SectionC3

A big fat zero from me, of course. But it looks like the healthiest president ever has a campaign fund that, frankly, isn’t so healthy at the moment. So to the ardent Trump supporters here: have you put your money where your mouth is? And, if so, how many Andrew Jacksons have you contributed to this cause? Discuss.

No doubt. They earned the “Dumbkirk” moniker for this stunt.

It’s interesting how some describe the place as a “dungeon” or a “hell hole” and also get annoyed when somebody posts something with a viewpoint different from their own. Cancel culture, anyone?

The recent practice photos seem to suggest as much. I’m with you.

Respectfully I disagree. It fits Trump perfectly. “I like guys who didn’t get shot down” is fairly consistent with “the guys who died” (this obviously is a paraphrase) are “suckers and losers.” Whether it’s true or not is in the eye of the beholder; the fact that Kelly hasn’t spiked it says to me that there’s at least some merit to The Atlantic’s reporting. And the Bolton denial isn’t dispositive until we know whether Trump was within earshot of Bolton at all times relevant to The Atlantic’s reporting. So the answer is yes? Maybe, but not for his military service. Face it. Barack Obama showed more respect for the service of John McCain than did Donald Trump.

Hoax. Lots of lies to unpack here. But let's start with the "coverup" allegation against Governor Cuomo. It's not his responsibility to investigate this issue. So how did he cover this issue up? *** And, let's stick to the script here. Your Trumpian scare tactic about "democrat run cities burning" is wild hyperbole not rooted in truth. What's on fire this morning? Nothing, except for the campfire embers leftover from last night in my fire pit. Another day, another right-wing hoaxy lie.

Which posts of yours did I ignore? *** Also, FYI, the subject is the Trumpian scare tactic about Democrat-run cuties being on fire. Not Daniel Pride. Different issue, big boy. So stick to the subject.

I'm not the one with the complaint, Old Dawg. That's you.

Let's get something straight. When someone from your nationalist crowd blows the racist dog whistle (e.g., there's a lot of good people on both sides in Charlottesville! or the Muslim travel ban! or birtherism!) the typical response is something along the lines of "he didn't literally say he's a racist or that he has a prejudice, so therefore he isn't and there is no merit to your wild accusation of racism! The shield of literalism is applied, if you will. In this instance, however, literalism apparently is to be discarded because it suits your purpose. When Trump or one of his mouthpieces says something like the Democrat-run "cities are burning," we check literalism at the door and revert to hyperbole because it suits your purpose. What cities (plural) currently are on fire in their totality? Because remember, it's not just a few buildings here and there that can be on fire. It's the "cit[y]," meaning the entirety of the political subdivision. And it has to be on fire now, at this very moment. Otherwise, it's just another shameless lie and shameless exaggeration from a shameless president propagated by the shameless apologists, like you, who follow him. You're the only one talking about a psychotic episode. Unless you mean the claim that multiple democrat-run cities are burning as we speak is psychotic. In which case, I would suggest dealing with the psychosis by not saying (or defending) psychotic things. Oh! And goodness gracious it looks like you posted a misleading link about insurance. Turns out the article you cited deals with things like the inability to procure coverage for damage caused by strike, riot, or civil unrest. Things that, as I'm sure you well know, can catalyze loss without the use of flame, and in the absence of a riot.

Hoax. https://www.portlandoregon.gov/fire/apps/calls/incidents_map.cfm

So someone who disagrees with you is a bad apple?

Present tense: which cities are burning?

Nice cop out.

So who are the bad apples?

If it’s a problem, and not a hoax, I figured there would be multiple cities on fire, as Trump suggested. But there’s not. So just another Trump hoax that all of the suckers and losers buy into.

That’s pretty sick. For real. I enjoy difference of opinion and can put up with the hyperbolic insults and even the delusional nonsense. But this crossed a line. It’s just demented. You gotta go.

There’s more than one city on fire? Holy cow.

I take it no other city is on fire. Just another trump hoax!

Hoax. Also, Trump said cities were burning. That’s plural. What other democrat run city is on fire?

Good to see that PPP is back to normal,

And therein lies the problem with this place.

Nope.

“Parade of fools?” Who might they be? People who don’t share your worldview? and inciting anger? With what, exactly? A competing viewpoint? Maybe the solution to your problems is to have an open mind.

No. But he’s also not the type to kiss and tell in public about his time in the WH.

Semi-educated guess: Kelly is one of the sources for the original report.