Sean Spicer cites Atlanta terror attack that never happened
Sean Spicer cites Atlanta terror attack that never happened - CNNPolitics.com
'
Did these people go to Trump University to get a degree in LYING?
This is getting embarrassing...
The whole of the Trump WH seems not to actually know what they are talking about, nor do they seem to even accurately remember U.S. history.
Conway mentioned that two so-called radicalized terrorists came to the U.S. and "masterminded" a "massacre" in Bowling Green, KY. There was no such event. To make matters worse,
she tried to say her statement was reported before someone asked her what she meant.
Who the hell is going to ask what it means to "mastermind a massacre?" Those aren't ambiguous terms; intelligent people know exactly what they mean. You know what that phrase doesn't mean? It doesn't mean "two men were convicted of trying to get money from the U.S. to Al Qaeda so as to help terrorists in Iran carry out attacks against Americans there," which is what the men in Bowling Green were convicted of doing.
It's also interesting that she called to attention the Bowling Green incident. That event is what inspired
Obama to issue his executive order that slowed, not halted, the immigration processing of Iraqi immigrants/refugees.
They don't know history, they don't know how the government works, what do they actually know? They know they have control and they're laughing.
The thing is this:
- Nobody's holding a gun to their heads making them utter these factually inaccurate statements
- Nobody's asking them questions about things they might not have had a chance to analyze carefully and know what they are talking about. It's not like a town hall debate/meeting where a citizen might ask some "out of left field" question that could not have reasonably been anticipated.
Once one is in the WH, it becomes one's job to know inside-out literally everything one might be called to discuss as goes current policy, its literal and contextual antecedents, and its impacts, both in the near and long term. That's the job, and it's not an easy job, which is why Presidents generally hire people with experience, not people who merely have strong opinions.
Spicer's job is among the easiest of the hard jobs in the WH. All he's got to do is accurately and truthfully communicate the President's/Administrations stance(s) on issues and identify what courses of action the Administration intends. If he doesn't know, all he has to say is, "That hasn't been determined," or, easier still, "I don't know." He'd never be wrong so long as he doesn't misrepresent the President's intentions and actions. Yet for some dumb reason he seems to feel that he should add more than just that. God only knows why because it seems he puts his foot in his mouth and shows his utter incompetence and unfitness for the job every time he tries to explain beyond the scope of what he needs to do. He doesn't need to stand there and make up stuff, yet that's what he does.
The thing is, and I've seen it all over, is that people do this off the cuff thing and will justify it as "they're normal". I mean, Bush got through 8 years of people saying "he's just like us", up until he fucked the economy and got thousands of American soldiers killed, it wasn't him out of pocket and it wasn't him in a box or with limbs missing.
That people are willing to forgo intelligence for those who lead the, simply because it makes them feel good about themselves, that they elect leaders they know are telling them lies, but they want to feel good about it, says a lot about how miserable many people's lives are.
they want to feel good about it, says a lot about how miserable many people's lives are.
Maybe so....I can't speak to the miserableness of others' lives. I'm really very content with my own, but then I'm a person who just followed the rules and, guess what, they worked as advertised and now as I am about to retire, I don't have a damn thing to complain about. The American Dream has been and worked out exactly as it was purported to do. It wasn't easy like "falling off a log" easy, but it was far from hard. It was more a matter of will than anything else.
people do this "off the cuff" thing and will justify it as "they're normal"
That is not the "normal" I was taught at any point in my life -- not by my parents as a child, not in school, not in my career. It's not the "normal" I grew up around. My idea of doing something off the cuff is doing something one may not have planned in advance to do, but it is not doing something one simply doesn't know how to do well or saying things that transcend the limits of one's actual knowledge. Once you get to the limit of what you know well, you stop talking. That's not at all hard to do.
people are willing to forgo intelligence for those who lead the, simply because it makes them feel good about themselves
You're more generous than I. I'd be hard pressed to ascribe such an innocuous motivation. Not that that is wholly harmless, but it's less harmful than are the causal factors I'm inclined to assign to people's acting/speaking unintelligently.
