UPDATED: Trump rips Wall Street Journal: I never said I have a good relationship with Kim Jong Un

[DonViejo]

Last edited Sun Jan 14, 2018, 10:34 AM - Edit history (1)

Source: The Hill


BY REBECCA SAVRANSKY - 01/14/18 08:16 AM EST

President Trump on Sunday morning went after The Wall Street Journal, claiming he never said he had a good relationship with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

His comments come after Trump reportedly said last week in an interview with the newspaper that he "probably" has a "very good relationship" with the North Korean leader.

“I probably have a very good relationship with Kim Jong Un,” Trump said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal. “I have relationships with people. I think you people are surprised.”

When asked during the interview if he has spoken with Kim, Trump said he didn't want to comment.

“I’m not saying I have or haven’t,” Trump said. “I just don’t want to comment.”

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/368945-trump-rips-the-media-i-never-said-i-have-a-good-relationship-with-kim

---

UPDATE:

White House, WSJ Trade Barbs Over Accuracy of Trump Quote

The White House and The Wall Street Journal traded barbs late Saturday and early Sunday morning over the accuracy of quote from President Donald Trump during an interview with the newspaper. “I have a great relationship with Prime Minister Abe of Japan and I probably have a very good relationship with Kim Jong Un of North Korea. I have relationships with people, I think you people are surprised,” WSJ quoted Trump as saying. But White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders fired back, and Trump tweeted on Sunday morning that the WSJ misquoted him. “Obviously I didn’t say that. I said ‘I’d have a good relationship with Kim Jong Un,’ a big difference,” he said, adding: “They just wanted a story.” The newspaper posted its own audio recording on Saturday night, saying it stands by its reporting.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

###

https://www.thedailybeast.com/white-house-wsj-trade-barbs-over-accuracy-of-quote?ref=home

[Maeve]

1. Let's hear the tape, then

The quotes don't match and what he says they wrote doesn't match what they wrote. Who do you suppose is telling the truth?

[muriel_volestrangler]

7. Here's the WSJ's audio - they transcribed it correctly. Trump is lying. Again.

http://www.wsj.com/video/disputed-audio-from-donald-trump-interview-with-wsj/33003B4D-0DA4-4760-B913-0C2CDC903E74.html (their firewall seems to allow everyone to listen to this - I guess they want everyone to know Trump is lying)

[Honeycombe8]

8. Yeah...sounds like he says he probably has a good relationship with him.

But what's the big deal, either way? Whether he said he does or he would...not much difference.

[Maeve]

9. while there is some wiggle room, in the context his explanation doesn't make sense

He speaks in the present tense in talking of China and Japan before saying the disputed phrase and then the next sentence is also present tense. It makes no sense to think he switched tense in the middle (ok, like he always makes sense, I know!).
He can't just say he misspoke, which would be normal; it's ALWAYS someone else's fault.

[thesquanderer]

13. I think context supports his explanation.

Switching between present and conditional sense is a perfectly reasonable, common, normal thing to do. The word "probably" actually further supports a conditional reading.

[Maeve]

16. Again, wiggle room, but I disagree after listening to it. eom

[thesquanderer]

12. I think WSJ is wrong here.

One can definitely hear that recording as either "I' or "I'd".

I'd be willing to give Trump the benefit of the doubt here (as painful as that is to say). It actually makes more sense, hearing his inflection and context and the word "probably", that he was indeed saying I'd.

But I think Trump is wrong to say that WSJ knew they were misquoting, and did it to create a fake news story. More likely confusion or even incompetence than malice. Especially from the WSJ which is generally kind to him. So of course he had to even take something where he had a point, and stupidly exaggerate it.

[muriel_volestrangler]

14. I completely disagree - there's no "d" in between "I" and "probably"

and note that Trump claimed they wrote it as "I have" - which is a lie too. No, Trump gets no benefit of the doubt. He said "I probably", not "I'd probably". I also disagree that the context would make "I'd" more likely"; he goes on to say "I have relationships with people. I think you people are surprised". He was clearly claiming he does have the relationships he's listed. They question it; he didn't reply 'no, I said "I'd"' or "no, I said "I would"', he comes up with the stupid "I’m not saying I have or haven't. I just don’t want to comment." This is the reaction of a habitual boaster and liar who has just been called on a ridiculous lie, and can't think how to justify it, so pretends to not be commenting when it was he who stated it a moment ago, unbidden.

The confusion and incompetence was only on Trump's part. And now that he's accusing they of lying, the malice.

[paleotn]

2. Either that's his dementia talking....

or, like many Rethugs, he doesn't fully grasp the concepts of audio and video tape.

[democratisphere]

3. Every utterance from drumpf is FAKE and a LIE.

[TheCowsCameHome]

4. Attack the WSJ. Brilliant, Donald.

[SWBTATTReg]

15. really...attacking the WSJ, owned by a billionaire, w/ lots of resources...smart!

Man, tRUMP is smart!

[Voltaire2]

5. He has Alzheimers. He honestly can't remember what he said five minutes ago.

He needs to be 25'd. Now.

[Mr. Ected]

6. These tweets were not written by Trump

Note the proper spelling, the proper use of punctuation, etc. This is way beyond Trump's natural capabilities.

I imagine a college-educated aide was responsible for trying to undo the embarrassment of the original tweet.

FAKE TWEET.

[AJT]

10. You're correct. I wonder if they have "can you tweet like dumpy"

contests at the white house. The winner gets to be dumpy's twitter-bot of the day.