Can you point to one real lie Trump told, with the exact quote and link?

I've found that a good percentage of the alleged lies provided were taken from Politifact (or as I call them, PolitiFake). So far I haven't had any trouble taking them apart to reveal their mischievous misdirection. Essentially they are just naughty kids lying about Trump, using cheap schoolyard tricks. It appears that none of the so called "Trump lies" they have published are lies at all. Instead they are the usual list:

1. Opinions
2. Misquotes
3. Mischievous editing (Fake News)
4. Mischievous grammar changing (Fake News)
5. Mischievous reporting of only part of the story (out of context Fake News)
6. Mischievous and deliberate reporting of his opinions, to change them (Fake News)
7. Jokes (Wow, she’s a real cow!)
8. Joking exaggerations (I could hit this ball to the moon!)
9. Innocent mistakes (gets a name or a date wrong)
10. English nuances (using “know” in a certain way millennials don’t understand).
11. Age nuances (talking the way his generation did that is no longer P.C.)
12. Locker room or bar room talk (as in on Howard Stern show)
13. Protection (taking the heat for someone else’s mistake)
14. Innovation (saying stuff stupid people don’t understand)
15. Military intelligence (saying stuff nobody knows but him)
16. High-end business (saying Mexico will pay, which the masses can’t understand)
17. Getting to the point (cutting out the red tape by summing up stuff as a business would)
18. And others.

 

I see lol

 

I covered that. There are plenty of important but stupid people, and the media have a technique they’ve used very successfully with them for years. As an example you can look at the way they handle Scientologists. The technique is as follows:

1. Calmly interview stupid person
2. Let the stupid person do most of the talking
3. Put that out there and sit back.

The pubic soon see that Mr Scientology is an idiot. There’s no need to harp on about them being stupid 24 hours a day. Their stupidity is apparent every time they talk. We get it. You let them do most of the work.

On the other hand, how would you handle a political enemy who is strong enough to undo all the Marxist crap you’ve been supporting for decades? He is rich, scrupulously honest, highly intelligent, courageous, innovative and fearless. The technique is as follows:

1. Accuse him of lying endlessly
2. Falsify his words using misquotes, mischievous misdirection, misinformation, etc.
3. Pay bimbos to accuse him of sexual assault and being a pervert
4. Make up stories and say they come from “anonymous sources”.
5. Pay and bus in demonstrators to disrupt his rallies and demonstrate on the street
6. Create conspiracy theories (nothingburgers) about any wild eyed idea
7. Tie his staff up in court for any hare-brained reason
8. Work hard to have him impeached even without good cause
9. Oppose him on everything he stands for
10. Rarely if ever mention any of his accomplishments
11. Describe his accomplishments as failures
12. Denounce him as a criminal, a pervert, a liar and encourage his assassination

That’s a lot of work. Fake News is at it 24/7/365 in conjunction with the Democrats.

 

In other words, they don't buy into the insane conspiracy theories you do and just base things in the facef as they present themselves without excessive imagination. Got it. I was worried you had something.

 

Lol that is a LOT of work. An insane amount really, and it would be pretty much impossible to keep under wraps. It would require these lizard people to coordinate thousands and thousands of people and some aspect of essentially every organization in this country you think is so horrible to work miracles in secret. Or... One amoral idiot is exactly as corrupt and dishonest as he and a handful of incompetent corrupt lackeys have been shown to be. I'm on the fence as to which one is more likely.

 

An article in the Huffington Post by Christina Wilkie, 14 Sept., 2016, a month and 25 days after Trump became the Republican nominee. The headline reads:

"Donald Trump's Brag That He Owned The Tallest Building After 9/11 Wasn't Even True"​

Christina Wilkie writes [bold emphasis and red comments mine]:

Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has been widely criticized for bragging, after the collapse of the twin towers on Sept. 11, 2001, that his building at 40 Wall Street was now the tallest skyscraper in lower Manhattan.

Not only was Trump’s boast despicable, coming as it did just hours after nearly 3,000 people lost their lives ― it was also a lie, according to architectural reports reviewed by The Huffington Post. [Christina probably means reviewed by her]

Trump’s building at 40 Wall Street did not become the tallest building in lower Manhattan after Sept. 11, as Trump claimed in a radio interview with WWOR on the afternoon of the attacks.

Immediately after 9/11, 70 Pine Street, which soars 952 feet into the air, became the tallest building in the area, according to the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, an academic and industry working group.
​

She included a photo of the 70 Pine St. building, but it no longer works – so, no photo. Under the non-existent photo of 70 Pine Street there is a description. It says, in a tiny gray font, “The spire of 70 Pine Street, center, rises above neighboring structures -- including the Trump Building -- in New York's financial district on March 18, 2009.”

Ohh… the spire rises above the Trump building. From Wikipedia’s list of tallest NY buildings page:

30th-tallest in the United States; was world's tallest building for less than two months in 1930; formerly known as the Bank of Manhattan Trust Building; currently known as the Trump Building, a more permanent name is 40 Wall Street. Was the Tallest building in New York City before being surpassed by the Chrysler Building. Was the tallest mid-block building in the city from 1930 until the completion of One57 in 2014.

​

If you take the spire out of the equation it was the tallest building in lower Manhattan after the twin towers came down. Since she did the research on this, surely Christina Wilkie must have known. Did she mention this, for balance?

Nah. That might make Trump look more reasonable. She would rather make him look like a big fat liar. At this time we should look at the actual interview, video and transcript, which you can see here. It was a long interview, and this is only a small part [emphasis mine]:

Interview: Donald Trump Interviewed on WWOR - 9/11 - September 11, 2001

Unidentified man: We are having some technical difficulties which is totally understandable when you try to do an ad hoc reporting and getting information to you as fast as we possibly can and making sure that it's accurate at the same time.

Unidentified woman: Donald Trump is on the line, and we know him as the man behind lots of real estate in Manhattan and of course, Donald, I understand you were actually a witness to what happened this morning

Trump: Well, I have a window that looks directly at the World Trade Center and I saw this huge explosion. I was with a group of people and I really couldn't even believe it and even I think worse than, that for years, I've looked right directly at the building. I see the Empire State Building in the foreground and the World Trade Center in the background, and now I'm looking at absolutely nothing. It's just gone. And it's just hard to believe.

Alan Moore: Donald, Alan Moore is here. Your building is, uh, Trump Tower is uh, one of the great tourist attractions in the world. It's well known universally. Are you taking any precautions there in light of what happened at the World Trade Center?

Trump: Well, Alan we've always had as you know very, very strong security but there's very little you can do about planes crashing into a building. I mean you look at Larry Silverstein is a terrific owner in New York and a very good friend of mine who I just called I was very worried about him because I know so maybe he was in the building he took possession of the building one week ago. As you know he just bought the World Trade Center. He was in his office that he was getting ready to move into the World Trade Center over the next two weeks. I just spoke to him. There's nothing you can do when people are going to be bombing planes at you're building. Well, I guess maybe the world is going to be changing and maybe you can have F16s flying all over the city, etc., but it's a pretty tough situation.

Alan Moore: Donald, you have one of the landmark buildings down in the financial district, 40 Wall Street. Did you have any damage or did you know what's happened down there?

Trump: Well, it was an amazing phone call I made - 40 Wall Street actually was the second tallest building in downtown Manhattan, and it was actually before the World Trade Center, was the tallest. And then when they built the World Trade Center it became known as the second tallest, and now it's the tallest. And I just spoke to my people and they said it's the most unbelievable site. It's probably seven or eight blocks away from the World Trade Center and yet Wall Street is littered with two feet of stone and brick and mortar and steel. And there are thousands of people walking over the debris over the Brooklyn Bridge where they're sending them out over the Brooklyn Bridge to Brooklyn. And then I guess they're going to have to figure out how to get home from there, but they have between a foot and two feet of debris right in front of a building, that's probably you would say Allan, six or seven blocks away.

[interview continues…]

​

You can see the different skyscrapers in Lower Manhattan here. Here is a graphic that shows the difference between 70 Vine St. and 40 Wall St.

​

Wall St. is 927' tall. Vine St. is 952’ tall - 25’ taller. We see here that the spire on 70 Pine is 100’ tall. The spire on 70 Wall St. is much shorter. Probably 30’ when you look at this grab from a video of its construction:

​

When both spires are removed, and you only measure the buildings themselves, 70 Pine is just 852’ and 40 Wall St. is 897’, which is 45’ higher. Back in the days when people started using spires to make their buildings bigger, there was a lot of controversy and argument. Many believed the spires should not be included. Trump was probably one of those since he doesn’t like spires.

​

When Trump stood at the top of 40 Wall Street, he would be aware that he was higher than 70 Vine, not just because he does not include the spire, but because his building is also higher up on the ground. Go here to see a very useful topographic map. Place the address in the address box. First 40 Wall St. Lower Manhattan, New York, NY and then 70 Pine St., Lower Manhattan, New York. Set the water level at 0.

The results are: 40 Wall St. = 9 meters above sea level. 70 Pine St. = 4 meters above sea level. This means Trump’s building is 5 meters (16.4' feet) higher than 70 Pine Street.

Floods are very important in Manhattan, as parts of the city are 5’ below sea level. This effects a building’s price. If you can get up higher than the rest you would consider yourself to be higher, and indeed you would be. Adding these two factors, in Trump’s mind 40 Wall St. would be 61.4’ higher than 70 Pine St.

​

Summary
On the day of 9-11 Trump was a traumatized man. He was afraid his good friend might be dead. He witnessed a terrible tragedy firsthand, just down the road from him. He witnessed two of New York’s finest skyscrapers collapsing after a terrorist attack and knew there were thousands dead. He also had to go on, showing no fear and encouraging others. He did radio interviews.

He was asked by the radio commentator, “Donald, you have one of the landmark buildings down in the financial district, 40 Wall Street. Did you have any damage or did you know what's happened down there?”

Did Christina Wilkie mention that the radio guy asked Trump? Did she point out that Trump didn’t bring this up, the DJ did?

What’s Trump supposed to say? He’s supposed to be interesting for the radio’s listeners. At the same time, he’s shaken up by the terrible events of the day. Would he respond perfectly under the circumstances? Who would? In his case, he did the best he could and said a few things about 40 Wall St.

One thing was that it was the tallest building before the Twin Towers were built, and now it would be the tallest again. We can laugh and say he should not have said that, and he himself no doubt realized as soon as he said it. People make minor mistakes when terrible things like 9-11 happen and they’re put on the spot on live radio. How would you have responded?

Christina Wilkie comes along 15 years later, just after Trump becomes the Republican nominee, to call him a despicable, boasting liar. Surely not to influence the election, nah. Surely not for purely political reasons, nah. Not because she is Fake News. Surely not. So who is Christina Wilkie?

​

She has a Bachelor of Arts! Yippee! She must know a lot about New York skyscrapers! More than any stupid billionaire skyscraper developer!

Once again, no lie. Just a pathetic beat-up by desperate Fake News knuckleheads.

 

So, poor donnie, so distraught he couldn't be expected to self aggrandize accurately. Still wrong though. Ok, we'll put that one in the stupid category. See? we're up to 5 and so far we've moved 2.5 from liar to stupid. That's a .500 batting average which is pretty good, you should be proud.

Ok, how about this:

 

You’re thinking of twerps like Clinton or Obama, who think very highly of themselves and exaggerate their importance no end. Trump tells the truth about himself as modestly as one can in the circumstances, and it’s a good thing he does when you consider the tsunami of Fake News he has to combat.

Not really. His building was the tallest if you take the fake spire out of the equation and especially when you add elevation. Even if you impanel a board of architects to declare him wrong, it’s still not a lie, and nor is it stupid. Stand on the top of 70 Vine, and let Trump stand on the roof of 40 Wall st., and stretch a string between you. The string will go from you to Trump going upwards. Then tell me he’s not higher than you. Of course you could always shimmy up the spire with Christina Wilkie, at which point maybe the string will go downwards, and you can blow raspberries at Trump.

I’ll put it into the “Trump knows more about New York skyscrapers than Christina Wilkie” category.

This is a common occurrence in political parties. Trump was forced by his own administration to say he meant ‘wouldn’t’ instead of ‘would’. When a man is ordered to say something he doesn’t want to say, any intent to deceive is not his, but those who do the ordering. All POTUS’ find themselves in this position from time to time – that’s politics, especially in regard to global adversaries and diplomatic relations with them. Trump doesn’t run the GOP, and when they insist he does something he will have to bend to their wishes. Now, before you call the GOP liars for this, as I said, many mistruths are told by political parties regarding their global enemies – that’s politics, war and life in general. We don’t sum it up as “lying”. It’s called politics and world diplomatic relations.

Regarding force, here is the definition.

Force

coercion or compulsion, especially with the use or threat of violence.

"they ruled by law and not by force"

synonyms: coercion, compulsion, constraint, duress, oppression, harassment, intimidation, threats; informal arm-twisting, bullying tactics

"they used force to achieve their aims"

Trump was coerced by the GOP, the FBI, his advisors and various other organizations to change the word for the sake of American/Russian relations and many other complex issues way out of most civilians’ league. If Trump is forced to change a word you may look for the intent to deceive from those doing the forcing. So no, that is not a “lie”.

 

Sure, you can add many other groups. I didn’t say it was unique to them. Just because they cheered doesn’t mean they’re the only ones.

That’s incorrect.

They weren’t cheering all day. A building collapses and a crowd cheers. Is that hard to understand?

There wouldn’t be too many people recording the boring Arab news.

Sure, as if he’s going to have 300 TV channels memorized. He just goes through them like everyone else when looking for a local event on the news.

I see your logic. Why would Muslim reporters want to cover the story of the century as it unfolds in front of their own eyes. I can see it now.

Scene: Multicultural TV station. News dept.

Abdul (manager): So, what’s happening?
Mohammad: The Twin Towers are under attack by terrorists!
Abdul: They are? Why didn’t you wake me you idiot?
Mohammad: Sorry…
Abdul: What’s going on?
Mohammad: One tower has collapsed. Both were hit by jumbo jets.
Abdul: [looking out window] By Allah, you’re right!
Mohammad: So, what do you want me to do?
Abdul: I dunno. Why don’t you take the film crew and do a story on that new Art and Craft market?
Mohammad: You what?
Abdul: Should be interesting, don’t you think?
Mohammad: You don’t want me to get out there and report on the Twin Towers?
Abdul: Oh that, nah. We can’t do that.
Mohammad: Why in Allah’s name not?
Abdul: Cos anonymous username Etbauer says it would never happen.
Mohammad: Who?
Abdul: This anonymous guy on a political debate board.
Mohammad: Are you feeling okay Abdul? Maybe you need a longer rest.
Abdul: No, I’m fine. Go cover the Art and Craft show.
Mohammad: Sure boss. Whatever you say. Come on, guys.
Abdul: See you when you get back.
Mohammad: Sure. [they leave]
Sam: What now?
Mohammad: Let’s get down to the Arab market. We can set up there and I’ll start reporting on the towers.
Sam: But Abdul said…
Mohammad: Abdul is losing his marbles. Come on, let’s go. This is the biggest story ever.​

In English we use the words ‘large crowd’ when describing thousands of people. Large crowds are common. You can see them in any popular marketplace. Would you like another film to illustrate?

Plenty of Arab housewives would have seen it while they ironed in front of the TV. If you think they’re going to run off to discuss it with 60 Minutes I have a bridge in San Francisco you might be interested in.

It happened because it was reported by a number of people, including Trump.

Arab housewives seeing Arabs rejoicing may have been happy, sad, angry or outraged, though I doubt the last two. Regardless, they would never go and blab about it on TV. Liberal TV would not want to interview them about even if they did.

The Democrats and Fake News are devoted to keeping any critical commentary about blacks, Arabs or any other minorities off their pages and screens. If ten black men loot a store the headline will read ‘Ten men loot a store’. You know it, I know it and the blacks know it.

 

It's not under wraps nowadays. It was, from the cold war until just recently. Now they've opened up and readily admit what they're doing. Look at Fake News any time and you'll see them slaving away all day and night to pillory Trump. It's all they do.

They do.

That's not necessary, though there are unions. The Left own education and most government entities.

America is a great country. It's been attacked from within and without by Socialists. A great man with cancer is still a great man.
​

Remember that while people often describe being on the fence a peaceful thing, it can actually be fraught with danger. Like sitting on a prison wall. One side is incarceration; the other freedom. Nonetheless, it's the swing voters we depend on at the end of the day. If they move Left, we're wrecked. If they move right, we win.

​

 

Al: Oooooohh man, a uge swing and miss. Boy you hate to see that bob, he swung for the fences missed entirely and still managed to force a double play... painful.

Bob: Right you are al. He was in an indefensible position, however, he could have choked up and gone for the 'he really did mean wouldn't' defense.

Al: Exactly, it's a patently ridiculous answer, but the one he gave is so outrageous that it requires entire universes to be made up inside of your imagination to even start to entertain the notion.

Bob: Not to mention, entire universes who's only evidence for existence is the players overwhelming wish that reality conform to his emotional beliefs.

Al: Solid point bob, no basis even remotely in reality. As we watch the playback in slow motion, we can see that even if this dreamworld were true, this would still be a lie.

Bob: Yup yup... and right there we see that not only that, the lizard people that run the country would have to be smart enough to coordinate MASSIVE conspiracies throughout the country and world, yet so mindblowingly stupid that they thought this 'retraction' would ever been seen as anything but a farce... and it also just makes trump look pathetic and weak from all sides al... just.. disappointing.

Al: You bring up another point, and it's going to be a tough call for the refs on the field. While this was very clearly a 'pants on fire' lie of the highest order, it was also historically stupid.

Bob: Right.. what do you do with that? We may see a doubling of the score, one in both columns, it'll be interesting to see what the judges do with it.

Al: One thing's for certain, that was a bad interception off the top rope for a pick 6, and I'll bet he wishes he had that one back.

Bob: What the hell sport are we commenting on here al?

Al: It doesn't matter bob, the player isn't really interested in rules, as long as something is racist and fits the way he wishes the world worked, reality doesn't really play a factor in his decision making.

Bob: Ah! Of course, lets go to the judges and see the updated scoreboard.

Truth | Stooopid | Lies | Stoooopid lies
0 | 2.5 | 1.5 | 2

Al: There you have it, a good call by the refs to add a further delineation. The way this game is going, I think we may be seeing a lot more of these tough calls.

Bob: Right you are al, I wonder if they have a mercy rule in this sport.

Al: Well, this player's conference doesn't use reality, so let's take a look at the scoreboard from his stands.

Scotsman | Not Scotsman |
0 | 6 |

Bob: And there you have it folks, let's get back to the game, and here's the next pitch:

 

Right, zero evidence....of a very extraordinary claim. Especially since nobody suppressed the celebrations in other countries. Essentially you are saying arab = bad, so any bad claim about them by default is true regardless of how little evidence there is of it... got it.

 

Lol, so... what you are saying is that truth and objective reality is biased against the worldview you wish were true.

Side question, which are you? flat earth or hollow earth?

 

If your skit was meant to illustrate something I’m afraid it fell by the wayside.

This is basically what would have happened:

Scene: President Trump at a desk. The door opens and his secretary enters.

Secretary: Sir, a delegation is here.
Trump: How many?
Secretary: Twenty, sir. Many cabinet members and officials from the FBI.
Trump: Jeez. Twenty? Okay, let them in.
Secretary: Yes sir. [opens the door and twenty people file in, including cabinet members]
Advisor: Sir, the group have come to ask you to make a change in your words yesterday.
Cabinet member: Specifically about what you said regarding Russia.
Trump: Like what?
Advisor: Um, sir, when you said the words, “I don't see any reason why it would be.”
Trump: Why what would be?
Secretary: I think they mean when you were explaining that Putin said it was not Russia, and so you said you didn't see any reason why it would be Russia, that was interfering with elections...”
Trump: Oh that - okay, what about it? It was the truth.
Cabinet member: Sir, it’s causing an uproar. We need to fix this. We have a solution.
Trump: Who cares about uproar? We're in charge, not Fake News.
Cabinet member: Even so, sir, we want this changed.
Trump: Changed to what?
Advisor: They want you to change the “would” to “wouldn’t”, sir.
Cabinet member: Basically you would call a press conference and say, “Yesterday I said 'I don't see any reason why it would be' but I meant to say ‘wouldn’t’, not ‘would’.
Trump: That’s ridiculous. I’d look like a fool. They'd call me a liar. It's crazy. And there's no need...
Advisor: Sir, they are adamant.
Cabinet member: If you refuse sir, we will have to vote against you and you will probably be replaced.
Trump: You'd sack me? Really? What's the matter with you people?
Group: [silent]
Trump: It’s a lie, and everyone will know it’s a lie. And there’s no reason to do that. The whole Russia thing is a nothingburger.
Advisor: Regardless sir, they intend to act on this if you disagree.
Trump: Is that true?
Group: [silent]
Cabinet member: Yes sir. You will most likely be replaced.
Trump: [addressing group] Do you all agree?
Group: [mumbling] Yes...
Cabinet member: I have the wording for you to learn here sir. [hands the POTUS a paper]
Trump: Okay, if that’s what you want. I want to say though that I think it’s a mistake.
Advisor: We understand sir.
Cabinet member: So can we call a press conference for say, half an hour?
Trump: Okay, but the whole thing stinks...
Advisor: Thank you, sir.
Cabinet member: Thank you, sir.

Who lied? The GOP. Why? World Politics. Did Trump lie?

No.
​

Obama’s TV viewers were 19% higher in 2009, but the global TV audience and web audience for the US and the world would have been significantly higher in 2017 than in 2009. During that 8 years, billions of people went online and had access to smartphones, iPads, etc. There is no doubt at all that Trump’s audience was many times as large as Obama’s, and the largest ever for an inauguration. To add to that, Trump has received far more publicity than any other POTUS, and probably any other human since humans first stood up to walk, again, thanks to the internet.

So, once again, no lie. Please do better. You're the one insisting Trump lies a million lies a day. Find one. These are all worn out has-been allegations, not worth a pinch of salt.

 

You have a number of people who saw the cheering, and you’ve seen videos showing them, despite Fake News’ and Democrats best efforts to cover it up. You also have the word of the President of the United States, and commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces.

What’s extraordinary about Muslims cheering Muslims who achieved a major victory in their war against infidels? Jeez – your Marxist English teacher has a lot to answer for.

Nope. I’ve made no such comments. That’s a separate subject to Trump allegedly lying, which is what this thread is about.

Nope. Arabs might be the nicest people in the world as far as this thread is concerned, which is simply a quest to find a real Trump lie. I’ve shown you evidence; people saying they saw and heard Arabs rejoicing the downing of the towers, and you have the POTUS’ testimony too. You have made a choice to not believe those accounts. What you haven’t done is proven a lie that Trump told. Your opinion, that he lied, is an opinion. It is cancelled out by my opinion.

 

​

Lol wait wait lol time out time out. Your contention is that his cabinet forced him to lie?

 

No.
Members of the cabinet. And the FBI. And others. When you say 'members of' Lefties always hear 'all'. They have a problem with the word 'all'.

 

Lol, and why did they force him to lie?

 

Remember, when you force a person to lie, it is you lying, not them. So did the GOP lie, therefore? When nations tell these kinds of “lies” they are not described as lies but as diplomatic relations. Since that is the case, nobody “lied”. They merely used diplomacy.

Why did they force Trump to carry out that diplomatic exercise? Because they can’t see the big picture the way Trump can. They honestly believed it was a mistake, and that it would damage the GOP in the upcoming midterm elections. They can’t afford to lose the Senate. In my opinion (and Trump’s) they were wrong. He was right. There was no need to humor Fake News by changing the word.

Unfortunately, some of the baby boomers in that group cannot bring themselves to believe that all the poutrage is fake. They were brought up listening to fake news since the 70’s and have a long habit of believing liberal myths, like Nixon’s being evil, and so on. They haven’t learned just how fake Fake News is. So that mountain of angst and poutrage had its effect on them.

It would have been a very bitter pill for Trump that day, having to change that word to humor the fools he’s surrounded by. Hey – I said they were ‘fools’, not that they were ‘all fools’.

 

Still a lie.

Why is he surrounded by any fools

 

Then all Kings, Queens, Presidents and Prime Ministers are liars according to you, and all global diplomatic political actions are lies, and all international relationships and agreements are lies. Self-defense, avoiding nuclear war and saving millions of lives is all just lying. We don't need to use so many adjectives now; just replace them all with the word lie. Obama was just the chief liar, as was Clinton, the United Nations are just the United Liars, and so on. When your POTUS meets a tyrant like Kim Jong-un, he should not say, "You are very kind," because that's lying; he should say, "You are a cold-blooded tyrant," which is true. That will make the world so much safer. Good luck with that.

Even the mafia, with all their expertise on routing out undercover agents, had undercover agents in their ranks. Trump isn't a mafioso or a private eye. He's a businessman. Maybe you think the guy is Superman, but even he can sometimes be conned by experts. A person convinces Trump he's loyal and Trump gives him a shot. Sometimes the guy turns out to be disloyal. Jefferson Beauregard Sessions III is a perfect example.

 

Well, first of all, of course they are all liars, just not anywhere near as much as trump. Plus you wouldn't be able to find any lies that obama told. And this was just a blatant lie, and stupid, but we can talk about that later.

... he kinda is..

not really

lol, suddenly he's not superhuman?

You mean sessions because he 1) won't abuse his power in the most egregious way possible? or 2) because he tortures small children?

What about omarossa?

 

“I am going to release my tax returns very soon... and they’re gonna be beautiful.” that was 20 months ago. still haven’t seen them.

“I’mgoing to build a wall and make mexico pay for it... and it’s gonna be beautiful.”

 

From what you’ve told us it’s clear you would put your ideas about “being honest” way before the lives of millions. When you are older you may learn that when a man says, “You are very kind,” to a mass murderer to prevent war and save millions of lives, it isn’t a “lie”. It’s an essential protocol. A little schoolkid might think it’s a lie because school kiddies don’t understand international politics, war diplomacy or criminal psychology. Trump’s been dealing with corrupt politicians, thuggish unions and the Mafia all his life, so Kim Jong-un isn’t difficult.

I knew a young man who worked in the tax department. He had a very naïve idea of honesty. He swore he would never tell a lie under ANY circumstances, which made me laugh. He said, “I wouldn’t, no matter what!”
I said, “Really? Then imagine the following hypothetical, assuming all its parameters are correct, with no other relevant considerations necessary, and answer without evasion. Let’s say you came across a crazy and ugly alien from another galaxy, with a bomb that could annihilate the universe. For whatever reason, he would detonate it unless you told a relatively harmless lie. He wanted to know if you thought he was handsome. If you said yes, he would destroy the bomb and go away. If you said no he would blow the universe up. Nobody would ever know about the event, and there would be no further consequences since he would die a few minutes later of natural causes. In short, you have no reason to tell the truth and every reason to “lie”. What would you do?”

Without hesitating, he said, “I’d tell him he was ugly.”

Needless to say, he never left the tax department.

 

Here’s both:

TAXES

In 2016 during his debate with Hillary Clinton, Trump stated that he had been audited by the IRS for 15 years, and that they audited him every year, and that as long as they were still auditing he would not release his tax returns, but he said he would go against his lawyer’s orders and release them IF Hillary released the 33,000 emails she destroyed. The YouTube for that is here.

Trump said in 2014 that he will produce them, which no doubt he eventually will. There is no mention of when. If I rang my cousin in England and asked him when he would be coming to visit again, he might say, “If I decide to sell my business, I'll come for a visit, absolutely. And I would love to do that." Let’s say a year later I learned that he sold his business, and a year after that he still hadn’t visited. Would I call him a liar? He would say, “I said I would visit if I sold my business, but I didn’t say when…”
“But I thought you meant immediately after you sold the business.”
“Well I didn’t mean immediately,” he’d say, “And I resent being called a liar!”

Thanks for trying though, and I’m sorry for your frustration – I was frustrated myself when looking for a genuine Trump lie. It can be very annoying when millions of people believe something and it turns out to be a myth. Then again, should we be surprised? People have believed millions of myths through the ages. Millions of Germans believed National Socialists. Millions believed that Zeus was the king of the sky. Millions believed that blood-letting prevented or cured diseases. Millions of others believed in witches, voodoo magic, ghosts and so on. Why be surprised that millions believe this particular myth and are wrong? Being wrong is something humans commonly do.

WALL

Trump didn't put a time limit on when the wall would be built, and he didn't say when Mexico would pay. Meanwhile, religious Lefties are very patient with other promises. They've been waiting two millennia for Christ’s second coming. They wouldn’t wait a few years for Trump’s wall or for the Mexican money that will pay for it.

Priest: Never mind my daughter. One day we will all be brought to heaven.
María: But when, Padre? When?
Priest: Patience my dear. When the Second Coming is here, you will know…
María: It’s been more than 2000 years Padre!
Priest: Eez true, but Christ said he will come, so he will come...
María: Sí Padre. I just get so hungry…
Priest: I know, I know. So, any news on Trump’s wall?
María: Ay caramba! He said last week he will build it.
Priest: So where is it? ¡Que ridículo! ¡Que estúpido!
María: Sí, está loco. ¡Una idiota! There eez no wall. The hombre eez a liar!
Priest: Ju didn’t vote for heem I hope?
María: Of course not, Padre. I vote for Cleenton. Ten times.
Priest: Hokay. Next time vote twenty times.
María: Sí.

Ah well… the religious Left. What can you do?

As Trump himself explained before the election, you sometimes make debtors pay later. In this case, Mexico refuses to pay, so Trump will have to use taxes or some other mechanism to force payment from them. In the meantime, there are many who will try and stop him doing that, including Democrats, Republicans and Fake News. If they succeed, and he is blocked, his promise was still an honest one. It doesn’t magically become a “lie” because the Left sabotage his plans.