Fact check: Trump delivers wildly dishonest speech at CPAC | CNN Politics

submitted by dicknipples from edition.cnn.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Elchampo 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

A lot of these are technicalities.

Trump made his usual argument that The Washington Post and The New York Times should not have won a prestigious journalism award, a 2018 Pulitzer Prize, for their reporting on Russian interference in the 2016 election and its connections to Trump’s team. He then said, “And they were exactly wrong. And now they’ve even admitted that it was a hoax. It was a total hoax, and they got the prize.”

Facts First: The Times and Post have not made any sort of “hoax” admission. “The claim is completely false,” Times spokesperson Charlie Stadtlander said in an email on Sunday.

That logic is backwards. Since WaPo and the Times didn't admit to covering a hoax... It wasn't a hoax....

That's like when they said there's no evidence that the covid lab leak theory is true so it was wrong. That's not how that works. At all. It's pulling the wool over people's eyes.

I'm not seeing any glaring lies here, exaggerations and self-aggrandizing sure, but they're using dodgy logic here that doesn't get applied to the crap Biden says equally, but I did find some.

CNN was supposed to dump the partisan coverage.

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

That logic is backwards

But you already admitted that the logic ISN'T backwards. You admitted it. Don't you remember? You made a post where you said "I admit the CNN logic isn't backwards and trump was therefore telling a lie here".

Oh, what's that? You didn't admit it? Does that mean I told a lie when I said you did? Be careful how you answer.

That's like when they said there's no evidence that the covid lab leak theory is true so it was wrong

You're missing half the sentence. There's no evidence so it's wrong to push a theory which has no evidence.

That's the wrong part. Nobody knows if it's factually right or wrong. People are just saying that you need more evidence than just saying "chyna kungflu"

[–]Elchampo 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Oh, what's that? You didn't admit it? Does that mean I told a lie when I said you did? Be careful how you answer.

We know the Russia thing was just a political smear job, we don't need WaPo and NY Times to admit to lying to it. You are employing shoddy logic.

You're missing half the sentence. There's no evidence so it's wrong to push a theory which has no evidence.

Except that turned out just to be political bullshit too. The lab leak was a Trump talking point, so the liberal media decided it would treat it as false. How are you okay with that deception?

[–]Site_rly_sux 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

This is copied from your own comment above

He then said, “And they were exactly wrong. And now they’ve even admitted that it was a hoax. It was a total hoax, and they got the prize.”

I don't know why you're still arguing when you already admitted that trump was totally lying when he invented that part in bold. You admitted it, you said it already. Don't gaslight me, you said it, you personally said to me that you think trump was talking out his ass here. You admitted it.

Call me a liar.... go on do it...

The lab leak was a Trump talking point, so the liberal media decided it would treat it as false. How are you okay with that deception?

It's because I am a normal person, so I need evidence for the things people tell me before I believe them. It's not evidence to say "chy-na, very bad, they did a temendous number"

[–]Elchampo 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

But what you're saying doesn't make any sense. You're trying to apply a bad sort of logic here.

[–]Site_rly_sux 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No sir.

Here is trump's statement.

He then said, “And they were exactly wrong. And now they’ve even admitted that it was a hoax. It was a total hoax, and they got the prize.”

The bold part is a lie that trump told.

Which you definitely agree with, because you already told me that you think trump was lying here, you admitted it. Why are you now pretending tha you didn't already admit that trump is lying here? You looked me square in the eye and you admitted "trump was bs'ing about that one".

Go ahead and tell me that you didn't. Tell me that I'm lying. Go on ...say it

[–]JewsAreOfColor 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Flagged for projecting your own racism onto the right under orders from the CCP whose complicity in germ warfare and the stealing of the election from President Trump is indisputable at this point.

[–]JewsAreOfColor 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Typing lies in bold text does not make them come true.

[–]dicknipples[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

If you need a better explanation: https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/15/politics/fact-check-trump-announcement-speech-2024/index.html

It's not 'partisan' to report on the lies of a politician

[–]Elchampo 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

CNN is garbage. You have any reputable sources?

[–]dicknipples[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If you can refute the points at that link, go ahead.

[–]JewsAreOfColor 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The link refutes itself because it is based on an inherently dishonest and treasonous premise. The lie is in the accusation. The accusation is a confession.

CNN is fake news. Only pro-Trump sources are acceptable sources. Only pro-Trump sources can be trusted to tell the truth about anything.