Politifact says President Trump is right…
…rates him “mostly false” anyway.
They don’t “check facts”. They ensure congruency with the narrative. No more.
65 thoughts on “Why I Ignore The “Journalistic Fact-Check” Racket”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
If you can foresee the future, there is no free will.
If there is no free will, you cannot make moral or immoral choices.
Therefore the Election of Trump proves that we live in a moral universe.
QED.
emery said
1) Wiretap the opposition
2) Gather damaging info
3) Say nothing
4) Let him win
5) Ride off into the sunset
2) was supposed to find damaging info found none for another October suprise since the ‘grab em by the pussy’ video didn’t sink him
3) pray that Hillary pulls it out anyway
4) Trump wins
5) Set up office in DC (something no former president has ever done)
6) Collude with the MSM and contacts in the administration to bring down Trump
7) Incite near Civilar War violence
8) Get back into power because the people clearly don’t know whats best for them
9) Become dictator
Ten More Questions for President Trump
1) To the extent any wiretap you revealed yesterday was previously classified, your tweets have declassified the fact of its existence. Do you agree that the FBI, DOJ, and the FISA Court are now at liberty to confirm the existence of any FISA surveillance that may have been taking place at Trump Tower or against its occupants?
2) Do you agree that, to whatever extent no such surveillance was taking place, the fact of its absence—which is to say the fact that you were either lying or making up facts or repeating allegations published in Breitbart with no idea of their accuracy—is also not classified?
3) Will you similarly declassify any material the underlying FISA application may contain so that the public can understand the basis or lawlessness of the alleged Obama surveillance of your campaign and business?
4) You say that there was “Nothing found” in the wiretapping of Trump Tower. Are you thereby declassifying the fruits of any surveillance that may have taken place? Will you?
5) You say that the surveillance was “Turned down by court earlier.” Are you thereby declassying the fact of and waiving any privacy interests in any earlier application to the FISA Court or to any federal district court under Title III—and in any rulings that any court may have made on the subject?
6) To whatever extent you have revealed FISA surveillance in a series of tweets, with which agencies, if any, did you consult before declassifying presumably sensitive material about a foreign counterintelligence investigation that is by most accounts still ongoing?
7) To whatever extent you have revealed FISA surveillance in a series of tweets, was your National Security Adviser, Gen. H.R. McMaster, aware that you intended to declassify sensitive material about a foreign counterintelligence investigation that is by most accounts still ongoing?
8) You say that you “bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!” Are you planning to bring suit against Obama or anyone else under either 50 U.S.C. § 1810—which provides for civil remedies for “[a]n aggrieved person, other than a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power . . . who has been subjected to an electronic surveillance”—or under 18 U.S.C. § 2520—which provides that “any person whose wire, oral, or electronic communication is intercepted . . . in violation of [criminal wiretap law] may in a civil action recover from the person or entity, other than the United States, which engaged in that violation”?
9) To the extent no such surveillance took place or you have grossly mischaracterized it, do you have any concerns that you might have imputed grave misconduct to your predecessor—in the language of New York Times v. Sullivan—with “‘actual malice’—that is, with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not”?
10) If so, have you or your counsel considered the question of whether a tweet from the @realDonaldTrump Twitter account that contains a slander or a libel is an official presidential act for which you are immune from liability under Nixon v. Fitzgerald or whether it is personal conduct for which you might be subject to suit under Clinton v. Jones?
https://www.lawfareblog.com/ten-more-questions-president-trump
Emery — did Trump say Obama had ordered his wiretap in any of his Saturday Tweets?
Be honest, now. No looking it up.
( crickets )
.
.
.
( shuffling noise of moving goalposts )
.
.
.
( furious typing of another talking points screed )
I’ll assume that was a rhetorical question.
Here are the exact tweets:
/Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my “wires tapped” in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!/
/ Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
I’d bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!/
/ Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!/
Not much ‘wiggle’ room there JPA
The wiggle room is the plausible deniability that you won’t find clear evidence that Obama specifically ordered it. However, as Powerline is noting, as well as others, the number of leaks of classified information coming from intelligence/FBI/whatever sources does indicate that whatever the specific justification for observation of members of the Trump campaign–official and unofficial–there was something going on by which the Obama administration was collecting data. You can’t get the leaks regarding, say, General Flynn without some observation, can you?
Trump is not a lawyer, and he is trolling Obama’s people and the D’s on Twitter. The responses from Obama spokesdrones are using lawyerly language, responding to Trump’s non-lawyerly language (“I’d bet a good lawyer could make a great case out of the fact that President Obama was tapping my phones in October, just prior to Election!”) with legalisms, as bikebubba noted.
Was there an undisclosed JD, FBI, or other executive-branch directed investigation of Trump, his family, or his close aides during the campaign?
That would be Nixonian.
Nobody trolls the media better than the Donald.
Painting Bannon as some sort of neo-nazi Svengali is a mistake on the part of the Left. What they do not understand about Bannon, and what they missed about Breitbart before him, is that their genius is that they understand the importance of seizing the narrative.
This is what the Left has done since at least the 1960s. The problem for the left is that they are now the Establishment in DC, education, and the arts. They have no way of dealing with the guerrilla tactics of Bannon and Trump.
It’s fascinating to watch. It may be a slow-motion train wreck, but until the dust settles it’s hard to see which train is getting wrecked.
From Newsmax, so consider the source:
http://www.newsmax.com/Ruddy/christopher-ruddy-democrats-smokescreen-russia/2017/03/05/id/776977/
As Andrew McCarthy wrote in national Review today, the Obama government in exile is now stuck with claiming both that intelligence investigations of the Trump campaign show that its officials colluded with the Russians to steal the election from Hillary, and that there was never an intelligence investigation of Trump campaign officials.
The only actual laws that we know were broken, were broken by the leakers — not by Flynn, not by Sessions, and certainly not by Trump.
We may be seeing the limits of the power of the “Deep State” (I hate that term, BTW).
Another interesting perspective; it is said that the Secret Service routinely clears areas for bugs and wiretaps. I would presume that they just might be as good at finding them as the NSA is at placing them, so it is entirely plausible that they did in fact find something they could not hide from the guy they were protecting.
Pingback: In The Mailbox: 03.06.17 : The Other McCain
This is what the Left has done since at least the 1960s. The problem for the left is that they are now the Establishment in DC, education, and the arts. They have no way of dealing with the guerrilla tactics of Bannon and Trump.
The shoe is on the other foot and they just cannot deal with it. Heh.