newtboy said:

No sir.
He is saying Trump is cleaning up Washington, removing corruption.
I'm saying he's more corrupt than any other politician ever and has made things exponentially worse.

All I see we agree on is that there is corruption in congress, but even then we don't agree on what level of corruption or by who.

We absolutely don't agree on Trump's corruption (or lack thereof).

bobknight33 said:

She clearly points out the swamps ability to satisfy their own self interest and the laws (that they write) that do nothing to stop loopholes of self enrichment and then implies that this is a higher standard than that of the president office is held to.

And yet she somehow feels that Trump ( POTUS of 2 years with no outside funding) has been more mailable than those she sits with.

You're wrong.
@bobknight33 is not a Russian Troll.

newtboy said:

No sir. There is a world of difference between slight bias in reports about the nationalistic leader who continues to attack all actual news reporters like a 2 year old and direct his terroristic followers to attack them as enemies of the people and a deeper level of bias against all non right wingers paired with outright campaigning for the same anti free press candidates.

Wait...you still defend Fox as having reporting but claim you don't need someone to bend facts? Bending facts like using proper English to describe a scene? But reporting on the birther movement for years as true, and the ridiculous waste of money named the Benghazi investigation, continued denial of climate science, etc. does bother you? Fox doesn't bend fact, they omit it. They don't get credit for using 5% (yes, that's exaggerated) truth to sell their lies.

I watched Chris Wallace interview Conway just yesterday (for as long as I could stand it, which admittedly was only a few minutes), his questions were ok, but delivered with a slow underhand pitch and with no follow-up or contradiction of her ridiculous rambling factless replies. That's not good reporting, it's being the setup for spreading their agenda/propaganda.

You think CNN goes to far by using words like "accost" to describe 3 policemen tackling a topless woman in tights, and while you claim to have looked up the definition , you still claim the word is somehow loaded and not proper. Please explain.

When the police were going after the fleeing armed supporters of Mr Bundie under Obama I think you likely called them violent thugs who attacked that poor innocent man unnecessarily....Fox did. That man was armed and an anti American terrorist, but right wing so Fox called him a strong patriotic American standing up for American values that the unAmerican Kenyan thug in the Whitehouse wanted to murder.
There is no equivalence. Fox is (disgusting unAmerican) entertainment, not news. There is no right wing news outlet, they are all propaganda outlets and little more today.
The Ministry of Truth doesn't need fact, you will believe any nonsense they tell you to, even when it contradicts what they had you believe yesterday. They have you believing any non Trump biased news is fake news reported with hyper liberal bias, even in other countries, but Fox has good reporting and less bias.
*facepalm

newtboy said:

What "facts"? Your opinion? That's just, like, your opinion, man.
Edit: Facts that Trump said aren't facts? That's the best indicator today that they are factual.
I'll take the dozens of convictions and guilty pleas based on those facts as proof enough they are true and well vetted. People don't agree to years in prison based on nonsense that's been proven false....especially not people with money like these people have.

As the exalted leaders #1 choice for (mis)information that becomes policy and platform for the right, and part of the right wing triad ministry of truth, you simply can't leave Jones out of any media discussion, particularly one where someone paints the BBC as having an (anti?)American political bias, and not just a bias for reality.

Yes, it's all fine and dandy. Any investigation of an investigation by the subject being investigated (or their proxies) is patently ridiculous and a clear political ploy to satiate your need for corroboration of what you want to believe, fact based or not. They knew they couldn't write the investigation's findings, nor could they accept the truth being made public, the only option left is to discredit the investigation, something they've been trying since before it began. I find it incredibly sad that so many are so thoroughly indoctrinated that you buy that obvious, self serving ploy to discredit the entire FBI and intelligence community in favor of a consummate narcissist and convicted fraud's self serving and baseless stated opinion about himself.
I guess you believe mob bosses who claimed they were framed and are just legitimate businessmen too, tapes and other evidence of them planning crimes and committing them are nothing in the face of their denials, right?

Yes...yes he did say that about central American immigrants....are you just parsing the fact that he didn't specifically say EACH AND EVERY ONE IS A RAPIST, while not acknowledging what he did say...."They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people."? Strictly read, he's saying they're all rapists, but some are good people anyway....just like some Neo Nazis are good people in his opinion. You're attempts at rectifying oldthink (rewriting history) only work with people who have no memories. I watched him say it and I can remember yesterday without big brother telling me what to remember.

I can't dive into your paranoia to decipher what you're feeling. If you can't hear "accosted" and gather they likely arrested her aggressively and instead read that as some hidden agenda to.....well, you didn't articulate what the motive would be...., perhaps reading comprehension isn't a strong suit.

ac·cost. /əˈkôst,əˈkäst/ verb
past tense: accosted; past participle: accosted
approach and address (someone) boldly or aggressively.

I disagree with your characterizations. Considering the constant vitriolic, dangerous, demonizing, now blatant terroristic threats from Trump directed at all non right wing propaganda outlets that won't spread his propaganda and stroke his ego, amplified through his right wing minitrue and interpreted by his base that he's trained to hear his dog whistling, and in the face of the same, they display a mature, composed, restrained, unbiased, and inhumanly patient character, including the three you listed.
Yes, they are mature and reasonable adults under constant attack from a serial con man/cult leader and constant threats against their lives, not one Fox host, Jones host, or OAN host is 1/4 as mature, honest, or unbiased as the worst you can mention from CNN.....and no, CNN is not my preferred news source, but they are infinitely better than anything the evil trinity of right wing propaganda produces, including the totally dishonest smear campaign against all news organizations that you are part of now, willingly or not.

That's what the ministry of truth does. They get you to repeat their lies until you believe them enough to be the enemy of anyone still believing fact and reality. It clearly worked.

Btw, still waiting on the names of CNN reporters who have gone on the campaign to stump for the left, like Fox hosts did on the right. You insanely claim CNN is more biased than Fox, you should be able to name at least 4 off hand then.

newtboy said:

"The president is a lame duck president. He shouldn't be allowed to stack the court before he leaves. This appointment belongs to the next president."
-all Republicans during Obama's last court appointment hearings

newtboy said:

Short answer, yes.

He, personally, has done severe, possibly irreparable damage to our government and it's safeguards, and the rule of law, has been the most divisive president in my lifetime, a high bar, is driving the very companies he claimed to have saved overseas, like Harley Davidson, is starting multiple trade wars, even with our allies, wasting tens of billions already, and has been mired in criminal and moral scandals since before day negative 45 when he told the Russians he would remove sanctions over election tampering even as Obama was instigating them, well before taking office which is a crime if you don't know.
Trump himself has divided America, intentionally, with his own words and policies. Reporting on those words and policies is not slanderous or fake. If they lied about what he said, Trump would sue for slander/libel like he did over Steele, a case he just LOST. He hasn't, and he won't.

Again, you take the lying convict's word about the evidence and the law over court rulings and fact. I know you won't investigate, so you'll continue to be duped. That's a conscious choice you are making, to be wrong but righteous instead of correct and guilt ridden.
The investigation predated the Steele Dossier, and it was never a key bit of evidence or the cause of the investigation....and it is not some baseless fantasy fabrication like you believe, it beats any Trump speech for honesty and correctness by a factor of 10.

His Twitter is his official policy, they are clear about that. It is almost always bat shit, and is never civil or honorable.

bobknight33 said:

Obama had 8 years With a few good quarters. Trump is in the beginning of his reign.

Obama was the lying fake weak POTUS.

newtboy said:

Bob, you admit he lies 16 times a day.

4.1% growth in one single quarter is worse than 4 of Obama's quarters under a Republican recession, and is likely highly exaggerated, this is a preliminary estimate, corrected/revised numbers are almost always much lower.
He hasn't broken 3% yearly GDP growth yet.

He is a bought politician, he's just not bought by Americans. It's pretty clear who he's beholding to.
No wonder no rational person believes a word he says anymore.

Fake president

newtboy said:

I hear he's planning on giving Putin Alaska as an anniversary present next year.

Wow Bob. Sounds like your family had it much worse than them black folks!

Not everybody reaped the benefits of post-depression America buddy, and it wasn't for lack of trying. Not that I want to rob you of you and your family's accomplishments because I'm sure they worked hard for their lot, it's just that the sweat of your GGrandfather's brow probably earned more, drop for drop, than those of darker complexion. Slavery (ignoring the fact it still exists in every country today) might be old news, but segregation (and worse) is within living memory. If you don't think that matters then I'm sorry, but you're nuts. You seem to accept that each generation tries to build upon the last, that by increments your family have dragged themselves up...but imagine now if your ancestors were prevented from building anything, that their increment was robbed for generation after generation. Can you honestly say you'd be where you are today?