ajvol01
GBO!
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2009
- Messages
- 25,405
- Likes
- 29,972
Mark Felt was not their only anonymous source. In fact, all of their sources were anonymous in the first year of that entire investigation and reporting except for one brave soul. The only person who would go on record about the Watergate break-in and it's possible ties to the White House was a man named Hugh Sloan. He was treasurer of the Committee to Re-elect the President and had served as an aid to Bob Haldeman.
Except that they really aren't. Fox News released polls yesterday showing Biden with a lead in every state that he needs to win - Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan and Florida... and even with a lead in states that he doesn't need to win - North Carolina and Arizona.Bidens poll numbers are falling. Heās suffering from bouts of Dementia. They gotta start pulling out the stops
It's just a guess, but I think he was a source for this story. That's why I want to read a denial from him. Kelly had a son die in a war. He is not going to sit still and listen to the President say something like this. I certainly find him more credible than Sarah Huckabee Sanders and Dan Scavino. Sanders was caught in several lies as White House Press Secretary. Good lord.
Why is that? If he didn't hear it, why not say so? He should issue a denial like others have.
- He was Trump's Chief of Staff at the time.Im still trying to follow the line of thought.
- General Kelly had a son die in war.
- He wouldn't sit still and listen to the president say something like this.
- The alleged comments are from 2018
- He was Trump's Chief of Staff at the time.
- He was on this trip in question.
- It makes sense that he would issue a denial, if he didn't hear it.
- And wouldn't the Chief of Staff be one of the first people who would be contacted to either confirm or deny this story? I would think so, and it is odd that he hasn't said a word yet. Maybe he will soon?
I don't know. I would just expect to see a denial from Kelly, if he didn't hear it. He was in a position to know if this was said. He was there. That is the one person who would immediately convince me that this didn't happen, and I don't think I'm alone in feeling that way. I just want to read a denial from him. Hopefully, he will say something and put this to bed soon.I think the comments that were supposedly made about Kelly's son were in May 2018 and you want us to believe a man like Kelly continued to work for Trump until Jan 2019?
Of course he said it, none of this is out of character for Trump. Trump's been insulting veterans and military personnel for years. John McCain, The Khan family, Alexander Vindman, La David Johnson. This article is no different.
I don't know. I would just expect to see a denial from Kelly, if he didn't hear it. He was in a position to know if this was said. He was there. That is the one person who would immediately convince me that this didn't happen, and I don't think I'm alone in feeling that way. I just want to read a denial from him. Hopefully, he will say something and put this to bed soon.
Problem is that is not what happens. The government takes more and more and doesnāt actually help anyone and the money is wasted on things like diversity training and studying cow farts for climate changeWhy donāt you want all Americans to have health coverage? Why arenāt you willing to pay more in tax to help your fellow citizens also prosper? Why are you only looking out for yourself rather than your fellow man as well?
Also you canāt privatize government entities. Thatās fundamentally not how government works
One more edit: unions helped build this country into what it is today. With strong unions also came the large middle class. Why are you anti union? Many European countries with higher standards of living than the US have strong labor unions.
FWIW my household also benefits from republican monetary policies. However Iām willing to pay more to help ensure a better future for others
Of course he said it, none of this is out of character for Trump. Trump's been insulting veterans and military personnel for years. John McCain, The Khan family, Alexander Vindman, La David Johnson. This article is no different.
Wouldn't the Chief of Staff at the time be one of the first people a journalist would reach out to in effort to confirm this story? I can only assume that John Kelly's phone has been blowing up today, and we don't have a comment from him... at least not yet. That is why he stands out to me (and others) as a possible source for this story.I doubt Kelly would dignify the article with a response. Did the author or anyone else reach out to him?
And Trump's denial is meaningless, when you've told over 20,000 lies you no longer get the benefit of the doubt, nor should he get the benefit of the doubt - that ship set sail long ago. Trump and his acolytes can deny it all they want but they have zero credibility when it comes to honesty.
Because thatās not what happens. There are reasons why most physicians and hospitals are against that. You would force people to āgiveā their services under government direction. Take choices out of physician hands even further and make care substandardIf everyone is covered, then everyone is covered. How is that ānot what happensā?
Wouldn't the Chief of Staff at the time be one of the first people a journalist would reach out to in effort to confirm this story? I can only assume that John Kelly's phone has been blowing up today, and we don't have a comment from him... at least not yet. That is why he stands out to me (and others) as a possible source for this story.
- He was Trump's Chief of Staff at the time
- He was on this trip in question
- It makes sense that he would issue a denial, if he didn't hear it
- And wouldn't the Chief of Staff be one of the first people who would be contacted to either confirm or deny this story? I would think so, and it is odd that he hasn't said a word yet. Maybe he will soon?
Because thatās not what happens. There are reasons why most physicians and hospitals are against that. You would force people to āgiveā their services under government direction. Take choices out of physician hands even further and make care substandard
Im not questioning his title/position at the time, nor the idea that he wouldn't have been present for the comment.
If these are true...
- The statement was made
- He heard it
- 3 other people heard it (which he would know)
- His son was a casualty of war
- The statement was from 2018
I question why he needs to be an unnamed source with 3 other witnesses. It's not a case of his word against just mine.
Why should I believe a career serviceman overheard a statement like that (given his own son is a fallen service member) and he wouldn't demand that this be public knowledge the day after it was said, with him being the unapologetic source? And that's worse case. Had it started a fight, it wouldn't have shocked me.
His silence shouldn't equal, "well, it has to be true then".
