'Impartial' fact-checkers are revealing their partisanship against Trump

Jul 2013
49,963
52,917
Nashville, TN
#62
The #Trumpcult has gone completely down the rabbit hole, cant believe the media other than hand picked right wing sites, refuse to acknowledge fact checking sites because they don't do confirmation bias on the right wing sites that have been hand picked. Believe anything Trump says absolutely, no matter if it contradicts something Trump said just the day before. WTF are you people going to do after Trump is no longer in office?
 
Likes: HayJenn

One

Former Staff
Dec 2006
11,258
9,844
----> X <----
#63
So far, facts are on President Trump's side. He has told us nothing but facts.
You know, there are people that actually believe that. Those are the kind of people trump targets to carry his water.
I'm actually embarrassed for them.
 

One

Former Staff
Dec 2006
11,258
9,844
----> X <----
#64
The left are clearly dishonest and will not come to grips with the real facts. They will not report good news, and instead go negative 24/7. I have never seen a more dishonest and reprehensible group of people as I've seen over the past few years.

Not that they weren't dishonest before Trump ran for office, but he has exposed them for what they are and they will never have the trust of the American people again. Except for Trump haters, who are their useful idiots.
snicker
 
Nov 2006
53,219
19,384
#66
It's respectability is in the tank these days. It's simply another Trump hate rag.
The NYT is probably one of, if not, the most respected papers in the world. It uses facts that happen to paint trump out to being a liar on a regular basis so that is what he says about them. Only those stupid enough to listen to what trump says would agree the NYT is in the tank.
 
Nov 2006
53,219
19,384
#68
I've been saying this for a long time. Fact-checkers are nothing more than left-wing political opinion sites, designed to convince the follower they are telling the truth. When, in fact, they are biased against Trump and conservatives.




‘Impartial’ fact-checkers are revealing their partisanship against Trump
By David Harsanyi
February 9, 2019 | 12:28pm |


If media wants to challenge the context and politics of Republican arguments, that’s their prerogative. There are plenty of legitimately misleading statements worthy of fact-checkers’ attention. Yet, with a veneer of impartiality, fact-checkers often engage in a uniquely dishonest style of partisanship. And State of Union coverage gave us an abundance of examples of how they do it:


Fact-checking subjective political assertions: The New York Times provided a masterclass in bad faith fact-checking by taking political contentions offered by the president and subjecting them to a supposed impartial test of accuracy. In his speech, Trump called the illegal border crossing “an urgent national crisis.” The New York Times says “this is false.” Why? Because illegal border crossings have been declining for two decades, they say. Customs and Border Protection agents, they go on to explain, had arrested around 50,000 people trying to illegally cross the southwestern border each of the last three months, which was only half of the arrests they had made in comparable months in the mid-2000s.

Even if those numbers are correct, there is no way to fact-check urgency. After all, a lessening crisis doesn’t necessarily mean it isn’t a pressing one.
No, an emergency or crisis is something that is getting so bad something must be done. It's not getting so bad, it's getting better so to call it an emergency is a fucking lie. but I hope he declares one so his party has to make asses out of themselves going along with him or tell him to fuck off. Either one would be advantageous to the other party.




We’ve seen a steep decline in gun violence over the past 30 years.
The CDC’s Wonder database shows that in 2017, 39,773 people in the US lost their lives at the point of a gun, marking the onward march of firearm fatalities in a country renowned for its lax approach to gun controls. When adjusted for age fluctuations, that represents a total of 12 deaths per 100,000 people – up from 10.1 in 2010 and the highest rate since 1996.
Sounds like you are almost as big a liar as trump.
 

Similar Discussions