Fake news?
-
Trump has to try and learn to be more thick skinned, but I doubt he will be. The press will exploit this weakness at every opportunity. He needs a strong person to tell him the way it is and how to respond. So far no one has taken on t hat responsibility it seems.
Jesus - you have something negative to say about Donald?! Wow.But yes, you're right.
-
-
Any rich man is going to have a big ego. I think it's difficult for him to let all the slander and libel slide, and I understand that because it is slander and libel, but it's not going away. He's gonna have to be able to ignore it or he's gonna implode.
-
Especially since the guy is the sith lord of libel and slander himself
-
Especially since the guy is the sith lord of libel and slander himself
Especially since the guy is the sith lord of libel and slander himself
Really? Show me something.
-
Slander isn't calling Rosie O'Donnell a fat pig. Slander is saying someone is guilty of rape and sexual assault, which is a crime, with no conviction.
Early man walked away as modern man took control. Their minds weren't all the same and to conquer was their goal. So He built his great empires and he slaughtered his own kind, and he died a confused man and killed himself in his own mind... -
He's the Troll King
-
-
Hey, Breitbart said it
and Trump was the "internet's" choice. But I feel "they" will quickly get bored again. At this point last year Ed was just jokingly supporting Trump. A lot can change.
-
-
You're acting like a child.
-
Slander isn't calling Rosie O'Donnell a fat pig. Slander is saying someone is guilty of rape and sexual assault, which is a crime, with no conviction.
Slander isn't calling Rosie O'Donnell a fat pig. Slander is saying someone is guilty of rape and sexual assault, which is a crime, with no conviction.
-
wait, ... he didn't refer to them by name, your point is feeble.
Just because you and others "think" he was saying they committed
the acts, doesn't mean diddley dung.
-
wait, ... he didn't refer to them by name, your point is feeble.
Just because you and others "think" he was saying they committed
the acts, doesn't mean diddley dung.
wait, ... he didn't refer to them by name, your point is feeble.
Just because you and others "think" he was saying they committed
the acts, doesn't mean diddley dung.
From the article:
...Incredibly, 14 years after their sentences were vacated based on DNA evidence and the detailed and accurate confession of a serial rapist named Matias Reyes, Mr. Trump has doubled down.
“They admitted they were guilty,” he said in a statement to CNN this month. “The police doing the original investigation say they were guilty. The fact that that case was settled with so much evidence against them is outrageous.”
Why the continued belief in the guilt of the Central Park Five, despite all the evidence to the contrary? Race and racism surely play their role. So does the cognitive trap that psychologists call anchoring and what we call first impressions: Mr. Trump quickly jumped to conclusions about their guilt, as did many in New York City.
And, as Mr. Trump pointed out, four of the five teenagers did confess to being at the scene of the rape. But false confessions are surprisingly common in criminal cases. In the hundreds of post-conviction DNA exonerations that the Innocence Project has studied, at least one in four of the wrongly convicted had given a confession.
In the case of the Central Park attack, the confessions were the only real evidence. DNA testing, a nascent technology in 1989, was used to compare a single sample found on the victim with the profiles of not only the Central Park Five, but also of many of the other kids they had been with in the park. There were no matches. The victim, when she awoke from a coma, had no memory of the attack.
That left only the statements from four of the teenagers: Raymond Santana, Kevin Richardson, Korey Wise and Antron McCray. The fifth, Yusef Salaam, might have confessed, but his mother interrupted the interrogation before he signed anything. A detective was nonetheless allowed to testify that Mr. Salaam had admitted to participating, though he’d given no formal statement..."
-
So, JB, that's what makes it okay for the left-wing mainstream media to accuse Donald Trump of a laundry list of crimes that are demonstrable false?
Its justified because, well he's evil he's Hitler he's a fascist blah blah blah, so he deserves it?
Or is there something more intricate about thinking that people who confess to crimes might have committed them buried under the surface?
WSS
-
Cal doesn't take enough from the post
Steve takes what isn't even there
Interesting
-
Not really interesting, very little of your snark is but... Is the point to prove that President Trump is no stranger to slander?
Why don't you explain to us the true meaning?
WSS
-
They did apparently confess and they were definitely convicted so I don't expect him to know every detail of every case. Even if told they were vindicated the fact that they confessed builds suspicion. Its an interesting situation. It's not the same as me saying "jbluhm molests kids. I heard it on the internet, he's a child molester. Pervert! Molester!"
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login