LIVE STREAM: Trump to speak about Helsinki trip, amid controversial Russia comments at 2 PM EST

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Oh is that right? I love when you guys infer what Trump meant, yet it is always different than any clarification.

That's because his "clarifications" are always revisionist bull#. How many times do we have go through this drill before you'll acknowledge the obvious pattern?

Trump says things, gauges the response, and if it's unusually unfavorable, he and/or his comms people/surrogates will simply say that he was misunderstood or more frequently that his statements were misrepresented by the "fake news" media.

Links for such grandiose claims or have emotions taken over?

I can provide many links to Hillary doing what you are accusing Trump of but you already know that.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

originally posted by: cosmickat
" I meant to say wouldn't..not would "

This takes the biscuit. Seriously pathetic attempt at damage control.

What a complete shambles smh

If it's true he " mis- spoke " yet again...he is a di@k
If he is lying to his country ..yet again...he is still a di@k

You've never misspoke?

Something I have told my kids before is when someone tells you they were misunderstood, and then corrects your understanding, you accept that. Not doing it shows a character flaw in you, not them.

Yep..I sure have.
I have never had to stand up and talk at a presser with Putin either. But anyone with an ounce of common sense would make sure they got their words right.
But this is exactly what it appears to be. A lie.
He never mis-spoke at all.
I just watched the clip again.
It is a given that he doesn't have " all the best words " as he proclaims. But this is just a lie/damage limitation/ backtracking.
Even if he is the absolute worst POTUS at public oration...this mis-spoke BS I ain't buying.

He said what he meant at the time..it is consistent with the rest of the context within his statement when he actually said it.

You don't really need this pointed out to you.

a reply to: theantediluvian

That's because his "clarifications" are always revisionist bull#. How many times do we have go through this drill before you'll acknowledge the obvious pattern?

Trump says things, gauges the response, and if it's unusually unfavorable, he and/or his comms people/surrogates will simply say that he was misunderstood or more frequently that his statements were misrepresented by the "fake news" media.

That's hocus pocus nonsense. I prefer to believe you are all clawing your way out of the withdrawal symptoms of public relations politics, where every response is prefabricated, run through the rigors of marketing techniques, even using fake accents to great affect, and served up in rhetorical fashion to placate those who listen to it. Fact is, people make mistakes when they speak, and that isn't a bad thing.

a reply to: cosmickat

I see it that way too, that what he said was consistent with the rest of what he was saying at the time. There is no way around these facts.

a reply to: InTheLight

The other thing that made my eyes roll was tonight when he made his " clarified " explanation of what he really meant to say., was he looked absolutely beat down. As if he had been made to sit on the naughty step for an hour before he came out and made his apology.
The body language was very telling.

a reply to: Isurrender73

Trump contradicts himself all the time because he's a bull#ter.

Oct. 6, 2015 - Trump tells Michael Savage that he's met Putin: "Yes, a long time ago. We got along great, by the way."

Oct. 14, 2015 - Trump tells Bill O'Reilly that Putin was his "stablemate" on 60 minutes, inferring that they'd met then: " My stablemate was Vladimir Putin and we did very well."

If it weren't for later lies from Trump, Trump supporters would argue that I was "misinterpreting" that statement but as it turns out, he expounded on his bull#:

Nov. 10, 2015 - At a Republican debate Trump says, "I got to know (Putin) very well because we were both on ‘60 Minutes,’ we were stablemates, and we did very well that night. But, you know that."

He got called out on it by Carly Fiorina so he tweeted this out, implying that she was somehow mistaken about what he'd just said THREE DAYS EARLIER on NATIONAL TELEVISION.

Nov. 13, 2015 - ".@CarlyFiorina I only said I was on @60Minutes four weeks ago with Putin—never said I was in Green Room. Separate pieces—great ratings!"

He lies all the time and often contradicts himself. He'll say basically anything in the moment if he thinks it's the right thing to say and then he'll later just say something else, often blaming other people for his lies, because he has absolutely no shame.

Do you want me to plot out some of the many contradictory statements that he's made about Russian interference? I kinda feel like you should since you're making the completely false claim that he's been consistent.

a reply to: cosmickat

Well, he also did say that there was no collusion, but he also still thinks other people may be involved. Where is the evidence for either or both?

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Isurrender73

Trump contradicts himself all the time because he's a bull#ter.

Oct. 6, 2015 - Trump tells Michael Savage that he's met Putin: "Yes, a long time ago. We got along great, by the way."

Oct. 14, 2015 - Trump tells Bill O'Reilly that Putin was his "stablemate" on 60 minutes, inferring that they'd met then: " My stablemate was Vladimir Putin and we did very well."

If it weren't for later lies from Trump, Trump supporters would argue that I was "misinterpreting" that statement but as it turns out, he expounded on his bull#:

Nov. 10, 2015 - At a Republican debate Trump says, "I got to know (Putin) very well because we were both on ‘60 Minutes,’ we were stablemates, and we did very well that night. But, you know that."

He got called out on it by Carly Fiorina so he tweeted this out, implying that she was somehow mistaken about what he'd just said THREE DAYS EARLIER on NATIONAL TELEVISION.

Nov. 13, 2015 - ".@CarlyFiorina I only said I was on @60Minutes four weeks ago with Putin—never said I was in Green Room. Separate pieces—great ratings!"

He lies all the time and often contradicts himself. He'll say basically anything in the moment if he thinks it's the right thing to say and then he'll later just say something else, often blaming other people for his lies, because he has absolutely no shame.

Do you want me to plot out some of the many contradictory statements that he's made about Russian interference? I kinda feel like you should since you're making the completely false claim that he's been consistent.

Yeah, do more. Being in the same stable doesn't mean they were in the same stall. Apt metaphor, except for the literal mind.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Maybe there is some truth to Trump being asked to run by those opposed to the deepstate.

Maybe what you call lies was just an amazing troll job from the troller in chief. Not saying I believe this, but this ATS after all.

I have said many times I don't like Trump's aggrandizing. But I'll still call that Trump being Trump. It's who he was before he was elected and who is now.

Not shocking, and not flip-flopping to pander to his base. Many republicans are Anti-Russia so if anything those remarks only hurt his election chances.

a reply to: Isurrender73

I can provide many links to Hillary doing what you are accusing Trump of but you already know that.

Here's the difference — I have no problem saying that Hillary Clinton lies, has lied and will lie in the future. Did you expect that I would? Perhaps the problem here is that you're projecting your own emotional need to defend Trump?

Nov. 28, 2016 - TIME magazine interview: "I don’t believe they interfered. That became a laughing point, not a talking point, a laughing point."

Dec. 15, 2016 - On Twitter, he expresses doubt for his followers: "If Russia, or some other entity, was hacking, why did the White House wait so long to act? Why did they only complain after Hillary lost?"

Jan. 11, 2017 - At a press conference: "I think it was Russia" "He (Putin) shouldn’t have done it. I don’t believe he will be doing it more."

June 20, 2017 - On Twitter, Trump insists that Russian hacking is all a big hoax:

"Why did Democratic National Committee turn down the DHS offer to protect against hacks (long prior to election. It’s all a big Dem HOAX. Why did the DNC REFUSE to turn over its Server to the FBI, and still hasn’t? It’s all a big Dem scam and excuse for losing the election!"

July 6, 2017 - At a press conference in Poland, no longer a hoax apparently: "Well, I think it was Russia and I think it could have been other people and other countries. It could have been a lot of people interfered. Nobody really knows for sure." So it was Russia but also "others." Continuing, he casts doubt on the IC while again hedging his bet:

"I remember when I was sitting back listening about Iraq, weapons of mass destruction. How everybody was 100% sure that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Guess what? That led to one big mess. They were wrong and it led to a mess. So, it was Russia. And I think it was probably others also."

Sep. 22, 2017 - On Twitter, he calls Russian meddling a hoax again: "The Russia hoax continues, now it's ads on Facebook. What about the totally biased and dishonest Media coverage in favor of Crooked Hillary?"

Nov. 11, 2017 - On Air Force One, talking to the press, he's asked about whether he confronted Putin. He says:

"Every time he sees me, he says, ‘I didn’t do that,’ and I really believe that when he tells me that, he means it."

"But he says, ‘I didn’t do that.’ I think he is very insulted by it, if you want to know the truth. Don’t forget. All he said was he never did that, he didn’t do that. I think he is very insulted by it, which is not a good thing for our country."

Then after implying that Putin's denial is credible, he goes on to attack John Podesta because that's another thing that Trump does — without skipping a beat, he'll transition from dodging a question with a word salad of bull# innuendo to attacking somebody he doesn't like about something unrelated. Just like he did in Helsinki where he launched into ranting about Hillary Clinton's emails. (or like in that Sep. 22 tweet)

The very next day:

Nov. 12, 2017 - After getting # in the media, he changes his tune. "I believe that he feels that he and Russia did not meddle in the election. As to whether I believe it or not, I’m with our agencies, especially as currently constituted, with their leadership."

That's far from a comprehensive list of course, noticeably missing for example is the 400 lb basement dweller statement. In general, he wants people to doubt that there was any hacking. And when he does concede that there was, he'll often try to inject doubt another way by bringing up China or "others." And of course, he's perpetually campaigning against Hillary Clinton because he uses her and people connected to her as props. So most statements about Russian interference in the election must also include a statement about Clinton.

This isn't some hard to discern pattern. It's blatant and frequently repeated.

a reply to: vinifalou

Political parties only have trust in intelligent agencies if it suits their cause. If you are for our party we love ya and you are doing a great job. If you are investigating our party you are lower than scum at the bottom of the outhouse and we don't trust ya. It works both ways.

It's going to keep getting worse before it gets better.

a reply to: theantediluvian

I think you are mixing comments from 2 seperate investigations.

I don't think he believed it was Russia that hacked the DNC. I don't think it was Russia that leaked the emails either. And the intelligence community already said as many as 5 countries hacked the system. The difference between me and POTUS he has to be careful what conspiracies he supports where Idgaf what anyone thinks about my opinion.

I do think he always believed Russia was using propaganda to influence our election. But as Nunes pointed out there is evidence Russia was talking smack about both sides to create division, something the MSM leaves out.

I still don't think he is flip flopping to pander to his base. I don't think his base actually likes this part of his personality. But we do like his accomplishments so we let it slide.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Dec. 15, 2016 - On Twitter, he expresses doubt for his followers: "If Russia, or some other entity, was hacking, why did the White House wait so long to act? Why did they only complain after Hillary lost?"

Expressing doubt? He was asking valid questions.

June 20, 2017 - On Twitter, Trump insists that Russian hacking is all a big hoax:

"Why did Democratic National Committee turn down the DHS offer to protect against hacks (long prior to election. It’s all a big Dem HOAX. Why did the DNC REFUSE to turn over its Server to the FBI, and still hasn’t? It’s all a big Dem scam and excuse for losing the election!"

That's blatantly untrue. Again, asking a question about why the DNC turned down the DHS offer to protect against hacks. Again, asking why DNC refused to turn over its server, is not insisting "Russian hacking" is all a big hoax.

July 6, 2017 - At a press conference in Poland, no longer a hoax apparently: "Well, I think it was Russia and I think it could have been other people and other countries. It could have been a lot of people interfered. Nobody really knows for sure." So it was Russia but also "others." Continuing, he casts doubt on the IC while again hedging his bet:

He never said "russian hacking was a hoax". You believe he did, apparently.

Sep. 22, 2017 - On Twitter, he calls Russian meddling a hoax again: "The Russia hoax continues, now it's ads on Facebook. What about the totally biased and dishonest Media coverage in favor of Crooked Hillary?"

No, he said "The Russian Hoax", not "Russian meddling was a hoax".

Nov. 11, 2017 - On Air Force One, talking to the press, he's asked about whether he confronted Putin. He says:

"Every time he sees me, he says, ‘I didn’t do that,’ and I really believe that when he tells me that, he means it."

Nov. 12, 2017 - After getting # in the media, he changes his tune. "I believe that he feels that he and Russia did not meddle in the election. As to whether I believe it or not, I’m with our agencies, especially as currently constituted, with their leadership."

Which confirms todays clarification.

This is all a weasily attempt at propaganda, no different than what you accuse Trump of doing.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Donald Trump denies he's ever met Putin despite someone called Donald Trump once saying he had

"I dont know Putin. I have no idea," Mr Trump said. "I never met Putin. This is not my best friend."

That was October 2016.

As early as 2013

At another point in the debate, he said: "I have nothing to do with Putin. I've never spoken to him.

"I don't know anything about him other than he will respect me."

A few years before that:

When asked in an MSNBC interview in November 2013 if he had a relationship with Mr Putin, Mr Trump replied: "I do have a relationship, and I can tell you that he's very interested in what we're doing here today.

Have some more; 17 times Donald Trump said one thing and then denied it

Some of my favorites include:

"If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously. Just knock the hell — I promise you, I will pay for the legal fees. I promise. I promise."

Followed by:

"I don’t condone violence," Trump said on ABC. "I never said I was going to pay for fees."

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Yeah, do more. Being in the same stable doesn't mean they were in the same stall. Apt metaphor, except for the literal mind.

"I got to know (Putin) very well because we were both on ‘60 Minutes,’ we were stablemates, and we did very well that night. But, you know that"

How did he get to know Putin very well if they had no interaction whatsoever? Is there some sort of telepathic link between people whose segments, filmed thousands of miles away on different dates, air on the same episode of 60 Minutes?

Perhaps we should move this discussion to a more appropriate forum, like Paranormal Studies and really delve into the depths of this heretofore undescribed phenomenon? Or, you could simply just stop being disingenuous.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Yeah, do more. Being in the same stable doesn't mean they were in the same stall. Apt metaphor, except for the literal mind.

"I got to know (Putin) very well because we were both on ‘60 Minutes,’ we were stablemates, and we did very well that night. But, you know that"

How did he get to know Putin very well if they had no interaction whatsoever? Is there some sort of telepathic link between people whose segments, filmed thousands of miles away on different dates, air on the same episode of 60 Minutes?

Perhaps we should move this discussion to a more appropriate forum, like Paranormal Studies and really delve into the depths of this heretofore undescribed phenomenon? Or, you could simply just stop being disingenuous.

And you know Trump so well. You must have some magical link through his twitter feed. Off to the paranormal forum to you then.

a reply to: Isurrender73

I think you are mixing comments from 2 seperate investigations. I don't think he believed it was Russia that hacked the DNC. I don't think it was Russia that leaked the emails either. And the intelligence community already said as many as 5 countries hacked the system.

No. You're conflating a few different things here. The "as many as 5 countries hacked the system" is actually a reference to Hillary Clinton's email system.

That comes from a report from Bret Baier on Nov 2, 2016 (six days before the election), citing multiple unnamed FBI sources. It was repeated throughout the day and evening by other Fox News reporters/personalities. The very next day, Bret Baier then reported that HRC was likely to be indicted having something to do with her role with the Clinton Foundation while Secretary of State.

On Nov. 4, 2016, Bret Baier retracted both stories and apologized.

Fox News apologizes for falsely reporting that Clinton faces indictment

Fox News anchor Bret Baier apologized on Friday for reporting that federal investigators had determined that Hillary Clinton’s private email server had been hacked and that an investigation would lead to an indictment of Clinton after the election.

In fact, Baier said, after checking with his sources, there is no evidence at this time for either statement.
Baier, the anchor of Fox’s evening newscast “Special Report,” went on the air Wednesday to report that the FBI had determined that Clinton’s private server, which she used while serving as secretary of state, had been hacked by “five foreign intelligence agencies.”

I suspect that Baier's sources were actually Rudy Giuliani and James Kallstrom and of course, it was bull#.

a reply to: cosmickat

Ill give you that...Trump lobs out turds then changes on the flight home

I'm seeing the same democrats that were yelling "everyone has bias" and "everyone commits crimes" (yes, someone said it), crucifying Trump for the mistake, but I haven't seen anyone saying that "everyone can misspoke a word".

I guess only Trump does that.

a reply to: vinifalou

Everyone is capable of misspeaking and I'm sure that in his 70+ years of life, Donald Trump has legitimately misspoken on more than one occasion.

This just doesn't happen to be one of those occasions.