Wash-Rinse-Repeat Biden Lied Again in 3/24 Briefing

[Lursa]

Easy.. I'll get the transcript. Give the gov goons time to generate it.

LOL we all know you lied. Now you're claiming a conspiracy?

 

[tshade]

I think Biden needs to quit lying and assuming everyone who voted for him is stupid

?????see zero evidence to suggest the voters were fooled............zero. I challenge you to give even ONE example

 

[CaughtInThe]

Washington Examiner

 

[VySky]

Washington Examiner

The LB Herald

 

[CaughtInThe]

The LB Herald

You should fo find some zerohedge stories.

 

[Dittohead not!]

The point is he lied. He now says sanctions are not a deterrent. That was the reporters point

So you say.
I didn't hear him say that.

 

[Rawley]

So you say.
I didn't hear him say that.

"Sir, deterrence didn’t work. What makes you think Vladimir Putin will alter course based on the action you’ve taken today," Biden was asked by CBS reporter Christina Ruffini during a press conference at a NATO summit in Brussels, Belgium.

"Let’s get something straight. You remember if you covered me from the very beginning, I did not say that, in fact, the sanctions would deter him. Sanctions never deter. You keep talking about that. Sanctions never deter," Biden responded.

Everyone in his administration was saying the whole point of sanctions was to deter Putin from invading.

 

[beefheart]

Washington Examiner?

Try harder. Do better.

I'll give you credit - you didn't link it from an MSN or a Yahoo news feed and declare that the news aggregator wrote the article.

More OP Fail

 

[pocket aces]

Joe lied. He said they never meant for sanctions to be a deterrent. That is a bold face lie. Joe just fumbled the question from the reporter as usual.

The only lies I see is in your posts.

 

[PeacefulWarrior]

A reporter asked why he thinks sanctions would deter when they clearly haven’t, then why expect different results with these?

Joe got all pissy and said they never inferred sanctions would deter anything.

Another BIG LIE

———

Five times the White House said sanctions could deter Putin

SANCTIONS MEANT 'TO PREVENT AND DETER'

Daleep Singh, deputy national security adviser for international economics and deputy director at the National Economic Council, said Tuesday that the express purpose of the sanctions threat was deterrence.

“Sanctions are not an end to themselves. They serve a higher purpose. And that purpose is to deter and prevent,” Singh said. “They’re meant to prevent and deter a large-scale invasion of Ukraine that could involve the seizure of major cities, including Kyiv. They’re meant to prevent large-scale human suffering that could involve tens of thousands of casualties in a conflict.”

Five times the White House said sanctions could deter Putin - Washington Examiner

President Joe Biden’s move this week alongside European allies to impose sanctions on Russia over its invasion of Ukraine has sparked a debate over whether the administration’s deterrence policy has already failed.“No one expected the sanctions to prevent anything from happening,” Biden said...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Sounds like pretty major stuff.

 

[Doug64]

Washington Examiner?

Try harder. Do better.

Except the article contains links to mostly transcripts from the White House website. You could always check out those out.

 

[MaryP]

I can see where Biden said that sanctions would deter Russia.
I can't see anywhere except in this post where he said that they wouldn't.

I think this post was made up. Can you prove me wrong?

I just watched the press conference. He indeed said it.

 

[JMB802]

Except the article contains links to mostly transcripts from the White House website. You could always check out those out.

Or not. Reading WE is usually a waste of time. Inflammatory WE article titles are rarely supported by the article content. If I cared about the story, I'd find the info elsewhere.

Washington Examiner - Bias and Credibility

RIGHT BIAS These media sources are moderate to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may

mediabiasfactcheck.com

 

[trixare4kids]

A reporter asked why he thinks sanctions would deter when they clearly haven’t, then why expect different results with these?

Joe got all pissy and said they never inferred sanctions would deter anything.

Another BIG LIE

———

Five times the White House said sanctions could deter Putin

SANCTIONS MEANT 'TO PREVENT AND DETER'

Daleep Singh, deputy national security adviser for international economics and deputy director at the National Economic Council, said Tuesday that the express purpose of the sanctions threat was deterrence.

“Sanctions are not an end to themselves. They serve a higher purpose. And that purpose is to deter and prevent,” Singh said. “They’re meant to prevent and deter a large-scale invasion of Ukraine that could involve the seizure of major cities, including Kyiv. They’re meant to prevent large-scale human suffering that could involve tens of thousands of casualties in a conflict.”

Five times the White House said sanctions could deter Putin - Washington Examiner

President Joe Biden’s move this week alongside European allies to impose sanctions on Russia over its invasion of Ukraine has sparked a debate over whether the administration’s deterrence policy has already failed.“No one expected the sanctions to prevent anything from happening,” Biden said...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

He is so lost... He can barely remember what he said yesterday. Is it any wonder puppet man's handlers get p/o when he goes off script?

 

[Doug64]

Or not. Reading WE is usually a waste of time. Inflammatory WE article titles are rarely supported by the article content. If I cared about the story, I'd find the info elsewhere.

Washington Examiner - Bias and Credibility

RIGHT BIAS These media sources are moderate to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may

mediabiasfactcheck.com

Let me get this straight. You so dislike the Washington Examiner that you won't even use the article's links to transcripts on the White House website?

 

[JMB802]

Let me get this straight. You so dislike the Washington Examiner that you won't even use the article's links to transcripts on the White House website?

If I cared about the story, which I don't, I wouldn't waste my time reading the WE's take on it. I would find another source.

 

[Doug64]

If I cared about the story, which I don't, I wouldn't waste my time reading the WE's take on it. I would find another source.

Do you treat CNN the same way? After all, according to your own website CNN is almost as far Left as the Washington Examiner is Right, and both are ranked Mixed when it comes to factual reporting:

CNN - Bias and Credibility

LEFT-CENTER BIAS These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording

mediabiasfactcheck.com

 

[JMB802]

Do you treat CNN the same way? After all, according to your own website CNN is almost as far Left as the Washington Examiner is Right, and both are ranked Mixed when it comes to factual reporting:

CNN - Bias and Credibility

LEFT-CENTER BIAS These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording

mediabiasfactcheck.com

Yes, I do. If a news story on any site seems biased or inflammatory or out of the norm, I try to verify with other sources.

 

[Doug64]

Yes, I do. If a news story on any site seems biased or inflammatory or out of the norm, I try to verify with other sources.

Oh, so you only reject Washington Examiner stories that seem "biased or inflammatory or out of the norm" then, rather than refusing to read any story they produce just because they produced it. I misunderstood you, sorry.

 

[NuffSaid]

You would prefer no sanctions?

He’d rather us help Russia.
That’s what 45 would have done.

 

[element94]

The hypocrisy is just astounding considering Trump told over 30,000(!) provable lies in his 4 years as President. 30,000!

 

[Michael Cole]

Ok.... Anyway...

Bottom line

VP Harris stated sanctions are meant as a detterent

Papa Joe keeps telling reporters he doesn't understnad where they are getting their information from that the Administration thinks sanctions are a deterrent..

Cool....

Joe lied. He said they never meant for sanctions to be a deterrent. That is a bold face lie. Joe just fumbled the question from the reporter as usual.

The administration can't get its shit together for the press. Imagine that. I mean, not like this ever happened before.

I'm listening to Bob Woodward detail and opine on the Thomas/Meadows text messages. Much more interesting. Unprecedented.

The OP, on the other hand, is a desperate attempt at painting Biden as a liar. I've noticed the alt-right/alt-reality wing of America has been attempting these pedantic, juvenile attempts for over a year. How many ya got? Three? Four?

There are two schools of thought regarding sanctions, but only one reality, that being; sanctions don't work as deterrents, they work as punishments. They take time. Even the 30 days stated by Biden is too little. That's only a starting point.

Sanctions promote regime change from within. Biden is correct. They are not and were not intended as deterrents. No lie. Harris is also correct. Sanctions deter continued activity, over time, by punishing those who can pressure or remove Putin. No lie there, either.

In your haste to find a lie *microscope* you've completely abandoned your mind and thought not one moment about what you're saying. Funny. Not. Boring. Stupid. Stupid and boring.

...back to Bob Woodward.

 

[VySky]

The administration can't get its shit together for the press. Imagine that. I mean, not like this ever happened before.

I'm listening to Bob Woodward detail and opine on the Thomas/Meadows text messages. Much more interesting. Unprecedented.

The OP, on the other hand, is a desperate attempt at painting Biden as a liar. I've noticed the alt-right/alt-reality wing of America has been attempting these pedantic, juvenile attempts for over a year. How many ya got? Three? Four?

There are two schools of thought regarding sanctions, but only one reality, that being; sanctions don't work as deterrents, they work as punishments. They take time. Even the 30 days stated by Biden is too little. That's only a starting point.

Sanctions promote regime change from within. Biden is correct. They are not and were not intended as deterrents. No lie. Harris is also correct. Sanctions deter continued activity, over time, by punishing those who can pressure or remove Putin. No lie there, either.

In your haste to find a lie *microscope* you've completely abandoned your mind and thought not one moment about what you're saying. Funny. Not. Boring. Stupid. Stupid and boring.

...back to Bob Woodward.

Why did Biden lie? I'm starting to see this question on the networks this morning. The left has a major malfunction when it comes to word definitions for example, insurrection, is, woman, man, deterrent. transitory inflation on and on and on.....

 

[VySky]

The hypocrisy is just astounding considering Trump told over 30,000(!) provable lies in his 4 years as President. 30,000!

The everybody is doing it childless defense noted and dismissed

.Just like Biden saying everyone knows someone who has been victimized like his son re:naked images etc.

 

[VySky]

The only lies I see is in your posts.

Really? IDK is that's a position you can defend.