I don't want you to trouble yourself, but if you -- not a website, but YOU-- had to go collect for me a list of times where a major paper or tv station had reported inaccurate information about Trump, it would be a shorter list than you would like. YES I know there is a left-slanting bias, in what aspect of a story the organization focuses on, on who they have to "analyze" the news of the day, what editorials they choose to publish, etc. Hopefully adults know how to detect that and take the reporting with a grain of salt. However, the facts themselves are not LIES. They are bound to verify their facts prior to publishing. It is how we somewhat trust what we hear so we can make any kind of informed decisions at all.
Let's see. There is the claim put forth by the New Republic that trump has a venereal disease
Then there is the claim from Grabell that trump alloewed the boeing execs to eavesdrop on his conversation with lockheed.
The NYT has been a constant source of lies about trum and the so called russian collusion nonsense.
Trump claimed he was wiretapped by the obummer admin. Proven to be true, but the MSM said no.
Then there was the claim that trumps travel ban caused a Muslim Olympian to be halted at the airport. The claim was found to be false as she was actually halted in 2016 before he was POTUS.
Numerous claims that trump hadn't spoken to Xi Jinping in months when the facts were that he had spoken with the Chinese leader the day prior, and when they were notified that their story was wrong they did correct it, but left no notification in the original to clarify for others.
Then there was the politico story that claimed trump was going to follow the gang of eights immigration Bill. We know that that was false from the get go.
Or how about the claim put forth by hillary's best bud sid blumenthal and reported in the London Review of Books that trump had printed two racist ads for a supposed New York City mayoral bid back in the 1960's? The ads were were proven to be fake and trump never even though about running for mayor.
Or how about the Reuters story that claimed trump was not familiar with the New START treaty? All claims were shown to be false. No retraction from Reuters though.
Then there were the multiple claims that Yemen would no longer allow US counter terrorist operations to be carried out. Lie.
Then there was the WAPO claim that bannon and Kelley had had a late night fight. Lie. They later recanted the story but by then no one was listening. It's the typical launch the lie and when the truth comes out the lie is so firmly entrenched that no one listens to the truth anymore.
Or how about the Raw Story claim that trump secretly spoke with putin and no record of their conversation was kept? Lie. There is indeed a transcript of the talk.
Then there was the claim that to pay back putin trump had eased the restrictions on russia so that American businesses could do business with the FSB, put forth by NBC's peter alexander. To his credit he corrected himslef later tweeting- "Source familiar w sanctions says it's a technical fix, planned under Obama, to avoid unintended consequences of cybersanctions." The NYT's Peter Baker had also stated that the fix was in the works long before trump took office.
These are just a few of the wild claims, and outright lies that the MSM has been spewing.
Projection thy name is fort fun indiana! There is no doubt about the lies that the MSM has spewed. They are now a laughingstock and it is no wonder that they are all in financial difficulties. People used to buy the newspaper for news. When they realised that the news is lying to them they stopped buying it.
