Trump runs for POTUS / Trumped Up! Part V

[logger]

OK, Blumenthal. Where's the evidence?

Post 1365

 

[A'isha]

That's because you don't remember the history of it.

I was an active participant in the many Birther threads here as that "history" was happening. I quite clearly remember the many falsehoods and fictions Birthers told about Obama's birth certificate.

Many dropped the issue but there were folks who thought it was and is a fake.

Such as Trump, who remained a Birther right up until today.

 

[logger]

I was an active participant in the many Birther threads here as that "history" was happening. I quite clearly remember the many falsehoods and fictions Birthers told about Obama's birth certificate.



Such as Trump, who remained a Birther right up until today.

When it comes to obama or hillary, one should remain suspicious.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Did Clinton ever repudiate any of the Birther nonsense that was swirling around in 07-08?

Why? She and her campaign staff never set foot in that swamp.

Actually it began in 2004 according to Politico.

In fact, birtherism, as it’s been called, reportedly began with innuendo by serial Illinois political candidate Andy Martin, who painted Obama as a closet Muslim in 2004. That spiraled into a concerted effort by conspiracy theorists to raise doubts about Obama’s birthplace and religion — and essentially paint him as un-American.
Martin, who briefly launched a little-noticed presidential campaign last year, has disavowed the movement he’s often credited with starting, though he still foments similarly discredited doubts about Obama’s religion.

It is well documented that Clinton supporters who were never on her campaign staff reportedly passed an email around suggesting Obama was not a citizen.

Then there is this well documented memo that Clinton rejected as a campaign strategy:

her then-senior strategist Mark Penn, who issued a memo in 2007 suggesting that Clinton emphasize Obama’s upbringing in Hawaii and Indonesia and paint him as fundamentally un-American. The memo never questioned Obama’s citizenship but did suggest highlighting his “lack of American roots.”

That's it. She had the option of going birther in the campaign and clearly chose not to. Just because there is no McCain moment telling a supporter Obama was not a Muslim is not evidence Clinton had anything whatsoever to do with birtherism.

 

[Puppycow]

Post 1365

What proof does he have?

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article102354777.html

Two supporters of Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign reportedly shared the claim that then-rival Barack Obama was not born in the United States and thus was not eligible to be president.

One was a volunteer in Iowa, who was fired, Clinton’s former campaign manager said Friday. The other was Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal, according to a former McClatchy Washington Bureau chief.

The issue arose Friday as Donald Trump finally acknowledged that Obama was born in the U.S. Trump, a leading champion of the debunked “birther” conspiracy theory for years, attempted to blame Clinton for starting it when she ran against Obama in 2008 for the Democratic presidential nomination.

In fact, there were several people publicly pushing the theory, which was repeated extensively on conservative news outlets. There were the two Clinton supporters, but there is no evidence that Clinton herself or her campaign spread the story.

Patti Solis Doyle, Clinton’s campaign manager during part of the 2008 race, told CNN on Friday that an Iowa campaign worker had passed on an email about the birther conspiracy and that Clinton quickly fired him.

Solis Doyle said she’d called Obama campaign official David Plouffe at the time “to apologize and basically say that this was not coming from us. It was a rogue volunteer coordinator.”

Phil Singer, Clinton’s 2008 campaign press secretary, said by email Friday: “The idea that the Hillary Clinton campaign had anything to do with spreading the birther issue has as much credibility as the birther issue itself: none. It didn’t happen.”

Meanwhile, former McClatchy Washington Bureau Chief James Asher tweeted Friday that Blumenthal had “told me in person” that Obama was born in Kenya.

“During the 2008 Democratic primary, Sid Blumenthal visited the Washington Bureau of McClatchy Co.,” Asher said in an email Friday to McClatchy, noting that he was at the time the investigative editor and in charge of Africa coverage.

“During that meeting, Mr. Blumenthal and I met together in my office and he strongly urged me to investigate the exact place of President Obama’s birth, which he suggested was in Kenya. We assigned a reporter to go to Kenya, and that reporter determined that the allegation was false.

“At the time of Mr. Blumenthal’s conversation with me, there had been a few news articles published in various outlets reporting on rumors about Obama’s birthplace. While Mr. Blumenthal offered no concrete proof of Obama’s Kenyan birth, I felt that, as journalists, we had a responsibility to determine whether or not those rumors were true. They were not.”

Blumenthal, who worked in the White House with President Bill Clinton and later was employed by the Clinton Foundation, could not be reached Friday but said in an email to The Boston Globe, “This is false. Period.”

The birther issue was long the province of conservative talk show hosts and far right politicians who opposed Obama’s candidacy and then his presidency. Trump used it as his platform into politics five years ago, despite numerous reports that exposed it as false.

So there was one volunteer, who was fired, and Blumenthal, who iirc, did not have an official position in her campaign, but was a close confidant. But he denies it. Trump was very much on the public record as a birther.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It picked up steam mostly after she had already suspended her campaign. Some volunteers attempted to spread the secret Muslim theory but they were dismissed and their actions condemned. The PUMAs went for it hardcore and switched from Hillary to McCain for general election.

This is from your link:

Furthermore, as the Atlantic and Politico reported in 2008, neither Clinton nor her campaign acted on Penn’s advice.

 

[BobTheCoward]

So what are other birthers saying today?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

They have, repeatedly, there's an extensive article about it on their website today. The BBc doesn't need to point out to UK viewers that birtherism is nonsense, anymore than they have to remind everyone the world is a globe if they mention the Flat Earth society.

That's not the lie I was referring to. I was referring to Trump claiming Clinton started birtherism. That lie has been debunked repeatedly yet Trump keeps repeating it and the news media (not all of them now fortunately) just lets him.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

There were some questions to the authenticty of it. That is certainly reasonable since obama went through such lengths to not release it.

No one with even the brains God gave gravel had "some questions" about it.

That's because you don't remember the history of it. Many dropped the issue but there were folks who thought it was and is a fake.

Yes, many idiots are idiots. Film at 11.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Bravo, Jake Tapper.

Love reading the organized Trumpettes responses. It's like reading the posting history here of the ODS brigade. "Oh, yeah! Well someone else started it."

We know... we know... And the Great Orange Poobah adopted it and wrapped himself in it and made it his raison d'etre for years after reasonable people dismissed it as passing nonsense.

And does it matter if the actual reporting community is finally getting fed up with being manipulated. It's not Trump's doing!! It's their bosses. The field people and line producers can get as fed up as they want. The board room is still handing out knee pads and chapstick because Trump Is News.

 

[Foolmewunz]

I'll take a stab and say no.

There seems to be a growing feeling that news presenters should be commenting on every piece of news that they report or show. I agree with your implication that this is not true unless it's a news commentary program and/or they're talking to "experts." In fact, constant commentary is exactly what we shouldn't want in a straight news program, and I say this whether the presenter is someone who would (either because of personal opinion or network opinion) agree with my views or not.

Just because at least half the things that come out of Trump's mouth are lies doesn't mean they shouldn't be presented somewhere without editorializing. As always, it's the responsibility of those watching to decide what to believe, hopefully based on facts and cogent analysis...and there's no end of analysis (cogent and otherwise) available to us, especially here in a world with the internet.

Exactly.

Exactly wrong.

They don't have to editorialize every article but they can do better than just repeating press releases, which is all his performance today amounts to. It's not that difficult to report the statement made and mentioning that it's a proven falsehood. "And Trump stated, "blah blah blah blah blah", which is a repeat of a claim his supporters often make but which has no supporting evidence".

BBC, "And today, Michelle Bachmann announced that she has a plan to counter the October 11th Reptilian invasion of Biloxi. And in other news...."

If they're just going to report what they've said, we can go by the press releases. Just what "reporting" or "journalism" is there in repeating **** that candidates say? As I said, their press releases are all that would be needed, but that wouldn't make front page news, so the candidates stage events and when they do so, they should be reported on, in full, including mentioning that certain parts of the statement are disputed or disproved.

"I heard it on the BBC, it must be true." They have a duty to that segment that actually believes this.

 

[Fudbucker]

"Trump on Clinton's guards: 'Take their guns away, see what happens to her'"
CNN

Clinton is right about her "basket of deplorables" comment, but she low-balled the percentage. Trump has done over a dozen things that would disqualify a normal candidate, and it doesn't faze his supporters. They either hate Clinton so much they're sticking with Trump, or they just give Trump a pass on literally anything because he "talks tough". Either way, they are, indeed, deplorable people.

 

[Stacko]

Donald said he’d give away $5 million — or maybe $50 million — for proof Obama was born in the U.S. Will he pay it?

Back when Donald Trump was a "birther" -- an era that lasted from early 2011 until Thursday — he offered to give huge donations to charity in exchange for hard evidence*that proved President Obama had been born in the U.S.

First, in 2012, Trump said he'd donate $5 million for that proof.

...

"Now then, what wasn’t reported by the press is, sometime just prior to the expiration date of that offer, I raised the offer to $50 million. $50 million! For charity,' Trump said in 2014. "Pick your charity, for $50 million, and let me see your records! And I never heard from him."

...

By The Post's estimate, a $5 million gift from Trump's own pocket now would be more than the GOP nominee has given to charity in the last 20 years, combined

 

[Stacko]

From the Clinton campaign research director in '08:

1. I'm in a strange situation tonight of knowing the answer to a Q being asked: Did the 2008 Hillary campaign push the birther conspiracy?

2. In 2008, I was the research director for Hillary Clinton. This meant I was responsible for all research on Hillary and her opponents.

3. This was a big job, I had a staff of about 20 people.

4. I talked to reporters every day about lots of things, including Obama. I also listened to the convos our press people had w/ reporters

5. I sat right next to Phil Singer who was our national press secretary. He is a very loud person

6. I can say, definitively, that Hillary's 08 research team never pushed the birther conspiracy

7. And I never heard anyone on the press team or any other part of the campaign push the birther conspiracy

8. I was aware of the rumors and chain emails and understood they were totally bogus

9. So when Trump says that the 08 Hillary campaign started the birther stuff, he's lying. I know. I was there​

 

[Ladewig]

Trump spent several years after the birth certificate release claiming that the matter wasn't settled. He claimed he sent investigators to Hawaii.

So why did Trump keep playing the Birther card all the way to 2016. I am asserting he continued because he wanted attention. Do you have a better explanation for that behavior?

Yes, he wanted obama to release his birth certificate. Guess what happened?

Are you sure you are replying to the correct post?

I was asking about Trump supporting birtherism from2011 to 2016. I say it he did it because he wanted attention and was willing to lie to get the attention. Another poster speculated that it was stupidity. If you have a different explanation for his motivations in that time period please present it.

 

[Ladewig]

Politics. How do you not know this?

I knew the answer would be special pleading. I asked the question just to see how the hypocrisy would be phrased.

The taxes are relevant. The liberals know it, the honest conservatives know it, and the video evidence shows that Trump, himself, knows it. Nothing has changed in the past four years. The taxes were relevant then and the taxes are relevant now.

Actually the taxes are more relevant now because this candidate is running on a platform of being the shrewdest businessman in the country. For others to ask for evidence of this claim is not only correct, it is a patriotic duty. All critical-thinking Americans should be asking for evidence of all important claims - especially when presenting the evidence is as simple as releasing a tax return.

The fact that Trump is afraid to release it should be worrisome.

 

[Travis]

Yeah, it's editorializing. If they want to clarify something, it's easy to alter the format to allow for that in a way that doesn't make the presenter the arbiter of fact versus fiction. However, the idea that, again, a "straight" news program (one or two people reading news stories and showing video clips) should have the presenter(s) commenting on the stories they're presenting is silly when, again, there are plenty of formats and avenues for such commentary.

"Here's what Presidential Candidate Donald Trump said today in a speech given in Dallas, Texas."
<play video>
"In Hoboken, New Jersey, Hillary Clinton gave a speech on health care."
<play video>
"In other news..."

There is nothing wrong with presenting the news like that. Inserting anything else is for another kind of show.

Any news program worth watching has researchers at its disposal. If Candidate A starts screaming about an impending meteor that will definitely kill billions in a few days they have an obligation to at least look into whether there actually is a meteor.

It's just not what most regular TV news programs are for, and it rarely ever has been. Most such programs cover a ton of topics in a short period of time. Are you actually complaining that there isn't enough news commentary available to you? Because it seems like what you're complaining about is that you don't like a particular TV news format that has been prevalent for at least 50 years, and you're doing so despite the fact that commentary and fact-checking are all over the *********** place. Anyone who gets all of their news from the type of program you're criticizing doesn't want what you're describing, and they will change the channel if that type of program changes to something else.

Uh, you'd be shocked. I know people who definitely get all their news from just one program that airs just once a day. They count on that to get them caught up enough. The rest of the time they are working two jobs trying to pay rent.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

And the Trumpers and Trumpettes pivot to the latest dog whistle: Clinton will take away people's guns.

 

[Jrrarglblarg]

And the Trumpers and Trumpettes pivot to the latest dog whistle: Clinton will take away people's guns.

NRA has been pushing that one pretty hard. Local pawn and gun has a stack of glossy, color, heavy stock, two-sided flyers announcing Hillary's intentions to TAKE YOUR GUNS!!!!

 

[Babbylonian]

Exactly wrong.

After giving it a great deal of thought and taking everything into consideration...
.
.
.
.
.
.
I was exactly wrong.