Fact Checking Trump's 2024 Presidential announcement... 20 'whoppers' say reporters. (Page 1/3)
rinselberg NOV 16, 12:16 PM
Daniel Dale has made a name for himself over the last several years as a Trump "Fact Checker".

Dale and another CNN reporter lay out their case that Trump's 2024 Presidential announcement included at least 20 entirely false or clearly misleading assertions from the former President.

These Trump remarks that were awarded "Pinocchio's" by the CNN reporters touched on a wide range of topics, from projections of Sea Level Rise to the retail price of Thanksgiving Holiday turkeys.

Text and video online at CNN.

"Fact check: 20 false and misleading claims Trump made in his announcement speech"
Daniel Dale and Paul LeBlanc for CNN: November 16, 2022.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/11...eech-2024/index.html

I don't know why this Topic has been marked with a Frowning Face symbol. I did not intend it. I would remove it if I could, but I don't see how to do that.

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 11-16-2022).]

82-T/A [At Work] NOV 16, 01:44 PM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:

Daniel Dale has made a name for himself over the last several years as a Trump "Fact Checker".

Dale and another CNN reporter lay out their case that Trump's 2024 Presidential announcement included at least 20 entirely false or clearly misleading assertions from the former President.

These Trump remarks that were awarded "Pinocchio's" by the CNN reporters touched on a wide range of topics, from projections of Sea Level Rise to the retail price of Thanksgiving Holiday turkeys.




Jesus... I read the items on this link, and they're ridiculous.

It's like saying, you clogged the toilet, and then CNN says... "FALSE, the turd eventually went down after a week of disintegrating."

That's basically the bull **** ...

First example...

"Trump claimed Tuesday evening that the US left $85 billion worth of military equipment in Afghanistan upon its military withdrawal in 2021."

And then they say...

"Trump’s figure is false. While a significant quantity of military equipment that had been provided by the US to Afghan government forces was indeed abandoned to the Taliban upon the US withdrawal, the Defense Department has estimated that this equipment had been worth about $7.1 billion — a chunk of about $18.6 billion worth of equipment provided to Afghan forces between 2005 and 2021. And some of the equipment left behind was rendered inoperable before US forces withdrew."

FIRST... FIRST OF ALL...

We left two C130s on the runway because we didn't have enough pilots. The few forces that were left, shot tons of bullets into the control panel, destroyed the engines, and shot out some of the tires. Does this somehow NEGATE that this equipment had value? Seriously... what kind of FACTCHECK is this? What kind of bullshit is this?

Second of all... what is being constituted as "military equipment?" The link that CNN references is actual vehicles, planes, and munitions... doesn't seem to cover all the other things that the MILITARY provided, which includes 10s of billions in IT infrastructures, mobile data centers, fiber, comms equipment, hardened comms structures, etc... none of which they are including. When I deployed to Afghanistan, I drove a Chevy Colorado around base... there's some ****ing Taliban dude sleeping in my CHU, and driving my ****ing car. And that's another thing... the CHUs (Containerized Hardened Units). There are 10s of thousands of those... along with 100s of thousands of vehicles that were left behind... they aren't included in "military equipment," but they absolutely were military, they were all manufactured in the United States, and shipped over by C17 or C130, and provided through DoD funding... but no... CNN doesn't count that because they want to shift the narrative as much as possible.


.


SECOND big piece of bull **** .

"Trump claimed his administration “filled up” the Strategic Petroleum Reserve but it has now been “virtually drained” by the Biden administration."

and then they say...

"Both parts of Trump’s claim are false. He didn’t fill up the reserve, and the reserve is not “virtually drained.”


Bull **** . Trump purchased 77 million barrels of oil for the strategic oil reserve at significantly reduced prices: https://www.axios.com/2020/...ic-petroleum-reserve
As the article states, the Democrats blocked it... you can guess... but they blocked it. But eventually, it did goo through, and 77 million barrels were purchased, metaphorically "topping off" the strategic oil reserve.

Next, Biden absolutely DID "virtually" drain the oil reserves. This chart doesn't lie...




Seriously... CNN... such dishonesty.

I don't hate you Rinse, I don't hold this against you, and I'd still buy you a beer if I ever visit Atari Headquarters in Sunnyvale one day. But this "fact check" from CNN is about as ****ing bull **** as anything I've ever seen in my life. I hope you can at least see how they've tried to shift the narrative by saying everything Trump said is "false" by simply shifting what they view as facts and semantics. Most people are too dumb to know any better... and unfortunately, that sticks.

[This message has been edited by 82-T/A [At Work] (edited 11-16-2022).]

cliffw NOV 16, 04:50 PM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
Daniel Dale has made a name for himself over the last several years as a Trump "Fact Checker".



He has never been right !



quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
These Trump remarks that were awarded "Pinocchio's" by the CNN reporters ...



Oh my gosh. Hell froze over. CNN (Counterfeit News Network) got it right.
MidEngineManiac NOV 16, 04:58 PM
I love the smell of liberal tears in the morning.

Smells like.....WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

rinselberg NOV 16, 05:48 PM
"Fact Checking Trump's 2024 Presidential announcement... 20 'whoppers' say reporters."

I set this up with those words (thread title) but to be fair about it, I got a little "carried away". The CNN banner for this report was "20 false and misleading claims Trump made in his announcement speech". Not 20 "whoppers".

The value of the weapons and other equipment that the U.S. abandoned to the Taliban, and the strategic petroleum reserve are the first two topics that were visited. There were 18 more, beyond that. Personally, it's Trump's remarks on Sea Level Rise that stand out for me as the most ridiculous of all in this review.
cliffw NOV 16, 11:52 PM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:
Personally, it's Trump's remarks on Sea Level Rise that stand out for me as the most ridiculous of all in this review.



Oh, that's rich. I am not surprised. I feel sad for you for believing in that false religion.

Try this. Put an ice cube in a glass. Put it on a paper towel. Fill it up with water. Add some dye to it. Come back when the ice has melted and see if it has over flowed the glass. Tell us how that worked for you.

Do you know what a core sample is ? A core sample is a cylindrical section of (usually) a naturally-occurring substance. Most core samples are obtained by drilling with special drills into the substance, such as sediment or rock, with a hollow steel tube, called a core drill.

Core samples are taken from trees, the Earth, even ice at the north and south poles. Core samples tell us many things. Mostly history. History of the evolution of what ever the core sample was taken from.

There are core samples of the Artic ice. They show CO2 levels for many million years. Way before man, even when there were mankind, CO2 levels have been many times higher than today. The World didn't end. Average temperatures have, throughout history, been higher, and lower over the period of hundreds of years.

Why is the phrase "green house effect" so frightening to you ? I have heard that bally boo about crops not growing. Tell that to people who raise plants in a green house.

You should take that 'religion' way up on a tall skyscraper and throw it off. If you wish to die believing false gods, jump off with it. Do you really believe man can change mother nature, ?

I can go on. But you would not accept facts. Do you remember 'climate-gate' ? Do you not remember the "climate exchange" ? Founded and owned by many progressive heavy weights ?

I think you lack common sense.
rinselberg NOV 17, 08:58 AM

quote
Originally posted by cliffw:
Try this. Put an ice cube in a glass. Put it on a paper towel. Fill it up with water. Add some dye to it. Come back when the ice has melted and see if it has over flowed the glass. Tell us how that worked for you.


I don't know about responding to the rest of all that, but I will respond to this ice cube in a glass of water experiment.

This is the same misconception that I talked about a number of weeks ago, when I responded to one of those Internet-meme images or cartoons that another forum member had posted.

What that would demonstrate, with the ice cube in a glass and filling the glass up with water (etc.) is that the total amount of sea water on the planet does not change because of sea ice—the ice that forms when it's so cold that the surface of the ocean freezes and covers offshore areas in the Arctic and Antarctic regions. These are the offshore ice packs and ice shelves. This is what ice-breaking ships have to deal with. When sea ice forms, it doesn't cause a negative contribution to sea levels. When sea ice melts it doesn't cause a positive contribution to sea levels. It doesn't affect sea levels.

Climate scientists are focused not on sea ice, but on land ice. That's the ice that covers areas of land. The glaciers in mountain regions all around the world, and the ice packs that have formed on land—conspicuously, the great ice packs that cover the continent of Antarctica and the large island of Greenland in the Arctic. These glaciers and land ice are seen by observations to be melting away at what many climate scientists say is an alarming pace. And when land ice melts and the melt water finds its way into the oceans, which is mostly what happens, that becomes a rise in sea levels all around the world.

I just said "alarming pace". It's an unnaturally rapid transition that most climate scientists believe is being mostly caused by us (humans) through everything we do that results in a net increase of planet-warming greenhouse gases in the atmosphere—conspicuously, carbon dioxide and methane—but there are some other greenhouse gases of concern, caused by people.

To model the melting of land ice, you should fill a glass with water all the way to its brim to represent sea water and then pour more water on top of that, to represent melt water from glaciers and ice packs on land. Or you could use an ice cube to represent land ice that is still frozen but goes into the sea as a glacier melts from below and flows downhill to the coastline—the "calving" of a new iceberg. Put an ice cube into the glass that's already filled to the brim with "seawater".

Either way, some of the water in the glass is going to be displaced and overtop the brim of the glass and flow downwards along the outer surface of the glass and collect on the surface of the table that supports the glass.

That's what happens when glaciers and land ice are thawed by warming temperatures and become melt water, or float out to sea, still frozen, as brand new icebergs—a rise in sea levels.

There's a second component to rising sea levels in a warming world, and that's the thermal expansion of seawater as its temperature goes up, but I've already said enough to explain that this "ice cube in a glass of water" experiment, as originally set up here by "cliffw", does not contradict anything that climate scientists are saying when they talk about rising sea levels.

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 11-18-2022).]

rinselberg NOV 18, 06:36 AM
If you've read to this point, here is an exit ramp to a road that leads to even a more fulsome explanation of the true meaning of the Glass of Water and Ice Cube experiment. It resides on another thread, for organizational reasons.

https://www.fiero.nl/forum/...m12/HTML/000452.html

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 11-18-2022).]

steve308 NOV 18, 12:38 PM
Much more then 20 Woppers.
cliffw NOV 20, 08:40 AM

quote
Originally posted by rinselberg:

If you've read to this point, here is an exit ramp to a road that leads to even a more fulsome explanation of the true meaning of the Glass of Water and Ice Cube experiment. It resides on another thread, for organizational reasons.



Hah !

Pray do tell, how can enlarging the conversations into many different threads be organizational, :crazy?