The Lie Of The Year
This article is a couple weeks old, but will always be timely.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
President Donald Trump started the morning of Sept. 20 dismissing headlines about someone who blew the whistle on a phone call he had with the president of Ukraine. The call, he tweeted , was "pitch perfect."
Later that morning, Trump and first lady Melania opened the White House for a day of ceremony with Australia’s prime minister and his wife. Before their dinner of sunchoke ravioli and Dover sole, the four sat in the Oval Office as reporters asked Trump about the whistleblower’s account.
"It’s a ridiculous story. It’s a partisan whistleblower," Trump said, though he added he didn’t know who it was and hadn’t read the complaint.
Since the Sept. 26 release of the whistleblower complaint about his call with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky, Trump has insisted more than 80 times that the whistleblower’s account is fake, fraudulent, incorrect, "total fiction," "made up," and "sooo wrong."
On Oct. 5 he tweeted that the "second hand information ‘Whistleblower’ got my phone conversation almost completely wrong."
"Everything he wrote in that report, almost, was a lie," Trump told reporters Nov. 8.
"The whistleblower defrauded our country, because the whistleblower wrote something that was totally untrue," he said to the approval of supporters at a rally Dec. 10 in Hershey, Pa.
Despite what Trump claims, the whistleblower got the call "almost completely" right.
We know this from the very record of the call the president released. We know this from testimony under oath from career diplomats and other officials. And the president and his allies have told reporters that Trump did what the whistleblower suggested — urged the Ukrainian president to investigate political rival Joe Biden. Their argument is that there was nothing inappropriate or unreasonable about it. Trump on Oct. 3 asked China to look at Biden and his son, Hunter, too.
Every year, PolitiFact editors review the year’s most flagrant inaccuracies in search of a significant false claim that can be elevated to Lie of the Year.
The distinction is awarded to a statement that is more than ridiculous and wrong. The Lie of the Year — the only time PolitiFact uses the word "lie" — speaks to a falsehood that proves to be of real consequence and gets repeated in a virtual campaign to undermine an accurate narrative.
The whistleblower, who to Trump’s consternation remains unidentified, raised the concern that the president’s actions leading up to and on that phone call amount to interference in the coming presidential election. Agree or disagree with the conclusion, or whether the president’s conduct warrants impeachment, the actions described in the complaint stand up to factual scrutiny.
The claim that the whistleblower got his phone call "almost completely wrong" is PolitiFact’s 2019 Lie of the Year.
The whistleblower filed the now famous complaint on Aug. 12. It is nine pages long. The description of a July 25 phone call between Trump and Zelensky takes up two pages. That section is the backbone (though not the entirety) of the impeachment inquiry of the president.
Trump started the call after 9 a.m. from the residence of the White House. The purpose for the leaders’ phone call, as suggested by the National Security Council, was for Trump to congratulate Zelensky on his political party winning control of Ukraine’s parliament.
The call started with pleasantries and lasted half an hour. The whistleblower was not listening in but cited "multiple White House officials with direct knowledge of the call." The complaint says Trump "pressured" Zelensky to:
• investigate Biden and his son, Hunter Biden;
• look into allegations that interference in the 2016 election, attributed to Russia, originated with Ukraine and a Democratic server; and,
• speak with Rudy Giuliani and Attorney General William Barr about those issues.
The day before the whistleblower’s complaint was public, the White House released a memo about the conversation that serves as a rough transcript of the call. Over the ensuing 80 days, the nation has watched Trump and his allies dispute the meaning of the core concerns, even as three officials who were listening have confirmed and elaborated on what was said in congressional testimony.
Those officials are Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman of the National Security Council; Jennifer Williams, adviser on Russia and Europe for Vice President Mike Pence; and Tim Morrison, who resigned his post as the top Russia expert on the National Security Council in October.
While Joe Biden was vice president, his son, Hunter, accepted a directorship on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma Holdings.
The whistleblower said Trump wanted Zelensky to "initiate or continue an investigation into the activities of former Vice President Joseph Biden and his son, Hunter Biden."
Confirmed. Page 4 of the White House partial transcript quotes Trump as saying, "The other thing, there’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it... It sounds horrible to me."
Tags
Who is online
39 visitors
The article is kind of long. I cut it off in the seed but the rest of it can be read at the seed link.
-
Trump LIES when he says the whistleblower got it completely wrong, and it is a LIE he has told , in public, 70 or 80 times. To say this is bizarre and not behavior worthy of the leader of the free world is putting it mildly.
Trump uses the tactic of a Goebbels, or a Jim Jones type cult leader. Lie over and over and over again and to some people the very repetition will cause some of the marks to believe you.
A lot of Trumpsters , on NT and elsewhere , ask for a list of Trump's lies, as if one cannot be immediately produced. These are sad times for America.
Suuuure it will............................Think about this..................
[Deleted]
This 'president' does nothing that is good for all. This 'president' only does what is good for his disgusting fat ass.
"We know this from testimony under oath from career diplomats and other officials."
All we know so far is, how "Career" Diplomats and "Other" Officials...… "Felt"
.
Not one of them stood up and said Trump actually Broke any "Laws" of this Country, when asked that "Specific" question !
What more do you need,
to NOT KNOW, cause don't you think you don't know enough by now...
What the Hell benefit would it be to know ALL the Facts from the MOST IMPORTANT persons involved...?
Worse than children with their fingers in their ears
Something more than "You Felt" ?
Yea, innocent persons are always told to NOT tell their side of the story...
Who would want the whole truth uncovered, the innocent, or those hiding things...
What a BAD JOKE the GOP is !
They are a True Embarrassment to our country. Just like Trump, just like those who defend imbecile Trump, and all that he does.
Pitiful pathetic pandering to a paltry pretend president, whose predictable path will eventually lead to the worst potUS in the history of these United States, when looked back upon by historians, and history in general. America...the country that allowed aloud, Ignorance to Rule over a country that has been damn fooled into believing pseudo realities, that should make any True American Patriot, BURN with anger.
For People to be so gullible, is just ridiculous. There IS NO EXCUSE for Trump.
And even worse, are his Defenders of any and all that he does, and he continues to violate a nation, without cessation.
Are this many peoples brains on vacation ?
As he cuts through the swamp like a slug, sucking out the best juices that swirl from the deepest depths where he stirs with a fork in his tongue as for what he has done asz a whole, will hopefully never be outdone !
.
Our Country deserves so much better.
The Defense of this "man", is outright offensive to anyu with the capabilities to reason and think,
don't you think...
NO, REALLY, Don't YOU THINK ?
It's not up to the "Innocent", to prove they are "Innocent".
Didn't they teach you that in "Grade School" ?
"I Felt", doesn't prove "Guilt"....of ANYONE !
How can ones guilt or innocence be truly proven, without all of the facts ?
Hint for You, IT CAN"T
Sure it can - ASK THE DEMS/LIBS in Congress.
It's the "Accusers" responsibility to "Prove" !
and Trump will not allow them to testify,
it's definitely, because HE HAS NOTHING TO HIDE !
The "Accusers" ?
How can ones guilt or innocence be truly proven, without all of the facts ?
What truly is ……. ALL the "FACTS" ?
"Felt".....is used in framing paintings, car manufacturing, musical instruments, home construction etc..... !
So.....how does "Felt" prove Guilt again ?
What amazes me is, the left doesn't think that the Senate members paid attention to the debacle labeled impeachment and therefore witnesses must come forth to rehash what they have already said. It's beyond stupidity.
I was watching "Crying Chucky" today, make the case for the [ deleted ] on this "Impeachment Debacle that hasn't even reached the Senate Yet. He had Trump found guilty as he spoke, right on the Senate Floor. He was siting "Reports" by Magazines
, as his "He's Guilty" moments, while telling "Mitch", how he wasn't being "Fair" for not doing anything to get the Senate ball rolling !
Chucky shoulda been after Nancy "bot" Pelosi, for NOT getting the ball rolling in the Senate.
Don't know - just ask the Dems/Libs Congresspeople - they'll be glad to explain it to you.
[Deleted]
So if Schumer is a 'retard' for actually knowing the rules, what are those who pretend they do but don't?
At minimum I say willfully obtuse...
RULES OF PROCEDURE AND PRACTICE IN THE SENATE WHEN SITTING ON IMPEACHMENT TRIALS
VI. The Senate shall have power to compel the attendance of witnesses, to enforce obedience to its orders, mandates, writs, precepts, and judgments, to preserve order, and to punish in a summary way contempts of, and disobedience to, its authority, orders, mandates, writs, precepts, or judgments, and to make all lawful orders, rules, and regulations which it may deem essential or conducive to the ends of justice. And the Sergeant at Arms, under the direction of the Senate, may employ such aid and assistance as may be necessary to enforce, execute, and carry into effect the lawful orders, mandates, writs, and precepts of the Senate.
I hear that that "House" managers haven't been decided on by Pelosi and Team yet.....or even considered for that matter.
What is the Senate supposed to be calling witness's for ?
You really don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about loki.
One would think that the Majority leader would have changed the rules by now if he could. He said this months ago:
Per McConnell, the 'majority' can't change the impeachment rules. There are details they can set but the rules is the rules.
So that's 2 strikes. Care to shoot for 3?
McConnell was talking about the articles of impeachment against Trump.
The 100-0 vote that you are so clueless about was on a Resolution SPECIFIC to the articles of impeachment against Clinton. Here is it's title:
A resolution to provide for the issuance of a summons and for related procedures concerning the articles of impeachment against William Jefferson Clinton, President of the United States.
Strike 3. You're OUT.
loki and Dulay:
Please refrain from making this discussion personal.
I'm not the one spinning loki.
Unlike you, I have posted links and facts. Facts which have proven that the posits in your comments are false.
Your question isn't worthy of a reply.
I never said that Mitch can't change the rules loki. I have merely taken Mitch at his word and HIS position is that the RULES OF PROCEDURE AND PRACTICE IN THE SENATE WHEN SITTING ON IMPEACHMENT TRIALS cannot be changed by a simple majority as you falsely claimed.
Actually loki, I find it sad that even after you've been proven utterly wrong about everything you have claimed, you just keep pretending you're right.
Quite pathetic.
Nope, READ MORE CAREFULLY.
How many times do I have to tell you NO loki?
3 strikes, you're out.
Then why did Mitch say it takes a 2/3rds vote loki?
Are you calling him a liar?
Or do you think that you know more about the Senate rules than Mitch?
Since you haven't admitted that you are WRONG about the Senate not being able to call witnesses and you didn't even know that the Impeachment rules and the Standing rules of the Senate are two different things, your track record ain't looking too good.
But hey, you be you and despite all facts to the contrary, keep telling yourself you are right.
Holy fuck, you know that members can see the whole thread right?
Again, READ MORE CAREFULLY.
Here's what you ACTUALLY said loki:
I posted the Senate Impeachment rule that proves that you are WRONG, the Senate CAN call witnesses.
IF loki. I posted a fucking link to the Senate rules for Impeachment. Just stop.
Oh and BTFW, Senate rules do NOT begin until the House give notice to the Senate.
IF you would have read the link that I posted, perhaps the information would cause you to stop blathering bullshit.
You are conflating the Senate Impeachment rules and the rules of the trial. You really do seem to be having a hard time understanding simple concepts.