47

nursej22 said:

Maybe I'm overly sensitive because I recently fell . Which is as relevant to Trump's speech as Biden is. 
I've watched about 20 minutes of his speech. 

I agree, you may be overly sensitive. 

Nope, its not really relevant.  Just like every time Biden's incapacitated state and the cover-up of it while in office is brought up, its met with discussion of Trump.

Let me know when you've watched the entire thing. 

NRSKarenRN said:

Explaining, not excusing Biden's fall:  he stood to shake hands with ALL West Point graduates, then tripped over sandbag afterward.   Trump made a partially rambling speech including comment about "trophy wives"  AND did not stay to shake West Point grad hands after handed diplomas breaking prescident.  But YOU focused on Biden's fall.  Excusing TRumps actions is my concern.

How can this rambling comment from a U.S. President  posted on a federal holiday for honoring and mourning the U.S. military personnel who died while serving in the United States Armed Forces not be considered alarming sign of mental illness?

This is MORE concerning for someone who holds the nuclear keys

What an impression for the world's leaders---- finally realizing Putin not interested in stopping this war PUTIN started "within 24hrs after I'm elected".

 

 

I don't like the posts he made.  Mental illness, though?  I don't think so.

I understand how Biden fell.  I didn't ask for an explanation.  And I didn't "focus" on it...LOL.  I made one comment.  

I hadnt watched Trump's speech, so not commenting on it.

I asked if you watched Trump's speech or simply relied on the reporting you linked to?

Beerman said:

 

Let me know when you've watched the entire thing. 

I  watched it. Not impressed. Rambling, several lines that I've heard from campaign events, and some historical inaccuracies. The MAGA hat looked stupid. 

nursej22 said:

I  watched it. Not impressed. Rambling, several lines that I've heard from campaign events, and some historical inaccuracies. The MAGA hat looked stupid. 

It's unlikely that most Trump voters and defenders will actually listen to or read Trump's crazy speech. We have lots of history and examples of a practiced and curated ignorance of the details, specifics, facts, examples, or demonstrations of Trump's disqualifying and unethical language and behavior by his devoted viewers and supporters.  If they don't know about the thing they can't really hold it against him, right? 

It's much easier for people to pledge and maintain public support for Trump if they don't actually know what he says and does.  Their opinions of the man are based upon what they're told that he said and what they are told that he meant and what they are led to believe that he is doing and upon what they WANT to believe about him.  They gladly accept all of the spin and fabricated narratives, or they laugh the Trump symptoms away as nothing more than their political leader having some innocent fun or something.   We see this from the politicians who scurry through the halls of congress, avoiding the questions about Trump by claiming ignorance of the most recent crazy thing he's said or done.  We saw it with supporters who wouldn't actually read the Mueller report or P2025 but expressed strong opinions about what the documents do or don't include.  

We ignore patterns of risky and dangerous behavior at our own peril.  

nursej22 said:

I  watched it. Not impressed. Rambling, several lines that I've heard from campaign events, and some historical inaccuracies. The MAGA hat looked stupid. 

You took time out of your weekend to watch the remaing 40 minutes just to appease me with a qualified opinion?  I'm flattered.

Nothing about your reporting of the speech is surprising.   He rambles and is inaccurate at times. And, more subjectively you weren't impressed and the hat looked stupid.  The national anthem?  I'd preferred he took the hat off.  Hoever, presidents have saluted in recent history, and the military keeps their hats on.  He's the Commander in Chief.  So, I see why he did what he did.  It wasnt to be disrespectful.   

If that's all there is to say about it, I'm not going to watch it as I doubt I'll find much to disagree about.

Beerman said:

 

If that's all there is to say about it, I'm not going to watch it as I doubt I'll find much to disagree about.

I've read that Trump voters do not actually listen to what he says, and instead rely on interpretation by their media of choice. This allows them to deny his worsening mental state, conveniently. 

Yes, I took time out of my weekend. A broken clavicle prevents a lot of activity. 

"inaccurate at times" = lies and makes things up

Tweety said:

"inaccurate at times" = lies and makes things up

I think we are supposed to think that Trump isn't telling intentional lies to manipulate people.  I can't for the life of me figure out why it would be a strategy to imply that the POTUS isn't lying, that he's simply naive, or stupid, or completely misinformed. Trump's "inaccuracies" are a consistent feature of his public persona. He's an adjudicated fraud. 

Why is claiming that he's just sloppy and dumb and not to be believed better than admitting that Trump is a liar and not to be believed? 

Maybe Trump just doesn't know what is true and what isn't because he is experiencing delusional thinking with both his mental illness and his dementia.  

We don't appease members here.  We engage in discussion and exchange of ideas, information, and opinions.  

Looks like 2 Dolls Donny had been protecting Putin? I'd love to hear about this.  

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2025/may/23/harvard-university-international-students-donald-trump-republicans-democrats-us-politics-latest-news

Quote

The US department of defense, which has held just one news conference this year, announced on Friday that it has a new press secretary, Kingsley Wilson, who has repeatedly shared an antisemitic conspiracy theory promoted by neo-Nazis.

Repeatedly shared.  So, not an accident.  

Quote

Wilson has served in the Pentagon press office since January, before being promoted on Friday. When her repeated endorsement of the attacks on Leo Frank were first reported in March, the American Jewish Committee said in a statement that she was "clearly unfit for her role".

"Anyone who posts antisemitic conspiracy theories lifted right out of the neo-Nazi playbook should not be in public office", the AJC wrote in March. Two months later, and just days after two Israeli embassy staffers were murdered as they left an AJC event in Washington, Wilson has been given a much more prominent role in the Trump administration, as the Pentagon's chief spokesperson.

It's a good thing she isn't a student at Harvard.