ADVERTISEMENT

Biden lied, soldiers died! Is this phone call an impeachable offense?

The bum is a pathological liar...

In March, Biden vowed that the Afghanistan withdrawal would be done "in a safe and orderly way."

In July, Biden said it would be "highly unlikely" for the Taliban to take over the country after the U.S. pulled out.

Biden promised that his administration would get every American who wanted to leave Afghanistan out of the country before the Aug. 31 withdrawal deadline.
 
Biden said no one could have imagined things would go this way.


How many lies are we up to now? This is a record breaking pace. They should get him back into the basement.
 
Over 10k so far.
During his first 100 days in Office, Trump told more falsehoods than Biden and Obama combined. Look it up! Again I find ironic your sudden concern with lies after not one comment during Trumps term! What's the deal, hypocrite?
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: mahb and doerunn
During his first 100 days in Office, Trump told more falsehoods than Biden and Obama combined. Look it up! Again I find ironic your sudden concern with lies after not one comment during Trumps term! What's the deal, hypocrite?
I'll link it again, from the Buffalo News, debunking another dim lie.

No, Trump Hasn't Made 20,000 'False or Misleading' Claims​

There are now 21 on-the-record denials rebutting The Atlantic’s bombshell alleging President Trump called American soldiers “losers” and “suckers.” Ignoring the most problematic aspect of Atlantic Editor Jeffrey Goldberg’s report – his sources were all anonymous -- many journalists saw this story as the perfect opportunity to wager the institutional media’s credibility against that of the president, who to be charitable, has a strained relationship with the truth.
Brian Stelter, the host of CNN’s media criticism show, “Reliable Sources,” began Sunday’s episode with a monologue lamenting the fact that many news outlets even bothered to report Trump’s vehement denials of The Atlantic story. “Why confer credibility where it doesn’t belong? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me 20,000 times, well, shame on all of us,” he said. “Why keep acting like things are normal after 20,000 false and misleading claims?"


Indeed, per The Washington Post fact-checker database, President Trump has told 20,000 “false and misleading” claims through July 9 of this year – an astonishing average of nearly 16 false or misleading statements a day. Framed in those terms, Stelter has a point. Choosing between the credibility of Trump or, say, a CNN host, the editor of a prestige magazine such as The Atlantic, let alone a Washington Post fact-checker, is no choice at all.


The problem is that any cursory inspection of the Post database reveals that the idea that Trump has told 20,000 “false or misleading” statements is itself false and misleading. Vast quantities of the 20,000 are redundancies – statements, however tendentious, that Trump has repeated ad nauseum. More problematic is that thousands of statements The Washington Post labels as untrue or misleading are more properly considered the habitual verbal excess for a man known for his immoderate form of communication. Further, a great many of the Post’s objections to Trump’s statements amount to argumentative quibbles that aren’t really “fact checks.”


Just to start, here’s one of Trump’s most oft-repeated “lies,” according to Washington Post fact checkers: “My job was made harder by phony witch hunts, by ‘Russia, Russia, Russia’ nonsense.” The Post dings Trump for some variation of this claim 227 times – more than 1% of Trump’s alleged untruths. Yet, the Post’s justification for why Trump is wrong to say this is pure pettifogging.

Much of it essentially consists of a defense of the probe conducted by special prosecutor Robert Mueller. However, the most tangible results from the Mueller investigation – criminal charges for Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort for unrelated work in Ukraine and fecklessly charging (and then quietly dropping the charges) against a bunch of Russian nationals for hacking and other dirty computer tricks – don’t come close to proving Trump colluded with Russia to steal an election.



In that respect, the Post fact checker flirts with dishonesty in the way it omits salient facts. “Mueller declined to reach a decision on whether to bring charges against Trump for obstructing justice. … Mueller spent nearly half of the report laying out a sustained effort by Trump to derail the investigation, including an effort by the president to have Mueller removed,” notes the Post.

It’s telling the Post is dredging up the obstruction allegations. Trump supporters would frame what happened this way: The Mueller investigation started with no real evidence that Trump colluded with Russia, uncovered no new evidence, and when investigators realized they had nothing, pivoted to making a politicized case for obstruction while investigating a crime they knew didn’t exist. Meanwhile, a top FBI lawyer just pleaded guilty to lying on Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants. If the FBI lied to get warrants to spy on Trump associates, that seems pretty close to “phony witch hunt.”


Suffice it to say, you will find numerous other Trump-Russia “fact checks” in the bowels of the Post database that fail to acknowledge there was major malfeasance in the FBI investigation, and there are reasons to believe the highest levels of the Obama administration knew about and enabled an improper and politicized investigation into Trump – reasons the fact checker credulously dismisses.


Setting aside 2016, the Post fact checker is also wading into the current election. How the Post justifies calling this statement misleading is a head-scratcher: “We need security, we can't defund our police and we can't abolish the police. They want to abolish our police.” (Again, the Post’s 20,000 total falsehoods registers Trump saying some variation of this eight different times.)


According to the Post this is false because “Biden does not support ‘defunding police,’ according to the candidate and the campaign.” However, the context of the Sean Hannity interview in which Trump makes the statement in no way suggests Trump is directly referring to Biden. “They” seems to mean the Democratic Party or the left more generally.
In addition, Biden has also said he’s “absolutely” in favor of redirecting funds from the police – which is the definition many “defund the police” supporters are using. Regardless, it’s true that numerous prominent Democrats and progressive activists have come out in favor of “defunding the police,” whatever that loaded phrase is supposed to mean. A New York Times article last month, headlined “Biden Said, ‘Most Cops Are Good.’ But Progressives Want Systemic Change,” testifies to the fact this is a significant intraparty tension. (See also this other Times op-ed from a progressive activist, “Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police.”)




Maybe you believe Biden, who has drifted left on numerous significant policy questions after a primary with socialist Bernie Sanders, can hold the line on defunding the police against many of his own supporters. But the Post has no business disputing Trump here. It looks as if the Post is moving the goalposts to give Biden cover on an issue hurting him at the polls.
Other allegedly misleading claims are simply insulting to readers, such as this one Trump’s been rung up for eight times: “We have tremendous African American support.” Trump exceeded expectations with his share of the African American vote in 2016. Regardless, is he supposed to call his own supporters lackluster? If this statement is “false or misleading,” what level of wishful political rhetoric is acceptable?

So far, all of the examples from the Post fact checker I’ve cited are from the first page of its database. But that’s the particular genius of what the Post has done – transformed thousands of nits it would like to pick into a cudgel of a talking point to be used against Trump, knowing no one is going to comb through such an exhaustive and tedious list.

I’ve spent the better part of a decade offering occasionally exhaustive analyses of why the entire media fact-checking enterprise is flawed, never mind the outrageous political double standards fact checkers employed in the Obama years.



However, I’ve also long said that if you must rely on a fact checker – and I don’t recommend it – The Washington Post is the best of the bunch. The Post fact-checking operation is more transparent and less biased than others, and head fact checker Glenn Kessler is responsive to complaints and is certainly capable of doing excellent journalism – see his recent deep dive into a GOP Senate candidate’s claims about his charitable work.

Had Post fact checkers been more discerning, they could have nailed Trump on a much smaller, but still impressive number of claims that would be difficult to dispute. Instead, they buffaloed the public with the dubious claim Trump has made an astounding 20,000 false or misleading statements. The worry is now that the media’s habitual overreach in the Trump era will endure long after Trump leaves office. In the meantime, there’s an election in two months, and voters who are asked to choose between the media’s credibility and Trump’s are frantically looking to see what’s behind door No. 3.
 
My dad always taught me to have respect for ladies. Democrat congresswoman make that difficult. It is shocking how many female democrat congresswoman there are that are just horrible people. I mean just nasty, rude, no rudder of the truth, mean, vindictive, stupid, lacking in very basic human courtesy, etc.. Just to name a few, Pelosi, Dingle, Omar, Talib, Pressley, Wasserman Schultz, AOC and many more. Maybe they are just mad because God was a little short on the looks department when it came to them. I could write a bunch of mean adjectives and descriptions, which would be correct, but why bother.

I just wonder why otherwise decent women (that are mothers) could ever vote for these vile females who put their perverse political power wishes ahead of basic human respect for the sacrifice of our armed forces and their mothers. Let's see if McCarthy has the guts to call this out? I doubt it. I am concerned he is happy to be "Red Klotz" the well paid Coach of the Washington Generals that was happy to always lose to the Harlem Globetrotters.
 
During his first 100 days in Office, Trump told more falsehoods than Biden and Obama combined. Look it up! Again I find ironic your sudden concern with lies after not one comment during Trumps term! What's the deal, hypocrite?
Mike your still raving about Trump lies, and he's not President. Fine, can we say it's True you just don't like lies ? If yes, Why are you excusing ALL The Lies Biden has said, what's more consequential lies, as 13 Soldiers have died and many many Citizens, allies, and even The Press core have been left behind ? Why do Biden's lies NOT bother you ? I haven't seen you write 1 pixel's worth of criticism, so can you clear that up ?
 
I'll link it again, from the Buffalo News, debunking another dim lie.

No, Trump Hasn't Made 20,000 'False or Misleading' Claims​

There are now 21 on-the-record denials rebutting The Atlantic’s bombshell alleging President Trump called American soldiers “losers” and “suckers.” Ignoring the most problematic aspect of Atlantic Editor Jeffrey Goldberg’s report – his sources were all anonymous -- many journalists saw this story as the perfect opportunity to wager the institutional media’s credibility against that of the president, who to be charitable, has a strained relationship with the truth.
Brian Stelter, the host of CNN’s media criticism show, “Reliable Sources,” began Sunday’s episode with a monologue lamenting the fact that many news outlets even bothered to report Trump’s vehement denials of The Atlantic story. “Why confer credibility where it doesn’t belong? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me 20,000 times, well, shame on all of us,” he said. “Why keep acting like things are normal after 20,000 false and misleading claims?"


Indeed, per The Washington Post fact-checker database, President Trump has told 20,000 “false and misleading” claims through July 9 of this year – an astonishing average of nearly 16 false or misleading statements a day. Framed in those terms, Stelter has a point. Choosing between the credibility of Trump or, say, a CNN host, the editor of a prestige magazine such as The Atlantic, let alone a Washington Post fact-checker, is no choice at all.


The problem is that any cursory inspection of the Post database reveals that the idea that Trump has told 20,000 “false or misleading” statements is itself false and misleading. Vast quantities of the 20,000 are redundancies – statements, however tendentious, that Trump has repeated ad nauseum. More problematic is that thousands of statements The Washington Post labels as untrue or misleading are more properly considered the habitual verbal excess for a man known for his immoderate form of communication. Further, a great many of the Post’s objections to Trump’s statements amount to argumentative quibbles that aren’t really “fact checks.”


Just to start, here’s one of Trump’s most oft-repeated “lies,” according to Washington Post fact checkers: “My job was made harder by phony witch hunts, by ‘Russia, Russia, Russia’ nonsense.” The Post dings Trump for some variation of this claim 227 times – more than 1% of Trump’s alleged untruths. Yet, the Post’s justification for why Trump is wrong to say this is pure pettifogging.

Much of it essentially consists of a defense of the probe conducted by special prosecutor Robert Mueller. However, the most tangible results from the Mueller investigation – criminal charges for Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort for unrelated work in Ukraine and fecklessly charging (and then quietly dropping the charges) against a bunch of Russian nationals for hacking and other dirty computer tricks – don’t come close to proving Trump colluded with Russia to steal an election.



In that respect, the Post fact checker flirts with dishonesty in the way it omits salient facts. “Mueller declined to reach a decision on whether to bring charges against Trump for obstructing justice. … Mueller spent nearly half of the report laying out a sustained effort by Trump to derail the investigation, including an effort by the president to have Mueller removed,” notes the Post.

It’s telling the Post is dredging up the obstruction allegations. Trump supporters would frame what happened this way: The Mueller investigation started with no real evidence that Trump colluded with Russia, uncovered no new evidence, and when investigators realized they had nothing, pivoted to making a politicized case for obstruction while investigating a crime they knew didn’t exist. Meanwhile, a top FBI lawyer just pleaded guilty to lying on Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants. If the FBI lied to get warrants to spy on Trump associates, that seems pretty close to “phony witch hunt.”


Suffice it to say, you will find numerous other Trump-Russia “fact checks” in the bowels of the Post database that fail to acknowledge there was major malfeasance in the FBI investigation, and there are reasons to believe the highest levels of the Obama administration knew about and enabled an improper and politicized investigation into Trump – reasons the fact checker credulously dismisses.


Setting aside 2016, the Post fact checker is also wading into the current election. How the Post justifies calling this statement misleading is a head-scratcher: “We need security, we can't defund our police and we can't abolish the police. They want to abolish our police.” (Again, the Post’s 20,000 total falsehoods registers Trump saying some variation of this eight different times.)


According to the Post this is false because “Biden does not support ‘defunding police,’ according to the candidate and the campaign.” However, the context of the Sean Hannity interview in which Trump makes the statement in no way suggests Trump is directly referring to Biden. “They” seems to mean the Democratic Party or the left more generally.
In addition, Biden has also said he’s “absolutely” in favor of redirecting funds from the police – which is the definition many “defund the police” supporters are using. Regardless, it’s true that numerous prominent Democrats and progressive activists have come out in favor of “defunding the police,” whatever that loaded phrase is supposed to mean. A New York Times article last month, headlined “Biden Said, ‘Most Cops Are Good.’ But Progressives Want Systemic Change,” testifies to the fact this is a significant intraparty tension. (See also this other Times op-ed from a progressive activist, “Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police.”)




Maybe you believe Biden, who has drifted left on numerous significant policy questions after a primary with socialist Bernie Sanders, can hold the line on defunding the police against many of his own supporters. But the Post has no business disputing Trump here. It looks as if the Post is moving the goalposts to give Biden cover on an issue hurting him at the polls.
Other allegedly misleading claims are simply insulting to readers, such as this one Trump’s been rung up for eight times: “We have tremendous African American support.” Trump exceeded expectations with his share of the African American vote in 2016. Regardless, is he supposed to call his own supporters lackluster? If this statement is “false or misleading,” what level of wishful political rhetoric is acceptable?

So far, all of the examples from the Post fact checker I’ve cited are from the first page of its database. But that’s the particular genius of what the Post has done – transformed thousands of nits it would like to pick into a cudgel of a talking point to be used against Trump, knowing no one is going to comb through such an exhaustive and tedious list.

I’ve spent the better part of a decade offering occasionally exhaustive analyses of why the entire media fact-checking enterprise is flawed, never mind the outrageous political double standards fact checkers employed in the Obama years.



However, I’ve also long said that if you must rely on a fact checker – and I don’t recommend it – The Washington Post is the best of the bunch. The Post fact-checking operation is more transparent and less biased than others, and head fact checker Glenn Kessler is responsive to complaints and is certainly capable of doing excellent journalism – see his recent deep dive into a GOP Senate candidate’s claims about his charitable work.

Had Post fact checkers been more discerning, they could have nailed Trump on a much smaller, but still impressive number of claims that would be difficult to dispute. Instead, they buffaloed the public with the dubious claim Trump has made an astounding 20,000 false or misleading statements. The worry is now that the media’s habitual overreach in the Trump era will endure long after Trump leaves office. In the meantime, there’s an election in two months, and voters who are asked to choose between the media’s credibility and Trump’s are frantically looking to see what’s behind door No. 3.
That's one article but Trump is such a pathological liar that his administration had to coin the term "alternative facts" to defend the prodigious number of his lies.
 
Mike your still raving about Trump lies, and he's not President. Fine, can we say it's True you just don't like lies ? If yes, Why are you excusing ALL The Lies Biden has said, what's more consequential lies, as 13 Soldiers have died and many many Citizens, allies, and even The Press core have been left behind ? Why do Biden's lies NOT bother you ? I haven't seen you write 1 pixel's worth of criticism, so can you clear that up ?
Raving? I was stating documented facts and when did I excuse the lies Biden has said? Any presidents lies bother me but why would I need to document Biden's lies when there are so many of you that have done nothing else? Every other post is about Biden lying so why the need for another?
 
During his first 100 days in Office, Trump told more falsehoods than Biden and Obama combined. Look it up! Again I find ironic your sudden concern with lies after not one comment during Trumps term! What's the deal, hypocrite?
There’s another founding member of Canesport’s Mt Rushmore for Libtards
 
  • Like
Reactions: grbcane
Any presidents lies bother me but why would I need to document Biden's lies when there are so many of you that have done nothing else?
Mike, who is the Current President ? The only thing citizen Trump is now is your shield. Mike why do you need a shield ? If not, then understand Biden is President, Biden has the spotlight, Biden is the only one to judge. Don't you agree ? So then, why fail to answer the question posed to you? If you are avoiding it just understand that a lie, as well mike. Cowards run, and running from fear isn't brave, just like not answering a question whose answer contradicts you. It'd be cowardice not to answer, and you don't lie nor like liars, So Answer the question,,,,,,,,,,,,
Why do Biden's lies NOT bother you ?
 
Stupid is denying documented facts!
So you believe biden Afghan pullout was successful??
What facts are you looking at???
Name one lie!
Bidens comments yesterday…..
”Afghan withdrawel was a total success”
Thats just the first one that comes to mind
however lets play this game
You mention bumbling Bidens good things and I’ll mention his stone cold BS
Your turn lil mikey
 
Mike, who is the Current President ? The only thing citizen Trump is now is your shield. Mike why do you need a shield ? If not, then understand Biden is President, Biden has the spotlight, Biden is the only one to judge. Don't you agree ? So then, why fail to answer the question posed to you? If you are avoiding it just understand that a lie, as well mike. Cowards run, and running from fear isn't brave, just like not answering a question whose answer contradicts you. It'd be cowardice not to answer, and you don't lie nor like liars, So Answer the question,,,,,,,,,,,,
I've already explained that any president's lies bother me. And I've also explained why I haven't posted on this. Why the need for another? Haven't you read enough of these posts?
 
I've already explained that any president's lies bother me. And I've also explained why I haven't posted on this. Why the need for another? Haven't you read enough of these posts?
No I havent
this isnt about lies, it’s about truth
Please tell us how bumbling Bidens insane exit, worst military decision EVER was a “total success”
WAITING Mikey………………………….
PS Would love to go tik for tat, just provide some tat, fair enough??????????
 
  • Like
Reactions: grbcane
So you believe biden Afghan pullout was successful??
What facts are you looking at???

Bidens comments yesterday…..
”Afghan withdrawel was a total success”
Thats just the first one that comes to mind
however lets play this game
You mention bumbling Bidens good things and I’ll mention his stone cold BS
Your turn lil mikey
The documented facts I referred to were Trumps lies during his first hundred days in office. I never claimed Biden's final departure was successful. To the contrary. I posted on here that it was ill-planned and should have had more military involvement. Biden called it a total success, not me!
 
So you believe biden Afghan pullout was successful??
What facts are you looking at???

Bidens comments yesterday…..
”Afghan withdrawel was a total success”
Thats just the first one that comes to mind
however lets play this game
You mention bumbling Bidens good things and I’ll mention his stone cold BS
Your turn lil mikey
grbcane accused me of lying and I asked him to "name one lie". I wasn't referring to Biden. Try to stay focused!
 
No I havent
this isnt about lies, it’s about truth
Please tell us how bumbling Bidens insane exit, worst military decision EVER was a “total success”
WAITING Mikey………………………….
PS Would love to go tik for tat, just provide some tat, fair enough??????????
as I said, "total success" were Bidens words, not mine!
 
You didn't and haven't called it a LIE mike. You called it ill-planned and unsuccessful, am I wrong ? There have been many documented lies our President Biden has said, and I haven't seen you comment nor acknowledge a single one , yet.
 
I'll link it again, from the Buffalo News, debunking another dim lie.

No, Trump Hasn't Made 20,000 'False or Misleading' Claims​

There are now 21 on-the-record denials rebutting The Atlantic’s bombshell alleging President Trump called American soldiers “losers” and “suckers.” Ignoring the most problematic aspect of Atlantic Editor Jeffrey Goldberg’s report – his sources were all anonymous -- many journalists saw this story as the perfect opportunity to wager the institutional media’s credibility against that of the president, who to be charitable, has a strained relationship with the truth.
Brian Stelter, the host of CNN’s media criticism show, “Reliable Sources,” began Sunday’s episode with a monologue lamenting the fact that many news outlets even bothered to report Trump’s vehement denials of The Atlantic story. “Why confer credibility where it doesn’t belong? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me 20,000 times, well, shame on all of us,” he said. “Why keep acting like things are normal after 20,000 false and misleading claims?"


Indeed, per The Washington Post fact-checker database, President Trump has told 20,000 “false and misleading” claims through July 9 of this year – an astonishing average of nearly 16 false or misleading statements a day. Framed in those terms, Stelter has a point. Choosing between the credibility of Trump or, say, a CNN host, the editor of a prestige magazine such as The Atlantic, let alone a Washington Post fact-checker, is no choice at all.


The problem is that any cursory inspection of the Post database reveals that the idea that Trump has told 20,000 “false or misleading” statements is itself false and misleading. Vast quantities of the 20,000 are redundancies – statements, however tendentious, that Trump has repeated ad nauseum. More problematic is that thousands of statements The Washington Post labels as untrue or misleading are more properly considered the habitual verbal excess for a man known for his immoderate form of communication. Further, a great many of the Post’s objections to Trump’s statements amount to argumentative quibbles that aren’t really “fact checks.”


Just to start, here’s one of Trump’s most oft-repeated “lies,” according to Washington Post fact checkers: “My job was made harder by phony witch hunts, by ‘Russia, Russia, Russia’ nonsense.” The Post dings Trump for some variation of this claim 227 times – more than 1% of Trump’s alleged untruths. Yet, the Post’s justification for why Trump is wrong to say this is pure pettifogging.

Much of it essentially consists of a defense of the probe conducted by special prosecutor Robert Mueller. However, the most tangible results from the Mueller investigation – criminal charges for Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort for unrelated work in Ukraine and fecklessly charging (and then quietly dropping the charges) against a bunch of Russian nationals for hacking and other dirty computer tricks – don’t come close to proving Trump colluded with Russia to steal an election.



In that respect, the Post fact checker flirts with dishonesty in the way it omits salient facts. “Mueller declined to reach a decision on whether to bring charges against Trump for obstructing justice. … Mueller spent nearly half of the report laying out a sustained effort by Trump to derail the investigation, including an effort by the president to have Mueller removed,” notes the Post.

It’s telling the Post is dredging up the obstruction allegations. Trump supporters would frame what happened this way: The Mueller investigation started with no real evidence that Trump colluded with Russia, uncovered no new evidence, and when investigators realized they had nothing, pivoted to making a politicized case for obstruction while investigating a crime they knew didn’t exist. Meanwhile, a top FBI lawyer just pleaded guilty to lying on Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants. If the FBI lied to get warrants to spy on Trump associates, that seems pretty close to “phony witch hunt.”


Suffice it to say, you will find numerous other Trump-Russia “fact checks” in the bowels of the Post database that fail to acknowledge there was major malfeasance in the FBI investigation, and there are reasons to believe the highest levels of the Obama administration knew about and enabled an improper and politicized investigation into Trump – reasons the fact checker credulously dismisses.


Setting aside 2016, the Post fact checker is also wading into the current election. How the Post justifies calling this statement misleading is a head-scratcher: “We need security, we can't defund our police and we can't abolish the police. They want to abolish our police.” (Again, the Post’s 20,000 total falsehoods registers Trump saying some variation of this eight different times.)


According to the Post this is false because “Biden does not support ‘defunding police,’ according to the candidate and the campaign.” However, the context of the Sean Hannity interview in which Trump makes the statement in no way suggests Trump is directly referring to Biden. “They” seems to mean the Democratic Party or the left more generally.
In addition, Biden has also said he’s “absolutely” in favor of redirecting funds from the police – which is the definition many “defund the police” supporters are using. Regardless, it’s true that numerous prominent Democrats and progressive activists have come out in favor of “defunding the police,” whatever that loaded phrase is supposed to mean. A New York Times article last month, headlined “Biden Said, ‘Most Cops Are Good.’ But Progressives Want Systemic Change,” testifies to the fact this is a significant intraparty tension. (See also this other Times op-ed from a progressive activist, “Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police.”)




Maybe you believe Biden, who has drifted left on numerous significant policy questions after a primary with socialist Bernie Sanders, can hold the line on defunding the police against many of his own supporters. But the Post has no business disputing Trump here. It looks as if the Post is moving the goalposts to give Biden cover on an issue hurting him at the polls.
Other allegedly misleading claims are simply insulting to readers, such as this one Trump’s been rung up for eight times: “We have tremendous African American support.” Trump exceeded expectations with his share of the African American vote in 2016. Regardless, is he supposed to call his own supporters lackluster? If this statement is “false or misleading,” what level of wishful political rhetoric is acceptable?

So far, all of the examples from the Post fact checker I’ve cited are from the first page of its database. But that’s the particular genius of what the Post has done – transformed thousands of nits it would like to pick into a cudgel of a talking point to be used against Trump, knowing no one is going to comb through such an exhaustive and tedious list.

I’ve spent the better part of a decade offering occasionally exhaustive analyses of why the entire media fact-checking enterprise is flawed, never mind the outrageous political double standards fact checkers employed in the Obama years.



However, I’ve also long said that if you must rely on a fact checker – and I don’t recommend it – The Washington Post is the best of the bunch. The Post fact-checking operation is more transparent and less biased than others, and head fact checker Glenn Kessler is responsive to complaints and is certainly capable of doing excellent journalism – see his recent deep dive into a GOP Senate candidate’s claims about his charitable work.

Had Post fact checkers been more discerning, they could have nailed Trump on a much smaller, but still impressive number of claims that would be difficult to dispute. Instead, they buffaloed the public with the dubious claim Trump has made an astounding 20,000 false or misleading statements. The worry is now that the media’s habitual overreach in the Trump era will endure long after Trump leaves office. In the meantime, there’s an election in two months, and voters who are asked to choose between the media’s credibility and Trump’s are frantically looking to see what’s behind door No. 3.
Calling Mikey,
Specifically what is your response to these statements.
Is the truth a lie??????
Or do libs simply lie to ward off anger???????????????
 
You didn't and haven't called it a LIE mike. You called it ill-planned and unsuccessful, am I wrong ? There have been many documented lies our President Biden has said, and I haven't seen you comment nor acknowledge a single one , yet.
Biden called it a total success. That was a lie. I called it ill-planned and unsuccessful. What is your point here? You've obviously followed Biden's career more closely than I. I'm aware that he has been accused of many lies but I can't recall specifics off the top of my head. I've explained I haven't commented because there is no need. Every other post is about Biden lies. What is the point of another?
 
Answer my question
Do you defend Bidens withdrawal or do you think it was the total disaster,it was?????
I've already answered that. It was ill-planned and resulted in chaos. As I've explained over and over, there should have been more military involvement. What else do you need to know?
 
I've already answered that. It was ill-planned and resulted in chaos. As I've explained over and over, there should have been more military involvement. What else do you need to know?
Thats enough
However a far too polite way to describe the worst military exercise in Amercian history!
I do respect the fact that you DIDNT ignore it
Lastly the POS president looked at his watch 12 times, each time as a dead soldier was presented.
Did you read the post of a parent’s feelings from yesterday
listen mikey, it was one thing to vote AGAINST Trump it’s quite another for other libs to support this administration
 
  • Like
Reactions: mahb and central17
Calling Mikey,
Specifically what is your response to these statements.
Is the truth a lie??????
Or do libs simply lie to ward off anger???????????????
I didn't lie and I'm not angry. That was one author's opinion. I don't know if the numbers cited are true or not. I do know that the Trump administration had to coin the term "alternative facts" to defend his many lies. Why was that?
 
I didn't lie and I'm not angry. That was one author's opinion. I don't know if the numbers cited are true or not. I do know that the Trump administration had to coin the term "alternative facts" to defend his many lies. Why was that?
Let’s see if you were in court and being charged with a serious crime and the prosecution presented its case and declared case closed but you lawyer had other facts or information that absolutely contradicts the prosecution wouldn’t you want the jury to here your lawyers “ alternative facts “
Hope that helps u out
I know you only want to hear facts that support your narrative because you and your liberal friends are smarter then the rest of us ... at least you think so
 
Thats enough
However a far too polite way to describe the worst military exercise in Amercian history!
I do respect the fact that you DIDNT ignore it
Lastly the POS president looked at his watch 12 times, each time as a dead soldier was presented.
Did you read the post of a parent’s feelings from yesterday
listen mikey, it was one thing to vote AGAINST Trump it’s quite another for other libs to support this administration
I don't know that it was the worst exercise in American history. There were many comparable or worse in Vietnam. I remember one battle that they called "hamburger hill" due the number of Marines slaughtered trying to reach the top of the hill. Once on top, they turned around and left. Why not just avoid the hill and move on to something more easily attainable? Stupid and costly! BTW. The incident was brought under Congressional investigation and involved U.S. Army and ARVN troops not Marines.
 
Last edited:
mike, Bidens been lying since he got into politics.

-Got an F in law school for Plagiarizing on an exam
-Lied about being in the top 10% of his law School Graduating Class (was bottom 10%)
those 2 are common knowledge. This link is from real clear politics, and it goes from law school to his campaign.

Joe Biden's Plagiarism Problem from realclear politics

these are from more recent and current

national review , The True Extent of Biden’s Lies about Afghanistan By JIM GERAGHTY

Here’s The Full List Of Every Lie Joe Biden Has Told As President: Part 60
 
Let’s see if you were in court and being charged with a serious crime and the prosecution presented its case and declared case closed but you lawyer had other facts or information that absolutely contradicts the prosecution wouldn’t you want the jury to here your lawyers “ alternative facts “
Hope that helps u out
I know you only want to hear facts that support your narrative because you and your liberal friends are smarter then the rest of us ... at least you think so
The prosecution can't declare case closed. That's up to the Judge. In Trumps case, the term "alternative facts" was coined to defend his many lies. They weren't alternative facts, they were outright lies1
 
The prosecution can't declare case closed. That's up to the Judge. In Trumps case, the term "alternative facts" was coined to defend his many lies. They weren't alternative facts, they were outright lies1
But that’s what you do and have done over and over on this board .
You think you have the final word
That’s okay because the “alternative facts” about your boy Biden are going to overwhelm you into submission. because the truth will win over delusional thought deception and then one day you might pull your head out of your ass and realize that things in the world don’t look and smell like shit when you can see without your ass in the way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: grbcane
grbcane accused me of lying and I asked him to "name one lie". I wasn't referring to Biden. Try to stay focused!

Pretty much every time you open your mouth, it’s not worth my time. Some posters already busted you in the Wuhan thread. You’re pathetic TDS carcass will claim an opinion of a Trump, or something you researched in your libtard sources constitutes a lie by Trump.
 
Last edited:
But that’s what you do and have done over and over on this board .
You think you have the final word
That’s okay because the “alternative facts” about your boy Biden are going to overwhelm you into submission. because the truth will win over delusional thought deception and then one day you might pull your head out of your ass and realize that things in the world don’t look and smell like shit when you can see without your ass in the way.

MiamiCD is the arbitrator of truth, just like the ones at Facebook and Twitter.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT