Heh, you beg the question with 'failed to admit error'. Tighten up, Kid.
============

Sure I can believe it kim. I saw the same report and followed it up. I didn't use it because my comments only refer to Trump's broadcast statements ( I also judge those relative to his audience, something scarcely mentioned - do you think they paid attention to the tense of his verbs, or to "last night"?). I profess no knowledge about conditions in Sweden (a point made yet again in my response to geronimoup-page).

One and one do make two, but sometimes not in TrumpWorld.

There is something amusing in there with 'beg' and 'charitable'. Lemme see if I can make it work, something besides the uncharitable reduced to begging. There, the meaning of the verb is off.

Can I work 'baksheesh' into it? Just trying to reach a fair deal, here.
===========

You seem to be raving, Alan.

Read back to what I put up days ago about Trump making a point about something that is of concern to voters, and the pundits and poobahs pounce to misinterpret it and congratulate themselves on their cleverness. Meanwhile, Trump has connected with his constituency, a rock has been overturned exposing ugly critters and fake news entirely misses what has happened. It even fools bright people like you.
=================

More interesting is the convolutions Trump supporters go to, to explain away the obvious failings of their idol. His assumed stance on climate change excuses mountains of abuse and error.

Funny though. Cognitive dissonance as a spectator sport.

Heh.

Yet more advocacy kim? I watched the speech, I put the "last night" into context (fore and aft listings of places where there had been terrorist outrages and absolutely no mention of any TV programmes), and reached the most reasonable conclusion. Trump's later tweet was IMO damage limitation and yet another lie.

It's all getting rather boring except for the mental contortions of his booster group. I await his next screw up with considerable interest. Let the contest resume then. Probably won't have to wait long.

You insist, Alan, that what Trump said is a lie. The lie here, the Big Lie, is that Sweden has no problems with immigration. How even bright people get suckered.

HeeHee, Phil, your quoted Swedish cop shows full blown cognitive dissonance. His one and one is too hard to compute.
===============

Yes, Alan, you won't have to wait long. The clever poobahs and press pundits will soon miss the point again, as will you, all of it being worthy of ridicule.
==============

Golf charlie. Even more made up news!

Feb 27, 2017 at 11:44 AM | Supertroll

Phil Clarke wants to keep Climate "Made-Up" Science liars in control of Politicians. What is fake about that?

I am sure we can all agree that Trump wants to get to the bottom of the rotten barrel of lies that support Climate Science, and give it a damn good smacking.

He won't even need to get his own hands dirty, if he offers the deed as a Restitution and Retribution package under changes to Criminal Law, though reverting to some of the English Law punishments administered during the Medieval Warm Period might prove interesting as a method of encouraging a confession of their wider sins against humanity.

Kim don't be boring (so unlike you). I have repeatedly said that my posts deal with Trumps lies, not the situation in Sweden. It would be so easy to document Trumps lies, but others have done this and it to would be a bore.

The lie is that Sweden is experiencing ' problems like they never thought possible.'. This is not in the crime stats, the first hand video testimony, or the police. It is only true in the Faux news/Breitbart/Infowars/ALt-Right distorted worldview.

A lie remains a lie. Lying Don did not invent the dogwhistle.

Hi Super

1. I should stop taking those "sarcastic capsules" if I were you, you're not coming across as sarcastic.

2. My entire family and my wife's entire family are working class I have working class friends and keep in touch with my schoolboy friends. Unless my wife and I have peculiar working class relatives I have good reason to assume I have some inisight into the thoughts of the working classes. I don't know where you got the "inner" from, I didn't write it.

3. There is little doubt that the Swedish Govt. is sitting on adverse publicity about immigration and their light hearted responses to Trump saying they have problems are not borne out in reality. How big the problems are I don't know, but here is a more nuanced analysis than you'll get in the Guardian or on the BBC. They have certainly got problems and maybe Donald T should throw his net wider than Fox News to get his data.

Maybe you should investigate the situation in Sweden. And Germany, and Brussels, hey, even in Great Britain.

Need I tell you not to trust Phil?
==================

Lying Phil Clarke, why should you be trusted about honesty? If you would like to be honest about Lying Climate Scientists, you might be more credible.

Alan's actually dealing with his cognitive dissonance pretty effectively. He wants to believe Phil, because he's with him about Trump, but he fairly observes his own ignorance about immigration. I suspect once he investigates he'll find that Phil is the biased propagandist, the Big Liar, that he knows so well.
==============

Yeah, g; nice link @ 1:26. Thanks.

Dhimmitude 101; the first quarter we'll learn to cover our eyes.
==================

Kim. Look back. You will find that Phil joined in the debate well after it began. So it's not a question of my need to believe Phil. It is so very odd. Many here, so opposed to climate change advocacy are over-indulging yourselves in pro-Trump advocacy and want to drag an essentially non climate story into that remit.

We need him, he fights.
================

Feb 27, 2017 at 1:34 PM | kim

Phil Clarke lies Progressively, but whilst Supertroll may align with Progressives about Trump, he knows Progressives out-trump Trump when it comes to lies about Climate Science., and Trump is probably right, even though he is Right.

If Politicians separated themselves from Climate Science, there would be nothing left, but the Left are left with what is not right about Climate Science.

Oh, well, I'll ditch the crypticism in order to make the point, dang seductive art. This was Lincoln's response to criticism of the crude Grant.
=============

Maybe you should investigate the situation in Sweden. And Germany, and Brussels, hey, even in Great Britain

Murder rate, 2016, per 100,000

Malmo (Immigrant hellhole, Sweden) : 3
Chicago (Land of the Free) : 28

Something about a Physican, heal ....

Yeah, Phil, Obama's home territory. What a winnah!

You obviously read the link at 1:26. C'mon, let's hear your best interpretation of it.
===================

geronimo

Many thanks for the link to what looks like a much more balanced article. We need more reporting like that when confronted with "liberals" trying to claim there is no problem with immigration and Trump supporters defending his every loopy statement. Both sides are wrong in my view, FWIW. I made the point earlier on this thread that the key information we lack (apparently because the Swedish authorities won't release it rather than because they don't have it is the proportion of crimes committed by immigrants in Sweden compared to the proportion of crimes committed there by non-immigrants. With that information, we would actually know some relevant facts, but without it we can all only speculate, which is far from ideal. The article you linked to has come to the same conclusion, and has a further conclusion that the attitude of the liberal Swedish authorities in refusing to release the information (why would they refuse, if releasing it would defuse the situation?) leads people to mistrust their motives

Radical Rodent & kim, never fear! The Guardian swoops to the rescue with more lies supporting the 97% of lies told by Climate Scientists

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2017/feb/27/just-who-are-these-300-scientists-telling-trump-to-burn-the-climate

It should be noted that Gergis 2016 has still not been withdrawn by Climate Science, and so Phil Clarke can remain triumphant and unapologetic as ever, in stating that Gergis proved Mann's Hockey Stick and all the other proofs of Mann's Hockey Stick.

What more proof does Trump need to axe about 97% of Climate Science funding, when Phil Clarke has endorsed it's failure to achieve anything? Obviously Phil Clarke's comments about lying should be judged by the standards of Climate Science dishonesty, blatant lies, double standards and hypocrisy. They helped elect Trump after all.