A Forest of Lies

Or

THE ART OF THE DEAL LIE

Or

WHEN TRUMP SPEAKS

Or

Ah… forget about it. You get the point, right?

Right.

So anyway… I like the fact that Dan Rather is trying hard to stay relevant by calling out the editor of the Wall Street Journal for not calling Trump’s lies lies:

So this statement (see attached article) from the editor in chief of the Wall Street Journal about how his paper will report on Donald Trump’s potential (likely?) future lies is deeply disturbing. It is not the proper role of journalists to meet lies—especially from someone of Mr. Trump’s stature and power—by hiding behind semantics and euphemisms. Our role is to call it as we see it, based on solid reporting. When something is, in fact, a demonstrable lie, it is our responsibility to say so.

But since Rather ironically (Get it? Rather, as in Dan Rather… and ironically… together as in rather ironically… Oh yeah. I just did that.) brought his own career to an end with a lie who cares what the formally esteemed journalist says about lies, right?

Well, fortunately for him we can still care about what he says because, as is evident by our choice for our next president AKA Putin Fanboy, lies no longer matter.

I mean, this whole argument about how to classify Trump’s lies compares to the old philosophical question about if the tree falling in the lonely forest is audible.

I mean, it doesn’t matter what we call Trump’s lies…

Heck, I mean, it doesn’t even matter that he even lies at all when what he says/lies about is what so many Americans desperately want to hear.

Because when so many of us, and by “us” I surely don’t mean me, want to believe his lies, the question of the veracity of what he says quickly becomes moot… and then just as quickly it becomes reality.

You know what I mean?

Anyway…

#whysodummerica

Advertisements

6 Replies to “A Forest of Lies”

  1. I’m encouraged by congress’ overnight attempt to destroy their ethics oversight panel.

    It’s easy to get the narcissist trump’s attention: he hate being unpopular. Let us show him how unpopular he is.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. I cannot equate Rather to Trump. First of all, Rather was in the business of getting good news and blocking bad news. He made thousands of calls on what was real, and what was bogus. He may well have gotten this one wrong. He used what he believed to be a reliable process to vet the story, and the process led to the wrong conclusion. The person who runs the story, owns the story – but some consideration should be paid to how they vet the story.
    Trump is also responsible for vetting the basis of his policies. The US has a long history of politicians pulling stuff out their butt, and calling it true – Ron Reagan and the Iran Weapons deal (Iran/Contra) was baldly illegal, but WTF, hey, if the Boss says it’s OK, then we do it, right?
    On September 8, 2004, Rather reported on 60 Minutes Wednesday that a series of memos critical of President George W. Bush’s Texas Air National Guard service record had been discovered in the personal files of Lt. Bush’s former commanding officer, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian. Once copies of the documents were made available on the Internet, their authenticity was quickly called into question. Much of this was based on the fact that the documents were proportionally printed and displayed using other modern typographic conventions usually unavailable on military typewriters of the 1970s. The font used on the documents has characteristics that exactly match standard font features of Microsoft Word. This led to claims that the memos were forgeries. (Wikipedia).
    The “Howard Hughes diaries,” the “Hitler diaries,” were also the products of a malign entity seeking to deceive the public at large. The writer of the memos, if they were bogus, committed fraud; and like the latter two cases, fooled some pretty good experts.
    The morality that judged Rather, and the morality that considers Trump, are from two different ages, two different eras.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I didn’t follow Rather’s fall that closely as I was too focused on Dubya’s wretched presidency to worry about it. I used him for the post mostly as a tongue-in-cheek prop. Thank you for the insight.

      Like

SAY IT LIKE YOU MEAN IT!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s