Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

FAKE news, LIES, fake lies. We need the Trump Oracle.

999 replies

Lweji · 26/02/2017 13:23

A new thread. From
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/2862265-Were-only-showing-Ami-the-good-news-now-to-keep-her-sweet-Its-another-Trump-thread?watched=1&msgid=67235918#67235918

OP posts:
Thread gallery
25
BoreOfWhabylon · 02/03/2017 00:28

Yup. Descendant of Cunedda Wledig, 3rd century founder of the Kingdom of Wales. Apparently.

Mail had the best pic of King Allan V Grin but there are plenty of others

www.mirror.co.uk/news/weird-news/american-man-claims-hes-rightful-9943336

cozietoesie · 02/03/2017 00:34

Well I'm sure Brenda enjoyed a giggle over that, Bore. Goodness knows, there's not much else to laugh about.

AcrossthePond55 · 02/03/2017 00:43

cozie

Which boy and what fence?

Both of my sons are firmly on the Fuck Trump side of the fence. If you're talking about our friend who voted on 2nd amendment but now wonders what he did, nope. According to him it's all starting to look pretty fucked up, but at least he's got his guns so he can 'defend himself and his family' when it all goes to shit. I rather think he fancies himself in a shootout, a la Clint Eastwood, to the theme song from The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly.

Yep, he's going to defend his home from the apocalypse. His tract home, in a neighbourhood, in a city of 60k. Good luck with that.

cozietoesie · 02/03/2017 00:51

Your Lt. Gov., Across. Wink

His stalking horses are coming on board now and I see that his Twitter rhetoric has been dialled up a notch. He's going to have to make that decision soon, though...........

BagelGoesWalking · 02/03/2017 01:14

Cozie i wasn't questioning your statement, I was agreeing with it, of course. It's just so bloody scary that it's happening so fast.

I've only read this thread and looked at a few links to find out reactions to the speech, haven't had time to look at more, but it amazes me that reporters like Jon Sopel seemed to "swallow" the speech. Where is the analysis, where is the criticism?

Horrific

AcrossthePond55 · 02/03/2017 01:15

Gotcha, cozie!

I think Newsom is a viable candidate for 2020. I think he knows it, too, so he'll be as active as he can be while still trying to stay somewhat 'palatable' to the more 'moderate' voters in the flyover states as well as Republicans who become disaffected with Trump over the next 3 years as his promises fail to materialize. It's going to be a very hard line for him to walk, but if he can do it, I think he has a very good chance.

So, for now, I think he'll be a bit 'softly, softly', but look for him to become more vocal and in the fore-front in mid 2018.

AcrossthePond55 · 02/03/2017 01:20

If Newsom is ever elected, a picture of him and Justin Trudeau together will 'break the internet' with the totality of their handsomeness.

AcrossthePond55 · 02/03/2017 02:08

Breaking news from NYT, Obama Administration disseminated info across departments so that incoming Trump Administration couldn't destroy it.

www.nytimes.com/2017/03/01/us/politics/obama-trump-russia-election-hacking.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=a-lede-package-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

CussingQuim · 02/03/2017 02:48

I randomly woke up and can't get back to sleep, just read about that Across. (People seem to be hoping it's a turning point but you know that "I've hoped too many times" feeling?)

Also this unsurprising article saying al Qaeda propaganda is having a field day, tweeted by John McCain.

AcrossthePond55 · 02/03/2017 04:01

MSNBC has done a 2 hour special on the Trump/Russia connection and spoke in great depth about the article, including the fact that AG Sessions did have contact with Russia despite his statements under oath to the contrary. And about Putin's desire for world domination and how he's basically playing Trump for a fool.

I know what you mean about that 'don't get your hopes up' feeling.

AcrossthePond55 · 02/03/2017 04:25

If this is the start, I wonder how many of Trump's cronies will be willing to fall on their swords to keep him in the presidency. Even if they are disgraced, they still stand to make mega bucks whilst he's in office.

amispartacus · 02/03/2017 04:43

Interesting:

The Attorney General did meet with the Russian ambassador despite saying he didn't meet with anyone connected with Russia.

www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/sessions-spoke-twice-with-russian-ambassador-during-trumps-presidential-campaign-justice-officials-say/2017/03/01/77205eda-feac-11e6-99b4-9e613afeb09f_story.html?utm_term=.4d59e6d409fa

In January, Sen. Patrick J. Leahy (D-Vt.) asked Sessions for answers to written questions. “Several of the President-elect’s nominees or senior advisers have Russian ties. Have you been in contact with anyone connected to any part of the Russian government about the 2016 election, either before or after election day?” Leahy wrote.

Sessions responded with one word: “No.”

Justice officials said Sessions met with Kislyak on Sept. 8 in his capacity as a member of the armed services panel rather than in his role as a Trump campaign surrogate.

He was asked at the hearings:

At his Jan. 10 Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing, Sessions was asked by Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) what he would do if he learned of any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government in the course of the 2016 campaign.

“I’m not aware of any of those activities,” he responded. He added: “I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians.

Apparently it's an ok answer because:

Justice officials said Sessions met with Kislyak on Sept. 8 in his capacity as a member of the armed services panel rather than in his role as a Trump campaign surrogate.

That's a weasel answer.

amispartacus · 02/03/2017 04:53

From Fox

www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/02/sessions-russian-ambassador-spoke-twice-during-presidential-campaign.html

Reports about the meetings appeared to contradict a statement Sessions made during his confirmation hearing to become attorney general. Sessions was asked by Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., how he would respond to evidence that “anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign communicated with the Russian government.”

“I’m not aware of any of those activities,” answered Sessions, one of Trump’s earliest and most prominent supporters during the campaign. “I have been called a surrogate a time or two in that campaign and I did not have communications with the Russians, and I’m unable to comment on it.”

When contacted by Fox News late Wednesday, Sessions said, "I never met with any Russian officials to discuss issues of the campaign. I have no idea what this allegation is about. It is false."

If he had said that he met with with the Russian ambassador as part of his role, then he wouldn't have to explain himself later.

saffronwblue · 02/03/2017 05:11

Twitter is all over this in a bigly way or is it just the echo chamber that I live in

It would be good to see Sessions go.

amispartacus · 02/03/2017 05:26

It's obvious the answer Spicer will give:

He met as a member of the Armed Forces committee.
He did not meet him as part of the Trump campaign so he did not need to mention that he met the Russian ambassador.

Why not simply say when asked that ' Yes, I met the Russian ambassador as part of my role as Senator".

CaveMum · 02/03/2017 06:19

BBC reporting the Sessions/Russian Ambassador meeting now too: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39136118

CussingQuim · 02/03/2017 07:09

As mentioned before, I don't understand a lot about the stock market or how money works (maybe a bit more than Mr "let's just print more cash to pay the national debt" Trump, but I have to admit, not much).

FoxNews keep tweeting about this: Dow Jones hits 21,000, a new record, the day after Trump's speech - http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2017/03/01/dow-s-latest-1k-point-advance-ties-record-trump-policy-priorities-fuel-rally.html

Can I ask again someone more knowledgable than me to try explaining in cough simple language why people are investing more? (Or even if they are?) (and to any Trump fans lurking, if it's a pro-Trump effect I'm still interested!)

CussingQuim · 02/03/2017 07:12

Also just seen this from someone on Twitter. Not exactly shocking but still.

FAKE news, LIES, fake lies. We need the Trump Oracle.
Dumdedumdedum · 02/03/2017 07:24

WHY? WHY? WHY? (Sorry for shouting, but so frustrated Sad) Why are these liars allowed to get away with it after lying so much themselves? And as pp said, where is the opposition cavalry? The NYT can't do it on its own, the Democrats and the more principled Republicans owe it to their country to stop this. Where are they?
Am wondering if I am just simple-minded in expecting that this shower will be stopped in its tracks, and sort of normal service resumed asap?

illegitimateMortificadospawn · 02/03/2017 07:33

I couldn't see Pence in the lie infographic. Wonder why....

AcrossthePond55 · 02/03/2017 07:40

I'm hoping I get the gist of this accurately. Tonight there was a gentleman on TV who was asked about why people aren't in an uproar about the Trump/Russia connection. He opined that 20 years ago Americans would have been outraged, regardless of political party, at the very thought of an 'adversarial' foreign govt even attempting to interfere in our elections, let alone with the apparent involvement of a candidate or his 'people'. But that in the internet age of all information at our fingertips 24/7 we're just inured to it, that as long as our day to day lives aren't affected or it can be 'explained away', that most people figure it's 'not that big of a deal'. I think he may be right.

BiglyBadgers · 02/03/2017 07:54

I do wonder though if without the internet people would have been able to connect with others that share their suspicion of the government and stand against it. Without the internet would their have been the protests of the size that we have seen? Would people be as informed about the things the government wants to remain hidden? It is clear that we can't rely on the official opposition to stand firm against Trump, so the internet has been central to allowing the people to organise as the stand in opposition party.

Of course it goes both ways, but I so often see people bemoaning the internet and how it is the cause of all awfulness without acknowledging that they seem pretty happy to make use of it when it suits them.

CussingQuim · 02/03/2017 07:55

The Guardian Only $20m in existing funds found to pay for Mexico wall, document says.

woman12345 · 02/03/2017 07:58

Herbert Mercuse (?) I think wrote about the mass media inuring the masses to war etc. I think internet has done this. Answers are only found if the masses ask the right questions.

Swipe left for the next trending thread