Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

That's a good idea Mick, give it a go ! ;)

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Well perhaps you ought to apply that sentiment to yourself as well Mr K.;)

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I repeat, Spicer did not make or repeat a line as if he was making such a claim, he quoted what the commentator had said and cited him. Just like I have quoted your post above and cited you, just because I have included your quote in this post does not mean, what you have said has come from me also.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Wow!

How is showing that the Daily Mail apologised to Melania Trump and paid her damages and fees an agenda?

Anyhoo, on a lighter note, any truth in the rumour that Mar-a-Lago is going to be redesignated as "Golf Course One"? ;)

---------- Post added at 11:51 ---------- Previous post was at 11:48 ----------

The difference is you are acting as an individual, and he is acting, when he says these things, as the official spokesman of the White House and the President of the USA, and putting forward the official position of the President - that's his job...

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I'm pleased you raised that point. I was a bit like the kids at school hoping someone else would raise their hand to ask the obvious question. :)

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

You said this last time this cropped up and I will tell you again. I don't need a lecture on job of White House press secretary. It does not change the fact he did not make the claim.

---------- Post added at 12:03 ---------- Previous post was at 12:02 ----------

Still irrelevant though !

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

I think it may have been Hugh or someone else who suggested The Times and Reuters.

---------- Post added at 12:16 ---------- Previous post was at 12:04 ----------

Hugh's not lecturing you Mick, he's simply having a debate with you and ensuring that things are sufficiently clear for other forum members without your knowledge to follow.
Spicer gave the commentator credence by quoting him. It would be a reasonable assumption by viewers that the President's spokesman would not have quoted Fox New if he hadn't some kind of due diligence. If the US President can't afford the resources to do such a thing, who can?

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

what do they say - to assume is to make an ass- of- u- and me

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

No he didn't.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

[QUOTE=Hugh;35894810]Wow!

How is showing that the Daily Mail apologised to Melania Trump and paid her damages and fees an agenda?

.........

are you familiar with the tale of the boy who cried wolf :)

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

No to which thing - giving him credence or quoting him?

---------- Post added at 13:58 ---------- Previous post was at 13:54 ----------

I'm aware of that saying but I believe that viewers would have assumed some degree of verification from the President's official spokesperson and that this would not be an unreasonable assumption to make given his level of responsibility.
What did you think of the source suggestions?

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Whatever's happened to all those huge demonstrations the media were predicting following Trump's victory. You know, all the massive, violent, anti-Trump protests which we were told were in the offing and would rock the Whitehouse. Maybe they've gone the same was as all those ridiculous project fear Brexit predictions... :D

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

They changed tact. The last big campaign was to attend townhall meetings with members of congress to put pressure on them not to repeal Obamacare.

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

Oh, you mean yet another failure?

Re: U.S President: Donald Trump
 

But we were warned of imminent and widespread social disorder, plus droves of people leaving the US immediately and other things. Doesn't look like any of that materialised and I'm not sure the sort of people who'd resort to riots would be the type who'd attend town hall meetings. ;)