One doesn't need to be correct with a lie.
One doesn't need facts to lie
One doesn't need any supporting data to lie
Once the lie is out, it ain't ever coming back
It's why leftist lie about everything, there are no repercussions, zip.
It's why they lie about Trump's supposed lies. They never say what the lie is, but that that is all he does. The throw it out there and let it hit the airwaves philosophy.
The Left, the Wall, the Truth | RealClearPolitics
The Left Lies about Trump-Russia Collusion | National Review
One Year Later, The Left’s Net Neutrality Lies Look Even Dumber
Classic projection
Projection ; the unconscious transfer of one's desires or emotions to another person. ... The person
accusing you also could be a narcissist. They often
accusepeople of doing things that they themselves are doing as a form of deflecting To control the conversation. It can be a form of abuse.
Trump has made over 1900 false claims
Why Narcissists And Gaslighters Blatantly Lie -- And Get Away With It
In a tweet, Donald Trump wrote, “I never called Meghan Markle ‘nasty’. [sic] Made up by the Fake News Media…” He then goes on to ask if CNN and The New York Times will apologize to him. However, there are audio recordings by the Sun showing that he did, in fact, refer to Markle as "nasty." Trump's lying should come as a surprise to no one at this point.
This is why you and the left are liars.
He says, "I never called Markle 'nasty'. then you spout the Sun saying, he referred to her as 'nasty'. This is a twisting of context, but more importantly, he was responding to the assertion that the interviewer made that she acted nasty. His response was, "I didn't know she acted nasty". It goes on from there, with careful parsing of words to get the desired amount of outrage.
Try again.
I truly don't care one iota about what he said. I believe he behaves like a tacky, vulgar prick and talks like a complete moron. He's been this way for decades. Nothing has changed. The lies are simply insult to injury.
I too don't give a shingle shit about what he says. I care about what he does with regard to what he said he would do.
So far, he has kept to his word, done some good in those things that still need working on, and has shown he easily caves when faced with the power of the House, even though he was in the right.
Right now, the left whine like little girls not because he is vulgar or because he is ill spoken and does not carry the brainwashing of the left, but because he is actually getting things done and turning this country, if not into a right-leaning country, at least stopped the lurching to the left.
I call out the hypocrisy and double standard being applied by the left and will continue to do so until they either stop it, or I pass away.
Nothing on this planet will change My mind in that regard.
Well you are already set in your ways. You probably already have your nest egg. Already get social security. You are probably comfortable financially.
Even though I am very comfortable financially I still can't get myself to join the dark side. I'm just not a douchebag. I still relate to workers because I made my fortune as a worker. I feel bad so many of my co-workers are struggling. But hey, if you vote for trickle down don't be surprised when you find out you're being peed on.
Meanwhile, you Republicans don't even realize how you're being played/manipulated and brainwashed. The got you all worked up over racism and gays and guns. Those are just distractions. And you are so brainwashed you vote for trickle down and you deny global warming because Fox/Rush tells you to.
And you think the media who distracts you with bs wedge issues like trannys in bathrooms and meanwhile
Big Business Keeps Winning at the Supreme Court
Most Americans pay attention to the Court only when it decides hot-button social or political issues like marriage equality, abortion, and immigration. As is often the case, however, this term the Court’s docket was packed with under-the-radar disputes with broad implications for business and the economy. So while Americans were debating whether the liberals or conservatives were winning, corporations and business interests were spending enormous resources to be sure that they came out once again on top.
The stage was set in the first case the justices heard, on whether businesses can require employees to go to arbitration over job complaints. Even though employees often are forced to agree to arbitration clauses—one company sent its employees an email announcing that anyone who did not quit would be “deemed to have accepted”—the Court ruled for the companies. By making it harder for employees to join together in collective or class actions to
recover for things like unpaid wages, the ruling was a windfall for business likely worth billions.
The streak continued through the term, on issues ranging from price fixing to overtime for workers. One measure of the term’s business-friendly tilt is the eye-popping success rate of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the self-proclaimed “Voice of Business.” The Chamber filed briefs in 10 cases this term and won nine of them. The Chamber’s victories limited protections for whistleblowers, forced changes in the Securities and Exchange Commission, made water pollution suits more difficult to bring, and erected additional obstacles to class action suits against businesses.
Corporate interests even won big in a number of cases that don’t appear at first to implicate business. A case striking down a federal ban on sports gambling was ostensibly about states’ rights and the powers of Congress, but the beneficiaries will include companies hitting the jackpot in the newly unfettered industry. A case requiring the government to obtain a warrant before tracking cell phones looks like a big win for personal privacy—but it will also bolster the arguments of tech companies looking to insulate themselves from government oversight.
The Court’s ruling last week that crisis-pregnancy centers can’t be compelled to post notices about the availability of abortion gives businesses a powerful new weapon in their fight against mandatory disclosure
requirements in the workplace and on product labels. Now, state-compelled disclosures about “controversial” topics will be deemed inherently suspect—a new doctrine that greatly expands the First Amendment rights of corporations.
Indeed, corporations were among the primary beneficiaries of several of this term’s major First Amendment decisions. Although commentators called the justices’ decision in favor of the religiously-motivated baker who refused to sell a wedding cake to a same-sex couple “narrow,” the ruling was nevertheless a big win for corporations. Although the baker was the one with the religious views, the justices allowed his company, Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd., to claim the same First Amendment protections. Don’t be surprised when businesses cite this decision in the future when they refuse to fill contraceptive prescriptions.
And the landmark First Amendment case striking down “fair share” fees for public employee unions will reverberate in the private marketplace too. Public employee unions often push wages higher in the private sector as well, and if public employee unions are decimated, the entire working class suffers. Companies, however, benefit from being able to pay lower wages.
When former Bush administration Solicitor General Paul Clement appeared early this year on behalf of a foreign bank that had allegedly laundered payments to terrorists, he argued that corporations cannot be held liable for human rights violations in U.S. courts. At oral argument, Justice Elena Kagan asked whether corporations would be liable if they used “slave labor ... in the United States.” Clement admitted it was a “tough hypothetical” but that corporations would still be immune from accountability under international law in U.S. courts.
If that seems like an audacious argument, Clement nonetheless won his case. In this term, like most, big business won nearly all of theirs.
