Even trumpers do not believe trump's defense

Walt said:
No one believes trump's defense. trump needs the jury to come up with a defense for him. It would have been good for him if he could have told the jury a defense. The problem is the defense he would have said would have been perjury for him.
Click to expand...
You don't get to speak for everyone. You only get to speak for you. Omniscience fallacy.
 
ExpressLane said:
Jarod tear yourself away from the receptionist phones long enough to tell me who linked Trump to recording the legal expenses being placed on the books.
Click to expand...
Trump did.

He has admitted to directing the hush money payments, as reimbursements to Cohen.
 
Nomad said:
So, the usual convenient bullshit denial of reality out of a sad Trumper cultist who knows he shills for a criminal traitor but doesn't have the spine to admit it. Got it.
Click to expand...
The so-called "fact checkers" are nothing but individuals with serious political bias who write what are, for all intents, op ed columns tossing in "fact checking" as a canard that they aren't who they obviously are, biased op ed writers.

www.acsh.org

Debunkers Debunked: Who Fact-Checks the Fact-Checkers?

Truth is real but sometimes difficult to ascertain, particularly when political ideologies and motivated reasoning are involved. To eschew these pitfalls, fact-checkers need to be keenly sensitive to such biases. Otherwise, they will be seen as simply another manifestation of "fake news."
www.acsh.org www.acsh.org



Now, those that want to toss credibility at fact checkers pull this fast one on the public. There are a number of academic sites that use this trick in papers they publish.
What they do is check to see if the fact checkers tend to agree or disagree with the things they fact check. This is just a massive logical fallacy. What they use is a Fallacy of exclusive premises. These academics assume that if the fact checkers agree on outcomes--that is that something is true or false--then their agreement means what they checked is actually true or false.
This is totally fallacious. That is, if the fact checkers are biased towards the same outcome, they as a group, call something true or false. Without objective measurement of the actual facts, we can't know if the way they called it was accurate or politically spun to suit their bias.

misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu

“Fact-checking” fact checkers: A data-driven approach | HKS Misinformation Review

This study examined four fact checkers (Snopes, PolitiFact, Logically, and the Australian Associated Press FactCheck) using a data-driven approach. First, we scraped 22,349 fact-checking articles from Snopes and PolitiFact and compared their results and agreement on verdicts. Generally, the two...
misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu

www.poynter.org

Who checks the fact-checkers? Penn State researchers - Poynter

A study found high agreement on like claims for PolitiFact and Snopes.
www.poynter.org www.poynter.org

There's two examples of this in action.
 
ExpressLane said:
No the people that "documented" his "lies" are lying. I checked the checkers.
Click to expand...

T. A. Gardner said:
The so-called "fact checkers" are nothing but individuals with serious political bias who write what are, for all intents, op ed columns tossing in "fact checking" as a canard that they aren't who they obviously are, biased op ed writers.

Now, those that want to toss credibility at fact checkers pull this fast one on the public. There are a number of academic sites that use this trick in papers they publish.
What they do is check to see if the fact checkers tend to agree or disagree with the things they fact check. This is just a massive logical fallacy. What they use is a Fallacy of exclusive premises. These academics assume that if the fact checkers agree on outcomes--that is that something is true or false--then their agreement means what they checked is actually true or false.
This is totally fallacious. That is, if the fact checkers are biased towards the same outcome, they as a group, call something true or false. Without objective measurement of the actual facts, we can't know if the way they called it was accurate or politically spun to suit their bias.

There's two examples of this in action.
Click to expand...
So tell me, what is the attraction for you Trumper cultists of being willing dupes?

Is it fun? Do you get a charge out of it?

Is there some kind of intrinsic joy gained by just mindlessly lying and shilling for such an obviously guilty POS like Dumpster Donnie?

Because I cannot believe that anyone or any group of people, no matter how obnoxious they might otherwise be, can actually be stupid enough to believe Trump is an innocent victim of a massive conspiracy or smear campaign.

You guys know he's a liar as well as the rest of us.

You're just worshipping your Lyin' King hero by trying to emulate him with your lies.
 
Nomad said:
So tell me, what is the attraction for you Trumper cultists of being willing dupes?

Is it fun? Do you get a charge out of it?

Is there some kind of intrinsic joy gained by just mindlessly lying and shilling for such an obviously guilty POS like Dumpster Donnie?

Because I cannot believe that anyone or any group of people, no matter how obnoxious they might otherwise be, can actually be stupid enough to believe Trump is an innocent victim of a massive conspiracy or smear campaign.

You guys know he's a liar as well as the rest of us.

You're just worshipping your Lyin' King hero by trying to emulate him.
Click to expand...
Ad hominem in the form of complex questions.
 
Walt said:
Let's remember what trump's defense is:
he claims he never had sex with Daniels, did not pay her hush money through Cohen, and therefore did not need to have records falsified.

Does anyone believe any part of that? Of course not. The best his crazy supporters can come up with is that trump falsifying business records is somehow legal.
Click to expand...
Trump is a notorious liar and a wannabe Mob Boss...now he wants to be a dictator of the US just like his pals Vlad and Kim.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top