Is this Fake News?

a reply to: underwerks

Great and we can agree he never lied about it. So the fake news is the op and media.

a reply to: underwerks

Ok. Let's just STOP.

What is this thread about????

That he lied about having financial interests *IN* SA, which was the reason for the tweet in the op, or that he had *any* financial interest, in which case I ask why that is relevant?

You do realize you can hardly pick a politician or business person who doesn't have ties to SA, right?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: underwerks

Whether Trump has business interests IN Saudi Arabia or WITH them,

Are two completely different things. The entire op is about Trump saying contradictory things. That's the op. The op is about Trump lying in his recent tweet.

Newsflash, he didn't. The op is lying about what Trump said.

President Trump says he has no business with Saudi Arabia

Now show me where Trump said that.

Maybe lying is a strong word for Trumps lawyer-speak in this instance, but it’s in no way incorrect. He has admittedly accepted millions from the Saudi government. Yet he uses the excuse of “I have no business interests in Saudi Arabia!” to try to take the focus off of that. And you follow his laser pointer right along.

I guess it’s more correct to say that Saudi Arabia has business interests in him. With him as the financial beneficiary. Can you agree with that?

a reply to: underwerks

No, he admitted to doing business with them in the past.

Your point of Trump having possible financial interests with SA is correct.

The op and the media are going beyond that and creating fake news about Trump contradicting himself.

I completely agree with you. OP is fake news and a lie.

Don't be confused with my disgust towards the fake news media thinking I didn't see exactly what Trump did there.

a reply to: loam

That he lied about having financial interests *IN* SA, which was the reason for the tweet in the op, or that he had *any* financial interest, in which case I ask why that is relevant?

Can you seriously not see how the president previously accepting millions of dollars from a foreign country isn’t relevant to his treatment of that country?

Are we sticking our heads all the way in the sand now?

originally posted by: underwerks
Can you agree with that?

Sure. It's like saying he has teeth, so he must be a cannibal.

a reply to: underwerks

That's no excuse for the media to create fake news.

Every president has financial interests everywhere.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Pretty pointless thread.

Once again, hand wringing over Trump's potential conflicts of interest, before having actually done anything.

On to more fertile ground.

a reply to: loam

Exactly. There is potential for something to happen.

But the media has already actually been caught making fake news.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: underwerks

No, he admitted to doing business with them in the past.

Your point of Trump having possible financial interests with SA is correct.

The op and the media are going beyond that and creating fake news about Trump contradicting himself.

I completely agree with you. OP is fake news and a lie.

The media is talking about his business dealings with Saudi Arabia, which Trump tried to deflect away from with his lawyer-like statement. Which you are here trying to defend on a technicality of what he said.

Yes, you’re correct in that he doesn’t have interests IN Saudi Arabia. What you aren’t correct in is your cries of fake news. Unless you can show me where the media attacked him for having business interests IN Saudi Arabia. If they did that, you have a point. Otherwise, it’s just you trying to argue in favor of Trumps deflection.

And if that’s the case I have to ask why don’t you want people looking at his ties to the Saudi government?

a reply to: underwerks

Like I said, just more hand wringing over Trump's potential conflicts of interest, before he's actually done anything.

Yawn.

originally posted by: loam
a reply to: underwerks

Like I said, just more hand wringing over Trump's potential conflicts of interest, before he's actually done anything.

Yawn.

So presidential conflicts of interest are only relevant when they become an issue?

Interesting.

a reply to: underwerks

The OP lied about Trump's statement. Here is CNN fake news lying too.

No financial interests in Saudi Arabia? Trump has said differently before

www.cnn.com...

Sorry, no, he didn't.

You need to stop supporting fake news.

The story should be Trump is right, he doesn't. But he's made a lot of money from Saudi Arabia in the past and we need to make sure US interests come first.

That's the story.

a reply to: underwerks

Yes. If he loses money to do right by Americans why is his potential conflict relevant?

a reply to: underwerks

Are you saying any previous business contact is automatically disqualifying?

What is your point?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: underwerks

The OP lied about Trump's statement. Here is CNN fake news lying too.

No financial interests in Saudi Arabia? Trump has said differently before

www.cnn.com...

Sorry, no, he didn't.

You need to stop supporting fake news.

The story should be Trump is right, he doesn't. But he's made a lot of money from Saudi Arabia in the past and we need to make sure US interests come first.

That's the story.

Again, you’re just arguing on a technicality. How do you know for certain Trump meant IN (as in inside the country of) Saudi Arabia? Do you know he meant that for certain? It could just as well be interpreted as the royal IN, meaning the government of Saudi Arabia with whom he’s done business with. Which is how CNN interpreted it.

That’s the problem I have with your cries of fake news. You’re accusing the media of fake news when they’re just interpreting Trumps statement. The same way your interpretation is just that, an interpretation.

It isn’t fake that Trump has accepted millions from the Saudi government, and it isn’t fake that he’s admitted to it. Which is the relevant part and what the entire CNN article you linked to is about, besides the headline. If you don’t agree with CNNs headline, that’s understandable. But that doesn’t mean the story and article that talks about the important parts is fake.

You calling the media’s news stories about it fake because of that one technicality in how you interpret the headline reeks of disinformation and a need to attack. I have a question for you, do you agree that the rest of the CNN article beyond the headline is true? As in factually true and not fake?

a reply to: underwerks

Because he has never and would never say with. He said in. CNN is fake news.

Stop supporting fake news.

The difference is I look to see what Trump meant, they look to see how they can twist his words against him.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: underwerks

Because he has never and would never say with. He said in. CNN is fake news.

Stop supporting fake news.

So the entire article is fake because of how you interpreted the headline?

I really think I’m starting to get an insight into how the concept of Trumpian “fake news” is used to obfuscate certain stories.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

The difference is I look to see what Trump meant, they look to see how they can twist his words against him.

The only difference here at all is that they are being critical of Trump with their interpretation of his statement and you are defending him with yours.

The truth is rarely ever either of those positions, it’s the verifiable facts that the story contains. Which your interpretation is trying to obfuscate.

This was the OP:

originally posted by: JAGStorm
twitter.com...

Someone please explain this to me.

If I say I hate the color red, yet you find ten videos of me saying I love the color red,
and then I claim it's fake news and I have never said I love the color red, What am I?????

This was the answer:

A liar.