Posted on Jun 13, 2025
688K views · 9.1K reactions | Pro-criminal sanctuary state governors will testify in front of...
238
9
4
3
3
0
Posted 6 mo ago
Responses: 1
A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney
The PREVIOUS Administration?
I Posted Several Just In Case Of Some Being "FAKE NEWS"
~~ Trump’s false or misleading claims total 30,573 over 4 years
docs.house.gov/meetings/FD/FD00/20240515/117301/...
May 15, 2024 ·BEFORE the 2020 vote, Trump made 503 false or misleading claims as he barnstormed across the country in a desperate effort to win reelection.
This astonishing jump in falsehoods is the story of Trump’s tumultuous reign.
~~~ False or misleading statements by Donald Trump - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_or_misleading...
On April 25, 2023, CNN reported that Trump had told a new lie about the 2020 election: "Trump pointedly noted that Biden got more votes than Trump in fewer than a fifth of US counties in 2020. Trump then said, 'Nothing like this has ever happened before. Usually, it's very equal, or—but the winner always had the most counties.'"
~~~ Washington Post counts 30,573 false or misleading claims in ...
thehill.com/homenews/media/535081-wapost-counts...
Jan 20, 2021 · The Washington Post reported on Wednesday that former President Trump made a total of 30,573 false or misleading claims during his time in office. The Post only counted one inaccurate claim...
~~~ Opinion | President Trump’s Lies, the Definitive List - The ...
http://www.nytimes.com/.../06/23/opinion/trumps-lies.html
Jun 23, 2017 · Many Americans have become accustomed to President Trump’s lies. But as regular as they have become, the country should not allow itself to become numb to them.
I Do NOT Condone ANY Lying SOB, Regardless Of Party Lines, And I Could NOT Care Less WHOM They Are. ~~~ I Just Felt THIS Also Needed To Be Clarified.
I Posted Several Just In Case Of Some Being "FAKE NEWS"
~~ Trump’s false or misleading claims total 30,573 over 4 years
docs.house.gov/meetings/FD/FD00/20240515/117301/...
May 15, 2024 ·BEFORE the 2020 vote, Trump made 503 false or misleading claims as he barnstormed across the country in a desperate effort to win reelection.
This astonishing jump in falsehoods is the story of Trump’s tumultuous reign.
~~~ False or misleading statements by Donald Trump - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_or_misleading...
On April 25, 2023, CNN reported that Trump had told a new lie about the 2020 election: "Trump pointedly noted that Biden got more votes than Trump in fewer than a fifth of US counties in 2020. Trump then said, 'Nothing like this has ever happened before. Usually, it's very equal, or—but the winner always had the most counties.'"
~~~ Washington Post counts 30,573 false or misleading claims in ...
thehill.com/homenews/media/535081-wapost-counts...
Jan 20, 2021 · The Washington Post reported on Wednesday that former President Trump made a total of 30,573 false or misleading claims during his time in office. The Post only counted one inaccurate claim...
~~~ Opinion | President Trump’s Lies, the Definitive List - The ...
http://www.nytimes.com/.../06/23/opinion/trumps-lies.html
Jun 23, 2017 · Many Americans have become accustomed to President Trump’s lies. But as regular as they have become, the country should not allow itself to become numb to them.
I Do NOT Condone ANY Lying SOB, Regardless Of Party Lines, And I Could NOT Care Less WHOM They Are. ~~~ I Just Felt THIS Also Needed To Be Clarified.
(0)
(0)
COL Randall C.
A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney - Rick, I read a MarketWatch article about the "30,000+ lies*" claim by the WAPO where they claimed that 27% of the 'lies' they fact-checked were actually true or defensible.
As I'm not one to take any of the media reporting as gospel (as long as it reinforces whatever ideology I subscribe to ... everything else is a lie of course), I double-checked those as well as another 100 (all of the ones that MarketWatch claimed were wrong by the WAPO also checked-out as factually wrong when I looked). I assume that you, being a level-headed individual who doesn't condone someone not telling the truth, did so likewise and didn't blindly believe something just because it supported your ideology.
While I'm sure there are quite a number of whoppers that would surpass the envelope of partisan speech, I assume you also discovered reason to severely doubt the 30k+ number of "false or misleading claims" for just a few of the following reasons:
• The fact-checker often labeled estimates as false/misleading because the information used was not the information that he would use. For example, President Trump would cite some estimate by a conservative-leaning organization and the fact-checker would label it as false because the president didn't use an estimate from a liberal-leaning organization. In another example, President Trump would cite one poll that was favorable to him but the fact-checker would say it's false because he used another poll that was unfavorable.l
• The fact-checker relied upon his mind-reading ability to determine 'what he meant' instead of 'what he said'. I.e., a claim made was 100% verifiably true but the fact-checker rated it as false because it didn't include information he felt was pertinent.
• Numerous times the fact-checker said an opinion was false because it didn't agree with his opinion (not fact - opinion) ... you can't fact-check an opinion because it is just that, an opinion. My opinion is that people who blindly accept what is reported in the media as gospel truth without doing the modicum of truth seeking are likely partisans who are uninterested in the facts of a situation and are just looking for something to reinforce their view. That might not be true, but it's my opinion.
Those are just my top three reasons for taking the "30k+" number with a truckload of salt. If I were to include a fourth, it's that the fact-checker often included things like President Trump's claim about his golf game or the popularity of his wife as "lies" (technically, the WAPO never labeled anything a 'lie' - they just called it an 'untruth' or 'false').
This is not to say the President hasn't told some verifiable whoppers, he absolutely has, but rather that you can't accept the word of a 'fact-checker' that is obviously partisan in his evaluation of what a lie is without bothering to double-check his claims.
Your last comment is "I Do NOT Condone ANY Lying SOB, Regardless Of Party Lines, And I Could NOT Care Less WHOM They Are" yet I can't remember ever seeing you calling out politicians, except along party lines, despite some whoppers they told. By all means, correct me if I'm wrong (for my own edification, I would appreciate you pointing me towards your previous claims that called out 'your side' as well).
-------------------------------------
* MarketWatch evlahttps://http://www.marketwatch.com/story/washington-posts-10000-trump-untruths-is-about-25-fake-news-2019-04-29
* Excel database from the Washington Post - https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-claims-database/csv/wapo_trumpclaims_export-012021.csv.zip
As I'm not one to take any of the media reporting as gospel (as long as it reinforces whatever ideology I subscribe to ... everything else is a lie of course), I double-checked those as well as another 100 (all of the ones that MarketWatch claimed were wrong by the WAPO also checked-out as factually wrong when I looked). I assume that you, being a level-headed individual who doesn't condone someone not telling the truth, did so likewise and didn't blindly believe something just because it supported your ideology.
While I'm sure there are quite a number of whoppers that would surpass the envelope of partisan speech, I assume you also discovered reason to severely doubt the 30k+ number of "false or misleading claims" for just a few of the following reasons:
• The fact-checker often labeled estimates as false/misleading because the information used was not the information that he would use. For example, President Trump would cite some estimate by a conservative-leaning organization and the fact-checker would label it as false because the president didn't use an estimate from a liberal-leaning organization. In another example, President Trump would cite one poll that was favorable to him but the fact-checker would say it's false because he used another poll that was unfavorable.l
• The fact-checker relied upon his mind-reading ability to determine 'what he meant' instead of 'what he said'. I.e., a claim made was 100% verifiably true but the fact-checker rated it as false because it didn't include information he felt was pertinent.
• Numerous times the fact-checker said an opinion was false because it didn't agree with his opinion (not fact - opinion) ... you can't fact-check an opinion because it is just that, an opinion. My opinion is that people who blindly accept what is reported in the media as gospel truth without doing the modicum of truth seeking are likely partisans who are uninterested in the facts of a situation and are just looking for something to reinforce their view. That might not be true, but it's my opinion.
Those are just my top three reasons for taking the "30k+" number with a truckload of salt. If I were to include a fourth, it's that the fact-checker often included things like President Trump's claim about his golf game or the popularity of his wife as "lies" (technically, the WAPO never labeled anything a 'lie' - they just called it an 'untruth' or 'false').
This is not to say the President hasn't told some verifiable whoppers, he absolutely has, but rather that you can't accept the word of a 'fact-checker' that is obviously partisan in his evaluation of what a lie is without bothering to double-check his claims.
Your last comment is "I Do NOT Condone ANY Lying SOB, Regardless Of Party Lines, And I Could NOT Care Less WHOM They Are" yet I can't remember ever seeing you calling out politicians, except along party lines, despite some whoppers they told. By all means, correct me if I'm wrong (for my own edification, I would appreciate you pointing me towards your previous claims that called out 'your side' as well).
-------------------------------------
* MarketWatch evlahttps://http://www.marketwatch.com/story/washington-posts-10000-trump-untruths-is-about-25-fake-news-2019-04-29
* Excel database from the Washington Post - https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/trump-claims-database/csv/wapo_trumpclaims_export-012021.csv.zip
(1)
(0)
A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney
I Cannot Argue With Many Of Your Comments As I'm Not Familiar Enough With Them.
If At Any Time I've Mentions Support For Any Political Party, And You Happen To Run Across Them, Please Send Them To [login to see]
"My Side" May Have Meant "My Position On The Subject", But NEVER A Political Party Affiliation... I Don't Play That SH*T,
If 27 % Of The Assumed Lies Were NOT Lies, That Means 83% WERE; And Even If It Were But 5%, Even That Amount Far More Than I Find Acceptable. I Simply Do NOT Associate With Liars And I Sure As All "L" Won't And Don't Support Them In Any Of Their Endeavors. ~ If They Lie To Others, They'll Also Lie To Me.~~ It's A TRUST Factor.~~
I Have NO Idea How Many Places Do Fact Checking. I Simply Copy Them From The Web, And Many Are Included With My Statements, I Seldom Pay Much, If ANY Attention To Their Names, But If You'll Give Me A Few Of Your Choosing ~ Even 1 or 2, Which I Should Post, Please Let Me Know And I'll Do What I Can To Include Them.,.
Thanks Coronel, I Appreciate You Comments And Your Replies.
If At Any Time I've Mentions Support For Any Political Party, And You Happen To Run Across Them, Please Send Them To [login to see]
"My Side" May Have Meant "My Position On The Subject", But NEVER A Political Party Affiliation... I Don't Play That SH*T,
If 27 % Of The Assumed Lies Were NOT Lies, That Means 83% WERE; And Even If It Were But 5%, Even That Amount Far More Than I Find Acceptable. I Simply Do NOT Associate With Liars And I Sure As All "L" Won't And Don't Support Them In Any Of Their Endeavors. ~ If They Lie To Others, They'll Also Lie To Me.~~ It's A TRUST Factor.~~
I Have NO Idea How Many Places Do Fact Checking. I Simply Copy Them From The Web, And Many Are Included With My Statements, I Seldom Pay Much, If ANY Attention To Their Names, But If You'll Give Me A Few Of Your Choosing ~ Even 1 or 2, Which I Should Post, Please Let Me Know And I'll Do What I Can To Include Them.,.
Thanks Coronel, I Appreciate You Comments And Your Replies.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next

Political Opinions
