President Donald Trump

[nots]

Well you all know how I feel--If you don't denounce something, you condone it through your silence.

I look forward to your denouncing of the Congressman's 'joke'

[nots]

Why I NEVER!!

I agree with that--your outrage is genuine and goes across partisan lines. Others in here......not so much

[GwynnInTheHall]

I look forward to your denouncing of the Congressman's 'joke'

Not a democrat any longer so....and wasn't aware of the comment until now so of course, anything that diminishes someone based on anything except their character and/or actions is reprehensible.

[senorsheep]

I never contributed to the outrage re Conway, but do you #1 think it's appropriate for anyone to sit on the Oval Office furniture that way? #2 Know of anything like it happening before? #3 disagree that if Michelle Obama were photographed in the same situation as Conway the outrage from the Right would not have been deafening?

1) Is it appropriate? If you're sitting that way for a meeting, no. If you're sitting that way momentarily to get a camera angle for a photo opp, then, sure, what's the problem?
2) I know of far more disrespectful things that have happened in that office. It was a photo opp. I doubt that it's uncommon for people to get a little informal off-camera while that's going on.
3) Sure. Does their dishonest partisan nonsense excuse the other side's dishonest partisan nonsense? I don't keep score - wrong is wrong.

You identify yourself as a smart, honest, ethical guy. Will you answer this question truthfully without qualification?

Do you agree that the original photo was spun falsely as her being disrespectful to the office and the A-A delegation, given that the second photo provides context that pretty clearly illustrates that that wasn't the case?

[GwynnInTheHall]

1) Is it appropriate? If you're sitting that way for a meeting, no. If you're sitting that way momentarily to get a camera angle for a photo opp, then, sure, what's the problem?
2) I know of far more disrespectful things that have happened in that office. It was a photo opp. I doubt that it's uncommon for people to get a little informal off-camera while that's going on.
3) Sure. Does their dishonest partisan nonsense excuse the other side's dishonest partisan nonsense? I don't keep score - wrong is wrong.

You identify yourself as a smart, honest, ethical guy. Will you answer this question truthfully without qualification?

Do you agree that the original photo was spun falsely as her being disrespectful to the office and the A-A delegation, given that the second photo provides context that pretty clearly illustrates that that wasn't the case?

Absolutely,

to be clear--I have no issue with it at all, I was just trying to find out where you stood on it.

[Redbirds Fan]

This was a bad situation.

She's an inveterate liar and a political hack, but that is what she should be criticized for...not anything having to do with her gender. I can't remember having heard of this Congressman, but he should be ashamed. An apology is not enough. He should be severely chastised by his fellow lawmakers.

Conway is no innocent victim. She defended Trump's misogyny and was hypocritical in doing so. Still, that is no excuse for the lewd remarks made toward her.

As for Conway's Oval Office pose, it's just not a huge deal. But, ranking equally high on the bullshit meter is the "taking a picture" argument. The fact is clear that she was too casual with a room full of dignitaries. There is no evidence that it is because they were African Americans, but it certainly did not show the requisite respect. But again, not a big issue, and I don't believe it was any type of intentional slight on her part.

One laughable bit...the many pictures trotted out by the conservatives in one of their many fits of Whataboutery: Obama with his feet on his desk. Two things come to mind. Those pictures show him with staff, rather than a room full of guests. The other is that he is the frigging President. I'm pretty sure it says somewhere that he gets to put his feet anywhere he wants.

[overkill94]

She must have been texting, 'cuz she's a girl, and that's what girls do, right?

Or maybe she was on the couch with her phone because she was attempting to take a good picture from a particular angle...



If you're going to do the phony outrage dance, you should at least try to get the basic facts straight.

The whole thing is more comedic than it is disrespectful IMO, but the explanations make no sense to me. In what world is kneeling on a couch the best way to get a good angle? She could just as easily be sitting regularly on the couch and get that exact same angle. Even more logically, she could be squatting on the rug but I'm guessing they wanted the full seal of the president in the picture. However it may be, there's no reason to have your shoes up on the couch that way.

[senorsheep]

The whole thing is more comedic than it is disrespectful IMO, but the explanations make no sense to me. In what world is kneeling on a couch the best way to get a good angle? She could just as easily be sitting regularly on the couch and get that exact same angle. Even more logically, she could be squatting on the rug but I'm guessing they wanted the full seal of the president in the picture. However it may be, there's no reason to have your shoes up on the couch that way.

I didn't say she was smart or logical. I said she wasn't sitting on a couch, texting and ignoring an African-American delegation, as the left-wing freak-out machine furiously pumped out to anyone silly enough to believe it.

Did she know she was part of the shot? Would she sit like that if she knew? Who knows?

[Redbirds Fan]

1) Is it appropriate? If you're sitting that way for a meeting, no. If you're sitting that way momentarily to get a camera angle for a photo opp, then, sure, what's the problem?
2) I know of far more disrespectful things that have happened in that office. It was a photo opp. I doubt that it's uncommon for people to get a little informal off-camera while that's going on.
3) Sure. Does their dishonest partisan nonsense excuse the other side's dishonest partisan nonsense? I don't keep score - wrong is wrong.

You identify yourself as a smart, honest, ethical guy. Will you answer this question truthfully without qualification?

Do you agree that the original photo was spun falsely as her being disrespectful to the office and the A-A delegation, given that the second photo provides context that pretty clearly illustrates that that wasn't the case?

I reject premise. The second photo doesn't clearly illustrate anything. It could just as easily be a picture of person who decided to take snaps of some guys who interrupted her internet surfing.

I already said in my post that the whole thing was no big deal, but this "taking a picture" explanation is just too much. Nobody in the administration accepts responsibility for anything. It's always "what about Obama?", or "everyone else does it", or "the Generals ate my homework". In the oft-repeated words of our dear leader, gimme a break.

[Hornsby]

It amuses the hell out of me that the more conservative factions of RJ essentially ignored all of the developments of the last several days in the WH, but seize upon this tempest in a teapot as a chance to score some points. No comment on Tumps accusation that the previous President allegedly violated several laws? That the FBI is asking the Justice Department to essentially denounce Trumps accusations by simply saying that the FBI had NEVER requested such a wiretap? That the President again, spent taxpayers money on what is nothing more than a glorified vacation? That the people inside the White House are so desperate for some sense of order that they're leaking like a sieve, hoping that something, somewhere, sticks and makes a difference? That the Administration is proposing slashing agencies budgets to the bone, and beyond? That there's more linking Trump associates to Russia just about every day?

No, instead defend KellyAnne from social media and some boorish politician...

BTW, I could give a shit about how she sits in his office, it's Trumps for the time being, and his rules apply. I just wish that he'd have an official White House Photographer for these thing, so staffers don't have to shoot them on their phones.

[senorsheep]

[/B]

I reject premise. The second photo doesn't clearly illustrate anything. It could just as easily be a picture of person who decided to take snaps of some guys who interrupted her internet surfing.

I already said in my post that the whole thing was no big deal, but this "taking a picture" explanation is just too much. Nobody in the administration accepts responsibility for anything. It's always "what about Obama?", or "everyone else does it", or "the Generals ate my homework". In the oft-repeated words of our dear leader, gimme a break.

I guess I bought the "taking a picture" explanation due to the presence of the camera, and the fact that it was pointed at people posing as if they were getting their pictures taken. Silly me.

There's plenty to legitimately criticize about Conway, and the administration. There's no need to make silly stuff up. This is as silly as it gets.

[DMT]

It amuses the hell out of me that the more conservative factions of RJ essentially ignored all of the developments of the last several days in the WH, but seize upon this tempest in a teapot as a chance to score some points. No comment on Tumps accusation that the previous President allegedly violated several laws? That the FBI is asking the Justice Department to essentially denounce Trumps accusations by simply saying that the FBI had NEVER requested such a wiretap? That the President again, spent taxpayers money on what is nothing more than a glorified vacation? That the people inside the White House are so desperate for some sense of order that they're leaking like a sieve, hoping that something, somewhere, sticks and makes a difference? That the Administration is proposing slashing agencies budgets to the bone, and beyond? That there's more linking Trump associates to Russia just about every day?

No, instead defend KellyAnne from social media and some boorish politician...

BTW, I could give a shit about how she sits in his office, it's Trumps for the time being, and his rules apply. I just wish that he'd have an official White House Photographer for these thing, so staffers don't have to shoot them on their phones.

Exactly.

[Redbirds Fan]

It amuses the hell out of me that the more conservative factions of RJ essentially ignored all of the developments of the last several days in the WH, but seize upon this tempest in a teapot as a chance to score some points. No comment on Tumps accusation that the previous President allegedly violated several laws? That the FBI is asking the Justice Department to essentially denounce Trumps accusations by simply saying that the FBI had NEVER requested such a wiretap? That the President again, spent taxpayers money on what is nothing more than a glorified vacation? That the people inside the White House are so desperate for some sense of order that they're leaking like a sieve, hoping that something, somewhere, sticks and makes a difference? That the Administration is proposing slashing agencies budgets to the bone, and beyond? That there's more linking Trump associates to Russia just about every day?

No, instead defend KellyAnne from social media and some boorish politician...

BTW, I could give a shit about how she sits in his office, it's Trumps for the time being, and his rules apply. I just wish that he'd have an official White House Photographer for these thing, so staffers don't have to shoot them on their phones.

The media may eventually learn not to fall for the banana in the tailpipe trick. But they still seem to go for things that would never fool a decent prosecutor. Take Huckabee's daughter last night. (I don't remember her name.) Her argument was that the President might have some information we don't know about which could support his claim, so let's have an investigation to see if it's true! Conway's pitch was that we're investigating Russia, Russia, Russia, so why not investigate this, too? It might even sound reasonable if you forget for a moment that nobody investigates anything unless there is at least an articulable basis to support the claim. The President has not even suggested why he believes Obama has 'tapped his wires'. If his only source is Breitbart, then we can all have a laugh and move on to whatever is next. If it is something substantial, then here we go.

[Hornsby]

The media may eventually learn not to fall for the banana in the tailpipe trick. But they still seem to go for things that would never fool a decent prosecutor. Take Huckabee's daughter last night. (I don't remember her name.) Her argument was that the President might have some information we don't know about which could support his claim, so let's have an investigation to see if it's true! Conway's pitch was that we're investigating Russia, Russia, Russia, so why not investigate this, too? It might even sound reasonable if you forget for a moment that nobody investigates anything unless there is at least an articulable basis to support the claim. The President has not even suggested why he believes Obama has 'tapped his wires'. If his only source is Breitbart, then we can all have a laugh and move on to whatever is next. If it is something substantial, then here we go.

Actually, a lot of the shows went after her pretty good...especially Martha Raddatz.

During a segment on ABC’s This Week, anchor Martha Raddatz took the opportunity to grill White House spox Sarah Huckabee Sanders on the unfounded allegations that former president Barack Obama ordered an illegal wiretap of Donald Trump during the election process.

Raddatz held nothing back, saying that Trump was making “extremely serious charges,” while questioning where Trump was getting his information.

In response Sanders said that numerous media outlets, including the BBC, reported that federal investigators sought warrants to monitor Russian banks suspected of potentially steering money to the Trump campaign, though this comment didn’t directly reference Trump’s wiretap claim.

“All we’re saying is let’s take a closer look. Let’s look into this. If this happened, if this is accurate, this is the biggest overreach,” Sanders said.

Raddatz, measuredly, went in for the kill: “If, if, if, if, if! Why is the president saying it did happen?” Jumping to POTUS’s defense, Sanders said, “I think he is going off information he’s seen that has led him to believe that this is a very real potential.”

“I will let the president speak for himself,” Sanders added.

“You’re his spokesperson,” Raddatz said

“And I’m speaking about it right now,” Sanders said.

“But you’re backing off of it. You’re backing off of it,” Raddatz said.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/if-if-if-if-if-abcs-martha-raddatz-takes-on-deputy-press-sec-over-uncertainty-of-wiretap/

[cardboardbox]

yikes nots, you were exactly right.