Clinton Pushes False Story Against Kavanaugh

225px-Hillary_Clinton_official_Secretary_of_State_portrait_cropHillary Clinton surprisingly tweeted a clearly false allegation against Judge Brett Kavanaugh on Wednesday that had already been widely disproven.  Clinton told followers that Kavanaugh referred to birth control pills as “abortion-inducing drugs.” He didn’t but that does not appear to matter to many spreading this false story, including Clinton.  Clinton said that she wanted to be
“sure we’re all clear about” about Kavanaugh’s comment to “set off a lot of alarm bells.”  It did but not the alarms that she intended.  The false account was first spread by Sen. Kamala Harris (D., Cal.) who received four Pinocchios for the claim from The Washingon Post.

Clinton tweeted “I want to be sure we’re all clear about something that Brett Kavanaugh said in his confirmation hearings last week. He referred to birth-control pills as ‘abortion-inducing drugs.’ That set off a lot of alarm bells for me, and it should for you, too.”


229 thoughts on “Clinton Pushes False Story Against Kavanaugh”

  1. This article reminds us of why Hillary Clinton is such a poor political power player. She consistently waits until a story or topic has been out there for a long time, has thoroughly made the rounds, and it is then and only then that she tries to ride the story/topic’s coat tails to notoriety or success. The woman is never forward leaning and never ahead of the curve.

  2. RBG is finally declared dead. Trump gets to nam her successor. Can you imagine the reaction on the left. It will look like Jonestown Guyana.

  3. Trust me hilary, that last thing in the world ANY conservative wants to do is limit liberals efforts to stop reproducing.

    1. Independent Bob – RBG thinks she can do another 5 years on the court. How long did Chevy Chase’s aunt do?

  4. Forget Hillary. Now Diane Feinstein is spreading a ridiculous story of something some unnamed woman says Kavanaugh did to her while in high school? What did he do while he was attending his all boys high school? How low will Feinstein go?

    Hillary, Kamala, Diane, Cory, etc….all these desperate grandstanding Democrats are out and out brazenly and intentionally lying to their base voters while the media is once again complicit in allowing it. Unbelievable. It’s true — they really do count on “the stupidity of the American people” – just as they’ve told us they do.

    Remember when Al Franken wrote that book called, “Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them”? It’s clear that he was talking about members of his own Democrat party.

    1. The press is now reporting that the incident involved Kavanaugh, then 17, and another 17-year old student locking a 17-year old female student in a room during a High School party. The woman was able to exit the room it is being reported. She did not author the “Feinstein letter”, which originated at Stanford Law school and was sent to a legislator serving the Palo Alto (where Stanford is located) then forwarded to Feinstein. Feinstein then forwarded the email to the FBI, who is performing the Kavanaugh background check. The FBI says it will not investigate.

      The “victim” did not want to come forward, and there is no allegation of sex or sexual harassment or sexual misconduct of any kind.

      1. Except that Feinstein held the letter for 6-8 weeks, never asked BK about it in private or in the hearings, and then forwarded it to FBI a few days ago, without letting anyone see it, even her fellow Dems on the Judiciary Committee, so that the speculation could continue to run wild.

        And this is the tribe of Peter Shill, Nutchacha, L4D, Fishwings, etc.

        1. Based on this BS it is hard to believe that Feinstein is a Senator representing people much less a Senator that is or has been on the Senate Rules Committee, the Select Committee on Intelligenceon and now the Senate Judiciary Comittee. I am sure we can find somewhere that she distinguished herself, but presently she is acting like a fool and is making a mockery of our justice system.

        2. They are also hammering at Kavanaugh about whether or not he was on the Gag List, an email list of ribald, off color jokes sent by disgraced judge Kozinski. Who are they kidding? Everyone’s received silly, raunchy jokes in their lifetime. If this were a crime, virtually no one would be free from prosecution. Is there a law that jokes must be PC?

          If you don’t want to be on a raunchy joke email group, then get your email removed. I have never understood this Pollyannaish attitude. In the 80’s, women were supposed to be powerful, not squeamish, and able to joke around with everyone. Now women clutch their pearls at ribald jokes.

          I am sure there could be circumstances where such jokes could be harassment. For example, if a woman turned down a man’s advances, and he kept emailing her sex jokes 400 times a day. OK, that’s harassment. Otherwise, if you don’t like receiving jokes, then ask for your email to be cut from the list, or assign it as spam.

          Whether or not he ever heard an off color joke is an entirely different issue from if he know that Kozinski was an alleged rapist. I loved Bill Cosby’s jokes, and I can say with certainty that I had no idea he was a rapist.

          1. I wonder if Bill Cosby were a Republican running for an important office if his alleged history of rape wouldn’t have been announced a lot earlier.

      2. Whaaa???

        This mysterious letter, held in reserve until the 11th hour, was because at 17 years old he and his friend allegedly locked another 17 year old in a room, which she was able to exit? That’s the worst prank that a teenage Kavanaugh did? Guy sounds like a boy scout.

        No wonder she refused to reveal its contents.

  5. Here’s Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg YESTERDAY at GW School of Law. Should this poor, feeble lady be deciding issues of national policy at her advanced age? Do you think she’s really writing those decisions?

    “The way it was was right … the way it is is wrong.”

    1. mespo…….I just saw this on tv. OMG! For the first 10 seconds I thought she was no longer with us…very disturbing. Her family should intervene and take her home and get her off the bench. Do they want her to be remembered like this!?

        1. mespo……….and not to be cruel, but does America need its own version of England’s Jeremy Bentham!?
          If she stays another year it will not only be sad, but will border on the macabre, IMO.

        2. Mespo, I think Justice Ginsberg would risk passing away on the bench, during opening arguments, rather than give President Trump the opportunity to choose another Justice. If she cannot wait until 2020, she would do her best to wait until after the midterms.

          Age is not for wimps, that’s for sure.

          1. Once she got going into her discussion, I found it very interesting. Even though she is rather far on the Left, she spoke in favor of bipartisan acceptance of nominees, rather than the hyper partisan grandstanding we have today. It is my understanding that she and Scalia were good friends.

            Her age weighs heavily upon her, it seems, as always happens to those fortunate enough to live long enough.

    2. Some years ago, I argued a case before a three judge panel of the 5th Circuit. One of the three judges was so old and physically infirm that he had to be carried out by two marshals. He did not ask any questions of either me or my opposing counsel so I was unable to tell whether his physical infirmities affected his thinking ability. This of course, is the downside of life-time appointments. The upside historically has been independence of the federal judiciary but so many courts have become so political that it makes one wonder if life-time tenure still is a good idea. In time, hopefully things will level out. The thing about Justice Ginsburg that troubles me is that she obviously is making a valiant effort to stay on the Court hoping to deny President Trump the opportunity to appoint her replacement. To me, she is placing her political ideology above the welfare of the Court as a whole and her own role as a Supreme Court Justice.

      1. Honestly – it is for the reasons stated below that I firmly believe that lifetime appointments must be contingent upon fitness assessment tests, administered at intervals determined by the medical profession. That should be the failsafe.

    3. That’s scary to see. Obama tried to get her to step down, but she would not. Imagine what sweet irony it will be when RBG up and dies in the next few years only to have Donald J. Trump be the one to appoint her replacement.

    4. 1 in 6 people over 80 have dementia. The reality of modern society is that cognitive tests should be administered regularly, just like drivers license tests, to anyone over the age of 65 who is still working in any field in which cognition is critical.

      Dementia is a frightening prospect. This is not a comment on Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Nanci Pelosi, or anyone else. Anyone with an important job should regularly take at least the meager diagnostic cognition tests now available. It’s irresponsible not to.

      1. Karen, I believe it is likely that she would pass the basic cognitive testing administered by a family doctor. This doesn’t mean I think she should remain on the bench, only that I don’t know how a life appointment could be monitored by testing without that testing subject to dangerous problems.

      2. Karen S – all of my friends who are over 65 get a cognitive test with my annual physical.

  6. When has she ever let the truth get in the way of her narrative?

    It was a video.

    Did I wipe it with a cloth?

    I never sent nor received classified information.

    My loss was because women hate themselves, and they let their husbands control them.


      What did Christopher Wray know and when did Christopher Wray know it?

      If Christopher Wray did not know of the FBI’s conspiracy, he is incompetent.

      If Christopher Wray did know of the FBI’s conspiracy, he is corrupt.

    1. i think we are about to hear that Kavanaugh allegedly pinched a girl’s fanny in prep school.

      this is a major threat to the republic. Call Meuller! Maybe there was a plot formed by a Russian spy to scare American women by pinching their bottoms? You can bring these two false narratives together somehow, I am sure of it!

      METOO is becoming MASS HYSTERIA



      Definition of treason

      1 : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or

      personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign’s family

      The FBI has attempted by overt acts to overthrow the President of the United States.

      1. False Assumption. What makes you think ‘the offender’ owes allegiance to any certain state?

        1. All government officials are required to take an oath of allegiance to the Constitution. Civil, Military, general bureaucrats, appointed, elected and so on. No exceptions.

        2. Can’t think of a single State that is not the same plus their own Constitution.

        3. All citizens take an oath to the same Constitution/

        4. Those born in the country take theirs ‘machina’ when they register to vote, register for selective service or actually join the military and accept student loans.

        Unfortunately their are two flies in the ointment.

        a. Men are not asked to volunteer for the draft but are coerced with threats of fines and jail time. Women get a free ride. but end up as second class citizens

        b. No one at age 18 is asked it is a presumption. which they verify by actions such as vote, jury duty, etc.

        That aside their is no false presumption with the oaths of office when elected or appointed.

        Yet one party subscribes to an ideology which openly preaches disloytalty to , replacement of (using means not authorized) and carries out acts against or supports acts against as defined in the Patriot Act.

        The rule in the social compact is the last oath is the one that counts. Meaning they can utter or sign one then quietly recant as a form of finger crossing.

        The difference today is some openly claim allegiance to foreign ideologies with out fear …. so far… of retribution.

        Ocasio wins a seat in the House of Representatives. Who is going to administer an oath of office which requires fealty to our Constitution and if they do who would believe the word of such a person as having any value?

        So the argument of ‘loyalty to’ does not hold much water if it is not enforced .

        Switch to Patriot Act.

        Anyone committing or supporting the commission of a terrorist act is guilty of terrorism.

        Defense terrorism. Any act that creates or causes fear

        Is anyone exempt? No. Unless it is in a classified portion.

        How does this affect civil rights?

        There are no civil rights for terrorists.

        Example. Probable Cause is changed to ‘suspicion of’

        Think not.;

        Obama signed that into law expanding and extending it end of December 2015 as part of the end of the year budget bill for the military.and law enforcement.

        Is Ocasio in jeopardy?

        Depends on who is running DHS.

        How about Blood Chuck Schumer?


      1. mespo……LOL….ya know, she DID say she spent alot of time in the woods after the election loss. By jove, man! Your deductive reasoning abilities are impeccable.

        1. Cindy Bragg – she was just duplicating Lena Durham’s trek into the forest. But I have heard from anonymous sources that Hillary is a bear after a few drinks. Maybe she is a shape-shifter.

          1. Paul.C…shape shifter…tee hee hee…..”in canus corpore transmuto” (“The Shaggy Dog”)
            (sorry, most of my classical references are either B&W films, Seinfeld, or Mencken)

          2. PC Schulte and mespo…..honestlawyer=hubby. But don’t let it go beyond this post 😉

          1. mespo…..belly laugh!!! Yep, you captured the magic that is Hillary. BTW The Band is my fave American group….Daryle, however, did a fine job with this song.

          2. PC Schulte and mespo…..honestlawyer=hubby. But don’t let it go beyond this post 😉

              1. Paul C. Sort of…LOL…. he doesn’t mind…just doesn’t want his real name on a shingle, flapping in the breeze 😁

              2. Paul C Schulte……….btw, wasn’t it “bring your spouse to the blog” day, or is that next week?

                1. Cindy Bragg – I didn’t know there was such a day and I will not be participating. 😉

    1. From the source:

      “It purportedly describes an incident that was relayed to someone affiliated with Stanford University, who authored the letter and sent it to Rep. Anna Eshoo, a Democrat who represents the area.

      Different sources provided different accounts of the contents of the letter, and some of the sources said they themselves had heard different versions, but the one consistent theme was that it describes an incident involving Kavanaugh and a woman while they were in high school. Kept hidden, the letter is beginning to take on a life of its own.”

      When women, for whatever reason, do not come forward to tell authorities about an incident, then they have made their decision, for better or worse. Women who wait decades, and then make allegations at the 11th hour before a man takes an important job, have little credibility with me. After all, Kavanaugh has been a prominent attorney, judge, and professor for decades. Why now? Unless they have evidence, it will be she said, he said, which is pointless. Some anonymous person made an allegation, but won’t release any details, about something that happened in high school, to someone who was affiliated with Stanford, who wrote the letter to Feinstein. And the details have changed multiple times…but we aren’t to know what they actually are. Give me a break. And this was about high school??? An accuser cannot remain anonymous. How is this to be investigated?

      I have no idea about the veracity of any claim. If you’re going to make an allegation, you’d better be able to prove it. Otherwise, it’s not fair to the accused party.

      This seems like a dirty trick to stall Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing until after the midterms. Swamp politics.

      1. The entire claim is ludicrous. Once again anonymous sources and this time from such a distant time that it has no business being raised. One can only say that the Senator(s) that is/ are promoting the letter do not belong in the Senate or the House or anywhere near Washington.

        Maybe some of the public will start to recognize how dangerous this game of identity politics is turning out. Yes, this is the way they do things in countries like Venezuela and Cuba except they use guns and bullets.

        1. Those countries were divided by class but pretty much ethnically and religiously and culturally unified.

          Imagine how much more chaotic and bloody the situation would be here if civil war or anarchy breaks out. Or I should say, breaks out more?

          When TSHTF — “diversity is not your greatest strength”
          When things jump off, you know who is in your car, and get in and go

          1. I think what you are saying is that a lack of assimilation and common language can lead to horrid results. If so you are right.

    1. Same thing if you use their re-defintions in their fictionary. National Socialism is the second child of International Socialism. Progressive Socialism is the first child of International Socialism.and their offspring is called Liberal Democracy.

      good time to introducer their new campaign slogan.

      For The People

      1. No ,mention of citizens
      2. Means The People can do nothing on their own they must have our ruling class gjuidance and leadership.

      Why use it? Because the real opponent is something called a Representative Constitutional Republic Re-resenting The Public. or if, by and for the citizens

      But them it means you are too stupid to be a citizen therefore we will have to do it for you. And that is called fascism. ‘small’ f.

  7. Four Pinnochios from WaPo for a Democrat Socialist? That’s unheard of. in modern history. When her fabrications get that bad it’s time to retire the hag or even pull her Socialist Party Card. Either a typo or someone in DNC Land woke up to all the damage she’s causing, has caused and is now on the chopping block again. Can’t be doing their campaigns much good. But then that IS a good thing.

    1. What concerns me is that anybody thinks the Washington Compost — where the cryptocracy craps, and its editors and reporters then package and sell the product as news — is any kind of credible arbiter of truth. Any truth it tells is mere packaging and marketing copy for its real product, crap. Furthermore, the aging loser Clinton is no longer useful to the deep state and in fact, poses a huge liability. For those reasons, some truth can be told about her. But that doesn’t make the crap packagers the go-to source. Unless you just like munching on sh*t sandwiches.

  8. My God, why doesn’t this witch just fly away on her broomstick. She can take her whole family with her. I’m not a democrat, but for Gods sake, get some new faces.


    If Kavanaugh felt that Priests For Life were ‘burdened’ by having to submit a form, he was, in affect, agreeing with their argument that birth control pills are ‘abortion inducing drugs’.

    Whether or not Kavanaugh himself actually feels that birth control pills are abortion inducing drugs is somewhat negligible. By accepting the priests argument, Kavanaugh put himself on record as accepting religious-based views that conflict with medical science.

    1. What tortured logic Peter Shill has for us today.

      “If Kavanaugh felt that Priests For Life were ‘burdened’ by having to submit a form,” At that time Kavanaugh said nothing of what he felt.

      “By accepting the priests argument, Kavanaugh put himself on record as accepting religious-based views that conflict with medical science.”

      Where did Kavanaugh put his own personal views on record when reviewing the Priess For Life?

      Peter Shills lack of logic never ends. I would hate to have to live in his world where down is up and up is down.

      1. So what you’re saying is Peter Hill has been tortured by priests his whole life and Judge Kavanaugh feels that was justice served?

        I’m beginning to understand how Peter Hill’s mind processes information; real or imaginary.

        1. Olly, I want freedom ‘from’ religion. The views of priests should have no bearing on social policy.

          1. The Priests are not asking you to be involved in what they do. They don’t want you interfering in their religious practices and their religious beliefs.

            How are they interfering with you?

            If you wish to remain clothed in front of others don’t get a job in a nudist colony where everyone is required to be nude.

          2. I want freedom ‘from’ religion.

            And others want freedom of religion. Do you have a problem with that?

            The views of priests should have no bearing on social policy.

            Then logically, the views of atheists should have no bearing on social policy. See how this works? If you take this out further, no personal belief system should have any bearing on social policy. Hmmm, where does that leave us? That’s right. We end up right where we started, policy based on what the law legitimately allows. We’re back to the constitution and the limits it imposes on government.

            Keep it up and we’ll turn you into an orginalist. 🙂

            1. I agree, Olly. The views of atheists should have no bearing on social policy. Militant atheists are every bit as obnoxious as meddling churches.

              1. what do you mean social policy? do you mean law? what’s wrong with metaphysical ideas influencing law? of course they do.

                anyways the question of religious freedom is a complicated one. from whether or not the Amish or whomever has to supply a picture for state ID, to this more attenuated thing about Catholic outfits having to provide insurance covered by contraception or not. A lot of it seems pretty detail oriented to me so I am ok to leave it to judges. I don’t really care if they have to or not. There are larger oppression by far happening that should probably occupy our attentions.

                but Di FI is going to focus our attention on an even smaller one.


                Probably not Russian collusion, it’s the other great canard of our day, #METOO, not merely an encouragement to report authentic incidents of illegal sexual conduct, but more profoundly, a slogan embodying the premise that damn near every woman is oppressed by some man somewhere…
                ….and we see now all the old women scorned come out of the woodwork at men with newfound fame! Hell hath no fury!

      2. Allan, you ‘do’ live in a world where down is up. It’s known as ‘Trumpland’; one exit past The Twighlight Zone.

        1. No, Peter, I live in a real world where logic and facts count. You make statements that aren’t correct so either you are lying or you are not logical.

          By the way did you ever check out the district I said Obama represented? You disagreed and I provided the best description I could of the territory it covered at the time. Facts seem to shut you up.

          1. A ‘real world’ where Trump claims only 13 people died when Hurricane Maria hit Peurto Rico. Not even Paul Ryan wod back Trump on that. But I’m sure ‘you’ would, Allan.

            1. The problem you have Peter is understanding the English language and understanding what was being talked about. Hurricane deaths are listed as direct deaths and indirect deaths. At the time Trump made that comment the reports from Puerto Rico were that only a small number died directly from the hurricane. Numbers always increase. A lot of the deaths were caused by Puerto Rico’s poor infrastrucure caused by Democrats that embazzeled money instead of using the money for infrastructure repair.

              Lots of water sent from the US was wasted by your type because it was withheld from people to prove nothing was being done when a lot was being done. It is your type that is responsible for many of the deaths in Puerto Rico.

              You should leave the US and go to Venezuela and live under the type of system you propose.

              1. Allan, these Venzuela references are pathetic. And they scarcely excuse Trump’s lies.

                1. Venzuela is where you belong, Peter. Venezuelan economics has a lot to do with how Obama thinks. You think our present prosperity is due to Obama trends, but one can always test and look at what has actually happened with these trends. The video below shows a bunch of metrics and what we see from the Obama years is a downhill trend on all of them and as soon as the business leadership realized Obamanomics was to be dismatled and Trump would be in control the downward trend reversed itself and went upwards. Make sure you review the last graph because this shows the OMB predictions that were way too low. They revised the trends at a later time and they were still well below the performance met by the Trump administration. In fact the present numbers are pretty close on that graph to the predicted ones which your type said could never be achieved.

                  Everyone watch the video so one can actually understand what is happening.

                2. You remind me of Kerry. Three scratches then cut and run.They less than scarcely excuse your pathetic frear of facts unless it’s complete unfamiliarity with same. Now go change the subject again. You haven’t touched on the AIDS death rate in the Zimbabwean military as compared to the general public yet…

                3. That’s right, Peter.
                  Venezuela would still be humming along like a finely-tuned machine (and generously providing free fuel oil to struggling Americans) if their robust leader, Hugo Chavez hadn’t been brought down by an unusually fast-acting cancer.
                  Puerto Rico suffers from being held at arms length by the gleefully sadistic corporate capitalist system that’s infiltrated our nation.

              2. Maybe English is not Peter Shill’s first language, Allan. Or even his second. Maybe that’s why facts shut him up so that he seizes on the word “Venezuela” in your comment and ignores everything else you said.

                1. Peter lies and twists the news. He calls others liars but when they prove their point Peter never debates it. He is a coward that runs away and repeats the same garbage another day.

              3. Verified reports said 18 early on. later one two or three days ater 2975. which immediately grew to 3,000 and then to over three thousand to ‘as much as 4,000. to what may turn out to be and so it grew.

                when you are dealing with events such as these you want to calm citizens and other not engage with cheap unsupported sensationalism

                What didn’t grow was the original statement of 18 known deaths That part never got reported just the sensationalist BS.

                Why would any one trust the former main stream media for factual news?

                1. Peter Shill trusts anyone that agrees with what he wants to hear. He is one of the most undiscerning persons I have ever communicated with.


            Barack Obama served three terms in the Illinois Senate from 1997 to 2004, when he was elected to the United States Senate. During this part of his career, Obama continued teaching constitutional law part time at the University of Chicago Law School as he had done as a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996, and as a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2008.[1][2][3]

            In 1994, Senator Alice Palmer announced her desire to run for the United States House of Representatives, leaving the Senate’s 13th district seat open. When filing opened in 1995 for her seat, Obama entered the race. Eventually, his challengers were disqualified and he won the Democratic primary unopposed in 1996. He won re election in 1998 and 2002. During his Senate tenure, Obama was involved with a wide range of legislation.

            While serving, he ran unsuccessfully for the United States House of Representatives in the 2000 elections. In the redistricting following 2000 Census, the Democrats gained control of the Illinois Senate, and Obama became more active in his legislation, which included work in areas such as health care, labor, law enforcement, campaign finance reform, welfare, and community reinvestment.

            So the question is how did he teach ConLaw without having the faintest idea how to describe or apply it other than by Executive Order?

            That was not a yes or no question just a demonstration of the reality of life. Objectivism wins out every time .

        2. Ahhh yes the land of mystic other words… subjectivism…. How Platonic of you.Did you know Plato rejected his whole construction?


    2. i dont get your comment Peter. are you aware that, in point of fact the OTC “Day after Pill” like plan B or whatever is a just the same kind of hormone pill that as “the Pill” ? i mean just look it up, don’t believe me.

      it definitely can be an abortifacient. that’s just chemistry and biology

      1. Drinking cedar bark tea and soaking in mustard plaster baths were the first line of defense in the olden days Kavanaugh wants to return to.

  10. The DNC should just take the socialist wing in, go for majorities in both chambers and win the White House. THEN, create 5-7 new seats on the Supreme Court. They need to get over their last fiasco of an election and get on with bigger plans that will facilitate a favorable correction in the long term, for them.Oh yeah, ship Grandma sorest looser off to a padded room while they’re at it.

    1. Their reputation is so bad it would take both of Trumps terms and 16 plus more to get the stench out of our nostrils. .

      1. Neither Hillary or Trump bother to think before speaking because they know none of their followers think before voting.

        1. That is rubbish talk about Trump that isn’t true. He won the Presdency based on his promises and has succeeded in carrying most of them out.

          1. Sorry, but the minor improvements we’ve seen are just sprouts that were seeded during the previous administration, which Trump’s plethora of death-wage temp jobs, noodle-brained tariffs, and tax cuts for the filthiest of the rich will tear up by the roots. The man’s nothing but a pillaging wart hog.

            1. All economic changes are based on the past and present along with perception. There is evidence that Trump made a difference economically and the real question is not whether or not he did rather how much of a positive effect he had.

              If he is following Obama policies why are people complaining?
              If he has not followed Obama’s policies then why is the economy getting better?

              I posted a video sometime back that showed what happened to the curves involving various metrics of the economy and they showed a downswing under Obama and an upswing under Trump. I have taken the .gov numbers on unemployment and demonstrated how unemployment reduction went quicker under Trump than it did under Obama even though it should have gone slower. All sorts of metrics have been used to show the differences but all you do is repeat the same pap. The increases in wages is real and has been demonstrated in a multiple of fashions.

              You don’t like his trade policies. That is not a lie. Do you have any idea of what he is doing? Nafta ended up reducing tariffs. Should the Chinese be permitted to steal our Intellectual property?

              You don’t like the tax cuts. But that too is not a lie and the economics behind them has demonstrated that they are working. The problem is not the tax cuts rather the debt incurred. But you are not talking about lies which is your claim and you are not debating policy rather you are just acting in a hyperbolic way.

              I am waiting for you to tell us where Trump made a significant lie as President. Alternatively you can deal with any of the hyperbolic statements you made and they can be discussed based on knowledge rather than hyperbole.

              1. Trump’s most prominent lie can be seen on every one of his silly MAGA hats. The slogan’s a PR stunt that suggests great days are ahead for the salt-of-the-earth working class, when in reality the “G” stands for “gullible” a goal he’s achieved with his pitifully besotted followers who don’t even realize Trump’s crap products are made in unregulated labor camps in China, Bangladesh, and Mexico because he cares nothing for quality, safety, or integrity..

                1. “MAGA hats.”

                  That too is not a lie. It actually is a very productive slogan.

                  ““G” stands for “gullible””

                  The same could be said for the Obama years where the middle class lost ground. At least under Trump the middle class is gaining some ground.

                  “Trump’s crap products” Trump would love to decrease our reliance on China but even the biggest companies deal with China. Google is even devising programs to stop the Chinese people from exploring everything we can and at the same time providing the Chinese government the ability to incarcerate the minds of their people. Trump is trying to stop that.

                  But again you haven’t provided a lie.

                  You obviously don’t understand economics and how to run a business. That is why we don’t hear any suggestions from you and are left only with hyperbolic complaints.

    1. So Issac, you’re disputing the good professor’s analysis of what was said publicly by two attorneys?

        1. Both Hillary and Trump are professionally trained liars. Hillary chose that path and Trump was born into it but they’re basically just two peas in a pod.

          1. Trump has been living up to most of his promises. That is quite different from what we have seen in recent years.

            1. Trump’s promises have the substance of cotton candy left out in the rain, and for that we should all be thankful because most of them are the mad ravings of a man-child who’s never matured past the symbiotic stage of development.

              1. “Trump’s promises have the substance of cotton candy ”

                A lot of rhetoric but no solid argument that would convince anyone you know what you are talking about. You failed to produce the lies you said he made. You failed to explain the questions asked regarding your hyperbolic comments on the economy. Nothing seems to escape your mind that is substantitive or contains any valid point of view that you can defend.

                1. You must free yourself from the confines of whatever sources you’ve been hoodwinked by because they’re keeping you from seeing what most folks have known for years: Trump’s just a bailed-out spokesman for the “Big Club” George Carlin warned us of, the one that chuckles while spitting out the carcasses of everyday people after feasting on the fruits of their labor.
                  The onus of defending Trump’s bogus sideshow is on you. Don’t try to place it on others.

                  1. “You must free yourself from the confines of whatever sources you’ve been hoodwinked by because they’re keeping you from seeing what most folks have known for years: ”

                    Really? It is I who has provided substance to our discussion.You have provided nothing but hyperbolic language.

                    First you said Trump lied and then in subsequent replies you changed the subject without providing any of the significant lies the President made while being President. I provided a bit of econmic reasoning and what did you provide? Only more hyperbole without dealing with any details whatsoever. That suggests that it is you who needs to search different points of view so you can rebut what is said with something other than empty rhetoric.

      1. Not disputing, only commenting on how the subject matter tends to be all the faults of the left, primarily. Turley speaks to his audience, just as FoxNews and Washingtontimes do. If Turley’s posts represented a fair illustration of the lies and malfeasance of the political world, we would be getting a lot more about Trump, the Republicans, and that side. One can’t help but reflect upon how this blog is inhabited primarily by the right, Trump supporters/defenders. So, Turley feeds his sheep.

        1. ” If Turley’s posts represented a fair illustration of the lies and malfeasance of the political world, we would be getting a lot more about Trump”

          You are free to list the most significant lies of Trump as president along with proof. You want Turley to do something you can’t do not matter how many times you make this type of statement. Tell Turley the signifcant lies and proof. Then maybe he will know where to look.

          1. Since Trump’s been spouting lies since he learned to speak it would be easier to ask for a list of times he told the truth.

            1. Trump has been President less than two years. List several of his most important lies with in context and preferrably with quotes. I’m sure everything he says isn’t always exactly the truth but one has to understand the difference between a lie and a mistake, puffing, opinion, etc.

              1. You can easily find a multitude of Trump’s lies with a modicum of effort, but like most of his supporters you expect others to hand everything to you on a silver platter.
                Now get crackin’ (and don’t get sidetracked by Trump’s favorite “JFK JR’s Alive sites).

                1. One can’t prove a negative. Therefore it is up to you, the one who made the claim to state what that claim is. When a person can’t state the claim it means that person doesn’t know what they are talking about. You are that person.

                  State the significant lies the President has made while President and defend your position. My position is that those lies don’t exist, but I understand that an intelligent person might find something that I might agree with. I don’t know what that would be and I can’t know until that person is able to let us know.

                  I don’t think you are that person because to date you refuse to provide a specific verifiable list.

                  You really need to broaden your horizons.

        2. Really? And you don’t think LD4 should have her own blog? Just the number of characters that person has produced ad nauseum “inhabiting” all things Left on this blog, which is not her own, is remarkable. So no,I don’t buy your direction that all the folks the good professor is “feeding” are Trumper supporters. The Left leaning individuals are more than getting to spew their counter drivel as well thus vomiting their somewhat delirious responses as is their choice.

    1. FFS – Squeeky just moved so I am sure she is unpacking, rearranging furniture, etc. She will be back soon.

Comments are closed.