WACriminalDying Is Easy, Young ManLiving Is HarderRegistered Userregular
You know, when I was a kid growing up a lot of things were sacred in our country. Women were sacred. Looked upon with great honor. That's obviously not the case anymore, as we've seen from recent cases.
--John Kelly, Chief of Staff to President And Pussygrabber-In-Chief Donald "Blood Coming Out Of Her Wherever" Trump
+40
Options
SurfpossumA nonentitytrying to preserve the anonymity he so richly deserves.Registered Userregular
In this case, I think he feels like she crossed a personal line both with him and with the calls themselves. On the latter point, I've heard now that the circumstances of the call is that the congresswoman was in the limo with the family at some point during the funeral procession, and the phone was on speaker when the call from the White House came in. The content of these calls is intended to be private, between the President and the Family. She overheard the call, and based on all evidence decided to use it for political points without the family's input. If it was the family coming forward with the Congresswoman, that's one thing; the Congresswoman just leaping out on her own and waving it around is the issue.
No, the issue is that the President is incapable of respecting another human being due to a mix of incompetence and a lack of empathy. But because Kelly accidentally told him that Obama didn't call his family, he felt he could "one up" Obama by making some phone calls and made a mess instead.
Wilson publicizing the mess he made is what they are trying to deflect to.
In this case, I think he feels like she crossed a personal line both with him and with the calls themselves. On the latter point, I've heard now that the circumstances of the call is that the congresswoman was in the limo with the family at some point during the funeral procession, and the phone was on speaker when the call from the White House came in. The content of these calls is intended to be private, between the President and the Family. She overheard the call, and based on all evidence decided to use it for political points without the family's input. If it was the family coming forward with the Congresswoman, that's one thing; the Congresswoman just leaping out on her own and waving it around is the issue.
I... that seems like stupendously arrogant, privileged thinking. Like, would that fly in real life? "Yeah, you heard me call her a hot piece of ass at work, but that was meant to be private. How dare you take our private conversation in which I called her a hot piece of ass and publicize it?! I'm offended that you're offended!"
And... I... how does any of this change the core fact that what was said was gross and disturbing? If only one person heard it, it wasn't gross and disturbing? Not pointing this at you emissary or at this particular post, but this whole damn thing has turned into a high-school-esque who-said-what finger-pointing game, and I'm just like... who the hell cares how many people Obama may or may not have called? Would that in any way change the fact that Trump said some horribly gross things and completely lied about what he's been doing and what past Presidents did/demonstrated his total ignorance of Presidential behaviour?
In this case, I think he feels like she crossed a personal line both with him and with the calls themselves. On the latter point, I've heard now that the circumstances of the call is that the congresswoman was in the limo with the family at some point during the funeral procession, and the phone was on speaker when the call from the White House came in. The content of these calls is intended to be private, between the President and the Family. She overheard the call, and based on all evidence decided to use it for political points without the family's input. If it was the family coming forward with the Congresswoman, that's one thing; the Congresswoman just leaping out on her own and waving it around is the issue.
I think you are being far too credulous. This is spin because Trump is a terrible person.
Is my order of events wrong? Didn't Trump fire his mouth off about calling every fallen soldier under his tenure, then claim that previous presidents didn't do the same, THEN didn't the story about him calling the widow hit?
In this case, I think he feels like she crossed a personal line both with him and with the calls themselves. On the latter point, I've heard now that the circumstances of the call is that the congresswoman was in the limo with the family at some point during the funeral procession, and the phone was on speaker when the call from the White House came in. The content of these calls is intended to be private, between the President and the Family. She overheard the call, and based on all evidence decided to use it for political points without the family's input. If it was the family coming forward with the Congresswoman, that's one thing; the Congresswoman just leaping out on her own and waving it around is the issue.
I... that seems like stupendously arrogant, privileged thinking. Like, would that fly in real life? "Yeah, you heard me call her a hot piece of ass at work, but that was meant to be private. How dare you take our private conversation in which I called her a hot piece of ass and publicize it?! I'm offended that you're offended!"
And... I... how does any of this change the core fact that what was said was gross and disturbing? If only one person heard it, it wasn't gross and disturbing? Not pointing this at you emissary or at this particular post, but this whole damn thing has turned into a high-school-esque who-said-what finger-pointing game, and I'm just like... who the hell cares how many people Obama may or may not have called? Would that in any way change the fact that Trump said some horribly gross things and completely lied about what he's been doing and what past Presidents did/demonstrated his total ignorance of Presidential behaviour?
Hey, I'm just relaying what seemed to be Kelly's take. Bolded is basically the long and short of it, and Trump started this one by criticizing Obama for something that's not actually criticizable. Like most of these spats, it's going to be gone once the weekend passes.
So, I am leaning towards agreeing with Emissary here.
Yes, the congresswoman was present for the phone call, but she gave some of that phone call's information to the press and it blew up into a big thing. The congresswoman knew that it would. Let's be clear. She knew what would happen.
Now, this was a phone call to a grieving widow from the POTUS. While the congresswoman was privy to some of it, I don't think she had the right to give this information to the press. If the widow wanted to make this information well-known, I think it is her right alone to do so.
While the grandmother of the soldier said what the congresswoman told the press was accurate and said Trump disrespected her family, I'm not sure it wasn't just said out of response to the whole thing blowing up and the media hounding the family. It's important to note that the wife has not given a statement to the press and that the grandmother did not go into detail about how Trump disrespected their family and chose not to when asked.
I feel everyone (but the family) comes out looking like assholes because of this because in the end, it was the family who received the call and I understand Kelly's disgust that something like this was given to the press by someone outside the family.
If new information comes to light that the widow was cool with the congresswoman saying what she said, I'll eat crow, but I feel this was a private moment that has had a spotlight shone upon it and the grieving family by a congresswoman looking to make headlines and it makes me feel sick to my stomach.
Also, let me be clear: Donald Trump is a gross sociopath who will hopefully be ousted from office due to his distinctly unpresidential BS. I am not defending him or what he said. There are enough people pouring it on him for being a shitheel about all of this.
I'm just surprised more people are not upset by this breach of trust the congresswoman seems to have done.
+3
Options
No-QuarterNothing To FearBut Fear ItselfRegistered Userregular
Is my order of events wrong? Didn't Trump fire his mouth off about calling every fallen soldier under his tenure, then claim that previous presidents didn't do the same, THEN didn't the story about him calling the widow hit?
As is typical, it's about throwing so much bullshit at you that you can't even nail them down one precisely thing because they've already moved the outrage goalpost.
In this case, I think he feels like she crossed a personal line both with him and with the calls themselves. On the latter point, I've heard now that the circumstances of the call is that the congresswoman was in the limo with the family at some point during the funeral procession, and the phone was on speaker when the call from the White House came in. The content of these calls is intended to be private, between the President and the Family. She overheard the call, and based on all evidence decided to use it for political points without the family's input. If it was the family coming forward with the Congresswoman, that's one thing; the Congresswoman just leaping out on her own and waving it around is the issue.
I... that seems like stupendously arrogant, privileged thinking. Like, would that fly in real life? "Yeah, you heard me call her a hot piece of ass at work, but that was meant to be private. How dare you take our private conversation in which I called her a hot piece of ass and publicize it?! I'm offended that you're offended!"
And... I... how does any of this change the core fact that what was said was gross and disturbing? If only one person heard it, it wasn't gross and disturbing? Not pointing this at you emissary or at this particular post, but this whole damn thing has turned into a high-school-esque who-said-what finger-pointing game, and I'm just like... who the hell cares how many people Obama may or may not have called? Would that in any way change the fact that Trump said some horribly gross things and completely lied about what he's been doing and what past Presidents did/demonstrated his total ignorance of Presidential behaviour?
Hey, I'm just relaying what seemed to be Kelly's take. Bolded is basically the long and short of it, and Trump started this one by criticizing Obama for something that's not actually criticizable. Like most of these spats, it's going to be gone once the weekend passes.
Yeah, no, sorry, I'm absolutely not criticizing you here. I'm just gobsmacked at how dumb this conversation (the national one, not the one in this thread) has gotten.
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
edited October 2017
The difference is that the rep is her district's problem. The President is the problem of all of us
Also, let me be clear: Donald Trump is a gross sociopath who will hopefully be ousted from office due to his distinctly unpresidential BS. I am not defending him or what he said. There are enough people pouring it on him for being a shitheel about all of this.
I'm just surprised more people are not upset by this breach of trust the congresswoman seems to have done.
Because it's not one. It's someone reacting to Trump being a deplorable human being without empathy.
The Congressperson reacted exactly as basically everyone did: outrage. The stories all even say she did it in the spot. She is pissed and reacting as normal people do to such appalling behaviour.
Kelly's spin on this is nothing but bullshit to try and distract from what Trump did. If Kelly really had an issue with disgusting behaviour he wouldn't be doing the job he is.
Also, let me be clear: Donald Trump is a gross sociopath who will hopefully be ousted from office due to his distinctly unpresidential BS. I am not defending him or what he said. There are enough people pouring it on him for being a shitheel about all of this.
I'm just surprised more people are not upset by this breach of trust the congresswoman seems to have done.
Why should they be? If it had been a leaked transcript or recording, nobody but Trump and cronies would be blaming the leaker. If only people who don't hate Trump are allowed to be publicly incensed by his bullshit...
Gold Star families, I think that left in the convention over the summer.
That's some serious passive voice there, General. Who did that, sir? Who made that happen? Who was and is responsible for that?
I realize, as Mild Confusion and others have said, he's under all kinds of limits, but... damn.
(Also personally not too happy about him saying that "women were sacred" when he was growing up; more like "valuable property, held in trust by fathers for their future husbands." And that his boss is on record - on tape - talking about assaulting those same women. But that's another thread.)
Gold Star families, I think that left in the convention over the summer.
That's some serious passive voice there, General. Who did that, sir? Who made that happen? Who was and is responsible for that?
I realize, as Mild Confusion and others have said, he's under all kinds of limits, but... damn.
(Also personally not too happy about him saying that "women were sacred" when he was growing up; more like "valuable property, held in trust by fathers for their future husbands." But that's another thread.)
If you have an issue with me invoking Kelly at all, I'm cool with you removing it from the rest of the context.
We're still left with someone who was privy to a private conversation between a widow and the president. That person, who can benefit from the publicity because they're in a position of power, gives the information of the conversation to the press. She essentially took away the widow's voice and used it as her own. I don't think that is acceptable.
If you put yourself in her shoes and someone whom you trusted had a spotlight shone onto you, your family, and your deceased loved one without your consent, how would you feel?
Also, let me be clear: Donald Trump is a gross sociopath who will hopefully be ousted from office due to his distinctly unpresidential BS. I am not defending him or what he said. There are enough people pouring it on him for being a shitheel about all of this.
I'm just surprised more people are not upset by this breach of trust the congresswoman seems to have done.
Wilson seems to have a long history of [caring vocally about, politicizing] tragedies that happen to her constituents.
If you have an issue with me invoking Kelly at all, I'm cool with you removing it from the rest of the context.
We're still left with someone who was privy to a private conversation between a widow and the president. That person, who can benefit from the publicity because they're in a position of power, gives the information of the conversation to the press. She essentially took away the widow's voice and used it as her own. I don't think that is acceptable.
If you put yourself in her shoes and someone whom you trusted had a spotlight shone onto you, your family, and your deceased loved one without your consent, how would you feel?
Depends on how it was used, same as with anything in this world.
So, I am leaning towards agreeing with Emissary here.
Yes, the congresswoman was present for the phone call, but she gave some of that phone call's information to the press and it blew up into a big thing. The congresswoman knew that it would. Let's be clear. She knew what would happen.
Now, this was a phone call to a grieving widow from the POTUS. While the congresswoman was privy to some of it, I don't think she had the right to give this information to the press. If the widow wanted to make this information well-known, I think it is her right alone to do so.
While the grandmother of the soldier said what the congresswoman told the press was accurate and said Trump disrespected her family, I'm not sure it wasn't just said out of response to the whole thing blowing up and the media hounding the family. It's important to note that the wife has not given a statement to the press and that the grandmother did not go into detail about how Trump disrespected their family and chose not to when asked.
I feel everyone (but the family) comes out looking like assholes because of this because in the end, it was the family who received the call and I understand Kelly's disgust that something like this was given to the press by someone outside the family.
If new information comes to light that the widow was cool with the congresswoman saying what she said, I'll eat crow, but I feel this was a private moment that has had a spotlight shone upon it and the grieving family by a congresswoman looking to make headlines and it makes me feel sick to my stomach.
You're making a lot of assumptions about the Congresswoman and her conversations with the family that none of us can know.
Given how readily the conservative media will monster a war widow, I really hope this story starts to fade and the family is left in peace.
The idea that there can only be one "bad guy" because otherwise it muddles that shitstorm Trump is receiving is utter nonsense.
That wasn't the point of my post. They (Kelly, etc) want the news networks spending time talking about how shitty the congresswoman is because then they aren't spending as much time talking about how shitty Trump's words were.
It's their only move. It's "the real problem are the leakers!". It's stupid.
+27
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
Has the family said anything about Wilson going against their wishes? Why are we assuming they are against her going public?
If you have an issue with me invoking Kelly at all, I'm cool with you removing it from the rest of the context.
We're still left with someone who was privy to a private conversation between a widow and the president. That person, who can benefit from the publicity because they're in a position of power, gives the information of the conversation to the press. She essentially took away the widow's voice and used it as her own. I don't think that is acceptable.
If you put yourself in her shoes and someone whom you trusted had a spotlight shone onto you, your family, and your deceased loved one without your consent, how would you feel?
The idea that there can only be one "bad guy" because otherwise it muddles that shitstorm Trump is receiving is utter nonsense.
That wasn't the point of my post. They (Kelly, etc) want the news networks spending time talking about how shitty the congresswoman is because then they aren't spending as much time talking about how shitty Trump's words were.
It's their only move. It's "the real problem are the leakers!". It's stupid.
I mean otherwise the solution would have to be "maybe Trump cold learn to shut his piehole" which everyone knows will never happen
So, I am leaning towards agreeing with Emissary here.
Yes, the congresswoman was present for the phone call, but she gave some of that phone call's information to the press and it blew up into a big thing. The congresswoman knew that it would. Let's be clear. She knew what would happen.
Now, this was a phone call to a grieving widow from the POTUS. While the congresswoman was privy to some of it, I don't think she had the right to give this information to the press. If the widow wanted to make this information well-known, I think it is her right alone to do so.
While the grandmother of the soldier said what the congresswoman told the press was accurate and said Trump disrespected her family, I'm not sure it wasn't just said out of response to the whole thing blowing up and the media hounding the family. It's important to note that the wife has not given a statement to the press and that the grandmother did not go into detail about how Trump disrespected their family and chose not to when asked.
I feel everyone (but the family) comes out looking like assholes because of this because in the end, it was the family who received the call and I understand Kelly's disgust that something like this was given to the press by someone outside the family.
If new information comes to light that the widow was cool with the congresswoman saying what she said, I'll eat crow, but I feel this was a private moment that has had a spotlight shone upon it and the grieving family by a congresswoman looking to make headlines and it makes me feel sick to my stomach.
You're making a lot of assumptions about the Congresswoman and her conversations with the family that none of us can know.
Given how readily the conservative media will monster a war widow, I really hope this story starts to fade and the family is left in peace.
Not going to deny this at all.
I only know how I immediately felt after hearing the news story and it feels exploitative in a super gross way.
In his way [Trump] tried to express that opinion that he's a brave man, a fallen hero, he knew what he was getting himself into because he enlisted, there's no reason to enlist, he enlisted and was where he wanted to be, exactly where he wanted to be with exactly the people he wanted to be with when his life was taken. That was the message.
Yeah I still have a lot of problems with this shit because it's more of politicians running dead soldiers up the flag pole.
"He was exactly where he wanted to be"
Do you know that? Can any one of us know where he wanted to be?
"There's no reason to enlist"
I can think of a few dozen off the top of my head and no one is exactly required to give out all their reasons.
It's more of this bullshit they pull out about "This person died for this cause". And it always really burns me cause there isn't a single person in a chain of command who can give you a definite reason for why everyone under their command is there, doing what they do.
He was there because he was given orders to be there, he was with people he was assigned, he was doing what he was trained to do, beyond that you can stop trying to gild every dead soldier in red white and blue to try and make their sacrifice mean something more and instead focus of making sure that the mission means something more and that meaning is self-evident. If every soldier has to be a superman who died for our sins for their death to mean something to you then you probably didn't care enough to know about them.
They should matter because they matter, not because you had to play up reasons for them to matter.
The idea that there can only be one "bad guy" because otherwise it muddles that shitstorm Trump is receiving is utter nonsense.
That wasn't the point of my post. They (Kelly, etc) want the news networks spending time talking about how shitty the congresswoman is because then they aren't spending as much time talking about how shitty Trump's words were.
It's their only move. It's "the real problem are the leakers!". It's stupid.
I also do not disagree with this.
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
Has the family said anything about Wilson going against their wishes? Why are we assuming they are against her going public?
No. The family has said next to nothing, which, to me, implies they just want to be left alone.
Or they decided to let their family friend, the public figure whose job it is to influence politics and talk to the press.... be their public voice.
How is that not at least an equally valid assumption?
It is valid! The problem is my assumption is looked upon as worse instead of equally as possible. I gave as much reasoning as I could to explain the way I felt and how it could have gone.
It's tough, because if you give any sort of leverage to my speculation, the family wouldn't want to muddy the waters by saying they weren't cool with what the congresswoman did if they did feel Trump should get some heat now that the information is out.
They could easily say "We were cool with what the congresswoman said" and had the chance to, but just backed up her claim as "Yes, he said that" and nothing else.
Has the family said anything about Wilson going against their wishes? Why are we assuming they are against her going public?
No. The family has said next to nothing, which, to me, implies they just want to be left alone.
The family said that Wilson's account was correct and that in addition they did feel that Trump was disrespectful.
That doesn't disprove what I said. I've not accused the congresswoman of lying or misrepresenting the facts.
You’re spinning it in the worst possible light without anything concrete to back that up. You’re doing exactly what Kelly hoped would happen after his remarks today.
+33
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
Has the family said anything about Wilson going against their wishes? Why are we assuming they are against her going public?
No. The family has said next to nothing, which, to me, implies they just want to be left alone.
Or they decided to let their family friend, the public figure whose job it is to influence politics and talk to the press.... be their public voice.
How is that not at least an equally valid assumption?
It is valid! The problem is my assumption is looked upon as worse instead of equally as possible. I gave as much reasoning as I could to explain the way I felt and how it could have gone.
It's tough, because if you give any sort of leverage to my speculation, the family wouldn't want to muddy the waters by saying they weren't cool with what the congresswoman did if they did feel Trump should get some heat now that the information is out.
They could easily say "We were cool with what the congresswoman said" and had the chance to, but just backed up her claim as "Yes, he said that" and nothing else.
But nobody asked them whether they were cool with it, or mad about it. If they disapproved, they also could have easily said that. But why would they say "Yes, Trump said those terrible things to us, and by the way we're not mad about Wilson talking about it" unless prompted?
Why aren’t peolpe more upset about the congresswoman who brought this up!? Trumps team cries
I dunno maybe because I’m still reeling from the fact the fucking President was that disrespectful to the wife of a dead soldier and then lied about it every way possible?
Posts
--John Kelly, Chief of Staff to President And Pussygrabber-In-Chief Donald "Blood Coming Out Of Her Wherever" Trump
Wilson publicizing the mess he made is what they are trying to deflect to.
I... that seems like stupendously arrogant, privileged thinking. Like, would that fly in real life? "Yeah, you heard me call her a hot piece of ass at work, but that was meant to be private. How dare you take our private conversation in which I called her a hot piece of ass and publicize it?! I'm offended that you're offended!"
And... I... how does any of this change the core fact that what was said was gross and disturbing? If only one person heard it, it wasn't gross and disturbing? Not pointing this at you emissary or at this particular post, but this whole damn thing has turned into a high-school-esque who-said-what finger-pointing game, and I'm just like... who the hell cares how many people Obama may or may not have called? Would that in any way change the fact that Trump said some horribly gross things and completely lied about what he's been doing and what past Presidents did/demonstrated his total ignorance of Presidential behaviour?
I think you are being far too credulous. This is spin because Trump is a terrible person.
Hey, I'm just relaying what seemed to be Kelly's take. Bolded is basically the long and short of it, and Trump started this one by criticizing Obama for something that's not actually criticizable. Like most of these spats, it's going to be gone once the weekend passes.
Yes, the congresswoman was present for the phone call, but she gave some of that phone call's information to the press and it blew up into a big thing. The congresswoman knew that it would. Let's be clear. She knew what would happen.
Now, this was a phone call to a grieving widow from the POTUS. While the congresswoman was privy to some of it, I don't think she had the right to give this information to the press. If the widow wanted to make this information well-known, I think it is her right alone to do so.
While the grandmother of the soldier said what the congresswoman told the press was accurate and said Trump disrespected her family, I'm not sure it wasn't just said out of response to the whole thing blowing up and the media hounding the family. It's important to note that the wife has not given a statement to the press and that the grandmother did not go into detail about how Trump disrespected their family and chose not to when asked.
I feel everyone (but the family) comes out looking like assholes because of this because in the end, it was the family who received the call and I understand Kelly's disgust that something like this was given to the press by someone outside the family.
If new information comes to light that the widow was cool with the congresswoman saying what she said, I'll eat crow, but I feel this was a private moment that has had a spotlight shone upon it and the grieving family by a congresswoman looking to make headlines and it makes me feel sick to my stomach.
I'm just surprised more people are not upset by this breach of trust the congresswoman seems to have done.
As is typical, it's about throwing so much bullshit at you that you can't even nail them down one precisely thing because they've already moved the outrage goalpost.
Yeah, no, sorry, I'm absolutely not criticizing you here. I'm just gobsmacked at how dumb this conversation (the national one, not the one in this thread) has gotten.
Because it's not one. It's someone reacting to Trump being a deplorable human being without empathy.
The Congressperson reacted exactly as basically everyone did: outrage. The stories all even say she did it in the spot. She is pissed and reacting as normal people do to such appalling behaviour.
Kelly's spin on this is nothing but bullshit to try and distract from what Trump did. If Kelly really had an issue with disgusting behaviour he wouldn't be doing the job he is.
Why should they be? If it had been a leaked transcript or recording, nobody but Trump and cronies would be blaming the leaker. If only people who don't hate Trump are allowed to be publicly incensed by his bullshit...
I realize, as Mild Confusion and others have said, he's under all kinds of limits, but... damn.
(Also personally not too happy about him saying that "women were sacred" when he was growing up; more like "valuable property, held in trust by fathers for their future husbands." And that his boss is on record - on tape - talking about assaulting those same women. But that's another thread.)
The problem is that he would answer "Khzir Khan".
We're still left with someone who was privy to a private conversation between a widow and the president. That person, who can benefit from the publicity because they're in a position of power, gives the information of the conversation to the press. She essentially took away the widow's voice and used it as her own. I don't think that is acceptable.
If you put yourself in her shoes and someone whom you trusted had a spotlight shone onto you, your family, and your deceased loved one without your consent, how would you feel?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/10/19/rep-frederica-wilson-didnt-flinch-at-trumps-attacks-her-record-explains-why/
I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt wrt a breach of trust unless I hear something to suggest otherwise.
Not that that would make me more inclined to believe Kelly is being sincere.
Depends on how it was used, same as with anything in this world.
You're making a lot of assumptions about the Congresswoman and her conversations with the family that none of us can know.
Given how readily the conservative media will monster a war widow, I really hope this story starts to fade and the family is left in peace.
That wasn't the point of my post. They (Kelly, etc) want the news networks spending time talking about how shitty the congresswoman is because then they aren't spending as much time talking about how shitty Trump's words were.
It's their only move. It's "the real problem are the leakers!". It's stupid.
Those are assumptions you are making.
I mean otherwise the solution would have to be "maybe Trump cold learn to shut his piehole" which everyone knows will never happen
I only know how I immediately felt after hearing the news story and it feels exploitative in a super gross way.
"He was exactly where he wanted to be"
Do you know that? Can any one of us know where he wanted to be?
"There's no reason to enlist"
I can think of a few dozen off the top of my head and no one is exactly required to give out all their reasons.
It's more of this bullshit they pull out about "This person died for this cause". And it always really burns me cause there isn't a single person in a chain of command who can give you a definite reason for why everyone under their command is there, doing what they do.
He was there because he was given orders to be there, he was with people he was assigned, he was doing what he was trained to do, beyond that you can stop trying to gild every dead soldier in red white and blue to try and make their sacrifice mean something more and instead focus of making sure that the mission means something more and that meaning is self-evident. If every soldier has to be a superman who died for our sins for their death to mean something to you then you probably didn't care enough to know about them.
They should matter because they matter, not because you had to play up reasons for them to matter.
Or they decided to let their family friend, the public figure whose job it is to influence politics and talk to the press.... be their public voice.
How is that not at least an equally valid assumption?
If we assume the Congresswoman is speaking out with the family's support...it isn't.
The family said that Wilson's account was correct and that in addition they did feel that Trump was disrespectful.
It's tough, because if you give any sort of leverage to my speculation, the family wouldn't want to muddy the waters by saying they weren't cool with what the congresswoman did if they did feel Trump should get some heat now that the information is out.
They could easily say "We were cool with what the congresswoman said" and had the chance to, but just backed up her claim as "Yes, he said that" and nothing else.
Source, please? (I just want it on record in this thread.)
You’re spinning it in the worst possible light without anything concrete to back that up. You’re doing exactly what Kelly hoped would happen after his remarks today.
But nobody asked them whether they were cool with it, or mad about it. If they disapproved, they also could have easily said that. But why would they say "Yes, Trump said those terrible things to us, and by the way we're not mad about Wilson talking about it" unless prompted?
I dunno maybe because I’m still reeling from the fact the fucking President was that disrespectful to the wife of a dead soldier and then lied about it every way possible?