Wednesday, April 12, 2017

Lying Liars


The retraction from the Gold House occupant and apologies to Susan Rice from all the RWS™ should be coming any moment now.
Washington (CNN) After a review of the same intelligence reports brought to light by House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes, both Republican and Democratic lawmakers and aides have so far found no evidence that Obama administration officials did anything unusual or illegal, multiple sources in both parties tell CNN... 
... One congressional intelligence source described the requests made by Rice as "normal and appropriate" for officials who serve in that role to the president. And another source said there's "absolutely" no smoking gun in the reports, urging the White House to declassify them to make clear there was nothing alarming in the documents...
We have a president who lies constantly, to whom the truth is, at best, immaterial. When can we ever believe him? Speaking of which, on a smaller scale I suppose:


The only thing Trump got right in his tweet, however, is the outcome of the race. Estes did not “easily” win on Tuesday, as the president said. In an ultra-conservative district that Trump won by 27 points in November, Estes won by only 7 points. ...Democrats did not spend heavily on the race. In fact, they barely spent anything at all. 
...They did not aid Thompson with funds for advertising. Republicans, on the other hand, poured significant money into the race. They dispatched Sen.Ted Cruz (R-Texas) to stump on behalf of Estes and ran robo-calls from both Trump and Vice President Mike Pence. Finally, no Democrat “predicted victory” there...
It's obvious by now that Trumpists prefer being lied to. Enjoy it. Find it refreshing, evidently. You know, "sticking it to the establishment."

[Image source]

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Just noticed the "Blade" in the background - good symbolism Sid.

EugeneInSanDiego

Sidney Schwab said...

Thanks, Eugene. Felt like a refresh was due.

Pieter B said...

It was a #11 before, right? I can't see quite enough of this one to tell what it is.

Sidney Schwab said...

Yes, it was a #11 Pieter, because at the time I couldn't find a good image of a #10, which is what this one is. Hardly ever used #11. #15 would be next most common, for me anyway.

Popular posts