Responses: 5
SSgt Ray Stone
SFC Casey O'Mally - Yeah right you jump from post to post defending his lies and treachery. Why are you ashamed to admit you're a Trumplican?
(0)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
SSgt Ray Stone If you are really THAT worried about my posts, you would notice that I have also defended Biden. And if you go back far enough, you will see I defended Hillary and Obama. And you will see I wrote open letters in 2016 and in 2020 - posted here on RP, and elsewhere - asking the Republicans (in 2016) and Democrats (in 2020) to figure out a better-than-Trump option QUICK so that we wouldn't be stuck with Trump.
I don't defend his lies and treachery. I defend the truth. And when people lie about Trump I call it out. Just like I will when they lie about Biden, Hillary, Obama, Pelosi, Schumer, McConnell, MTG, AOC, etc. Just the other day I was posting the link to a fact check on a false meme about an anti-Trump NYT reporter, defending her.
And just like I will defend all of the above, I will also call out their lies when I see them on here. If someone hasn't already beat me to it.
I am not pro-Trump, I am pro-truth.
I don't defend his lies and treachery. I defend the truth. And when people lie about Trump I call it out. Just like I will when they lie about Biden, Hillary, Obama, Pelosi, Schumer, McConnell, MTG, AOC, etc. Just the other day I was posting the link to a fact check on a false meme about an anti-Trump NYT reporter, defending her.
And just like I will defend all of the above, I will also call out their lies when I see them on here. If someone hasn't already beat me to it.
I am not pro-Trump, I am pro-truth.
(0)
(0)
SSgt Ray Stone
SFC Casey O'Mally - So the Atlantic article I posted wasn't true?. Those exact words came out of his mouth. Why be mad at me for exposing his many lies, you should be upset with him for downplaying the seriousness of COVID and lying to the public
(0)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
SSgt Ray Stone - Did you read what I posted?
I am a Tigers fan. If I say the Tigers will win the World Series in 2022, and they do not, that doesn't mean I lied, it means I made a bad prediction. If I say they won the World Series in 2021 - that already being done and determined - *that* would be a lie. Bad predictions aren't lies. Unless you are writing a smear piece which is itself exceptionally dishonest.
Fully half of the "lies" covered in this article fall into this camp.
Then we get to the fact checking with opinion. Calling a statement a lie because Trump called something a problem that the author didn't think was a problem so that the author can say that nothing being done (which nothing WAS done) is a lie. No, it isn't. Trump said nothing was done, nothing was done. That is the truth, not a lie.
And I also admitted that yes, there were lies. Trump was not our most truthful President. I make no assertions that he was. Never have, never will. But Using opinion to challenge facts, and writing an opinion piece and calling it fact are both dishonest. This is a POS article designed to smear Trump using the cover of the press to lend credibility.
I am a Tigers fan. If I say the Tigers will win the World Series in 2022, and they do not, that doesn't mean I lied, it means I made a bad prediction. If I say they won the World Series in 2021 - that already being done and determined - *that* would be a lie. Bad predictions aren't lies. Unless you are writing a smear piece which is itself exceptionally dishonest.
Fully half of the "lies" covered in this article fall into this camp.
Then we get to the fact checking with opinion. Calling a statement a lie because Trump called something a problem that the author didn't think was a problem so that the author can say that nothing being done (which nothing WAS done) is a lie. No, it isn't. Trump said nothing was done, nothing was done. That is the truth, not a lie.
And I also admitted that yes, there were lies. Trump was not our most truthful President. I make no assertions that he was. Never have, never will. But Using opinion to challenge facts, and writing an opinion piece and calling it fact are both dishonest. This is a POS article designed to smear Trump using the cover of the press to lend credibility.
(0)
(0)
Well, all I can say is a good friend of mine was a firm believer in the dotard. We buried him last summer. Evidently just geting to see ONE of his grandkids wasn't a priority.
(2)
(0)
It is an opinion piece.
Half of the "lies" are bad predictions. Another quarter are factual truthful, but the "reporter" still felt they were wrong - the explanation of "wrongness" doesn't even actually address the statement.
Example of a "lie" included in the article:
When: Friday, March 13
The claim: The Obama White House’s response to the H1N1 pandemic was “a full scale disaster, with thousands dying, and nothing meaningful done to fix the testing problem, until now.”
The truth: Barack Obama declared a public-health emergency two weeks after the first U.S. cases of H1N1 were reported, in California. (Trump declared a national emergency more than seven weeks after the first domestic COVID-19 case was reported, in Washington State.) While testing is a problem now, it wasn’t back in 2009. The challenge then was vaccine development: Production was delayed and the vaccine wasn’t distributed until the outbreak was already waning.
The ACTUAL truth:
"full-scale disaster" this is a matter of opinion, and cannot be determined to be a "fact" or a "lie." I would disagree that it was a "full-scale" disaster, but it was certainly not good.
"thousands dying" 12,469 deaths. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/2009-h1n1-pandemic.html
"nothing meaningful done to fix the testing problem, until now" nothing HAD been done. The author uses his OPINION that there was not a problem to label this statement a lie, while ignoring the truth of the FACTUAL elements of the statement.
Another example:
When: Monday, May 11
The claim: America has “developed a testing capacity unmatched and unrivaled anywhere in the world, and it’s not even close.”
The truth: At the time, the United States was still not testing enough people and was lagging behind the testing and tracing capabilities that other countries had developed. The president’s testing czar, Brett Giroir, and Fauci confirmed the need for more testing at a May 12 Senate hearing.
The ACTUAL truth: At this time, America DID have the highest testing numbers and capacity. But the author decides that tracing - which was not part of the President's statement - is now part of the equation, and also decides that because we were not testing ENOUGH, that the actual facts were somehow lies. (In the author's next "fact check" he offers up this: "By May 18" (i.e. one week later), "when Trump last made this claim, the U.S. had conducted more tests than any other country" to prove the inaccuracy of his previous "fact check.") Just because we can do more does not mean we are not still in the lead.
And he included Trump conflating Google and Alphabet - which 90% of Americans do. Saying "Google engineers" are doing something, when it is not Google, but rather Alphabet - the company that owns Google and everyone thinks is the same thing - is not a lie.
And yes, there are ACTUAL lies here, too.
Half of the "lies" are bad predictions. Another quarter are factual truthful, but the "reporter" still felt they were wrong - the explanation of "wrongness" doesn't even actually address the statement.
Example of a "lie" included in the article:
When: Friday, March 13
The claim: The Obama White House’s response to the H1N1 pandemic was “a full scale disaster, with thousands dying, and nothing meaningful done to fix the testing problem, until now.”
The truth: Barack Obama declared a public-health emergency two weeks after the first U.S. cases of H1N1 were reported, in California. (Trump declared a national emergency more than seven weeks after the first domestic COVID-19 case was reported, in Washington State.) While testing is a problem now, it wasn’t back in 2009. The challenge then was vaccine development: Production was delayed and the vaccine wasn’t distributed until the outbreak was already waning.
The ACTUAL truth:
"full-scale disaster" this is a matter of opinion, and cannot be determined to be a "fact" or a "lie." I would disagree that it was a "full-scale" disaster, but it was certainly not good.
"thousands dying" 12,469 deaths. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/2009-h1n1-pandemic.html
"nothing meaningful done to fix the testing problem, until now" nothing HAD been done. The author uses his OPINION that there was not a problem to label this statement a lie, while ignoring the truth of the FACTUAL elements of the statement.
Another example:
When: Monday, May 11
The claim: America has “developed a testing capacity unmatched and unrivaled anywhere in the world, and it’s not even close.”
The truth: At the time, the United States was still not testing enough people and was lagging behind the testing and tracing capabilities that other countries had developed. The president’s testing czar, Brett Giroir, and Fauci confirmed the need for more testing at a May 12 Senate hearing.
The ACTUAL truth: At this time, America DID have the highest testing numbers and capacity. But the author decides that tracing - which was not part of the President's statement - is now part of the equation, and also decides that because we were not testing ENOUGH, that the actual facts were somehow lies. (In the author's next "fact check" he offers up this: "By May 18" (i.e. one week later), "when Trump last made this claim, the U.S. had conducted more tests than any other country" to prove the inaccuracy of his previous "fact check.") Just because we can do more does not mean we are not still in the lead.
And he included Trump conflating Google and Alphabet - which 90% of Americans do. Saying "Google engineers" are doing something, when it is not Google, but rather Alphabet - the company that owns Google and everyone thinks is the same thing - is not a lie.
And yes, there are ACTUAL lies here, too.
A summary of key events of the 2009 H1N1 pandemic and the CDC's response activities between April 2009 and April 2010.
(2)
(0)
(0)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
SSgt Ray Stone - I do not know, and never have had, a Fuhrer.
Yes, Trump downplayed the seriousness. He is on record admitting he did so, because he was trying to avoid a panic. You know, like when someone comes on the intercom in a calm and rational voice and says "due to a localized emergency, we are requesting everyone calmly and quickly proceed to the nearest exit" rather than screaming "holy shit there's a bomb, and we all gonna die! Run for your lives!"
But please, tell me what FACTS you have provided. You provided one link - to a biased and only partially factual Atlantic article. Which I have already addressed as garbage. And you have not addressed a single point a made there.
So... what FACTS have you provided?
Also, if you respond, please tag me. I don't spend all day waiting for a reply and checking back up.
Yes, Trump downplayed the seriousness. He is on record admitting he did so, because he was trying to avoid a panic. You know, like when someone comes on the intercom in a calm and rational voice and says "due to a localized emergency, we are requesting everyone calmly and quickly proceed to the nearest exit" rather than screaming "holy shit there's a bomb, and we all gonna die! Run for your lives!"
But please, tell me what FACTS you have provided. You provided one link - to a biased and only partially factual Atlantic article. Which I have already addressed as garbage. And you have not addressed a single point a made there.
So... what FACTS have you provided?
Also, if you respond, please tag me. I don't spend all day waiting for a reply and checking back up.
(0)
(0)
SSgt Ray Stone
SFC Casey O'Mally - "GARBAGE" . See again your opinion, your opinion is just your opinion against facts . There are numerous articles out there with the same and more Google Trumps COVID lies. So are you saying the Atlantic made up those quotes?
(0)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
SSgt Ray Stone - No. I am saying that many of those quotes are not lies, despite the author's (and apparently your) assertion that they are.
You really seem to have a problem with reading comprehension. I have REPEATEDLY addressed what the author is SAYING about the quotes. I have not once contested the accuracy of the quotes. Because, quite frankly, hunting down the quotes to ensure they are word for word accurate is tiresome.
And yes, "garbage" is my opinion. It is an opinion I supported with evidence. And yet you stand by the article without addressing a single point I made about it being garbage. Which means it is your opinion versus mine. Except you call your opinion FACTS - and provide no evidence to support your opinion, either.
You really seem to have a problem with reading comprehension. I have REPEATEDLY addressed what the author is SAYING about the quotes. I have not once contested the accuracy of the quotes. Because, quite frankly, hunting down the quotes to ensure they are word for word accurate is tiresome.
And yes, "garbage" is my opinion. It is an opinion I supported with evidence. And yet you stand by the article without addressing a single point I made about it being garbage. Which means it is your opinion versus mine. Except you call your opinion FACTS - and provide no evidence to support your opinion, either.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next