Another Day, another derogatory book about Trump.

[Brian37]

Nothing to do with Trumply, Omarosa has given differing and inconsistent accounts.  She fubar'd this entirely on her own.

We need a fucking credible account and an impeccable witness.  Omarosa has/is neither.  

VERY annoying, I'd fire her too.

Don Regan wrote a great kiss and tell on Ron and Nancy, it is beyond frustrating with some great extant examples such as that to use as a guide,  Omarosa still managed to fuck this up so badly and so rapidly.

I don't think anyone here is arguing she is a girl scout. She is an opportunist, but again, when you take into account all the vile dehumanizing comments the President has made repeatedly almost on a daily basis, outside her personal contact with him, it adds up to her being consistent with what others have said even if you don't like her personally.

Any law investigator or prosecutor will NOT rely on claims alone, they get evidence that backs up the claim. It does not matter to me that Omarosa is trying to make a buck off all this. I am not shocked, but when you take into account the fact 45 did not rent to blacks in the 70s. Called for the death penalty for the Central Park 5 whom were eventually cleared and proven innocent. When he perpetuates 5 years of "secret black Muslim". when he starts his campaign calling Mexicans rapists, when he calls for a ban on an entire religion, when he refuses to condemn KKK and Nazi supporters and vilifies REPEATEDLY black NFL players, when Omarosa says he said vile things in front of her in private, that sounds very credible in the context of is long term behavior we do know about.

It is really no different than what law and prosecutors are doing in the Manafort case. They are not just using those who admitted committing crimes. That alone if they only stuck to mere word, could easily be subject to appeal. No, they are backing up the flippers, with paperwork and employees who were conned but not in on it. 

I find Omarosa's statements about him saying racist things very credible, regardless of knowing she is an opportunist.

[The Grand Nudger]

Hey, spill the beans if you really know how to get past all that teflon coating to allow Trump's base to see he actually is standing in the crosswalk shooting people.

Trumps base can see just fine.  They like what they see.

[Minimalist]

I'd advise caution, just cuz she wrote something you concur with does not guaranty it's veracity.

Unless she's got the tapes of him running his fucking foul mouth.

[Jehanne]

Hey, spill the beans if you really know how to get past all that teflon coating to allow Trump's base to see he actually is standing in the crosswalk shooting people.

Trumps base can see just fine.  They like what they see.

Which is both sick and scary;  then again, there are some folks who daydream about a global thermonuclear war and would rejoice if such happened.

[Brian37]

Oh and as far as the title of the thread, making an observation that is apt knowing his vile behavior of scapegoating and vilification is is not "derogatory", it is an observation, and the bully deserves to be called a bully.

It can be both.  'Derogatory' tends to denote tone more than it does content.  If two people make the same observation, but one of them does so disrespectfully, that one is derogatory.  For example:

A: 'Donald Trump has made some major mistakes thus far in his presidency.'

B: 'Donald Trump has made some major mistakes thus far in his presidency, chiefly because he is emotionally a 6 year old child and has all the intellectual and social acumen of a moldy Mars bar.'

B is derogatory, A is not.

Boru

No, the use of that word allows the bad guys to falsely play victim.

Calling someone evil who is is deserving, if you call that language "derogatory" you undermine the ability to prevent that evil from growing.

If we were talking about sane reasonable people you'd have a better case. But this to me is no different than saying "you have the right to your opinion" about the word "theory" in calling it a mere guess. The unreasonable will use the word "derogatory" and falsely play victim.

The only one being "derogatory" is Trump, calling him a bully is what sane and empathetic people should call him.

To not do so is to give a bullhorn to the evil ideologies that support him.

[Fireball]

Oh and as far as the title of the thread, making an observation that is apt knowing his vile behavior of scapegoating and vilification is is not "derogatory", it is an observation, and the bully deserves to be called a bully.

It can be both.  'Derogatory' tends to denote tone more than it does content.  If two people make the same observation, but one of them does so disrespectfully, that one is derogatory.  For example:

A: 'Donald Trump has made some major mistakes thus far in his presidency.'

B: 'Donald Trump has made some major mistakes thus far in his presidency, chiefly because he is emotionally a 6 year old child and has all the intellectual and social acumen of a moldy Mars bar.'

B is derogatory, A is not.

Boru

Yellow flag for compound derogation. The Mars bar is bad enough on its own; no need to go for the jugular with the "moldy".

[Angrboda]

Apparently there's documentation that the Trump organization tried to bribe Omarosa's silence. Damn her credibility. You don't need credibility when you've got documentation.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

It can be both.  'Derogatory' tends to denote tone more than it does content.  If two people make the same observation, but one of them does so disrespectfully, that one is derogatory.  For example:

A: 'Donald Trump has made some major mistakes thus far in his presidency.'

B: 'Donald Trump has made some major mistakes thus far in his presidency, chiefly because he is emotionally a 6 year old child and has all the intellectual and social acumen of a moldy Mars bar.'

B is derogatory, A is not.

Boru

No, the use of that word allows the bad guys to falsely play victim.

Calling someone evil who is is deserving, if you call that language "derogatory" you undermine the ability to prevent that evil from growing.

If we were talking about sane reasonable people you'd have a better case. But this to me is no different than saying "you have the right to your opinion" about the word "theory" in calling it a mere guess. The unreasonable will use the word "derogatory" and falsely play victim.

The only one being "derogatory" is Trump, calling him a bully is what sane and empathetic people should call him.

To not do so is to give a bullhorn to the evil ideologies that support him.

Look up the meaning of 'derogatory' and get back to me, there's a good lad.

Boru

[Minimalist]

I couldn't think of a single thing to say about that miserable scumbag that wasn't derogatory.

[John V]

Repeat at 1, noon central.  Aren't people starting to get tired of it all?

Yep. Some of us warned about that.