• Trump Lie Count: 1950 false public statements over 347 days (avg 5.6 lies per day)
    50 replies, posted
[url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/01/02/president-trump-has-made-1949-false-or-misleading-claims-over-347-days/?__twitter_impression=true[/url] [Quote]With just 18 days before President Trump completes his first year as president, he is now on track to exceed 2,000 false or misleading claims, according to our database that analyzes, categorizes and tracks every suspect statement uttered by the president. As of Monday, the total stood at 1,950 claims in 347 days, or an average of 5.6 claims a day. (Our full interactive graphic can be found here.) As regular readers know, the president has a tendency to repeat himself — often. There are now more than 60 claims that he has repeated three or more times. The president’s impromptu 30-minute interview with the New York Times over the holidays, in which he made at least 24 false or misleading claims, included many statements that we have previously fact-checked.[/quote] I know I'm preaching to the choir, but we have never in our history had such an abjectly dishonest president. Nearly every single time he opens his mouth, lies spill out of it.
Well, he is certainly the greatest in one category.
24 lies in 30 minutes is impressive. Demented, but impressive.
Makes me wonder if the presidental pants are made of nomex or asebstos...
non-AMP url here: [url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/01/02/president-trump-has-made-1949-false-or-misleading-claims-over-347-days/?utm_term=.38e93fef0f64[/url]
What ever happened to “he tells it like it is”? :downs:
[QUOTE=Trekintosh;53023635]What ever happened to “he tells it like it is”? :downs:[/QUOTE] He does, in the same way that war is peace and freedom is slavery.
[media]https://twitter.com/HoarseWisperer/status/948230159957716993[/media] [media]https://twitter.com/HoarseWisperer/status/948230778625888256[/media] He also believes in the conspiracy theory of the "Deep State coup" - something he shares in common with no one except far-right conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones and Sean Hannity.
I can easily believe it
I really really hope if the democrats get a chamber back they start calling the WH to the hill everytime he makes a bullshit claim over twitter, after all those are "official" statements right now, unless they aren't, but they could be....
Trump lies all the time. You won't see me disagreeing with that, but it's just plain false (a lie?) to say that the statements listed by the WaPo in this record are all "false statements." For example, one of the most cited statements goes as follows: “The stock market is at an all-time- high and continues to go up, up, up.” This is a factually true statement, but they list it, 85 counts of it, by this explanation, and only this explanation: [QUOTE=Washington Post]This is a flip-flop for Trump. Before he was elected, he dismissed the stock-market performance under Obama as “artificial” and “a bubble." Moreover, the U.S. rise in 2017 was not unique. When looking at the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index, it’s clear U.S. stocks haven’t rallied as robustly as their foreign equivalents. [/QUOTE] So... they didn't disagree with it at all? Is Trump not allowed to think it was an artificial bubble under Obama, but the growth under him isn't? This seems more like a list of actual lies mixed in with political disagreements. [editline]3rd January 2018[/editline] Here's another one that really struck me as absurdly idiotic. Trump is cited as having said: “This [North Korea] is a problem that should have been handled for the last 25 years. This is a problem, North Korea. That should have been handled for 25, 30 years, not by me. This should have been handled long before me. Long before this guy has whatever he has.” They added it to the list with this explanation:"Previous presidents, notably Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, made major efforts to rein in North Korea's nuclear ambitions. But the deals they struck did not stick. " That's a joke, right? So it's a false or misleading statement by Trump because people tried and failed in the past? What? He didn't say that nobody ever tried to handle the NK crisis. He said that it should have been handled, that they should have fixed it by now. Nothing the WaPo said even disagreed with what Trump said.
You're right, some of the lies could be seen as misleading statements! Which really isn't a whole lot better in my opinion.
[QUOTE=sgman91;53025083]Trump lies all the time. You won't see me disagreeing with that, but it's just plain false (a lie?) to say that the statements listed by the WaPo in this record are all "false statements." For example, one of the most cited statements goes as follows: “The stock market is at an all-time- high and continues to go up, up, up.” This is a factually true statement, but they list it, 85 counts of it, by this explanation, and only this explanation: So... they didn't disagree with it at all? Is Trump not allowed to think it was an artificial bubble under Obama, but the growth under him isn't? This seems more like a list of actual lies mixed in with political disagreements. [editline]3rd January 2018[/editline] Here's another one that really struck me as absurdly idiotic. Trump is cited as having said: “This [North Korea] is a problem that should have been handled for the last 25 years. This is a problem, North Korea. That should have been handled for 25, 30 years, not by me. This should have been handled long before me. Long before this guy has whatever he has.” They added it to the list with this explanation:"Previous presidents, notably Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, made major efforts to rein in North Korea's nuclear ambitions. But the deals they struck did not stick. " That's a joke, right? So it's a false or misleading statement by Trump because people tried and failed in the past? What? He didn't say that nobody ever tried to handle the NK crisis. He said that it should have been handled, that they should have fixed it by now. Nothing the WaPo said even disagreed with what Trump said.[/QUOTE] The "Stock Market" statement is misleading because it attributed the upward trend of the US economy under Obama to an "Artificial Bubble" only to immediately claim it as a permanent rise for which Trump was directly responsible for upon assuming office. The deceptive statement here is that it was all just a big fake bubble, but then *pow*, Trump is here, and now things are great, best in the world, and they're great *because* of him. Whatever Trump [I]may believe[/I] isn't relevant in terms of [I]what's actually true[/I]. While not an outright lie, it's certainly fair to call that misleading on the basis that he is over exaggerating the rise of the economy and falsely attributing it to things that he wasn't actually responsible for. As for the North Korea bit, that's a misleading statement because it is implying (and not subtly) that nobody else has "handled" North Korea, and that now he has to come in and finally do something because everybody else just ignored the rising threat. In fact, diplomatic relations with North Korea have been ongoing for decades. People have been handling them for decades. So, yeah, it's a misleading statement, akin to saying, "why has nobody fixed the hole in this wall," when a construction crew has been toiling away at it all day. And, frankly, these are pretty small fuckin' points. While you might be able to call these a bit persnickety, and I might even be inclined to agree that some things are more "exaggeration" than "lie," it really doesn't diminish the fact that Trump has outright lied about a [B]lot[/B] of [I]very serious shit.[/I] As you said, the dude's a liar. He is shockingly dishonest, about damn near everything he ever deigns to comment on. The fact that we're even in [I]the realm[/I] of 2000 false statements from our president in less than a year in office is just... Jesus, man. Even if you can rule some of those out as being a bit too critical, how many does that leave? 1750? 1500? How many baldfaced lies from the lips of the President of the United States is an acceptable amount?
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;53025215]The "Stock Market" statement is misleading because it attributed the upward trend of the US economy under Obama to an "Artificial Bubble" only to immediately claim it as a permanent rise for which Trump was directly responsible for upon assuming office. The deceptive statement here is that it was all just a big fake bubble, but then *pow*, Trump is here, and now things are great, best in the world, and they're great *because* of him. Whatever Trump [I]may believe[/I] isn't relevant in terms of [I]what's actually true[/I]. While not an outright lie, it's certainly fair to call that misleading on the basis that he is over exaggerating the rise of the economy and falsely attributing it to things that he wasn't actually responsible for. As for the North Korea bit, that's a misleading statement because it is implying (and not subtly) that nobody else has "handled" North Korea, and that now he has to come in and finally do something because everybody else just ignored the rising threat. In fact, diplomatic relations with North Korea have been ongoing for decades. People have been handling them for decades. So, yeah, it's a misleading statement, akin to saying, "why has nobody fixed the hole in this wall," when a construction crew has been toiling away at it all day. And, frankly, these are pretty small fuckin' points. While you might be able to call these a bit persnickety, and I might even be inclined to agree that some things are more "exaggeration" than "lie," it really doesn't diminish the fact that Trump has outright lied about a [B]lot[/B] of [I]very serious shit.[/I] As you said, the dude's a liar. He is shockingly dishonest, about damn near everything he ever deigns to comment on. The fact that we're even in [I]the realm[/I] of 2000 false statements from our president in less than a year in office is just... Jesus, man. Even if you can rule some of those out as being a bit too critical, how many does that leave? 1750? 1500? How many baldfaced lies from the lips of the President of the United States is an acceptable amount?[/QUOTE] IMO, if you're going to call things like that lies or "misleading" statements, then half the things that come out of every politician's mouth would fit. Including things like that hurts the argument because Trump actually does clearly lie about real things all the time. Confusing and mixing those in with political exaggeration, slightly misleading comments, etc. makes him seem more normal because all politicians do that kind of stuff constantly. [editline]3rd January 2018[/editline] Honestly, if you take out those semantics/political opinion/etc. comments out, then the total falls way down. That one statement about the stock market counted for 85 of the 1950, and those sorts of disagreements are throughout the list. Instead of trumping (no, pun intended) up big numbers to look good, focus on his most clear lies, the ones that nobody can deny.
[QUOTE=sgman91;53025311] Honestly, if you take out those semantics/political opinion/etc. comments out, then the total falls way down. That one statement about the stock market counted for 85 of the 1950, and those sorts of disagreements are throughout the list. Instead of trumping (no, pun intended) up big numbers to look good, focus on his most clear lies, the ones that nobody can deny.[/QUOTE] Reading through the lie count it looks like they did. [editline]3rd January 2018[/editline] The header explicitly says false and [B]misleading [/B]claims. You have a point that many politicians lie, but the answer shouldn't be to obfuscate or ignore Trump's lies, it should be to hold everyone accountable.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;53025378] The header explicitly says false and [B]misleading [/B]claims. [/QUOTE] What about the thread title?
[QUOTE=Conscript;53025544]What about the thread title?[/QUOTE] At this point we are splitting hairs over semantics. You can call it whatever you want; misleading, false, lies. The end result is that the POTUS has no credibility.
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn_PSJsl0LQ[/media]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;53025378]Reading through the lie count it looks like they did. [editline]3rd January 2018[/editline] The header explicitly says false and [B]misleading [/B]claims. You have a point that many politicians lie, but the answer shouldn't be to obfuscate or ignore Trump's lies, it should be to hold everyone accountable.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't care if they did this for everyone, but they're not. They're making it seem like Trump saying those kinds of things is special when the reality is that basically every politician stretches the truth/says things with favorable spin/etc. all the time. If we're going to have a list specifically for Trump, and only Trump, then it needs to be about what Trump does that's different. [editline]3rd January 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=Raidyr;53025549]At this point we are splitting hairs over semantics. You can call it whatever you want; misleading, false, lies. The end result is that the POTUS has no credibility.[/QUOTE] Not really. Many of the comments are factually true or are political opinions. To call them "false statements" is, in itself, a factually false statement. It's not just semantics. *As a side note, has the forum been really unresponsive and crappy the last few days for anyone else?
[QUOTE=sgman91;53025604]I wouldn't care if they did this for everyone, but they're not. They're making it seem like Trump saying those kinds of things is special when the reality is that basically every politician stretches the truth/says things with favorable spin/etc. all the time. If we're going to have a list specifically for Trump, and only Trump, then it needs to be about what Trump does that's different.[/QUOTE] I think the difference with Trump is the sheer scale of his duplicity both in terms of individual statements made and how casually he makes them. When we talk about politicians who have been misleading or outright lied in the past people bring up a few examples for everyone, or make videos like the Hillary Clinton one where she "lies" for 13 minutes. With Trump you could fill 13 hours of footage of him being misleading or outright lying to people. I really don't think you can argue that he is the same as Obama, or Bush, or either of the Clintons, or Macron, or Merkel, or most democratically elected leaders. Also, frankly, it's not WaPo's (or anyones) obligation to collate, cite, and categorize every statement made by every politician in the world. I'm not even sure something like that is practical, it's just far easier when you are talking about the President of the United States, a POTUS who also lies and misleads on an unprecedented scale. [QUOTE=sgman91;53025604]Not really. Many of the comments are factually true or are political opinions. To call them "false statements" is, in itself, a factually false statement. It's not just semantics. [/QUOTE] Yes really. Conscript is talking about the thread title, not the article title. [editline]4th January 2018[/editline] So here is two good examples of things he said as recently as Dec 30th [QUOTE]"Since the election we have created more than 2 million jobs.” Trump is counting jobs from Election Day, even though he did not take office until almost three months later. At the time, about 1.7 million jobs had been created during his presidency. [/QUOTE] Technically true (probably, I cba to look it up) that 2 million jobs have been created since the election but the inclusion of we makes it seem like he had anything to do with this. [QUOTE]“Unemployment is at a 17-year low.” This is flip flop for Trump. While campaigning Trump dismissed the unemployment rate as made up, suggesting unemployment was closer to 30 or 40 percent. Since becoming president Trump has embraced the figure.[/QUOTE] Again, true statement, but the key point here is that when the unemployment figures were around 5% under Obama he made a brazenly false statement. So not only has he flipflopped, embracing the lower figures, it shows that he lied in the past about a similar issue. I gotta agree with BDA, you are nitpicking over how the only outfit who has bothered collating Trump's statements over the years has them categorized while suggesting that maybe journalists shouldn't focus on misleading statements because they aren't technically false or lies, just the entire context used when he says them, while at the same time insinuating partisan hackery over "political disagreements", which I'm not even sure how the stock market is an example of such. [editline]4th January 2018[/editline] [QUOTE=sgman91;53025083] Here's another one that really struck me as absurdly idiotic. Trump is cited as having said: “This [North Korea] is a problem that should have been handled for the last 25 years. This is a problem, North Korea. That should have been handled for 25, 30 years, not by me. This should have been handled long before me. Long before this guy has whatever he has.” They added it to the list with this explanation:"Previous presidents, notably Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, made major efforts to rein in North Korea's nuclear ambitions. But the deals they struck did not stick. " That's a joke, right? So it's a false or misleading statement by Trump because people tried and failed in the past? What? He didn't say that nobody ever tried to handle the NK crisis. He said that it should have been handled, that they should have fixed it by now. Nothing the WaPo said even disagreed with what Trump said.[/QUOTE] The implication from Trump is clear: That 25-30 years of American presidents have done nothing to inhibit North Korea's nuclear ambitions. Which is blatantly, observably false, and WaPo even has an article about it. Come on dude, I know you aren't stupid and I know you don't like Trump. Why are you trying to make these statements that are [B][B]clearly [/B][/B]disingenuous seem completely above the board?
[QUOTE=sgman91;53025604]I wouldn't care if they did this for everyone, but they're not. They're making it seem like Trump saying those kinds of things is special when the reality is that basically every politician stretches the truth/says things with favorable spin/etc. all the time. If we're going to have a list specifically for Trump, and only Trump, then it needs to be about what Trump does that's different.[/QUOTE] I agree with you that a list of absolutely irrefutable, blatant lies would be much more effective because there is [I]a lot[/I] of them and very frequently the lie can be proven simply by comparing two tweets, two statements, or a statement to a statistic. But, Trump saying those things [I]is[/I] special, because he's the president.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;53025624]= Come on dude, I know you aren't stupid and I know you don't like Trump. Why are you trying to make these statements that are [B][B]clearly [/B][/B]disingenuous seem completely above the board?[/QUOTE] Because something something echo chamber.
[QUOTE=sgman91;53025604]I wouldn't care if they did this for everyone, but they're not. They're making it seem like Trump saying those kinds of things is special when the reality is that basically every politician stretches the truth/says things with favorable spin/etc. all the time. If we're going to have a list specifically for Trump, and only Trump, then it needs to be about what Trump does that's different. [editline]3rd January 2018[/editline] Not really. Many of the comments are factually true or are political opinions. To call them "false statements" is, in itself, a factually false statement. It's not just semantics. *As a side note, has the forum been really unresponsive and crappy the last few days for anyone else?[/QUOTE] I find your posts highly curious. I see that you always seem to find these really granular elements to something that's incorrect and you thus end engagement. This thread is about the insane scale of Trump's lying. Why don't we talk about that, rather than delving into specificity that aren't relevant to the wider argument?
[QUOTE=sgman91;53025311]IMO, if you're going to call things like that lies or "misleading" statements, then half the things that come out of every politician's mouth would fit. Including things like that hurts the argument because Trump actually does clearly lie about real things all the time. Confusing and mixing those in with political exaggeration, slightly misleading comments, etc. makes him seem more normal because all politicians do that kind of stuff constantly.[/QUOTE] OK? And nobody would really disagree with you on that? Just because others do that doesn't mean Trump is normal. Politicians shouldn't lie.
[media]https://twitter.com/ShaunKing/status/949004340764856326[/media] Somewhat related to his massive pile of lies, now he won't even come out and face the press. :v:
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;53026544][media]https://twitter.com/ShaunKing/status/949004340764856326[/media] Somewhat related to his massive pile of lies, now he won't even come out and face the press. :v:[/QUOTE] Would you?
@Raidyr Here's part of the problem: with many of those statements you, and the WaPo, are looking at a statement made by Trump, extrapolating what he [I]really[/I] meant by the statement, and then calling the original statement misleading or false instead of going into the details of why he's generally dishonest on the topic. So, for example, take the stock market claim. Trump said that the stock market is at an all time high and continuing to grow. This is an indisputably true statement. The claim of it being misleading comes from his supposed inconsistent treatment of the stock market under Obama and the stock market under himself. You, and the WaPo, are claiming that the reason for growth in the stock market under both Obama and Trump is essentially equivalent, therefore it's misleading for Trump to praise his growth while down talking Obama's growth. The problem is that that is a nuanced political issue. I'm sure Trump would say that his economic polices have grounded the new growth far more than the growth under Obama. It has pushed a bubble into real, solid growth, and I'm sure you would respond that he's totally wrong.... and a political conversation, with detailed argumentation would follow. The problem is that we're taking a fairly nuanced political argument and pretending it's as simple as a 'true' or 'false' situation. Prove that Trump is wrong. I would endorse it completely, but can't take an entire political argument and turn in into a simple statement of calling something false.
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;53026544][media]https://twitter.com/ShaunKing/status/949004340764856326[/media] Somewhat related to his massive pile of lies, now he won't even come out and face the press. :v:[/QUOTE] I mean the media is pretty awful
Situations like this are different than a factually false claim, of which Trump does plenty of as well.
I can't get over how he speaks. Like, he talks like a lying child 100% of the time. To the point where I can see where the dementia suggestions come in. I have no idea where anyone thought he had charisma came from. He genuinely speaks like he has the education of a 10 year old. Contradicting sentences within the same phrase, ideas that go nowhere immediately, repetition of really, really weird phrases.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.