Lawrence O'Donnell show just talked about this and affirmed what Joe Biden said, where as I showed data to the contrary.

This is what happens, supporters of the President carry water and the detractors, well they detract.  Facts don't matter.  My facts can be explained away by another set of facts, and those facts can be overturned by another set of facts - all used to either support or criticize whatever statement is at hand.

Now Trump was a bold-faced liar, no question.  I think actually he was too stupid to know what he was supposed to be talking about.  No arguing that.  But same thing, friendly media explain it away because that is 'their guy' (or gal).

@nebish

As soon as #46 was inaugurated, 2 legit news outlets announced their intention to fact-check his remarks & publish incorrect info. This is different from The Washington Post keeping a running tab of #45's lies.

As you demonstrated, data has wiggle room (just look at any rosy financial report & then its footnotes where a far bleaker picture emerges). Depending upon the source, data can be different. Just because a president or any other public speaker uses a source that doesn't dovetail w/others doesn't mean he's lying. It means his speechwriter used a source to support a statement. Trump, who spoke off the cuff, actually made stuff up and lied.

I hate to go back to Covid, but #s there are all over the place for just about anything - cases, hospitalizations, deaths, risk factors, age, etc. depending upon the source - WHO, CDC, state public health depts, local health depts, & watchdog groups. Same for immigration stats. The average media watcher/reader isn't going to compare multiple sources to get the most accurate count. 

I haven't read anything that Biden's said or done, but as long as he's not saying "Since I took office, _______ has been reduced by 5000%  - more than any other leader in the history of the world" as Trump did as SOP, I'm ok that his ego isn't driving the bus.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/25/politics/fact-check-biden-first-press-conference/index.html

@nebish

Lawyer Sidney Powell's defense to the defamation lawsuit against her by Dominion Voting Systems admits that the "stolen vote" story was completely false. She claims that 1) no reasonable person would believe such a ridiculous lie and 2) she knew it was a lie as she was spreading it. That's her DEFENSE - she actually defamed the company and knew she was doing it. She torpedoed her own case by essentially saying reasonable people don't watch Fox to get actual news - it's entertainment or its viewers aren't too bright.

Now, Fox has been hit w/ a $1.6B lawsuit that Fox News & specific staff defamed the company. The point is there's a difference between systemic lies designed for a specific outcome (lies told to win an election) & misrepresented data in one speech.

Statistics can be made to say anything you want.

It is however misleading I think to suggest that surging illegal immigration numbers happens "every single solitary year" in January, February and March.  CBP's numbers contradict that.

I'm not overly sophisticated, but I knew immediately when I heard that last night that it couldn't be true, because almost nothing is absolutely true all the time.  So call it low hanging fruit, find one or two years it wasn't true, ah-ha gotcha.  No, it was only true in 3 of 6 or even 3 of 7 of the last years - that from what I believe is one of, if not the most authoritative place for statistics on the southern border, a US government site.

But he says it and it paints the picture that what is happening is a normal occurrence, instead, when I look at the data, I see in fact it is not. 

Posted by: @stormyrider

https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/25/politics/fact-check-biden-first-press-conference/index.html

That is good thanks.  This one seems interesting:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by: @cyclone88

@nebish

Lawyer Sidney Powell's defense to the defamation lawsuit against her by Dominion Voting Systems admits that the "stolen vote" story was completely false. She claims that 1) no reasonable person would believe such a ridiculous lie and 2) she knew it was a lie as she was spreading it. That's her DEFENSE - she actually defamed the company and knew she was doing it. She torpedoed her own case by essentially saying reasonable people don't watch Fox to get actual news - it's entertainment or its viewers aren't too bright.

Now, Fox has been hit w/ a $1.6B lawsuit that Fox News & specific staff defamed the company. The point is there's a difference between systemic lies designed for a specific outcome (lies told to win an election) & misrepresented data in one speech.

I know, her defense, "no reasonable person would believe" - is she calling Trump supporters unreasonable?  Might be a good defense actually!  LOL.

True, there are differences and context to a lie or misrepresentation and it's intended effect.  Lying to make yourself or your administration look better, or to deflect criticism still seem pretty bad if you ask me.  But they all do it - Trump of course did it ALL THE TIME, I just want some acknowledgement that Saint Joe isn't different than your average politician in this regard.  They are all going to lie to protect themselves or their interests or image on some level.

@nebish

Actually, the only elements to prove a defamation case are that 1) the defendant lied & knew it was a lie, 2) the defendant told that lie to more than 1 person, and 3) harm was caused to the plaintiff as a result of that lie. Win for Dominion thanks to Powell's admissions.

Statistics lie. Politicians lie. I'm not saying Biden is a saint nor that he has never lied or misspoken. I'm saying he made generalizations in his FIRST press conference that were dumb. By this time in Trump's administration, he'd lied so much, he had people believing Covid was a hoax, Mexico was paying for a wall that was being built, and that white supremacy was admirable.

I respect your opinions. You & I differ in that you actually care about specifics & do the work the media should be doing. I don't. In general, I don't think an occasional misrepresentation or blunder or lie isn't going to cause the wheels to come off nor is Biden going to lead anyone to storm the Capitol. Frankly, I'd rather have a president who is paying attention to ALL the areas that need attention rather than ensuring that every bit of data is accurate in every speech.

12 hours after a post with our former more active forum, somebody might've raised the question - "where were you to call out all the lies Trump told".  The answer is simple in that so many other people were doing so by the time I might get around to doing it would be old news already.  On the other hand, misinformation, misleading statements or inaccuracies are much more likely to fly under the radar with this administration.  Credit to stormyrider's CNN fact check link...where I think they tested the President on 7 points, where as the statement I called out is not one of them.

There you go, now I'm asking myself questions and then offering answers to post.

Anyone could have a field day combing through statements politicians make, doing that is not my intention.  I'm trying to start some activity if that is possible.  Suppose I got a little energy to see if the forum responds.

@nebish

Prior to all news all the time, journalism (I'm not even sure that job classification still exists) couldn't air or publish w/o confirmation from 2 independent sources and fact-checking. CNN & the other outlet who said they would fact-check Biden seem to think they're pioneers. Of course, when Fox is now saying they consider lies to be ok to be presented as news because no one really believes them, it probably is a good thing to go back to basics.

There are some rumblings in legal circles that Fox's defense to Dominion's suit (separate from Powell's) may be that some of their hosts & guests are parody like the SNL Weekend News update. Again, admitting they were lying but passing it off as news. smh

During the GWB and Obama admins I thought CNN was fairly middle of the road. Early in the Trump admin, either CNN or Time published and editorial calling out Trump for attempting to curb freedom of the press and his rampant lies and said they would be fighting him whenever possible. Personally, I agreed with the editorial and applauded it. Yes, they can be a bit self serving and sensationalistic, but given the BS that was being tossed at us every day by POTUS and Fox I got where they were coming from. I laughed when any media that criticized Trump was called "leftist".

To cyclone's point, early in the Trump admin, a reporter from CNN got taken off the WH bureau for not double checking a source and a NYT reported got fired. Both published anti Trump stories without confirmation. 

Fox was expecting CNN to give Biden a pass on everything (the way Fox did) and falsely accused them of stopping the covid death stats when Biden became POTUS. 

Long winded, but questioning the fairness of media (and the honesty of politicians) is fair game, imo. I don't think CNN will give Biden a pass - I have seen critical editorials already. I don't think we will ever see a politician who doesn't bend and twist the truth. I also don't think we will ever see a flat out, bald faced lier like trump. At least I hope not. 

Sydney Powell - just have to shake my head and wonder. She just made an ass of herself, Trump, and everyone who believed her BS. 

@stormyrider

Yes, that is my sense of things re CNN. To me, it was C-SPAN for non-politico viewers w/entertainment, sports, & commentary added over the years. It went on steroids to combat Fox's 24/7 Trump.

I wonder if the defamation lawsuits (& certainly, more will come) & its non-defense defenses will cause the FCC to revoke its broadcast journalism license. It can do that in cases of hoaxes, distortion, & falsification of news & knowingly broadcasting false statements that cause public harm (storming of the Capitol???). Sounds like Fox has the choice of being killed off or becoming the next SNL w/a less engaging cast.

CNN seems to be returning to its pre-Trump era norms.

There is only one Donald Trump so I don't think we'll ever see such an unchecked pathological liar taking over entire media outlets unless he creates his own.

Just wondering what you mean by 'the site blocked me'...... do you mean here?

I know in the past your login only lasted one day (don't think that is the case now) ... so at times I would start a post, and when I went to post it I would get a message that it didn't recognize me because I wasn't logged in.  I happened to be typing a message  during the exact time I was automatically logged out.

I know I have issues at times because I check this site from my computer upstairs, my chromebook downstairs, and sometimes my phone.  I have no idea how many devices you can have logged in at once to the same login.  Might have something to do with the device specific cookies.  I have similar issues with email - it seems to only let me be logged in to one device at a time.

Maybe our old buddy @rowland can let us know how it works with the new site ... or tell us why he singled you out ... 😎 

Posted by: @sang

Just wondering what you mean by 'the site blocked me'...... do you mean here?

Straight up blocked, thread here:

https://allmanbrothersband.com/community/general-chat-whipping-post/i-just-spend-like-a-half-hour-composing-another-post-and-got-this/#post-169816

I will tag rowland or whatever you call it @ or whatever in that thread and we'll see.

I think everything needs to be fact checked, and party affiliation shouldn't matter. I have noticed that left-wing media has been more critical of Biden than right-wing media was of Trump, and that's a good thing too. The media shouldn't be cheerleaders.

Agree, Trump's treatment by right-wing media was almost always overly friendly and flatering.  With a few exceptions, like Neil Cavuto for example, who I have always liked.  He drew Trump's ire a few times.

Our news outlets tend to reflect what their particular viewers and readers want, just about everything is going to have a friendly bend to an issue, party or person their commentators, journalists and 'customers' like.

Have heard some ridiculous criticism of Biden from the right sources, not surprisingly, and while, yes, the mainstream or left-leaning sources will call out Biden and his administration I find it is often done in a way that doesn't really leave a damaging critique when perhaps they should.  But it goes back to, if that's your guy or your gal, you tend to go easier on them...or if it is somebody you don't believe, trust or like in general, the harshness in the critique is noticeably difference.

An occurrence that Joe Biden says happens "every single solitary year" and "it happens every year" when it actually has only happened 3 of the last 7 years (including the covid 2020 year), not correcting the record on that allows the President and the administration to get off better than they should.

Like I said, I am not interested in being Joe Biden's fact police...I'm flat out not that interested in much honestly in the world of politics any more.  The right is too hard on Biden, the left is too easy on him.  If you like him and what he supports, you're mostly ok with whatever he is saying and you rationalize omissions or misrepresented statements.  If you don't, then you aren't.  I don't know anymore, it's all gotten so tiring and frustrating to try and see through it all.

The difference nebish is the right wing media will rarely if ever fact check or criticise the Republicans and support unsubstantiated claims or will ignore issues all together while the liberal media will at least do cursory fact checking and report on issues that may put a Democrats in a negative light.

The majority of Fox News talking heads supported and helped propagate Trumps phony election fraud claims. A few were willing to mild support the fact that there was no evidence of  election fraud but not many.