Man, can’t you let a guy revel in memories of being a spunky teenage “rebel” without bringin’ it down with all sorts of Real Facts and Numbers?
(I kid, I kid)
Now Fox News is colluding with Clinton.
Yeah, seriously. Who the fuck asks, “Please give us a closing statement” at a debate? Total collusion.
JFrazer
3179
Is that what he’s upset about? That she was prepared to give a closing statement?
Did you see the smile on her face when Wallace said “I know we said there wouldn’t be closing remarks…but I want you to give them anyway”? It was like the straight A student that studied items the professor didn’t have on the test-prep sheet and then saw the surprise extra credit question at the end of the final.
I have no fucking idea. But it’s a goddamn debate for the position of President of the United States. It’s not trivia night at the pub. It’s pretty easy to figure out what they’ll ask.
I was way more amused by your initial profanity laden response that has since vanished into the ether.
Ephraim
3182
Don’t you insult the KFC double down in that manner!
Who would have thought they’d throw him a curve ball the likes of “Why should the American people elect you?”
ShivaX
3186
So I guess his kid steals lemonade from fast food places. That’s just good business.
ShivaX
3187
So… he’s basically an idiot. He doesn’t want the 1st Amendment so he can sue people. Only… he literally lies like 20 times a day. Does he think his money is going to protect him? Cause he’s said bullshit about people with more money and power than he has.
But mostly, fuck Trump’s assault on the Constitution.
Menzo
3189
The most hilariously ironic part of this whole tirade is that his plan B when he loses is to start TrumpTV, which will, without a doubt, make its money by knowingly lying about Hillary Clinton and the rest of the Democratic party.
JFrazer
3190
I guess I’m confused. Can’t you already sue a newspaper for printing a personal attack that they know to be false? Obviously, IANAL, but my understanding of British libel law is that the judge or jury needs to be convinced that the statements are both false and damaging.
A fun thing is that, in Britain, you can’t file suit if the paper uses a nickname. So if, say, The Sun said “Chee-to Jesus is bankrupt”, even though people know who they are talking about, he still can’t sue thing.
Technically they (or these days much more likely a judge) need to be convinced that the statements caused (or are likely to cause) serious harm, and not be convinced that they are true.
Timex
3192
Yeah, there’s no way Trump wins a libel suit under current law, even in the UK.
He’s threatening to sue people for saying he did things that he was video taped saying that he did.
JFrazer
3193
OK, so that sounds a bit different than U.S. law. Again, IANAL, but my understanding is that in the U.S. the “defamed” needs to prove that the statements are both false and damaging. In Britain is it up to the defendant to prove that the statements are true as opposed to them being assumed true until proven otherwise?
Menzo
3194
Not just that, but that the accused wrote those things knowing they were false.
