FOX news confirms that Trump disparaged veterans ...

[Albion]

It has, effectively, been confrimed through multiple journalists talking to multiple sources ...

It's not confirmed if the only "witnesses" are not on the record as having done any witnessing.

That's when the "multiple journalists" are forced to refer to "multiple sources" instead of people.

Or sometimes it's "numerous" instead.

 

[Albion]

Yep, to be exact, Referring to Sen. John McCain, Trump said, “He’s not a war hero. He’s a war hero because he was captured...I like people who weren't captured."

If that is not disrespecting all prisoners of war, please tell me what is.

Well, it looks obviously like it isn't a disparagement of 'all' prisoners of war, that's for sure.

In fact, it looks like it's disparaging ONE prisoner of war (who was also disparaged by other POWs he was held with).

 

[cow451]

It's not confirmed if the only "witnesses" are not on the record as having done any witnessing.

That's when the "multiple journalists" are forced to refer to "multiple sources" instead of people.

Or sometimes it's "numerous" instead.

Many people are saying ....

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Fox News Confirms Trump Disparaged Veterans

https://twitter.com/JenGriffinFNC/status/1301975321495973889

Wow, Fox confirms that 2 out of the 4 anonymous sources made anonymous statements. Amazing journalism.

 

[Hans Blaster]

It's not confirmed if the only "witnesses" are not on the record as having done any witnessing.

That's when the "multiple journalists" are forced to refer to "multiple sources" instead of people.

Or sometimes it's "numerous" instead.

It would only be those of us outside journalism that would count them as "a few", "multiple" or "numerous". If you actually collect the stories you can count the journalists involved. (I think it is 4 stories at this time. I haven't counted the bylines.)

It is true that with multiple stories using various numbers of unnamed sources, we outsiders (and likely even the reporters involved) can't tell how many total unnamed sources there are. Some sources may be used by more than one reporter so we just can't add the numbers in each article together. The largest number listed in an article (and they usually report the source count) is the minimum number of sources used by all reporters.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Well, it looks obviously like it isn't a disparagement of 'all' prisoners of war, that's for sure.

In fact, it looks like it's disparaging ONE prisoner of war (who was also disparaged by other POWs he was held with).

Frankly what this story (and the follow ups) should show us (though it should have been patently obvious previously is that:

1. Donald Trump cares only for himself.

2. Donald Trump does not comprehend why anyone would willing give anything up to help someone else without receiving significant compensation. (He is transactional in his base nature.)

3. Donald Trump lacks empathy for others.

If you still want to support him, I can't stop you. I just want you to all realize who he is on the inside.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Frankly what this story (and the follow ups) should show us (though it should have been patently obvious previously is that:

1. Donald Trump cares only for himself.

2. Donald Trump does not comprehend why anyone would willing give anything up to help someone else without receiving significant compensation. (He is transactional in his base nature.)

3. Donald Trump lacks empathy for others.

If you still want to support him, I can't stop you. I just want you to all realize who he is on the inside.

You are entitled to your opinion.

 

[KCfromNC]

Well, it looks obviously like it isn't a disparagement of 'all' prisoners of war, that's for sure.

Oh, well, if he only disparages some of our soldiers that's no reason to believe he continues to do it now to others.

 

[Bobber]

Oh, well, if he only disparages some of our soldiers that's no reason to believe he continues to do it now to others.

No it's not a reason to believe he did it again. First that incident with Trump back 2015, what Trump said about McCain was perhaps his greatest blunder ever made. Quite frankly I don't believe his heart was really in the statement I really don't believe he feels those captured shouldn't be honoured. McCain and he had not been getting along to say the least and in a moment of anger blurted out what he did. He would have been well served to pivot back some other way but again I hold that's still isn't a reason to believe he said this about others. The man deserves the benefit of the doubt especially when the accusation comes from anonymous sources. To me that's even worse that the alleged insult. A man should be able to stand before his accusers and not have them hiding in the dark.

 

[GreatLakes4Ever]

No it's not a reason to believe he did it again. First that incident with Trump back 2015, what Trump said about McCain was perhaps his greatest blunder ever made. Quite frankly I don't believe his heart was really in the statement I really don't believe he feels those captured shouldn't be honoured. McCain and he had not been getting along to say the least and in a moment of anger blurted out what he did. He would have been well served to pivot back some other way but again I hold that's still isn't a reason to believe he said this about others. The man deserves the benefit of the doubt especially when the accusation comes from anonymous sources. To me that's even worse that the alleged insult. A man should be able to stand before his accusers and not have them hiding in the dark.

If it was a one off you might have a point in extending Trump the benefit of the doubt but this seems to be a recurring scene for Trump to disrespect the sacrifices our military and their families make:

Fury over Trump soldier's mother remarks

Donald Trump repeats claim Gold Star family's son would be alive had he been president - CNNPolitics

Gold Star family slams Trump for 'selfish, divisive' actions

 

[Bobber]

If it was a one off you might have a point in extending Trump the benefit of the doubt but this seems to be a recurring scene for Trump to disrespect the sacrifices our military and their families make:

Fury over Trump soldier's mother remarks

Donald Trump repeats claim Gold Star family's son would be alive had he been president - CNNPolitics

Gold Star family slams Trump for 'selfish, divisive' actions

Sorry but I'm not buying what you're saying about this case. They went on the DNC Convention stage in 16 and began to make statements that Trump needs to read the Constitution. If you're going to stand on a political stage and give your opinion to millions of Americans the other side he has a right to respond and give rebuttals. He NEVER said ANYTHING that their son shouldn't be honoured. He said as your middle link even states that if he were President instead of Obama he would have sought not to have kept the troops there....thus he would still be alive....thus therefore why are you supporting the Dems in all this?

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Sorry but I'm not buying what you're saying about this case. They went on the DNC Convention stage in 16 and began to make statements that Trump needs to read the Constitution. If you're going to stand on a political stage and give your opinion to millions of Americans the other side he has a right to respond and give rebuttals. He NEVER said ANYTHING that their son shouldn't be honoured. He said as your middle link even states that if he were President instead of Obama he would have sought not to have kept the troops there....thus he would still be alive....thus therefore why are you supporting the Dems in all this?

Wow! How can you dare to twist logic and common sense so much to defend him in this? I just don't get it. And I am not democrat nor leftist. I am non partisan trying to be objective.

 

[cow451]

No it's not a reason to believe he did it again. First that incident with Trump back 2015, what Trump said about McCain was perhaps his greatest blunder ever made. Quite frankly I don't believe his heart was really in the statement I really don't believe he feels those captured shouldn't be honoured. McCain and he had not been getting along to say the least and in a moment of anger blurted out what he did. He would have been well served to pivot back some other way but again I hold that's still isn't a reason to believe he said this about others. The man deserves the benefit of the doubt especially when the accusation comes from anonymous sources. To me that's even worse that the alleged insult. A man should be able to stand before his accusers and not have them hiding in the dark.

Trump’s comments against McCain were typical as seen over the decades. He has disparaged disabled people, women he mistreated, etc. These new allegations are so typical of Trump, they are, frankly, easy to believe. Had he not had this long history, I would be quite skeptical. Trump has proudly earned the scorn. He plays the victim, but he is a career perpetrator.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Trump’s comments against McCain were typical as seen over the decades. He has disparaged disabled people, women he mistreated, etc. These new allegations are so typical of Trump, they are, frankly, easy to believe. Had he not had this long history, I would be quite skeptical. Trump has proudly earned the scorn. He plays the victim, but he is a career perpetrator.

If there’s one thing that Donald “boy who cried loser” Trump doesn’t deserve, it’s the benefit of the doubt...

 

[Albion]

Even more witnesses who were with the President on that occasion came forward today, including General Kelly's aide, to say that President Trump never said what was alleged. So that's about a dozen of them who were in a position to know.

 

[Bobber]

Wow! How can you dare to twist logic and common sense so much to defend him in this? I just don't get it. And I am not democrat nor leftist. I am non partisan trying to be objective.

Maybe you missed the context of what we were talking about? Did Trump make a statement that this Gold Star Families son shouldn't be honoured? No he never did. As for his Father you don't get a free ticket to stand on a political stage as he did in 16 and give opinions as to why Trump is not a good Presidential candidate without the other having a right to respond.

 

[Bobber]

If there’s one thing that Donald “boy who cried loser” Trump doesn’t deserve, it’s the benefit of the doubt...

Everyone has the right to be considered innocent UNTIL proven guilty. If anything his supporters who want his policies for the nation should have the right to not have lies to unjustly effect how people might vote.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Everyone has the right to be considered innocent UNTIL proven guilty.

You may not be aware of this, but we’re not talking about a court case. We’re talking about what a reasonable assumption is.

If anything his supporters who want his policies for the nation should have the right to not have lies to unjustly effect how people might vote.

If anything, the American public deserves a president who’s not a pathological liar...

 

[Hans Blaster]

Everyone has the right to be considered innocent UNTIL proven guilty. If anything his supporters who want his policies for the nation should have the right to not have lies to unjustly effect how people might vote.

In a court of law. That is how we minimize the likelihood an accusation of criminal activity being transmuted into a conviction without adequate proof.

I look forward to giving Donald Trump that consideration after his indictment(s).

 

[Bobber]

You may not be aware of this, but we’re not talking about a court case. We’re talking about what a reasonable assumption is.

Doesn't matter if it's a court case! It's only right and proper in a civilized society that people are innocent until proven guilty.