Posted on 10/21/2015 12:56:32 PM PDT by elhombrelibre
As usual, Donald Trumps latest comments are rankling at least one of his opponents. When you talk about George Bush, Trump said on Bloomberg TV on Friday morning, I mean, say what you want, the World Trade Center came down during his time. Challenged by anchor Stephanie Ruhle, he added, He was president, okay? . . . Blame him, or dont blame him, but he was president. The World Trade Center came down during his reign. On Twitter, Jeb Bush called Trumps comment pathetic, sparking a back-and-forth between the campaigns on social media.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Well, after last night, I would have to agree with you.
“One of the key problems today is that politics is such a disgrace. Good people dont go into government. D.T.
think ...lets call it .....again....giving you the benefit of the doubt”
I need no “benefit of the doubt. Are you a member of Capos for Communism?
sorry charlie..... no President..... of a Republic..... is a Sovereign
Sovereigns have reigns..Presidents....DO NOT
continue to conflate at will
google ...conflate .......if necessary
You have a dangerous mind my good FRiend, lol
in your dreams skipster
sigh
Had he just said he kept us safe after 9/11,
Agree. Billy Jeff bears a lot of blame for not addressing Bin Laden when he had the chance, and for his lackluster “ legal - no controlling authority” approach to the attacks that factually happened on his watch.
I don’t think Trump implied that GWB was responsible in any way for 9-11. He just said it happened during his presidency. I think Trump feels that the leadership should have been more vigilant about the danger of Muslim immigrants back then. I agree.
I think he was also implying that if he had been president back then, he would have made more stringent attempts to stop the illegals. Well, we’ll never know about that, will we.
My main two points were that these comments by Trump caused an unnecessary distraction and gave ammunition to the democrats. Trump has nothing to fear from Jeb Bush so why even do it? Trump should ignore Jeb Bush and concentrate on Hillary and Obama.
And Trump people are way too sensitive and prickly.
“NR has purged ALL of them. Rich Lowry has apparently dedicated his career to destroying Trump. Others are almost as bad.”
NR reminds many of us of what the WSJ has become since the Murdoch left wing thugs bought it.
A faux conservative outlet.
Do the Murdoch left wing thugs own/control NR?
I don’t read anything NR has to say. They are polluted with TDS and are basically not very conservative. Lowry the crude and rude probably wrote this. Could care less what he has to say.
“Do the Murdoch left wing thugs own/control NR?”
Dave this is a very interesting question. Let’s both look into it, and get back later.
The president at that time was Bush. The buck stops with him. Why don’t some people realize that? Didn’t this site have threads about this topic very recently? Facts have not changed no matter how some try.
It’s morning here, but thanks anyway.
I am voting for Trump. Bush folks are has been losers!
Go Trump!
He blamed Clinton for 911, too. Good try.
But as Rush explained, Trump sucked Jeb and the establishment in to set up the opportunity for Trump to talk about him writing in one of his books that a major terrorist attack was coming - via Bin Laden - a couple years before the 911 attack. He said it would make the world trade center bombing (the first one) look like children playing with fire crackers. He has foresight the establishment (the uni-party) lacks.
The editors of The National Review are of the establishment. They want Jeb.
Love him or hate him; it is what it is.
Now -- how about you telling me what other Republican politicians who have made heavy donations to Democrats in their political races, that you would vote for? Bueller? Bueller?
I think you are so very right with regard to bearing false witness -- I have unwittingly done my share of it here because I didn't pay enough attention to the fact and said things about candidates that were in fact false. Once I discover I'm in error, I cease and desist; that was the case with Trump for me in many instances, and I humbly apologize.
HOWEVER, there is also something very, very wrong with labeling folks to raise valid questions and express justifiably skepticism regarding Trump as looking at his past actions, as "haters."
If you think I "hate" Trump, you are not only very, very wrong, you need to re-think your definition of "hater."
I don't think you're a Cruz "hater" -- yet by your own definition, you are one, I expect.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.