Trump. “It doesn't cost 60,000 bucks to bury a f###ing Mexican!”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted the other thread on this. I haven’t said anything on FB this year, but this did it for me. How can you be the party of patriots and permit this?

Because according to the sister of Vanessa, it’s false and exploitative of her sister’s life and memory.

I believe the sister, who voted for Donald Trump.

You believe unnamed and anonymous sources who won’t even publicly allow themselves to be quoted.

You believe a sister who wasn't in the room? Good for you. Maybe you should go back to school and learn critical thinking.

You believe anonymous sources?

Yes, I completely believe Vanessa’s sister. 100%. I believe Vanessa’s family. Her family isn’t “random.”

Anonymous sources are the very definition of random and impossible to prove.

She has as much credibility as you do. None. She wasn't there. It's tragic what happened to her sister. But that doesn't make her a credible source. You need to learn critical thinking.

How do we know if the anonymous sources are credible?

I believe her sister has more credibility than me, the Atlantic, or anonymous source. We don’t even know who they are. Why won’t they go on the record?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted the other thread on this. I haven’t said anything on FB this year, but this did it for me. How can you be the party of patriots and permit this?

Because according to the sister of Vanessa, it’s false and exploitative of her sister’s life and memory.

I believe the sister, who voted for Donald Trump.

You believe unnamed and anonymous sources who won’t even publicly allow themselves to be quoted.

You believe a sister who wasn't in the room? Good for you. Maybe you should go back to school and learn critical thinking.

You believe anonymous sources?

Yes, I completely believe Vanessa’s sister. 100%. I believe Vanessa’s family. Her family isn’t “random.”

Anonymous sources are the very definition of random and impossible to prove.

She has as much credibility as you do. None. She wasn't there. It's tragic what happened to her sister. But that doesn't make her a credible source. You need to learn critical thinking.

How do we know if the anonymous sources are credible?

I believe her sister has more credibility than me, the Atlantic, or anonymous source. We don’t even know who they are. Why won’t they go on the record?

I'm willing to give an institution that has been around for 150+ years that has been a bastion of journalistic integrity before I'll extend the same credulousness to a random sibling WHO WASN'T THERE!

[Anonymous]

I believe it.

The family wouldn't know what Trump said because it wasn't said in their presence. The article says he said it to Mark Meadows. Names are in fact named.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

In april 2020, Vanessa Guillén, a 20-year-old Army private, was bludgeoned to death by a fellow soldier at Fort Hood, in Texas. The killer, aided by his girlfriend, burned Guillén’s body. Guillén’s remains were discovered two months later, buried in a riverbank near the base, after a massive search.

Guillén, the daughter of Mexican immigrants, grew up in Houston, and her murder sparked outrage across Texas and beyond. Fort Hood had become known as a particularly perilous assignment for female soldiers, and members of Congress took up the cause of reform. Shortly after her remains were discovered, President Donald Trump himself invited the Guillén family to the White House. With Guillén’s mother seated beside him, Trump spent 25 minutes with the family as television cameras recorded the scene.
In the meeting, Trump maintained a dignified posture and expressed sympathy to Guillén’s mother. “I saw what happened to your daughter Vanessa, who was a spectacular person, and respected and loved by everybody, including in the military,” Trump said. Later in the conversation, he made a promise: “If I can help you out with the funeral, I’ll help—I’ll help you with that,” he said. “I’ll help you out. Financially, I’ll help you.”
…

At a certain point, according to two people present at the meeting, Trump asked, “Did they bill us for the funeral? What did it cost?”

According to attendees, and to contemporaneous notes of the meeting taken by a participant, an aide answered: Yes, we received a bill; the funeral cost $60,000.

Trump became angry. “It doesn’t cost 60,000 bucks to bury a fxxxing Mexican!” He turned to his chief of staff, Mark Meadows, and issued an order: “Don’t pay it!” Later that day, he was still agitated. “Can you believe it?” he said, according to a witness. “Fxxxing people, trying to rip me off.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2024/10/trump-military-generals-hitler/680327/

Trump is a monstrosity. He is a disgrace to the office of the president. I am so pissed off.

Democrats are so darn gullible. Then again they are still going on about Russiagate and Jan6.

“Many people are saying it’s true.” Look if that line is good enough for you to believe the cr@p that spews out of Trump’s pie hole, then it’s good enough for me to believe the sources who told the Atlantic.

You want standards then don’t be a hypocrite and pick and choose.

You believe anonymous sources but not Vanessa’s family?

Vanessa’s sister says it’s fake news.

Fake news with no sources, garbage.

I believe a reputable publishing organization that triple checks its sources before publishing something like this. A random family member who wasn't there doesn't have the same credibility.

They don’t have any sources.

A random family member? It’s her sister!

You people are disgraceful.

They triple checked anonymous sources, that’s a damn joke.

Looks like you’re unfamiliar with the concept of journalism.

Oh hey, look another elementary schooler that we have logic to! It's sad you don't understand critical thinking. It's a big reason why we are where we are today.

So cute when MAGAs try to use big words.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted the other thread on this. I haven’t said anything on FB this year, but this did it for me. How can you be the party of patriots and permit this?

Because according to the sister of Vanessa, it’s false and exploitative of her sister’s life and memory.

I believe the sister, who voted for Donald Trump.

You believe unnamed and anonymous sources who won’t even publicly allow themselves to be quoted.

You believe a sister who wasn't in the room? Good for you. Maybe you should go back to school and learn critical thinking.

You believe anonymous sources?

Yes, I completely believe Vanessa’s sister. 100%. I believe Vanessa’s family. Her family isn’t “random.”

Anonymous sources are the very definition of random and impossible to prove.

She has as much credibility as you do. None. She wasn't there. It's tragic what happened to her sister. But that doesn't make her a credible source. You need to learn critical thinking.

How do we know if the anonymous sources are credible?

I believe her sister has more credibility than me, the Atlantic, or anonymous source. We don’t even know who they are. Why won’t they go on the record?

Her sister wasn’t in the room. How dim are you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted the other thread on this. I haven’t said anything on FB this year, but this did it for me. How can you be the party of patriots and permit this?

Because according to the sister of Vanessa, it’s false and exploitative of her sister’s life and memory.

I believe the sister, who voted for Donald Trump.

You believe unnamed and anonymous sources who won’t even publicly allow themselves to be quoted.

You believe a sister who wasn't in the room? Good for you. Maybe you should go back to school and learn critical thinking.

The statement from Patel that Pfeiffer sent me said: “As someone who was present in the room with President Trump, he strongly urged that Spc. Vanessa Guillen’s grieving family should not have to bear the cost of any funeral arrangements, even offering to personally pay himself in order to honor her life and sacrifice. In addition, President Trump was able to have the Department of Defense designate her death as occurring ‘in the line of duty,’ which gave her full military honors and provided her family access to benefits, services, and complete financial assistance.”

Someone in the room says it didn’t happen.

Who was in the room that said it did happen?

Triple checked anonymous sources? People we aren’t allowed to know the identity of? Why not?

A new democratic standard: call the family of a murdered Soldier random and untrustworthy; while pretending anonymous sources are “triple checked” while not even quoting them by name in the article.

Mark Meadows has denied the story. So who are the sources?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted the other thread on this. I haven’t said anything on FB this year, but this did it for me. How can you be the party of patriots and permit this?

Because according to the sister of Vanessa, it’s false and exploitative of her sister’s life and memory.

I believe the sister, who voted for Donald Trump.

You believe unnamed and anonymous sources who won’t even publicly allow themselves to be quoted.

You believe a sister who wasn't in the room? Good for you. Maybe you should go back to school and learn critical thinking.

You believe anonymous sources?

Yes, I completely believe Vanessa’s sister. 100%. I believe Vanessa’s family. Her family isn’t “random.”

Anonymous sources are the very definition of random and impossible to prove.

She has as much credibility as you do. None. She wasn't there. It's tragic what happened to her sister. But that doesn't make her a credible source. You need to learn critical thinking.

How do we know if the anonymous sources are credible?

I believe her sister has more credibility than me, the Atlantic, or anonymous source. We don’t even know who they are. Why won’t they go on the record?

Her sister wasn’t in the room. How dim are you?

Who was in the room? Names?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I believe it.

The family wouldn't know what Trump said because it wasn't said in their presence. The article says he said it to Mark Meadows. Names are in fact named.

Mark Meadows says it didn’t happen.

Who else was in the room?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted the other thread on this. I haven’t said anything on FB this year, but this did it for me. How can you be the party of patriots and permit this?

Because according to the sister of Vanessa, it’s false and exploitative of her sister’s life and memory.

I believe the sister, who voted for Donald Trump.

You believe unnamed and anonymous sources who won’t even publicly allow themselves to be quoted.

You believe a sister who wasn't in the room? Good for you. Maybe you should go back to school and learn critical thinking.

You believe anonymous sources?

Yes, I completely believe Vanessa’s sister. 100%. I believe Vanessa’s family. Her family isn’t “random.”

Anonymous sources are the very definition of random and impossible to prove.

She has as much credibility as you do. None. She wasn't there. It's tragic what happened to her sister. But that doesn't make her a credible source. You need to learn critical thinking.

How do we know if the anonymous sources are credible?

I believe her sister has more credibility than me, the Atlantic, or anonymous source. We don’t even know who they are. Why won’t they go on the record?

I'm willing to give an institution that has been around for 150+ years that has been a bastion of journalistic integrity before I'll extend the same credulousness to a random sibling WHO WASN'T THERE!

Why won’t they document who was in the room and why won’t they name their sources?

[Anonymous]

With Trump threatening to eradicate “the enemy within” defined as people who don’t agree with him … well, maybe that explains unnamed sources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I posted the other thread on this. I haven’t said anything on FB this year, but this did it for me. How can you be the party of patriots and permit this?

Really, this did it for you?

The other thousand horrific things were OK?

To borrow the phraseology of people leaving the Mormon church, everyone has something that will break their shelf. This broke that PP’s shelf.

[Anonymous]

Mark Meadows and Kash Patel lie all the effing time just like Trump so their denials are for sh|t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A $2 billion campaign throwing fake years old crap at the wall on the eve of the election.

The internals must be a DISASTER.

This is laughably desperate, along with all the rap concerts and corn ball Obama telling black men to fall in line.

The election is going to be close, but I fear for how people like you are going to react if Harris wins. You guys didn’t do so hot in 2020/2021.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mark Meadows and Kash Patel lie all the effing time just like Trump so their denials are for sh|t.

But the unnamed anonymous sources are completely trustworthy and truthful? How do you know they are? Who are they? Why won’t they go on the record?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mayra Guillen says the accusations made by The Atlantic are false and says Trump "did nothing but show respect to my family & Vanessa."

"I don’t appreciate how you are exploiting my sister’s death for politics- hurtful & disrespectful to the important changes she made for service members,"
@mguilen_
said on X.

"President Donald Trump did nothing but show respect to my family & Vanessa. In fact, I voted for President Trump today."
https://x.com/CollinRugg/status/1848835154795458944

LOL! Like Trump has never exploited anything for politics.

+1 It’s not standard practice for a POTUS to offer to pay for anyone’s funeral. That was certainly to try to score political points.