunkie

I hope that becomes real one day.

It's about damn time. I've been asking for 3 years why Trump wouldn't just give the order to release every single document which he suggested he would do but never did. Now the new head of DNI that Democrats opposed as "un-qualified" is on a tear releasing everything out there.... Originally Posted by HedonistForever

My simplistic analogy is when they demolish a building with a controlled implosion. What you never see on TV is the pain staking work, over the course of many days, by highly trained professionals to set the whole thing up - along with all of the logistics. We are simply there to watch the 30 seconds of the controlled implosion, with collapsing walls and a giant dust cloud billowing up to the skies, which occurs after the warning sirens. We are in the warning sirens phase. Just ask OBammy. He can hear them wailing.

Just ask OBammy. He can hear them wailing. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

proof may not be enough to get obama

especially if its interpretative proof that can be spun, no matter the implausibility

it will require a change of heart in many dims

which will require 60% or more of americans in red or blue states to accept obama's perfidy

his fire wall is mainly the main stream media and then the college professors and Hollywood

they will not go gently into that good night

no matter the proof, for in protecting him they survive

dims are not conservatives, who hold a basic fealty to truth, they are unburdened by right or wrong and the consideration for barr et al would be do we merely expose the events and not prosecute obama because the country would be torn apart

proof may not be enough to get obama

especially if its interpretative proof that can be spun, no matter the implausibility

it will require a change of heart in many dims

which will require 60% or more of americans in red or blue states to accept obama's perfidy

his fire wall is mainly the main stream media and then the college professors and Hollywood

they will not go gently into that good night

no matter the proof, for in protecting him they survive

for dims are not conservatives, who hold a basic fealty to truth, they are unburdened by right or wrong and the consideration would be do we merely expose the events, and not prosecute obama because the country would be torn apart Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

Yep!

proof may not be enough to get obama

especially if its interpretative proof that can be spun, no matter the implausibility

it will require a change of heart in many dims

which will require 60% or more of americans in red or blue states to accept obama's perfidy

his fire wall is mainly the main stream media and then the college professors and Hollywood

they will not go gently into that good night

no matter the proof, for in protecting him they survive

dims are not conservatives, who hold a basic fealty to truth, they are unburdened by right or wrong and the consideration for barr et al would be do we merely expose the events and not prosecute obama because the country would be torn apart Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

Reminds me of Lincoln and his writing!

Although I liked the video, IMO arresting Obama would be a mistake, even after the 2020 election. Before the 2020 election, with this laid out, President Trump needs to address the nation and name names.

Exactly why they use hundreds of explosive charges, meticulously placed and timed, to bring it all down in an orderly fashion instead of one big boom. Will it take out OBammy? Who knows. Will it shake this building to the core and gush out a plume of ash and dust? Oh yea...

proof may not be enough to get obama

especially if its interpretative proof that can be spun, no matter the implausibility

it will require a change of heart in many dims

which will require 60% or more of americans in red or blue states to accept obama's perfidy

his fire wall is mainly the main stream media and then the college professors and Hollywood

they will not go gently into that good night

no matter the proof, for in protecting him they survive

dims are not conservatives, who hold a basic fealty to truth, they are unburdened by right or wrong and the consideration for barr et al would be do we merely expose the events and not prosecute obama because the country would be torn apart Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

conservatives, who hold a basic fealty to truth Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

Fact-checker counts 16K false, misleading claims by Trump in three years

Bwahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!! !

Fact-checker counts 16K false, misleading claims by Trump in three years Originally Posted by pfunkdenver

So yeah, wow, shit, I get it. Trump really needs to up that count. That's nothing more than an average day in the leftist media circles.

proof may not be enough to get obama

especially if its interpretative proof that can be spun, no matter the implausibility

it will require a change of heart in many dims

which will require 60% or more of americans in red or blue states to accept obama's perfidy

his fire wall is mainly the main stream media and then the college professors and Hollywood

they will not go gently into that good night

no matter the proof, for in protecting him they survive

dims are not conservatives, who hold a basic fealty to truth, they are unburdened by right or wrong and the consideration for barr et al would be do we merely expose the events and not prosecute obama because the country would be torn apart Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

dragged into a cell at GITMO works fine for me ..

Fact-checker counts 16K false, misleading claims by Trump in three years

Bwahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! Originally Posted by pfunkdenver

who fact checks the fact checkers?


BAAHHAA


most of these fact checking sites are politically biased. very biased. butt you keep believing they aren't, okay?


the press has intentionally mislabeled and misrepresented Trump's statements repeatedly and they've been called on it. and not just by Trump, other media have also called out their brethren in the press for it.


here's an easy example for ya


"Mexico will pay for the wall with a check"

we all know Trump said this, correct? or do we?


your "fact checker" says so ..


Trump says he didn't say Mexico would write US a check for border wall. But he did

https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...uld-write-che/


As his border wall fight with Democrats continues, President Donald Trump finds himself in the awkward position of having to explain what happened to the idea that Mexico would pay all the costs.


Trump tried to dance out of the apparent contradiction on the White House lawn Jan. 10, the 20th day of a partial government shutdown.


"When during the campaign I would say ‘Mexico is going to pay for it,’ obviously, I never said this, and I never meant they're going to write out a check," Trump told reporters. "I said they're going to pay for it. They are."


Later on the same day while visiting the border in Texas, Trump offered the same logic: "When I say Mexico is going to pay for the wall, that's what I said. Mexico is going to pay. I didn't say they're going to write me a check for $20 billion or $10 billion."


We’ve seen the president try to say he never said something that he very much said before, so we wondered about this case.


Spoiler: Trump has it wrong.


We found several instances over the last few years, and in campaign materials contradicting the president’s statement.


In an April 2016 memo, Trump’s campaign outlined the steps he could take to get Mexico to pay for the wall.


"It's an easy decision for Mexico: make a one-time payment of $5-10 billion to ensure that $24 billion continues to flow into their country year after year," the memo said.


Trump proposed measures to compel Mexico to pay for the wall, such as cutting off remittances sent from undocumented Mexicans in the U.S. via wire transfers.


Then, the memo says, if and when the Mexican government protested, they would be told to pay a lump sum "to the United States to pay for the wall, the Trump Administration will not promulgate the final rule, and the regulation will not go into effect." The plan lists a few other methods if that didn’t work, like the trade deficit, canceling Mexican visas or increasing visa fees. (Experts have told us there isn’t a connection between the U.S.-Mexico trade deficit and finding money for a wall.)


Trump has amended his "Mexico will pay" pledge many times, though this is the first day we’ve heard him deny that he once called for a large check.


The earliest mention we could find of him pitching a Mexico-funded wall came during a visit to New Hampshire in April 2015 (hat-tip Washington Post). He said he would "take it out" of the trade deficit: "I will take it from out of just a small fraction of the money they’ve been screwing us for over the last number of years."


Then he outlined the lump-sum-in-exchange-for-allowing-remittances idea. As president, he has also thrown out "reimbursement/other," the trade deficit and a "solar wall" that would cut down on Mexico’s bill.


More recently, including during his border trip, Trump says the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USCMA) trade deal will result in Mexico "indirectly" paying for the wall. That argument is also faulty: The deal has not been ratified by each country’s legislature, it lacks new tariffs on Mexican goods coming into the country, and the benefits would go to private businesses.


We’ve compiled a number of his mentions here:
Featured Fact-check


"I would build a great wall, and nobody builds walls better than me, believe me, and I’ll build them very inexpensively, I will build a great, great wall on our southern border. And I will have Mexico pay for that wall. Mark my words." - Trump presidential announcement speech, June 16, 2015


"And, you know, we're building a wall. And it's going to be a great wall. OK? And, by the way, Mexico will pay for it." - CBS Face the Nation, Aug. 23, 2015


"They said, ‘The president of Mexico said they will not, under any circumstance, pay for the wall, what is your comment?’ I said, ‘the wall just got 10 feet higher.’" - Tampa rally, Feb. 12, 2016


"We have a trade deficit with Mexico, that’s why Mexico is going to pay for the wall .. It’s 100 percent … We have a trade deficit with Mexico of $58 billion a year, the wall is going to cost $10 billion. You’re telling me I can’t make that deal? That’s an easy deal."- Trump press conference, March 8, 2016


"We’re going to build a wall, we’re going to build a wall. And Mexico, as sure as you’re standing here, Mexico is going to pay for the wall." - Trump rally in Kansas City, MO, March 12, 2016


"Mexico will pay for the wall!" - Trump tweet, Sept. 1, 2016


"I want to get the wall started. I don’t want to wait a year and a half until I make my deal with Mexico … so in order to get the wall started, Mexico will pay for it, but it’ll be reimbursed." - Trump press conference, Jan. 11, 2017


"Ultimately, it'll come out of what's happening with Mexico. We're going to be starting those negotiations relatively soon. And we will be in a form reimbursed by Mexico, which I've always said." - ABC News interview with David Muir, Jan. 25, 2017


"Well, we're working on a tax reform bill that will reduce our trade deficits, increase American exports and will generate revenue from Mexico that will pay for the wall if we decide to go that route." - Republican retreat in Philadelphia, Jan. 26, 2017


"Eventually, but at a later date so we can get started early, Mexico will be paying, in some form, for the badly needed border wall." - Trump tweet, April 23, 2017


"We're talking about the southern border, lots of sun, lots of heat. We're thinking about building the wall as a solar wall so it creates energy and pays for itself. And this way, Mexico will have to pay much less money." - Trump rally in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, June 21, 2017


"With Mexico being one of the highest crime Nations in the world, we must have THE WALL. Mexico will pay for it through reimbursement/other." - Trump tweet, Aug. 27, 2017


"One way or the other, Mexico is going to pay for the wall. That’s right. It may be through reimbursement, but one way or the other, Mexico will pay for the wall." - Joint press conference with Finland President Sauli Niinistö, August 28, 2017


"I don't want to cause a problem. I don't want to cause it. But, in the end -- in the end, Mexico is going to pay for the wall." Trump rally in Nashville, TN, May 29, 2018


"I often stated, ‘One way or the other, Mexico is going to pay for the Wall.’ This has never changed. Our new deal with Mexico (and Canada), the USMCA, is so much better than the old, very costly & anti-USA NAFTA deal, that just by the money we save, MEXICO IS PAYING FOR THE WALL!" - Trump tweet, Dec. 13, 2018


Our ruling


Trump said, "When I say Mexico is going to pay for the wall, that's what I said. Mexico is going to pay. I didn't say they're going to write me a check for $20 billion or $10 billion."


Trump’s campaign called a one-time payment of $5 billion-$10 billion "an easy decision for Mexico." The country’s other option would be to lose billions more in impounded remittances from immigrants working in the United States and increased fees on U.S. temporary visas and border crossing cards.


Trump as president has thrown out a number of other ways for Mexico to pay for the wall. Now he says it will be "indirect" through the trade deal (though that’s unsupported).
But his rewrite of a famous campaign pitch doesn’t clear. We rate this statement False.


notice the eloquent efforts to "prove" Trump said "Mexico will write a check .." by using Trump's own words against him. there is one small problem. nowhere in those statements does Trump mention a check.

so while Politico rates the "denial" as FALSE fact checking the fact checks PROVES they are FALSE.


see how easy that was?