- Joined
- Jan 25, 2013
- Messages
- 37,070
- Reaction score
- 17,953
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Trump’s willingness to constantly repeat false claims has posed a unique challenge to fact-checkers. Most politicians quickly drop a Four-Pinocchio claim, either out of a duty to be accurate or concern that spreading false information could be politically damaging.
Not Trump. The president keeps going long after the facts are clear, in what appears to be a deliberate effort to replace the truth with his own, far more favorable, version of it. He is not merely making gaffes or misstating things, he is purposely injecting false information into the national conversation.
To accurately reflect this phenomenon, The Washington Post Fact Checker is introducing a new category — the Bottomless Pinocchio. That dubious distinction will be awarded to politicians who repeat a false claim so many times that they are, in effect, engaging in campaigns of disinformation.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...w-rating-false-claim-repeated-over-over-again
I had to post this because I usually like to review what Kessler thinks is a false claim. For yucks, you know.
The following 2 that he said were bottomless Pinocchios fairly jumped off the page.
Another campaign claim that has carried into his presidency is the assertion that Democrats colluded with Russia during the election (48 times). This is obviously false, as the Democrats were the target of hacking by Russian entities, according to U.S. intelligence agencies. (The assertion, also spread widely by Trump allies in the conservative media, largely rests on the fact that the firm hired by Democrats to examine Trump’s Russia ties was also working to defend a Russian company in U.S. court.)
On 30 separate occasions, Trump has also falsely accused special counsel Mueller of having conflicts of interest and the staff led by the longtime Republican of being “angry Democrats.”
Now, maybe in some past column he explained in some detail why he believes they were Pinocchios but he sure didn't divulge any reasons here.
For the Russian collusion one giving "largely rests on the fact that the firm hired by Democrats to examine Trump’s Russia ties was also working to defend a Russian company in U.S. court." as the reason is absolutely preposterous.
And how he can be certain Mueller has no conflicts of interest given, for example, his and Comey's lucrative relationship in the 2000's when Mueller was FBI Director?
Who fact checks the fact checkers?
And who fact checks the fact checkers checking the fact checkers?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...w-rating-false-claim-repeated-over-over-again
I had to post this because I usually like to review what Kessler thinks is a false claim. For yucks, you know.
The following 2 that he said were bottomless Pinocchios fairly jumped off the page.
Another campaign claim that has carried into his presidency is the assertion that Democrats colluded with Russia during the election (48 times). This is obviously false, as the Democrats were the target of hacking by Russian entities, according to U.S. intelligence agencies. (The assertion, also spread widely by Trump allies in the conservative media, largely rests on the fact that the firm hired by Democrats to examine Trump’s Russia ties was also working to defend a Russian company in U.S. court.)
On 30 separate occasions, Trump has also falsely accused special counsel Mueller of having conflicts of interest and the staff led by the longtime Republican of being “angry Democrats.”
Now, maybe in some past column he explained in some detail why he believes they were Pinocchios but he sure didn't divulge any reasons here.
For the Russian collusion one giving "largely rests on the fact that the firm hired by Democrats to examine Trump’s Russia ties was also working to defend a Russian company in U.S. court." as the reason is absolutely preposterous.
And how he can be certain Mueller has no conflicts of interest given, for example, his and Comey's lucrative relationship in the 2000's when Mueller was FBI Director?
Who fact checks the fact checkers?
*edit: Beaten by Americanwoman!
Who fact checks the fact checkers who fact check the fact checkers?
And who fact checks them? And them? Infinite regress is your defense? I suppose we'll have a bottomless Pinocchios paired with your infinite deflection.
Trump had, and has, no legitimate, significant evidence to back his claims, but you're up in arms that the fact checker didn't back his own? OK.
Everyone knows Trump is full of ****, and that his supporters require no evidence, and hold him to account for nothing. Why try to debate it? Oh, the infinite thing, gotcha.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...w-rating-false-claim-repeated-over-over-again
I had to post this because I usually like to review what Kessler thinks is a false claim. For yucks, you know.
The following 2 that he said were bottomless Pinocchios fairly jumped off the page.
Another campaign claim that has carried into his presidency is the assertion that Democrats colluded with Russia during the election (48 times). This is obviously false, as the Democrats were the target of hacking by Russian entities, according to U.S. intelligence agencies. (The assertion, also spread widely by Trump allies in the conservative media, largely rests on the fact that the firm hired by Democrats to examine Trump’s Russia ties was also working to defend a Russian company in U.S. court.)
On 30 separate occasions, Trump has also falsely accused special counsel Mueller of having conflicts of interest and the staff led by the longtime Republican of being “angry Democrats.”
Now, maybe in some past column he explained in some detail why he believes they were Pinocchios but he sure didn't divulge any reasons here.
For the Russian collusion one giving "largely rests on the fact that the firm hired by Democrats to examine Trump’s Russia ties was also working to defend a Russian company in U.S. court." as the reason is absolutely preposterous.
And how he can be certain Mueller has no conflicts of interest given, for example, his and Comey's lucrative relationship in the 2000's when Mueller was FBI Director?
Who fact checks the fact checkers?
But that's false. He linked to the refutation...an entire analysis for each one!Right.
=bubbabgone;1069395641]Another campaign claim that has carried into his presidency is the assertion that Democrats colluded with Russia during the election (48 times).
On 30 separate occasions, Trump has also falsely accused special counsel Mueller of having conflicts of interest and the staff led by the longtime Republican of being “angry Democrats.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...w-rating-false-claim-repeated-over-over-again
I had to post this because I usually like to review what Kessler thinks is a false claim. For yucks, you know.
The following 2 that he said were bottomless Pinocchios fairly jumped off the page.
Another campaign claim that has carried into his presidency is the assertion that Democrats colluded with Russia during the election (48 times). This is obviously false, as the Democrats were the target of hacking by Russian entities, according to U.S. intelligence agencies. (The assertion, also spread widely by Trump allies in the conservative media, largely rests on the fact that the firm hired by Democrats to examine Trump’s Russia ties was also working to defend a Russian company in U.S. court.)
On 30 separate occasions, Trump has also falsely accused special counsel Mueller of having conflicts of interest and the staff led by the longtime Republican of being “angry Democrats.”
Now, maybe in some past column he explained in some detail why he believes they were Pinocchios but he sure didn't divulge any reasons here.
For the Russian collusion one giving "largely rests on the fact that the firm hired by Democrats to examine Trump’s Russia ties was also working to defend a Russian company in U.S. court." as the reason is absolutely preposterous.
And how he can be certain Mueller has no conflicts of interest given, for example, his and Comey's lucrative relationship in the 2000's when Mueller was FBI Director?
Who fact checks the fact checkers?
Crooked Hillary paid for a phony dossier that was produced by the Russians. And it was used by the crooked FBI to get a FISA warrant to spy on Trump's campaign.
Mueller hired all Democrat lawyers for his investigation and he does have a conflict of interest. Mueller was best friends with crooked Comey. Plus
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-h...t-and-it-leads-directly-to-a-russian-oligarch
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/pre...elationship-mueller-amounts/story?id=56914885
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...cial-counsel-glenn-reynolds-column/102990890/
Newp. Simply didn't happen.
Also didn't happen. Sad to watch you flail around like this, getting nothing right.
Nice try. You have "0" credibility, you saying "it didn't happen" is meaningless. :yawn:
Nice try. You have "0" credibility, you saying "it didn't happen" is meaningless. :yawn:
Nice try. You have "0" credibility, you saying "it didn't happen" is meaningless. :yawn:
LOL! Coming from you, trying to pass off your lies as somehow, magically, based in reality.
What you claimed simply didn't happen, nor can you show otherwise.
Like always.
You claimed it didn't happen, PROVE IT
You claimed it didn't happen, PROVE IT
That's not how things work. You can't prove something didn't happen. He's right. You made the claim - now you need to prove it.
You made the claim, you PROVE IT
You claimed it didn't happen, PROVE IT
I did prove it, you just can't read. Further you just blow off with your same old ****. It didn't happen. To me you don't happen.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?