Fact Checkers Obliterate Trump As 70% of His Statements Are False.

[kstewart33]

Politicususa:

Some things never change. Donald Trump can’t tell the truth. It’s just not in his wheelhouse.

“His (Trump’s) track record has not improved. He’s still on our scale earning about 70% of mostly false, false, or pants on fire,” Angie Holan of PolitiFact said of President Trump’s continued record of inaccurate statements, on CNN’s Reliable Sources.

“The other thing I’ve noticed about President Trump is he will stick to his inaccurate talking points, he won’t drop them the way some of the more traditional and experienced politicians will if they get repeatedly fact-checked,” Holan elaborated.

“I think fact-checking works from the point of view of citizens being informed,” Holan said, citing concerns about people’s ability to rely on what they’re reading. “Democracy doesn’t work without an informed electorate,” she said.

Link: http://www.politicususa.com/2017/04/02/30-trump-earn-false-false-pants-fire.html

[gratuitous]

1. So, popular media - do you call out the lies or just give up because there are too many?

One path serves the country; the other is that of least resistance. Choose.

[Orrex]

2. NPR's self-serving excuse is, at best, disingenuous.

Here's Mary Louise Kelly's rationalization:

On Morning Edition, Kelly explains why. She says she went to the Oxford English Dictionary seeking the definition of "lie."

"A false statement made with intent to deceive," Kelly says. "Intent being the key word there. Without the ability to peer into Donald Trump's head, I can't tell you what his intent was. I can tell you what he said and how that squares, or doesn't, with facts."

By this definition, no one can ever be called out for lying, because it's unlikely that the liar will say "I'm saying something that's false because I intend to deceive."

Hiding behind a dictionary is no excuse for journalistic failure.