President Trump

This guy is President.

So was LBJ.

Already addressed this false equivalence:

So hang on, did he say it or did the media make it up?

As for you saying the same thing about where you live, I'm pretty sure you're not a statesman under scrutiny on the world stage

Also, LBJ is probably going down in history as our pettiest, most ruthlessly ambitious, most vindictive President, so it's not actually much of a defense or normalization to be using him as a baseline.

Thank you for your input.

I was rooting for him in 2004 during the primaries, but he's too short in today's society to be President... I also don't see a guy with a long and/or unpronounceable surname as electable.

I suspect the man who uses the greatest adjectives will win in 2020.

That was my point. Yet he was President. The man was a blatant racist, sexist, politically incorrect bigot, yet did more to advance civil rights than any President before him (post Lincoln, of course).

How could such an obviously flawed (some would say "evil") person do anything that resulted in good for anyone?

Thank you for your non answer.

So did he say it or did the media spin it?

How would I know?

I dont know but you seem to chop and change a bit. Either you think he said it or you dont.

There's also absolutely no reason to defend LBJ for anything he said. I hope there's no Democrat Party flag wavers here who defend the members of their party at all costs because there's constant awfulness coming from that party too and that will never stop. Unless Captain is bringing him up for another reason?

Anyway that's obviously a deflection so if we all agree LBJ was awful then we can eliminate that as a defence. I for one think LBJ was awful, had some pretty solid policies but Vietnam was a disaster and he sounded like an awful person from the stories about him if they are true of course.

This is one of the most famous pictures of him

You're making my point. Earlier I told the story of how the media influenced me to think he said it by reporting it as fact (as if it was recorded within a public address). Now, other reports say there is no recording of him saying it, he denies saying, others that were there don't recall him saying it, and it was in private behind closed doors.

My point is not about whether he said it or not (Presidents have been known to say all sorts of awful, colorful or downright nasty things in the worst language imaginable in closed-door meetings), but about the way the media reported this information as if Trump made it to the world - where it's the media telling it to the world. That's a very important (and potentially dangerous) differentiation.

I'm not making any point of yours. I'm asking a question because I dont know what happened. Missed it on the news and first saw it discussed here You said he said it and you also said the media spun it. I;m curious which it is.

Yesterday CNN (I don't know about other networks) reported that Trump said this (called certain countries that people want to escape from "s-holes").

They based the report on hearsay of someone that was in the private meeting, then went on with hours of coverage and talking-head discussions as if the report was undisputed fact: as if Trump got in front of cameras and stated these words (giving the public the impression that Trump had done just that). With the meeting being private, that means that whatever said was not intended for public consumption, just as issues of national security are not meant to be leaked for the safety of the country.

Today, others in the meeting say they never heard the term (while others say they did) and Trump denies that he used it.

There now the news (with my own add ons - just like CNN does but with a bit more reservation regarding the actual facts, and you can listen to me without paying a cable company or watching commercials)!

Well I guess now he'll really push for his new libel laws he wants to shut down freedom of speech, hey?

Probably. (I'm not up on that story - so don't know the context.)
If he's really calling to engage in cancelling the freedom of protected speech, then I'll have to prove Yoda wrong and not defend Trump simply because I'm on his "side" no matter what he does.

You commented on his altering libel laws speech, you know what she is talking about.

I assure you I don't. I heard a blurb somewhere about Trump and libel laws, but have no idea about details.