There's a person whose job I would never want, even if I believed in Trump and regardless of how much it pays. I'm surprised she's hung around this long.
Yeah, we're paying her six figures a year to stand behind a podium and lie to us every day. I have no idea how she sleeps at night.
So let me get this straight... an article that misrepresented the extent of a Russian hack now means that Trump is a great president and his administration is not a train wreck?
Thank God that got straightened out. I was beginning to think that the election of Trump was a big mistake.
Sanders said Trump did not have to look at specific numbers "because he knew there was a trade deficit. Whether they got down to the dollar amount or not, there is a trade deficit between the two countries."
Asked what the actual size of the deficit Trump believes it is, Sanders was not immediately able to provide a figure.
There's a person whose job I would never want, even if I believed in Trump and regardless of how much it pays. I'm surprised she's hung around this long.
So, let me see if I got this straight (didn't watch the clip so I'm surmising): Known agenda-driven news fabricator is shown disparaging, um, being disparaged by, um wait, what?
Only partly incorrect. They were wrong about who was Chief of Base (CoB) when a particular individual (Zubaydah) was tortured and mocked for his suffering. Still, she became the boss of that torture site, and oversaw torture somewhat later after that incident. In addition:
The February 2017 ProPublica story did accurately report that Haspel later rose to a senior position at CIA headquarters, where she pushed her bosses to destroy the tapes of Zubaydah’s waterboarding. Her direct boss, the head of the agency’s Counterterrorism Center, ultimately signed the order to feed the 92 tapes into a shredder. Her actions in that instance, and in the waterboarding of al-Nashiri, are likely to be the focus of questions at her confirmation hearings.
Aside from the mocking and time frame, nothing changes essentially.
Just demonstrating that many supposedly informed persons are actually quite gullible. That in spite of all the warnings, they continue to fall for anything #Fakenews so long as it matches their preconceived notions.
Many justifiably rail against outside influence in elections. Well hey, look no further than your own continental organizations doing it deliberately. It's not like the media haven't already told you what they really think.
Falling for deliberately planted misinformation ("being gullible") isn't the same as being dishonest. They trusted insider sources and got burned.
If, in fact, they did get burned—I guess we'll find out tomorrow. But following that up with an exposee of CNN...where did that come from? WaPo ran the story.
Sanders said Trump did not have to look at specific numbers "because he knew there was a trade deficit. Whether they got down to the dollar amount or not, there is a trade deficit between the two countries."
Asked what the actual size of the deficit Trump believes it is, Sanders was not immediately able to provide a figure.
The pair were introduced again six weeks later by a mutual friend at a birthday party at a New York restaurant, where they ended up hitting it off. “We talked for an hour,” Vanessa recalled. Although the two initially didn’t remember each other from their first meeting, Vanessa says she recalled blurting at one point, Wait, you’re “the one with the retarded dad!”
Sanders said Trump did not have to look at specific numbers "because he knew there was a trade deficit. Whether they got down to the dollar amount or not, there is a trade deficit between the two countries."
Asked what the actual size of the deficit Trump believes it is, Sanders was not immediately able to provide a figure.
Don't even try to make like you were laughing at anything to do with a trade deficit. Because your posting history on fiscal and complicated policy topics won't offer you any support.
It's like a different side of the bi-polar you completely took over a few years back. The not anywhere near as bright version. Or perhaps I'm giving the previous version far too much credit.
Further reading for any other dimwitted sexist laugh-alongs.
oh the irony.
