• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Wall Street Journal jeered after printing Trump rant about 2020 election

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
112,152
Reaction score
102,337
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent

10/27/21
The Wall Street Journal on Wednesday published a letter to the editor from former President Donald Trump containing a multitude of falsehoods that have been fact-checked by the newspaper and other publications. Trump's letter was in response to a Monday editorial about Pennsylvania's state Supreme Court. The editorial stated, factually, that President Biden won Pennsylvania in 2020 by 80,555 ballots, which set Trump off. "Well, actually, the election was rigged, which you, unfortunately, still haven't figured out," Trump wrote. He went on to make several false claims about the vote in Pennsylvania, including that "120,000 excess voters are not yet accounted for by the Pennsylvania Department of State — far more votes than voters!" This was debunked by The Philadelphia Inquirer's Jonathan Lai in January.

There was swift pushback against Trump's letter and the Journal's decision to publish it, with Jonathan Tamari, the Inquirer's national political writer, tweeting, "This is full of absolute lies — from the first bullet point down." The Washington Post's Glenn Kessler asked, "Why would they publish, without analysis, a bunch of stuff that['s] already been fact-checked as false?" Amanda Carpenter, director of Republicans for Voting Rights and a columnist at The Bulwark, called Trump's missive "garbage." By allowing Trump to spew "election lies" as a letter to the editor, the Journal was able to "avoid taking responsibility," Carpenter said, adding, "Trump couldn't post this to Facebook but the editors at the WSJ collectively decided to put it on their platform. Think about that."


The Journal certainly isn't what it used to be. The Bible of business, the Journal's editorial board has promoted views that are at odds with the scientific consensus on climate change, acid rain, and ozone depletion, as well as on the health dangers of passive smoking, pesticides, and asbestos. Now they provide discredited former president Donald Trump with a whine platform. To compound matters, they've placed WSJ behind a paywall.
 




The Journal certainly isn't what it used to be. The Bible of business, the Journal's editorial board has promoted views that are at odds with the scientific consensus on climate change, acid rain, and ozone depletion, as well as on the health dangers of passive smoking, pesticides, and asbestos. Now they provide discredited former president Donald Trump with a whine platform. To compound matters, they've placed WSJ behind a paywall.
yawn...

That's what happens when a newsrag allows both sides of a story: They get slammed by the left.

Next thing you know, Twitter, FB, etc., will ban WSJ.

We've seen this movie a thousand times over the last five/six years. It's getting boring.
 
I was just going to post about this in the "Breaking News" forum, but was alerted that there was already a thread about the topic on Debate Politics. I am glad you started one, @Rogue Valley. Some news stories are making fun of Donald Trump for having to write a letter to the editor and some are making fun of "The Wall Street Street Journal" for stooping to publish his lies. I tend to think that the newspaper and Trump deserve each other. Where is the integrity of the WSJ?
 
Back
Top Bottom