Wall Street Journal: Trump's falsehoods hurting his and US's credibility


And so the tantrums go on. Pot calling the kettle black.
Having no desire to subscribe to, let alone log in to, the Wall Street Journal, there wasn’t much to read; but it was (more than) enough. Do these “journalists” really believe their own fantasy writings? :confused:

The nightmare for US conservatives is that this junk might go on for another eight years, but of course that’d be a good sign. :smiley:

OP: Seeing i “couldn’t” read the thing, what are some examples of Trump’s “falsehoods”?

Not the OP, but here’s a recent list:


They are not “falsehoods” with quotations. They are outright lies, distortions, or fabrications. They man lies more often than he speaks the truth. I’m surprised that anyone who values personal integrity would defend him.

I wish the forum would go back to infractions for insulting the President, i.
e. calling him a liar

In other words: I didn’t read the article but have strong opinions about it regardless.

Millions of illegal voters and Obama wiretapping Trump tower are two recent examples of Trumps falsehoods.

It’s not an insult, it’s an objective description.




noun: liar; plural noun: liars

a person who tells lies.

I called Obama a liar, which is an accurate description, and received an infraction for it just a few months ago.

At this point considering the forums have in many areas devolved into a back and forth about yer man Trump and how bad/good he is the forum owners would probably have to employ most of the members of your national guard to keep up with the mud slinging.

There is a subtle difference between calling a person a liar and calling some of the things the person says lies. The difference in emphasis is what I think the forum rules are after. When you call a person a liar, you are insinuating that the person has a character flaw that makes him prone to lying. When you name some of the things a person says lies, you are not directly attacking his character. If anyone here called Trump a liar, they deserve an infraction, in my opinion.

**Moderator Note
No name calling
Do not discuss moderator actions on the forums

This thread is wandering, return to the topic of the original post

Some excerpts were posted here:

I’m not sure if I follow the logic, although I agree this is not the venue to attack the President, or anyone else.

Someone who manages is a manager, someone who directs is a director, someone who writes is a writer, someone who paints is a painter.

Is not someone who sins a sinner…or is the Church wrong to point this fact out about you and I to both of us?

So what is the noun associated with the verb lie? I think, if we remove the veil of political correctness the only answer is the word liar.

You do realize that you just called Obama a liar?

And Ill do it again!

You can keep your plan, your doctor.

Families will save $2500 a year.

Yes, Obama lied about all of this and others.

Obama is a liar

I’m pretty sure that most people who voted for Trump knew what they were going to get if he won. So these articles just smack of preaching to the choir and selling validation to those who agree. He’s big on the rhetoric. He uses rhetoric to his advantage very well. I think he knows when to stop though, I don’t think he’s talking this way in private conversations with heads of State and CEO’s. A business man who has a reputation for lying does not get very far in the US.

Lol, the WSJ leans conservative. No one believes Trump btw, the latest polling shows that the majority of the country thinks he’s a liar.

Lastly - Trump isn’t a conservative.

More with polls? Still falling for them, sad

This is related. I’m working my way through it now but it’s difficult to read. I’m sure some hearts will swell with pride at the words of our president but to me this is kind of…:confused:

Read President Trump’s Interview With TIME on Truth and Falsehoods

**But I grant you some of those. But you would agree also that some of the things you have said haven’t been true. You say that Ted Cruz’s father was with Lee Harvey Oswald. **
Well that was in a newspaper. No, no, I like Ted Cruz, he’s a friend of mine. But that was in the newspaper. I wasn’t, I didn’t say that. I was referring to a newspaper. A Ted Cruz article referred to a newspaper story with, had a picture of Ted Cruz, his father, and Lee Harvey Oswald, having breakfast.

**That gets close to the heart… **

Why do you say that I have to apologize? I’m just quoting the newspaper, just like I quoted the judge the other day, Judge Napolitano, I quoted Judge Napolitano, just like I quoted Bret Baier, I mean Bret Baier mentioned the word wiretap. Now he can now deny it, or whatever he is doing, you know. But I watched Bret Baier, and he used that term. I have a lot of respect for Judge Napolitano, and he said that three sources have told him things that would make me right. I don’t know where he has gone with it since then. But I’m quoting highly respected people from highly respected television networks.

But traditionally people in your position in the Oval Office have not said things unless they can verify they are true.

Well, I’m not, well, I think, I’m not saying, I’m quoting, Michael, I’m quoting highly respected people and sources from major television networks.

To “his advantage”, I can agree with that. This isn’t about rhetoric, it’s about lies.

This is a naive position, especially in light of post #17.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.