Trump vs the BBC re his January 6th comments

[Greenman]

Rather than asking a question for which there's an obvious and plausible explanation (Donald waffles a lot and it wasn't relevant to the topic), why not seek the truth yourself?

https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial

Because I didn't know there was an obvious and plausible explanation, and didn't feel like searching for it. Since you fellows live to follow Trump and count his farts, I assumed someone would have the information at hand, and I was right.

 

[outriding]

Because I didn't know there was an obvious and plausible explanation, and didn't feel like searching for it. Since you fellows live to follow Trump and count his farts, I assumed someone would have the information at hand, and I was right.

Says the person who actively goes out of their way to ignore facts

 

[mikeymikec]

Because I didn't know there was an obvious and plausible explanation, and didn't feel like searching for it. Since you fellows live to follow Trump and count his farts, I assumed someone would have the information at hand, and I was right.

Since discussing Donald regarding his incitement of an insurrection is "counting his farts" in your opinion, I shudder to think how much greater in magnitude a factual event caused by him would have to be to make you sit up and take notice.

 

[Greenman]

Found this from the BBC.

BBC director resigns over editing of Trump speech

The head of the BBC and the British broadcaster’s top news executive both resigned Sunday after criticism of the way the organization edited a speech by U.S. President Donald Trump.

www.ctvnews.ca