Lefty fact-checker confirms Biden lied about Charlottesville

[hollodero]

(06-24-2024, 11:50 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Has it ever occurred to you that some of the people in attendance likely had little to no idea that Neo Nazis were going to be there? You know there is another point of view on the Civil War Monument discussion that also feels that those who choose to not remember history are doomed to repeat it. Perhaps that is the faction of people that Trump was referring to? After all, he did clarify that he was not speaking of the Neo Nazis when he said "very fine people".

I mean, that imho is tough to evaluate with absolute certainty. Sure, fine people with right leaning politics can be drawn to an unite the right rallye in the first place, or to a protest against renaming monuments (not a cause I can particularly understand, but that doesn't matter). No objections against that. It's just, as soon as it's becoming clear that this event is usurped by Nazis, white supremacists and David Duke types that make their immense presence unmissable, it's getting tough for me to understand how fine people can just stay and participate nonetheless. And from all descriptions of the event and how it unfolded, not least including one from Bels, to me it's quite obvious that these extremists were not just a small and possibly neglectable minority within this rallye. That, to me, is the point of contention.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(06-24-2024, 07:29 AM)pally Wrote: Sorry, but in my opinion, “very fine people” aren’t protesting along side neo-nazis just to protect a statue of a man, who fought against the US for the right to keep human beings as slaves by leading the confederate army.

It is always a song and dance with Trump. He always has to be prompted to condem hate and even then there always seems to be a qualifier that detracts from the condemnations.

Using your own logic that means every single person protesting the war in Gaza is a Hamas supporter, because there's damn sure are a fair number of those at every one of those protests.  Now, if they went to the first protest, saw a bunch of neo-Nazis and then decided to keep coming back knowing they would be elbow to elbow with those people then you'd start to have a point.

(06-24-2024, 08:53 AM)hollodero Wrote: Well, you say "lie", I wonder if that is the appropriate term here. A lie would be to explicitely deny that there was a condemnation by Trump. There were at least two, that much is correct, whoever states there was none says a falsehood. Imho though there's a credibility problem for many, and that is because of Trump's general conduct in that affair. For one, he sure tried to defend the people that were marching alongside Nazis and white supremacists, and that alone left a sour taste for me too. Then he talked way more about Antifa and left-wing bad people than he ever talked about the people actually committing the awful deeds in Charlottesville, it was a display of whataboutism. He seemed way more enraged about the press painting a bad picture of the unite the right rallye goers than he ever was about the David Duke's, the chants and the murder. A description you used yourself, that describes my view on this, is that Trump just did enough for plausible deniability, but his earnesty was put in question and I for one can see why. That those allegedly condemned fully supported Trump anyway - and how Trump once tried to claim he doesn't know who David Duke is and things like that - just added to that picture. And all that - as he says - led Biden to a moral evaluation of the situation. Imho it's not about true or false in the first place, but about a personal moral judgment that is a bit beyond the facts. For sure, as stated he also got his facts wrong when explicitly talking about 'no condemnation' or that Trump explicitly called Neo-Nazis fine people (he did not, he called some of those marching with them 'fine people'), but that was not what pally was talking about and it was not what Charlottesville was about for many.

No, lie is absolutely the correct term.  This was debunked years ago and has been repeated as truth ever since until now.  Carville recently reiterated it on Bill Maher, and was rightfully called out for it.  They know it's not true, yet they repeat it, thus it is a lie.  I don't disagree with you that Trump did not phrase it well, which is rather typical of him.  As for the whataboutism, I'm fine with pointing that out as long as it is done consistently.  You condemn all violent riots, not everyone else does.

At the end of the day we're back to an old point of mine.  Trump says so much actually ridiculous stuff that making up, twisting or otherwise embellishing others not only makes zero sense, but actually provides cover for him.

[*pally*]

(06-24-2024, 12:32 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Using your own logic that means every single person protesting the war in Gaza is a Hamas supporter, because there's damn sure are a fair number of those at every one of those protests.  Now, if they went to the first protest, saw a bunch of neo-Nazis and then decided to keep coming back knowing they would be elbow to elbow with those people then you'd start to have a point.



No, lie is absolutely the correct term.  This was debunked years ago and has been repeated as truth ever since until now.  Carville recently reiterated it on Bill Maher, and was rightfully called out for it.  They know it's not true, yet they repeat it, thus it is a lie.  I don't disagree with you that Trump did not phrase it well, which is rather typical of him.  As for the whataboutism, I'm fine with pointing that out as long as it is done consistently.  You condemn all violent riots, not everyone else does.

At the end of the day we're back to an old point of mine.  Trump says so much actually ridiculous stuff that made up, twisting, or otherwise embellishing others not only makes zero sense, but actually provides cover for him.

Yeah, if people stay at a protest that changes from Pro-Palestinian to Pro-Hamas then they are indicating by their presence that they agree with that premise.  Same thing with the riots in 2020.  If someone stayed "protesting" once looting and destruction broke out, they condoned that

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(06-24-2024, 07:29 AM)pally Wrote: Sorry, but in my opinion, “very fine people” aren’t protesting along side neo-nazis just to protect a statue of a man, who fought against the US for the right to keep human beings as slaves by leading the confederate army.

It is always a song and dance with Trump. He always has to be prompted to condem hate and even then there always seems to be a qualifier that detracts from the condemnations.

You got got by the fake news, and instead of just owning up to it, you keep digging in.

Got to watch out for being lead by the nose via ,CNN/MSNBC lick-bait...

[hollodero]

(06-24-2024, 12:32 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Using your own logic that means every single person protesting the war in Gaza is a Hamas supporter, because there's damn sure are a fair number of those at every one of those protests.

* edit, I just realized this answer wasn't intended for me - I leave my comment in anyways
Not exactly. What i would say is that if one participates at a protest against the war and said protest then turns out to be occupied by pro Hamas voices, then it's time to leave or you bear some moral guilt. That is what I'm saying.
Wouldn't it be a tad weird if Biden came out claiming how very fine people were at a anti war/pro Hamas demo and how it's outrageous how negatively these events are portrayed, especially since so many right wing groups have problems too? I would think it would be weird.

(06-24-2024, 12:32 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Now, if they went to the first protest, saw a bunch of neo-Nazis and then decided to keep coming back knowing they would be elbow to elbow with those people then you'd start to have a point.

The way I see it, that is pretty close to the actual events taking place in Charlottesville.

(06-24-2024, 12:32 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: No, lie is absolutely the correct term.  This was debunked years ago and has been repeated as truth ever since until now.

Depends on what you mean by "this". The parts that were bolded in the OP, imho, do not qualify as a lie, since they were a personal evaluation. and as explained, I can understand how one can reach that conclusion. But it is not important enough to bicker about it for me, there are some actual lies connected with this stance after all, like "Trump never condemned the Nazis/supremacists" and other stuff Biden did also say, so it's fine.

(06-24-2024, 12:32 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: At the end of the day we're back to an old point of mine.  Trump says so much actually ridiculous stuff that making up, twisting or otherwise embellishing others not only makes zero sense, but actually provides cover for him.

That is generally very true. Where i possibly diverge from your stance is in ranking the significance of actual stuff Trump really said vs. stuff others make up that he did not say. The former just rattles me way more than the latter.

[*pally*]

(06-24-2024, 11:50 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Has it ever occurred to you that some of the people in attendance likely had little to no idea that Neo Nazis were going to be there? You know there is another point of view on the Civil War Monument discussion that also feels that those who choose to not remember history are doomed to repeat it. Perhaps that is the faction of people that Trump was referring to? After all, he did clarify that he was not speaking of the Neo Nazis when he said "very fine people".

It wasn't a secret that right-wing white nationalists organized the march.  If someone didn't know, it is still on them to have remained when they saw the Nazi swastika flying and heard the chants.

People who support Confederate monuments can justify all they want.  Just like they pretend the southern battle flag actually represents :southern pride" and not an army trying to defend slavery.

No country in the world has statues in their public squares honoring people who led a treasonous rebellion against their country and lost.  Statues aren't history anyway...they are art.  They belong in a museum, not on Main Street

No, he just implied people who marched alongside of them are fine.

[*pally*]

(06-24-2024, 12:46 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: You got got by the fake news, and instead of just owning up to it, you keep digging in.

Got to watch out for being lead by the nose via ,CNN/MSNBC lick-bait...

you still haven't identified the very fine people who were marching with Neo-Nazis

I watched that news conference live....I don't need to be told what he said.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(06-24-2024, 12:43 PM)pally Wrote: Yeah, if people stay at a protest that changes from Pro-Palestinian to Pro-Hamas then they are indicating by their presence that they agree with that premise.  Same thing with the riots in 2020.  If someone stayed "protesting" once looting and destruction broke out, they condoned that

I'm very surprised to hear you say that.  Could you kindly go inform Dill in the Israel/Palastine War thread?

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(06-24-2024, 12:52 PM)pally Wrote: you still haven't identified the very fine people who were marching with Neo-Nazis

I watched that news conference live....I don't need to be told what he said.

You got took, falling for the click-bait hook line and sinker.

Disappointed to see the hooks are in too deep for you to let go of the lie, in spite of the overwhelming evidence against the CNN/MSNBC narrative.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(06-24-2024, 12:47 PM)hollodero Wrote: * edit, I just realized this answer wasn't intended for me - I leave my comment in anyways
Not exactly. What i would say is that if one participates at a protest against the war and said protest then turns out to be occupied by pro Hamas voices, then it's time to leave or you bear some moral guilt. That is what I'm saying.
Wouldn't it be a tad weird if Biden came out claiming how very fine people were at a anti war/pro Hamas demo and how it's outrageous how negatively these events are portrayed, especially since so many right wing groups have problems too? I would think it would be weird.

We hear prominent people making excuses for these protests all the time.  Not Biden, he's old school and pretty pro-Israel.

Quote:The way I see it, that is pretty close to the actual events taking place in Charlottesville.

IIRC there was a protest the night before and then the next day.  You'd also be assuming that the same people returned or were at both.  I don't disagree with the general point, I have frequently said that if I went to a protest and discovered I was elbow to elbow with Antifa, neo-Nazis etc. I'd take my happy ass home immediately.  But that doesn't change the point of this thread, that people knowingly lied about Trump's statement for years.

Quote:Depends on what you mean by "this". The parts that were bolded in the OP, imho, do not qualify as a lie, since they were a personal evaluation. and as explained, I can understand how one can reach that conclusion. But it is not important enough to bicker about it for me, there are some actual lies connected with this stance after all, like "Trump never condemned the Nazis/supremacists" and other stuff Biden did also say, so it's fine.

You pulling a Bill Clinton on me? 

Quote:That is generally very true. Where i possibly diverge from your stance is in ranking the significance of actual stuff Trump really said vs. stuff others make up that he did not say. The former just rattles me way more than the latter.

I agree, which is why the constant embellishing or straight up making things up (bloodbath comes to mind) endlessly baffles me.  They aren't the boy that cried wolf at this point, they're the boy who made a novel, then a stage play than a movie about crying wolf.

[StoneTheCrow]

(06-24-2024, 12:32 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Using your own logic that means every single person protesting the war in Gaza is a Hamas supporter, because there's damn sure are a fair number of those at every one of those protests.  Now, if they went to the first protest, saw a bunch of neo-Nazis and then decided to keep coming back knowing they would be elbow to elbow with those people then you'd start to have a point.



No, lie is absolutely the correct term.  This was debunked years ago and has been repeated as truth ever since until now.  Carville recently reiterated it on Bill Maher, and was rightfully called out for it.  They know it's not true, yet they repeat it, thus it is a lie.  I don't disagree with you that Trump did not phrase it well, which is rather typical of him.  As for the whataboutism, I'm fine with pointing that out as long as it is done consistently.  You condemn all violent riots, not everyone else does.

At the end of the day we're back to an old point of mine.  Trump says so much actually ridiculous stuff that making up, twisting or otherwise embellishing others not only makes zero sense, but actually provides cover for him.

The playbook. Then two years later you may be lucky to get a



then the game continues.

[Luvnit2]

Those on the left including fake news media who condoned a lie against Trump will never admit it or apologize for it. It is these series of lies liberals use to frame Trump is a racist. These facts blow up their Big Lie.

Trump is not a racist and the left leaning media and the Biden campaign should immediately issue an apology.

The candidate with factual evidence he is racist is Biden. All anyone needs to do is watch hi VP call him a racist for his actions years ago. That is just one of many instances Biden has proven he is a racist.

But we know liberals never accept responsibilities for their actions. The good news for Trump is minorities are seeing through the haze of smoke and mirrors and are leaving not only Biden, but the party.

This will add more reason for them to leaves Biden and fake news stations like NBC, ABC, CBS, NYT, WAPO, MSNBC and CNN. Those outlets were wrong over and over again with anything Trump and only Fox and right leaning news organizations were correct. Joe lied about Hunter's laptop and saying no family member made money from China, Hunter made a ton of money from China. Joe lied and said the laptop was compromised by Russians. One more lie at the Oct. 2020 debate to win an election. Sadly, the media validated the lies, never doing a thorough investigation as they wanted all the lies to be seen as the truth.

Over time, Trump's accusations are proven wrong. Trump has been right on illegal immigration, media and Democrats dead wrong.

I understand why the liberal will continue the lie or spin it; it kills their credibility admitting their coverage for 7 years was dead wrong.

[hollodero]

(06-24-2024, 12:59 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: We hear prominent people making excuses for these protests all the time.  Not Biden, he's old school and pretty pro-Israel.

Yeah I believe you, but sadly you didn't explicitly mention how you react to those people making these excuses. I would assume you have some harsh critizism for that kind of behaviour. You might even claim that these people draw a faulty moral equivalency between Israel and Hamas. So how is it so surprising that Trump got an equally harsh reaction, and why is it so condemnable when Biden then made a similar comment regarding moral equivalencies? That's the part I don't get.

(06-24-2024, 12:59 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: IIRC there was a protest the night before and then the next day.  You'd also be assuming that the same people returned or were at both.  I don't disagree with the general point, I have frequently said that if I went to a protest and discovered I was elbow to elbow with Antifa, neo-Nazis etc. I'd take my happy ass home immediately.  But that doesn't change the point of this thread, that people knowingly lied about Trump's statement for years.

Sure people did that, I did not deny that at all. However, pally didn't, I didn't, and at least in the Biden statement bolded in the OP, imho he didn't either (he sure did later). I'm not trying to pull anytrhing here, I'm claiming that stating Trump drew an inappropriate moral equivalency imho is not a lie, even if someone might disagree with the assertion made.

(06-24-2024, 12:59 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I agree, which is why the constant embellishing or straight up making things up (bloodbath comes to mind) endlessly baffles me.  They aren't the boy that cried wolf at this point, they're the boy who made a novel, then a stage play than a movie about crying wolf.

Yeah we still respectfully disagree a bit on the bloodbath comment, but I see the overall point for sure. It's just, I feel the counter-reaction of many is to now ignore all the wolf howls and deny the existence of wolves in the first place, and that to me appears equally baffling.

[Dill]

(06-24-2024, 07:00 AM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: I believe bad people support both candidates. Trump already condemned Duke and his racist leanings multiple times.
Maybe DJT is just such a better option that even those he condemns are supporting him?
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/aug/27/joe-biden/biden-wrong-when-he-says-trump-hasnt-condemned-dav/
In 2016, we fact-checked a claim that "Trump refuses to denounce the KKK." We rated the statement Mostly False. 

But both candidates don't invite "bad people" to dinner, or tell them to "stand by." 

I've already read all the "fact checking" related to Trump statements.
I have not disputed that Trump has denounced the KKK and neo Nazis when pressed.
Ok to stop "proving" that now. 

My question is why, after hearing the condemnations Trump is pressured to give, do White Supremacists groups still support him? 

Prominent alt right leader Richard Spencer thought Trump's condemnation of white supremacists at Charlottesville wasn't genuine.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/richard-spencer-trump-condemnation-isnt-serious

On Oct. 2, 2020, Trump again was pressured to condemn "all white supremacists, including the Proud Boys," which he did.  https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN26N0AB/. But they still considered themselves his shock troops on 1/6.

Not unfair to ask why he seems "just such a better option" to those mostly single-issue voters.  Some do complain
that he doesn't go far enough or is too little too late. Plus he let his daughter marry a Jew.  
But the rest think they see some important alignment between their agenda and his policies which has been
lacking in presidential candidates since Wallace.   

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(06-24-2024, 01:49 PM)Dill Wrote: But both candidates don't invite "bad people" to dinner, or tell them to "stand by." 

I've already read all the "fact checking" related to Trump statements.
I have not disputed that Trump has denounced the KKK and neo Nazis when pressed.
Ok to stop "proving" that now. 

My question is why, after hearing the condemnations Trump is pressured to give, do White Supremacists groups still support him? 

Prominent alt right leader Richard Spencer thought Trump's condemnation of white supremacists at Charlottesville wasn't genuine.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/richard-spencer-trump-condemnation-isnt-serious

On Oct. 2, 2020, Trump again was pressured to condemn "all white supremacists, including the Proud Boys," which he did.  https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN26N0AB/. But they still considered themselves his shock troops on 1/6.

Not unfair to ask why he seems "just such a better option" to those mostly single-issue voters.  Some do complain
that he doesn't go far enough or is too little too late. Plus he let his daughter marry a Jew.  
But the rest think they see some important alignment between their agenda and his policies which has been
lacking in presidential candidates since Wallace.   

As stated before, maybe Joe Biden is viewed by many as such a terrible candidate and liability that the support DJT?

People are voting with their pocket books. 

Minorities are leaving the Democrats in droves as well.

Hate groups support on candidate or the other, but it does not follow that that candidate supports them. Like Antifa, BLM, the Black Panthers, etc... all vote for one candidate or the other. It's not like DJT or his VP were bailing the KKK out of jail while they were burning down buildings, rioting, and assaulting people.

You're pushing a non-story. Imagine if DJT said some of Joe Biden's racist quotes...

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(06-24-2024, 01:39 PM)hollodero Wrote: Yeah I believe you, but sadly you didn't explicitly mention how you react to those people making these excuses. I would assume you have some harsh critizism for that kind of behaviour. You might even claim that these people draw a faulty moral equivalency between Israel and Hamas. So how is it so surprising that Trump got an equally harsh reaction, and why is it so condemnable when Biden then made a similar comment regarding moral equivalencies? That's the part I don't get.



Sure people did that, I did not deny that at all. However, pally didn't, I didn't, and at least in the Biden statement bolded in the OP, imho he didn't either (he sure did later). I'm not trying to pull anytrhing here, I'm claiming that stating Trump drew an inappropriate moral equivalency imho is not a lie, even if someone might disagree with the assertion made.

I think our disconnect stems from my not equating a person who is opposed to the destruction of Confederate monuments with a Hamas supporter.  While I have never been one of those people I can understand the distaste for the erasing of history, and the removal of monuments or names that have been there over a century.  Especially when it naturally progressed to removing statues of "problematic" people like Jefferson or Washington.   One of the major reasons for these monuments and location names was reconciliation.  Lincoln was very big on smoothing over hurt feelings naturally present after a civil war.  While there are certainly some pro-Confederacy, or those who romanticize it, types in that crowd there are also a sizeable number of people who dislike what the removal represents based on why the monument or location name is there to begin with.

So I can't bring myself to draw an equivalence to people opposed to the removal of a historical monument to a person who is pro-Hamas or a neo-Nazi.

Quote:Yeah we still respectfully disagree a bit on the bloodbath comment, but I see the overall point for sure. It's just, I feel the counter-reaction of many is to now ignore all the wolf howls and deny the existence of wolves in the first place, and that to me appears equally baffling.

Of course it is, every action having a counter reaction and all.  My issue is with people who take umbrage with one side of this coin while lauding, or at best ignoring the other.  As I've said, you don't do this.  There are plenty here, and elsewhere that do.

[hollodero]

(06-24-2024, 02:03 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: As stated before, maybe Joe Biden is viewed by many as such a terrible candidate and liability that the support DJT?

People are voting with their pocket books. 

Nazis or white supremacists don't. David Duke did not say he supports Trump because he believes in his economic plan. He said he supports Trump because Trump promised to take their country back and they wanted to help fulfil that promise. His words of course, not mine.

[Luvnit2]

(06-24-2024, 02:03 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: As stated before, maybe Joe Biden is viewed by many as such a terrible candidate and liability that the support DJT?

People are voting with their pocket books. 

Minorities are leaving the Democrats in droves as well.

Hate groups support on candidate or the other, but it does not follow that that candidate supports them. Like Antifa, BLM, the Black Panthers, etc... all vote for one candidate or the other. It's not like DJT or his VP were bailing the KKK out of jail while they were burning down buildings, rioting, and assaulting people.

You're pushing a non-story. Imagine if DJT said some of Joe Biden's racist quotes...

These are factual words used by Joe Biden, nothing out f context, Joe Biden is a racist and the left media cover for him.

Why? If they are concerned about racism, why not cover every person fairly?

The left-wing media has earned the term "fake news". They are left wing partisan hacks and 2 of them will be debate moderators on Thursday. They are not journalists; they are scorned left wing zealots who lash out at Trump because he calls out their lies.

[hollodero]

(06-24-2024, 02:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I think our disconnect stems from my not equating a person who is opposed to the destruction of Confederate monuments with a Hamas supporter.  While I have never been one of those people I can understand the distaste for the erasing of history, and the removal of monuments or names that have been there over a century.  Especially when it naturally progressed to removing statues of "problematic" people like Jefferson or Washington.   One of the major reasons for these monuments and location names was reconciliation.  Lincoln was very big on smoothing over hurt feelings naturally present after a civil war.  While there are certainly some pro-Confederacy, or those who romanticize it, types in that crowd there are also a sizeable number of people who dislike what the removal represents based on why the monument or location name is there to begin with.

So I can't bring myself to draw an equivalence to people opposed to the removal of a historical monument to a person who is pro-Hamas or a neo-Nazi.

Well, of course not, neither do I. But imho you misrepresented my analogy here. It's not about protesting the renaming of a monument, as it's not about being against Israel's approach in Gaza. Protesting both, imho, is just fine. The problem occurs when in one case the Hamas supporters that shout from the river to the sea, or in the other case the Neo-Nazis, supremacists and the like that shout Jews will not replace us take over. This is the breaking point where things aren't just fine and people still attending aren't blameless any longer. And that would be the intended interpretation of this analogy, that it is weird to still continue the "fine people" narrative after this point, that I would consider being a breaking point, was reached.

(06-24-2024, 02:09 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Of course it is, every action having a counter reaction and all.  My issue is with people who take umbrage with one side of this coin while lauding, or at best ignoring the other.  As I've said, you don't do this.  There are plenty here, and elsewhere that do.

I get what your issue is, I just question how to weigh it in comparison. But sure, that's indeed because I find Trump's lies more scary than the lies of those who oppose him, which of course is not meant to be a justification for the latter.

[Dill]

(06-24-2024, 01:23 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: Trump is not a racist and the left leaning media and the Biden campaign should immediately issue an apology.

The candidate with factual evidence he is racist is Biden. All anyone needs to do is watch hi VP call him a racist for his actions years ago. That is just one of many instances Biden has proven he is a racist.

If you believe Harris is telling the truth when she condemns Biden as a "racist," and her word is your proof, then what if she similarly condemns Trump?
 https://www.nytimes.com/video/us/elections/100000007412930/kamala-harris-morehouse-georgia.html

Is the "proof" also valid in his case, or is there an exception for him?

(06-24-2024, 01:23 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: But we know liberals never accept responsibilities for their actions. The good news for Trump is minorities are seeing through the haze of smoke and mirrors and are leaving not only Biden, but the party.

This will add more reason for them to leaves Biden and fake news stations like NBC, ABC, CBS, NYT, WAPO, MSNBC and CNN. Those outlets were wrong over and over again with anything Trump and only Fox and right leaning news organizations were correct. Joe lied about Hunter's laptop and saying no family member made money from China, Hunter made a ton of money from China. Joe lied and said the laptop was compromised by Russians. One more lie at the Oct. 2020 debate to win an election. Sadly, the media validated the lies, never doing a thorough investigation as they wanted all the lies to be seen as the truth.

Over time, Trump's accusations are proven wrong. Trump has been right on illegal immigration, media and Democrats dead wrong.

I understand why the liberal will continue the lie or spin it; it kills their credibility admitting their coverage for 7 years was dead wrong.

Seems Trump made a bit of money form China. How much did Joe Biden make? 
https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2020/10/23/forbes-estimates-china-paid-trump-at-least-54-million-since-he-took-office-via-mysterious-trump-tower-lease/

Joe had pretty good reason to question the legitimacy of the laptop. I explained that to you before. And media caution about something that looks very much like a disinformation ploy is not "lies."   And despite your claim that Fox was "correct," it is still "fake news stations like NBC, ABC, CBS, NYT, WAPO, MSNBC and CNN" that finally sort out what is true from false, and you use them yourself, while Fox et al. continue to amplify outrageous Trump claims about Ukraine and much else.

The most important political lie in US history is likely Trump's claim that Biden stole the 2020 election. Did Fox get that right? Did you? 
And now that is followed by a full blown disinformation campaign about a "weaponized" DOJ, all flowing from the guy who directly and
explicitly weaponized the DOJ as president. And you are now trying to present the RWM as the more trustworthy option.