JFLNYC wrote:Turns out Kelly “misremembered” about Cong. Wilson’s talk at 2015 opening of new FBI building in Florida. Kelly said we was “stunned” (for a guy who gets around he gets stunned a lot) that Wilson took credit for getting the building funded.

She didn’t.

She talked about how quickly Congress and the President got the approval for the building’s name passed, giving credit to both Boehner and Rubio in the process.

Now, a man’s man would apologize. We’ll see.

this part is out there now, and that's all that matters

probably just my set, but it seems like Huckabee Sanders' continuing to do her awful job has made her physically uglier than when she started

Ha, pac, are you living in some alternate reality where verifiable facts matter?

oh jesus christ, doc

Gimpy wrote:Ha, pac, are you living in some alternate reality where verifiable facts matter?

i wish

General Kelly is a standup guy. Anytime you can use your fallen son’s corpse as a step stool to ascend a moral high horse from which you can deride a congresswoman for something that never happened in defense of a white supremacist, you have to do it.

I, for one, am thankful that his maturity and composure is helping shape our executive branch for the next week or so until he either is fired in humiliating fashion or resigns in disgrace.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders wrote:If you want to get into a debate with a 4-star Marine general, I think that's something highly inappropriate.

This, plus the NRA add that was released today on Twitter. I believe in our institutions ability to survive this, but man it's not even a year.

traderdave wrote:It gets to, is Wilson a black Congresswoman or a Congresswoman who is black? Viewed a different way, should Kelly's criticism have been toned down because Wilson is black? Is that not also racism, treating Wilson differently because of her race? Part of the reason why racism will never be a non-issue in the United States (and the ROW) is because race is regularly made an issue. Sometimes rightly but often times, IMHO, presumptuously.

I thought O'Donnell did a good job of contextualizing Kelly, one of his fellow South Boston emigres. Hard for O'Donnell to miss - or Kelly to shed - where Kelly was coming from

drsmooth wrote:

traderdave wrote:It gets to, is Wilson a black Congresswoman or a Congresswoman who is black? Viewed a different way, should Kelly's criticism have been toned down because Wilson is black? Is that not also racism, treating Wilson differently because of her race? Part of the reason why racism will never be a non-issue in the United States (and the ROW) is because race is regularly made an issue. Sometimes rightly but often times, IMHO, presumptuously.

I thought O'Donnell did a good job of contextualizing Kelly, one of his fellow South Boston emigres. Hard for O'Donnell to miss - or Kelly to shed - where Kelly was coming from

traderdave, the point is not that Kelly should have toned down his rhetoric because Wilson is black, but that he used dehumanizing rhetoric because she is black. He may not have done it intentionally, per se, but he certainly doesn't emphasize with her. Kelly expressed surprise and a lack of understanding why she was there with the family to begin with.

One can only speculate why someone who believes women are sacred would treat a woman like that.

Congresswoman Wilson’s 2015 speech at the new FBI location was released by the Florida Sun Sentinal, and it shows that Kelly was flat out wrong in his line of attack about her taking claim for things, whereas she really actually was talking about her effort to have the building named after to slain FBI agent. It’s also been pointed out time again that she was not even in Congress when the $20 million preparation was made. Something that may have been reported and I did not know, was John Kelly was in the audience for her speech. Also missing was her praise of how speaker Bonner and President Obama in helping her secure those naming rights. I think the most horrible thing about this part of the larger narrative is that she stops in the middle of her speech and asks all of the representatives of law-enforcement to stand up and receive applause in recognition of their valor.

This all comes out because Sarah Huckabee from the podium went after the press over the facts. Maybe the most appalling is that she stated that it it would be ill advise and in appropriate to go after a four star general. I’m not even sure what to say about that.

**** I caught it on replay and missed slugs mentioning it above, but still blown away.

Sad, pathetic people inhabit the White House

slugsrbad wrote:

Sarah Huckabee Sanders wrote:If you want to get into a debate with a 4-star Marine general, I think that's something highly inappropriate.

This, plus the NRA add that was released today on Twitter. I believe in our institutions ability to survive this, but man it's not even a year.

What if we are debating if Papa John's is better than Domino's. Is that appropriate?

Given twitter threads are deeply problematic, Laura Seay has thankfully taken to the notoriously right wing outlet Slate.com to slam Maddow and explain all of this in article format.

This Is Not Trump’s Benghazi

MADDOW WAS JUST ASKING QUESTIONS

So Fox News can spew their bile 24/7 and as long as it helps in a tangential fashion to take healthcare from kids and increase taxes on the poor it is a-okay. The second a media member on the left gets maybe a tiny bit hyperbolic its time for a lynching. Double standards much?

Let jersey be. He's helped 0 people in his life. Reads about serving communities on the internet.

drsmooth wrote:

TomatoPie wrote:

drsmooth wrote:oh, and #$!&@ Kelly. If his son had a soul, he's spinning in his grave. Filthy shameless #$!&@

Kelly is a magnificent man.

He's a man, as far as I know. Before you nominate Kelly for sainthood, listen to O'Donnell's dissection of his tirade:

Well here's the thing.

Kelly is an old-school military man. He has a lot of outdated values, like the sacred lady stuff. I don't doubt that some of the wacky Bannon stuff sits OK with him.

We don't have the luxury, though, of debating how Kelly feels about the gender pay gap or Floridians who wear cowboy hats.

The big picture is that our nation is in great peril, having elected Hitler's stunted brother.

I don't have any doubt that Kelly sees his duty as serving - and protecting - his country, not his fmoron boss. Prince Jeebus was entirely useless in this role; Kelly is essential. And he understands the ridicule heaped on him for saying the things he must say to keep his job. Yet he puts our safety above his own reputation.

Just like 99% of the "conservatives" in and around DC, he sees that Trump is incompetent. No sentient person can fail to see that.

This is a good post TP.

I don't think he's worried about losing his job. His job sucks and he knows it. But he is willing to suffer fools to try and save our country from our goofy commander in chief.

agrudez wrote:So Fox News can spew their bile 24/7 and as long as it helps in a tangential fashion to take healthcare from kids and increase taxes on the poor it is a-okay. The second a media member on the left gets maybe a tiny bit hyperbolic its time for a lynching. Double standards much?

You wouldn't exactly have to sprain a finger looking for me criticizing Fox News. And I'd certainly expect other posters here would point out the folly in the segment if I were to praise a Fox News host for conjuring up a conspiracy theory.

If there are double standards here, I do not think I'm the one suffering from them.

i side with jh on this topic. i think it was unconscionable what Republicans did with Benghazi. i'd rather wait for the Pentagon/FBI investigation and a hearing in a Senate committee before I 'use' this. Asking questions is fine, but there's really no way for us to know any answers at this point because no reports have been created. Wait for a report.