President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

That's the way you have to play it. And for the record, I figure @MisterCreosote would actually write/report it that way, too.

 

I don't give a fuck if you're "nice" to him.

I don't even care if journalism ruins what's left of their reputation by the way they cover him. Actually, that's not true. I encourage this.

I think it's funny how defensive folks get when the spotlight is shown on the media for even a minute. "Whataboutism!" "Distraction." "Change of focus."

The media wants to get in the mud and wrestle with Trump, but don't want anyone pointing out that they get dirty in the process.

 

I HAVE written it that way!

I would take a little stank off the language for a "straight news story" in The Dick Whitman Tribune, though.

 

I really do want to hear which specific pieces you thought were framed or reported unfairly. You have us fighting windmills right now: "the media" or "the press" has been covering this unfairly.

I need specifics.

 

Sometimes.

But in this case, you are expressly arguing that Trump's reaction is justified due to unfair press coverage. A proper response to that is, "No, Trump's reaction is not justified due to unfair press coverage, even stipulating unfair press coverage."

 

Just trust him.

 

@YankeeFan has the right to be believed.

 

I believe he believes it shouldn't be covered at all, or has an issue with the scope of the coverage.

 

We are in a world where anything (negative) one person does/believes is ascribed to everyone in every group that person is a member of.

 

Yeah, we wouldn't want to accuse Trump falsely of anything, like not being a native-born American or being a Muslim.

 

This is just "whataboutism," though, isn't it?

 

If you portray a conversation differently than it occurred, by accurately quoting one part of it, but leaving out the rest of it, that, out in the proper context, would change our opinion of the conversation, that's being untruthful. You know this.

Is lie the wrong word, or too harsh of a term? OK. Fine. But, she accused him of being deliberately insensitive. That was not true.

Yes. her grandstanding was discussed at the time, and Kelly misremembered the reason for the charge.

I'm not a fan of the argument that, "I was wrong, but the point stands."

But, I'm sure that @MisterCreosote will agree that the grandstanding congresswoman doesn't deserve the benefit of the doubt here.

Trump responded to the charge made in today's interview. His version is contradictory to what the widow says, but he didn't accuse her of lying in her recollection of the conversation. He merely restated his version, and wasn't disrespectful in doing so.

I'm truly stumped as to why anyone in the media would be upset by this. He literally answered a question you had to ask him.

My focus? Have we not discussed the other aspects of this fully? Have I avoided the discussion?