Question

Is she really a legal US Citizen?

Discussion is locked

Answer
Follow
Reply to: Is she really a legal US Citizen?
PLEASE NOTE: Do not post advertisements, offensive materials, profanity, or personal attacks. Please remember to be considerate of other members. If you are new to the CNET Forums, please read our CNET Forums FAQ. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Reporting: Is she really a legal US Citizen?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Comments
- Collapse -
Answer
RE:maybe it is time to actually look into her history on a l

maybe it is time to actually look into her history on a legal basis.

Have her apply for a REAL ID......that should bring out the truth...

- Collapse -
Answer
Re: legal US citizen

I suppose it's checked before you are admitted as a member (or maybe even as a candidate for Congres). So I suppose it's yes.

- Collapse -
You're forgetting the Deep State, or

Birthing, or Area 51, or the STAR Chamber.
Or something.

Perhaps Triumph of the Will should be required viewing. There was a guy who knew the power of chanting.

- Collapse -
Yeah, like Obama's birth certificate ...

....was vetted first before running for President. Our stupid court system can't even see the validity of asking people in a census if they are citizens or not. Add to that the Dems who daily sell their soul for a few extra votes, and there's little faith that Omar's legal status is legit.

- Collapse -
I'm sorry, sir.

Only Toni is permitted to resurrect BO here.
Good catch, though.

- Collapse -
Answer
Hasn't the issue been settled by the chanters?
- Collapse -
Link works, as of this moment.

I watched it yesterday. Today I could go to the link but it wouldn't show or play as a video. Curious.
Just now, from my post, it did play.

It SEEMS to show Trump NOT doing what he SAID he did about the chanting. Unequivocally.

Here's my description, just in case.
> He tells reporters he spoke up about it quickly.
> Cut to video of the rally.
> He's speaking against Omar as the chant is heard in background.
> He pauses for 12 seconds- BBC timer running on screen- while the chant continues.
> He resumes his Omar rant.

If you don't hear from me in the next ten minutes, tell my wife the insurance papers are in the bottom left desk drawer.

- Collapse -
His handlers do need to help him avoid

those Mussolini-channelling moments, though.

- Collapse -
He looked like the proverbial "deer in the headlights"

He didn't look pleased but, at the moment, hadn't a clue what to do or say. People can become too enthusiastic at these things. We've also seen far worse from noisy crowds. I'm sure some in our news media folks were drooling at the moment and couldn't wait to make sure this was the highlight of the rally and the only part that would be covered. Unfortunately, today's news is delivered in sound bites and edited text rather than in context. This was very obvious when the statement that precipitated this controversy was made. He said nothing that, decades ago, would receive this much negative coverage IMO.

- Collapse -
RE:He said nothing that, decades ago,
He said nothing that, decades ago, would receive this much negative coverage IMO.

Would have received positive coverage?

HE said nothing at the time of the chants.....a day later HE condemns the chants(falsely claims he condemned earlier).....and later the same day or the next day HE takes back his condemnation?

3 versions of the same event within 2 days was a "normal event" decades ago...sloppy reporting OR the Internet has changed everything?

DJT...the "deer in the headlights"...grinning like a Cheshire cat, for about 10 seconds, walking around the stage listening to the chant.....
- Collapse -
"Triumph of the Will"

Available online.
You might also look up its directpr, Helene "Leni" Riefenstahl.

There are some crowd scenes in it that look and sound much like the Trump rally in question. I scanned the faces, looking for evidence of evil incarnate. Didn't find any. I did see you, though, and myself.

"Deer in the headlights" is not what Himself said about his reaction, which was the only reason for the BBC video showing it.

"today's news is delivered in sound bites and edited text rather than in context."
Not in this case; not on the BBC, which is why I use it and Reuters. (I mentioned earlier that I've dropped the Washington Post, an otherwise good source, because of its throwaway anti-Trump inserts in its stories.)

Did I forget anything? Just the Bible. Oh, the Bible!
Ps 146:3
Bill, you're forbidden to read it.

- Collapse -
Would you believe I proofread it 3 times?
Sad
- Collapse -
Going out of the country for news...

You Commie pinko? Actually, I've bookmarked several sites including the notoriously "liberal" and "conservative" ones and will try to find something believable between the lot. As for the original tweet that started this, that's out there too but I wonder how many read it in its entirety before jumping up and down and screaming "racist". Variations of "America...love it or leave it", have been around a long time. Depending on the stability of the political climate, the words are greeted differently. This, too, shall pass. (not exactly biblical though some believe it so)

- Collapse -
(NT) Relevance to my post?
- Collapse -
Yes

Comparison of news sites used but with bonus verbiage.

- Collapse -
My ¶ 1&2 were about a film and its director.

Relevant to the OP of a political rally.

¶3 stands as written. Your reply?

¶4 ditto. I refuted your universal claim*- rather, the videos did that. I mentioned 3 sources, by name, and explained why I use two of them. A cursory examination of either will confirm the basis for my decision. Yor reply said you bookmark several(?), without names. Combining an acid and a base always produces water and a salt. Combining Left and Right news sources rarely produces truth. Find one or more with a track record and follow them.
Just don't expect the truth there, either. The best you'll get is reliable information.
The truth is here: John 18:37.

* Do you forget that I'm the guy ranting against soundbite journalism and its followers?

- Collapse -
Never mind

I've found that dissecting this to be a waste of time. The OP, by the way, had nothing to do with the rally. Maybe I can't follow the arrows in the new forum display but my Commie pinko remark was meant to follow your "Triumph of the Will" post which mentioned your news site preferences. That post seemed to be a response to mine but maybe not. The opening remark was meant has humor. I guess that failed. Lots of things fail including finding the whole of truth in most of today's journalism. My apology if something I said upset you.

- Collapse -
Interesting movie she did

Good show on how media can sway the masses.

- Collapse -
Answer
Legal

Something for the courts to settle.
Keep the justice dept busy.

As for Omar she's a dem nut case.

The chant at the rally.
The Don did not have a clue what to do with it.

CNET Forums

Forum Info