"Crowd-size" important enough for a press-conference

[bcking 3,157]

8 hours ago, OriZ said:

 

.....and your misquoting is exactly what Spicer and co come out against on a daily basis, not because they want to but because they are forced to. Biased, fake news. 

 

He did not say sometimes we disagree with facts. He said "I think sometimes we can disagree with the facts". But wait, there's more; if you watch the video in full context you realize what he actually meant to say was that they disagree about or on the facts, which is perfectly reasonable. Fail #3,985,762,009

 

Apologies for the misquote. I left out the word "can", my bad.

 

He is the press secretary. He is supposed to be explaining to us what the President means/intends to do. We shouldn't need a Press Secretary for the Press Secretary explaining what the Press Secretary "meant to say". I'm sick and tired of Trump's entire team constantly "meaning to say" one thing but actually saying something else. They need to get out of this business if they can't form proper sentences to get across what they "mean to say".

 

The context of the discussion was VERY clear. He was talking about his "Press Conference" on Saturday where he told a lie (Inauguration was biggest ever. He even ended the sentence with "Period" so we knew he was serious). It was a clear, obvious lie. It was an "alternate fact" (IE: Lie). In that scenario he "disagreed with the facts" and by that I mean he was wrong.

 

Sorry that context just seems very obvious to me.

 

EDIT: Just to be clear so you don't think I'm intentionally misquoting. He said:

 

"That was the largest audience to witness an inauguration, period. Both in person and around the globe."

 

^^

"Alternate fact" (Lie)

Edited January 24, 2017 by bcking

[OriZ 3,157]

Seems to me like per his clarification yesterday, "both in person and around the globe" could easily mean combined. Maybe he should have used "combined" instead. Now that's not a lie nor truth, there's simply no way for us to know one way or the other. Regardless, I thought his comment on disagreeing with the facts was very clear to anyone not trying to nitpick on every sentence to try and find something that's not there.

[OriZ 3,157]

1 hour ago, smilesammich said:

no misquote, and context is an attempt to peddle alternative facts. this is from the horse's mouth, you attempting to make 'alternative facts', otherwise known as lies, reasonable statements taken out of context, is not reasonable and it is not reality. if you could tell me the difference between those two quotes and what exact context you're applying, that would be a good start to put you on the path of realizing you're wrong.

 

I think your energy would be better used on making sammiches rather than trying to convince me I'm wrong 

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, OriZ said:

Seems to me like per his clarification yesterday, "both in person and around the globe" could easily mean combined. Maybe he should have used "combined" instead. Now that's not a lie nor truth, there's simply no way for us to know one way or the other. Regardless, I thought his comment on disagreeing with the facts was very clear to anyone not trying to nitpick on every sentence to try and find something that's not there.

There is something there. It's obvious to anyone who is actually cares about having a President who wants to manipulate the public.

 

He told a lie in his first conference. He was quite b****y about the way he told it as well. He took no questions, he was butthurt from the get go.

 

He then proceeds to have a real conference. Did he ever say he lied on Saturday? Of course not. He tries, like you are trying, to "rephrase" what he said to at least form it into an opinion instead of an "alternate fact" (lie).

 

If you can't say that I'm sorry but you are just intentionally not looking.

[bcking 3,157]

4 minutes ago, OriZ said:

 

I think your energy would be better used on making sammiches rather than trying to convince me I'm wrong 

Well at least we know that even if we don't convince you of it, a fact is still a fact. You can hold on to your alternate fact as much as you want

 

While you're at it, would you watch my Unicorn this weekend?

Edited January 24, 2017 by bcking

[smilesammich 10,727]

1 minute ago, OriZ said:

 

I think your energy would be better used on making sammiches rather than trying to convince me I'm wrong 

i'm not trying to convince you you're wrong, i'm telling you you're wrong. 

[OriZ 3,157]

25 minutes ago, bcking said:

Well at least we know that even if we don't convince you of it, a fact is still a fact. You can hold on to your alternate fact as much as you want

 

While you're at it, would you watch my Unicorn this weekend?

 

25 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

i'm not trying to convince you you're wrong, i'm telling you you're wrong. 

 

Ahhh...ok. Good to know. Well, here's the deal: at the end of the day an opinion is just that, an opinion. Your opinion is that mine are alternate facts, I think the opposite. Who's to say who is right and who is wrong? Let me guess, you're right and I'm wrong. Ok but again I say the opposite. We can continue this for eternity. It'll nevertheless be just as useless as everything else some are trying to do these days by needlessly nitpicking on stupid things.

Edited January 24, 2017 by OriZ

[bcking 3,157]

Just now, OriZ said:

 

 

Ahhh...ok. Good to know. Well, here's the deal: at the end of the day an opinion is just that, an opinion. Your opinion is that mine are alternate facts, I think the opposite. Who's to say who is right and who is wrong? Let me guess, you're right and I'm wrong. Ok but again I say the opposite. We can continue this for eternity. 

I was only joking with you I hope you know (winky face was trying to give it away). In this situation I completely agree with you! We are both giving opinions on how to interpret Sean Spicer's words.

 

Want an example of a fact? Sean Spicer lied in his first press conference. Simple as that.

[OriZ 3,157]

That's not a fact, that's an opinion, completely and entirely open to interpretation.

 

Gosh, and we're the ones with the ego.....LOL 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

2 hours ago, bcking said:

Apologies for the misquote. I left out the word "can", my bad.

 

He is the press secretary. He is supposed to be explaining to us what the President means/intends to do. We shouldn't need a Press Secretary for the Press Secretary explaining what the Press Secretary "meant to say". I'm sick and tired of Trump's entire team constantly "meaning to say" one thing but actually saying something else. They need to get out of this business if they can't form proper sentences to get across what they "mean to say".

 

The context of the discussion was VERY clear. He was talking about his "Press Conference" on Saturday where he told a lie (Inauguration was biggest ever. He even ended the sentence with "Period" so we knew he was serious). It was a clear, obvious lie. It was an "alternate fact" (IE: Lie). In that scenario he "disagreed with the facts" and by that I mean he was wrong.

 

Sorry that context just seems very obvious to me.

 

EDIT: Just to be clear so you don't think I'm intentionally misquoting. He said:

 

"That was the largest audience to witness an inauguration, period. Both in person and around the globe."

 

^^

"Alternate fact" (Lie)

Actually that statement is very true , the around the world part. Think about it. 

[OriZ 3,157]

1 minute ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Actually that statement is very true , the around the world part. Think about it. 

 

Senseless....this is all just senseless...then they wonder why we "defend" him(which I don't defend him personally, I don't like seeing senseless attacks against anyone). Maybe if they had better things to do with their time rather than this senseless BS we wouldn't feel so inclined to.

[Jacque67 7,328]

Apparently obsessed with the fact that he lost the popular vote by more than 2.8 million votes — and only narrowly achieved an Electoral College win — Trump a few weeks after the election tweeted this:

 

Trump’s fixation with this apparently started with a few tweets by Gregg Phillips, a self-described conservative voter fraud specialist, who started making claims even before data on voter history was actually available in most jurisdictions. (It had not even been determined which provisional ballots were valid and would be counted.) These claims were then picked up by such purveyors of false facts as Infowars.com, a conspiracy-minded website, even though Phillips declined to provide any evidence to back it up.

After Trump’s tweet, the Trump transition team then scrambled to come up with proof, but could only resurrect claims and data that had been previously rejected as irrelevant during the campaign. None of the information supported Trump’s claim of “millions” of illegal votes, just isolated instances of voting irregularities.

Both Trump’s claim and the Trump team’s effort to justify it earned Four Pinocchios.

As of December, just four documented cases of voter fraud have been identified. Our colleague Philip Bump calculatedthat voter fraud amounted to 0.000002 percent of the ballots cast in the race for the White House — if they counted, which they don’t.

[Jacque67 7,328]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/01/24/recidivism-watch-trumps-claim-that-3-5-million-people-voted-illegally-in-the-election/

 

wewe period.

[smilesammich 10,727]

oh no jacque, all trump is doing is forgetting that he can't set the bar high for the number of illegal voters and then wait for congress to push back with a better sounding number and then trump can go a little lower so congress can reach a little higher..he's simply forgetting that he can't negotiate the number of illegal votes hillary received. let's see if we can find someone who has a alternative fact opinion of how many illegal votes were accounted for. opinions only. i say negative seventeen.

[Transborderwife 4,666]

Just now, smilesammich said:

oh no jacque, all trump is doing is forgetting that he can't set the bar high for the number of illegal voters and then wait for congress to push back with a better sounding number and then trump can go a little lower so congress can reach a little higher..he's simply forgetting that he can't negotiate the number of illegal votes hillary received. let's see if we can find someone who has a alternative fact opinion of how many illegal votes were accounted for. opinions only. i say negative seventeen.

Not illegal votes, alternative votes from prospective citizens ?