Trump "Fake news"

[Eisdrache]

Originally Posted by Demi.

He didn't call Mexican immigrants rapists or drug dealers. He meant that many coming over the boarder illegally probably are(That's how you distort the truth while still appearing to tell the facts). It's still a dumb statement but It's not a clear indicator of racism; only false information to better justify one of his campaign promises.

You mean that's what Mike Pence said what his interpretation was when he had to clean up after Trump's speech. Like he has to do after every speech because Trump loves to make vague statements that can be seen either way and then leaving it to his cabinet to make sense of it.

Originally Posted by Demi.

It's locker room banter meant to be funny-- I personally thought it was. Are you going to accuse black people of being misogynistic for liking rap music? We all know what kind of lyrics are conveyed there. The reality is it doesn't matter what you think of a class or group of people in your mind, but rather, your actions to them in an open environment.

Originally Posted by Demi.

I never claimed it was fake, merely misleading and often opinionated. As far as presidents go, Trump is passable. There are things I like about him and just as many I don't. I lean more on the side of finding humor in his twitter rants and that they're a facet to his rambunctious personality.

Let's not equate anonymous people liking rap music with the president of the United States openly going after people.

Originally Posted by Demi.

"The media story reviewed the tone of coverage of Trump’s first 60 days in office and found that just 5 percent was “positive.”" This is way before you can accuse Trump of doing a far worse job.

Home prices are on the rise; manufacturing jobs rebounded; unemployment is the lowest in 44 years; GDP growth is at 3% over the last two quarters; 3rd highest stock market rebound of any 1st term sitting president... I'll say that it is tough to credit Trump for anything when democrats want to credit Obama for the current economic growth and not the sitting president.

It's hard to credit Trump for things he hasn't had any hand in it either.

[felix]

Originally Posted by MrTerrorist

Merkel’s Efforts to Teach Trump About Diplomacy Didn’t Go Well

Somehow this reminds of that one That 70's Show episode where Kelso's dad tried to repeatedly explain to Kelso what his job was which the latter didn't understand until he gave up and just say his dad is a "farmer".

I really like how a commenter put it....

to be fair to both, they were speaking to each other in their non-native language of English; Merkel's native language being German and Trump's being Imbecilic.

[Dauerlutscher]

Oh man, after 1 year full of bullshit an there are still people defending this misogynist racist idiot.

[Haak]

Originally Posted by Demi.

He didn't call Mexican immigrants rapists or drug dealers. He meant that many coming over the boarder illegally probably are(That's how you distort the truth while still appearing to tell the facts). It's still a dumb statement but It's not a clear indicator of racism; only false information to better justify one of his campaign promises.

There's only one type of person dumb enough to believe it, and if you don't realise that's the whole point behind it then you must be naive beyond belief.

[Toukairin]

Originally Posted by Dauerlutscher

Oh man, after 1 year full of bullshit an there are still people defending this misogynist racist idiot.

Go figure how and why. In Game of Thrones, Bronn told it best as it is:

There's no cure for being a ****

[Demi.]

Okay, lets move along shall we?

It turns out the CDC banning certain words isn't true. I can't find a CNN or Washington Post article that corrects their mistake. Their story was inaccurate on many levels. Particularly on who they blamed, which was misinformation at best and a complete fabrication at worst.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health...t_the_cdc.html

The culprits were career CDC officials who fear that certain words may offend republicans to the point of having their budgets cut. So they reasoned that these words are best to be avoided. The Trump administration had no involvement in it; it was liberal bureaucrats doing whatever they can think of to protect their work from scrutiny.

[dniv]

Originally Posted by ChuckE

Regarding statues you reap what you sow, no? Just like with muslims, such actions (we had an example with Jerusalem. The scale is bigger but the idea is the same) cause radicalizing of people...And accusing and labeling doesn't help either.

I think it's unfair how the Republican party is treating Muslims. There are at least as many Muslims in the world as there are Christians (I'm pretty sure more than 1 billion).

Even if you were to have 100,000 Muslims commit suicide terrorist attacks (and I picked that exaggerated number to make a point), the other 999,899,999+ Muslim people in the world are suffering because of the actions of an extreme minority. It's ridiculous to hold innocents responsible for the actions of a crazy minority, you know? I don't understand why you think this is okay? I'm (agnostic) Jewish btw, and I just feel bad for Muslims going through ridiculous persecution. This unfair persecution isn't going to decrease the amount of terrorism. It's going to increase it by festering more hatred. What's your logic for perpetuating it anyway? Religion is just a way of life for most people; it's not a reason to oppress people.

Also, I'll be honest with you. I don't think liberals are largely trying to make Trump look bad on purpose. They honestly just believe it. If you look at Fox News and at Liberal Media they cover entirely different topics because they have different priorities and because they feel differently about the same issues. I don't think there has to be a bad guy here. Sure, some of the people on both sides are probably crooked, but as we've learned from video games and anime, you just need a few crooked individuals to play around with everyone else's good intentions like they're dumb puppets to manipulate all people involved. Though ... you could also take the persona 5 perspective that the whole system is ****ed...

[ChuckE]

Originally Posted by dniv

Even if you were to have 100,000 Muslims commit suicide terrorist attacks (and I picked that exaggerated number to make a point), the other 999,899,999+ Muslim people in the world are suffering because of the actions of an extreme minority. It's ridiculous to hold innocents responsible for the actions of a crazy minority, you know? I don't understand why you think this is okay? I'm (agnostic) Jewish btw, and I just feel bad for Muslims going through ridiculous persecution. This unfair persecution isn't going to decrease the amount of terrorism. It's going to increase it by festering more hatred. What's your logic for perpetuating it anyway? Religion is just a way of life for most people; it's not a reason to oppress people.

It's way of life but it should be restricted when itis trying to affect the people who no relation to that. You don't eat pork - ok then. I shouldn't eat that? Sorry but no.

Well at least Islam should have a reformation. But I am curious about the historical development of judaism. Because it feels like it has never had such periods like crusades or reformations or holy wars

[Haak]

Originally Posted by ChuckE

It's way of life but it should be restricted when itis trying to affect the people who no relation to that. You don't eat pork - ok then. I shouldn't eat that? Sorry but no.

ROFLMAO. Talk about being triggered...

"They don't want us to eat pork? BAN MUSLIMS"

Eat all the pork you want mate. No one's stopping you.

[Key Board]

Originally Posted by Demi.

The culprits were career CDC officials who fear that certain words may offend republicans to the point of having their budgets cut. So they reasoned that these words are best to be avoided. The Trump administration had no involvement in it; it was liberal bureaucrats doing whatever they can think of to protect their work from scrutiny.

Please read what you have just typed

You don't see what the problem is?
They had a staff level discussion on how to present this budget and one of the things they have decided is to avoid using such words in the report
Why do they need to do this?!!
The fact that they had to worry about GOP cutting their budget is a big sign of what's wrong with this country

And there are plenty reasons to be afraid. Look what happened to the EPA

[Demi.]

Originally Posted by Key Board

Please read what you have just typed

You don't see what the problem is?
They had a staff level discussion on how to present this budget and one of the things they have decided is to avoid using such words in the report
Why do they need to do this?!!
The fact that they had to worry about GOP cutting their budget is a big sign of what's wrong with this country

And there are plenty reasons to be afraid. Look what happened to the EPA

You're missing the point. The CNN and Washington Post article was a complete misinterpretation of reality. They didn't fact-check, they took one persons anonymous report at face value because they're so gung-ho about anything that will sling mud at Trump.

It was also assumed that science-based and evidence-based were only listed because they appear far too often in reports and are maddeningly abused by both sides. And they're not even on the watch-list; rather, it was recommended they make an effort to use fact-based and evidence-based only when necessary.

[dniv]

Originally Posted by ChuckE

It's way of life but it should be restricted when itis trying to affect the people who no relation to that. You don't eat pork - ok then. I shouldn't eat that? Sorry but no.

Well at least Islam should have a reformation. But I am curious about the historical development of judaism. Because it feels like it has never had such periods like crusades or reformations or holy wars

Yeah, only Zionists are sorta like that and they're a really tiny minority. I mean, I do understand your point to some degree. It's annoying when people tell you what to do and act as if their way of life is the only right way to live, but my point is more that that's only an extreme minority of muslims. I know plenty from college and they're not like that at all. I really think it depends both on where they came from and by who or what they were influenced by while growing up. I just think it's unfair to lump them all together ... when they're not all the same.

[Key Board]

Originally Posted by Demi.

You're missing the point. The CNN and Washington Post article was a complete misinterpretation of reality. They didn't fact-check, they took one persons anonymous report at face value because they're so gung-ho about anything that will sling mud at Trump.

Even though the context was incorrect, that list was real.

And they did correct things

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...3b6_story.html

It was also assumed that science-based and evidence-based were only listed because they appear far too often in reports and are maddeningly abused by both sides. And they're not even on the watch-list; rather, it was recommended they make an effort to use fact-based and evidence-based only when necessary.

You can't be a centrist about things when the fact is that this admin has taken an anti intellectual stance and has ignored scientific studies on climate change and transgender issues.
You know who Trump listens to? Alex Jones

[Blueknight78]

And here we are again and what is trump first "first day action in the new year???? twitter and attack someone, this time was pakistan
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...02588174577664

The United States has foolishly given Pakistan more than 33 billion dollars in aid over the last 15 years, and they have given us nothing but lies & deceit, thinking of our leaders as fools. They give safe haven to the terrorists we hunt in Afghanistan, with little help. No more!

but here the answer for the trump "info"
https://twitter.com/KhawajaMAsif/sta...01021356085248

Pres Trump quoted figure of $33billion given to PAK over last 15yrs,he can hire a US based Audit firm on our expense to verify this figure & let the world know who is lying & deceiving..

yeah trump never stop to amuse how he can really be crap if he want to proper complain don't come with "random numbers" to fire-up his "base", well we already know which trump is a "walking lie machine".

and
http://www.huffpostbrasil.com/entry/...b0b0e5a7a6637b

U.S. Military Set To Allow Recruitment Of Trans People Despite Trump's Wishes

probably trump new year not was happy as he wanted, since the "lgbt which he "cowardly betrayed won a battle against him.

[Solace]

Originally Posted by Demi.

Okay, lets move along shall we?

It turns out the CDC banning certain words isn't true. I can't find a CNN or Washington Post article that corrects their mistake. Their story was inaccurate on many levels. Particularly on who they blamed, which was misinformation at best and a complete fabrication at worst.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health...t_the_cdc.html

The culprits were career CDC officials who fear that certain words may offend republicans to the point of having their budgets cut. So they reasoned that these words are best to be avoided. The Trump administration had no involvement in it; it was liberal bureaucrats doing whatever they can think of to protect their work from scrutiny.

This story isn't quite accurate either. If you read the tweets from the CDC, despite claiming there are no banned words, she also says this:

"The assertion that HHS has 'banned words' is a complete mischaracterization of discussions regarding the budget formulation process."

So which is it? Is there a ban, or not? People often misunderstand how political language works. It's not a ban, you can still talk about it, but you can't call it what it is. This creates a huge sense of obfuscation, because now people speak in code rather than getting to the point.

[Demi.]

Originally Posted by Solace

This story isn't quite accurate either. If you read the tweets from the CDC, despite claiming there are no banned words, she also says this:

"The assertion that HHS has 'banned words' is a complete mischaracterization of discussions regarding the budget formulation process."

So which is it? Is there a ban, or not? People often misunderstand how political language works. It's not a ban, you can still talk about it, but you can't call it what it is. This creates a huge sense of obfuscation, because now people speak in code rather than getting to the point.

Career CDC officials were trying to hide words from the Trump administration (or republicans in general), but this only accounts for two of the words: transgender and fetus. In the case of "science based" and "Evidence based" the words are considered overused and are only on that list for the purpose of slimming them down. “vulnerable,” “diversity,” and “entitlement.” are on the list for a similar a reason, but also because they are frequently misused.

How the message got across: The budget office at HHS sent the other divisions of the CDC a pamphlet of sort that told them which words they should avoid. Meaning, it's not a ban per see, but the words words should only be used when other alternative words would not work in their place. It is confusing, but the main issue is that the accusations were being directed towards the wrong people.

[Blueknight78]

looks like finally trump give up on his "fraud comission"
https://www.theroot.com/trump-dissol...sio-1821756361

Trump Dissolves His Controversial Voter Fraud Commission

another "battle lost for trump".

[Key Board]

By now I think everyone has probably heard about the Trump Bannon thing
There's something odd about this

The first thing Trump did was get upset at Steve Bannon
not the author of Fire and Fury: Inside the White-house
note: Bannon did not write this book

For all we know maybe it was just a sensationalist book, and the facts could have been embellished
but what happened promptly is Trump attacked Bannon on social media, that White House press followed soon

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...-desist-322937

And now Trump's lawyer is sending Bannon a cease and desist letter
Again, not to the book's author

To me this indicates that something about this book is true.
He could have just yelled "FAKE NEWS!" like he usually does
but this.. something struck a nerve
Maybe Trump should have just kept quiet about it

[felix]

Originally Posted by Key Board

By now I think everyone has probably heard about the Trump Bannon thing
There's something odd about this

The first thing Trump did was get upset at Steve Bannon
not the author of Fire and Fury: Inside the White-house
note: Bannon did not write this book

For all we know maybe it was just a sensationalist book, and the facts could have been embellished
but what happened promptly is Trump attacked Bannon on social media, that White House press followed soon

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...-desist-322937

And now Trump's lawyer is sending Bannon a cease and desist letter
Again, not to the book's author

To me this indicates that something about this book is true.
He could have just yelled "FAKE NEWS!" like he usually does
but this.. something struck a nerve
Maybe Trump should have just kept quiet about it

[edit] Isn't them going ballistic about this being "illegal disclosure blah-blah" the same as admitting everything he says is true.

Do they actually claim anything he says is untrue? (since it's just the article's view it's kind of a 2nd hand opinion)

[Blueknight78]

Originally Posted by Key Board

By now I think everyone has probably heard about the Trump Bannon thing
There's something odd about this

The first thing Trump did was get upset at Steve Bannon
not the author of Fire and Fury: Inside the White-house
note: Bannon did not write this book

For all we know maybe it was just a sensationalist book, and the facts could have been embellished
but what happened promptly is Trump attacked Bannon on social media, that White House press followed soon

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...-desist-322937

And now Trump's lawyer is sending Bannon a cease and desist letter
Again, not to the book's author

To me this indicates that something about this book is true.
He could have just yelled "FAKE NEWS!" like he usually does
but this.. something struck a nerve
Maybe Trump should have just kept quiet about it

now trump goes to a really dangerous zone with bannon, trump must really go soft on him if he don't want bannon and muller "goes friend", that could be the worst possible outcome.

another note why bannon could be upset about trump family being friendly with Russia since was pretty clear from the beginner russia support of trump and trump "crush" over putin, they where "friends" before the elections then it's not supposed to be a surprise or act of "betrayal from trump or his family the whole problem with Russia" he was supposed to know which trump could be using help from russia.

another note looks like finally trump approval rise in a more "confortable place" he is currently at 40% approval and 55 disapproval" really US peoples are very forgetible about they president craps.