Trump Threatens to Violate Mexican Sovereignty.

[spurraider21]

At best, the AP is running with any anti-Trump story regardless of how credible the source is because they want it to be true. At worst, the AP is blatantly lying to try to discredit Trump. Either way, they (like the rest of the corrupt legacy media) are peddling fake news.

i'm just asking if you see a distinction between the fake news phenomenon on social media and stuff like this AP report

[FuzzyLumpkins]

At best the government is trying to mislead the public and Trump indeed said that.

Middle ground is that the AP is being mislead by someone from the WH.

At worst they are fabricating the story.

All are possible. I just find board conservatives newfound faith in government hilarious.

[Clipper Nation]

i'm just asking if you see a distinction between the fake news phenomenon on social media and stuff like this AP report

Fake news is fake news. It's actually worse coming from "credible" sources like the AP than from the shady sites that spam Facebook.

[spurraider21]

Fake news is fake news. It's actually worse coming from "credible" sources like the AP than from the shady sites that spam Facebook.

so no, you don't see a difference between people completely fabricating stories just for click bait (such as "the pope has endorsed donald trump")... and a news agency reporting what source has told them

[Mitch]

tbh, it's juvenile.

By the same token you're defending the government who the AP disputes because you want it to be true. I'm intellectually honest enough to admit that the AP could be duped. Your blind faith in government is an interesting contrast.

I like to argue. Your butthurt about me. It's okay. I can deal with it, dim.

Intellectually honest

Believes journalists over two separate governments

Pick one, dummy.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Intellectually honest

Believes journalists over two separate governments

Pick one, dummy.

I'll pass. You really should not expect that your limited brain thinks like mine does. I look at it as a matter of probability and neither government has stated that the quoted transcript was misquoted or fabricated. Their rebuttals smack of dissembling to me.

Nuance seems something of a struggle for you which is interesting in light of your flails about autism.

[Mitch]

I'll pass

There we have it, folks. Re in denial

[Clipper Nation]

neither government has stated that the quoted transcript was misquoted or fabricated.

Once again:

Eduardo Sanchez, spokesman for Mexico's presidential office, denied the tone of the conversation was hostile or humiliating, saying it was respectful.

"It is absolutely false that the president of the United States threatened to send troops to Mexico," Sanchez said in an interview with Radio Formula on Wednesday night.

Repeating a lie doesn't make it come true, got.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

There we have it, folks. Re in denial

So says the guy who completely whiffed on what I meant about probability.

I stated that I look at it as a probability. I am not certain of any possibility and pass on feigning it for one possible outcome.

It's things like this that make me think you're dumb as . Stupid people struggle with ambiguity as you do here.

[Mitch]

Once again:

Repeating a lie doesn't make it come true, got.

Not point, he created his own truth and just wants to argue.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Not point, he created his own truth and just wants to argue.

Wow you two are dumb as . I do like you writing like Frankenstein from those SNL skits though. NOT TRUE! WRONG!

He's not saying that he thinks it makes it true. He is just saying there is a difference between saying something you know to be untrue and and reporting something you think is true but is in reality false.

It's the difference between a lie and an honest mistake.

Thanks for revealing further how nuance eludes you though. You went right for the oversimplified preferred outcome.

[Clipper Nation]

so no, you don't see a difference between people completely fabricating stories just for click bait (such as "the pope has endorsed donald trump")... and a news agency reporting what source has told them

The AP's claim that Trump threatened to send troops into Mexico to "take out bad hombres" is no different from your example. Both are outrageous claims with no basis in fact, only spread to get clicks and push an agenda regardless of the truth.

[spurraider21]

The AP's claim that Trump threatened to send troops into Mexico to "take out bad hombres" is no different from your example. Both are outrageous claims with no basis in fact, only spread to get clicks and push an agenda regardless of the truth.

if one is based on the writer's imagination and the other comes from a source, there's no difference?

[djohn2oo8]

if one is based on the writer's imagination and the other comes from a source, there's no difference?

LMAO CN

[Clipper Nation]

if one is based on the writer's imagination and the other comes from a source, there's no difference?

You're Philo-ing again. Any fake news outlet can reach for a dubious source or just pull the old Chris Broussard "multiple sauces" routine without actually having any.

The AP's claim is just ridiculous on its face. If they weren't too blinded by anti-Trump zeal and leftist partisanship to do their job, they wouldn't have published it without irrefutable proof that Trump said it. But who needs journalistic ethics when you have an agenda to push? Thus, we have fake news like this story, the Supreme Court nominee's "fascist club," the MLK bust, etc.

[spurraider21]

You're Philo-ing again. Any fake news outlet can reach for a dubious source or just pull the old Chris Broussard "multiple sauces" routine without actually having any.

The AP's claim is just ridiculous on its face. If they weren't too blinded by anti-Trump zeal and leftist partisanship to do their job, they wouldn't have published it without irrefutable proof that Trump said it. But who needs journalistic ethics when you have an agenda to push? Thus, we have fake news like this story, the Supreme Court nominee's "fascist club," the MLK bust, etc.

if irrefutable proof was needed we'd have empty newspapers. if you think the AP is inventing the source, thats a different allegation. the story turning out to be false doesn't make it "fake news." the news can report what their sources tell them. the source turning out to be wrong isn't the fault of the news agency.

granted, usually you want more than one source so you can corroborate the story

it's still entirely different than making up a story like these...

[SnakeBoy]

If I am wrong, it is apparently a much bigger deal to you than it is to me. That you make such a big deal of it is more a sign of respect than you are willing to admit.

lol Fuzzy

Why is it so hard for you to just say "Ok I was wrong" to strangers on the internet?

[DarrinS]

Did we invade yet?

[Clipper Nation]

Multiple sources tell me the pope endorsed Trump.

It's not fake news, I have "sources"!

[CosmicCowboy]

This is hilarious. Fuzzyfakenews is still doubling down on stupid?

[Mitch]

This is hilarious. Fuzzyfakenews is still doubling down on stupid?

the stupid bas just wants an argument, that's all he wants - a prolonged argument.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

lol Fuzzy

Why is it so hard for you to just say "Ok I was wrong" to strangers on the internet?

I could ask the same of you.

Wrong about what? I get that you are positive that the AP was lying and the POTUS didn't say that. I am not positive although I admit that it is possible. I doubt it quite a bit.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

This is hilarious. Fuzzyfakenews is still doubling down on stupid?

lol board conservatives acting as simpletons insisting on certainty.

The AP still has not retracted.

[z0sa]

I would have rathered spreading freedom to Mexico with Iraq's wasted trillions, tbh

[CosmicCowboy]

@ fuzzyfakenews, Spurstalks own unhinged Don Quixote.