8mo ago

Trump pulls out of interview after paper questions dubious claims about crime rate

www.independent.co.uk

Federal data shows the national crime rate has dropped under President Biden

Donald Trump backed out of an interview after a local paper asked him for data to back up his continued baseless claims that crime is on the rise under President Joe Biden.

The Detroit News reported that Trump’s campaign had agreed to an interview with the former president on Tuesday after a campaign speech. However, the campaign suddenly claimed Trump no longer had time for the interview after a reporter began probing them on crime data.

“The Trump campaign had initially agreed that Trump would participate in an interview with The Detroit News on Tuesday,” state politics reporter Craig Mauger wrote. “But after the newspaper began asking about the Michigan crime data before the event, a campaign aide said the presidential candidate no longer had time for an interview after the speech.”

64 comments

Pulling out of a scheduled interview as part of a presidential campaign because the interviewer wants you to back up your claim sure is a weird thing to do.
- back up your claim
  i can't recall a single claim he's ever made that he "backed up" with anything other than "everybody says so" or something similar
  
  Oh he couldn't possibly back up his lies. But I love that he's so terrified of the press asking him to do it that he's running away from them.
  
  I can think of one, around COVID, when his "data" evoked this response
  
  He had sharpy on a map to back up a claim once.
- Aren’t the questions usually arranged beforehand? You think that one would prepare in advance.
  
  It was easier to cancel the interview than to provide a source for his claim.

Convicted felon Trump's kryptonite is a followup question.
- I really wish this had been more of a thing in the lead up to the first election. Yes um source?
  
  So your source is "trust me bro"?
- Pretty much... Weird coward still is a coward
- More like "being asked for proof of patently ridiculous and obviously false claims"

If this is all you have to do, then EVERY MEDIA OUTLET should do this. Not even hardball, just "ok can you show me some numbers?"
If that's all it takes to get this chicken shit weirdo to curl up in a ball, then fucking do it. He gets no airtime then other than his stupid rallies commemorating when he was pitted against an octogenarian.

So the key to keep him running away is to have the media actually ask him real questions? Let's keep asking and he'll never be on TV again other than fox.
- But that would require media outlets to actually have editorial independence. Sadly those days are long gone.

- D'ya Like Dags?
  
  Dags?

Holy fucking shit, I wish mainstream outlets would take notes. Any time Trump talks about crime or immigration or really anything, all you have to do is bring up facts. Quit fucking meeting Republicans in the middle with their lying and bigotry.

I liked this at the end of the article:
The Washington Post estimated that during his presidency, Trump made more than 30,000 false or misleading statements.
- .

I watched the debate between Trump and Biden and could hardly believe that there were no fact checks at all from the moderators. Sure, it would have been good if Biden had pointed out more clearly that almost every statement Trump made was factually incorrect. But can you really just tell any tall tales in your presidential debates without even mentioning any facts? That seems absurd. Is that the norm for presidential debates in the US? Or is it just that Trump would not have participated if there were fact checks?
- Do you think for a second that Trump would agree to a debate with fact checking?
  
  No, but I thought the US public wouldn't let him get away with never engaging in a (factual) debate. That would make him look weak, because that's how democracy usually works. You know, arguments and counter-arguments - that sort of thing.
- Trump lies at a rate where fact checkers can't keep up.
  
  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
  Generally, it is more difficult to use the Gish gallop in a structured debate than a free-form one.
  This sums it up nicely, and why I think he's like any bully: he picks his fights and only ones he can win.
  
  I don't think so. It's just the same lies he repeats over and over again.
  
  Someone called the Trump Trot.
- It would have been best if there was fact checking as part of the debate, but as you speculated, there's no way Trump would agree to that. And, to be fair, it's probably a difficult thing to do live and accurately in timely manner.
  However, other news agencies were doing fact checking during and following the debate.
  
  Yes, it's certainly not easy to check facts live. But you can at least be well prepared, especially as the questions are asked by the journalists and they should also know the usual claims made by the candidates. I also don't think it's necessary to check every figure. I just mean that it makes sense to name obvious false statements as such - Trump has made enough of them, and most of them were anything but new. And yes, it is of course also true that there are fact-checks after the fact, but I think that this is often not noticed at all. The presidential debates are an event that many people watch, but unfortunately only a few inform themselves afterwards. That's why I think it's necessary to expose at least the grossest untruths immediately.
- The media are owned by the oligarchs and those mostly back Trump. Simple as that.
  
  I can't argue with that.

That is a very weird way to phrase "Old man throws temper tantrum and refuses to do previously agreed upon interview when called out for lying"
As far as I'm concerned, every media outlet that sugarcoats things, or misrepresent things, or otherwise skews the truth about what the MAGAts are up to are 100% in bed with Republicans, and are mouthpieces for the MAGAgenda

He's really banking on the crazies overthrowing the election isn't he?
- Honestly yes. Not on the mob of MAGAs, but on states refusing to certify the results.
- He is, and they're a lot closer to getting that done than you'd like to believe.

The Washington Post estimated that during his presidency, Trump made more than 30,000 false or misleading statements.
- That seems like a really low estimate.
  
  Agreed. There's only so much budget and time they can commit to fact checking this turd. There's real news to report on.
  
  20 per day, certainly he had more than 20 interactions per day

What a coward

Just so you know, trump is a known liar. Nothing he says can be taken at face value. Fact check everything.
- Who's got time for fact checking? Just assume he's lying whenever his mouth is open and enjoy the rest of your day