A letter from Rhino Times Reader Christian Rice
One of the most remarkable aspects of modern politics is not that politicians spin the truth—it is that so many voters continue to trust a politician who has built an entire brand around doing it.
President Trump recently posted on social media that Iran had “agreed to never have a nuclear weapon” and that reports involving hundreds of billions of dollars in reconstruction funding for Iran were “fake news” created by Democrats. Yet even members of his own administration have acknowledged that the current arrangement is a memorandum of understanding and framework for future negotiations, not a finalized agreement, and discussions of a potential reconstruction fund have been publicly acknowledged by administration officials.
Whether one supports negotiations with Iran is beside the point. The larger issue is that Trump routinely presents complicated and evolving situations as simple, settled facts. He speaks in absolutes because absolutes are easier to sell than reality.
This pattern has repeated itself for years. Trump makes a bold claim. Supporters repeat it. Media outlets investigate it. Then details emerge showing the situation is far more nuanced—or in some cases directly contradicting what was originally said. When that happens, the blame is shifted to the media, Democrats, judges, bureaucrats, or anyone else convenient enough to serve as the villain of the day.
What makes this strategy so effective is that many supporters never hear the correction. They hear the original claim, accept it as truth, and move on. The falsehood travels farther than the fact-check.
At some point, citizens must ask themselves a simple question: If a person repeatedly tells you things that later prove false, misleading, or incomplete, how many times do you have to be fooled before you acknowledge that you are being conned?
No politician is perfect. Every administration has made mistakes. But there is a difference between occasional exaggeration and a constant stream of claims that require fact-checking. A functioning democracy depends on voters demanding honesty from their leaders, regardless of party.
The saddest part is that many Americans who pride themselves on not being easily fooled have become the easiest people to fool…because they have decided that loyalty matters more than truth.
Christian Rice
As the old joke goes, “How can you tell if a politician is lying?” “When their lips are moving.” It isn’t meant literally; it’s a cynical way of expressing distrust of politicians.
The Supreme Court has not explicitly legalized lying by politicians, but it has ruled that the First Amendment protects a vast amount of false speech.
The First Amendment guarantees our right to free speech, but it does not explicitly protect us from government dishonesty or civil rights violations.
Any hope of holding government officials accountable for their lies rests with the political process, in the voting booths and through the impeachment process, which themselves have become so ineffective as to offer little real hope of transparency, accountability, or reform.
We have been lied to so much, for so long, by government officials of both parties, undermining civil liberties and eroding trust in our institutions, which reflects how low the bar has been set by those we elect to represent us.
I hope we hold them accountable this election cycle and flip both the house and senate. It is a long shot but Trump seems to be doing all he can to make it happen. Even with his attempts to make voting more difficult.
Fingers crossed.
Showing a legit ID is not making it more difficult. You can it do anything in society without ID. Get real.
Never said it was. That isn’t what the SAVE act is doing. if you don’t understand that by now, it is only because you don’t want to understand the actual proposal but happy to discuss if you like.
The save act just requires you to show legit ID plus a birth certificate or other approved document. And if you have legally changed your name you have to have that document too. Yes it will take some effort to be allowed to decide the date of your nation. Sounds good to me.
The problem is that “just show a legitimate ID plus a birth certificate” makes the real-world requirements sound considerably simpler than they are.
A driver’s license, even a REAL ID, isn’t proof of citizenship by itself. You need qualifying citizenship documentation, and millions of Americans don’t have a certified birth certificate readily available. Some were born in another state, have lost or damaged records, have older or unusual records, or face fees, paperwork and delays to obtain a certified copy.
Then there are name changes. If your driver’s license says Jane Smith but your birth certificate says Jane Jones, you don’t simply show two documents and walk away. You may need a marriage certificate, divorce decree, court order, or other documentation establishing the connection. Similar problems can arise with adoption and other legal name changes. It gets even more complicated for those born overseas.
Research from the Bipartisan Policy Center estimates that roughly 28 million voting-age citizens (about 12% of registered voters) don’t have ready access to the types of documents most likely to satisfy documentary-proof requirements. That doesn’t mean they aren’t citizens; it means they may face an additional hurdle to exercising a constitutional right.
But there’s an even more important question: What problem are we solving?
Noncitizen voting is already extraordinarily rare. In one review of more than 2 million registered voters, only 27 confirmed cases of noncitizen registration were identified.
So I’m not arguing that citizenship shouldn’t be verified. I’m asking whether imposing a new documentary requirement on millions of legitimate voters is justified when the problem we’re trying to solve appears to be exceptionally small.
And saying “it will take some effort to be allowed to decide the fate of your nation” doesn’t really answer that question. The issue isn’t whether citizens are willing to make an effort. The issue is whether the government should place an additional documentary hurdle between eligible citizens and their right to vote to address a problem for which there is very little evidence of a significant threat.
The fact that you personally may have a birth certificate, a matching photo ID, and every necessary name-change document doesn’t mean every American does. That’s the difference between saying a requirement is simple in theory and recognizing what it can mean in practice.
The truth is simple, the more barriers placed before the right to vote, the fewer people that vote. It is clear the real motivation behind the SAVE act and all the other restrictions to voting such as reduced early voting, mail in voting, etc….
My gosh you’re long winded. Yeah, like I said, you need ID, plus a birth certificate, plus whatever name change document you got when you changed your name. Adding a bunch of words doesn’t make it an impossible task. Just go get a copy of the documents you need. Yeah it takes time and a little bit of money. Ok, so does everything else in life. Get real dude.
I fully understand you don’t care about others and the challenges this law would make on them to fulfill their constutuonal right.
Like I said, the more barriers you put up, the fewer people vote. Only a conservstove would view thst as a positive.
Cheers
————————————
Don, the Pretentious “Professor” thinks that the more words he uses, the more educated he sounds. And it’s normally just flannel and rambling vacuity, ad nauseam.
He doesn’t understand that brevity is the soul of wit… because he has no wit.
His comments are invariably pedestrian, predictable and pedantic – and prolix, as you say.
On other words he’s just a tiresome blowhard who brings nothing to these columns except for empty excrement. By the bucket load.
Cheers!
[ He has even started imitating me when I salute others with “Cheers!”, even though there’s nothing British about the wanker. I don’t know what that’s all about. ]
what happened to the formatting?
What happened to your brain.
— Oh, hilarious! Good one, William.
What Pro…I mean Chris is trying not to say this should only apply to Republicans/Conservatives, not the National Socialist Democrat Party AND the Republican Party. At least that’s what I read between the lines.
Trump doing a damn good job. Thank God we have him for president
The point is that Trump is special in regard to lies, exaggerations and dishonesty when compare to any political leader in modern history….but more importantly, he has been enabled by his gullable base. No need to guess what is the point of the letter….it is right there in the letter in black and white.
Hope that helps
You only need to compare him to last man/group that held that office, to see it’s a biased slant you take.
But, then you be you!
Interesting that you suggest that….the Washington Post did just that thing during Trump’s first term in office. It tracked Trump and Biden’s public statements throughout their first 100 days.
Trump Lies = 492
Biden Lies = 78
In 2020, the day before the election, The Post counted 503 false claims in a single day.
Beyond frequency, Trump is special in how he continues to tell the lies after they have long been debunked. The Post data was studied and showed that Trumps 30,573 identified lies during his first term in office included 9,799 distinct false or misleading claims. Some of those repeated dozen or even hundreds of times.
So yes, all politicians lie and mislead at some point, but studies are very clear…..Trump is very special in this regard, and his followers are the enablers.
But you be you.
Cheers
.
The Washington Post !!
Why don’t you just regurgitate a “study” from The Brookings Institution ?
.
.
Also, the Professor – aka Chris – has been found to have told three million four hundred and twenty-nine thousand six hundred and ninety-four lies.
In just the last month!
Studies prove it.
Classic deflection to claim bias of the source as if the source just made up the numbers. If you have a source that shows anything different go ahead and share….bet you don’t.
Cheers
Chri…I mean Professor
Pot…Kettle…Black
You must mean Biden who didn’t even have a brain but he was Obama puppet
Biden Biden Biden….classic conservative deflection from addressing the failings of their dear leader.
Trump… Trump… Trump !!
Classic liberal deflection from addressing the failings and infighting of their own party.
Trump is the sitting President of the United States. So yes, it makes sense people discuss his performance.
Cheers
More special than when Joe Biden got caught plagiarizing and had to drop out of a presidential race in 1987?
Nice!
Wow, having to go deep in the way-back-machine to find any real whoopers told by other politicians. But, even then, in the case of Biden or Clinton, there were consequences for their lies that conservative refuse to hold accountable against Trump who tells these types of lies on a daily basis at a level and scale unlike any past President.
But you be you.
Didn’t have to go back. Just wanted to. It’s the best.
So give any example of a President who lies as often as Trump and blantantly as Trump. Data required.
Al Gore (VP) inventing the Internet or caring about the environment when he flies private jets everywhere.
Barak saying “if you like your doctor you can keep your doctor”
Bill Clinton “I did not have sex with that woman.”
Those are just the top of my head.
Yes, that was a whopper but those are one offs versus Trump who does this daily. For example, how many times has Trump claimed that the Strait of Hormuz is fully open? How many times has Trump declared victory in Iran War? How many times has Trump claim he has reached a peace agreement with Iran? Not only are these daily lies and whoopers, they are about actual national security.
No President has lied near the level of Trump. Full Stop.
As I said, those were off the top of my head. Like any politician, as many have said here, they all lie every day of their lives. Trump is no exception either. Just don’t pretend that this is something special for him. Here are my top four after the old “keep your doctor”, which is really always number 1 for old Barak. I can keep them coming if you like, but hopefully you get the point.
“The day after the attack, Governor, I stood in the Rose Garden and I told the American people and the world that we are going to find who did this and we are going to bring them to justice, and I said that these were acts of terror.”
In reality, he and his administration initially tried to say it was simply a violent response to an anti-Islamic video and not a pre-planned, coordinated attack in Benghazi.
“First of all, the sequester is not something that I proposed. It’s something that Congress has proposed. It is a law that Congress passed.”
He was attempting to deflect political accountability for the impending, highly unpopular automatic budget cuts. Investigative reporting later proved his own White House aides had conceptualized and introduced the mechanism to lawmakers to break a fiscal deadlock.
“I first learned about it (IRS Targeting) from the same news reports that I think most people learned about this. I think it was on Friday. And this is pretty straightforward. If, in fact, IRS personnel engaged in the kind of practices that had been reported on… then that’s outrageous.”
Obama was trying to distance his office from the fallout of the IRS targeting conservative groups. Critics quickly noted that his own White House Counsel had received a detailed briefing on the investigation weeks before the public news broke.
“With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case… There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply bypass Congress and change the law myself is not appropriate and it’s not legal.”
This exact phrasing was delivered during an interview with Univision on October 25, 2011. He was defending himself against progressive activists who were furious over high deportation rates. (He was known as the Deporter-in-Chief) Less than a year later, in June 2012, under heavy election-year pressure, he bypassed Congress to establish the DACA program via executive action.
How many more you want to be satisfied, dum-dum?
You can’t come up with one example of any President lying the level of Trump. If you could, you would have shared it already versus having to go back and grab one or two big lies from a couple of Presidents.
Here is a challenge for you….find one example of a President who lies about things that data show is clearly not true, such as Trump claiming that prices are falling drastically. Or find one example of a President continuously telling the same lie even after it has long been debunked by media, fact checkers and/or courts.
Your continuing to claim ‘all politicians lie’ is as about as helpful as saying all baseball players strike out. Some strike out far more than others. If I was batting against a major league pitcher, I couldn’t claim to be the same as a major league batter just because they strike out too, given that I would strike out every single time.
I have shared a convincing study as well as convincing antidotes showing that not only does Trump lie, but he also lies more than any other President in recent history and tells whoopers on a daily basis unlike any other President in the history of the office. I notice you are unable to do the same. Not shocked, because there is no study or data or antidotes that compare to Trump and his lies.
Hope that helps.
Oh, so this is just a “My daddy is better than your daddy” situation. Got it, Big Boi. Whatever helps you sleep at night.
Some dads are better than others. No question.
Yep, Dems never lie.
Former Governor Roy Cooper lied in his framing of the 2021 pardons as targeting nonviolent offenders nearing the end of their sentences. However, subsequent state data and a legislative oversight committee investigation revealed a different reality regarding who was actually freed, with 51 death row inmates released.
The released population included individuals previously convicted of violent crimes, including manslaughter. According to the New York Post, eighteen of those released early were later charged with murder.
The vote on who will represent North Carolina in the 2026 Senate election is a choice between common sense and the radically liberal Roy Cooper.
I think you are reading someone elses lies. Cooper never released from prison anyone from death row. He commuted their sentences but they stayed in prison.
Hope that helps
U.S. Senate candidate Roy Cooper and his administration’s release of 51 prisoners from death row will be investigated by a legislative panel.
Respective General Assembly leaders, Sen. Phil Berger and Rep. Destin Hall, said first-term Democratic Gov. Josh Stein’s involvement will also be checked.
Sen. Buck Newton, R-Wilson, and Rep. Brenden Jones, R-Columbus, will jointly lead the newly formed Joint Legislative Commission on Governmental Operations: Subcommittee on Prisons.
A release from Hall said more than 4,200 “criminals” were released early.
The 12-member subcommittee includes four Democrats.
They stayed in Prison with no chance of parole. No one was released from prison off of death row. Nothing you provided makes that statement inaccurate.
Criminals are often released early. Trump released how many people? Many who committed crimes after release. This is a fact of life of overcrowded prisons. Not corruption.
The investigation you are referring to is related to the terms of the settlement (reached btw the State and Civil Rights groups like the ACLU and Disability Rights NC), the state agreed to release roughly 3,500 to 4,200 non-violent or lower risk offenders early to prevent overcrowding and slow the spread of COVID in prisons.
There is no conspiracy here….you have any data or evidence of mass violence as a result of this release? The few studies I saw from the investigation show the average rate of recidivism of ~ 40%. It is true 18 did commit murder which again is about average for those released from prison under normal terms. Only way to keep people released from prison to never commit crime again (including murder) is to never release them…. Not really a valid option.
Hope that helps.
If we didn’t keep death row inmates in prison for 20-30 years, we could reduce the prison population.
That is a different subject all together. But True.
——————–
Hackneyed liberal boilerplate. Nothing insightful, nothing original.
You can read this every day in the Letters Column of the News & Record.
Tired trite tripe.
Standard deflection from Austin. Yawn.
—————–
It’s your Letter that’s the yawn.
Which is it….you don’t think Trump lies more than any president in history (studies and data would say you are wrong) or do you not care that Trump lies daily to the American people?
I bet a third option is true, you can’t defend Trump and his use of misinformation as a primary propaganda tool, so you are just you are using avoidance to dodge, dip, dive, duck, dodge.
Cheers Chappy
I was raised to be patriotic and civic-minded. My favorite President was/is Harry Truman (also the first one I remember). Today, I do not trust our government, nor do I accept anything our representatives say until I can verify it. I do not believe anything they say like the one about the 4% inflation rate – sure baby.
I can think of no solution. I won’t be here much longer, so I am grateful to have been an American during some of the time of her greatness. Nothing on this earth stays the same.
* “I did not have sexual relations with that woman”
* “If you like your plan, you can keep your plan”
* “If you get the vaccine, you can’t get COVID!”
Just a few whoppers from Democrats.
You had to go to three different presidents over how many decades to find those ‘lies’. With Trump you can find more lies on a single subject that are ‘whoppers’ in just the last few months. Just look at the Iran War.
* “totally obliterated their ability to create nuclear weapons” …that was BEFORE he claimed…
* “Iran is an imminent threat of using nuclear weapons”
* “Iran was right at the doorstep of a nuclear bomb”
* “Iran will soon have missiles capable of reaching the US”
* “We have destroyed 100% Iran’s military capabilities”
* “The war would be very short”
* “The strait is fully open…”
* “A peace deal has been reached”
Want to hear his whoppers on elections, immigrants, democrats, economics, trade policy, public health, covid, etc.. etc… etc…
As the letter clearly points out….no politician is perfect and all are prone to exaggeration, but because Trump’s base is more worried about loyalty than truth, Trump continuously makes bold claims that just aren’t true every day on every topic in order to deflect from his failing administration, failed promises, and lack of concern for what is really troubling Americans.
Hope that helps.
Cheers
The Strait of Hormuz will be irrelevant in two or three years. Pipelines are already in progress that will bypass the Strait of Hormuz.
Did Trump tell you that? If so, you should really check your facts. Out of the prewar volume The Guardian notes that the best-case scenario maybe 50% of the oil shifts to pipelines. The truth is that the Strait of Hormuz will remain a critical global geopolitical choke point for the foreseeable future.
Even if what you said was true, it doesn’t justify Trump’s continuous lies to the American people on such important things as the status of an ongoing war that has already cost us billions of dollars and appears to yet again to be escalating.
Cheers, as always thank you for the polite exchange of differing views.
Could be, but Iran will blow many of them up, or not allow their completion with repeated attacks.
Curtis LeMay should lead our military in Iran.
Glad you agree that both parties lie.
One lies far more than the other.
Cheers
Really…? That all you got?
Pathetic.
I share the data / study and multiple current examples yet all you can do is reference a couple of lies told decades ago? Yeah, I think I have made my point very well.
The fact that that isn’t enough for you tells me you put ‘team’ before country which is common among those on the right these days. So unless you something other than ‘Na Uh’, I asked….is that all YOU got?
Cheers.
– ‘Well, your side lies more than my side ! So there!
Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic. And that is the central theme of your pathetic, partisan little letter.
You’re like a little kid.
Can’t believe you wrote that. Where is the fact-based data to prove your statement?
Keep complimenting yourself, and patting yourself on the back, buddy. No wonder they call you the wanker.
And your weak boring little rant of a letter makes the Earth shattering claim that…. your team lies less than the other team.
Well you would say that, wouldn’t you? And then you try to claim that the other guys are partisan!
What a blatant hypocrite. You’re an idiot – but why don’t you go look for a study that says you’re a genius… or even just a professor?
Which you aren’t.
Right?
You missed the part where Trump followers’ gullible nature is what enables Trump to lie multiple times a day. I include you in that mix if you can’t see how Trump stands out in his lies to the American people on a daily basis.
Cheers
You missed the part where you admitted that both parties lie.
Hope this helps.
Cheers.
You still ignore that Trump lies more than any other and more blatantly than any other President in modern history.
As I told Don, claiming all Presidents lie as a defense of Trump is like me saying I am the same as a major league player at bat because all major league players strike out. It ignores the idea of volume and scale.
But you be you. Keep your head in the sand and enjoy your life.
Cheers
Dey do. They tell us what they think we want to hear. For example, we’ve been watching the Cooper/Whatley attack ads for….months. Hardly anything about the issues, or SOLUTIONS.
Jessie Helms clearly stated his positions v/s Jim Hunt, coming from way behind to win the Senate race. Senator Helms practiced what he preached(Senator no). The Coop is another smiley cuddle and warmy candidate who WILL follow the DSP agenda. The DSP is funding his campaign.
So the choice is poor v/s awful.
In Washington, whoppers are universal.
——————
Scott, shouldn’t the readers know that the person masquerading as the Professor is the same person who wrote the Letter?
People who write letters often use their real names for Letters to the Editor, and use screen names for posting comments. If he wants to make that connection he is free to do so. Posts are posts, but, for letters, I like for people to use their real names though I have made exceptions in the past in more extreme cases.
Austin is an extreme case for sure.
————-
I have only used one pen name here, Austin Morris. Everyone knows my comments, my Letters, my opinions, my ethnicity, my background. Austin Morris.
“Professor” – who is not a professor – has slyly used several pseudonyms, some of which he denies using – which is a lie, isn’t it “Rich Ellison” ? That was a fake name he once used in a comment that backed up one of his own previous comments. I can’t prove this, but it was clear that it was him. “Rich Ellison” has never appeared since, and had never been heard of since I ID’d him as “Professor”.
Rich Ellison disappeared once he was outed as “Professor”
And now the “Professor” posts comments that are vehemently in support of the Letter. That’s because “Professor” is the same guy who wrote the Letter.
How sly and dishonest. But that’s the kind of guy he is.
Austin,
I’m going to be censored for this and probably spanked, but here goes…[deleted] hides behind a pen name we all know because he CLAIMS he was threatened by people. I choose to publish under my ACTUAL name. The difference (one of the differences} between him and me is I don’t get scared or mad, I get even.
“He takes out a knife, you take out a gun. He sends one of yours to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue. That’s the Chicago way .”[
Oooooooo Tough Guy!
🙂
———–
That’s commendable Alan, and I also used to submit Letters to the N&R under my own name years ago.
Sadly, the mere expression of certain valid viewpoints is now enough to put myself and my family in physical danger. I’m not worried about decent North Carolina folk who disagree with me. They’re not going to issue a Fatwa on me or try to destroy me publicly with hate speech and smears- but certain people will.
All in all, it’s much more prudent and less dangerous to employ a pen name and let the sentiments I express stand or fall on their own merits.
Which is how it should be anyway.
Cheers!
“I’m going to be censored for this and probably spanked, but here goes…[deleted]…”
SCOOOOOOOOOOORE!
From the movie where Sean Connery has that line?
Same old, same old TDS
Classic conservative deflection. Any valid criticism of Trump, the current President of the United States, and his base claim TDS as they know they can’t actually defend his actions being criticized. Let me guess, you next comment is to say ‘what about Biden’, the guy who is no longer in office or at all relevant to today’s issues?
————-
What, like any valid criticism of Obama caused his base to scream racism ?
Never heard the liberals make such claims except in cases where the criticism had long been debunked such as the continue lies repeated about his birth certificate and the false claims that he was a muslim….things like that….
Hope that helps
Cheers
—————–
OFFS….. back in the day almost every criticism of Obama was attributed to racism, overt or subtle, conscious or unconscious.
Don’t deny it, or you look like a partisan liberal who just won’t accept the truth.
Which is exactly what you are.
I didn’t support Obama in office as I found him ineffective in driving real legislative change in the country and thought his push for ACA was underfunded and overly complicated when I would have preferred a single payer system for healthcare. But, no, I don’t recall every criticism against him defined bigoted or racist, although very many were…..the best example being the false claims against his citizenship, religion, and loyalty to the United States of America.
If you have any evidence of this other than your personal biased opinion, I would be happy to read it but I won’t accept your “I thunk it so it mus be troo” approach to justification for belief in a topic given how your own bigotry is paraded in the comments of the Rhino too often to ever be trusted.
FYI, it is racist for thinking Obama he was born of a lessor evolved race than your own. (you seem to love to defend kind of thinking and deny it is racist…..but….it is the definition of racism)
Here are some data points about the level of racism faced by Obama:
– A 2010 peer reviewed study found that 30% of white Americans were ‘troubled’ by the prospect of a Black president
– A major study by McDermott and Belcher analyzed surveys from battleground states and found that racial sentiments initially rallied positively after Obama’ election but then rose to “unprecedentedly antagonistic levels” during his first term, while racial polarization by party increased dramatically.
– 32% of white Americans said Obama made race relations worse, while only 5% of Black Americans did. Among white Republicans, the figure was 63%, rising to 71% among conservative white Republicans.
Obama certainly faced legitimate political opposition, but the research shows that racial prejudice was also a measurable and significant component of that opposition.
Happy to provide links to the studies.
Cheers Chappy Boy
—————–
What a load of rambling, meandering irrelevant crap.
.
Yet another ad hominem from Austin. Yawn
Cooper ranked third for early prisoner releases from state custody during COVID, behind California Governor Newsom and Illinois Governor Pritzker. Cooper granted clemency to many individuals, including pardons, sentence commutations, and early releases. During his two terms, Cooper used his executive clemency powers more than any modern-day NC governor.
Trump as released well over a thousand prisoners. Some who violently attacked Capitol Police. Many who have also committed new crimes since their release.
Cooper made his pardons and reduced sentences due to a covid civil lawsuit. Trump did it because he has a fragile ego and no morals.
Still doesn’t address the massive scale and frequency of Trumps lies and his supporter’s willingness to ignore this fact.
Cheers
As George Carlin said in 2008 (paraphrased to eliminate profanity), sooner or later, the people in this country are gonna realize the government doesn’t care about you, or your children, or your rights, or your welfare, or your safety. It’s interested in its own power.
I believe there are many who actually do care. They just lack the financial support since the working class lacks the giving nature to support their political priorities. Take money out of politics and we can return the government to the ‘average Joe’. Doubt it will happen sadly.
————–
Exactly right. Government cares only about two things : money and power.
It’s the biggest drug addict in our society, and those are its drugs of choice.
And it’s hooked.
I just saw one of Cooper’s latest ads. Coop said he would fight against his own party and work with Trump to make things better for Americans.
Another BIG lie from Cooper.
Democrats say that some women have penises, that America deserved 9/11, and that “the warmth of collectivism” will save us. That’s a nice way of saying communism.
But… Trump! Trump !! Trump !!! It’s called Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS).
Democrats deflect. Can’t blame them. Nobody’s buying their beliefs, so just talk about Trump. What a bankrupt party.
More BS conservative false claims about democrats to drive fear and hate between the parties.
No Democrat says that America deserved 9/11. There are a few liberal podcasters who have discussed ways that American foreign policy helped produce the conditions that led to 9/11. While a controversial thing to say, it is in no way the same as claiming the US deserved the attack and neither are they actual Democrats sitting in office. They are just provocateurs saying garbage to get likes and follows. Both the right and left has such meat heads making noise.
And no Democrats say that women have penises. They just acknowledge the idea of gender dysphoria. Only crass people lacking any understanding or empathy for the issue make such belittling comments.
Only people who can’t defend actual criticism of their dear President say TDS as a means of deflection.
I am here to discuss the issue of the historical level mass of lies told by Trump to the American people on a daily basis….yet no one on the conservative side seems able to actual counter or defend Trump with any real engagement…just deflections such as Biden Biden Biden, or Trump Derangement Syndrome, or everyone lies….. Heck, Al even had to go all the way back to Clinton (who was impeached for his lie), to deflect about the level of lies Trump makes every day.
Not shocked.
Cheers
Somebody here sure is peddling BS.
Usual suspect.
Not shocked.
Just another Ad Hominem. Yawn.
I’m glad to have you here professor … you take the heat pretty good. You have the facts straight as opposed to your haters!
Are all libs paranoid? If you disagree with them, you’re full of hate.
Or maybe it’s projection. Noticed that libs are always angry?
But maybe they just like calling us names.
If Democrats were honest, they would admit that four years of Biden’s open-border policies have led to thousands of American citizens being gravely harmed by illegal aliens who broke into our country. But those on the Left still believe that illegals should all be let in with no vetting.
Liberals are honest about this subject. I think it is you who is being dishonest in your comment.
Liberals fully understand that Biden was too slow to react to the volume of crossings at the border and it is one of two very big reasons democrats lost the 2024 election (inflation was the other).
What we do take issue with is the false claim of an ‘open borders’. This is a lie through and through, given the real issue remains a long out of date immigration law that provided a gaping hole in the border with the asylum loophole that democrats tried to close via new legislation but republicans blocked by ….wait for it…..lying about the how the bill was going to actually work. To actually close the border, a President has to ignore actual laws as written today. I fully understand that conservative don’t seem have much care for the law under Trump’s leadership given he himself is a convicted felon.
No one on the left in any official capacity thinks that we should let everyone cross the border with no vetting. That is an absurd claim and I would need to see an actual quote or proposal from an actual Democrat in office to believe that isn’t just some made up BS talking point use by conservatives to use fear to deflect from the actual truth….which is that democrats actually tried to reform immigration law…and republicans blocked that reform to keep their boogeyman alive for the 2024 election.
For the actual position on immigration by Democrats…look at their actual party platform statement:
It calls for border security, additional Border Patrol agent, asylum officers, inspection technology, and faster removal of people who don’t have a legal basis to remain. It also says asylum processing should include screening and that people without valid claims should be removed.
The actual top statement in their platform says “We believe in secure borders, common-sense laws, and fair enforcement”.
I haven’t read the conservative platform (I don’t think the right one anymore given Trump makes up his priorities as he goes), but I assume it would say something like “get all immigrants of non-white countries out of the United States at all costs”.
Hope that helps.
Cheers
Democrats are such poor losers. They lost the White House, Congress, and the Supreme Court. Now they want to take their toys and go home unless the rules are changed.
If they don’t win, they want to destroy the systems that denied them power: get rid of the Electoral College, pack the Supreme Court, allow illegals to vote, and eliminate the filibuster.
Imagine if Harris had won the presidency: 14 million more illegals would be allowed in, who, once they get here, profess their hate for this country.
What do the Democrats want to give us: millions of illegals that are dependent on the welfare state, pronouns, defund the police, no cash bail, abolish ICE, more than two genders, boys showering with girls, the Muslim Brotherhood, abortions up to the day of delivery, no voter ID laws because it will make people prove who they are, multilating the bodys of minors, Communsism, cesoring of free speech,
Again you are being highly disingenuous in what you claim democrats ‘think’. If you have an example of any democrat claiming they want to allow illegals to vote, go ahead and share that information….you can’t, because they have never made that suggestion formally or informally.
Again, what basis do you have the Harris would ‘open the border’. Biden finally ignored the law and closed the border to asylum seekers and reduced the flow before he left office. Sure, it was way late but Democrats have always been supportive of strong border enforcement, they just prefer we update the laws versus ignore the laws. Odd that conservative haven’t even tried to pass immigration reform to fix the laws since they hold the executive and legislative branches.
If you have examples of anyone claiming they want more illegal immigration and ‘open borders’ from actual democrats please share…..otherwise, you are just another conservative making up false claims about what democrats believe to create hate, fear and division between yourself and those that have legitimate differences of opinions about immigration and immigration enforcement.
Just ask your local farmers how they feel about the restrictive impact of less immigration in the US due to the overly aggressive approach of this administration for deportations that includes detaining and even deporting those with legal status just because the come from a country the Administration doesn’t like.
Cheers
Here’s the proof: Dems voting against voter ID laws tell it all.
Evidence show it reduced voter turnout.
A 2021/2022 study by Justin Grimmer and Jesse Yoder used North Carolina administrative voting records and a difference-in-differences methodology. They found that among the roughly 3% of North Carolina voters who lacked qualifying ID, the state’s voter-ID requirement produced a 0.7 percentage-point reduction in turnout in the 2016 primary relative to comparable voters who had ID.
Interestingly, the researchers also found that the turnout differential persisted after the ID requirement was suspended: those without ID were subsequently less likely to vote in the 2016 general election and 2018 general election. That suggests the issue isn’t necessarily just someone being turned away at the polls—it can also involve confusion, deterrence, or the administrative burden of complying with the law.
Only conservative seem to think fewer people voting is a positive.
Cheers
Trump whooper of lie of the day:
“I have largely taken care of inflation” “the prices are all coming down” “the prices are coming down very rapidly” “very very very substantially”
Inflation is up during his term and rising, prices are increasing, not falling. What is so amazing, you don’t need any data to know he is lying…heck even many of the GOP midterm candidate election ads focus on how they are going to ‘beat’ rising prices.
And no, this is not like any other President’s lies or exaggerations. I dare the deflection crew commenting here to show me any example where a President has made an empirical claim about the present that can so easily be checked against his own government data….and more to the point, or used such extraordinarily emphatic terms to push his lie.
Vote Blue in the Midterms and let’s bring accountability back to government.
Very true, prices are not coming down significantly. Most of us know that, but voting Blue is not the answer.
Just look at the numbers from Biden’s time in the WH. Only honest people/politicians will admit issues within their own party, like Fetterman and Joe Manchin.
Hunter Biden said the biggest issue during his dad’s presidency was his open-border policy.
During his time in office, Biden’s administration brought down inflation faster than any other country who were all impacted by Covid market disruptions and faced similar inflation growth as the US, and did without causing a recession.
Was he perfect? Far from it, but he was at least smart enough to allow people with actual expertise to advise on monetary and fiscal policy versus Trump who is yet again, screaming to lower interest rates when the vast consensus is that that would actually lead to more inflation, higher prices, and higher long-term interest rates.
Biden’s numbers at the end of his term were better than the numbers we have today. The real test is how the numbers look at the end of a term….not the beginning. At the beginning of term, there is a great deal of overlap in the prior administration’s actions. Now that we are two years into Trump’s term and most of the economic impact can be directly linked to his actions…..I would say with confidence, I wish Biden were still in office versus Trump. And I didn’t even like Biden as President as he was my third from last choice for the office (behind Hilary and Donald).
Cheers
Democrat Senator Elissa Slotkin of Michigan recently said Democrats blocked the SAVE Act because it would make it hard for any Democrat in any state to win any election.
Without knowing this, Slotkin admitted Democrats need to cheat to win elections. They need voter fraud by importing illegals to vote. She admitted that Democrats can’t win elections if only American citizens were allowed to vote. Of course, all common-sense folks know this.
This is a tired BS conservative talking point.
A lot of democrats and people on the Left fear the impact of the SAVE act on woman voters due to the extra requirements for them if they changed name when they were married. Since woman favor the democratic party, the fear is losing enough of their vote will have a very negative impact on Democrats in tight races.
Hope that helps.
For anyone who has had a name change it is literally one extra piece of paper that you can get from the county clerks office, if for some reason you were foolish enough to get rid of your original copy. Stop acting like the world is so incompetent that they have to be babied through life. Get real. Dummy.
In guilford county, getting certified copies of name change documents can be done in person or by mail. It costs a whopping $3 plus an extra $1 per page. If you do it by mail. You have to include a self addressed stamped envelope, so add another couple bucks. So maybe $10 total investment. This is not hard, time consuming, or financially taxing.
Also, if you’ve done it right, (and most women who get married have done this) and already got your social security card, ID Card, and/or passport to all match, then you don’t even need that additional documentation. And all of this is only required if your current name does not match the name on your voter registration. If my voter registration says Jane Smith and my ID says Jane Smith, no additional work is needed.
This is the libs yet again making their constituents out to be incompetent.
Sure, not a big deal if you own a car, can drive, have the time, and still live in the state where you changed names. Per the SAVE act, that name change document is specially requires a certified Marriage certificate.
Common sense, the more barriers you put up to legally vote, the fewer people vote. Only conservatives see this as appropriate or a good idea.
Show me anything that justifies these new requirements (ie barriers to voting).
Cheers
IT CAN BE DONE BY MAIL, Dummy. No car needed, and yes, it’s a certified copy.
I’m not arguing that obtaining a marriage certificate from another state is impossible, or even necessarily THAT difficult. I’m arguing that it is an additional documentary requirement that some citizens will have to satisfy before they can register, taking more time, effort and headaches than many other people will face.
A person whose birth certificate and current legal name match has one less hurdle than someone whose name changed through marriage in another state.
So, the relevant question isn’t whether the additional document can eventually be obtained. The question is whether the government should condition registration for a fundamental right on obtaining additional documents that many eligible citizens would otherwise have no reason to possess or retrieve.
I will say again, the more requirements you place for individuals to exercise their constitutional right to vote, the fewer will be willing to jump through so many hoops and therefore fewer people will vote. AND these rules target a class of people that is conveniently more likely to vote Democrat than Republican.
And don’t give me the “it’s no big deal, it is just more paperwork and delay” given how much conservatives push back against any additional requirements for guns because guns are also a constitutional right. In both cases (voting and guns) these new requirements do nothing to stop what those proposing them claim they will stop….for voting, there is no problem of illegal immigrants voting….and with guns, paperwork doesn’t prohibit crime.
Cheers
No one is advocating that anyone can hit the drive through and buy a gun. Background checks should be mandatory, but as you say, the criminals don’t care about the rules. That tends to be where the libs and conservatives disagree. Chicago has the strictest gun laws and rampant gun crime. You cannot legislate your way out of violent crime.
And the vast majority of women have already handled all of their name change issues. You are talking about a tiny tiny minority of people who will need to get this “oppressive” paperwork in order. If your name already matches your voter registration, you are good to go, which is by far the vast majority of people. Keep screaming at the sky about a tiny portion of people sending a piece of mail or taking a lunch hour one time in their whole lives to get a document in order. My gosh, so dumb.
Over 1/3 of women no longer have on hand the certified copies of the paperwork required to meet the SAVE act requirements.
If it is so easy, why did it take so many years to implement the Real ID? Which by the way didn’t require all the same documents as the SAVE act requires.
We will just have to agree to disagree on how ‘easy’ the SAVE act requirements are for ALL Americans…..not just you.
Cheers
It’s a piece of mail. Once. Ever. Can’t get much easier than that. But sure, the sky is falling.
“it’s only one piece of mail” is a pretty impressive way to miss the point.
Nobody said a marriage certificate is impossible to obtain. The question is why a citizen who is already legally registered to vote should have to obtain a certified document that she may not have needed, kept, or even thought about for decades …simply because Congress decided to add another condition to voter registration.
And your “tiny tiny minority” claim isn’t supported by the available evidence. One survey found that roughly one-third of voting-age women do not have citizenship documentation reflecting their current legal name. That does NOT mean one-third would be unable to vote, but it does mean your “virtually nobody” characterization is wrong.
We also have actual evidence from New Hampshire, where similar documentation requirements have already caused problems for eligible married women who didn’t have their marriage documentation available. Some couldn’t register until they obtained it.
So yes, Don, most people can probably get the paperwork eventually. That’s only part of the argument (and you still ignore the question of ‘if it is so easy, why did Real ID take so long to implement?)
The argument is: if there is no demonstrated problem of citizens voting illegally, why should the government add another documentary hurdle to exercising a constitutional right?
“It’s only one piece of mail” is an answer to whether the hurdle is possible, sure it is possible after some inconvenience. It isn’t an answer to whether the hurdle is necessary.
Cheers.
Real ID took time because the government chose to delay its implementation. Just bureaucratic backpedaling. No other legitimate reason. People were given years of advanced notice and still didn’t do what they needed to do, which created a panic.
I question your numbers as well. What woman gets married and goes through the trouble to legally change her name, but then does not go ahead and get her drivers license changed, her SSN changed, and make changes to all of the other documents with her name on it? And then of all of those that for some reason wanted to go through life dealing with the hassle of none of their names matching on crucial documents, the dog ate all of their name change paperwork? Get real.
Your ID didn’t used to have a photograph, but now it’s mandatory. Getting an ID in general used to be a lot easier than it is now. You didn’t used to have to basically get x-rayed to fly. You didn’t used to have to get an emissions inspection done on your car. You used to be able to just get health insurance instead of having to go through some ass-backwards marketplace to get it. There are lots of things that used to be easier than they are now, but things change. That’s life.
In the end, the SAVE Act is not a law yet. Probably won’t ever be. If it passes, you will need to show proof of your identity to vote. Yes, it might involve showing one extra piece of paper that can be obtained through the mail for $10 or less. And you have months if not years of advanced notice to get it done. OMG, such a tribulation. So dumb.
Danbury, Connecticut, approves non-citizen residents serving as police officers. Think these folks can vote also?
this professor guy is some kind of [deleted], huh?
Funny, they once accused me of ‘being you’ I think. Fun crowd here at the Rhino Times.
Never happened. Wrong again, buddy.
I could be wrong (hence the phrase ‘I think’). I lose track of all the BS commenters you all say about me here.
Cheers.
I appreciate Christian’s perspective……and such is correct about Trump. It bothers me to no end because in the end he does hurt himself and his agenda…….however, when did this lying, misrepresenting and false narrative construction begin? Well, we probably could go back to George Washington on that one…….but, in more recent times I recall the bold lies and false narratives spun around Trump during his first administration – There were many examples – the one that vividly comes to mind was Adam Schiff repeatedly getting on national television and saying he had PROOF that Trump colluded with the Russians to win the 2016 election. He absolutely did! Was Schiff ever held accountable by Congress, by his constituents or by the MSM? NO! The list is long with liars through Trump’s first term and during his four years waiting for 2024’s election. I do not condone or excuse Trump….but, I do understand his vindictiveness and propensity to lie……..he’s a good student.
Media loves to chase a lie if it wins them clicks and likes. And yes some stories get blown up that even crongress jumps in, but Trump has never been honest about anything. When has Trump ever been honest when it comes to his accomplishment, mistakes, or hard truths?
Never. And that is a sign of a very poor leader. Period.
Fyi, there was more than a kernel of truth with Trump and Russia…..the formal investigation found: his campaign associates welcomed, sought to benefit from, and interacted extensively with Russian operatives, investigators did not establish sufficient evidence to prove a criminal conspiracy (or “collusion”) between the Trump campaign and the Russian government during the 2016 election. But there was a great deal of ebgsgment that raised eyebrows and deservedly so.
Cheers
I think my point flew right over your head Prof………..right over.
————
He’s not very smart, Rick. He just thinks he is.
It might have but I don’t think so….can you clarify? Or are you like Austin and just use insults as a form of defense?
Prof……..I don’t see the insult in what I followed up with – just said I think my point flew over your head……..by that, I mean, I think you are so biased by your hatred for Trump that you cannot objectively consider a valid point in his defense. My point has validity – please re-read slowly and consider. Your assertion that “associates……..interacted with Russians” tells me nothing about Trump and any involvement nor does it clarify with evidence what these “associates” were up to when reaching out to the Russians. Such is also a far cry from actually colluding with the Russians to somehow defeat an admittedly disdainful candidate – Hillary Clinton. The Democrats doggedly impeached during his first four years and then continued pursuing his destruction during the four years he waited to run again……it is no wonder that the man is vengeful. I wish he could move on – but, he won’t. I wish he would not lie………but, I’m sure you wished that Biden had not lied while in office……right?
I think you support of Trump has clouded your view of his actions and engagement with Russia during the 2020 election. I don’t think I need to spell out any more the engagements that were well documented between him, his family and Russian operatives. Just because it was found ‘ not criminal’ doesn’t mean it was morally or politically justified.
Would you like to me expand on Trump’s loyalty to Russia and Putin specifically? Would you like me to expand on Trump’s family investments in Russia and Russian oligarchs’ investment in Trump’s properties?
I think I understood your point very well. Conservatives claim Trump’s relationship with Russia is just peachy because it wasn’t found as criminal in one investigation. I strongly disagree, as most laws never imagined a person of such low moral character every serving in the Whitehouse.
Happy to discuss further.
Cheers.
Uh Scott….why was I censored but he wasn’t. Could there be some form of FAVORITISM hiding somewhere?
That person whose name was removed takes so much vitriol, hatred and abuse from everyone else on these boards that he has asked for his real name not to be “outed” in the comments. It doesn’t matter, everyone knows his real name anyway. Not sure what you mean when you ask why he wasn’t censored. I’m not sure what comment you are talking about but my guess is that he usually makes his points in civil non hateful ways unlike some people so the answer is that probably his comment was not censored because there was no reason to.
—————-
Oh, he’s pretty good at slinging mud himself, John. And he generally starts it.
Well ‘John’, if it’s because he “…takes so much vitriol, hatred and abuse…”, every time he uses my name with his “…vitriol, hatred and abuse…” I’m expecting the same treatment.
See how ridiculous it can get? I have a nickname I was raised with my whole life before joining the Army. Even today if you refer to me by by birth name you would get a blank “who?” looks from 2/3rds of my family.
And BTW, it should be “[censored]”, not “[deleted]” because that’s what you’re doing.
Cracks me up the silly things you girls argue about. Thanks for the giggles.
Cheers
—————–
Giggle away, girly man.
Or are you now going to whine that this is an Ad Homonem?
No, Alan’s comment didn’t meet the definition of ad hominem.
Hope that helps. Don’t worry, you will get it, but go for you for asking.
Cheers
—————
You’re the one who doesn’t get it, mate. Two things, actually. That’s because you are so jaw droppingly unintelligent.
1. I called you a girly man, because of your predilection for giggling like a little girl. It’s
definitely an ad hominem remark, and I made clear I was referring to my own comment –
not Alan’s.
2. The deliberate and apt misspelling also went right over your head.
“Professor”, you have the reading comprehension skills of a rather slow 5 year old.
In other words, for all your ersatz erudition you’re as thick as a brick.
And it shows. So stop being condescending towards me and everyone else here. You are nowhere near being our intellectual superior, no matter how many fake titles you assume, no matter how many patronizing insults you throw at us.
You’re just an odious personality with a distinctly average intellect who has an opinion on everything, and who spews the most predictable, jejune tripe imaginable.
Hope that helps.
.
Oh, no. Since my comment itself lacked any formal argument in support or against an argument (I was just sharing my reaction to Alan’s comment), your comment would not quality as an ad hominem.
Hope that helps. Keep trying, I know you will figure it out eventually. You can do it!!
Cheers Chippy Dippy Do
————-
You’re not even making sense any more, mate. Are you drunk? As well as stupid?
Yet another ad hominem. Yawn
New Whooper Lies over the weekend:
“The Moon is Ours” (no, we don’t own the moon)
“Many people suggested” renaming the state to “New America” – No one is suggesting this and it isn’t even in his authority
“three-term president” who won the election three times – No. No he didn’t.
“I’ve made Hundreds of Billions of Dollars on Stocks, and many other type Holdings, for the U.S.A., not myself.” – no he hasn’t. The US own a very limited number of stocks.
FYI, those are just the whoopers. From one day.
————–
Trump is not a career politician. He has never learned to be careful about what he says publicly, so he goes off on flights of hyperbole and unfiltered stream of consciousness thinking out loud.
He is “What you see is what you get”, and as such is more fundamentally honest than 99 per cent of our career politicians.
But it does allow pettifogging little pricks like “Professor” to cavil over his every utterance. It makes them feel superior.
He isn’t careful with what he says is the understatement of the day and is the foundation of what makes him an awful leader. I argue he doesn’t think at all and lacks any longer-term strategic view on anything he does which makes him a dangerous leader.
—————-
Er no, Trump is the very definition of a leader !
Just ‘cos you don’t care for him doesn’t change that.
Since you didn’t bother to provide any context for your opinion of Trump as a leader, let me help….
A strong leader is someone who can establish a clear direction, make difficult decisions, take responsibility for the consequences, and bring people together to accomplish a shared objective….while remaining accountable to the people they lead.
Clear Direction – Trump fails as he clearly makes things up as he goes….just look how many times he changed the justification and goals of the war with Iran
Make Difficult Decisions – Trump does make decisions easily….I argue too easily as he tends to ignore real input to weight the long-term impact of his decisions…again look at war with Iran, all experts new how Iran would react yet Trump ignored those warning and now here we are…
Take Responsibility for Consequences – Trump Fails – has never admitted to a failing in his life. Again look at Iran or the economy. He continues to blame others or pretend, ‘its no big deal’.
Bring People Together – Trump fails as he can only speak childishly about any not 100% loyal to himself. Trump has never attempted to compromise and reach across the aisle for the good of the American People. His only negotiation tactic is bully and it is a failing strategy…just look at the trade wars impact on our foreign relations….lack of any progress on any of the major issues facing the US (except the border where he tramples the constitution to meet his bigoted goals of isolating the US)
Accountable to the People – Trump fails here ‘biggly’ as he is happy to insult all Americans who disagree with him and ignore the impact his polices have had on working Americans. Just look at farmers to understand this point.
Hope that helps.
Cheers Pappy
—————————————–
What a torrent of tripe.
Verbose vomit.
Prolix puke.
Shower of sh*t.
——————————————
Got it?
Yet another ad hominem from Austin. Yawn.
New Whooper of a lie from yesterday
Trump now claims that he was ‘rescued’ by Firefighters from a failing building on 9/11. It is well established that he was nowhere near ground zero on 9/11. He was in midtown over 4 miles away. This is known since he actually gave live interviews during the event and described watching the attacks from his apartment.
What a joke.
Trump was miles away at Trump Tower in Midtown Manhattan during the actual attacks on September 11.
The most consequential leaders in world history are always the most controversial. Trump falls into this category.
But sometimes, Mr. President, there are moments when silence truly is golden—and when saying less would serve you, your principles, and the Republican Party far better than saying more.
Yes, Trump carries some negatives, but none of this changes my overall assessment of the 2024 election. I believed—and still believe—that Trump was the stronger leader and, in my view, clearly the better alternative in 2024.
But supporting someone doesn’t require you to surrender your judgment. This is not disloyalty.
Trump is consequential all right….but not in a good way.
The only success Trump has had is the border but that has had it’s own lasting negative consequences on our economy, peoples constitutional rights, and foreign relations….in this case, the end does not justify the means.
In no other measure has Trump been a positive to the United States. He has hurt farmers, small business owners, working families, the sick and poor, our longtime allies, etc.. etc.. etc…
I do appreciate your take Salt Life as you don’t play the 100% loyalty cult member role as many do, but I do think you ignore the wider truth about the long-term impact of the modern conservative movement.
As always, I appreciate the dialog without the personal insults even though we strongly disagree with each other.
Cheers
Whooper of a lie today from Trump:
Trump declares victory in Iran: Yet as we sit today….
– US and Iran are still conducting military operations
– Iran attacked US interests
– US destroyed 5 Iranian oil tankers
– Strait of Hormuz remains severely disrupted (remember when he claimed the strait was fully open)
– Brent Crude is above $100 a barrel
– US gas average price has jumped to $422 a gallon
– Disel has reached a record $5.94 a gallon
How is this victory?
Newest Whoopers Told By Trump Last night:
“Zero” border crossings for 16 months” – CBP data shows nearly 600,000 encounters….
“The $5,000 “Trump Dividend” – while not really a lie given it is a promise…..it would cost $1 Trillion dollars the government doesn’t have and he has promised payments so many times before that never happened….
Trump said Democrats oppose the SAVE Act’s voter-ID/citizenship provisions “because they want to cheat.” – The classic lie many here love to repeat but doesn’t make it true.
Convention was “sold out” / huge viewership – Classic trump lie – Reporting showed substantial empty seating and organizers had been distributing free tickets shortly before the event. There was also no reliable evidence establishing Trump’s claims about online viewership surpassing the NFL
The $5k will never fly. Congress will never approve it, and Trump knows that.
I’ll save my grim bloviating on tariffs and Iran for another day.
New Whoopers of Lies from Trump in last 24 hours
– Biden allowed “25 million immigrants to enter illegally” – Biden never allowed illegal immigration, he did allow about a fraction of that to enter under asylum
– “War with Iran is essentially a victory’ – the war is actually expanding and price of oil continues to climb
– “Democrats oppose SAVE act because they want to cheat” – The actual motive as clearly stated by Democrats is 1) it isn’t needed 2) it will reduce voter turnout, especially for women and low income voters
– “Biden allowed in 11,888 murders” – The figure refers to noncitizens with murder convictions who were on ICE’s non-detained docket in 2024. Most entered the country before Biden took office (some arrived while Trump was in office) and many were already incarcerated and only some entered illegally
“We now pay the lowest prices in the entire world for prescription drugs” – Easily looked up to confirm this is a lie
“My tax cut was the largest tax cut in history” – Easily confirmed a lie
“More than $20 trillion has been invest in America since I took office” – This is even a lie when you check the Whitehouse website that only lists 11.2 trillion in PROMISED investments. He can’t even keep his own lies straight
“The US became the world leader in oil and gas production un me” – The US was already the leader in oil and gas production before Trump took office