Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Massena's Trump Files III

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Censorship without an explanation, or just plain censorship is not a function of the National Archives:

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/na...cid=spartandhp

    The large color photograph that greets visitors to a National Archives exhibit celebrating the centennial of women’s suffrage shows a massive crowd filling Pennsylvania Avenue NW for the Women’s March on Jan. 21, 2017, the day after President Trump’s inauguration.

    The 49-by-69-inch photograph is a powerful display. Viewed from one perspective, it shows the 2017 march. Viewed from another angle, it shifts to show a 1913 black-and-white image of a women’s suffrage march also on Pennsylvania Avenue. The display links momentous demonstrations for women’s rights more than a century apart on the same stretch of pavement.

    But a closer look reveals a different story.

    The Archives acknowledged in a statement this week that it made multiple alterations to the photo of the 2017 Women’s March showcased at the museum, blurring signs held by marchers that were critical of Trump. Words on signs that referenced women’s anatomy were also blurred.

    In the original version of the 2017 photograph, taken by Getty Images photographer Mario Tama, the street is packed with marchers carrying a variety of signs, with the Capitol in the background. In the Archives version, at least four of those signs are altered.

    A placard that proclaims “God Hates Trump” has “Trump” blotted out so that it reads “God Hates.” A sign that reads “Trump & GOP — Hands Off Women” has the word Trump blurred out.

    Signs with messages that referenced women’s anatomy — which were prevalent at the march — are also digitally altered. One that reads “If my va***a could shoot bullets, it’d be less REGULATED” has “va***a” blurred out. And another that says “This P***y Grabs Back” has the word “P***y” erased.

    The Archives said the decision to obscure the words was made as the exhibit was being developed by agency managers and museum staff members. It said David S. Ferriero, the archivist of the United States who was appointed by President Barack Obama in 2009, participated in talks regarding the exhibit and supports the decision to edit the photo.

    “As a non-partisan, non-political federal agency, we blurred references to the President’s name on some posters, so as not to engage in current political controversy,” Archives spokeswoman Miriam Kleiman said in an emailed statement. “Our mission is to safeguard and provide access to the nation’s most important federal records, and our exhibits are one way in which we connect the American people to those records. Modifying the image was an attempt on our part to keep the focus on the records.”

    Archive officials did not respond to a request to provide examples of previous instances in which the Archives altered a document or photograph so as not to engage in political controversy.

    Kleiman said the images from the 2017 and 1913 marches were presented together “to illustrate the ongoing struggles of women fighting for their interests.”

    The decision to blur references to women’s genitals was made because the museum hosts many groups of students and young people and the words could be perceived as inappropriate, Kleiman said in the statement.

    Kleiman said the National Archives “only alters images in exhibits when they are used as graphic design components.”

    “We do not alter images or documents that are displayed as artifacts in exhibitions,” she said. “In this case, the image is part of a promotional display, not an artifact.”

    When told about the action taken by the Archives, prominent historians expressed dismay.

    "There's no reason for the National Archives to ever digitally alter a historic photograph," Rice University historian Douglas Brinkley said. "If they don't want to use a specific image, then don't use it. But to confuse the public is reprehensible. The head of the Archives has to very quickly fix this damage. A lot of history is messy, and there's zero reason why the Archives can't be upfront about a photo from a women's march."

    Wendy Kline, a history professor at Purdue University, said it was disturbing that the Archives chose to edit out the words "va***a" and "p***y" from an image of the Women's March, especially when it was part of an exhibit about the suffragist movement. Hundreds of thousands of people took part in the 2017 march in the District, which was widely seen as a protest of Trump's victory.

    "Doctoring a commemorative photograph buys right into the notion that it's okay to silence women's voice and actions," Kline said in an email. "It is literally erasing something that was accurately captured on camera. That's an attempt to erase a powerful message."

    The altered photograph greets visitors to "Rightfully Hers: American Women and the Vote," an exhibit that opened in May celebrating the centennial of women's suffrage. The 19th Amendment to the Constitution, which was ratified in 1920, prohibits the federal government and states from denying the right to vote on the basis of sex.

    "This landmark voting rights victory was made possible by decades of suffragists' persistent political engagement, and yet it is just one critical milestone in women's battle for the vote," reads a news release announcing the exhibit on the Archives website.

    Archives spokesman John Valceanu said the proposed edits were sent to Getty for approval, and Getty "then licensed our use of the image."

    A Getty spokeswoman, Anne Flanagan, confirmed that the image was licensed by the National Archives Foundation but said in an email Friday evening that Getty was still determining whether it approved alterations to the image.

    Karin Wulf, a history professor at the College of William & Mary and executive director of the Omohundro Institute of Early American History and Culture, said that to ensure transparency, the Archives at the very least should have noted prominently that the photo had been altered.

    "The Archives has always been self-conscious about its responsibility to educate about source material, and in this case they could have said, or should have said, 'We edited this image in the following way for the following reasons,' " she said. "If you don't have transparency and integrity in government documents, democracy doesn't function."
    We are not now that strength which in old days
    Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
    Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
    To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

    Comment


    • T. A. Gardner
      T. A. Gardner commented
      Editing a comment
      A sense of morality and decency...?

    • Massena
      Massena commented
      Editing a comment
      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
      A sense of morality and decency...?
      Perhaps blanking out Trump's name was done for 'morality and decency' as Trump has neither characteristic.

    • T. A. Gardner
      T. A. Gardner commented
      Editing a comment
      Originally posted by Massena View Post

      Perhaps blanking out Trump's name was done for 'morality and decency' as Trump has neither characteristic.
      Could be...

  • #17
    There is definitely something wrong with Trump that he does things like this.

    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...cid=spartandhp

    President Trump said Wednesday that he didn't mention the U.S. service members who were injured in a Iranian strike against a U.S. base because they suffered "headaches." He initially said no Americans had been injured in the January 8 strike on Al Asad airbase in retaliation for the strike that killed Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani.


    CBS News' Weijia Jiang on Wednesday asked Mr. Trump, who was in Davos, Switzerland, for the World Economic Forum, to explain the discrepancy between the initial reports that there were no injuries and the Pentagon's statement on January 16 that several U.S. service members were injured.

    "I heard that they had headaches and a couple of other things, but I would say that, and I can report, it is not very serious," said Mr. Trump.
    We are not now that strength which in old days
    Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
    Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
    To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

    Comment


    • T. A. Gardner
      T. A. Gardner commented
      Editing a comment
      Originally posted by Massena View Post

      How is it not? Of course, he has no idea regarding the armed forces, being a draft dodger...
      And Obama did...? How about Clinton? He was a real draft dodger. At least the Bush's served...

      As for Trump's comments, I don't see them as belittling but then I don't suffer from terminal TDS either...

    • Massena
      Massena commented
      Editing a comment
      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

      And Obama did...? How about Clinton? He was a real draft dodger. At least the Bush's served...

      As for Trump's comments, I don't see them as belittling but then I don't suffer from terminal TDS either...
      Nothing but whataboutism. It's too bad you cannot actually at least attempt answering under the topic. And you ad hominem comment is noted, yet another illogical posting.

    • TactiKill J.
      TactiKill J. commented
      Editing a comment
      Originally posted by Massena View Post

      Describing a concussion, or worse, as merely a 'headache' is belittling. Have you ever had a concussion?
      Were they actually concussions though?

      As far as military injuries go, a headache or concussion isn't very serious when compared to the alternatives.

  • #18
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...cid=spartandhp

    The Pentagon said on Friday that 34 service members had been diagnosed with traumatic brain injury following missile strikes by Iran on a base in Iraq earlier this month, a number higher than the military had previously announced.

    President Donald Trump and other top officials initially said Iran's attack had not killed or injured any U.S. service members.

    Last week the U.S. military said 11 U.S. troops had been treated for concussion symptoms after the attack on the Ain al-Asad air base in western Iraq and this week said additional troops had been moved out of Iraq for potential injuries.

    Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman told reporters that 17 service members diagnosed had already returned to duty in Iraq.

    Eight service members who had been previously transported to Germany had been moved to the United States and would receive treatment at either Walter Reed military hospital or their home bases.
    We are not now that strength which in old days
    Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
    Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
    To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

    Comment


    • #19
      https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartandhp

      A recording reviewed by ABC News appears to capture President Donald Trump telling associates he wanted the then-U.S. ambassador to UkraineMarie Yovanovitch fired while speaking at a small gathering that included Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman -- two former business associates of Trump’s personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani who have since been indicted in New York.

      The recording appears to contradict statements by President Trump and support the narrative that has been offered by Parnas during broadcast interviews in recent days. Sources familiar with the recording said the recording was made during an intimate April 30, 2018, dinner at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, D.C.

      Trump has said repeatedly he does not know Parnas, a Soviet-born American who has emerged as a wild card in Trump’s impeachment trial, especially in the days since Trump was impeached.

      "Get rid of her!" is what the voice that appears to be President Trump’s is heard saying. "Get her out tomorrow. I don't care. Get her out tomorrow. Take her out. Okay? Do it."

      On the recording, it appears the two Giuliani associates are telling President Trump that the U.S. ambassador has been bad-mouthing him, which leads directly to the apparent remarks by the President. The recording was made by Fruman, according to sources familiar with the tape.

      “Every President in our history has had the right to place people who support his agenda and his policies within his Administration,” White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said.
      We are not now that strength which in old days
      Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
      Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
      To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

      Comment


      • marktwain
        marktwain commented
        Editing a comment
        Originally posted by Massena View Post

        Anyone can make a judgment on this. Unless you want to stay in 'lockstep' with a corrupt president. And it wasn't Trump who actually made the decision, it was Giuliani who has no function in the US government. Get your facts right.
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A9on_Degrelle
        Did you ever get the uneasy feeling, Massena, that Leon Degrelle is still alive and well in -Belgium?

      • Nichols
        Nichols commented
        Editing a comment
        Originally posted by Massena View Post

        You most certainly are defending anything Trump does.
        I am listing a fact; the president has the authority to relieve an ambassador.

        You claim that means I am "defending anything Trump does"

        BS, your hatred Trump and the republicans and loyalty to your party has blinded you to facts. Lose the hatred, limit your devotion to your party and for once look out for our country.

        It is that simple.

      • ljadw
        ljadw commented
        Editing a comment
        Originally posted by Massena View Post

        Yes, there is. He tried to evacuate to get out of the bombing in London. His duty was to stay with the embassy, not run away.

        Where did Yovanovitch 'alienate' the Ukrainian government? She was fighting corruption, not the other way round.
        It is not on you to say what was the duty of the US ambassador in London during the Blitz . Thousands of LOndoners were evacuated out of London; the Queen Mary was evacuated already in September 1939, thus why not the US ambassador ?
        It is not on Yovanovitch to fight against corruption: she was not the president of Ukraine . The corruption in Ukraine is not the business of the US .
        Every one knows that a big part of the Marshall help for Italy disappeared in the pockets of the Democracia Christiana and its henchmen ,the Mafia . But no one demanded that Italy would fight against corruption . And it was the same in Britain, Belgium, France, Greece, Spain, etc.
        The IG of USAID (an extension of the CIA ) has admitted that 20 % of its budget ended up in the pockets of the politicians of the countries who received this money and in the pockets of the people who work for USAID.
        If you want to prevent corruption in countries who receive US aid, there is only one solution : recolonize them .
        Yovanovitch was the worst of US ambassadors : she made enemies everywhere and when she left, her successor had to clean up everything .
        Do you think that the government of Armenia was satisfied when the US ambassador was telling them how to treat their political opponents ?Her attitude was qualified by a lot of people as racist, colonialist and imperialist .What,if the ambassador of Armenia would attack the Democratic governor of Virginia for his anti gun measures ?
        A good ambassador makes no enemies,but builds a network of acquaintances,to promote the interests of his country and he NEVER,NEVER intervenes in the domestic problems of the country where he is ambassador .
        Yovanovitch disaggreed with the Ukrainian policy of Trump, which is her right, but instead of resigning, she preferred to remain ambassador in Ukraine ,to sabotage the policy of Trump and to continue the policy of Obama/Biden . Something which was illegal,because in January 2017, Obama was no longer president , but Trump was president .

    • #20
      Let's see: One article from the AP, courtesy of ABC; one from NBC; one from the Washington Post; one from The Hill...Would you like more...?

      1.https://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment...orter-68530473

      Secretary of State Mike Pompeo lashed out in anger Saturday at an NPR reporter who accused him of shouting expletives at her after she asked him in an interview about Ukraine. In a direct and personal attack, America's chief diplomat said the journalist had “lied” to him and he called her conduct “shameful.”

      NPR said it stood by Mary Louise Kelly's reporting.

      Pompeo claimed in a statement that the incident was “another example of how unhinged the media has become in its quest to hurt” President Donald Trump and his administration. Pompeo, a former CIA director and Republican congressman from Kansas who is one of Trump's closest allies in the Cabinet, asserted, "It is no wonder that the American people distrust many in the media when they so consistently demonstrate their agenda and their absence of integrity.”

      It is extraordinary for a secretary of state to make such a personal attack on a journalist, but he is following the lead of Trump, who has repeatedly derided what he calls “fake news” and ridiculed individual reporters. In one of the more memorable instances, Trump mocked a New York Times reporter with a physical disability.

      2.https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/pol...meful-n1122881

      Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Saturday attacked an NPR correspondent who reported that he berated and cursed at her following questioning over Ukraine, claiming “she lied to me” and describing her actions as “shameful.”

      “NPR reporter Mary Louise Kelly lied to me, twice. First, last month, in setting up our interview and, then again yesterday, in agreeing to have our post-interview conversation off the record,” Pompeo said in a statement. “It is shameful that this reporter chose to violate the basic rules of journalism and decency.”

      Pompeo did not challenge the details of Kelly's claims about his statements or demeanor during their conversation.

      NPR correspondent Mary Louise Kelly said Pompeo cut off their interview when she pressed him on why he has not defended former Ambassador to Ukraine Marie Yovanovitch, who is at the center of President Donald Trump’s impeachment. During her testimony before House impeachment investigators in November, Yovanovitch said she had felt threatened by Trump and his allies. Trump removed Yovanovitch as ambassador last year.

      3.https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...orter-ukraine/

      Secretary of State Mike Pompeo launched into a profanity-laced rant against an NPR reporter after an interview, the news organization says, apparently frustrated by questions he had been asked about Ukraine and former U.S. ambassador Marie Yovanovitch.

      During an interview with NPR’s Mary Louise Kelly that aired Friday, Pompeo refused to say whether he owed an apology to Yovanovitch, whose firing has featured prominently in President Trump’s impeachment inquiry. An aide ended the interview after Kelly pressed Pompeo for a response.

      Kelly recounted what happened next in a report that accompanied her interview. She said a staffer brought her to Pompeo’s private sitting room, where he was waiting for her. Even though she was not allowed to bring her recording equipment into the room, she said there was no request that she keep the exchange off the record, and she would not have agreed to a conversation if it was off the record.

      4.https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...d-ukraine-on-a

      Secretary of State Mike Pompeo reportedly lashed out at a reporter for NPR after an interview in which he was questioned about Ukraine and issues that are at the center of the impeachment trial against President Trump.

      NPR's Mary Louise Kelly said during a segment on "All Things Considered" on Friday that Pompeo forcefully questioned whether Americans care about Ukraine and if the veteran journalist — who had recently returned from reporting in Iran — could find the former soviet country on a map.

      “He asked, ‘Do you think Americans care about Ukraine?’ He used the F-word in that sentence and many others,” Kelly told her co-host Ari Shapiro, according to a transcript of the program.


      We are not now that strength which in old days
      Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
      Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
      To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

      Comment


      • T. A. Gardner
        T. A. Gardner commented
        Editing a comment
        I like that the Republicans have finally found some spine to stand up to weasel mouthed "journalists" intent on gotcha questions and thinking that their $h!+ don't stink. About time those Progressive, Leftist, Liberal whinny @$$ed pencil necks got told to shove off in no uncertain terms. Maybe they'll figure out that they need to be more objective in their reporting if they truly want some respect.

      • Salinator
        Salinator commented
        Editing a comment
        She got Pompeo to consent to the interview by saying it was about Bangladesh, and agreed to no questions regarding Ukraine. Seems fair because of the House impeachment at the time and now the Senate trial, AND not to have talk about comments afterwards. She lied twice.

        Just more TDS.

    • #21
      https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/25/polit...ies/index.html


      The Veterans of Foreign Wars is demanding that President Donald Trump apologize for downplaying traumatic brain injuries sustained by US service members in Iraq after Iranian missile strikes on American troops earlier this month.


      Earlier this week, Trump said he does not consider potential traumatic brain injuries to be as serious as physical combat wounds, minimizing the severity of the injuries, saying he heard that some troops "had headaches, and a couple of other things, but I would say, and I can report, it's not very serious."

      "The VFW expects an apology from the President to our service men and women for his misguided remarks," William "Doc" Schmitz, VFW National Commander, said in a statement Friday, following the Pentagon's announcement that 34 US service members have been diagnosed with traumatic brain injuries in the January 8 Iranian attack.

      "And, we ask that he and the White House join with us in our efforts to educate Americans of the dangers TBI has on these heroes as they protect our great nation in these trying times. Our warriors require our full support more than ever in this challenging environment," Schmitz added.
      The VFW, described on its website as America's largest and oldest combat veterans service organization, said TBI is a "serious injury and one that cannot be taken lightly."

      On Friday, the Pentagon announced that 34 US service members have been diagnosed with traumatic brain injuries in the January 8 attack, which was in retaliation for the January 2 US drone strike that killed a top Iranian general.
      Of the 34 service members, 17 of those who were injured have since returned to duty in Iraq.
      Nine service members are still being treated in Germany. An additional eight service members who had been flown to Germany have since been sent to the United States for additional treatment.

      We are not now that strength which in old days
      Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
      Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
      To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

      Comment


      • T. A. Gardner
        T. A. Gardner commented
        Editing a comment
        It couldn't have been all that "traumatic" if half have returned to duty in roughly two weeks. CNN is overplaying the issue.

    • #22
      What about the other 17? Looks to me like you're downplaying it-just like Trump.
      We are not now that strength which in old days
      Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
      Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
      To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by Massena View Post
        What about the other 17? Looks to me like you're downplaying it-just like Trump.
        Don't know. I doubt any of them suffered more than a mild injuries due to blast. Certainly none of them were hit with shrapnel or otherwise seriously wounded.

        Oh, and you're overplaying it-just like the MSM.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by Massena View Post
          What about the other 17? Looks to me like you're downplaying it-just like Trump.
          And what is your point? Orangeman not revealing Battle Damage to the Enemy?
          Trying hard to be the Man, that my Dog believes I am!

          Comment


          • #25
            This was a surprise this evening:

            https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=spartandhp
            President Trump told his national security adviser in August that he wanted to continue freezing $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine until officials there helped with investigations into Democrats including the Bidens, according to an unpublished manuscript by the former adviser, John R. Bolton.

            The president’s statement as described by Mr. Bolton could undercut a key element of his impeachment defense: that the holdup in aid was separate from Mr. Trump’s requests that Ukraine announce investigations into his perceived enemies, including former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son Hunter Biden, who had worked for a Ukrainian energy firm while his father was in office.


            Mr. Bolton’s explosive account of the matter at the center of Mr. Trump’s impeachment trial, the third in American history, was included in drafts of a manuscript he has circulated in recent weeks to close associates. He also sent a draft to the White House for a standard review process for some current and former administration officials who write books.
            Multiple people described Mr. Bolton’s account of the Ukraine affair.

            The book presents an outline of what Mr. Bolton might testify to if he is called as a witness in the Senate impeachment trial, the people said. The White House could use the pre-publication review process, which has no set time frame, to delay or even kill the book’s publication or omit key passages.

            Over dozens of pages, Mr. Bolton described how the Ukraine affair unfolded over several months until he departed the White House in September. He described not only the president’s private disparagement of Ukraine but also new details about senior cabinet officials who have publicly tried to sidestep involvement.

            For example, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo acknowledged privately that there was no basis to claims by the president’s lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani that the ambassador to Ukraine was corrupt and believed Mr. Giuliani may have been acting on behalf of other clients, Mr. Bolton wrote.

            Mr. Bolton also said that after the president’s July phone call with the president of Ukraine, he raised with Attorney General William P. Barr his concerns about Mr. Giuliani, who was pursuing a shadow Ukraine policy encouraged by the president, and told Mr. Barr that the president had mentioned him on the call. A spokeswoman for Mr. Barr denied that he learned of the call from Mr. Bolton; the Justice Department has said he learned about it only in mid-August.

            And the acting White House chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, was present for at least one phone call where the president and Mr. Giuliani discussed the ambassador, Mr. Bolton wrote. Mr. Mulvaney has told associates he would always step away when the president spoke with his lawyer to protect their attorney-client privilege.

            During a previously reported May 23 meeting where top advisers and Senator Ron Johnson, Republican of Wisconsin, briefed him about their trip to Kyiv for the inauguration of President Volodymyr Zelensky, Mr. Trump railed about Ukraine trying to damage him and mentioned a conspiracy theory about a hacked Democratic server, according to Mr. Bolton.

            Charles J. Cooper, a lawyer for Mr. Bolton, declined to comment. The White House did not provide responses to questions about Mr. Bolton’s assertions, and representatives for Mr. Johnson, Mr. Pompeo and Mr. Mulvaney did not respond to emails and calls seeking comment on Sunday afternoon.

            Mr. Bolton’s submission of the book to the White House may have given the White House lawyers direct insight into what Mr. Bolton would say if he were called to testify at Mr. Trump’s impeachment trial. It also intensified concerns among some of his advisers that they needed to block Mr. Bolton from testifying, according to two people familiar with their concerns.

            The White House has ordered Mr. Bolton and other key officials with firsthand knowledge of Mr. Trump’s dealings not to cooperate with the impeachment inquiry. Mr. Bolton said in a statement this month that he would testify if subpoenaed.
            We are not now that strength which in old days
            Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
            Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
            To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

              Don't know. I doubt any of them suffered more than a mild injuries due to blast. Certainly none of them were hit with shrapnel or otherwise seriously wounded.

              Oh, and you're overplaying it-just like the MSM.
              You don't think that incurring a brain injury is serious? Have you ever had a concussion?
              We are not now that strength which in old days
              Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
              Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
              To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by Massena View Post

                You don't think that incurring a brain injury is serious? Have you ever had a concussion?
                Depends. Could be, might be minor too. Neither of us truly knows, but I tend to err towards the MSM is making an over-blown case because they (and you) hate Trump, and the military is being over-cautious from the medical end.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post

                  Depends. Could be, might be minor too. Neither of us truly knows, but I tend to err towards the MSM is making an over-blown case because they (and you) hate Trump, and the military is being over-cautious from the medical end.
                  Maybe the MSM should go after Trump for not talking about the NFL concussion protocol.

                  "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    That isn't because of enemy action, now is it?

                    So now you're mocking troops wounded in combat?
                    We are not now that strength which in old days
                    Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                    Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                    To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by Massena View Post
                      That isn't because of enemy action, now is it?

                      So now you're mocking troops wounded in combat?
                      How am I mocking troops wounded in combat?
                      "I don't discuss sitting presidents," Mattis tells NPR in an interview. "I believe that you owe a period of quiet."

                      Comment

                      Latest Topics

                      Collapse

                      Working...
                      X