a compromised ad orientem
The pro-life presidency?
Wait. Isn't this Kelly Ann "Alternative Facts" Conway?Sorry, a President with no discernible values or fixed principles is a dangerous thing indeed. Rob Dreher writes in "The American Conservative" of Trump's inauguration speech, ". . . that was not the speech of a man who is capable of leading a government that he does not command. Many people have faulted its dark quality, but for a pessimist like me, that’s not necessarily a fault. The country really does have big problems, with no easy solutions, if they can be solved at all. That said, he really does seem to be a menacing figure, chiefly (to me) because he has a hot temper, no self-control and no fixed principles. And it is unnerving to watch a US president deploy rhetoric to ramp up fear and manipulate his listeners into thinking that only he can save us."
The fake catholics who post here are devastated.Meanwhile, fake catholic Tim Keane presided over a gay wedding on the night of the Inaugaration. What is his bishop going to do about that? NADA.
So - the death penalty will go too?
Anonymous, nice to see you have your priorities straight, that we should worry about the execution of a murderer just as much as an innocent babe in the womb. The problem with the political left and fake catholics, they place ZERO value on the life of the innocent unborn. FYI, the last time I checked the Catholic Catechism, the death penalty is not contrary to the Faith but abortion is.
TJM, Virginia, where Kaine is from, unfortunately is becoming the southernmost northern state, with all the associated liberalism. Northern Virginia---the DC suburbs---backed Clinton by nearly a 2-1 margin. The Diocese of Richmond was pretty liberal under the 30-year tenure of Walter Sullivan (1974-2004)---the story goes when the state was divided into two dioceses in the 1970s, the conservatives went to Arlington in Northern Virginia, and the liberals stayed with Richmond.
Kellyanne Conway is a devout Roman Catholic and daily communicant, she is now under Secret Service protection because of death threats from Left Wing nut jobs, just simply disgusting. They Left is full of vile and hatred like we have never seen before, pray for Kellyannne and President Trump. The FIST WOMAN to run and win a presidential election but the Left could care less why? Because she does not fit the narrative of a mean faced, butch cut hair, obese, man hating, family hating, police hating, military hating, abortion supporting woman, simple as that folks.
Kellyanne Conway is a devout Muslim and prays facing Mecca five times a day. She is under protection from the Muslim Brotherhood due to the threats lodged against her by the National Policy Institute, which is disgusting.These are NOT falsehoods, aka "lies." They are alternative facts.
Anonymous at 1:32, you are obviously a leftist because your whole word is based on lies and alternative facts.
For all the anonymous folk here sputtering about 'alternative facts', I should point out that this comes from the dust-up between the new Press secretary and the media over how the Inaugural was represented by the PR wing of the democratic party (otherwise known as the main stream media).The MSM showed a photo of the Mall at 10am as though that was what it looked like at noon. The dig was to provoke Trump by insinuating that he was unpopular. But the press secretary's actual statement was not apples to apples head counts between 2008 people on the Mall vs. this years. He EXPLICITLY included everyone watching on TV AND streaming on the internet.So we have two related but distinct points. One, the Media DID undoubtedly play fast and loose with the photo time stamps but there were factually fewer people on the Mall in 2017 than in 2013 or 2009. Some were kept away no doubt by increased security and the anarchists blockading the checkpoints. But The Press Secretarty's point about TOTAL viewership is not wrong. Meanwhile while the left hyperventilates about "alternative facts" (perhaps like "alternative lifestyles?) Trump is quietly fulfilling campaign promises.
Methinks anonymous winds up with mud on his face (as usual). CNN's finally released zoom photohttp://ijr.com/2017/01/784781-the-highest-quality-photograph-of-trumps-inauguration-yet-has-been-released-guess-what-the-crowd-looks-like/of the Trump inauguration crowd suggests that Kelly Ann's "alternative fact" is an actual fact. Scroll down through the zooms in on the crowd in the mall, densely packed all the way back to the base of the Washington monument, 1.5 miles away. I don't recall any photo of an Obama inauguration crowd this large. "He who laughs last (usually) laughs best."
Jusad - Nah, Spicer (who in the world of Alternatnive Facts and Gaslighting is a practicing Hindu, by the way) did not include the TV audience in this remarks.No, he didn't - watch the tape again.Yes, he did "misspeak" (aka lie) when he said the white grass covers had NEVER been used before. They had, and the photographic evidence is there for anyone who wants to see it.Yes, he did misspeak(aka lie) when he provided bogus information on the number of riders counted by the Metro authorities.Yes, he did misspeak (aka lie) when he said it had stopped raining when the President gave his address. Again, watch the tape and see the raindrops landing on the President's lapels.Nuff said.
Anonymous at 3:40, WRONG. Nuff saidps: are you an angry Hillary supporter? ObamaCare may cover anger management
No, Henry, look at the Megapixel pic again. You can't see the ground space between the Smithson Castle and the Washington Monument because a two story temporary pavilion has been erected across the Mall at appx 12th Street. From 12th street to the Washington Monument is 0.6 miles. In the pix I have seen, taken not from the Capitol but from the Washington Monument, that space between 12th and the Washington Monument is almost entirely vacant.
Father McDonald,Here is this morning's interview with Kellyanne Conway on Fox & Friends:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V74XWp9B8AEI haven't watched the entire interview, but from the 7:30 mark to 8:30, she discusses pro-life issues related to President Trump.She twice referred to President Trump as pro-life...and at the 8:28 mark she used the phrase from "conception to natural death."The only way that that her claim in question is valid in regard to President Trump is if he has rejected his support for abortion in cases of "rape, incest, and life of the mother."If Kellyanne Conway told the truth this morning about President Trump, and I will assume that she did, in regard to pro-life issues, then President Trump has accepted the Church's teachings on abortion.Deo gratias!We have an amazing news story at hand. President Trump has rejected his support for abortion.Again, Deo gratias!Is President Trump, via daily communicant Kellyanne Conway's holy example as a faithful Catholic, on the path to conversion to the True Church? That possibility is uplifting and amazing to contemplate.We need to pray for President Trump's conversion to the Church.Pax.Mark Thomas
I agree with Henry. I have looked at the CNN gigapixal of Trump's inauguration and blowing it up was able to see the crowd stretching back to the Washington Monument - with no gaps at all. In fact, it is so clear that you can see people are still coming through the gates back there.Kelly Ann's "alternative facts" was a polite way of her saying "The media lied yet again by putting up photos taken at 10 am and compared them to Obama's swearing in around midday". The comparison was totally fake as the gigapixal photo reveals. Not only that but CNN has carried both photos. Do they think we are blind and can't see the difference between the two? Their own gigapixal photo speaks loud and clear to the fact that they once again misinformed the public.For Anonymous's benefit, Mashable also has a side by side comparison that shows both inaugurations at the time of swearing in of both Presidents and there is no appreciable difference in crowd size, and certainly not the gaps shown in the photos of Trump's inauguration circulated by the MSM, also bearing in mind that Obama did not have Hillary supporters blocking the entrance ways to the mall and preventing people getting in.http://mashable.com/2017/01/20/inauguration-crowd-comparison/#xP_83YNj45qPIt seems petty looking at photos to compare crowd sizes, but that is what you have to do in this day and age when you have the MSM hell bent on de-legitimizing Trump's presidency and prepared to go to any lengths to do it. I was stunned when I saw the comparisons being shown by CNN and others - shocked that they would be so petty and shocked because I had watched the inauguration live and realized that the photo of Trump's inauguration crowd was patently false. The Gigapixal absolutely proves that and yet CNN haven't bothered to remove the original offending photo that shows the crowds coming into the ground at 10 am. Being the fake news network that they are that is hardly surprising and we can't expect them to change their spots. The Trump administration has said holding President Trump to account works both ways and they will be holding the MSM to account and so will President Trump's supporters.Jan
Anonymous at 4:38, is that you Kavanaugh? Even if you're not, you're still wrong, and the whole discussion just shows how desperate the looney left has become. I read today that a leading candidate for the DNC told White People they need to shut up. Now, that's a way to influence people to your cause!
I have tried to be scrupulously fair about this issue by comparing photographs very closely and carefully. In my judgment the CNN Megapixel pictures are quite consistent with the following pictures taken from the other end of the Mall:https://gma.yahoo.com/2009-v-2017-comparing-trump-obama-inauguration-crowds-221704926--abc-news-topstories.html#https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBW-VCro7RwAnd then there are the Metro ride numbers mentioned in the first link.This said, the NYT did publish a deceptive photo, which as the photos in the above links demonstrate, they did not need to do to make the point that the Obama inauguration numbers were much greater than the Trump inauguration numbers. I am very disappointed in their apparent misrepresentation, as indeed I am in Trump’s constant disregard for the facts. If ever there was a time when we need the mainstream media to be above reproach, this is it.
Anonymous2,Thanks for the laughs. NO ONE disregarded the facts or the law like Obama or the Clintoons.You are living in an alternate world of reality. And the New York Slimes, well, they are the Slimes, the Bible for Looney Liberals.
TJM:I have noticed that when you have nothing really to say in answer to a point you resort to the juvenile “Thanks for the laughs” line.I take it, then, that you concede the point about Obama’s inauguration numbers being significantly greater than Trump’s (respectable though those were too). I take it, too, that you will concede Trump’s disregard for the truth evidenced most recently (oh wait, I haven’t checked again this morning) by the absurd claim that there were 3-5 million votes cast illegally. Of course, the Narcissist-in-Chief_has_to say something like that, doesn’t he, in the face of a massive win in the popular vote for Hillary and the razor thin margin by which he won the Electoral College (about 100,000 votes spread across three states as I recall), because in his mind he won in a landslide.“How, many fingers, am I holding up, Winston?”
P.S. TJM: In addition to dismissive responses (as in the juvenile “Thanks for the laughs”), the other Trumpian rhetorical technique (although I believe Karl Rove may have pioneered, or at least perfected, it) is to deflect criticism by reflecting it back on the critic (as in the alternate facts/alternative reality remark). Well, these techniques won’t work with me so you can give up on them right now.
Anonymous 2 (kavanaugh)Here is some bad news which shoots holes in your theory about the inaugaration crowds:http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/01/crowd-size-matters-trump-is-right-it-was-huge/Libs like you constantly engage in projection, accusing others what you are guilty of doing.
TJM:What you fail to understand, it seems, is that the CNN megapixel shot is taken from the Capitol from a much lower elevation, so that one cannot see the huge spaces_behind_people. However, if you are really careful and examine the photo closely you_can_see how the CNN megapixel photos shot does correlate with the photo and video I posted at 2:24 a.m. And if you still refuse to acknowledge the facts, perhaps you will believe the video taken_during_the address (watch at 3:25 when they pan out to the crowd from a much higher Capitol end location):https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRBsJNdK1t0Surely you cannot deny the evidence of your own eyes. Or will you now say the video was doctored?“How may fingers am I holding up, Winston?”And I leave the projection up to others who are so much better at it then I could ever be. Trump did it all the time during the campaign, accusing others of lying (which they sometimes did) while being a greater offender than anyone (although in his case it might not be lying just delusion if he really believed what he said, and still says).By the way, is “kavanaugh” a category now?P.S. Your “lib” smear won’t work either any more than it does when Gene or others do it. Definition of “lib” in your lexicon = anyone who disagrees with me.
Anonymous2:"...in the face of a massive win in the popular vote for Hillary and the razor thin margin by which he won the Electoral College (about 100,000 votes spread across three states as I recall), because in his mind he won in a landslide."''There were over 128,800,000 votes cast just between Mr Trump and Hillary Clinton (which was 94% of all votes cast). The difference between each of their vote totals amounts to only a little over 2.0% of the overall total (hardly a massive win). You may have considerable competence in your field, but apparently maths is not you strong suit.
FYI:Don’t tell me; tell President Trump. Judging by his obsession with the issue, he is the one who seems to think Hillary's margin was so massive—so massive in his mind indeed that he has now become delusional about massive voter fraud that robbed him of a popular vote victory even though no-one else, including the leaders in his own Party, can see what he sees.
Anonymous 2, a report has just been published in the New York Times that Hillary in fact received 800,000 votes from illegal votes which they say gives credence to Trump's complaint. That is no doubt just the tip of the iceberg. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jan/26/hillary-clinton-received-800000-votes-from-nonciti/As regards the inauguration crowd, if you blow the Gigapixal photo up and go to the very back there are no gaps. The angle makes no difference at all. The gaps just do not exist in those areas shown - they are photos taken at an earlier time. Also, I read comments where people who attended the inauguration, who were standing in those areas, said when they saw the photos in the paper the following day they knew they were false because there were no gaps and they actually couldn't get into some of those areas because they were full. It is just the MSM attempt to de-legitimatize President Trump. Interestingly the polls show the public confidence in the media has dropped to just 15%.
Jan:Sorry, but you are wrong. Please look at the video of the actual address at 3:25 that I posted at 8:18 p.m. on January 25. As I say there, the video shot is perfectly consistent with the other photo and video that I posted at 2:24 a.m. and that I refer to in the 8:18 p.m. post (which are not the duplicitous NYT photo taken earlier in the morning). As for those present who say there were no gaps, I would need to know in which part of the crowd they were located and/or how credible they are. Can you please provide a source for these claims? Where did you read these comments? There are also others who say the opposite, including the very reputable Chris Wallace on FOX News:http://www.politicususa.com/2017/01/22/fox-news-trump-lying-inauguration-crowd-size.html
Jan: I read the article. It is the Washington Times, not the New York Times; it refers to a report posted on a Blog by a political scientist (as yet not evaluated—it might be junk science for all we know); and even this study says Hillary could have received no more than 800,000 votes, far short of the 3-5 million claimed by President Trump. I will look into the claim more closely later today.
Jan - The Gigapixel picture stops at the pavilion erected across the Mall at 12th street.You (and Trump) cannot see beyond it. From 12th street to the Washington Monument is 0.6 miles. Pictures from the Washington Monument taken during the President's speech show that space virtually empty.Trump did not see all the way to the Washington Monument because the two story pavilion blocked his view.He's a pathological liar.
What's next? Are we to compare the crowds of Pope Francis and Pope St John Paul II?To what end? I'm surprised Mr Trump's crowd was as large as it was, given the promised, media-hyped threats posed by hooligans and anarchist types.
Huh:Yes, if Pope Francis appeared to be lying about the crowd size and then continued to double down on the apparent lie even in the face of overwhelming evidence proving the actual facts—yes we would most definitely want to compare crowd sizes.Again, it is amazing to see the contortions Trump supporters are going through to defend this man, especially given that they would have crucified Obama or Biden in similar circumstances.Truth and facts matter. Always. They are not partisan. If we cannot defend them, our Republic is lost, not to mention our integrity.
Post a Comment