• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Shep Smith to Chris Wallace: ‘Why is it lie after lie after lie’

It's amazing to me; since I started out here, observing different posters and their styles.

There's this odd, yet identifialbe core of, well, just pathologically dishonest posters.

Rationalization has been taken to an art form.

Sad.
The big problem as of late, is they've been given license from the very top! The President and Congress!

And the real danger with Trump, amongst the many, is he proved lying works phenomenally well! It's hard to argue with success!
 
An interesting side note regarding Nixon is that his loyal base stuck with him pretty much right up until he was forced to resign. Just like Trump supporters are sticking with Trump right now. History does repeat itself. The difference is, Nixon was a true statesman before he lost his mind. Trump has never contributed anything of value to anyone but himself and his own family. Trump is a symbol of the idiocracy that is threatening to take over this nation. I hear Kid Rock might run for the senate in Michigan. And so it continues....
Yep, Nixon held around 30% nationally if I remember right, and I'm pretty sure he was in positive territory amongst the GOP rank & file.
 
Your go to cop out. But but Obama.

Yawn.

Pointing out hypocrisy is not a 'cop out.' Its funny how the but but Bush crowd who kept that refrain going into Obamas eighth year are whining about the but but Obama crowd who have only been at it for a couple months.
Liberal hypocrites.

Yawn.
 
The elite have been bigtime liars for a long time, there is nothing new here.

Pointing out hypocrisy is not a 'cop out.' Its funny how the but but Bush crowd who kept that refrain going into Obamas eighth year are whining about the but but Obama crowd who have only been at it for a couple months.
Liberal hypocrites.

Yawn.

You'll be calling Trump out for his lies now then?
 
You'll be calling Trump out for his lies now then?

I have. I have been critical of many aspects of Trumps behavior from his tweets to his struggles with the truth. You just don't notice because I am not a hate filled, unhinged liberal playing the tune you want to hear.
 
Junior's email chain -- which he forwarded to Manafort and Kushner long before its release -- has exposed the lie in pretty much every single thing the Trump administration has said about Russia in the last year.

At the very least, there's a few people guilty of perjury here.

Specify the law broken?
 
Try not telling lie after lie in a thread about people who tell lie after lie


I said nothing about what the form does say or whether anyone had to report any meeting. I merely noted that your claim was a completely dishonest work of fiction. Did you forget your forget your lie so quickly? Here it is


Please quote from the form where it says there is no obligation to report contacts with american citizens or admit that there is no such exclusion

First of all I did not lie, and stop calling me a liar. A lie is a statement provided intentionally for the purpose of deception.

I made a mis-statement based on an assumption without researching, and I will admit that I was wrong. That was simple laziness, not willful intent.

I agree that any person seeking a secret clearance for government service must report any contact with any person representing a foreign agency for whom they rendered advice or support. This would include an American citizen. That was a mistake on my part. Mea culpa.

However, the rest of my statement was correct. No one at the meeting from the Trump camp appears to have provided advice or support. They were expecting information the visitors had alleged they could provide to aide the Trump campaign.

Therefore, IMO there was no need to list the contacts on the clearance form. The fact that Kushner did so shows he was going the extra mile.
 
The elitists meaning trump and his crime family syndicate .

No, no, an alleged billionaire real estate owner from NYC isn't the elite.

They're common folk like you. They just hang out with Russian elites from time to time.

Ya know? Just like going to a bar, having a beer.
 
The big problem as of late, is they've been given license from the very top! The President and Congress!

And the real danger with Trump, amongst the many, is he proved lying works phenomenally well! It's hard to argue with success!
Yes, it works but it is puzzling that the same people demanded absolute truth from others. When Obama mistakenly said "you can keep your doctor," the very same people bounced on him like he was sacrificing one of his daughters on an alter. But Trump, the fibber-in-chief can spew mountains of lies and they give him a pass -- and see no disconnect. It's like they care controlled by mass hypnotism.

Saying that, it's showing in the approval numbers -- now at 36%.
 
No, no, an alleged billionaire real estate owner from NYC isn't the elite.

They're common folk like you. They just hang out with Russian elites from time to time.

Ya know? Just like going to a bar, having a beer.
I recognize the sarcasm but my take is why didn't the electorate, notice when he was a candidate that never he took a commercial flight in his adult life -- always traveling by private jet or helicopter, never did anything for anyone besides himself or his family, did his best to avoid contact with the working class, etc., somehow was now the champion of the working class? At 70, one doesn't change your world outlook. Trump conned enough suckers to get elected.
 
Yes, it works but it is puzzling that the same people demanded absolute truth from others. When Obama mistakenly said "you can keep your doctor," the very same people bounced on him like he was sacrificing one of his daughters on an alter. But Trump, the fibber-in-chief can spew mountains of lies and they give him a pass -- and see no disconnect. It's like they care controlled by mass hypnotism.

Saying that, it's showing in the approval numbers -- now at 36%.
Yes.

But until the next election. the only numbers that count are Trump's numbers withing the GOP. And those are still pretty good. (80-85% approval)

I strongly suspect most GOP Congress critters are getting unhappy with the Trump situation, and would dump him for Pence in a NY minute! But they can't even begin to move against him due to his popularity with the base.
 
First of all I did not lie, and stop calling me a liar. A lie is a statement provided intentionally for the purpose of deception.

I think your definition fits your argument. I stand by my claim

I made a mis-statement based on an assumption without researching, and I will admit that I was wrong. That was simple laziness, not willful intent.

I agree that any person seeking a secret clearance for government service must report any contact with any person representing a foreign agency for whom they rendered advice or support. This would include an American citizen. That was a mistake on my part. Mea culpa.

However, the rest of my statement was correct. No one at the meeting from the Trump camp appears to have provided advice or support. They were expecting information the visitors had alleged they could provide to aide the Trump campaign.

Therefore, IMO there was no need to list the contacts on the clearance form. The fact that Kushner did so shows he was going the extra mile.

You see, now I face a bit of a conundrum. On one hand, we have the lawyers Kushner has hired, whose years of experience in these matters have led them to say that this meeting did need to be reported. On the other hand, we have you --an anonymous poster on the internet-- who says the meeting did not have to be reported.
 
None have been proven to have done so. That you wish they were is irrelevant.

Yes, it's objective reality. They all either lied under oath of written forms or before congress. You can try and dance around and whine about that fact to your heart's content, but it won't change reality.

Good luck with your magical thinking.
 
The two most respected men on Fox News dish it out and agree on all the lies!



Those two are NPINO's

aka Non Partisan In Name Only

Smith is a lefty wacko and Wallace is an inside washington anti trumpster
 
I recognize the sarcasm but my take is why didn't the electorate, notice when he was a candidate that never he took a commercial flight in his adult life -- always traveling by private jet or helicopter, never did anything for anyone besides himself or his family, did his best to avoid contact with the working class, etc., somehow was now the champion of the working class? At 70, one doesn't change your world outlook. Trump conned enough suckers to get elected.


I base a lot of my political views on the attitudes I seen in this forum. Many who support Trump here are closet racists, white guys trying their hardest to be seen as black, or guys who think that rich people will give them jobs if the taxes are low enough. Somewhere on this forum, there is a trans person who lukewarmly supports Trump just as long as he sticks it to liberal. We even have a poster who supports Trump, has accused Jews of being hateful people only because they ran a website with pictures of white racists; same poster gets regularly accused of being just a little racist.

The point is that even if you were to look at this forum as an anomaly, you know, political junkies and people who are "informed", a large percentage of Trump supporters are people who think their country is being taken by others; the liberals, the blacks, the judges, the Jews, the media, the academics, scientists, etc. It's no longer run by the good values of yesteryear; the confederate/conservative values that gave us Jim Crow and electroshock therapy for gay people. Even the ones who have zero reasons to support Trump are doing it out of spite for the dirty liberals who made their lives so miserable.

None of it is supposed to make sense; it's just people being hateful and Trump giving them an opportunity to be so.
 
Last edited:
Yes.

But until the next election. the only numbers that count are Trump's numbers withing the GOP. And those are still pretty good. (80-85% approval)

I strongly suspect most GOP Congress critters are getting unhappy with the Trump situation, and would dump him for Pence in a NY minute! But they can't even begin to move against him due to his popularity with the base.

And Don is a buffoon, Pence on the other hand is a wild eyed religious fanatic.
 
Spoiler: I've been watching Fox News since 2008. Sorry to burst your bubble of hate.

But... do you love FOX News like he says you do? He thinks your for love for FOX News is fake. As opposed for your love towards any major news corporation from which you don't earn money, and probably don't even think about from 9-5. His political opinions on media don't have a lot of substance. He thinks people really 'love' or 'hate' TV networks. He doesn't understand that the point of this sub-forum is to review what they are saying. FOX News seems to have at least 1 personality who isn't a Trump slurper. So if you point it out, then you must LOVE FOX News - as opposed to just being an observer.
 
The two most respected men on Fox News dish it out and agree on all the lies!



Wow--now up to 8 people in that meeting--and it was a nothing burger--YEAH RIGHT. They lie all of the time.

Here is a video from a few months ago, with Shep Smith. An 8 minute video where he explains that Trump surrogates where not only on the phone with the Russian ambassador but with Russian intelligence agents, including the very day that DNC databases were hacked into.



The Trump campaign never had a clue that they were being watched since 2015, and this is why they are continually getting busted for lying.

GCHQ first became aware in late 2015 of suspicious “interactions” between figures connected to Trump and known or suspected Russian agents, a source close to UK intelligence said. This intelligence was passed to the US as part of a routine exchange of information, they added. Over the next six months, until summer 2016, a number of western agencies shared further information on contacts between Trump’s inner circle and Russians, sources said. It is understood that GCHQ was at no point carrying out a targeted operation against Trump or his team or proactively seeking information. The alleged conversations were picked up by chance as part of routine surveillance of Russian intelligence assets. Over several months, different agencies targeting the same people began to see a pattern of connections that were flagged to intelligence officials in the US. The European countries that passed on electronic intelligence – known as sigint – included Germany, Estonia and Poland. Australia, a member of the “Five Eyes” spying alliance that also includes the US, UK, Canada and New Zealand, also relayed material, one source said.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/apr/13/british-spies-first-to-spot-trump-team-links-russia
British intelligence passed Trump associates' talks with Russian on to US counterparts - CNNPolitics.com
 
Last edited:
I have. I have been critical of many aspects of Trumps behavior from his tweets to his struggles with the truth. You just don't notice because I am not a hate filled, unhinged liberal playing the tune you want to hear.

So when you call him out it's ok? But when a lefty calls him out it's unjustified. Got it.
 
But... do you love FOX News like he says you do? He thinks your for love for FOX News is fake. As opposed for your love towards any major news corporation from which you don't earn money, and probably don't even think about from 9-5. His political opinions on media don't have a lot of substance. He thinks people really 'love' or 'hate' TV networks. He doesn't understand that the point of this sub-forum is to review what they are saying. FOX News seems to have at least 1 personality who isn't a Trump slurper. So if you point it out, then you must LOVE FOX News - as opposed to just being an observer.

I have loved it in the past when they weren't pro-trump all the time. I still watch it. My love or hate for a network doesn't mean I don't watch it. People mostly seem to equate one pundit with the whole network, or even worse, one commentator who comes in for a segment to spout nonsense. Then you see threads like, "CNN wants to kill all white people!" I have my favorite commentators on each channel and these two are my favorites on this particular channel. It doesn't mean I watch them all the time or that I never watch the network because everyone else is a hack.
 
I think your definition fits your argument. I stand by my claim

Now, your typical abrasiveness has pissed me off.

I want to amend my prior "correction."

1. I was actually correct when I made my statement about not having to report American citizens as foreign contacts; the error was applying it in reference to the Section 20B.1.

See Section 19 of SF 86 "Foreign Contacts.":

A foreign national is defined as any person who is not a citizen or national of the U.S. You must indicate whether you have, or have had, close and/or continuing contact with a foreign national within the last seven years with whom you, or your spouse, or cohabitant are bound by affection, influence, common interests, and/or obligation.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...ts.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGFhj7c50-bjGPsh5uWfeBcz_wOug

This was the section I was recalling from memory in my original response. (So, I was not "lying," I was just in error about which section I referred to).

2. In regards to my "interpretation" not being correct?

See Section 20B "Foreign Business, Professional Activities, and Contacts."

Indicate whether you have provided any support or advice to an individual associated with a foreign business or organization (not listed as a previous employer) within the last seven years.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...ts.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGFhj7c50-bjGPsh5uWfeBcz_wOug

This is a much more specific instruction, limiting the report to those persons the applicant has "provided advice or support" to in the last seven years.

Why you cannot understand that the terms used, i.e. "Advice," or "Support," are both pro-active is beyond me.

Definitions:

Advice:
recommendation regarding a decision or course of conduct.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/advice

Support:
a. To aid the cause, policy, or interests of: supported her in her election campaign; b. To argue in favor of; advocate: supported lower taxes; c. To have an enthusiastic interest in (a sports team).
Support - definition of support by The Free Dictionary

You see, now I face a bit of a conundrum. On one hand, we have the lawyers Kushner has hired, whose years of experience in these matters have led them to say that this meeting did need to be reported. On the other hand, we have you --an anonymous poster on the internet-- who says the meeting did not have to be reported.

The only conundrum is your choice of opinions. Since you appear to support the idea of collusion you tend to lean toward any opinion that supports that belief...regardless of whether it complies with the wording of the SF 86 (and standard definitions) or not.

In the law, the first rule of interpretation is the "Plain Meaning" rule:

Any question of statutory interpretation begins with looking at the plain language of the statute to discover its original intent. To discover a statute's original intent, courts first look to the words of the statute and apply their usual and ordinary meanings.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/statutory_construction

Basically, when reading a Federal form (which is created in response to Federal law(s) establishing the requirements) the words are presumed to mean exactly what they say...not what you on anyone else would like them to mean. :coffeepap:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom