Trump's 4% GDP growth promise update

[Correll]

A lie can be a bad lie by not being credible, yet still have the intent to deceive.


On the other hand, an exaggeration can be made without the intent to deceive.


That some people believe hyperbole, is one of the downsides of using a lot of hyperbole. That is obviously true, and it is sad that you are the first lib to make the point, at three years and counting.

So, in the end you have nothing other than your own opinion that Trump was not trying to deceive, even though you claim it as fact that he did not.

Were you attempting to deceive when you called me a “lib”, which is not a credible statement?

As I have repeatedly offered my argument and supporting arguments, such as links to the definitions I am using, that you guys seem to be ignorant of,


it is not just my opinion, but a well argued and supported analysis. One you have been unable to counter, seriously or effectively.




My calling you a lib, is my opinion, based on my observation of your positions and style of argument. I truly believe that you are a "liberal" in the modern usage of the word. My opinion on that could be right, it could be wrong, but since I truly believe it, is can not be a lie.

Something that you should know. Unless you are playing at lying yourself, of course.

Based upon your definition of a lie...intent to deceive and credibility...the people that called me and told me my SSN had been suspended were not lying because I did not find it credible.

After 60 pages we are back to nothing more than your opinion vs my opinion.

What a waste of time.

Bye
Since it was not a lie, how would you categorize such a phone call? It is just hyperbole? Was it just an exaggeration?

You asked why I reached the conclusion that a specific comment was not seriously intended to deceive.

My answer was that the statement was so lacking in credibility that I did not believe it to be a real attempt at deception.


That does not mean that that rule is applicable to all statements. A person can say something that is not credible at all, and yet be deadly serious about their intent to deceive.


This is normally something people learn as children. That you are so twisted up with partisan bile that you have managed to convince yourself you do not know it, is hilarious.

So now we are back to everything just being about your opinion.

I do not view Trump's "hyperbolic statements" as you call them any different than I view the people that told me my SSN was suspended. Both are full of shit and try to fool people into thinking things that are not true.

Your lack of ability to discern between a serious attempt to deceive and meaningless pap, is a lack of skill on your part, caused by TDS.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

So, in the end you have nothing other than your own opinion that Trump was not trying to deceive, even though you claim it as fact that he did not.

Were you attempting to deceive when you called me a “lib”, which is not a credible statement?

As I have repeatedly offered my argument and supporting arguments, such as links to the definitions I am using, that you guys seem to be ignorant of,


it is not just my opinion, but a well argued and supported analysis. One you have been unable to counter, seriously or effectively.




My calling you a lib, is my opinion, based on my observation of your positions and style of argument. I truly believe that you are a "liberal" in the modern usage of the word. My opinion on that could be right, it could be wrong, but since I truly believe it, is can not be a lie.

Something that you should know. Unless you are playing at lying yourself, of course.

Based upon your definition of a lie...intent to deceive and credibility...the people that called me and told me my SSN had been suspended were not lying because I did not find it credible.

After 60 pages we are back to nothing more than your opinion vs my opinion.

What a waste of time.

Bye
Since it was not a lie, how would you categorize such a phone call? It is just hyperbole? Was it just an exaggeration?

You asked why I reached the conclusion that a specific comment was not seriously intended to deceive.

My answer was that the statement was so lacking in credibility that I did not believe it to be a real attempt at deception.


That does not mean that that rule is applicable to all statements. A person can say something that is not credible at all, and yet be deadly serious about their intent to deceive.


This is normally something people learn as children. That you are so twisted up with partisan bile that you have managed to convince yourself you do not know it, is hilarious.

So now we are back to everything just being about your opinion.

I do not view Trump's "hyperbolic statements" as you call them any different than I view the people that told me my SSN was suspended. Both are full of shit and try to fool people into thinking things that are not true.

Your lack of ability to discern between a serious attempt to deceive and meaningless pap, is a lack of skill on your part, caused by TDS.

I am not the one with TDS, that would be you. You have Trump Defense Syndrome. you have to defend him at all cost. Even when you admit he lied you sugar coat it.

I give Trump credit when he deserves it and blame when he earns it.

Your opinion is no more or less valid than mine.

 

[Correll]

As I have repeatedly offered my argument and supporting arguments, such as links to the definitions I am using, that you guys seem to be ignorant of,


it is not just my opinion, but a well argued and supported analysis. One you have been unable to counter, seriously or effectively.




My calling you a lib, is my opinion, based on my observation of your positions and style of argument. I truly believe that you are a "liberal" in the modern usage of the word. My opinion on that could be right, it could be wrong, but since I truly believe it, is can not be a lie.

Something that you should know. Unless you are playing at lying yourself, of course.

Based upon your definition of a lie...intent to deceive and credibility...the people that called me and told me my SSN had been suspended were not lying because I did not find it credible.

After 60 pages we are back to nothing more than your opinion vs my opinion.

What a waste of time.

Bye
Since it was not a lie, how would you categorize such a phone call? It is just hyperbole? Was it just an exaggeration?

You asked why I reached the conclusion that a specific comment was not seriously intended to deceive.

My answer was that the statement was so lacking in credibility that I did not believe it to be a real attempt at deception.


That does not mean that that rule is applicable to all statements. A person can say something that is not credible at all, and yet be deadly serious about their intent to deceive.


This is normally something people learn as children. That you are so twisted up with partisan bile that you have managed to convince yourself you do not know it, is hilarious.

So now we are back to everything just being about your opinion.

I do not view Trump's "hyperbolic statements" as you call them any different than I view the people that told me my SSN was suspended. Both are full of shit and try to fool people into thinking things that are not true.

Your lack of ability to discern between a serious attempt to deceive and meaningless pap, is a lack of skill on your part, caused by TDS.

I am not the one with TDS, that would be you. You have Trump Defense Syndrome. you have to defend him at all cost. Even when you admit he lied you sugar coat it.

I give Trump credit when he deserves it and blame when he earns it.

Your opinion is no more or less valid than mine.

Except you are the one who has twisted himself up so much, that you don't know what lies are, or hyperbole is, or how to tell the difference between the two.


I defend Trump when he is attacked by crazy people, who say crazy shit, like "saying something that is wrong, is always a lie".

 

[otto105]

Donald Trump promised 4.0% GDP growth a year.

Updated - Trump-O-Meter: Grow the economy by 4 percent a year

In 2018, he fell short with 3.2% growth.

It's still early in 2019, so all we have is estimates of first quarter growth. In order for the economy to stay on track to 4% growth, Q1 must be at least /approximately 4%.


So far things don't look good at all. Economist Diane Swonk said yesterday that Q1 growth could be 1.5%:

GDP growth for the first quarter could slip below 1-1/2% if shutdown endures through the end of the week.

Diane Swonk on Twitter

It looks like Trump wildly exaggerated the results he could achieve.

Let me guess, it’s still a myth.

 

[edthecynic]

If someone really believe something, but it wrong about it, they are not lying. They are mistaken.

Only if they keep their big mouth shut. As soon as they speak it they are telling a lie and are therefore a LIAR!

 

[edthecynic]

it is clear from their actions that dems are opposed to any efforts to secure our border.

Now that IS a Trumpian LIE, and you know it!
The Dems clearly want to secure the border with methods and technology that works. Tramp and the GOP don't because they want to keep the issue to inflame their base. Thus they support an ineffective wall as the ONLY way to secure the border.
Your Tramp scripted lies fool no one, not even yourself, therefore your lies are PREMEDITATED!

NO, they obviously don't. For that matter, the GOP leadership doesn't either.


The tens of millions of illegals living in this country, shows that what we have done, didn't work.


I truly believe that a Wall, will help control the border.

The GOP have BLOCKED all immigration reform offered by bipartisan committees. The GOP owns the immigration problem.

 

[Correll]

If someone really believe something, but it wrong about it, they are not lying. They are mistaken.

Only if they keep their big mouth shut. As soon as they speak it they are telling a lie and are therefore a LIAR!

Nope. That is a silly thing to say.


People can be mistaken, and tell say something they think is true, yet are wrong about, and it is not a lie, because there is no intent to deceive.


This is the type of thing that most people learn as children. Young children.


You probably knew it too, until recently, when your TDS required you to "forget" it, so you could say bad stuff about the President.

 

[Correll]

it is clear from their actions that dems are opposed to any efforts to secure our border.

Now that IS a Trumpian LIE, and you know it!
The Dems clearly want to secure the border with methods and technology that works. Tramp and the GOP don't because they want to keep the issue to inflame their base. Thus they support an ineffective wall as the ONLY way to secure the border.
Your Tramp scripted lies fool no one, not even yourself, therefore your lies are PREMEDITATED!

NO, they obviously don't. For that matter, the GOP leadership doesn't either.


The tens of millions of illegals living in this country, shows that what we have done, didn't work.


I truly believe that a Wall, will help control the border.

The GOP have BLOCKED all immigration reform offered by bipartisan committees. The GOP owns the immigration problem.

By "immigration reform" I assume you mean, various forms of amnesty?


Good. Block it all. Deport them all.

 

[Faun]

If you tell me trump's inauguration crowd was larger than Obama's, you are.

If you tell me trump tried to stop a crowd from chanting, "send her back," by speaking g quickly to quiet the crowd; when in fact, he paused for about 13 seconds and didn't speak again until the chant died down, you are.

If you claim the economy right now is the best economy in history, you are.

If you claim Democrats are opposed to any efforts to secure our border, you are.

LOL, Dems love Third world immigration, legal and illegal, because they know it will give them power.


YOur denial of that fact, makes you the liar. A real liar.

LOLOL

What irony, huh? How am I a liar when I didn't deny the claim you just lied about, saying I did?

Because despite their repeated attempts to lie about it, it is clear from their actions that dems are opposed to any efforts to secure our border.

Liar. Their actions were to vote in favor of border support other than trump's wall. Trump's wall is not a panacea.

lol!!! Yes, I'm aware of their willingness to support "border support" that they know will fail, in order to spend money to give themselves political cover as they work towards amnesty.


Calling you out on your lies, is not lying. It is speaking the Truth to Power.

You're not very bright, liar The only way their support for increased border security fails is if Republicans vote them down.

 

[Faun]

So, in the end you have nothing other than your own opinion that Trump was not trying to deceive, even though you claim it as fact that he did not.

Were you attempting to deceive when you called me a “lib”, which is not a credible statement?

As I have repeatedly offered my argument and supporting arguments, such as links to the definitions I am using, that you guys seem to be ignorant of,


it is not just my opinion, but a well argued and supported analysis. One you have been unable to counter, seriously or effectively.




My calling you a lib, is my opinion, based on my observation of your positions and style of argument. I truly believe that you are a "liberal" in the modern usage of the word. My opinion on that could be right, it could be wrong, but since I truly believe it, is can not be a lie.

Something that you should know. Unless you are playing at lying yourself, of course.

Based upon your definition of a lie...intent to deceive and credibility...the people that called me and told me my SSN had been suspended were not lying because I did not find it credible.

After 60 pages we are back to nothing more than your opinion vs my opinion.

What a waste of time.

Bye
Since it was not a lie, how would you categorize such a phone call? It is just hyperbole? Was it just an exaggeration?

You asked why I reached the conclusion that a specific comment was not seriously intended to deceive.

My answer was that the statement was so lacking in credibility that I did not believe it to be a real attempt at deception.


That does not mean that that rule is applicable to all statements. A person can say something that is not credible at all, and yet be deadly serious about their intent to deceive.


This is normally something people learn as children. That you are so twisted up with partisan bile that you have managed to convince yourself you do not know it, is hilarious.

So now we are back to everything just being about your opinion.

I do not view Trump's "hyperbolic statements" as you call them any different than I view the people that told me my SSN was suspended. Both are full of shit and try to fool people into thinking things that are not true.

Your lack of ability to discern between a serious attempt to deceive and meaningless pap, is a lack of skill on your part, caused by TDS.

Telling lies like Mexico will pay for the wall is not meaningless pap. It's deceitful and it's lying to America.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

As I have repeatedly offered my argument and supporting arguments, such as links to the definitions I am using, that you guys seem to be ignorant of,


it is not just my opinion, but a well argued and supported analysis. One you have been unable to counter, seriously or effectively.




My calling you a lib, is my opinion, based on my observation of your positions and style of argument. I truly believe that you are a "liberal" in the modern usage of the word. My opinion on that could be right, it could be wrong, but since I truly believe it, is can not be a lie.

Something that you should know. Unless you are playing at lying yourself, of course.

Based upon your definition of a lie...intent to deceive and credibility...the people that called me and told me my SSN had been suspended were not lying because I did not find it credible.

After 60 pages we are back to nothing more than your opinion vs my opinion.

What a waste of time.

Bye
Since it was not a lie, how would you categorize such a phone call? It is just hyperbole? Was it just an exaggeration?

You asked why I reached the conclusion that a specific comment was not seriously intended to deceive.

My answer was that the statement was so lacking in credibility that I did not believe it to be a real attempt at deception.


That does not mean that that rule is applicable to all statements. A person can say something that is not credible at all, and yet be deadly serious about their intent to deceive.


This is normally something people learn as children. That you are so twisted up with partisan bile that you have managed to convince yourself you do not know it, is hilarious.

So now we are back to everything just being about your opinion.

I do not view Trump's "hyperbolic statements" as you call them any different than I view the people that told me my SSN was suspended. Both are full of shit and try to fool people into thinking things that are not true.

Your lack of ability to discern between a serious attempt to deceive and meaningless pap, is a lack of skill on your part, caused by TDS.

Telling lies like Mexico will pay for the wall is not meaningless pap. It's deceitful and it's lying to America.

He is hopeless. I used his own standard for what constitutes a lie so he had to shift paths once again to keep defending Trump.

Going by Correll’s standards the prince from Nigeria that wants to give you 25 million dollars is not lying.

 

[Faun]

Based upon your definition of a lie...intent to deceive and credibility...the people that called me and told me my SSN had been suspended were not lying because I did not find it credible.

After 60 pages we are back to nothing more than your opinion vs my opinion.

What a waste of time.

Bye
Since it was not a lie, how would you categorize such a phone call? It is just hyperbole? Was it just an exaggeration?

You asked why I reached the conclusion that a specific comment was not seriously intended to deceive.

My answer was that the statement was so lacking in credibility that I did not believe it to be a real attempt at deception.


That does not mean that that rule is applicable to all statements. A person can say something that is not credible at all, and yet be deadly serious about their intent to deceive.


This is normally something people learn as children. That you are so twisted up with partisan bile that you have managed to convince yourself you do not know it, is hilarious.

So now we are back to everything just being about your opinion.

I do not view Trump's "hyperbolic statements" as you call them any different than I view the people that told me my SSN was suspended. Both are full of shit and try to fool people into thinking things that are not true.

Your lack of ability to discern between a serious attempt to deceive and meaningless pap, is a lack of skill on your part, caused by TDS.

Telling lies like Mexico will pay for the wall is not meaningless pap. It's deceitful and it's lying to America.

He is hopeless. I used his own standard for what constitutes a lie so he had to shift paths once again to keep defending Trump.

Going by Correll’s standards the prince from Nigeria that wants to give you 25 million dollars is not lying.

It's a sickness.

 

[Correll]

LOL, Dems love Third world immigration, legal and illegal, because they know it will give them power.


YOur denial of that fact, makes you the liar. A real liar.

LOLOL

What irony, huh? How am I a liar when I didn't deny the claim you just lied about, saying I did?

Because despite their repeated attempts to lie about it, it is clear from their actions that dems are opposed to any efforts to secure our border.

Liar. Their actions were to vote in favor of border support other than trump's wall. Trump's wall is not a panacea.

lol!!! Yes, I'm aware of their willingness to support "border support" that they know will fail, in order to spend money to give themselves political cover as they work towards amnesty.


Calling you out on your lies, is not lying. It is speaking the Truth to Power.

You're not very bright, liar The only way their support for increased border security fails is if Republicans vote them down.

Yeah, you said that, and then I pointed out, that you are lying.

So if all you have is repeating yourself, **** off, liar.

 

[U2Edge]

Donald Trump promised 4.0% GDP growth a year.

Updated - Trump-O-Meter: Grow the economy by 4 percent a year

In 2018, he fell short with 3.2% growth.

It's still early in 2019, so all we have is estimates of first quarter growth. In order for the economy to stay on track to 4% growth, Q1 must be at least /approximately 4%.


So far things don't look good at all. Economist Diane Swonk said yesterday that Q1 growth could be 1.5%:

GDP growth for the first quarter could slip below 1-1/2% if shutdown endures through the end of the week.

Diane Swonk on Twitter

It looks like Trump wildly exaggerated the results he could achieve.

Here is Trumps average quarterly real GDP growth rate to date compared to other Presidents:

01. John F. Kennedy: 5.31%
02. Lyndon Johnson: 5.18%
03. Harry Truman: 4.87%
04. Bill Clinton: 3.82%
05. Ronald Reagan: 3.62%
06. Jimmy Carter: 3.32%
07. Richard Nixon: 3.06%
08. Dwight D. Eisenhower 2.65%
09. Donald Trump: 2.64%
10. Gerald Ford: 2.28%
11. George H.W. Bush: 2.24%
12. Barack Obama: 1.90%
13. George W. Bush: 1.87%

So at 2.64%, he is well below is 4% goal.

 

[Correll]

As I have repeatedly offered my argument and supporting arguments, such as links to the definitions I am using, that you guys seem to be ignorant of,


it is not just my opinion, but a well argued and supported analysis. One you have been unable to counter, seriously or effectively.




My calling you a lib, is my opinion, based on my observation of your positions and style of argument. I truly believe that you are a "liberal" in the modern usage of the word. My opinion on that could be right, it could be wrong, but since I truly believe it, is can not be a lie.

Something that you should know. Unless you are playing at lying yourself, of course.

Based upon your definition of a lie...intent to deceive and credibility...the people that called me and told me my SSN had been suspended were not lying because I did not find it credible.

After 60 pages we are back to nothing more than your opinion vs my opinion.

What a waste of time.

Bye
Since it was not a lie, how would you categorize such a phone call? It is just hyperbole? Was it just an exaggeration?

You asked why I reached the conclusion that a specific comment was not seriously intended to deceive.

My answer was that the statement was so lacking in credibility that I did not believe it to be a real attempt at deception.


That does not mean that that rule is applicable to all statements. A person can say something that is not credible at all, and yet be deadly serious about their intent to deceive.


This is normally something people learn as children. That you are so twisted up with partisan bile that you have managed to convince yourself you do not know it, is hilarious.

So now we are back to everything just being about your opinion.

I do not view Trump's "hyperbolic statements" as you call them any different than I view the people that told me my SSN was suspended. Both are full of shit and try to fool people into thinking things that are not true.

Your lack of ability to discern between a serious attempt to deceive and meaningless pap, is a lack of skill on your part, caused by TDS.

Telling lies like Mexico will pay for the wall is not meaningless pap. It's deceitful and it's lying to America.

Did you believe that claim?

 

[Correll]

Based upon your definition of a lie...intent to deceive and credibility...the people that called me and told me my SSN had been suspended were not lying because I did not find it credible.

After 60 pages we are back to nothing more than your opinion vs my opinion.

What a waste of time.

Bye
Since it was not a lie, how would you categorize such a phone call? It is just hyperbole? Was it just an exaggeration?

You asked why I reached the conclusion that a specific comment was not seriously intended to deceive.

My answer was that the statement was so lacking in credibility that I did not believe it to be a real attempt at deception.


That does not mean that that rule is applicable to all statements. A person can say something that is not credible at all, and yet be deadly serious about their intent to deceive.


This is normally something people learn as children. That you are so twisted up with partisan bile that you have managed to convince yourself you do not know it, is hilarious.

So now we are back to everything just being about your opinion.

I do not view Trump's "hyperbolic statements" as you call them any different than I view the people that told me my SSN was suspended. Both are full of shit and try to fool people into thinking things that are not true.

Your lack of ability to discern between a serious attempt to deceive and meaningless pap, is a lack of skill on your part, caused by TDS.

Telling lies like Mexico will pay for the wall is not meaningless pap. It's deceitful and it's lying to America.

He is hopeless. I used his own standard for what constitutes a lie so he had to shift paths once again to keep defending Trump.

Going by Correll’s standards the prince from Nigeria that wants to give you 25 million dollars is not lying.

You are using a reason I gave in one specific example as an universal standard. That is ironically dishonest of you.


YOur pretense that you do not understand the concept of discernment is you literally being insane.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You asked why I reached the conclusion that a specific comment was not seriously intended to deceive.

My answer was that the statement was so lacking in credibility that I did not believe it to be a real attempt at deception.


That does not mean that that rule is applicable to all statements. A person can say something that is not credible at all, and yet be deadly serious about their intent to deceive.


This is normally something people learn as children. That you are so twisted up with partisan bile that you have managed to convince yourself you do not know it, is hilarious.

So now we are back to everything just being about your opinion.

I do not view Trump's "hyperbolic statements" as you call them any different than I view the people that told me my SSN was suspended. Both are full of shit and try to fool people into thinking things that are not true.

Your lack of ability to discern between a serious attempt to deceive and meaningless pap, is a lack of skill on your part, caused by TDS.

Telling lies like Mexico will pay for the wall is not meaningless pap. It's deceitful and it's lying to America.

He is hopeless. I used his own standard for what constitutes a lie so he had to shift paths once again to keep defending Trump.

Going by Correll’s standards the prince from Nigeria that wants to give you 25 million dollars is not lying.

You are using a reason I gave in one specific example as an universal standard. That is ironically dishonest of you.


YOur pretense that you do not understand the concept of discernment is you literally being insane.

You use the same standard for every Trump statement you have been asked about. I applied that same standard to someone other than Trump and I now insane...literally...which I assume to mean you believe me to be insane. Or was that just hyperbole?

 

[Correll]

So now we are back to everything just being about your opinion.

I do not view Trump's "hyperbolic statements" as you call them any different than I view the people that told me my SSN was suspended. Both are full of shit and try to fool people into thinking things that are not true.

Your lack of ability to discern between a serious attempt to deceive and meaningless pap, is a lack of skill on your part, caused by TDS.

Telling lies like Mexico will pay for the wall is not meaningless pap. It's deceitful and it's lying to America.

He is hopeless. I used his own standard for what constitutes a lie so he had to shift paths once again to keep defending Trump.

Going by Correll’s standards the prince from Nigeria that wants to give you 25 million dollars is not lying.

You are using a reason I gave in one specific example as an universal standard. That is ironically dishonest of you.


YOur pretense that you do not understand the concept of discernment is you literally being insane.

You use the same standard for every Trump statement you have been asked about. I applied that same standard to someone other than Trump and I now insane...literally...which I assume to mean you believe me to be insane. Or was that just hyperbole?

Sorry, you're jumping around a lot. I thought you were referring to one specific example, where I said that I did not find it to be a lie because it was so lacking in credibility, that it was not a serious attempt to deceive.


But yes, as a general rule, a complete lack of credibility is a strong indicator that a statement might be hyperbole.


Context matters, of course.


Your desire to nail everything down to black and white, demanding a specific rule or two, while ignoring the massive complexity in normal human communication,


is either insane or dishonest.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Your lack of ability to discern between a serious attempt to deceive and meaningless pap, is a lack of skill on your part, caused by TDS.

Telling lies like Mexico will pay for the wall is not meaningless pap. It's deceitful and it's lying to America.

He is hopeless. I used his own standard for what constitutes a lie so he had to shift paths once again to keep defending Trump.

Going by Correll’s standards the prince from Nigeria that wants to give you 25 million dollars is not lying.

You are using a reason I gave in one specific example as an universal standard. That is ironically dishonest of you.


YOur pretense that you do not understand the concept of discernment is you literally being insane.

You use the same standard for every Trump statement you have been asked about. I applied that same standard to someone other than Trump and I now insane...literally...which I assume to mean you believe me to be insane. Or was that just hyperbole?

Sorry, you're jumping around a lot. I thought you were referring to one specific example, where I said that I did not find it to be a lie because it was so lacking in credibility, that it was not a serious attempt to deceive.


But yes, as a general rule, a complete lack of credibility is a strong indicator that a statement might be hyperbole.


Context matters, of course.


Your desire to nail everything down to black and white, demanding a specific rule or two, while ignoring the massive complexity in normal human communication,


is either insane or dishonest.

It is you that gave the two rules for something being a lie, all I did was apply them outside of the realm of your god in the White House.

But now that you have added in the complexity of human communication...is it not only expected but also normal that different people viewing the same thing being said might come away with different opinions of what was said?

Is the opinion he is lying any less valid than your view that he just says a lot of things he does not mean?

 

[Correll]

Telling lies like Mexico will pay for the wall is not meaningless pap. It's deceitful and it's lying to America.

He is hopeless. I used his own standard for what constitutes a lie so he had to shift paths once again to keep defending Trump.

Going by Correll’s standards the prince from Nigeria that wants to give you 25 million dollars is not lying.

You are using a reason I gave in one specific example as an universal standard. That is ironically dishonest of you.


YOur pretense that you do not understand the concept of discernment is you literally being insane.

You use the same standard for every Trump statement you have been asked about. I applied that same standard to someone other than Trump and I now insane...literally...which I assume to mean you believe me to be insane. Or was that just hyperbole?

Sorry, you're jumping around a lot. I thought you were referring to one specific example, where I said that I did not find it to be a lie because it was so lacking in credibility, that it was not a serious attempt to deceive.


But yes, as a general rule, a complete lack of credibility is a strong indicator that a statement might be hyperbole.


Context matters, of course.


Your desire to nail everything down to black and white, demanding a specific rule or two, while ignoring the massive complexity in normal human communication,


is either insane or dishonest.

It is you that gave the two rules for something being a lie, all I did was apply them outside of the realm of your god in the White House.

But now that you have added in the complexity of human communication...is it not only expected but also normal that different people viewing the same thing being said might come away with different opinions of what was said?

Is the opinion he is lying any less valid than your view that he just says a lot of things he does not mean?

Yes, because you are being absurd in the pursuit of a partisan point, while I am not being absurd, nor in the pursuit of a political point.