General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRudy Guliani is a slimy jackass.
He is sickening. Corrupt, Corrupt, blah, blah....all unsubstantiated claims.
radical noodle
(8,000 posts)He reminds me of my ex-husband when he'd had too much to drink.
Hekate
(90,704 posts)world wide wally
(21,744 posts)Corrupt motherfucking liar
apcalc
(4,465 posts)Last edited Wed Aug 10, 2016, 09:32 PM - Edit history (1)
He is one of the aliens that landed at Roswell, NM.
It's all I see.
Raine
(30,540 posts)a bruise or skin condition, bad makeup job. I couldn't listen to what he was saying because I was so distracted by his grimy looking face.
RapSoDee
(421 posts)Raine
(30,540 posts)SheriffBob
(552 posts)he is a member of the mafia.
spanone
(135,838 posts)Cicada
(4,533 posts)He is a talented prosecutor, like Christie.So talented that it is hard to think of rebuttals to his arguments. That makes us angry. In trials after a gifted lawyer makes his or her case you think - damn that has to be true. Until the similarly skilled lawyer rebuts with his side of the case. Then you think - oh yeah now I see the flaws in that argument. Lawyers like Rudy are amazingly skilled at making persuasive arguments for whatever they want to prove, right or wrong. That is the main reason so many people hate lawyers. We know they are not telling the truth but we can't easily spot where they are lying. that makes us really angry. An Olympic athlete with great native ability and years of coaching and practice can do amazing things. So too a great lawyer like Rudy or the awesome Elizabeth Warren. But this time the truth is on our side and in trials the truth almost always prevails. So relax, don't be angry. Chris Matthews was able to smile at Rudy's sophistry today because he knew that Rudy's sly distortion of the truth are going to end up in a spectacular belly flop.
Gabi Hayes
(28,795 posts)dial up his hebrephenia, and let it take over, without regard to the most easily provable mendacity.
here's the easiest one: he repeated the obvious lie about Hillary claiming that "we ARE" going to raise taxes on the middle class. dunno how many times he's claimed that, but I saw him do it with Martha Raddatz on Sunday, several days after it had been conclusively debunked (with audiograph recordings) on politifact, which showed the ''N'' consonant on the graph provided....there was no discernible "T," to be fair, but the presence of the N proves that she was saying 'aren't'
and what was Raddatz's response? NOTHING!
she just let it pass, and then fulsomely, blushingly, gushingly thanked him for allowing her to suck up to him in the most embarrassing manner imaginable
Gabi Hayes
(28,795 posts)Alan Yu, a linguistics professor at the University of Chicago who specializes in phonology, ran the audio through a computer program called Praat, which analyzes phonetics.
By analyzing the sound waves, we can see that Clinton was saying "arent," because she definitely pronounced the "n," though she didnt really hit the "t."
Heres a screenshot of the results:
https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/lUTEUmYRSgmmKEzvKf_UFBNwCtox5N9gTZ6b0a9A1WCu0Koitg8gLxgAaYq39bLMQ0ud1Q7lVZPjZPe6scNuq1IFNwjv9N2lm9kcgriiGl8U2sxK9jzms8RuyZXIXeMHrSiH-myq
"It is pretty common for people to not release the final t in word-final -nt clusters and is definitely not likely for someone to release the tin a three-consonant sequence like ntg in aren't going," Yu told us. "In any case, since she did pronounce the n in aren't, it is clear that she produced the negated form of the copula are."
Gabi Hayes
(28,795 posts)he just told another ASTOUNDING lie, which, of course, tweety didn't counter:
the Clinton foundation, which is ACTUALLY a charity, gives 89 percent of its donations to CHARITY
Giuliani claimed it was TEN PERCENT, and the rest of the money goes to the Clintons!!!!!!
here:
http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/where-does-clinton-foundation-money-go/
Fiorina and others are referring only to the amount donated by the Clinton Foundation to outside charities, ignoring the fact that most of the Clinton Foundations charitable work is performed in-house. One independent philanthropy watchdog did an analysis of Clinton Foundation funding and concluded that about 89 percent of its funding went to charity.
Simply put, despite its name, the Clinton Foundation is not a private foundation which typically acts as a pass-through for private donations to other charitable organizations. Rather, it is a public charity. It conducts most of its charitable activities directly.
thanks for the journalistic malpractice....you gonna follow up on this, sycophant? this gigantic lie has been around for MONTHS and MONTHS!