Actually, it's called being a decent *** human being.
He unfairly attacked Trump who absolutely zero to do with his sons death. He was a political hack prostituting his son's death to help Hillary Clinton who sent his son to die in Iraq in the first place. Trump is not proposing to ban all Muslims. That is a lie the Democrats will not let go of. Now I see Mr Khan saying that he wants out of the spotlight. Convenient timing as stories are now breaking of his ties to the Clinton Foundation, Saudi Arabia and the corrupt selling of Visas to wealthy Middle-Easterners.
That's gonna be par for the course in the next 90 or so days.
Make wild exaggeration/accusation about trump, wait for him to respond, then collude with the media to gang up on the response no matter what it is. When the wild accusation or accuser is challenged, bury the story and move onto the next one.
In the meantime post no storyies that deal with Hillarys insidious behavior and when someone brings them up, ignore them. Let's hope trump can adjust to be new tactic. No one is showing up at Hillarys rally's, she is in deep ***.
Trump has been calling for a ban on all Muslims from entering the country since December, pretending thats not part of his platform in order to attack the Khan speech is a joke and its not working. Nothing Khan said on that stage was false. Keep trying to spin a Gold Star family as the villains tho.
It's not a 'permanent' ban in that, it could eventually get lifted. Once everything is figured out. Like extensive background checks on civilians in a war torn country. Which currently take a minimum of two months to do.
You know, if you want to pretend a large conservative faction would ever support such a ban from being lifted.
It has nothing to do with his support of veterans. Trump has a problem with lashing out at people who attack him, and often says something inappropriate as a result. It seems like a majority of statements people use against him to portray him as anti-veteran, anti-women, or anti-whatever have more to do with him not keeping his overly-defensive yap shut than they have to do with his actual views or policies.
And before you go oh look but it says 2 years in the link, read the study. It's a comparison between their 20yr projection which is based on the current policy, infrastructure, and man power vs what it would take to do it in 2yrs as proposed by Trump and Cruz in their campaigns.
It's sorta cute that you think anyone will read this.
Well I don't expect you to read anything over 140 characters but I do expect people who want to discuss the findings of a study to read it. Especially if we want to discuss the logistics of deporting 11 million people over the course of 2yrs vs 20yrs.
Well like I said, he has been on the record in banning all Muslims from entering the country since December. He might have backpedaled on it a bit and changed his ban to "temporary," but its still a major part of his platform.
Well like I said, he has been on the record in banning all Muslims from entering the country since December. He might have backpedaled on it a bit and changed his ban to "temporary," but its still a major part of his platform.
Change the words temporary to permanent and chance the words ban to kill !
And before you go oh look but it says 2 years in the link, read the study. It's a comparison between their 20yr projection which is based on the current policy, infrastructure, and man power vs what it would take to do it in 2yrs as proposed by Trump and Cruz in their campaigns.
It's sorta cute that you think anyone will read this.
I didn't, the statement was contradictory, says 20 years if buses ran 600+ a day, which was terrible math. That was what I was getting at, the math itself was way off. You simply can not run around saying if we did this is would take 20 years, when it is obviously ***.
To make is comparison is one thing, to add in logistics is another, to blatantly come out and say it would take 20 years to deport 11 million people at a rate of 600+ buses a day is ignorant.
No it's hyperbole, do I need a /hyperbole tag? but it doesn't change the fact it's a monumental undertaking that can't be done as advertised on the campaign stump. /inference.
No it's hyperbole, do I need a /hyperbole tag? but it doesn't change the fact it's a monumental undertaking that can't be done as advertised on the campaign stump. /inference.
What can't be done is attempting to make false claims with math, math is the one true language, there is no slang in math, there is no ghetto in math. Math is the same in every language.
As I skimmed over your link, nowhere in there did I find anything about 600 buses, and I used that neat little trick called ctrl+F. I searched "year" to find your claim of 600 buses a day, I search "600" I did not find the claim of 600 buses a day would take 20 years. So I might have missed it, not likely, but possible. The fact is, either you lied about 600 buses a day to support your side of the debate which was proven to be false with real math. Or I missed where is said they are putting 2.5 people per bus in that link.
Don't like the idea? fine. don't like Trump? fine. Don't go making things up to support your opinion. Don't go believing everything you see online, obviously as I clearly blew a whole in that false claim of 600 buses a day would take 20 years.
Now if you want to be anti-Trump or whatever, fine go right ahead, but please use real facts and math if you want to be taken seriously, because the very moment you make wild *** *** claims like you did with the 600 buses a day would take 20 years, you immediately lose credibility and nobody will buy anything you say anymore.
Why is this person so angry? And why are they incapable of accepting that they missed an information that was simply implied by the other person(the logistics)?
Not sure who is angry, I just pointed out you can't make false claims with math and proved that very point. I also clearly stated I don't care what political values he holds, just not to make *** claims.
It has nothing to do with his support of veterans. Trump has a problem with lashing out at people who attack him, and often says something inappropriate as a result. It seems like a majority of statements people use against him to portray him as anti-veteran, anti-women, or anti-whatever have more to do with him not keeping his overly-defensive yap shut than they have to do with his actual views or policies.
It's almost like people do the same ***towards Hillary. Go figure.
At least you're aware Trump is absolutely someone we don't want doing any sort of interaction with foreign leaders.
Oh, so you're okay with outsourcing american jobs to asian workers?!?
say that in california, i bet you'll find a ton of white conservatives willing to pick walnuts and strawberries for sub standard pay with 0 benefits in a 100+ degree sun!
yeah! get rid of those immigrants and cheap labor! america needs jobs!
No it's hyperbole, do I need a /hyperbole tag? but it doesn't change the fact it's a monumental undertaking that can't be done as advertised on the campaign stump. /inference.
What can't be done is attempting to make false claims with math, math is the one true language, there is no slang in math, there is no ghetto in math. Math is the same in every language.
As I skimmed over your link, nowhere in there did I find anything about 600 buses, and I used that neat little trick called ctrl+F. I searched "year" to find your claim of 600 buses a day, I search "600" I did not find the claim of 600 buses a day would take 20 years. So I might have missed it, not likely, but possible. The fact is, either you lied about 600 buses a day to support your side of the debate which was proven to be false with real math. Or I missed where is said they are putting 2.5 people per bus in that link.
Don't like the idea? fine. don't like Trump? fine. Don't go making things up to support your opinion. Don't go believing everything you see online, obviously as I clearly blew a whole in that false claim of 600 buses a day would take 20 years.
Now if you want to be anti-Trump or whatever, fine go right ahead, but please use real facts and math if you want to be taken seriously, because the very moment you make wild *** *** claims like you did with the 600 buses a day would take 20 years, you immediately lose credibility and nobody will buy anything you say anymore.
The 600 buses was hyperbole. It was intentional. You shouldn't still be stuck on it.
If you need it pointed out to you
#1 the study has nothing to do with the hyperbole of 600 buses but everything to do with the scope and scale of deporting 11 million people in 2yrs with respect to what needs to addressed with respect to current laws, available man power, and resources to achieve that.
#2: The same group that published this paper published a prior study that gave a range of 20yrs to deport 11 million people with the current laws, available man power, and resources.
#3 you're probably still stuck on the 600 and nobody can help you get off your high horse. But that's ok because you for got the variables of 28 days of detainment and the required judges decision. Which in case you didn't know are backlogged for 2yrs at the moment.
So forget about the 600 buses statement because it wasn't meant to be taken seriously, much like any post directed at Lordgrim.
US TV network NBC is cutting ties with Donald Trump over "recent derogatory statements" that the veteran businessman made about immigrants.
NBC said the company would now not be airing the Miss USA and Miss Universe pageants that are co-owned by Mr Trump.
Responding to the announcement, Mr Trump said he would consider suing NBC.
Earlier this month, he accused Mexicans of adding drugs and crime to the US as he announced he was seeking the Republican presidential nomination.
"They're bringing drugs, they're bringing crime, they're rapists, and some I assume are good people, but I speak to border guards, and they tell us what we are getting," he said in his speech on 16 June.
He also pledged to build a "great wall" on the US border with Mexico and insisted it would be paid for by Mexicans.
He later insisted he was criticising US lawmakers, not Mexican people.