Within the First Few Days

Trump, or his administration, has, within the first few days of their Presidency, openly lied about the size of their inauguration crowd. Introduced the defense of "alternative facts" to address those lies, told EPA and USDA that they can no longer publish scientific research or discuss scientific finding in online media platforms, and has just today announced that they will only allow certain select journalists to cover the Administration and attend the press briefings, oh and also ended their first press briefing with scolding the media for criticizing the administration and then permitting no questions.

I ask a completely fair and honest question to Trump supporters out there.

Regardless of whether or not you agree with the findings of the EPA and USDA. Regardless of whether or not you agree with the "Alternative Facts" about the inauguration crowd size. Regardless of whether or not you feel the press has been kind to Trump, completely beside whether or not you might agree with me on each of those discreet issues, I must ask you:

How does this not worry you?

Furthermore, if it does not worry you, I must also ask, if Hillary had won and done the same thing, would you be ok with it? Or would it have concerned you deeply?

It completely boggles my mind how you could be ok with this behavior. I loved Hillary, but you bet your ass if she pulled this kind of stuff following the election I would be highly concerned and speaking out against it.

Does this honestly not worry you, and if it doesn't, can you please explain to me, give me some rational reason why, putting a gag on the scientific departments, defending a lie by calling it "alternative facts" and vetting only approved journalists to be granted access to cover the white house....how do these things not scream out to you as being extremely worrying?

After having started a number of threads to try to understand the current thinking of the Trump supporters on this forum, I forewarn you that you will not likely get any thoughtful or well reasoned responses. You will probably get a snarky one lined response, some sort of partisan based insult, or a red herring into Clinton/MSM/protesters.

jimithyashford said:

Trump, or his administration, has, within the first few days of their Presidency, openly lied about the size of their inauguration crowd. Introduced the defense of "alternative facts" to address those lies, told EPA and USDA that they can no longer publish scientific research or discuss scientific finding in online media platforms, and has just today announced that they will only allow certain select journalists to cover the Administration and attend the press briefings, oh and also ended their first press briefing with scolding the media for criticizing the administration and then permitting no questions.

I ask a completely fair and honest question to Trump supporters out there.

Regardless of whether or not you agree with the findings of the EPA and USDA. Regardless of whether or not you agree with the "Alternative Facts" about the inauguration crowd size. Regardless of whether or not you feel the press has been kind to Trump, completely beside whether or not you might agree with me on each of those discreet issues, I must ask you:

How does this not worry you?

Furthermore, if it does not worry you, I must also ask, if Hillary had won and done the same thing, would you be ok with it? Or would it have concerned you deeply?

It completely boggles my mind how you could be ok with this behavior. I loved Hillary, but you bet your ass if she pulled this kind of stuff following the election I would be highly concerned and speaking out against it.

Does this honestly not worry you, and if it doesn't, can you please explain to me, give me some rational reason why, putting a gag on the scientific departments, defending a lie by calling it "alternative facts" and vetting only approved journalists to be granted access to cover the white house....how do these things not scream out to you as being extremely worrying?

Click to expand...

Not a trump supporter, but I can answer your question:
No, it does not bother them, that is what You need to come to terms with.

I've heard a couple Trump supporters in my life, who are boomers, basically say, "I'm too old to care about corruption any longer." We'll see about that when they come for your medicare and SSC.

Casper said:

Not a trump supporter, but I can answer your question:
No, it does not bother them, that is what You need to come to terms with.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I know they don't, I am asking for one of them to use language to illuminate the thought process/set of values/rationalization that allows them to not be bothered by it.

jimithyashford said:

Trump, or his administration, has, within the first few days of their Presidency, openly lied about the size of their inauguration crowd. Introduced the defense of "alternative facts" to address those lies, told EPA and USDA that they can no longer publish scientific research or discuss scientific finding in online media platforms, and has just today announced that they will only allow certain select journalists to cover the Administration and attend the press briefings, oh and also ended their first press briefing with scolding the media for criticizing the administration and then permitting no questions.

I ask a completely fair and honest question to Trump supporters out there.

Regardless of whether or not you agree with the findings of the EPA and USDA. Regardless of whether or not you agree with the "Alternative Facts" about the inauguration crowd size. Regardless of whether or not you feel the press has been kind to Trump, completely beside whether or not you might agree with me on each of those discreet issues, I must ask you:

How does this not worry you?

Furthermore, if it does not worry you, I must also ask, if Hillary had won and done the same thing, would you be ok with it? Or would it have concerned you deeply?

It completely boggles my mind how you could be ok with this behavior. I loved Hillary, but you bet your ass if she pulled this kind of stuff following the election I would be highly concerned and speaking out against it.

Does this honestly not worry you, and if it doesn't, can you please explain to me, give me some rational reason why, putting a gag on the scientific departments, defending a lie by calling it "alternative facts" and vetting only approved journalists to be granted access to cover the white house....how do these things not scream out to you as being extremely worrying?

Click to expand...

I certainly don't agree with Trump on everything and I've critiqued him on several things in the past.

That being said I think the crowd size thing is really a non-issue. Of course you will see bigger crowds at the inauguration of the first black president in a stage that is highly left, why this surprises anyone kind of confuses me.

On the topic of media, some media sources (a lot of them right or left) have proven to be completely unreliable in providing any kind of reliable reporting. This thing where the media likes to bitch and complain about Trump and then they don't expect any retort for their actions is just stupid. They should be held to a standard and I'd have to see exactly which sources Trump removes from the WH as I'm not familiar with what/who he's removing.

The fact that the White House is offering alternative facts or is spewing propaganda in any form is nothing new, it's always happened. I'm not going to judge Trump on his transparency 5 days in but if we get to the year mark and there isn't much of it, I will criticize him.

jimithyashford said:

Yeah, I know they don't, I am asking for one of them to use language to illuminate the thought process/set of values/rationalization that allows them to not be bothered by it.

Click to expand...

You do not seem to grasp something basic here, but hey give it a shot, don't say I did not warn ya.

jimithyashford said:

Trump, or his administration, has, within the first few days of their Presidency, openly lied about the size of their inauguration crowd. Introduced the defense of "alternative facts" to address those lies,

Click to expand...

I have never placed any importance on the inauguration nor could I care how many people attended, watched it on TV, the internet, listened to it on the radio, or decided to watch it at a later time like I did at my convenience.

I did enjoy what he did say and that is what is important to me. The message conveyed is important. Not media hype or drama in attempt to make more money.

jimithyashford said:

told EPA and USDA that they can no longer publish scientific research or discuss scientific finding in online media platforms, and has just today announced that they will only allow certain select journalists to cover the Administration and attend the press briefings, oh and also ended their first press briefing with scolding the media for criticizing the administration and then permitting no questions.

Click to expand...

First it is my understanding that the restrictions on the EPA and USDA are temporary. I hope Trump and his team put an end to all the misinformation and lies coming out of our government agencies.

As far as the press briefings I would exclude any and all media that sets a priority on twisting what I have to say and what I want to convey to the American people. The last thing Trump needs is a corrupt media trying to undermine everything he is trying to tell the American people. If they are incapable of conveying his message without twisting his words to create problems then they need to be excluded. Good for Trump. I am sick of all the misinformation from most of our media. The last thing we need is our media creating confusion and chaos. Provide the message as accurately as possible or get kicked out. This should have been done years ago.

Ok, I appreciate what appears to be a good-faith and thoughtful reply. So please indulge me a few more probing questions

Koke said:

That being said I think the crowd size thing is really a non-issue. Of course you will see bigger crowds at the inauguration of the first black president in a stage that is highly left, why this surprises anyone kind of confuses me.

Click to expand...

I wont argue with you about what it indicates, but for the sake of this let's just say it indicates nothing and is no big deal.....then why lie about it? Then why lie about it, doctor up fake images, and make your VERY FIRST press briefing all about claiming those numbers to be bigger than they were. If it really is no big deal then why lie about it? Does this not indicate perhaps a dangerously frail ego at work?

Koke said:

On the topic of media, some media sources (a lot of them right or left) have proven to be completely unreliable in providing any kind of reliable reporting. This thing where the media likes to bitch and complain about Trump and then they don't expect any retort for their actions is just stupid. They should be held to a standard and I'd have to see exactly which sources Trump removes from the WH as I'm not familiar with what/who he's removing.

Click to expand...

I will not disagree with you that we have a problem with dodgy news media, but the fact is that we also have a problem with a dodgy president. Even the most rabid Trump supporter on earth would have to admit that Trump is prone to great exaggeration, off the cuff proclamations of questionable veracity, and frequent hyperbole. I think that's being generous, but even Trump lovers would have to admit that much. Now the fact is the as much as they spent the better part of a decade bashing him constantly in a haphazard and deceitful fashion, Obama still allowed Fox News. The fact is that a president doesn't ban those outlets that are most critical of him, in fact it is a sign of integrity to continue to allow them. Now if Trump's list comes out and maybe he has removed a few low tier trash publications that have fallen out of relevance, then ok, I guess I wouldn't have a problem. But if his list seems to weirdly coincide with news outlets that speak well or poorly of him, then you would be concerned.....right?

Koke said:

The fact that the White House is offering alternative facts or is spewing propaganda in any form is nothing new, it's always happened. I'm not going to judge Trump on his transparency 5 days in but if we get to the year mark and there isn't much of it, I will criticize him

Click to expand...

But is it not concerning that literally his VERY FIRST press conference, literally the first one, day one, topic one, right out of the gate, was lies and propaganda about a petty vain issue like crowd size? You don't have to wait a year for that to not sit well with you. You don't need time to decide if that is ****ty behavior or not....do you?

And lastly, you didn't answer one of my primary questions, so I will put it to you again. If Hillary had done the same thing right out of the gate, how would you feel? I can assure if my candidate had done that right out of the gate, I would be highly critical. But then agian if my candidate had done half the **** Trump's done they wouldn't have been my candidate at all, so there is a chance we just have extremely difference standards in those regards.

Casper said:

You do not seem to grasp something basic here, but hey give it a shot, don't say I did not warn ya.

Click to expand...

That being? I invite you to elaborate on what it is that I do not grasp rather than alluding to it distantly.

jimithyashford said:

That being? I invite you to elaborate on what it is that I do not grasp rather than alluding to it distantly.

Click to expand...

You are expecting "illuminate the thought process/set of values/rationalization" from them, enough said.

jimithyashford said:

Ok, I appreciate what appears to be a good-faith and thoughtful reply. So please indulge me a few more probing questions



I wont argue with you about what it indicates, but for the sake of this let's just say it indicates nothing and is no big deal.....then why lie about it? Then why lie about it, doctor up fake images, and make your VERY FIRST press briefing all about claiming those numbers to be bigger than they were. If it really is no big deal then why lie about it? Does this not indicate perhaps a dangerously frail ego at work?



I will not disagree with you that we have a problem with dodgy news media, but the fact is that we also have a problem with a dodgy president. Even the most rabid Trump supporter on earth would have to admit that Trump is prone to great exaggeration, off the cuff proclamations of questionable veracity, and frequent hyperbole. I think that's being generous, but even Trump lovers would have to admit that much. Now the fact is the as much as they spent the better part of a decade bashing him constantly in a haphazard and deceitful fashion, Obama still allowed Fox News. The fact is that a president doesn't ban those outlets that are most critical of him, in fact it is a sign of integrity to continue to allow them. Now if Trump's list comes out and maybe he has removed a few low tier trash publications that have fallen out of relevance, then ok, I guess I wouldn't have a problem. But if his list seems to weirdly coincide with news outlets that speak well or poorly of him, then you would be concerned.....right?




But is it not concerning that literally his VERY FIRST press conference, literally the first one, day one, topic one, right out of the gate, was lies and propaganda about a petty vain issue like crowd size? You don't have to wait a year for that to not sit well with you. You don't need time to decide if that is ****ty behavior or not....do you?

And lastly, you didn't answer one of my primary questions, so I will put it to you again. If Hillary had done the same thing right out of the gate, how would you feel? I can assure if my candidate had done that right out of the gate, I would be highly critical. But then agian if my candidate had done half the **** Trump's done they wouldn't have been my candidate at all, so there is a chance we just have extremely difference standards in those regards.

Click to expand...

Of course has Trump has a big ego. Any leader of a country, especially as one like the United States, must have some level of ego and charisma to get through the day properly. I'll say that I personally couldn't take the amount of propaganda and flak the MSM throws at Trump... it truly is amazing on how he is able to deal with it and is one of the characteristic I actually respect him a lot for. He deflects by making (sometime even admitted outrageous statements) an the media eats it up and falls right into the trap every single time. The reason you haven't seen this in other presidents is not because they've got some ego that can't be shattered, it's because they haven't gotten nearly the amount of negative attention from the media.

Like I briefly mentioned above, comparing Obama's conflict with the media with Trump's conflict with the media is a false equivalency. Trump has had to deal with almost infinitely more criticism on issues.

Hillary Clinton was a moral abomination of the highest order and how anyone could've supported or even more "loved" her is completely beyond me to be honest. Even if everything that the MSM spins about Trump was true, he would still be a better candidate than Hillary in my opinion. She will likely go down as one of the dodged bullets of American politics regardless of if Trump succeeds or does not.

It seems you have put forth the effort to write a good-faith reply, and I appreciate that. May I please press you a bit further.

PIPEWRENCH said:

I have never placed any importance on the inauguration nor could I care how many people attended, watched it on TV, the internet, listened to it on the radio, or decided to watch it at a later time like I did at my convenience.

Click to expand...

I agree with you that the crowd size was not important. I 100% agree. So then I must ask, if it's not important, why flagrantly lie about it? Why send out your press secretary to repeat the lie? Why doctor a bunch of fake images to make the crowd look larger than it was? Why send out your campaign director to repeat and defend the lie again on air?

I am not asking you to care about the size of the crowd, I am asking you to care that your president felt the need to lie about it then passionately defend the lie. Does that not concern you? Does that not perhaps indicate an extremely frail ego at work here? And if your president feeling the need to lie about something so petty and vain doesn't concern you, why on earth not? Most people would be turned off by that behavior from anyone else. Wouldn't that behavior from Hillary have turned you off? Why not with Trump?

PIPEWRENCH said:

First it is my understanding that the restrictions on the EPA and USDA are temporary.

Click to expand...

They are supposed to be temporary, but also have no planned end date. Surely you know the danger of a government saying something restrictive is just "temporary" but not providing an end date. Does that not concern you?

PIPEWRENCH said:

I hope Trump and his team put an end to all the misinformation and lies coming out of our government agencies.

Click to expand...

Implying that a bunch of business tycoons should be going in and telling the scientists what real science is? Surely you know that filling your agencies with scientists that only agree with you is a worry thing for a president to do.....

PIPEWRENCH said:

As far as the press briefings I would exclude any and all media that sets a priority on twisting what I have to say and what I want to convey to the American people. The last thing Trump needs is a corrupt media trying to undermine everything he is trying to tell the American people. If they are incapable of conveying his message without twisting his words to create problems then they need to be excluded. Good for Trump. I am sick of all the misinformation from most of our media.

Click to expand...

So then Obama should have banned Fox News from his press briefings, right? Furthermore, and I can't believe I am having to explain this to a conservative, a "free press" by definition means a press that can bash you and bad mouth you all they want. Lastly, it can become incredibly difficult to separate "twisting his words" from "being critical of him". Again I can't believe I have having to explain this to a conservative, but surely you MUST be aware that silencing "troublesome" press is one of the first things dictators do, that is a crucial and frightening step down a dark road....you do know that right?

Let me just ask it this way, if Hillary had said she was going to ban "problematic" news groups who "twisted her words" from the white house, would you be ok with that, or would you have a big problem with that?

Casper said:

You are expecting "illuminate the thought process/set of values/rationalization" from them, enough said.

Click to expand...

One can dream.

jimithyashford said:

One can dream.

Click to expand...

Just do not expect too much and you will not be as disappointed with what you end up with.

Koke said:

Of course has Trump has a big ego. Any leader of a country, especially as one like the United States, must have some level of ego and charisma to get through the day properly. I'll say that I personally couldn't take the amount of propaganda and flak the MSM throws at Trump... it truly is amazing on how he is able to deal with it and is one of the characteristic I actually respect him a lot for. He deflects by making (sometime even admitted outrageous statements) an the media eats it up and falls right into the trap every single time. The reason you haven't seen this in other presidents is not because they've got some ego that can't be shattered, it's because they haven't gotten nearly the amount of negative attention from the media.

Like I briefly mentioned above, comparing Obama's conflict with the media with Trump's conflict with the media is a false equivalency. Trump has had to deal with almost infinitely more criticism on issues.

Hillary Clinton was a moral abomination of the highest order and how anyone could've supported or even more "loved" her is completely beyond me to be honest. Even if everything that the MSM spins about Trump was true, he would still be a better candidate than Hillary in my opinion. She will likely go down as one of the dodged bullets of American politics regardless of if Trump succeeds or does not.

Click to expand...

I feel like you didn't substantively reply to any of my questions. As to why Trump would feel the need to lie about such petty things your reply seems to be that because the media is mean to him, he needs to lie because of his ego....and you like that about him? This is truly bizarre.

Also, you might be right that Trump has received more media criticism than Obama, that may very well be true. But you seem to believe the ONLY possible reason for that is that the media is just super mean and unfair to Trump. There is another possibility you know. Trump might get more criticism, and follow along with me on this one cause it's very complicated......because he does more wrong/stupid things than Obama did. I mean basically the media is a Referee calling more fouls on your team than the other, and you are saying that means the ref must be crooked.....well or maybe it just means your team is fouling a lot more......consider that.


Anyway, you didn't really address any of my other points so I don't know what else to say. Your first reply was very thoughtful and informative. This one not so much. I would like another like the first.

Koke said:

Of course has Trump has a big ego. Any leader of a country, especially as one like the United States, must have some level of ego and charisma to get through the day properly. I'll say that I personally couldn't take the amount of propaganda and flak the MSM throws at Trump... it truly is amazing on how he is able to deal with it and is one of the characteristic I actually respect him a lot for. He deflects by making (sometime even admitted outrageous statements) an the media eats it up and falls right into the trap every single time. The reason you haven't seen this in other presidents is not because they've got some ego that can't be shattered, it's because they haven't gotten nearly the amount of negative attention from the media.

Like I briefly mentioned above, comparing Obama's conflict with the media with Trump's conflict with the media is a false equivalency. Trump has had to deal with almost infinitely more criticism on issues.

Hillary Clinton was a moral abomination of the highest order and how anyone could've supported or even more "loved" her is completely beyond me to be honest. Even if everything that the MSM spins about Trump was true, he would still be a better candidate than Hillary in my opinion. She will likely go down as one of the dodged bullets of American politics regardless of if Trump succeeds or does not.

Click to expand...

I do not get the Hillary hate. I don't like Trump but I don't hate him. People hate Hillary and I am not sure why. It doesn't seem to be based in anything that is grounded in reality. Are you sure you hate her? Maybe you just succumbed to propaganda and rebranding of Hillary.

CriticalThought said:

I do not get the Hillary hate. I don't like Trump but I don't hate him. People hate Hillary and I am not sure why. It doesn't seem to be based in anything that is grounded in reality. Are you sure you hate her? Maybe you just succumbed to propaganda and rebranding of Hillary.

Click to expand...

But....but....emails! And um.....Benghazi! And like.....Monica (for some reason).

Never mind that Hillary is hardly the first to use a private email server, the first SoS to have outposts attacked on their watch, or the first wife to have a prominent husband cheat on her. Nevermind all that....F*CK Hillary in particular....god I hate her.

I dislike Hillary because she is everything that embodies your average corrupt money grubbing neocon/neoliberal politician. A warhawk who doesn't have the interest of the American people in mind but instead a personal agenda. You should know that I view her the same way I view George Bush, Obama, Daddy Bush, Bubba Bill, and even kind of Reagan. Reagan was a mild reformer or paleocon at best and I disagree profusely with some of his decisions.

I'm not justifying any of Trumps actions btw, I'm simply postulating as to why he does what he does. I, by the way, am not saying that Trump deserves zero criticism from the media or that some of it isn't justified. Nor am I saying that when he replies he can sometimes come off as arrogant or rude. But like both you and I know, media and academia are completely controlled by liberals so it's not surprise he gets more criticism from these areas.

I answered the questions that are actual questions. I'm not going to answer what you subjectively consider to be ****ty behavior or whatever (no offense).

It looked to me that since there were millions of women "protesting" all over the country, Trump controlled the narrative by getting people to talk about crowd size.

I mean he has even gotten people like the OP to post on message boards about it.

Whenever something happens that doesn't seem to make much sense, you have to ask why it would be done.

There is always a logical answer. Nothing is done at random at those levels of government.

PIPEWRENCH said:

I have never placed any importance on the inauguration nor could I care how many people attended, watched it on TV, the internet, listened to it on the radio, or decided to watch it at a later time like I did at my convenience.

I did enjoy what he did say and that is what is important to me. The message conveyed is important. Not media hype or drama in attempt to make more money.



First it is my understanding that the restrictions on the EPA and USDA are temporary. I hope Trump and his team put an end to all the misinformation and lies coming out of our government agencies.

As far as the press briefings I would exclude any and all media that sets a priority on twisting what I have to say and what I want to convey to the American people. The last thing Trump needs is a corrupt media trying to undermine everything he is trying to tell the American people. If they are incapable of conveying his message without twisting his words to create problems then they need to be excluded. Good for Trump. I am sick of all the misinformation from most of our media. The last thing we need is our media creating confusion and chaos. Provide the message as accurately as possible or get kicked out. This should have been done years ago.

Click to expand...

so trumps orders are playing into your paranoia? I get it now.

jimithyashford said:

I am not asking you to care about the size of the crowd, I am asking you to care that your president felt the need to lie about it then passionately defend the lie. Does that not concern you? Does that not perhaps indicate an extremely frail ego at work here? And if your president feeling the need to lie about something so petty and vain doesn't concern you, why on earth not? Most people would be turned off by that behavior from anyone else. Wouldn't that behavior from Hillary have turned you off? Why not with Trump?

Click to expand...

I know Trump is not politically correct. That is why I voted for him. I wish he and his staff would ignore the press when they go on and on about nothing important in an attempt to overshadow the real change Trump is accomplishing. I voted for hope and change with Obama and got nothing but hopeless about any change. I don't want a bought and paid for lawyer for president saying what I want to hear but doing nothing or just the opposite. I am so pleased to finally after 40 years of following politics to see a leader talking to me not around me and doing what they said. As far as fear goes. All my fears were taken away when an incompetent, bought and paid for puppet, who couldn't even handle classified documents responsibly, was kept out of the White House.

jimithyashford said:

They are supposed to be temporary, but also have no planned end date. Surely you know the danger of a government saying something restrictive is just "temporary" but not providing an end date. Does that not concern you?

Click to expand...

We will see about that when the democrats stop trying to stop the wheels of change and progress they couldn't deliver with Obama. The end date is when Trumps appointment is in place and running things.

jimithyashford said:

Implying that a bunch of business tycoons should be going in and telling the scientists what real science is? Surely you know that filling your agencies with scientists that only agree with you is a worry thing for a president to do.....

Click to expand...

First off the senate has yet to approve of Trumps person who will be in charge of these agencies. Trump has no one in charge of these agencies so it is a lie that his people have told them what real science is. He has yet to make changes in that department so it is also a lie that he is filling these departments with his scientist. Do I expect change? I can only hope. It would be nice to hear more than one side of an issue.

jimithyashford said:

So then Obama should have banned Fox News from his press briefings, right?

Click to expand...

Obama is gone along with his lie about change that never happened. Thank God and lets move on.

jimithyashford said:

Furthermore, and I can't believe I am having to explain this to a conservative, a "free press" by definition means a press that can bash you and bad mouth you all they want.

Click to expand...

True. Bad mouthing seems the only thing they are good at. The president can also kick such disruptive media out of the White House and not release any information to them as well. I wouldn't continue to try and work with a corrupt press who will not work with me. I want to hear what my President is trying to tell me not some perverted and twisted version of his message. If they will not deliver the message as it is intended by our President then by all means don't give them the message any more. The press better be careful or they will be getting their statements from Trump on the internet along with and at the same time as the American people. Then they will have to do their twisting of the truth and the facts after the American people have heard from our leader first hand.

.

jimithyashford said:

Lastly, it can become incredibly difficult to separate "twisting his words" from "being critical of him".

Click to expand...

Not at all. If you cannot read between the lines of these left/right bias and truth twisting media then I feel sorry for you.

jimithyashford said:

Again I can't believe I have having to explain this to a conservative, but surely you MUST be aware that silencing "troublesome" press is one of the first things dictators do, that is a crucial and frightening step down a dark road....you do know that right?

Click to expand...

First off Trump is not silencing the media. No one is working on amending the constitution to take away freedom of the press. Just an out right lie or truth twisting which is all the media does anymore instead of delivering the intended message of our leaders.

The only people going down the dark road or truth twisting and misinformation is our media who are owned by the rich and powerful pushing their agenda on the American people. They are out raged that their puppet Hillary lost to a man who wants to work for the people despite all their efforts to destroy him.

jimithyashford said:

Let me just ask it this way, if Hillary had said she was going to ban "problematic" news groups who "twisted her words" from the white house, would you be ok with that, or would you have a big problem with that?

Click to expand...

I would not have a problem with that but Hillary did not have that problem. The same people who own most of the news outlets in this country are the same people who funded Hillary's campaign and destroyed the legitimate democrat candidate Bernie Sanders as well as tried to destroy Trump

PIPEWRENCH said:

Not at all. If you cannot read between the lines of these left/right bias and truth twisting media then I feel sorry for you.



First off Trump is not silencing the media. No one is working on amending the constitution to take away freedom of the press. Just an out right lie or truth twisting which is all the media does anymore instead of delivering the intended message of our leaders.

The only people going down the dark road or truth twisting and misinformation is our media who are owned by the rich and powerful pushing their agenda on the American people. They are out raged that their puppet Hillary lost to a man who wants to work for the people despite all their efforts to destroy him.



I would not have a problem with that but Hillary did not have that problem. The same people who own most of the news outlets in this country are the same people who funded Hillary's campaign and destroyed the legitimate democrat candidate Bernie Sanders as well as tried to destroy Trump

Click to expand...

I had hope for productive conversation based on your initial reply, but this is all obfuscatory garbage. You should join up with a Broadway troupe given how good at tap dancing you are.