CNN refuses to retract its lie

[*bfine32*]

(08-30-2018, 05:19 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This cracks me up.

You are actually saying that no children were separated from their parents because they did not use the right picture.

Trump lovers will grasp at any straw.

"FAKE NEWS!!  NO CHILDREN WERE SEPERATED FROM THEIR PARENTS!!!  TIME MAGAZINE IS LYING!!!"

uuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmm.........No; that's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying they used a picture of a child not getting separated from her parent to illustrate a story about children getting separated from their parents.

The caps lock was really unnecessary.

[fredtoast]

(08-30-2018, 10:56 AM)Vlad Wrote:  Gee I cant imagine why.

CNN thought it had President Trump caught in a potentially impeachable offense – lying about prior knowledge of the infamous Trump Tower meeting during the 2016 presidential campaign.

Obtained lie from anonymous source at the time which happened to be Lanny Davis...who said he “unintentionally misspoke” .
"Unintentionally misspoke"?... lol, good one Lanny.

Aside from the huge disappointment most you guys must have felt, what do you think about CNN's refusal to retract this fake news?

The https://www.aim.org/aim-column/cnn-retract-trump-tower/

Perfect example of how the Trump supporters mind works.

When Lanny Davis says anything to hurt Trump he is a habitual liar.  When Davis says something that helps Trump then he must be believed 100% honest.

Davis actually said what CNN said he said.  There is no "fake news" here.  In fact Davis has a very strong motive to lie now because if he didn't he would open up his client to Perjury charges.

When a court tries to decide when a person who has changed his story is lying they often look to which statement is most "self serving".  In this case Davis was pretty much forced to change his story to save his clients ass.  On the other hand he had zero to gain when he first made his comments to CNN a couple of months ago.  Based on that I would believe his prior story over his most recent.

[fredtoast]

(08-30-2018, 05:28 PM)bfine32 Wrote: uuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmm.........No; that's not what I'm saying.

I'm saying they used a picture of a child not getting separated from her parent to illustrate a story about children getting separated from their parents.

The caps lock was really unnecessary.

You called it "fake news".  Doesn't that mean the facts of the story are false?  How does a different picture change any of the facts of the story?

[*bfine32*]

(08-30-2018, 05:38 PM)fredtoast Wrote: You called it "fake news".  Doesn't that mean the facts of the story are false?  How does a different picture change any of the facts of the story?

I actually said it gives Trump legitimacy when he cries fake news.

I assume you have no problem with a news outlet using a photo that is not a true representation of the story; I do. We differ on a lot of things though. Unless you only don't care about the legitimacy of the photo when it supports your view.

[Nebuchadnezzar]

What if Davis is the soure for CNN's "Sources"?

Davis said something
Others heard him say it
Davis then goes on CNN and says it again
CNN goes to those others who heard Davis say it
Davis then says he misspoke
But other sources say its true

That would be funny as hell.

[fredtoast]

(08-30-2018, 05:47 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I actually said it gives Trump legitimacy when he cries fake news.

I assume you have no problem with a news outlet using a photo that is not a true representation of the story; I do. We differ on a lot of things though. Unless you only don't care about the legitimacy of the photo when it supports your view.

I have a problem with the photo, but it in no way makes trumps claims of "fake news" legitimate.

How does the photo make the facts of the story "fake"?  It doesn't.  Therefore it is not "Fake news".  The photo does not change any facts at all that would make the story "fake".  If I was to see a story about school shootings and they used a stock photo of a scholl where there had been no shooting I would not start squealing "FAKE NEWS!  THERE ARE NO SCHOOL SHOOTINGS!"

You are just grasping at straws to support your boy.  

[hollodero]

(08-30-2018, 05:47 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I actually said it gives Trump legitimacy when he cries fake news.

I understand what you mean. It does.

As for the picture. I think the importance of the facts presented in the story are around 1.000 times more important than the picture used in said story, but sure it's a mistake. It probably takes the will to find something to find that one. People have that will, of course. And being critical is good. I just wished those people looked quite as hard at FOX and the Trump-supported propaganda that gets peddled there and would complain about it at least just as much. That would seem fair.

Also, mistakes by "MSM" don't give Trump, who lies habitually about any matter large or small, any credibility in anything and I still see no reason to believe anything he says. Which is no excuse of "MSM", which I am not a fan of.

[fredtoast]

(08-30-2018, 05:53 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: What if Davis is the soure for CNN's "Sources"?

Davis said something
Others heard him say it
Davis then goes on CNN and says it again
CNN goes to those others who heard Davis say it
Davis then says he misspoke
But other sources say its true

That would be funny as hell.

There is no dispute he said it.  If he told multiple people than there would be multiple sources.

The more times he said it the less chance is that he "misspoke".  To me claiming to misspeak means making a mistake one time.  If he repeated the same exact thing multiple times to multiple people then it is harder to believe that he "misspoke".

It is easier to change a claim you just made one time than it is to change a claim you have made multiple times.

[*bfine32*]

(08-30-2018, 06:05 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I have a problem with the photo, but it in no way makes trumps claims of "fake news" legitimate.

How does the photo make the facts of the story "fake"?  It doesn't.  Therefore it is not "Fake news".  The photo does not change any facts at all that would make the story "fake".  If I was to see a story about school shootings and they used a stock photo of a scholl where there had been no shooting I would not start squealing "FAKE NEWS!  THERE ARE NO SCHOOL SHOOTINGS!"

You are just grasping at straws to support your boy.  

OK Fred.

(08-30-2018, 06:06 PM)hollodero Wrote: I understand what you mean. It does.

As for the picture. I think the importance of the facts presented in the story are around 1.000 times more important than the picture used in said story, but sure it's a mistake. It probably takes the will to find something to find that one. People have that will, of course. And being critical is good. I just wished those people looked quite as hard at FOX and the Trump-supported propaganda that gets peddled there and would complain about it at least just as much. That would seem fair.

Also, mistakes by "MSM" don't give Trump, who lies habitually about any matter large or small, any credibility in anything and I still see no reason to believe anything he says. Which is no excuse of "MSM", which I am not a fan of.

Of course the story was more important than the photo, but can you quote a paragraph of the story from memory ? Now, can you picture the photo from memory?

Time should have said they made a mistake and pulled the photo, just as CNN should state their source was lying. Failure to do so allows Trumps and his folks to say "see fake news!!" and it adds legitimacy to their claims.

As to Trump: Which would you say gives him more credibility if he did/said something in error?

If he said " I made a mistake, let me retract it"

or
If he said "Nothing changes my message"

Also, you do realize you said 1 time more important

[6andcounting]

(08-30-2018, 11:04 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: I like how someone else saying something (potentially) false and a news agency reporting it becomes the news agency's lie. Logic doesn't exist for some people.

(08-30-2018, 11:11 AM)GMDino Wrote: Remember when Trump won the election and there was a debate on the board about whether news organizations should or should not call his lies lies?

Seems like a decade ago people wouldn't say they were lies because they didn't know his "intent".

Now news organizations are liars to his supporters...and the believe they do it intentionally.

(08-30-2018, 11:37 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I'd call it irresponsible, to say the least.  Isn't it kind of their mission and duty to only report confirmed factual information?

CNN used Davis as an anonymous source for the single most important detail of the story (the detail that made the story) and in the article breaking the story wrote that Davis declined to comment on the matter.

[fredtoast]

(08-30-2018, 06:22 PM)6andcounting Wrote: CNN used Davis as an anonymous source for the single most important detail of the story (the detail that made the story) and in the article breaking the story wrote that Davis declined to comment on the matter.

But Davis admits he made the comment.  CNN was just trying to protect a confidential source.


So what is your point?

[fredtoast]

(08-30-2018, 06:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Time should have said they made a mistake and pulled the photo, just as CNN should state their source was lying.

But you have no proof that he was lying.

CNN put Davis on the air last week for him to make his claim that he is changing his story.  They have provided his side of the story.  They just don't believe he is telling the truth now.

[6andcounting]

(08-30-2018, 06:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: But Davis admits he made the comment.  So what is your point?

CNN knowingly quoted him while denying they knowlyingly quoted him.

[hollodero]

(08-30-2018, 06:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course the story was more important than the photo, but can you quote a paragraph of the story from memory ? Now, can you picture the photo from memory?

Time should have said they made a mistake and pulled the photo, just as CNN should state their source was lying. Failure to do so allows Trumps and his folks to say "see fake news!!" and it adds legitimacy to their claims.

These are legit points I wouldn't want to disagree with.
CNN, however, did report that the Cohen lawyer claims he misspoke and that he was one of the sources. At least they did so online.
(Which is all I see from CNN admittedly)

(08-30-2018, 06:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: As to Trump: Which would you say gives him more credibility if he did/said something in error?

If he said " I made a mistake, let me retract it"

or
If he said "Nothing changes my message"

Hm, that's a tricky question. I don't know. I know with me it's the first one (as with the media), especially when the misinformation/mistake is glaringly obvious (like that picture was once that intentional or unintentional mistake was revealed), but with some folks it's the latter. Which is what he does, and it works, he gains credibility somehow by not retracting. His hyperboles, misinformations and lies are not just "mistakes", they're often just blatant hyperboles/misinformations/lies anyway. He treats those like he treats his errors, with no retraction tours. Which makes it somehow funny that he'd be the one demanding higher standards than his own ones.

When he said he meant "wouldn't" when he said "would" (which is the only instance I remember when he did something like retracting), I didn't believe him either. With me, he lost all credibility (I guess somewhere around the "Mexico will pay for a huge wall"-claim) and I do wonder how that can even be seen differently - but I know about the limitations of my perspective. Yeah I'd advocate for option A), but the guy in that example clearly does not.

[SunsetBengal]

(08-30-2018, 06:48 PM)fredtoast Wrote: But you have no proof that he was lying.

Should we really have to prove he was lying?  Isn't it the "news outlet's" responsibility to make certain that what they are putting out there is true and honest?

[fredtoast]

(08-30-2018, 06:18 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course the story was more important than the photo, but can you quote a paragraph of the story from memory ? Now, can you picture the photo from memory?

I am not a Trump supporter.  I do not erase everything from my mid about his bad decisions, and obsess over minor details that don't change the story but support Trumps claims of "FAKE NEWS".  So my memory is the complete opposite of yours.  I remember exactly the facts that the story was about, but I actually can not remember anything about the photo of the little girl.

But even if I could remember the picture, what is your point?  Are you claiming that there were no children separated from their parents?  You have never been able to tell me how the photo changed any of the facts about what was going on.  Instead you just pant about how "This proves Trump was right!  It gives him legitimacy!!  This is all FAKE NEWS!!"

[6andcounting]

(08-30-2018, 06:53 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Should we really have to prove he was lying?  Isn't it the "news outlet's" responsibility to make certain that what they are putting out there is true and honest?

Why vet sources and they statements they make when they are saying what you want to report?

[fredtoast]

(08-30-2018, 06:53 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Should we really have to prove he was lying?  Isn't it the "news outlet's" responsibility to make certain that what they are putting out there is true and honest?

He did say exactly what they reported he said.  

When he changed his story they put him on the air to give his new version.

They have been completely honest about reporting what he said.

If they had to prove that everything Donald Trump said was true they would never be able to publish any remark by him, but that is not fair to the public.  They deserve to know what the President is saying even if they don't know for sure if he is telling the truth.

[hollodero]

(08-30-2018, 06:55 PM)fredtoast Wrote: "This proves Trump was right!  It gives him legitimacy!!  This is all FAKE NEWS!!"

He doesn't say the first part. 
He doesn't say the last part.

And regarding the credibility issue, he does have a point there.

[fredtoast]

(08-30-2018, 06:55 PM)6andcounting Wrote: Why vet sources and they statements they make when they are saying what you want to report?

They put Davis on the air to give his new version.  So they have given both sides of the story.  What more do you want them to do?  Ask Trump what they are allowed to report?