Projection.
I met enough Muslims in Turkey … some Turks and some Arabs … to know that their skin is not always “brown”. So if one of them was radicalized by a violent Islamicist group, he or she might be a terrorist with skin no darker than my own… which is somewhat olive from my Greek ancestry.
In fact right after 911, with my super short hair and olive skin, I was a frequent target of airport searches and patdowns. (maybe I should team up with some lib and add my stories of WWO - walking while olive - and FWO - flying while olive - to their data base of outrages)
This projection will not serve you well.
Should we really expect more out of the president of the United States? The lying is as bad as it has ever been. Obama was probably worse.
The latter a much more probable scenario. still waiting for those 1000’s of Muslims who celebrated 9/11 in Jersey.
Allan
dantes
July 31, 2018, 7:05pm
24
He was talking in past tense with remains from North Korea after which you kindly explained that verb tense is irrelevant to Trump.
I’m sorry. The prejudice against Muslims is far greater than I made it out to be. I was using “brown” to represent “otherness”. I understand completely that you can’t hide your ethnicity simply because your skin color might look “white” or in your case “olive”.
LouC
July 31, 2018, 7:07pm
26
No doubt all DEEP STATE operatives.
Every human being alive has an “otherness detector” built in to their DNA. It is how we survive. It’s a flag. We then use our own judgement, developed through education and experience, to respond to that flag.
Some people’s flag is suppressed or they have been trained by their indoctrination to ignore it. For example. Note that Daniel Pearl didn’t survive his last journalistic interview gig. His flag was suppressed by the indoctrination he likely received as a journalist.
Do we?? Some people think a terrorist is “a guy who lives in my neighborhood” who you just happened to launch your political career in their living room.
1 Like
Ha! Good point.
OBAMA…Hardly knew the guy!
Hahahahahahaha…
Libs are so gullible.
PizzaReverend:
Accurate title but not what you think.
Lawfare – 31 Jul 18
It isn’t every day that the U.S. Department of Justice acknowledges formally that the President of the United States lied in a speech to Congress. But that’s how I read a letter I received a few days ago from the department.
To understand the significance of this letter, let’s go back to Trump’s first address to Congress in February 2017. The new president made the striking claim quoted above: “According to data provided by the Department of Justice, the vast majority of individuals convicted of terrorism and terrorism-related offenses since 9/11 came here from outside of our country.”
So in April of last year, I filed two FOIA requests. I asked for any records supporting the president’s claim before Congress, along with any records “relating to the nationality or country of origin of individuals convicted of terrorism-related offenses”; correspondence between the Justice Department and the White House related to that data; and correspondence related to preparation for and reaction to the February 2017 joint address. When the department did not respond, I filed a lawsuit.
A number of weeks ago, the Justice Department and my lawyers—Larry Schwartztol and Justin Florence of Protect Democracy—agreed to simplify the remaining searches to facilitate resolution of the case. The offices of the attorney general, the deputy attorney general, legislative affairs, and public affairs would each conduct a search “for records containing data of (i) all individuals convicted of all terrorism-related offenses (domestic and international) between 2001 and the date of the initial search, or (ii) all individuals convicted of all domestic terrorism-related offenses between 2001 and the date of the initial search.” Presumably, if the Justice Department had provided the White House with data to support the president’s claims, the request would have gone through the department’s top brass. If there was some data “provided by the Department of Justice” to the White House showing that “the vast majority of individuals convicted [in all] terrorism and terrorism-related offenses since 9/11”—including domestic terrorism cases—“came here from outside of our country,” there would be some record of it either in the attorney general’s office or the deputy attorney general’s office.
Because what the President of the United States said before a joint session of Congress was not true. It wasn’t true about immigrants and terrorism. And neither was it true about the Justice Department.
It’s pretty clear this matters to not a single Trumper. But shouldn’t it? The President went before the Congress and the Nation and told a huge, Pants on Fire level lie, and blamed the DoJ for it. On what level is this remotely acceptable?
Ah, the level of racists, liars and trolls.
From the article:
“It isn’t every day that the U.S. Department of Justice acknowledges formally that the President of the United States lied in a speech to Congress. But that’s how I read a letter I received a few days ago from the department’s Office of Information Policy in connection with one of my Freedom of Information Act suits against the department .”
The DOJ acknowledged nothing resembling the claim in the subject of this thread. The sentence in bold says it all. It is simply the opinion of a Trump-hater.
If you are expecting that Trump speaks according to some algorithm, he does not.
If you dont have your Trump decoder ring on, you might be out of luck.
peek-a-boo:
PizzaReverend:
Accurate title but not what you think.
Lawfare – 31 Jul 18
It isn’t every day that the U.S. Department of Justice acknowledges formally that the President of the United States lied in a speech to Congress. But that’s how I read a letter I received a few days ago from the department.
To understand the significance of this letter, let’s go back to Trump’s first address to Congress in February 2017. The new president made the striking claim quoted above: “According to data provided by the Department of Justice, the vast majority of individuals convicted of terrorism and terrorism-related offenses since 9/11 came here from outside of our country.”
So in April of last year, I filed two FOIA requests. I asked for any records supporting the president’s claim before Congress, along with any records “relating to the nationality or country of origin of individuals convicted of terrorism-related offenses”; correspondence between the Justice Department and the White House related to that data; and correspondence related to preparation for and reaction to the February 2017 joint address. When the department did not respond, I filed a lawsuit.
A number of weeks ago, the Justice Department and my lawyers—Larry Schwartztol and Justin Florence of Protect Democracy—agreed to simplify the remaining searches to facilitate resolution of the case. The offices of the attorney general, the deputy attorney general, legislative affairs, and public affairs would each conduct a search “for records containing data of (i) all individuals convicted of all terrorism-related offenses (domestic and international) between 2001 and the date of the initial search, or (ii) all individuals convicted of all domestic terrorism-related offenses between 2001 and the date of the initial search.” Presumably, if the Justice Department had provided the White House with data to support the president’s claims, the request would have gone through the department’s top brass. If there was some data “provided by the Department of Justice” to the White House showing that “the vast majority of individuals convicted [in all] terrorism and terrorism-related offenses since 9/11”—including domestic terrorism cases—“came here from outside of our country,” there would be some record of it either in the attorney general’s office or the deputy attorney general’s office.
Because what the President of the United States said before a joint session of Congress was not true. It wasn’t true about immigrants and terrorism. And neither was it true about the Justice Department.
It’s pretty clear this matters to not a single Trumper. But shouldn’t it? The President went before the Congress and the Nation and told a huge, Pants on Fire level lie, and blamed the DoJ for it. On what level is this remotely acceptable?
Ah, the level of racists, liars and trolls.
From the article:
“It isn’t every day that the U.S. Department of Justice acknowledges formally that the President of the United States lied in a speech to Congress. But that’s how I read a letter I received a few days ago from the department’s Office of Information Policy in connection with one of my Freedom of Information Act suits against the department .”
The DOJ acknowledged nothing resembling the claim in the subject of this thread. The sentence in bold says it all. It is simply the opinion of a Trump-hater.
Exactly. He went to all that trouble and came back with literally nothing. What a duffus!
dantes
July 31, 2018, 7:44pm
33
Right. Trump is his own man which means he doesn’t care about the meaning of words or tenses or anything like that. It makes it easier for the hive mind to tell the drones what he said since you no longer have to listen and think for yourself.
Wouldn’t exactly call it nothing. We have the beginnings of another Trump bashing thread. There’s still that!
1 Like
Don’t be angry. The thing that you need to learn to do is to be patient. WAIT after Trump says something.
I tried to tell you this before. Trump uses his speaking and his tweets to figure out what he believes is true. He says something. Then he asks himself “Did I say what I wanted to say?” If the answer is no, you will hear him make some changes and say it again.
He’s not a ■■■■■■■ lawyer… thank God.
LouC:
In February of this year, I received 57 pages of material from the National Security Division in response to the request—specifically, the portion of the lawsuit concerning communications within and originating from NSD. From the documents, Ellingsen and I were able to reconstruct a partial picture of the origins of the president’s spurious claim . To boil it down, NSD had provided data on international terrorism prosecutions only , not domestic ones. Both NSD and the FBI emphasized the limitations of this data . The Justice Department explicitly warned the White House that the data did not “include convictions related solely to domestic terrorism. ” And the FBI noted that “database checks are limited in their ability to accurately identify a date/place of birth.”
In other words, having been advised that the dataset contained critical omissions , that data about naturalized citizens probably contained “gaps or errors ,” and that the data dealt only with international terrorism cases—not domestic ones —the president and his administration nonetheless crafted the misleading statement that appeared in his first address to Congress. What’s more, in January of this year, the president again mischaracterized the data in a tweet promoting a report by the Justice Department and Department of Homeland Security:
Two critical paragraphs from the OP article are above.
The President and his administration were informed and warned but they ignored what information they were given and created an “alternative fact ” aka LIE for his speech.
Pretty straight forward if you ask me.
Thank you for doing the required reading. Note to the chuckleheads who didn’t: He even hilighted it for you.
1 Like
Yes, the terrorism that occurred in countries outside the US was mostly done by people other than US citizens. That however isn’t what Trump said
NSD had provided data on international terrorism prosecutions only, not domestic ones.
And victims of TDS got a fix too.
Don’t want them trotting out Maxine … which they do when they are short on outrage.
dantes
July 31, 2018, 8:03pm
39
Not angry. Just trying to learn how the brains of Trump supporters work. You’ve decided to abandon logic, causality and now grammar.
Trump lied? I’m shocked, I tell you - ahocked!!
Ok, not really.
In other news, I hear water is wet.