Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Are Trump's Lies Becoming Even More Blatant?

This morning he tweeted that the GDP was higher than the unemployment rate for the first time in over 100 years! The only problem with that is that it isn't even close to true. In the past 70 years, there have been 62 quarters where that is true. In other words, over 22 percent of the time, the GDP has been higher than the unemployment rate over a quarter. And while a high GDP and low unemployment is good, they measure completely different things and are never compared by economists.

Does Trump even care that his continuing lies are so easily debunked?
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Mountainlady16 · 22-25, F
Hey how many times did obummer lie. I seem to remember a promise I could keep my Dr and my hospital. Well my Dr is not approved by my insurance company and my hospital like many other small hospitals for shut down by Obama
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@Mountainlady16 OK, you've got one. Now give me the next 5,000 and maybe he can be compared to Trump.
Mountainlady16 · 22-25, F
@windinhishair every time Obama reported unemployment or deportment numbers. Unemployment only including people actively seeking work and deportment numbers included ppl turnedback at the border
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@Mountainlady16 The way unemployment has been calculated has been that way for a long time, predating Obama by many years. Trump's lies are both numerous and constant. In fact, Trump's lawyers told Mueller that Trump can't testify directly because he is incapable of telling the truth.
Mountainlady16 · 22-25, F
@windinhishair and fords lawyer said the feminazis is afraid with real man with actual balls unlike the sissy boys with no balls that are liberals
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@Mountainlady16 Would you kindly provide a source for the exact quote? I would like to read it, if true.
Mountainlady16 · 22-25, F
@windinhishair all the requests on who can ask her questions. That lawyers can't be present and neither can the accused
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@Mountainlady16 So in other words you don't have a source for the specific words you put in her mouth.

You do understand the trauma of facing a sexual abuser, right? Well, perhaps not, but there is a reason why abuse victims are rarely forced into close proximity with their abusers.
Mountainlady16 · 22-25, F
@windinhishair the accused has a right to face his accusers.
Mountainlady16 · 22-25, F
@windinhishair how can he and his lawyers defend him without being present.
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@Mountainlady16 There is no right of the accused to sit at the same table in close proximity to the accuser. When children are abused, they don't make them sit next to their abuser in court. In an assault trial, the two sides do not sit at the same table. Kavanaugh will be well represented by others during her testimony, including by the female prosecutor the Senate Republicans selected to do the questioning to avoid their personal clueless embarrassment. And Kavanaugh will testify as well. So it isn't as one-sided as you portray.
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
Some people seem to be having a problem telling the difference between a court and a job interview. A confirmation hearing is to see if he gets the job, not goes to jail , like Bill Cosby.
The idea of "beyond reasonable doubt" is justly upheld and the level of proof needed for a criminal act. to be proved. However for civil suits, and damages to be paid. "The Balance of Probabilities" has been the benchmark. OJ was called "Not Guilty " in a civil court, But o0rdered to pay damages for killing his wife in a civil court. "Now, if you want to push the trial angle, Given his friends novel, the reputation of his fraternity, plus his own , the comments in the yearbook, and complaints for three women so far, on the balance of probabilities, he should fail the job interview. Let him keep his old job. @Mountainlady16
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
The media has been pretty much one sided and none of these people have testified yet. @windinhishair
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@jackjjackson Actually, you're wrong once again. There has been extensive coverage of both sides. You just don't like one of the sides, so you complain about that side. We'll hear sworn testimony tomorrow from both sides, the Republicans can ignore it, and they can vote to recommend Kavanaugh to the full Senate on Friday.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
I wrote pretty much one sided. Name an outlet besides Fox siding with Kavanaugh? @windinhishair
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@jackjjackson The issue isn't who "sides" with whom, it is whether both sides are being reported. And they are. You can make up your own mind. You already have.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
So your statement that there is extensive coverage on both sides was now wrong? I’ve stated from the get go that if Kavanaugh sexually assaulted anyone he is disqualified. What have you stated and when? @windinhishair
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@jackjjackson Both sides have been extensively presented, as I stated. I'm withholding judgment on what the truth is until a thorough investigation is completed. No one is likely to win a "he said, she said" argument without supporting evidence from an investigation.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
Credibility and support evidence. @windinhishair
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@jackjjackson Credibility is important. Both people appear credible on the face of things. Tomorrow should be very interesting and historically important.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
The spins on the testimony will be fascinating. @windinhishair