Can a Trump supporter explain to me how fake news works?

[UltraVires]

@Sherrerd

Could you link to a half-dozen or so of those “hillion jillion” times Trump supposedly said that?

My recollection is that he read in a monotone (clearly under protest) a couple of statements that sort of hinted at disapproval of Nazis and white supremacists—nothing more.

But if you’ve got a hillion jillion such public statements at the ready, you can surely offer us some links.

Here’s one:

At the rally, Trump said: “This evil, anti-Semitic attack is an assault on all of us. It is an assault on humanity. It must be confronted and condemned everywhere it rears its ugly head. We must stand with our Jewish brothers and sisters to defeat anti-Semitism and vanquish the forces of hate. Those seeking their destruction, we will seek their destruction.”

Netanyahu praises Trump for condemning anti-Semitism following Pittsburgh...

Also, moving our Embassy to Jerusalem.

Sounds like words straight from Himmler. :rolleyes:

[Sherrerd]

@UltraVires

Here’s one:
https://www.jta.org/2018/10/29/news-opinion/netanyahu-praises-trump-for-condemning-anti-semitism-following-pittsburgh-attack

He did read the teleprompter relatively skillfully, for him–didn’t misread. The monotone is always a dead giveaway that he isn’t enjoying himself when he has to read such things, of course. This time, he fairly quickly segued into a more enjoyable riff on ‘putting people to death.’

And of course just a bit earlier he’d blamed the Pittsburgh murder victims for not having an armed guard at their services.

So you haven’t yet managed to fulfill the request to document your claim that “he’s said a hillion jillion times that he does not support Nazis or white supremacists”, not even to the requested level of a half-dozen examples.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/27/politics/donald-trump-illinois-rally/index.html

@UltraVires

Also, moving our Embassy to Jerusalem.
Sounds like words straight from Himmler. :rolleyes:

Seriously, you’re citing the moving of the embassy as being equivalent to a denunciation of Nazis and white supremacists?

And that’s all you’ve got?

[Lance_Turbo]

@UltraVires

Maybe he was confused about the organization of the event just like I was because of similar recent protests/events in the same city. But let’s not let that get in the way of a good Trump bashing.

Like this one?

On May 13, 2017, white supremacist Richard Spencer led a rally in Charlottesville to protest the city’s plans to remove the statue of Lee. The event involved protesters holding torches near the statue. That same night, a candlelight counterprotest took place.

Or this one?

The Ku Klux Klan held another rally in Charlottesville on July 8. About 50 Klan members and 1,000 counterprotesters gathered at a loud but nonviolent rally; the Klan members left the park after about 45 minutes. In opposition to the rally, the Charlottesville Clergy Collective created a safe space at First United Methodist Church, which was used by over 600 people.

Remember when you posted this?

@UltraVires

Huh. I’m seems as if I was wrong about the organization of the event and will eat my crow.

Doubling down on historical revisionism is not eating crow.

You were wrong about the Unite the Right rally, and now you’re compounding that mistake by being wrong about several other rallies.

[Skywatcher]

@UltraVires

Also, moving our Embassy to Jerusalem.

To piss off the Arabs. Support for Israel isn’t even necessarily contradictory with the new white nationalism, which advocates for separate ethnic nations—a Jewish state in a separate, strategic position as an ally against a perceived Arab enemy is one thing, the safety of Jews from persecution at home is another.

[Steve_MB]

“A lot of reporters are creating violence by not writing the truth. The fake news is creating violence.”

Well, duh. We’ve all seen how that works. The hacks on Faux Noise and right-wing squawk radio spew scary nonsense about Teh Caruhvan and Teh [DEL]Joooos[/DEL] globalists, and through the magic of stochastic terrorism a few listeners way out on the tail of the sanity bell curve attack the menace (or whatever reasonable facsimile might be within convenient reach) with guns and bombs.

Oh. Wait. That’s not what he’s talking about…?

Well, then, it’s just more Mango Moron authentic frontier gibberish.

[Steve_MB]

@UltraVires

After Charlottesville, which was a demonstration between primarily people who wanted confederate monuments removed and those who wanted to keep the confederate monuments. Of course with any demonstration, a few radical idiots showed up, modern day Nazis, KKK members and a guy who killed a woman with his car. The protests became violent.

When commenting on the event, Trump made one comment out of many that there were “good people on both sides.” It seems clear that the only fair reading of that comment, even at the time and without Trump’s subsequent statements, that Trump was talking about the two mainstream sides of the protest itself. Many people who want confederate monuments removed are good people; many people who want to keep confederate monuments are good people.

That is an absurd interpretation, given that the original dispute about the monuments (like many such disputes over the years) did not rise to the level of calling for Presidential comment until the Nazis and Klansmen and other alt-rightists organized the Charlottesville event and became the face of the pro-Confederate side.

[enipla]

@UltraVires

<snip>This isn’t the only event. Some examples:

1. Grab 'em by the pussy. What’s always left out of that is the very next statement when he says “when you’re a star, they don’t care.” We could have a civil debate over whether that statement was hyperbole or whether it is morally right to use one’s star power to bed women or commit adultery. What we get is the statement that Trump bragged about sexually assaulting women.

:eek:

Bolding mine. You think that excuses his statement in any way shape or form? What if Tom Hanks had said that? Can’t wrap your mind around that possibility can you. That’s because Hanks is thought to be a good decent person. Since Trump is a known misogynist and predator does not give him an excuse, it just reinforces what we know about him.

[putnam6]

@Little_Nemo

Some recent statements by President Tru

So I’m attempting to understand what he is claiming.

Is the President saying that recent events like the mail bombs, the Kentucky supermarket shootings, and the Pittsburgh synagogue shootings didn’t happen? That the media just made these events up?

Or is he saying that these events occurred but they were staged by the media? Or that they were staged by somebody else and media was wrong to report them? If so, does the President think the media knew the events were staged?

Or does the President believe that these events did occur but feel that they were not newsworthy and the media only chose to report them in order to avoid reporting on other more important stories?

Or does the President feel that these events occur but the media is deliberately altering the facts of the events in their report, by adding and subtracting to the facts they report?

How does the President feel these things are co-ordinated? Is there somebody who tells the media which stories to cover and which to avoid? There are thousands of media sources in this country; how do these decisions get communicated?

I realize there are going to be many posters who will want to mock the President on this topic. But I want them to refrain. There are other threads where you can do that. I honestly want responses from people who support the President so I can understand their point of view.

While it may have some basis of truth initially, its sadly become the Republicans version of REEEEEEEEEEEE!

[bump]

I always interpreted the “Fake news!” cries as being basically code for news that has anything other than a bias toward him and the GOP.

Basically if it doesn’t fit the narrative that they/he is pushing, then it’s “fake news” because they’re so awesome, and so on, and these jerky reporters and news outlets have to be making stuff up to try and disprove its awesomeness.

Because, you know, he’s always telling the truth, and as such, the rest of this stuff has to be made up to try and make him look bad. The alternative is that he’s full of shit, and the GOP is wrong, and they can’t have that.

So “Fake news” it is. I think the problem I have is that it’s one thing to bitch about editorial bias, especially in terms of what stories get prominent billing, but it’s another entirely to claim that decades-old, widely respected professional news organizations are pushing blatant untruths.

[Johnny_L.A]

An uncle shared a post claiming that people in the South American [del]invaders[/del] migrant caravan were looting and leaving garbage all over the place. Naturally, I looked for any information to back up the claim. Now, whenever there are people, there will be garbage. Whenever there are a lot of people, there’s a chance that a few will commit crimes. I found nothing to back up the claim. I told my uncle, ‘Funny, there’s nothing in the news about it.’

He gave the expected reply: ‘It’s not in the news because it doesn’t fit their agenda.’

AFAICFO, Trumpistas believe ‘The proof is there is no proof!’ Any facts that don’t fit their agenda are false.

[puddleglum]

@Little_Nemo

Some recent statements by President Trump:

So I’m attempting to understand what he is claiming.

Is the President saying that recent events like the mail bombs, the Kentucky supermarket shootings, and the Pittsburgh synagogue shootings didn’t happen? That the media just made these events up?

Or is he saying that these events occurred but they were staged by the media? Or that they were staged by somebody else and media was wrong to report them? If so, does the President think the media knew the events were staged?

Or does the President believe that these events did occur but feel that they were not newsworthy and the media only chose to report them in order to avoid reporting on other more important stories?

Or does the President feel that these events occur but the media is deliberately altering the facts of the events in their report, by adding and subtracting to the facts they report?

How does the President feel these things are co-ordinated? Is there somebody who tells the media which stories to cover and which to avoid? There are thousands of media sources in this country; how do these decisions get communicated?

I realize there are going to be many posters who will want to mock the President on this topic. But I want them to refrain. There are other threads where you can do that. I honestly want responses from people who support the President so I can understand their point of view.

I am not a Trump supporter but he appears to be talking about bias in the media. Bias works by covering certain things more than others, and by the tone of the coverage.
For example the coverage of the synagogue shooting. The Washington Post"How much responsibility does Trump bear for the synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh?
" CNN"direct line from Trump rhetoric to murder of jews. CNN"Defiant and divisive, Trump set to honor Pittsburgh victims" Vox"Progressive Jewish leaders to Trump: You’re not welcome in Pittsburgh “until you fully denounce white nationalism”

None of those articles mention that the synagogue shooter hated Trump, that Trump has a Jewish daughter and son-in law or that anti Semitic attacks were common under previous presidents. The tone is accusatory and Trump’s critics are given the bulk of the articles. For instance the final sentence of the Vox article is Bend the Arc’s leaders disagree. “You yourself called the murderer evil, but yesterday’s violence is the direct culmination of your influence,” they wrote.

No one has to coordinate the stories. Some members of my family were listening to the Steeler Ravens game on the radio yesterday. When they were in Pennslyvania the announcers were excited when the Steelers did well, and when they crossed into Maryland and found a new channel the announcers were excited when the Ravens did well. No one had to go to those announcers and tell them to be excited when the home team does well. They are ex football players, they live and work around the team, and are paid either by the team or a media partner. Likewise, no one has to tell the media to love liberals and hate conservatives. The Democrat party is the media’s home team. 90% of them are liberals and so it is natural for them to assume that Trump caused the synagogue shooting to happen. Yet when the Holocaust museum shooting happened it never occurred to them to ask if Obama was responsible.

[Lance_Turbo]

@puddleglum

None of those articles mention that the synagogue shooter hated Trump, that Trump has a Jewish daughter and son-in law or that anti Semitic attacks were common under previous presidents. The tone is accusatory and Trump’s critics are given the bulk of the articles. For instance the final sentence of the Vox article is Bend the Arc’s leaders disagree. “You yourself called the murderer evil, but yesterday’s violence is the direct culmination of your influence,” they wrote.

Fourth paragraph of the only article you linked that I bothered to check.

Still, after discussions with advisers that included daughter Ivanka Trump and son-in-law Jared Kushner, who are Jewish, Trump declared his intent to visit Pittsburgh. The trip comes amid a last-minute midterm campaign push and has forestalled, for now, a planned address on immigration.

Why is it that every argument presented in this thread purporting to show anti-Trump media bias relies heavily on misrepresenting what the media is actually reporting?

[Lance_Turbo]

From the Washington Post piece linked by puddleglum…

First sentence…

In the hours after the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting, President Trump’s allies were at pains to point out that Robert D. Bowers, the alleged shooter, was in fact anti-Trump.

Also in the first paragraph…

“Trump is a globalist, not a nationalist,” Bowers wrote on one of his social media accounts.

Later on…

In fact, Trump had so much to say about the Jews that his Jewish son-in-law has had to publicly defend him as “not an anti-Semite.”

Did you think we wouldn’t read the things you linked to?

Do you wish to retract this? “None of those articles mention that the synagogue shooter hated Trump, that Trump has a Jewish daughter and son-in law or that anti Semitic attacks were common under previous presidents.”

[Steve_MB]

@Lance_Turbo

Do you wish to retract this? “None of those articles mention that the synagogue shooter hated Trump, that Trump has a Jewish daughter and son-in law or that anti Semitic attacks were common under previous presidents.”

To say nothing of the weakness of the “the shooter hated Trump for not being anti-semitic enough” argument.

[Little_Nemo]

@puddleglum

I am not a Trump supporter but he appears to be talking about bias in the media. Bias works by covering certain things more than others, and by the tone of the coverage.

Are you saying that bias is the equivalent of fakery?

[Sterling_Archer]

Sad that we’ve all forgotten “fake news” was originally a legit problem that will return in 2020 guaranteed. Fake news stories sent out by fly-by-night websites that smear candidates with completely fabricated stories. But as they always do, the GOP/Trump has co-opted this term to refer to the media whenever they report anything that makes him look bad.

[eschereal]

AAUI, prez is frustrated by the fact that he says stuff and the media interprets some other meaning than what he intended to convey. He is unable to blort with reckless impunity without being misinterpreted (or perhaps seen through). But it is not unique to him: anyone remember “you didn’t build that”?

[Chisquirrel]

@Lance_Turbo

Fourth paragraph of the only article you linked that I bothered to check.

Why is it that every argument presented in this thread purporting to show anti-Trump media bias relies heavily on misrepresenting what the media is actually reporting?

“When the facts are on your side, pound the facts. When the law is on your side, pound the law. When neither are on your side, pound the table.”
I feel sorry for the table.

[JB99]

@eschereal

AAUI, prez is frustrated by the fact that he says stuff and the media interprets some other meaning than what he intended to convey. He is unable to blort with reckless impunity without being misinterpreted (or perhaps seen through). But it is not unique to him: anyone remember “you didn’t build that”?

It doesn’t help that Trump is an epic dumbfuck who can barely speak in complete sentences.

This is why politicians choose their words carefully. They speak with precision. They use qualifiers and conditional statements. They understand the importance of being unambiguous - especially when it comes to foreign policy.

But the semi-literate retards in America hear these people talk and think it implies dishonesty. So when Trump comes along they are thrilled to have someone who just says whatever random shit pops into his head. They think it is honest and articulate because he doesn’t try to parse or qualify his statements. The fact that it’s just a bunch of goddamned gibberish doesn’t seem to faze them at all.

[eschereal]

Probably should include what some actual supporters say. It is kind of creepy.