And there you have it folks - when a fact is better looked at as an alt fact. Oh, wait...a FACT is actually, a FACT, everything else is a lie, or a falsehood. DD
Agree that he does not appear bright enough to do this purposefully, but he is surrounded by others who might be, or maybe they have just stumbled into it.
i'm sorry you can't intellectually follow that we're talking about context, framing, and themes and how important they are when dealing with "facts." it's best you excuse yourself from discussion to avoid embarrassment. i say that in friendship.
But if something happens, the entire world witnesses it live, those who don't witness it live can watch unaltered raw video of the event, and everyone has a simple agreement on how the event occurred(cause, you know, evidence), how can you disagree with it, or suggest 'alternate facts'? Cause that literally happened with Spicer and Conway.
what an amazing shitpost i've explained it, context, framing, themes, perspective, etc... for example, for the pope god is fact. for me god does not exist is fact. good luck convincing the pope or me that our "facts" are wrong. why we're both right is because how we contextualize and frame the fact. spicer/conway included live participants and as well as tv viewers and online viewers. the media and photo alone didn't use that context or framing. because of lack of explicit details on what was considered and what was not, that could lead to hilariously different views when it appears there shouldn't be. so i stand by what i said that the media can be correct and the trump admins could be correct because neither was specific and they both made the mistake of equalizing unequal positions.
Wow, I remember when a certain ex-President became famous for the meaning of "is". It really is simple... did Trump and his spokepeople says a million to million and a half ? Were there any number even near that number? Was it the first time a white covering was used? Again, another lie, as the same coverings were used in 2012. Would release his tax returns. Yes, no, yes. Did he compare the CIA with Nazi Germany? These are all very easy statements to prove or disprove. These aren't "is it warm outside?, or "is President Bush a nice guy?" type statements that allow for interpretation of what warm equals or what nice is. These are simple statements of fact. Yes/No questions.
Trump and his minions could not be correct. They stated incorrectly that the media used Magnetometers that made the crowd size look smaller. That is verifiable and has been verified as false. It was a falsehood, and in no possible way was Trump and his team correct about that. They stated that for the first time they used white coverings to protect the grass so that it highlighted more the spots where there were no people. That is verifiable and has been verified as false. It was a falsehood. Obama used the grass coverings for his inauguration as well. The claim Spicer made was about the human attendants at the inauguration. We know that is what he was referring to because he mentioned the use of magnetometers and grass covering. Those play no role at all in television or other media viewing of the inauguration. He was wrong and in no context was he correct. For some reason you are bending over backwards to try and defend this.
If this was a discussion on religion this would make more sense. I'm a christian(non-denomination), but religion can be looked at with an objective viewpoint. The writings and teachings of religion are there, but it lacks live visual evidence so it's about what you believe and what you conclude from the evidence at hand. Whether you're right or wrong, we don't know until we get to the other side. This isn't the same situation. We have live evidence from multiple sources, this happened 3 days ago not millions of years ago. Religion, as much faith as I have in mine, is a theory at the end of the day. Witnessing the obvious lack of people at the inauguration eliminates the theory aspect and puts a whole lotta fact into it. The issue is that Spicer came out and made false claims about the size of the attending audience and made false claims as to why the audience was so small. We can see it with our eyes. There are no 'alt facts' that can change the lack of attendance at the inauguration. Blame it on the weather, the luncheon, anything and this isn't as big of a deal as it currently is. But presenting obvious falsehoods and 'alt facts' that can be easily proven makes you look not good.
A fact is a fact sir - if you can't understand there is no such thing as alternative FACTS, then I suggest you get help immediately. A Fact is a FACT...we are not talking about theories, but facts. DD
Do Trump awww... He's using big boy words now. Our little teenage skeptic is gowning into a wonderful Trump acolyte.
Trump needs thicker skin. It is pretty dumb to let something like this bother him. He is in for a long ride if he lets the press get to him.
I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for that "thicker skin," cml750. Trump has always been like this. He tells "falsehoods" and outright lies, and then gets pissed off when he's called out on it. Trump conjures conspiracies out of thin air and blames the thin air, not himself or his people. It's weird.
Yet here you are tripping over yourself defending "alternative facts" in this thread and "p***y grabbin" in a different one...
